PRINCES, ARMIES, SANCTUARIES
THE EMERGENCE OF COMPLEX AUTHORITY IN THE
CENTRAL GERMAN ÚNĚTICE CULTURE
Harald Meller
ABSTRACT
The Circum-Harz group of the Central German Únětice
Culture (2200-1600 BC) was a highly stratified society, which arose from the merging of the Corded Ware
and Bell Beaker Cultures. This process was advanced
by princes who established their legitimacy as rulers on
symbolic references to both cultures as well as on newly
created traditions and historical references. Their power
was based on armed troops, which appear to have been
accommodated in large houses or longhouses. The hierarchical structure of the troops can be determined by
both their distinctive weapons and the colours thereof.
The prince of the Dieskau territory commanded the largest army and occupied a dominant position, expressed
through the large Bornhöck burial mound and by the
gold find of Dieskau, which itself most likely originated
in the Bornhöck barrow. The article concludes with a
discussion whether the Dieskau ruler was an actual head
of a genuine state, according to the criteria put forth by
Max Weber and Stefan Breuer. There is some indication that these criteria of statehood were fulfilled by the
period associated with the Nebra Sky Disk at the latest,
since this disk allowed the prince to act as ‘a representative of the gods before the community’ (Breuer 1998,
39).
DEDICATION
This article is dedicated to Klavs Randsborg (1944-2016),
to whom I owe a debt of gratitude. Only very few archaeologists over the past century have managed to have a
similarly inspiring impact. Klavs Randsborg’s pioneering
work on numerous Bronze Age hoards in Denmark (including the large Smørumovre hoard) anticipated some
of the suggestions that follow here (Randsborg 1995, 44-
52). Had it not been for his advances, I would have perhaps been more hesitant to publish my own rather bold
claims. Here, too, Klavs Randsborg has served as a superb model for entering unknown territory.
INTRODUCTION
The end of the Neolithic towards the last centuries of the
3rd millennium BC marked the onset of profound social,
religious, and economic change in Central Germany.
As a consequence, a new cultural group, commonly referred to as the Únětice Culture, emerged at the start of
the Bronze Age. It differed in many aspects both from
earlier Corded Ware and Bell Beaker Cultures as well as
from subsequent Bronze Age cultures. Of special note is
the advanced Circum-Harz group of the Central German
Únětice Culture. Its characteristic grave finds, settlement traces and identifiable hoard finds date from 2200
to 1600 BC and can be found in the area north, east and
south of the Harz mountain range (see, inter alia, Zich
1996; Evers 2012). The Circum-Harz region is among
the most fertile regions in the world, the so-called Lössbörde. Its deep chernozem soil lies in the precipitation
shadow of the Harz mountain range and provides ideal
conditions for agriculture (Fig. 1) (cf. Kainz 1999, 21f.,
27-29). Consequently, different cultures succeeded and
replaced one another for several millennia in the area
(Meller 2008; Schwarz 2013; Schwarz & Meller forthcoming). The Circum-Harz group of the Central German Únětice Culture, which finally unified the Late Neolithic Corded Ware and Bell Beaker Cultures, exhibit
a remarkably high level of social stratification, as shall
be discussed here with a view to a number of examples.
40
Acta Archaeologica
Fig. 1. Precipitation map of the annual mean in 1961-1990. The map
shows very low precipitation rates in the areas northeast, east and
south of the Harz mountain range. For this reason, extremely fertile
chernozem soils are preserved in this region. These two factors provide
ideal conditions for agriculture and make the so-called Lössbörde one
of the most fertile regions in the world. Therefore, it was a highly
demanded settlement area throughout the Neolithic period and later.
Map: Deutscher Wetterdienst; Únětice Culture areas added by B. Janzen,
State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
THE LEGITIMATION OF POWER:
THE PRINCELY BURIALS IN
CENTRAL GERMANY
The Barrows of Leubingen and Helmsdorf
The phenomenon of the legitimation of power is impressively exemplified by the Early Bronze Age princely burials found at Leubingen, in the district of Sömmerda, and
at Helmsdorf, in the district of Mansfeld-Südharz, which
are already familiar to many. These are among the most
important grave finds in Central Europe (Klopfleisch
1878; Höfer 1906; Größler 1907). Their significance is
due to the high number of grave goods unearthed as well
as elaborate tomb building techniques. Additionally, the
good state of the wooden constructions allowing for the
dendrochronological dating of both sites has contributed
to their renowned status (note 1). Furthermore, despite
the finds hailing from the early days of archaeology,
their documentation is of very high quality. This is true
especially for the princely grave in Leubingen, initially
excavated by Friedrich Klopfleisch in 1877, the detailed
report of which, however, was only published by Paul
Höfer in 1906, based on Klopfleisch’s reports and sketches (Höfer 1906). The Leubingen grave has been discussed
and interpreted at great length, also quite recently (note
2). However, one essential aspect, namely intentional references to traditions associated with earlier cultures for
the purpose of legitimising power, has not yet been sufficiently examined (note 3). This grave is in fact key for understanding the development of the Únětice Culture and
its social stratification. That said, the grave in Leubingen
is, most likely, not the earliest Únětice princely burial,
given that the majority of the prominent Únětice burial
mounds have either been looted and destroyed (Bornhöck, see below) or remain unexamined (e.g., Evessen,
district of Wolfenbüttel; see Zich 2016, 391).
The emergence of the Únětice Culture has long been
discussed in relation to the Bell Beaker Culture, as well
as to the Corded Ware Culture (see, inter alia, Zich 1996,
340-344; Schwarz 2015). The earliest evidence of the
Corded Ware Culture in Central Germany dates to around
2800 BC. The evidence gradually diminishes from 2300
BC onward and finally disappears around 2200 BC. The
earliest archaeological evidence of the Bell Beaker Culture dates to 2500 BC, and the latest to around 2100 BC.
This indicates that both cultures overlapped one another
for at least 300 years. This concurrent existence is particularly remarkable given that the two cultures were also
sharing the same settlement areas, namely the extremely
fertile plains of the Börde region located in the northern,
eastern and southern foothills of the Harz mountain range
(Fig. 2.1) (note 4). The two cultures seem to have coexisted as neighbours without actually sharing the same settlements (Fig. 2.2). Evidence suggests that the innovative
Bell Beaker Culture prevailed in the long run, while the
Únětice Culture subsequently became noticeable from
2200 BC onward, progressively replacing the Bell Beaker
Culture (Schwarz & Meller, forthcoming) (Fig. 2.3).
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
41
2400–2300 BC
2300–2200 BC
Bell Beaker culture (phase 2)
Bell Beaker culture (phase 3)
Corded Ware culture (phase 2)
Corded Ware culture (phase 3)
Chernozem
Chernozem
EL B E
RZ
Mu l de
HA
Mu l de
HA
EL B E
RZ
str
ale
ale
Sa
Sa
Un
Un
u
u
t
t
0
50 km
2.1
0
50 km
2.2
2200–2050 BC
Bell Beaker culture (phase 4)
Únětice culture (phase 1)
Chernozem
EL B E
RZ
Sa
ale
Un
str
u
t
0
Fig. 2. Distribution of the Corded Ware, Bell Beaker and Únětice
Cultures in Saxony-Anhalt and neighbouring regions in Thuringia.
The map clearly shows that the Corded Ware and Bell Beaker Cultures
shared the same settlement area on the extremely fertile black earth
soils and along the rivers throughout the region for an extended period,
before the Corded Ware Culture started to disappear during the 23rd
century BC and merged with the Bell Beaker Culture. Around 2200
BC, the Únětice Culture emerged out of the blend of these two earlier
cultures.
Find sites and chronology according to R. Schwarz. Map: R. Schwarz;
graphic design: B. Janzen, both State Office for Heritage Management
and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
Mu l de
HA
2.3
str
50 km
42
Acta Archaeologica
With all that said, genetic evidence now suggests that
this image of cultural succession has been created exclusively by the archaeological finds. While the material
culture changed, the people themselves did not. Genetic
evidence indicates that a considerable segment of the
‘Corded Ware’ population lived on (Brandt 2017, 189).
It appears that they were integrated into the Bell Beaker
Culture over time and that both cultures contributed significantly to the development of what is called in archaeology the Únětice Culture (Schwarz 2015, 692). People
using Corded Ware pottery originally immigrated from
the region of the Eastern European steppes (Allentoft
et al. 2015; Haak et al. 2015). According to recent studies, the same seems to apply to later communities using
Bell Beaker pottery, although there is a reason to assume
that they might have originated in more southern regions
(Gronenborn & Haak 2018, 77; see also views on Western European ancestry in Olalde et al. 2018). It is noticeable that both groups went to great lengths, over the entire
300-year-period, to each preserve their cultural identities
through specific bipolar burial rites differentiated by gender and distinctive drinking vessels. However, they seem
to have had somewhat similar burial and drinking rituals and even social structures (Strahm 2010, 166). The
question as to why the Corded Ware Culture eventually
disappeared from the archaeological record, whether by
integration, assimilation, or something else, remains unanswered.
Perhaps the Bell Beaker groups were more innovative
and thus had a greater cultural radiance. This is suggested
by one potential piece of evidence: the construction of a
Bell Beaker period circular enclosure on the foundations
of a former Corded Ware Culture sanctuary at Pömmelte
in the Salzland district (Spatzier 2017, 268-272; see below).
Burials of the Únětice Culture have been shown to
contain genetic evidence linked to people of both Corded
Ware and Bell Beaker Culture (Brandt 2017, 189f.). This
suggests that the Únětice Culture, which subsequently
manifested itself as a coherent entity, emerged from the
conflation of both population groups within the CircumHarz region over the course of the 3rd millennium BC. In
fact, it may have been precisely this blending of the two
distinct population groups and cultures that was a key factor in the remarkable success and longevity of the Únětice
Culture. If the prolonged coexistence of the Corded Ware
and Bell Beaker Cultures is already peculiar - one pos-
sible explanation being previous population losses due to
plague or other epidemics introduced by westwards moving steppe populations (Rasmussen et al. 2015; Andrades
Valtueña et al. 2017) - then the transformation of both
cultural groups into one unified culture is certainly all the
more remarkable.
