Download PDF | (East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 450-1450, 67) Daniela Tănase - Craftsmen and Jewelers in the Middle and Lower Danube Region (6th to 7th Centuries)-Brill (2021).
424 Pages
Introduction
In Europe, in general, as well as in Romania, in particular, metalworking and of craftsmen practicing ironmongery and goldsmithing in the early Middle Ages have preoccupied scholars especially during the second half of the 20th century. This was largely the result, after World War 11, of archaeological excavations on a large scale, which in turn led to the accumulation of a very large quantity of artifacts pertaining to the whole set of daily activities. Equally important in this respect was the systematic application of archaeometrical approaches, particularly metallographic and physico-chemical analyses.
The first remains related to metalworking that have been found on the present territory of Romania are the molds discovered in Felnac (Arad County) in the late 19th century. The most notable discovery, however, is the grave with tools from the cemetery excavated in the early 20th century in Band, tomb no. 10 (Mures County). In the lands to the south and to east from the Carpathian Mountains, the first archaeological discoveries pertaining to metalworking were made between the two world wars — molds, tools, smelting furnaces, and wasters. Those were either settlement or isolated (stray) finds. At the current stage of research, when mapping all known discoveries of this type from Romania it becomes clear that one deals with different cultural areas, and different populations inhabiting those territories. However, irrespective of the cultural area, there is a clear Byzantine influence on local metalworking.
Despite such early beginnings, in Romania the early medieval metalworking has not so far been the subject of systematic research in Romania, especially not within a narrowly defined chronological span and with a detailed approach to the problems raised by metalworking practices. That is why I chose to study the 6th and 7th centuries, a period of important political, military, demographic, and cultural changes in both the Middle and the Lower Danube regions, which historians tend to regard as marking the beginning of the Middle Ages in those parts of the European continent. Between 500 and 700, a number of Germanic kingdoms disappeared (Herules, Lombards, Gepids), and new power structures emerged which are associated to steppe nomads (Avars and Bulgars). Those steppe nomads posed a greater and much mote serious threat to the Byzantine Empire than any of the Germanic peoples that had for decades been under its influence. All those changes significantly altered the cultural relations between the Byzantines and the populations in the lands to the north from the Danube River. My goal is to identify the differences and similarities between the archaeological evidence of different populations in the Middle and Lower Danube regions, with a special emphasis on metalworking and burial practices.
I chose to look at both the Carpathian Basin (the Middle Danube region) and the territory outside the Carpathian Mountains (Lower Danube region) because of the extraordinary abundance of archaeological evidence, and the great potential for comparative analysis. Several settlements have been excavated in Moldavia (eastern Romania, where excavations were carried out by Dan Gh. Teodor and Ioan Mitrea) or Walachia (southern Romania, where excavations were carried out by Suzana Dolinescu-Ferche, Victor Teodorescu, and Margareta Constantiniu), and numerous tools as well as wasters discovered in each one of them bespeak the development of local crafts. My approach is different from that of most other Romanian scholars, who have examined the topic, in that all of them chose a very broad chronological span (between the 4th and the uth century), with in-depth analysis of either the metalworking techniques or the changes in the social conditions of production. Since the last significant studies devoted to this subject have been published in 1997 by Dan Gh. Teodor and Stefan Olteanu, the number of finds has increased considerably. Time is ripe not only for an update, but for an entirely new perspective, which will take into consideration not just the technological aspects of ironworking and goldsmithing, but also the specific economic and social circumstances and implications.
The catalog in the second part of this book includes not only finds from Romania, but also from the neighboring territories in Hungary, Serbia, the Republic of Moldova, Bulgaria, and Ukraine. In doing so, my goal was to offer a solid base for comparison of technologies employed in producing dress accessories, the most expressive and innovative domain of the metalworking during the 6th and 7th centuries. I paid particular attention to all other details of the archaeological evidence that could in one way or another relate to the production of dress accessories. I treated separately tools from settlements and graves, and I advanced a new tool typology. On that basis, I attempted to reconstruct the production process and the main techniques employed by craftsmen to decorate dress accessories, a topic that shifted the emphasis to cultural influences from several directions — the Byzantine Empire, the steppe world and the Merovingian environment of Central Europe.
The lands on either side of the Carpathian Mountains formed an area of cultural interaction during the early Middle Ages, with different technological options in the west and in the east, respectively. A careful study of the archaeological evidence will answer the fundamental question of why rudimentary melting techniques and mold casting were preferred in the regions outside the Carpathian Basin. Conversely, such a study will explain why in the Carpathian Basin, most dress accessories were produced by pressing. Although several scholars have already noted such technological choices, there has been no attempt to study the evidence of Central and Eastern Europe comparatively. My goal is therefore to point out those cultural practices that would resonate with technological choices made both inside and outside the Avar Qaganate. Of great importance in this respect are the numerous metallographic analyses of both tools and products, which have been found on several sites of Central and Eastern Europe. On the other hand, the use of chemical analyses raised the thorny question of the origin and supply of raw materials, as well as the equally difficult question of alloying recipes, both topics discussed in this book.
Another important category of archaeological sources is that of burial assemblages with tools. My goal is to compare tools found in graves to those found in settlements, in order to understand why such implements were deposited in the 6th and 7th centuries in graves, such as those found at Band, Felnac (Arad County) and Sarata Monteoru (Buzau County). I will demonstrate that the symbolism of those tools is directly related to the various metalworking techniques that the craftsmen were supposed and expected to master. In fact, tools found in graves cover the entire range of metalworking techniques: blacksmithing, bronze casting, plating, and gilding. Craftsmen produced not only jewelry and weapons, but also tools and household utensils. A few crafts are more important than others in terms of tools deposited in graves, as well as of industrial activities documented for settlements — blacksmithing, silversmithing, and goldsmithing. Evidence suggests that the distinction between these specialties, especially between blacksmithing and goldsmithing, was quite fluid, which means that blacksmiths could produce jewels, and jewelers were able to produce tools and weapons. Although the structure of the toolkit mainly indicates blacksmithing activities, there are also tools that could be used to create ornaments.
The deposition of tools in graves was certainly symbolic, but that symbolism was undoubtedly related to the status of the craftsman and to his social role in the community. In other words, the ritual must have brought to mind a series of cultural practices without which it would have made no sense. The fact that only the graves of a small number of individuals were equipped with tools is a clear indication not only of their high rank, but most likely, of certain occupations that were assigned to them, whether or not they had practiced them during lifetime. In short, the archaeological evidence highlights the economic and military role of craftsmen. In this book, I shall discuss the significance of the deposition of tools along with such objects as the helmet from Band or the pieces of armor from K6lked-Feketekapu B and from Kunszentmarton.
Another interesting area of current research is the study of matches between ornaments for certain types of dress accessories or parts thereof, many of which were cast in molds found at considerable distance from each other. This indicates the existence of regional decorative styles. In the light of archaeological sources, several regions with increased activity in terms of metalworking can be identified, which suggests a concentration of demand, and therefore of social and political entities: the sub-Carpathian region of Moldavia, the southeastern part of Walachia, and central Transylvania. In this respect, I shall also address the issue of large-scale imitation of Byzantine dress accessories, both in the Carpathian Basin (where mainly pressing on dies was used for producing imitations) and in the extra-Carpathian area of Romania and the neighboring regions to the east (where imitations were produced primarily by casting in molds). In both cultural areas, Byzantine products were adapted and modified according to different sets of rules as well as technological constraints.
Link
Press Here
0 التعليقات :
إرسال تعليق