DOI article:
Dosedla, Heinrich: František Šach's contribution towards research on pre-industrial tilling implements in Austria
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49002#0048
46
H. C. DOSEDLA
sense from left to right (Sach 1968,11 ff plate
I-III).
In working out his ten primary construc-
tional types, he also followed the principle
that to establish a common and everywhere
applicable classification criterion, only the
actual working bodies (i.e. the part carrying
the tilling wedge) of an implement should be
evaluated (Sach 1968,3,9 f). The other sub-
sidiary parts were of technical importance,
but were used in forming the various ty-
pological combinations or subgroups within
the ten primary types.
Each of these constructional main types
bears two names, one being a technical de-
scription related to its working, and the
other derived from the most ancient speci-
men of its kind yet known, or from the cul-
tural area where it seems to be most common
(Sach 1968, 10 ff).
Many of the ten basic types are shown on
Scandinavian and Ligurian rock engravings
of the Bronze Age, and there are also traces
of many of them, dating back even as far as
the Neolithic period, including such pre-
decessors of tilling devices drawn by men as
have been excavated in Palestine and Swit-
zerland (Kothe fig. 2a,c, 4b, 6, 16a, 17; Mul-
ler Beck p. 9,38-49, 59-74, 175f and pl. 10-
12, 16, 19).
PLATE II The stilt type — Mesopotamian type.
Fig. 1. Cultivation implement with a hand-
draught-pole, a single stilt with a two-sided
cross-handle, and a regulating iron rod between
beam and ard head to which a triangular flat share
and symmetrical mouldstrokers are fixed. From
Goisern, District of Gmunden, Upper Austria,
about 1900. (After Dosedla 1977, p. 21).
Fig. 2. Ard with a yoke beam and a single stilt
with a one-sided handle, with a sheath, and a
triangular flat share fixed to the ard head. From
the Bavarian Forest, 19th century (Drawn by
Dosedla after Sperber 1982, 215 fig. 3).
Fig. 3. Ard with a yoke beam, and a forked stilt,
sheath-less, with a so-called undershare fixed to
the ard head. From a 13th century fresco, St. Ca-
therine’s chapel, Znojmo, Southern Moravia,
CSSR. (Drawn by Dosedla after Kasparek 1939,
258 ff).
Fig. 4. Ard with a beam supported by a wheel
foot, with a forked stilt and a cross-handrail, a
sheath, and a shovel-shaped iron share with a flat
wooden extension. From Ranggen, near Imst,
District of Landeck, Tyrol, 19th century. (After
Dosedla 1977 fig. la, b).
Fig. 5. Ard with a non-supported beam, with a
forked stilt, a sheath, and a triangular flat share
fixed to the ard head. From Hochwolkersdorf,
District of Wiener Neustadt, Lower Austria,
about 1900. (After Dosedla 1977, 18, fig. 10a).
Pre-industrial types of tilling implements
in Austria:
According to Sach’s typology, in present
day Austria prior to the adoption of indus-
trial developed implements, the quadrangu-
lar types of either ard or plough, which are
deliberately neglected in this report, were
dominant. On the other hand there are Au-
strian boundary areas or otherwise remote
regions where a number of other construc-
tional types have been preserved until recent
times. Since Sach indicates that in the course
of historical development, various elements
of quite different origin may happen to
mingle gradually with other constructional
types (Muller-Beck 15,16 f), we can look at
Austria’s central geographical situation, with
this in mind. It is likely that the dominance
of quadrangular types in Austria results
from various changes of construction, which
are supposed to have taken place even in pre-
medieval times, though only a few authentic
examples of such changes are known from
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries
(Dosedla 1977,22-27).
H. C. DOSEDLA
sense from left to right (Sach 1968,11 ff plate
I-III).
In working out his ten primary construc-
tional types, he also followed the principle
that to establish a common and everywhere
applicable classification criterion, only the
actual working bodies (i.e. the part carrying
the tilling wedge) of an implement should be
evaluated (Sach 1968,3,9 f). The other sub-
sidiary parts were of technical importance,
but were used in forming the various ty-
pological combinations or subgroups within
the ten primary types.
Each of these constructional main types
bears two names, one being a technical de-
scription related to its working, and the
other derived from the most ancient speci-
men of its kind yet known, or from the cul-
tural area where it seems to be most common
(Sach 1968, 10 ff).
Many of the ten basic types are shown on
Scandinavian and Ligurian rock engravings
of the Bronze Age, and there are also traces
of many of them, dating back even as far as
the Neolithic period, including such pre-
decessors of tilling devices drawn by men as
have been excavated in Palestine and Swit-
zerland (Kothe fig. 2a,c, 4b, 6, 16a, 17; Mul-
ler Beck p. 9,38-49, 59-74, 175f and pl. 10-
12, 16, 19).
PLATE II The stilt type — Mesopotamian type.
Fig. 1. Cultivation implement with a hand-
draught-pole, a single stilt with a two-sided
cross-handle, and a regulating iron rod between
beam and ard head to which a triangular flat share
and symmetrical mouldstrokers are fixed. From
Goisern, District of Gmunden, Upper Austria,
about 1900. (After Dosedla 1977, p. 21).
Fig. 2. Ard with a yoke beam and a single stilt
with a one-sided handle, with a sheath, and a
triangular flat share fixed to the ard head. From
the Bavarian Forest, 19th century (Drawn by
Dosedla after Sperber 1982, 215 fig. 3).
Fig. 3. Ard with a yoke beam, and a forked stilt,
sheath-less, with a so-called undershare fixed to
the ard head. From a 13th century fresco, St. Ca-
therine’s chapel, Znojmo, Southern Moravia,
CSSR. (Drawn by Dosedla after Kasparek 1939,
258 ff).
Fig. 4. Ard with a beam supported by a wheel
foot, with a forked stilt and a cross-handrail, a
sheath, and a shovel-shaped iron share with a flat
wooden extension. From Ranggen, near Imst,
District of Landeck, Tyrol, 19th century. (After
Dosedla 1977 fig. la, b).
Fig. 5. Ard with a non-supported beam, with a
forked stilt, a sheath, and a triangular flat share
fixed to the ard head. From Hochwolkersdorf,
District of Wiener Neustadt, Lower Austria,
about 1900. (After Dosedla 1977, 18, fig. 10a).
Pre-industrial types of tilling implements
in Austria:
According to Sach’s typology, in present
day Austria prior to the adoption of indus-
trial developed implements, the quadrangu-
lar types of either ard or plough, which are
deliberately neglected in this report, were
dominant. On the other hand there are Au-
strian boundary areas or otherwise remote
regions where a number of other construc-
tional types have been preserved until recent
times. Since Sach indicates that in the course
of historical development, various elements
of quite different origin may happen to
mingle gradually with other constructional
types (Muller-Beck 15,16 f), we can look at
Austria’s central geographical situation, with
this in mind. It is likely that the dominance
of quadrangular types in Austria results
from various changes of construction, which
are supposed to have taken place even in pre-
medieval times, though only a few authentic
examples of such changes are known from
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries
(Dosedla 1977,22-27).