The princely burial of Leubingen (1942 ± 10 BC) provides a good starting point for reconstructing the causes
for this unification. It should be added that the process of
merging had apparently already begun by 2300 BC and
was more or less completed by 2050 BC (see Figs. 2.12.3). One reliable indicator of this is the range of ceramic
finds at Pömmelte, Salzland district (see below), dated
between 2300-2050 BC in which Corded Ware pottery
is no longer present. Although there have been isolated
instances of substantial bronze hoard finds (Meller 2013a,
516-517, Tab. 2), indicating more complex social differentiation, no princely graves are dated to this period. The
analysis of the Leubingen grave suggests not merely an
accidental fusion of material inventories of two cultural
groups but rather an intentionally induced process of unification by the political leadership. When examining the
tomb building techniques and grave goods found at the
Leubingen grave, it is possible to easily identify a blending of the main distinctive elements and burial traditions
associated with the Corded Ware and the Bell Beaker
Cultures. In sum, a qualitatively new appearance is created. This is especially noteworthy considering that the
memories pertaining to the Corded Ware Culture must
have been preserved for at least two and a half centuries.
The most illustrative example of this is shown in Figure
3. The cultural features of both the Corded Ware and the
Bell Beaker Cultures are contained in the princely burial
at Leubingen. Indications of a Corded Ware legacy include the burial mound, measuring at least 48 metres in
diameter, as well as the wooden tent-like burial chamber.
Both are typical of important Corded Ware graves (e.g.,
Moos 2006; Häusler 2011, 331). Furthermore, an ‘overdisplay’ of weaponry - in Leubingen represented in the
form of two axes, three daggers, and a halberd - likewise
testifies to the influence of the Corded Ware tradition.
The latter is manifested in the form of axes in richly furnished graves (see also Strahm 2010, 168) (Fig. 4). There
is also a large vessel, which functionally corresponds to
the Corded Ware amphorae, though, in contrast to them,
it is not decorated.
At the same time, there are objects in Leubingen,
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
43
Fig. 3. Comparison between distinctive cultural features of the Corded Ware and Bell Beaker Cultures and the princely grave at Leubingen. The burial
illustrates that individual elements of both earlier cultures were adopted and conflated. This appears to have served the intentional fusion of both cultural
groups as well as the legitimation of the princes’ rule.
Graphic design: J. Filipp, Bad Bibra.
44
Acta Archaeologica
1 cm
Fig. 4. The inventory of the Leubingen princely grave exhibits elements of both the Corded Ware and Bell Beaker Cultures. The ‘overdisplay’ of
weaponry is a feature of the Corded Ware Culture, while the two golden spiral hair ornaments, daggers and forging tools are associated with distinguished
Bell Beaker graves. The markedly more ancient Early Neolithic shoe-last celt most likely served to emphasise the legitimacy.
Photos: J. Lipták, Munich.
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
which are characteristic of the typically abundant grave
finds associated with the Bell Beaker Culture. This notably includes two golden Noppenringe as well as the daggers (Meller 2014, 616-628; Hille 2012, 48f.). Other than
that, forging tools are present, also a common characteristic of the richly furnished graves associated with the
Bell Beaker Culture (Bertemes 2010, 154). However, the
deposition of ceramic cups and footed bowls and especially of arrowheads (indicative of projectile weaponry),
which is a distinctive trait of richly furnished Bell Beaker
graves, did not occur at Leubingen.
The positions and orientations of those buried may
provide further clues. The contracted or crouched position known from ordinary burials usually allows for clear
attribution to either of the two cultures based on their
orientation. However, the position of the corpse at Leubingen is somewhat neutral. The prince in the Leubingen
tomb was laid on his back with his limbs stretched out. So
he assumed neither of the positions preferred by the two
traditions in question.
New burial practices for the population at large indicate that the desire for unification was not limited to the
exceptional Leubingen find. While the Corded Ware burial tradition was bipolar and gender-differentiated, using
a contracted position orientated E-W, facing south, the
Bell Beaker Culture’s burial ritual was bipolar and gender-differentiated using a contracted position orientated
N-S, facing east. In the Corded Ware Culture, men were
buried in a contracted position, lying on their right side,
whereas women lay on their left side. The Bell Beaker
Culture used this burial position in exact reverse (Fischer
1956, 120-123, 163-165; Häusler 2011, 341f.). The bodies found in Únětice graves were, in turn, buried in flat
graves facing eastward as in the Bell Beaker Culture,
albeit without the bipolar differentiation (Fischer 1956,
174f.; Häusler 2011, 352-355). Their heads are always at
the southern end of the grave. As a result, both genders
lie on their right sides - as men do in the Corded Ware
Culture and women in the Bell Beaker Culture.
The idealised existence of the ‘heroic’ lone warrior,
rooted in a ‘heroic’ lifestyle, appears to have been practised by some men in the Corded Ware and Bell Beaker
Cultures. This is suggested by the numerous male graves
that include weapons, as well as by specific injury patterns and the erecting of statue-menhirs honouring individual warriors. However, this entirely changes in the
Únětice Culture (see Vandkilde 2006; Schwarz 2015,
45
699-703; Meller 2015; 2017; Meller, Arz et al. 2015). No
weapons have been found in any of the common graves
belonging to the Únětice Culture; they are reserved only
for the princely burials and other richly furnished graves,
apparently representing military or possibly civil leaders.
Another component of the conflation of both culture
groups’ customs pertains to the ceramic vessels associated
with the Únětice Culture. The applied style evolved from
the ceramic styles of the Bell Beaker as well as the Corded Ware Cultures. In contrast to both preceding cultures,
however, the pottery is largely undecorated (Zich 1996,
43; Meller 2011, 75f.) (note 5). Assuming that the decoration of ceramics emphasised regional variations and thus
perhaps represented certain clans or social groups, the
undecorated, almost standardised pottery again suggests
that previously clearly distinguishable cultural groups
were rendered indistinguishable. It is conceivable, given
the long lifespan of the Únětice Culture, that the determined will for unification eventually eroded the memory
of ancient origins.
What can be established is that in the case of the earliest proven princely burial associated with the Únětice
Culture, the buried, and/or those burying him, clearly
intended to incorporate elements from both cultures into
the new burial tradition. The underlying reason is apparent: the creation of a new cultural identity based on the
‘princely’ burial rites of both preceding cultures. The
ancestry of the prince himself is traceable to neither of
the individual cultures. It was a clear demonstration of
the fact that he transcended particular group interests and
exercised legitimate power over all members of society.
The need for the construction of an additional ‘historical’ legitimacy is demonstrated by the large shafted
shoe-last celt, which most likely represents an object
from the Stroke-ornamented Ware Culture, dating more
than 2700 years earlier, found in the Late Neolithic or
Early Bronze Age (note 6). This item is a splitting wedge
used for working large pieces of wood. To the Bronze
Age discoverers of the Early Neolithic find, however, the
shoe-last celt must have rather appeared to have been a
mythical weapon of primeval giants. In this sense, this
find is very clear in unmistakeably documenting the intentions of those who buried the Leubingen prince. The
furnishing of an ancestor’s grave with an essentially unusable ‘giant axe’ doubtlessly assisted in the construction
of historical legitimacy, and, more importantly, in the
creation of charismatic qualities, which manifested them-
46
Acta Archaeologica
selves in exceptional and rare objects such as the shoe-last
celt (see Breuer 1990, 64f.; Kienlin 2008a, 195; Strahm
2010, 168). In line with this, a probably Middle Neolithic
shafted stone axe head was found in the princely grave
of Helmsdorf which dates later (1829/1828 BC) (Größler
1907, Tab. 2.7) (Fig. 5).
A newly created set of gold ornaments consisting of a
heavy bracelet, two pins, two spiral hair ornaments, and
one spiral bead was another element of the strategy of
self-portrayal (Meller 2014, 628-649) (note 7). The conscious act of creating traditions - and proclaiming legitimacy derived thereof - is indicated by the identical composition of the gold ornaments in both princely burials of
Leubingen and Helmsdorf (the former predates the latter
by more than a century), as well as the continuous use of
the same specific gold sources in the making of bracelets, pins, spiral hair ornaments, and spiral beads, which
make up the set of gold ornaments (Lockhoff & Pernicka
2014, 230-232; Meller 2014, 628-632) (see Figs. 4 & 5).
The weight of the golden ornaments alone is 255.8 grams
in Leubingen and 176.7 grams in Helmsdorf. Therefore,
they are several times the weight of the earlier Bell Beaker period spiral hair ornaments which were made of gold
wire and weighed only a few grams at most (Meller 2014,
616-620). This additionally underscores the new princes’
aspirations, which went far beyond the role of the Late
Neolithic chiefs.
Equally, a clear special link with the preceding cultures was established in order to substantiate legitimacy.
Beneath the burial mound of Helmsdorf, a Corded Ware
grave has been found (Größler 1907, 40-43). It seems
reasonable to suggest that a pit found underneath the
Bornhöck, another princely barrow recently identified
near Dieskau in the Saale district (see below), could be
likewise interpreted. Seeing as the mound in Leubingen
has not yet been fully studied, it cannot serve as a reliable reference in this regard. One feature observed at
the Bornhöck barrow as well as in Leubingen is that the
mound itself partially comprises an occupation layer,
probably from an earlier settlement (note 8), littered with
finds. Here, again, a link with the past and the preceding
settlers was intentionally established. At the same time,
an important means of subsistence was provided as well:
the fertile soil.
The Bornhöck and the Dieskau Gold Find
In the communal district of Dieskau, part of the municipality of Kabelsketal, in the district of Saalekreis, the largest Bronze Age burial mound in Central Europe, named
Bornhöck, was removed by workers from 1844 on, particularly between 1870 and 1900. Measuring more than
80 metres in diameter and 15 metres in height, the burial
mound had dominated the flat landscape until the 20th century. Excavations between 2014 and 2017 revealed that
the burial mound - similarly to the princely barrows at
Leubingen and Helmsdorf - contained a tent-like wooden
construction surrounded and covered by stone packing.
The artificial mound measured about 65 metres in diameter and 13 metres in height during the Bronze Age (Fig.
6). A 14C data series dates it to the second half of the 19th
century BC or about 1800 BC (Meller & Schunke 2016).
Furthermore, only three kilometres away, a large gold
find, also known as Dieskau I, was discovered during underground drainage works in 1874. Based on the remaining objects retrieved (a flanged axe, two ribbed bracelets,
one open bracelet, and a small eyelet ring (Ösenring))
this find has been dated to the Únětice post-classical
phase (Bz A2b; 1775-1625 BC) (Fig. 7). The Dieskau
gold finds represent a key assemblage suitable for assessing both the Únětice Culture as well as the Early Bronze
Age in Central Europe more generally. In the past, this
has prompted various presumptions concerning its archaeological context alongside repeated studies of its
provenance (Olshausen 1886, 470; Montelius 1900, 4243; Jacob 1911, 180; von Brunn 1959, 55). The suspicion
emerged that the gold objects may well have originated
in the barrow at Dieskau-‘Meiersche Höhe’, potentially a
princely tomb, the previous looting of which was documented during a rescue excavation (Schmidt & Nitzschke
1980, 182). This theory was largely accepted (e.g., Zich
1996, 428, No. E136). A recent comprehensive review of
files has provided further insight into the history of the archaeological finds (Filipp & Freudenreich 2014). According to this study, the gold find of Dieskau appears to have
originally consisted of 13 gold artefacts, allegedly recovered from the ‘Saures Loch’ (‘Sour Hole’), what once
more supported the presupposition of a hoard find. While
eight of the artefacts appear to have been melted down by
a Leipzig jeweller, the remaining five artefacts were sent
to the former Royal Museum in Berlin, from where they
were subsequently taken to the Pushkin State Museum
in Moscow, Russia, after World War II. Apart from the
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
47
1 cm
Fig. 5. Among the inventory of the Helmsdorf princely grave, there is a markedly archaic Middle Neolithic stone axe, a symbol of legitimacy and
entitlement. A set of gold ornaments is also present. Both of these were also contained within the Leubingen grave, dated to around one century earlier.
These ornaments demonstrate the princes’ claim to power.
Photos: J. Lipták, Munich; drawing of the stone axe according to Größler 1907, Tab. 2,7 by M. Wiegmann, State Office for Heritage Management and
Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
48
Acta Archaeologica
Fig. 6. Excavation plan of the core of the large Bornhöck burial mound near Dieskau. It shows the remains of the tent-like burial chamber and stone
packing as well as the wheel ruts from transporting the building material.
Graphic design: J. Filipp, Bad Bibra.
small eyelet ring, which has been lost, the gold artefacts
remain on display undamaged (Piotrovski 2013, 465-466,
No. 157). The chemical composition of the gold used for
the objects has been more recently examined by E. Pernicka (Born et al. 2015, 214). According to this analysis,
the tested artefacts, namely the axe and the ribbed bracelets, exhibit relatively low content of copper and silver,
similar to the spiral hair ornaments (Noppenringe) from
Leubingen (see Lockhoff & Pernicka 2014, 230-232).
Given the find history and considering the results of
the most recent excavations at Bornhöck, I am of the opinion that the Dieskau gold find is related to the Bornhöck
mound’s removal (Meller forthcoming a). That is to say, the
findspot was probably moved to the nearby ‘Saures Loch’
in an attempt to cover up the local workers’ illegal extraction of artefacts, a measure which ultimately proved successful. In my view, it is highly unlikely that the discovery
of possible burial chambers at Bornhöck, which, according
to R. Virchow (1874), had already been half removed by
1874, would coincide with the random discovery of such a
gold find in close geographic proximity purely by chance
and without there being any kind of connection. Another
particularly convincing argument is that in contrast to other regions with Únětice hoard finds such as Bohemia, the
deposition of gold artefacts in hoards appears to have been
unacceptable in the Circum-Harz group; gold was reserved
almost exclusively for graves (Fig. 8). One exception is the
find of two spiral hair ornaments (Noppenringe) in a set-
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
49
Fig. 7. The gold find of Dieskau discovered under dubious circumstances in 1874, which included five existing (replica on display) and eight lost gold
items, probably originated in the Bornhöck burial mound located near Dieskau that was removed around the same time (Meller forthcoming a). This is
consistent with the rule found to apply to all reliably documented gold finds in the Circum-Harz group: all of them are from grave finds, none are from
hoard finds. The Dieskau gold find most likely represents part of the set of gold ornaments placed in one or several princely graves.
Photos: J. Lipták, Munich.
tlement pit in Pretzsch, Burgenlandkreis district (Meller
2014, 697, No. 17). Another exception is the deposition at
Nebra in the Burgenland district, which dates towards the
end of the Únětice Culture. Here, the sheet metal covering the Sky Disc and the hilt mounts of the sword hilts
are made of gold. However, these cannot be considered as
proper gold finds, but rather they are bronze finds with a
golden iconographic programme (Meller 2010).
As for the Dieskau gold find, it seems safe to assume
that it represents the contents of one or several graves discovered over the course of the removal of the Bornhöck
mound. The central burial chamber, remains of which still
exist, can be ruled out as the actual site of provenance,
given the likeliness of looting as early as the High Middle Ages (Meller & Schunke 2016, 455, Annotation 28).
Instead, we may assume the existence of at least one more
burial chamber, perhaps constructed in accordance with
dynastic succession. One important aspect is that the
enormous mound was raised in a relatively short time.
The new burial chamber would therefore either have been
inserted at a later point or already planned for beforehand.
A discovery on the edge of the mound’s stone core,
a pit measuring 1.70 by 1.20 metres in plan and 1.60
metres deep, indeed corresponds to a ‘crouched’ burial.
However, it can be ruled out as being the grave originally
containing the Dieskau gold find, given that the old sur-
50
Acta Archaeologica
Fig. 8. In the Circum-Harz group of the Únětice Culture, ribbed double axes, halberds, certain types of rings, decorative badges, and amber were (almost)
exclusively deposited in hoards, whereas gold (from confirmed contexts) and bronze-made spiral rings have been found (almost) only in graves. Some
other objects have been found in both graves and hoards, although axes are only very rarely found in graves (exceptions and very rare objects are depicted
transparently. The composition of the Dieskau find, depicted here, suggests that the discovered set derives from a grave.
Graphic design: J. Filipp, Bad Bibra.
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
face level had not yet been exposed by 1874 (Virchow
1874). In fact, this deep hollow may point to an earlier
culture, such as either the Corded Ware or Bell Beaker
Culture; this would imply a reference to tradition like at
Helmsdorf (see above).
The Dieskau gold find comprises four golden rings
and one golden axe (Meller 2014, 628-649) (see Fig. 7).
Quite remarkably, the single gold bracelet corresponds to
the bracelet from the Leubingen princely burial with regard to both patterns and profile as well as its terminals
(see Fig. 4) (note 9). Seeing as it was probably forged
directly around a person’s wrist, we may assume that it
was at one point opened by force. Both ribbed bracelets
form a pair and correspond to the Bohemian hoard find at
Minice in the Czech Republic (Moucha 2005, 130, No.
121). This suggests that the custom of wearing one golden bracelet, which was common in the period associated
with Leubingen and Helmsdorf, subsequently changed to
two bracelets. The closest counterpart to the small eyelet ring made of electrum from the Dieskau find is part
of a votive deposit (‘Jarre Montet’) in Lebanon (Gerloff
1993, 66-67, 86, No. 1-44). One particularly striking feature is the 234-gram gold flanged axe with a semi-circular
blade of the Langquaid II type.
If this find of five gold artefacts is already by itself
somewhat unique, it should be added that, as mentioned
earlier, C. von Bülow reports in a letter to the Royal
Museum in Berlin on January 25, 1880 that the find assemblage included another eight gold objects (Filipp &
Freudenreich 2014, 745, 748): ‘In 1874 a treasure was
found during drainage works on my property, also referred to as the ‘Saures Loch’. The treasure consisted of
different ancient Roman gold jewellery objects, bracelets,
buckles, rings, gold wire, etc. In sum, 13 pieces were
reported’ (note 10) (Filipp & Freudenreich 2014, 745).
Unfortunately, their form is not described in any greater
detail. The weight of the entire gold find is placed at four
Prussian pounds, that is 1,868 grams. According to this
figure, the missing eight gold objects thus weighed a total
of 1,232 grams (note 11).
The grave find hypothesis postulated in this article
demands that the composition, namely the four bracelets, is explained. After all, these are noticeably uncommon objects in a grave find. There are two options. Either the find was at some point transported there and
mixed in during the removal of the Bornhöck mound,
meaning that the objects came from several graves at
51
Bornhöck. Or they belonged to the inventory of a single grave where they partially acquired specific meanings. Following this interpretation, the small size of the
electrum-made eyelet ring may have some relevance to
the childhood of the deceased. A comparable find at Byblos testifies to the long-distance contacts of the buried
prince. The large bent (or forcibly opened) gold bracelet
in turn almost appears as a twin find matching the gold
bracelet from Leubingen (cf. Figs. 4 & 7). It could be an
Early Bronze Age replica of the original item or even
a contemporary artefact from the same workshop (note
12). The bracelet could thus have been a more ancient
artefact commemorating a person’s glorious ancestry.
This is rendered unlikely by the fact that the bracelets
were deposited in the princely graves at Leubingen and
Helmsdorf. The thickness and diameter of the bracelets
show that they had to be forged directly around the wrist
in order to be worn. That said, the object from Dieskau
may also be a piece of booty, which the prince of
Dieskau might have snatched from another conquered or
deposed - most likely inferior - ruler of, say, the rank of
the Leubingen or Helmsdorf princes. Alternatively, the
prince of Dieskau may have worn the ring at a younger
age, serving, perhaps, as a lower-ranked prince of the
Leubingen or Helmsdorf kind, before he was finally entitled to wear the two ribbed rings when he became the
supreme ruler of the entire region.
Both ribbed bracelets correspond chronologically
and in their gold composition to the flanged axe of the
Langquaid II type. This would date the find to the Bz
A2b phase (1775-1625 BC). This date moreover corresponds to the recent 14C data from Bornhöck, assuming that the gold find indeed belonged to a later grave
within this burial mound. It can, therefore, be assumed
that at least the axe and both ribbed bracelets formed
part of the inventory of a single grave. What might the
missing eight gold artefacts, weighing the estimated
1,232 grams, have looked like? If the inventory of the
princely graves was canonical and had possibly expanded from one to two bracelets (as can be observed
in the hoards of Minice and Nebra), the Dieskau bracelets would be part of a set with two pins, two spiral
hair ornaments and one spiral bead - all of which is
missing. In this case, three additional gold finds would
remain. It is conceivable that there were originally two
golden axes, one or two golden daggers and/or halberds included as well (note 13). The only other Early
52
Acta Archaeologica
Fig. 9. Comparison of the three known princely graves. While the construction of the burial chambers inside the mounds exhibits Corded Ware
traditions, the sizes of the mounds point to elaborate social stratification and strict demarcations.
Measurements: Leubingen: excavation sketches F. Klopfleisch; Klopfleisch 1878; Höfer 1906; information kindly provided by K. Schauer, Salzburg and
M. Küßner, Thuringian State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology; Helmsdorf: Größler 1907; Kutzke 1907; Bornhöck: Meller & Schunke
2016; information kindly provided by T. Schunke, Saxony-Anhalt State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology.
Graphic design: J. Filipp, Bad Bibra.
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
Bronze Age weapon made of gold in Central Europe
is, incidentally, the gold dagger discovered as a single
find at Inowrocław, Poland (Piotrovski 2013, 466, No.
158.1). The closest location of any other gold weapons
is in Southeastern Europe, e.g., in the hoard finds at
Perşinari and Ţufalău, both in Romania (Primas 1988).
Consequently, we may assume that the golden princely
insignia were expanded to include golden weapons
from the 18th century BC onward.
Comparing the Princely Graves
Alongside the above mentioned identical gold ornaments
and references to the ancestors, the almost identical internal constructions of the princely burial mounds of
Leubingen and Helmsdorf, but also the Bornhöck barrow
were probably just as much an element in the construction of traditions. All three known princely burial mounds
exhibited tent-like wooden chambers inside, with stone
packing above and around (Höfer 1906; Größler 1907;
Meller & Schunke 2016) (Fig. 9). The burial mound at
Leubingen has a diameter of at least 48 metres (note 14),
and that at Helmsdorf has a diameter of 34 metres. With
the height of 8.5 metres, the burial mound at Leubingen
was substantially larger than that at Helmsdorf being 6.82
metres high. The (calculated) volumes would have been
(at least) c. 7,270 cubic metres and 2,031.7 cubic metres,
respectively. The Bornhöck mound, with a diameter of
65 metres, a height of about 13 metres and a volume
of c. 20,050 cubic metres, by far exceeded the former
in size (note 15). Considering that the grave goods in
the three princely tombs reflect the sizes of the graves,
a clear gradation is apparent. The differential is already
implied by the gradient in the weight of gold objects from
Dieskau (about 1,850 grams), Leubingen (255.8 grams),
and Helmsdorf (176.7 grams), assuming of course that
the gold find of Dieskau really did come from Bornhöck
originally. However, regarding Leubingen and Helmsdorf, it should be noted that Leubingen’s distinctive feature (the doubling of deposited daggers and axes) is not
present at Helmsdorf (note 16).
That the princes differed markedly from the ordinary
population in terms of lifestyle is also illustrated by the
Helmsdorf prince’s diet, consisting to an exceptional extent of animal products (Knipper et al. 2015).
THE PRINCELY ARMIES: THE
CONTENTS OF HOARDS
53
For many years scholars interpreted prehistoric hoard
finds, including the Early Bronze Age hoard finds in Central Germany, either as trade deposits or sacrifices to gods
(see, e.g., Hänsel 1997). In addition to the convincing
interpretation as votive offerings to gods, we may postulate that the Early Bronze Age deposit finds in Central
Germany reflected social realities. This is true especially
for the Early Bronze Age hoards linked to the Únětice
Circum-Harz group (von Brunn 1959; Meller 2013a, 516517, Tab. 2). These hoard finds consist mostly of weapons, with jewellery (indeed, almost exclusively ring ornaments) accounting for the second-most distributed type
of artefact. In one instance, namely the hoard of Dieskau
II, an amber necklace was deposited. Given that weapons
are only very rarely included in grave finds (see Fig. 8),
it must be assumed that deposits of weapons represent
actual male warriors (see below). Necklaces and bracelets are also uncommon in graves. Whether the items of
adornment found in the deposits can also be ascribed to
male warriors is not so easy to determine, since necklaces, for example, are often interpreted as being generically
female. The burial in Esperstedt in the district of Burgenland of a young man with a necklace, however, confirms
that it was also common for men to wear jewellery (Bogen 2006). Of particular importance is the possible proof
of military units, the existence of which can be deduced
from the numerical proportions of distinct weapon types
in hoard finds (Meller 2015; 2017). These numerical ratios, then, indicate a hierarchization of weapon types. The
1,178 axes from the Circum-Harz hoard finds account
for the bulk of the weapons (Fig. 10). These are complemented by 26 halberds, 18 daggers, and eight ribbed
double axes. The implication of the large presence of so
many axes should not be underestimated, because precisely the capacity for serial production based on bronze
casting may well have constituted one of the main drivers
of social hierarchization. Serial production is moreover
suggested by chemical analyses; the metal composition
in the hoards is largely homogeneous. This would not be
the case if warriors had obtained or produced their axes
individually (Fig. 11). It would appear that the common
soldiers themselves were only equipped with axes and
commanded by halberd-bearers at a ratio of 1:45, by dagger-bearers at a ratio of 1:65, and by bearers of the ribbed
axes at a ratio of 1:150 (Fig. 12) (note 17). Interestingly,
Acta Archaeologica
54
Burial mounds
Princely grave
Number of axes
in hoards
1
2–5
6–15
35–50
60–100
120–125
290–300
Helmsdorf
Bornhöck
Leubingen
0
20 km
Fig. 10. It is quite conspicuous that (by far) the largest axe hoards associated with the Circum-Harz group of the Únětice Culture were found in the
micro-region of Dieskau, that is, in direct proximity to Bornhöck, the likely origin of the Dieskau gold find. Correspondingly, the prince of Dieskau
appears to have had the largest army under his command.
Map: A. Swieder; graphic design: B. Janzen, both State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
the hoards also exhibit similar ratios of deposited axes.
This shows that the number of axes in hoards with more
than ten axes is not coincidental (Fig. 13). If we round
the numbers up, this comes to 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120 or
300 axes. These numerical sequences could reflect military hierarchies, as have been proven to exist throughout
military history since antiquity. This finding is particularly noteworthy, for it implies new aspects pertaining to
hoard find interpretations which may be relevant beyond
the Únětice Culture (note 18).
It can, therefore, be assumed that the princes apparently had armies at their disposal, and thus an enforcement or administrative staff in the sense posited by Max
Weber (Weber 1922, 29-30; 1978 [1922], 54). The distribution of hoards and graves containing weapons linked
to the Circum-Harz group, in connection with natural
boundaries, suggests the existence of distinct territories
(Fig. 14) (note 19). If the axe hoards represent actual soldiers or troops, the largest armies were located in the region around Dieskau, near the Bornhöck barrow and the
gold find of Dieskau (see Fig. 10). This is certainly not
a coincidence. Only here have axe hoards been found to
contain almost 300 axes and thus, it appears, correspondingly large military units (Meller 2015; 2017).
One rather important observation concerns the presence of numerous grindstones in the lowest, partly conserved stone course of the stone packing inside the Bornhöck mound. According to the responsible researcher, R.
Risch, they represent unusually large grindstones, whose
operation required an exceptional workforce. The larger
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
55
Fig. 11. Charts of trace elements (Ag/Ni, Sb/As) of Early Bronze Age hoard finds in Central Germany. The metal composition of the hoard finds is rather
homogeneous, which suggests mass production of the objects and a subsequent issuing by the prince. This renders individual production or obtainment
unlikely.
Charts: E. Pernicka, Mannheim; graphic design: B. Janzen, State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
Fig. 12. Chart depicting the possible military organisation of the Únětice Culture in Central Germany. While small units of 15 axe bearers were probably
each led by a single, more experienced axe-bearing warrior, the larger units would have been commanded by warriors carrying halberds, daggers or
double axes. Similar forms of military organisation have been proven to exist since classical antiquity.
Graphic design: B. Parsche, State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
56
Acta Archaeologica
Fig. 13. Graph of all Early Bronze Age (phase Bz A2) hoards containing axes in Central Germany (see Meller 2013a, 516-17, Tab. 2). The number of
axes found ranges from one to almost 300 axes. Most hoards contain only a small number of up to 10 or 14 axes, at times in combination with other
bronze items. Hoards consisting of axes alone are far rarer, with the number of axes contained therein ranging from 30 to 45, 60, 90, 120 or 300. This
pattern might reflect a military system where the smallest unit consisted of 15 axes or men.
Graphic design: B. Janzen, State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
Fig. 14. The distribution of hoards and graves containing weapons possibly indicates the existence of distinct territories. In the (assumed) territories of
Naumburg and Goldene Aue princely graves have yet to be discovered. Probably, there were further princely graves in each territory (Zich 2016, 396,
Fig. 20). The hoard find of Nebra, which is located in between the different territories, has not been associated with any particular territory.
Map: J.-H. Bunnefeld; graphic design: B. Janzen, both State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
grindstones might even have been operated by two men.
Given the form of these grindstones, we may assume
that grinding was no longer a female domestic activity,
as is often asserted, but rather that there existed centralised grinding workshops, possibly involving slavery. O.
Montelius and M. Jahn have already noted that Dieskau
represented a particularly wealthy region unmatched in
Central Europe (note 20).
The rulers of Dieskau likely reserved the privilege
of maintaining the highest levels of troop force, doubtlessly enabling them to dominate neighbouring regions
(note 21). These thoughts on the Dieskau territory are
confirmed when the territories of Leubingen and Helmsdorf are examined. Here, the sizes of hoards, or, for that
matter, armies, were in each case also proportional to
the abundance of goods found in the princely graves.
The ruler of the Leubingen area correspondingly had a
lot more troops under his command than the prince of
Helmsdorf. Based on the distribution of grave and hoard
finds as well as the natural boundaries, the region around
Naumburg and the Goldene Aue region may also have
been such delimited territories, suggesting the existence
of princely graves there as well (cf. Zich 2016, 398-399)
(see Fig. 14).
DISTINCTION AND ‘DRESS CODE’:
THE COLOUR OF WEAPONS
As has been shown, the Circum-Harz group of the Únětice
Culture displayed a highly stratified social structure, evidenced not only by princely graves and gold jewellery but
also by the distribution of eyelet pins (Ösenkopfnadel) in
graves (e.g., Schwarz 2014; Knoll & Meller 2016; Meller
& Schunke 2016, 455-462).
Proceeding from there, an examination of the Early
Bronze Age weapon finds in graves and hoards provides
an hitherto unexplored interpretative approachJ. Filipp
to social stratification and armies if the ancient colouring of the bronze weapons is taken into account (Meller forthcoming c). Several rather enlightening archaeometric studies of the colouring of various bronze alloys
have been conducted in recent years (e.g., Berger 2012;
Mödlinger et al. 2017; Radivojević et al. 2018). Different
alloys of copper with tin, arsenic, antimony, and nickel,
as well as their varying combinations, produce distinct
colours (note 22). These alloys must have fascinated the
prehistoric observer simply for the fact that, say, highly
57
alloyed tin bronze produces gold-coloured, i.e. seemingly
golden objects. On the other hand, arsenic bronzes tend to
produce a brighter colouring. Alloys with certain contents
of antimony and nickel appear, if polished, even silvery.
Needless to say, the interpretation of alloys must consider many other factors as well, such as the availability
of certain raw materials, casting properties, mechanical
material properties, and technological sophistication (cf.
Kienlin 2008b). Even though the examination of chemical compositions of Central German Early Bronze Age
hoard finds still remains incomplete, the roughly 1,000
relevant objects studied certainly provide a representative body of evidence (Fig. 15). The intention here is not
to present a conclusive analysis of the phenomenon, but
rather to point out the apparently systematic application
and function of colours in Early Bronze Age artefacts, as
well as the corresponding implications for interpreting
social structures (note 23).
The axe hoards contain 1,178 identifiable axes, of
which 862 have been analysed. The Bz A2a phase (20001775 BC) is dominated by pure copper axes (Fig. 16),
while the later phases from A2a/A2b onward (starting
around 1800 BC) exhibit a rise in tin-alloyed objects.
This indicates that common soldiers, at least at first, did
not have gold-coloured bronze axes, but rather softer copper axes (note 24). It is conceivable that this was not due
to a general shortage of tin but rather intentional, so as
to mark the distance between princes, other leaders, and
common soldiers. An examination of the graves reveals
that all five tested axes from grave finds (so far, there
are 13 identifiable axes from graves (note 25)) were tinalloyed and therefore had a shimmering golden colour.
This can hardly pass for coincidence, but much rather reflects social hierarchy. A glance at the distribution map of
axes in hoards and graves indicates an even distribution
(see Fig. 14); i.e. axes were indeed only deposited in the
graves of distinguished personalities. The ratio of axes
in graves versus hoards is 1:90. The halberd finds correspond to this pattern, yet the daggers do not: some 26
halberds and 18 daggers were found in hoards, and three
halberds and 30 daggers were deposited in graves. Interestingly, the ribbed double axes do not feature as grave
goods at all (see Bunnefeld forthcoming). This means
that there was a distinction between graves and hoards,
a phenomenon which, by the way, can also be observed
with regard to gold (see above), decorative badges, amber, and a number of ring types (see Meller forthcoming
58
Acta Archaeologica
Fig. 15. Depiction of hoards with weapons (containing more than one weapon) associated with the Circum-Harz group of the Únětice Culture for the
territories of Dieskau, Leubingen, Helmsdorf, Naumburg and Goldene Aue. Nebra is located in between these groups and not included. The centre
of the circle represents the princely burials with their respective inventories. The colouring is based on the specific metal alloys (tin bronze ≥ 5% tin;
arsenic/nickel bronze ≥ 3% arsenic/nickel; antimony bronze ≥ 4% antimony; fahlore copper ≥ 4% summed contents of arsenic, antimony and nickel).
The larger part of axes from hoards consists of copper or fahlore copper, with the former outnumbering the latter. Tin bronzes are less commonly
used for axes found in hoards and only start to appear in the Bz A2b phase. Halberds, daggers and double axes are for the most part alloyed with tin,
arsenic or antimony, producing at least for daggers and double axes a clearly visible and intentionally distinct colouring. This also applies to some of
the ornaments. In sum, it appears that a person’s rank was not only denoted by weapons such as axes, daggers, halberds and double axes, but also by
certain combinations and colouring thereof.
Graphic design: J. Filipp, Bad Bibra.
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
59
宇宬室宪宵室宰季宲宩季宷宬宱季室宱宧季室宵家宨宱宬宦季宲宩季室宻宨家季宬宱季宅宽季宄孵室
孻季
孺季
孹季
宄家季季季孨季
學季
孷季
0
孴季
孵季
孶季
孷季
學季
孹季
孺季
宖宱季季季孨
孻季
孼季
孴孳季
孴孴季
宋宨宯宰家宧宲宵宩
孳季
宏宨宸宥宬宱宪宨宱
孴季
宏宨宸宥宬宱宪宨宱
宏宨宸宥宬宱宪宨宱
孵季
宋宨宯宰家宧宲宵宩
宏宨宸宥宬宱宪宨宱
孶季
孴孵季
孴孶季
孴孷季
安宯室宱宪宨宧季宦宫宬家宨宯
安宯室宱宪宨宧季室宻宨
宅宸宵宬室宯季r宱宧
孴學季
室
宇宬室宪宵室宰季宲宩季宷宬宱季室宱宧季室宵家宨宱宬宦季宲宩季宲宷宫宨宵季宲宥宭宨宦宷家季宬宱季宅宽季宄孴宥将宄孵室
孻季
孺季
宄家季季季孨季
孹季
學季
孷季
孶季
孵季
專宇宲宸宥宯宨季室宻宨專
孴季
宋室宯宥宨宵宧季宥宯室宧宨
孳季
宇室宪宪宨宵季宥宯室宧宨
守宼宨宯宨宷季害宬宱
0
孴季
孵季
孶季
孷季
學季
孹季
孺季
孻季
宖宱季季季孨季
孼季
孴孳季
孴孴季
孴孵季
孴孶季
孴孷季
孴學季
宅宸宵宬室宯季r宱宧
宥
Fig. 16. a) Sn-As chart of flanged axes from the Bz A2a phase. During this period, axes made from pure copper or fahlore copper prevail. Higher
tin content, meaning intentionally produced alloys, can be found almost exclusively in axes and chisels from princely graves. This is most likely not
accidental, but rather reflects intentional production of weapons for the prince, either for reasons of their material properties or due to the shiny golden
colour of the tin bronze. b) Sn-As chart of other objects from the Bz A2a phase. The weapons associated with a higher rank in the Únětice Culture usually
consist of two distinct copper alloys. Halberds were mainly made of arsenic bronze, daggers of tin bronze, resulting in different colours respectively.
The ribbed axes are made of various alloys and contain high rates of minor elements. The high prestige associated with the eyelet pins (Ösenkopfnadel)
is moreover indicated by their tin-bronze composition.
Charts: J.-H. Bunnefeld; graphic design: M. Wiegmann, both State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
60
Acta Archaeologica
a) (see Fig. 8). The fact that tin-bronze, shiny golden axes
in the graves do indeed denote a certain elevated social
position is also substantiated by the colouring of the rarer
and thus likely more highly valued daggers, halberds, and
ribbed axes (Fig. 16, see also Fig. 15). The latter are often alloyed with tin, arsenic or antimony. The result is an
interesting and clearly visible play of colours (note 26).
Simultaneously, there are striking differences between
halberds, daggers, and ribbed double axes, too. The halberds consist largely of arsenic bronzes (note 27), probably mainly due to casting properties and mechanical material properties, and the daggers mainly of tin bronzes.
The ribbed double axes are made of different materials,
including tin bronze, antimony bronze, nickel bronze, and
copper, frequently with a high content of minor elements.
Many of them have a strikingly silvery colour.
The fact that axes dating from the Bz A2a/A2b phase
onward were increasingly made of tin alloys and thus had
a golden colour, may be the true reference to the gold axe
discovered in the gold find of Dieskau (see Fig. 7). Given
that even common soldiers carried gold-coloured axes by
this time, the distinction of the supreme prince of Dieskau
may have required him to bear weapons of pure gold. The
phenomenon of precious-metals weaponry ultimately
originated in the Middle East and Southeastern Europe,
where they have been encountered in graves, hoards, and
temple treasures, demonstrating their owner’s superior
status (Primas 1988, 162-178; Hansen 2001, 42-58).
From a broader perspective, the use of distinct alloys
for different objects was certainly not confined to the
Únětice Culture but was widespread throughout Europe
during the Early Bronze Age. In the region north of the
Alps, axes of the Salez type consist of fahlore copper
amalgamated with arsenic, antimony, nickel, and silver
up to several per cents, but almost entirely without tin
(Kienlin 2008b, 121-123). Axes of the Neyruz type and
the Saxon type, by contrast, are made of copper with a
low content of minor elements and are partially alloyed
with tin. The most recent axes of the Langquaid type, in
turn, all consist of tin bronze alloys containing only a few
trace elements (Kienlin 2008b, 221-224). The material
properties of the alloys were apparently widely known
and used in different ways to achieve the required hardness so that axes made of tin alloy were not necessarily
any harder than other alloys (Kienlin 2008b, 267-280).
Halberds made of arsenic bronze occur all over Europe,
while halberds made of tin bronze have been found in
the Irish-Scottish region, Central Germany, Northeastern
Germany, and Southern Scandinavia, and in some instances in Poland and southern and southeastern Central
Europe (Horn 2014, 147-155). The daggers from southern Central Europe consist mainly of tin bronze with an
arsenic content of less than one per cent (note 28). Although the interpretation of such alloys is complex and
multi-layered, the parallels with the use of specific alloys
in Central Germany may point to large-scale dissemination of fundamental notions regarding the value of alloys,
perhaps in part transmitted via contacts with the Únětice
Culture.
The hoard at Dieskau II illustrates well the potential
benefits of detailed colour analysis (Fig. 17) (note 29).
The hoard was discovered slightly to the north of the village of Dieskau in 1904 (von Brunn 1959, 55-56). The
fact that it included 14 halberds, among other artefacts,
is particularly remarkable. In eleven instances the halberds were mere blades and three were blades with rudiments of metal shafts. Further items included one axe,
two ribbed double axes, various necklaces, bracelets or
anklets as well as a copper spiral necklace and an amber
necklace. When assessing this hoard without taking into
consideration the alloy composition or artefact colour, it
is not possible to attribute the single axe or the two ribbed
axes and ring jewellery to any hypothetical person.
If we do consider colour analysis, however, we learn
that one halberd blade is amalgamated with 7.6% tin,
while the remaining halberds are bronze alloys with a
4.1% to 6.1% content of arsenic. The gold-shimmering
halberd made of tin bronze can be grouped, due to its alloy (or, for that matter, colour), with the axe, one ribbed
double axe, possibly also the second, silvery-gleaming
ribbed double axe, and five items from the set of ring
jewellery. This very much looks like the equipment of a
single warrior, who likely commanded other armed men,
given his gold-shimmering equipment. Accordingly, it
appears reasonable to ascribe the amber necklace to him,
as well (note 30). Two of the shafted halberds exhibit a
fahlore copper socket alongside an arsenic-bronze blade.
The remaining eleven halberd blades are amalgamated,
as described, with arsenic, while the rivets, as far as is
known, are made of fahlore copper or more pure copper.
Apart from that, one ring and one spiral bracelet are made
of fahlore copper. One ribbed double axe, as well as one
ring, are made of antimony bronze. The listed objects cannot be matched with a particular individual. Seeing as the
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
61
Fig. 17. This detailed depiction of the alloys used in the Dieskau II hoard shows that a halberd, a ribbed double axe, an axe and five pieces of the set
of rings are made of tin bronze. This represents a complete, gold-coloured set of equipment of a single warrior. The second, silvery-shimmering ribbed
double axe possibly also belonged to him. The remaining 13 halberds represent additional warriors who were most likely his subaltern military leaders.
The latter likely wore the remaining ring ornaments made largely of copper.
Graphic design: J. Filipp, Bad Bibra.
62
Acta Archaeologica
remaining ring jewellery is made of copper, any specific
ascription is impossible here as well. Even though a certain association of the ring and jewellery ornaments with
the male vestments has so far not been possible - a consequence of the lack of ornaments present in Central German graves (see above) - an initial glance reveals that the
ten open loop-headed necklaces (Ösenhalsring), the other
twelve rings, and the two spiral bracelets and copper spiral necklace, given their number, could be conveniently
matched with the 13 halberds as jewellery inventory.
PRINCELY RESIDENCE OR ‘MEN’S
HOUSE’? THE LONGHOUSES OF
DERMSDORF AND ZWENKAU
Studies of the Dermsdorf complex in the district of Sömmerda support the notion that weapon hoard finds represent ritual relicts of armed troops. During road works
in 2011, pathbreaking excavations conducted by M.
Küßner and K.-P. Wechler unearthed an unusually large
Early Bronze Age longhouse located about 2,200 metres
to the west of an Early Bronze Age settlement (Küßner
2015) (Fig. 18). It was built in NE-SW alignment and lies
only 3.6 kilometres to the northeast and within sight of
the Leubingen barrow. One particularly striking aspect is
the fact that the narrow southwestern side of the house
was dug into a Corded Ware period burial mound, which
must still have existed at the time and seems to have contained two additional graves, one from the Bell Beaker
period and one from the Early Bronze Age (note 31).
Right in front of the opposite north-eastern side of the
house, a hoard find was discovered containing 98 axes
and two unfinished halberd cast blanks deposited in a vessel. The house’s radiocarbon dating and the hoard find
date the assemblage to a later period than the Leubingen
burial mound, allowing for a potential link between the
two (Küßner 2015, 196-197). It seems very unlikely that
the hoard find, the Corded Ware burial mound, and the
princely grave of Leubingen would be aligned along a
straight axis by mere coincidence (note 32).
The large three-aisled house itself, measuring 44 metres in length and 11 metres in width, may have been the
residence of a distinguished person such as, for instance,
a prince of the Leubingen rank. A factor supporting this
view, alongside the size and characteristic construction
of the structure, is the most peculiar location isolated
from other houses. As I have stated elsewhere, however,
I favour the ‘men’s house’ interpretation, albeit with an
extension (Meller 2013a, 520-521; Schwarz 2014, 727728). The length of 44 metres allowed for the accommodation of up to 100 people along the long walls, assuming
a width of 90 centimetres to one metre per individual seat
or bed. Comparable ‘men’s houses’ serving as assembly
or leisure halls or dormitories and often associated with
secret societies or masked societies (as known from, e.g.,
certain African contexts), often serve as storage for tools
and weapons and have been associated with countless
ethnic groups worldwide (see Schurtz 1902). One possible scenario might have been that the community of
soldiers living in the men’s house sacrificed the weapons issued by the particular prince in front of the building
when he died; perhaps as a preparation for the issuing of
new weapons by the succeeding ruler so as to symbolically secure his subjects’ loyalty (Meller 2015, 248; 2017,
1538). Proceeding from this concrete finding, a broader
perspective may allow for the more general consideration of weapon hoards (and, perhaps, equipment hoards
as well). The large weapon hoards in the Dieskau region
would correspondingly have been sacrificed at the death
of each prince who had originally issued the weapons
(see above).
Another rather noteworthy feature is the unusual deposit of a bronze bodkin in a posthole at the house’s eastern corner. It exhibits some resemblance to a chisel found
at the princely grave at Leubingen (see Fig. 4), which appears to present the prince as a metal artisan, or rather
as a master of the new material (Bertemes 2010, 154).
The small bodkin from Dermsdorf may, therefore, be a
foundation sacrifice in honour of the prince who commissioned the construction of the ‘men’s house’ to accommodate his troops. The deposition of a cushion stone, which
likewise features in the Leubingen prince’s set of tools,
in the circular enclosure at Schönebeck, in the district of
Salzland (see below), which otherwise lacks deposits,
underlines the plausibility of such an interpretation. This
stone apparently was sufficient to symbolise the prince’s
presence.
Given that the house’s association with a Corded
Ware period burial mound cannot be accidental, the reference to the Corded Ware Culture represents another link
between the men’s house and the Leubingen mound. During the Early Bronze Age, these mounds must have been
visible from far away, significantly exceeding the Bell
Beaker mounds in size. The princes’ awareness of the his-
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
63
Fig. 18. Photograph of the house floor in Dermsdorf including the location of the hoard at the ridge post of the northeastern side, the Corded Ware burial
mound at the southwestern side, and the position of the Leubingen princely barrow, the view of which is blocked by trees in the picture. The spatial
relationship between the hoard, the longhouse, the Corded Ware burial mound, and the princely barrow of Leubingen, namely that they are all more or
less aligned along a straight axis, is most likely intentional rather than accidental.
Photo: Mario Küßner, Thuringian State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology, 11.09.2011, modified; graphic design: B. Janzen, State Office
for Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
torical ancestry of both groups, the Corded Ware and the
Bell Beaker Cultures, is corroborated by the analyses of
the Leubingen grave described above. By consciously appropriating the more ancient Corded Ware period mound,
the prince and his soldiers were making an explicit reference to the prince’s historical legitimacy.
At Zwenkau, in the district of Leipzig, another longhouse, substantially longer and similarly isolated, has
been found (Fig. 19) (note 33). The house sits above an
earlier building in E-W alignment, next to which there
is another smaller construction. At a length of 57 metres
and a width of nine metres, it is even slightly larger than
the Dermsdorf men’s house. The Zwenkau house is also
three-aisled, and its central postholes are in similar positions to those at the Dermsdorf house. However, here the
outer posts do not comprise small, closely lined-up posts,
but rather large posts erected at roughly one-metre intervals. As at Dermsdorf, the Zwenkau house is constructed
on the foundations of a Corded Ware burial mound. The
mound has a diameter of about 15 metres and contained
two graves. It is significant that the burial mound was previously, i.e. during an earlier phase of the Early Bronze
Age, integrated into some kind of sanctuary by surrounding it with a circular trench. As was common in the Early
and Middle Bronze Age circular trenches, its opening
faced the sunrise in the east. Another noteworthy aspect
is the apparent burning and levelling of the Early Bronze
Age house located next to the Corded Ware burial mound.
Debris and burnt pottery were used to fill in the Early
Bronze Age circular trench. Some of that material of the
64
Acta Archaeologica
Fig. 19. Site of the large ‘men’s house’ (or longhouse) in Zwenkau, whose southern long wall with an entrance in its centre was most likely intentionally
built on top of a previously levelled Corded Ware burial mound with an Early Bronze Age circular trench so as to establish a link to the ancestors. The
circular trench may be related to the burial mound in ritual terms or associated with the house itself. Ever since the discovery of the sites in Pömmelte
and Schönebeck, we know that there were links between the Corded Ware and Únětice Cultures, but also between graves and circular complexes. Both
might have been part of a strategy of power legitimation during the Early Bronze Age.
Source: Huth & Stäuble 1998, 189, Fig. 2; Schunke 2009, 274, Fig. 1; with kind permission of H. Stäuble, Archaeological Heritage Office of Saxony.
Únětice classical phase was also deposited in the postholes of the new longhouse and thus provides a terminus
post quem. This gives us an idea of the sequence of events
(Schunke 2009, 305-308). At Zwenkau, the construction on top of the foundations of the Corded Ware burial mound most likely was not due to shortage of space,
given the vast flat landscape. Instead, an intentional link
to the ancestors appears to have been established. The
(probably intentional) burning of the old house and filling
of the circular trench is reminiscent of what took place at
the circular enclosure at Pömmelte towards the end of its
period of use, around 2050 BC (see below). Apart from
the entrance at the southern side of the large building,
there were probably entrances at both narrow sides on the
eastern and western sides as well. During the excavation
of the Zwenkau house, however, no Early Bronze Age
deposit was found. Perhaps the commissioning prince
outlived the house’s lifespan, or the depositional custom
did not demand that the deposition be placed right in front
of the assembly house. One factor in line with this view
are the numerous weapon deposits unrelated to construction or house finds (see above) (note 34). Applying the
same parameters from Dermsdorf to the Zwenkau house,
the latter could have accommodated up to 65 individuals on each longitudinal side, totalling 130 warriors. One
pointer, without claiming any reliable link, is that one of
the axe hoards of the Dieskau territory - namely the hoard
found at Schopkau in the district of Saalekreis - yielded
124 axes. Seeing as the largest hoards here contained up
to 300 axes, while houses of 100 metres length are rather
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
improbable, the troops behind these major axe hoards
may have occupied a total of two or three Dermsdorf or
Zwenkau-sized houses. As the case of Dermsdorf demonstrates, the discovery of such isolated houses is contingent on pure coincidence or else requires large-scale
excavations as in the case of the lignite opencast mining
site of Zwenkau.
A CHANGE IN RELIGIOUS
IDEOLOGY. PÖMMELTE AND
SCHÖNEBECK: SACRED SITES AT
THE INTERSECTION BETWEEN THE
BELL BEAKER AND THE ÚNĚTICE
CULTURES
Until very recently, finds broadening our access to and
advancing our understanding of the religious landscape
of the Late Neolithic and Únětice societies in Central
Germany have been quite limited. Essentially, any assessments regarding religious beliefs and practices had
to be based exclusively, as is the case in most regions, on
graves, deviant burials, and hoards. The recently excavated circular enclosures at Pömmelte and Schönebeck, both
located in the Salzlandkreis district, however, provide us
for the first time ever in the Central German context with
monumental architectural constructions and archaeological evidence of related burial and sacrificial practices;
other regions have long yielded such structures, for instance, southern England with its henge monuments.
Pömmelte and Schönebeck only make sense in combination, seeing as they were successively constructed,
their periods of use overlapped, and they stood in a particular spatial relation to one another (Meller forthcoming
d; Spatzier forthcoming). The sacred site of Pömmelte
appears to have begun as a small rectangular enclosure
dating to the Corded Ware period. Its two entrances are
aligned with the point of sunrise during the summer solstice and the point of sunset during the winter solstice,
respectively (Fig. 20). This suggests the performance of
ritual ceremonies following the seasonal cycle (Spatzier
2017, 242-243; Meinike forthcoming, Fig. 1). A large,
representative Corded Ware burial located 50 metres to
the west may be associated with the enclosure (note 35).
The monumental circular enclosure at Pömmelte, consisting of palisade ditches, segmented ditches and postholes,
has been analysed and detailed in a publication by A.
65
Spatzier (Spatzier 2017). The site appears to have been
in use from around 2300 to 2050 BC. One key finding
is that the ceramic forms at Pömmelte no longer display
any kind of Corded Ware elements; they are exclusively
related to the Bell Beaker Culture, already hinting at the
Únětice Culture. This is hardly surprising, given that the
representation of the Corded Ware people in archaeological materials markedly declines from the 23rd century
BC and disappears entirely from 2200 BC onward (see
above). As we know from genetic analyses, however,
the erstwhile bearers of the Corded Ware Culture did not
disappear. They adopted the material culture of the Bell
Beaker Culture and most likely had a significant role in
the construction and ceremonial operation of Pömmelte
and Schönebeck. The ritual character of the Pömmelte
site is illustrated by the surrounding graves of male individuals, and particularly by the sacrificial pits, at the
bottom of which lie shards of intentionally destroyed
ceramic vessels - mostly drinking cups - as well as animal bones, grindstones and human skeletal remains of
women and children, and, in the layer above, still more
grindstones and cattle jaw halves. The end of the site’s
period of use is marked by the deposition of human skulls
and stone axes at the top of the long filled-in pits (Spatzier 2017, 151-183). Towards the end of that period, the
trench was filled up with the remains of the burnt palisades. This suggests that the structure was intentionally
destroyed around 2050 BC. In terms of its interpretation,
Pömmelte appears - not forgetting the site being aligned
to the course of the sun - to have served as the site of
complex ritual procedures performed by different groups
of people. Probably human sacrifices were part of these
rituals, combining displays of ultimate authority with supernatural justifications. They seem to be typical for the
emergence of highly stratified social systems (Watts et al.
2016).
The beginning and end of the period of use of the
Schönebeck circular enclosure cannot be dated exactly.
What can be ascertained is that its period of use overlapped with that of Pömmelte during the 22nd to 21st centuries BC, and it was possibly abandoned around 1775
BC. In contrast to Pömmelte, indicators of sacrifice are
entirely missing at Schönebeck; traces of this practice,
which one might expect in the ground, are not present.
Instead, certain performances during gatherings or ceremonies and the reference to the sun’s celestial course
were likely prioritised here. The only deposit, the cushion
Acta Archaeologica
66
0
50 m
Circular enclosure
outer post ring
ditch segment
segmented ditch
ring ditch
palisade
post ring A
post ring B
shaft pits
post ring segments
Associated features
graves and »cenotaphs«
pit cluster
pits in SE
Other
Corded Ware features
other features
excavation boundary
Fig. 20. Map of the Bell Beaker period circular enclosure of Pömmelte, including, among other things, the sacrificial pits, Bell Beaker and Únětice
graves and cenotaphs, and the older features associated with the Corded Ware Culture. The site was abandoned during the early phase of the Únětice
Culture. The circular enclosure at Schönebeck was constructed about 100 years later than such at Pömmelte and used until about 1775 BC, that is,
until the period of the Nebra Sky Disc. The Schönebeck circular enclosure replaced Pömmelte after the latter’s ritual destruction. It is important to
note that Schönebeck enclosure displays an entirely distinct character, without any reference to human sacrifice or burials. This also suggests a power
concentration among the princes.
Source: Spatzier & Bertemes 2017, 657, Fig. 2 with modifications.
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
stone of a blacksmith, similar to that found in the Leubingen princely grave, may reflect the changed social relations and the emphasis on strict hierarchies in the sense
of ‘representing’ the ruler (see above). One result of both
sites’ prolonged coexistence - until Pömmelte was intentionally destroyed - is the opportunity to observe and reconstruct the transition from Late Neolithic and earliest
Bronze Age religious forms to the new social and political structure of the advanced Únětice Culture. While the
Pömmelte circular enclosure represents mainly the Late
Neolithic ‘heroic’ society without finished centralisation
of power, the Schönebeck site possibly shows a cosmological order with an absolute concentration of charisma
in the sun itself from which the Únětice princes then derived their authority (cf. Voegelin 2002).
AMBER AND BRONZE. THE
ÚNĚTICE SYSTEM OF EXCHANGE
A brief glance at the areas north of the Únětice Culture
indicates another factor contributing to its power. Large
quantities of amber from the North were transported to
the Únětice territory, particularly to Bohemia but also to
Central Germany, mainly during the Bz A2a phase (20001775 BC) (Ernée 2013; Meller 2017, 1536, Fig. 6) (Fig.
21). From here, the amber was passed on to the southern neighbouring cultures in substantial volumes. It was
thereafter confined to these cultures and only rarely transported to distant regions. These rare long-distance contacts likely represented special forms of exchange, such
as princely gifts, given that amber occurs mainly in finds
linked to high-ranking social contexts, e.g., the circular
burial site B at Mycenae, Greece (Harding et al.1974,
164; Czebreszuk 2011, 210-211, Nos. 120 & 122). In
these cases, the amber’s provenance is the southern Scandinavian and the Baltic coast, respectively (Woltermann
2016, 237-239; Vandkilde 2017, 144, Fig. 86). The immediate northern neighbours of the Únětice Culture in what
today is the Altmark, Brandenburg, Mecklenburg and
Pomerania were unable to supply any noteworthy volume of amber given the material’s scarcity there. Consequently, it appears all the more astonishing, at least at first
glance, that they had access to a large number of Únětice
weapons and other bronze objects (some of which are
deposited in large hoards) precisely at the time of the
most extensive amber importing by the Únětice Culture
(Rassmann 1993, 37-48; Vandkilde 2017, 147, Abb. 87).
67
A good example of this are the hoards containing eyelet
rings (Ösenringe), which seem to have been brought to
the north from the Únětice areas in larger numbers (BathBílková 1973, 27, Fig. 2; reprinted in Vachta 2016, 38,
Fig. 14). In this context, it is striking that in the actual regions of provenance, i.e. the coastlines of West and North
Jutland and the Danish isles, and also the Baltic coast,
there is no comparable presence of Únětice bronzes, but
instead only scattered single finds and rare hoard finds
such as that in Pile, Sweden (Lomborg 1973, 155; Rassmann 1993, 45; Vandkilde 1996, 263f.; 2017, 140-157).
This raises the probability that the regions to the immediate north of the Únětice Culture organised the import of
amber to the Únětice system - both to Bohemia and Central Germany - and received large quantities of bronze
items in return, including weapons such as halberds (note
36). The bronze objects were largely withheld from the
more northern regions, and direct contact occurred only
sporadically. That people in Scandinavia certainly valued
the Únětice bronze items, without having any immediate (or other) access to them, is indicated not only by
flint daggers with fake ‘casting seams’ (Lomborg 1973,
156) resembling metal daggers, but also by the emulation of eyelet pins (Ösenkopfnadeln) made of bone found
on the Danish isles (Knoll & Meller 2016, 285, Fig. 1,
300). It is quite likely that amber represents only the archaeologically best detectable trading good and that other
trading goods, including honey, hides, wool, or slaves
were just as important in the north-south exchange. Owing to the fact that no additional goods from the south,
apart from the few scattered bronze finds, can be identified in Scandinavia as exchange equivalent to amber, it
may be assumed that the Southern Scandinavian goods
were exported from there by the societies immediately
to the north of the Únětice Culture - either in the form
of tribute or through violent means - and imported into
the Únětice system in exchange for weapons and other
bronze items. From the Bz A2b phase (around 1775/1750
BC) onward, the import of amber to both Central Germany and Bohemia from sources in the north gradually
came to an end (Ernée 2013). The question if and, if so
to what extent, this equally applies to bronze items in
Northern Germany requires further study. It remains unclear, moreover, why this exchange between the Únětice
Culture and the north apparently ceased at this point in
time. While communication ties between the north and
the Únětice Culture gradually diminished, the latter’s ex-
Acta Archaeologica
68
Early Bronze Age amber finds
Middle Bronze Age amber finds
Únětice Culture
0
500 km
Fig. 21. Distribution map of the Early Bronze Age (c. 2200-1600 BC) and Middle Bronze Age (c. 1600-1300 BC) amber finds against the background
of the distribution area of the Únětice Culture (2200-1600 BC). It shows that amber was limited to the Únětice Culture and its immediate southern
neighbours during the Early Bronze Age, making its way as far as the eastern Mediterranean only in the form of princely gifts. Following the demise
of the Únětice Culture and its control over amber exchange at the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age, this changed entirely, and amber began to be
transported to southwestern Germany, the Carpathian basin and the Mediterranean in large quantities.
Map: A. Swieder, J.-H. Bunnefeld, B. Janzen, State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
change with the southern neighbours continued to flourish uninterrupted. These observations highlight not only
the (cultural) charisma, exertion of influence, degree of
organisation and stability, but also the military power of
the Únětice Culture.
CONCLUSION
The analysed find categories of graves, settlements, hoard
finds, and ritual architecture allow us to not only describe
but also to define and classify the Únětice social system.
Finally, I wish to discuss the hypothesis whether the
Circum-Harz group of the Central German Únětice Culture constituted an ‘early state’ in the sense devised by
Max Weber (Weber 1922, 29; 1978 [1922], 54-56) (note
37). The Weberian definition of the state was further refined by, for example, St. Breuer (1998). In contrast to
other theories of the state, such as that put forth by P.
Bourdieu (2014), the Weberian theory not only bases itself on certain notions with regard to modernity but also
on historical conditions.
If we apply the Weberian criteria of statehood, then
the results of the analysis of the Leubingen and Helmsdorf
princely barrows clearly indicate ‘legitimate domination’
in both its charismatic and traditional form (Weber 1922,
124; 1978 [1922], 215) (note 38). Correspondingly, while
the princely ornaments, or insignia, testify to the sanctity
of tradition, the abundant weaponry underscores the heroic dimension of an order based on charismatic authority.
The military organisation of the administrative staff
as manifested in the form of an army and its hierarchical
differentiation confirms that there was not only authority but a ruling organisation in the Weberian sense. That
this ruling organisation moreover amounted to a political
organisation in the Weberian sense is illustrated by the
longevity of the Únětice Culture and its hierarchy in the
Circum-Harz area over a period of more than 400 years;
the Circum-Harz area constituted the territory of the ruling organisation and the groups settling within its confines the ‘people of the state’ in the Weberian sense (Weber 1922, 627; 1978 [1922], 922) (Fig. 22).
The question of the monopoly on physical force can
also be answered. The discovery of the monumental
Bornhöck mound and its link to the gold find of Dieskau
reveals a quality of authority entirely distinct from that
in Leubingen and Helmsdorf. Given that the Únětice
Culture represented a highly standardised order based
69
on hierarchical authority, as I hope to have demonstrated
in the preceding pages, the gradient in the weight of the
gold objects from Dieskau (about 1,850 grams), Leubingen (255.8 grams), and Helmsdorf (176.7 grams) further
underlines the hierarchical order of the princes. Furthermore, they were distinguished from their subaltern military and perhaps also civilian leaders which had only gold
spiral hair ornaments (up to a maximum of 10 grams of
gold). The standardised order is also demonstrated by
the volumes of the princely burial mounds of c. 20,050
cubic metres, to (at least) c. 7,270 cubic metres and, finally, 2,031.7 cubic metres. The princes’ claim to historical legitimacy is additionally evidenced by the inclusion
of fertile soil and, more importantly, of materials from
earlier settlements, in the barrows of Leubingen and the
Bornhöck, as well as ancient ‘weapons’ in Leubingen
and Helmsdorf, respectively. This reference to tradition
is equally displayed in the princes’ or men’s houses and
their architectural integration with earlier Corded Ware
period burial mounds.
The monopoly on legitimate physical force required
for classification as a state is indicated by the size of the
armies. The Dieskau region appears to have had military
troops from the Leubingen period onward, i.e. starting
in the 20th century BC. They were several times the size
of both the Leubingen and Helmsdorf armies, which, in
turn, were proportional to one another. In this sense, and
despite the relatively late dating of the Dieskau burial
mound of Bornhöck to around 1800 BC at the latest, a
centralised form of rule exercised in the Dieskau region
can be assumed from as early as the 20th-19th centuries BC
onward. If nothing else, the construction of the Bornhöck
mound must have certainly been assertive. Military dominance and hierarchical organisation are the ingredients
for turning a (traditional or charismatic) ruling organisation into a novel political organisation. This includes the
monopoly on the use of legitimate force. Consequently,
all relevant criteria in the Weberian definition of statehood are evidenced.
We likewise find all criteria fulfilled if we look to the
further refinement of state theory by St. Breuer (Breuer
1990; 1998). The ‘oligopolistic orders’ (note 39) of the
Corded Ware and Bell Beaker Cultures declined after
the ‘hierarchization and verticalization’ (note 40) - especially via the ‘control over the most scarce and important good […]: charisma’ (note 41) - of the monopoly on
violence (Breuer 1998, 39). The person-related charisma
70
Acta Archaeologica
Fig. 22. The highly stratified social structure of the Circum-Harz group of the Únětice Culture according to the contents of graves. Persons buried
together with bronze items, including eyelet pins (Ösenkopfnadel), daggers, and (very rarely) axes stood markedly above the common population,
which were either not even buried at all or received only pottery as grave goods. Higher-ranking individuals were additionally distinguished by golden
spiral hair ornaments. Above all of them ranked the princes from the burials at Leubingen and Helmsdorf, who in turn were subordinate to the supreme
prince of Dieskau.
Graphic design: J. Filipp, Bad Bibra.
became an ‘official and hereditary charisma’ (note 42)
(Breuer 1998, 39) at least since the appearance of gold
ornaments. A monopolisation of the ‘supernatural as imaginary sources of prosperity’ (note 43), however, cannot reliably be contended in this context, even if the destruction of the Pömmelte circular enclosure and the sole
use of the Schönebeck site might point in this direction
(Breuer 1998, 39). The Bornhöck princes and the princes
associated with the Dieskau gold find may have been
the first princes to reserve the right to exclusive access
to the supernatural world. In contrast to Leubingen and
Helmsdorf, this is symbolised by the almost oriental custom of including gold weapons in the grave. The analysis
of the contemporary Nebra Sky Disc, the earliest version
of which is only conceivable through long-distance trade
contacts, adds further clarification (Meller 2010, 59-62;
see also Meller & Michel 2018) (Fig. 23). The rational,
intellectual substance in particular demonstrates a high
degree of independence certainly rather uncommon for
prehistoric conditions, and above all the capability of de-
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
71
Fig. 23. Photograph of the Nebra Sky Disc. The Sky Disc granted its owner exclusive access to the supernatural sphere. During its initial period of use,
it assisted in the creation of a lunisolar calendar and thus in the establishment of a new temporal order. Given that the Sky Disc would be most likely
associated with the Dieskau princes, it ultimately demonstrates their claim to state power.
Photo: J. Lipták, Munich.
vising a lunisolar calendar. The latter, in turn, allowed for
an extremely accurate positing of time including even the
capacity for predicting lunar eclipses. The introduction
of a new temporal order underscores the claim to entitlement and power of the Únětice princes. The Dieskau
princes, with whom the Sky Disc is most likely associated, thereby clearly transcended the definitional boundaries of chiefdom: ‘The status of the chief can now change
from being a representative of the community vis-à-vis
the gods to becoming a representative of the gods before
the community, with exclusive discretionary powers over
spiritual goods - a reversal synonymous with the transformation of chiefdom to charismatic state.’ (note 44)
(Breuer 1998, 39). It is precisely this ‘change at the symbolic level’ (note 45) that ‘distinguishes the state from
the chiefdom’ (note 46) (Breuer 1998, 40). Not long after 1600 BC, the ‘Únětice state’ eventually disintegrated
due to direct contacts between more southern regions and
Southern Scandinavia (Meller 2013a, 521-523; Vandkilde 2014). No comparable hierarchization was to occur
72
Acta Archaeologica
in Central Germany up until the Germanic societies of
the early Roman Imperial Period. Needless to say, the deliberations presented here are no more than a hypothetic
model, which future research will have to scrutinise particularly in economic archaeology, on the basis of the settlements, and scientifically on the basis of the health and
nutritional state of those buried in the graves.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would especially like to thank J.-H. Bunnefeld, State
Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt, for revising the manuscript and doing the
required research. Furthermore, I express my gratitude
to R. Risch, UAB Barcelona, for discussions and helpful
comments and E. Pernicka, CEZ Mannheim, and C.-H.
Wunderlich, State Office for Heritage Management and
Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt, for discussing the metal
colours. Also, I owe my thanks to F. Knoll, MLU HalleWittenberg, and B. Stoll-Tucker, State Office for Heritage
Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt, for proofreading as well as to J. Filipp for designing many of the
figures.
NOTES
1. On dendrochronological dating: Becker et al. 1989.
A new examination of the Helmsdorf princely grave
(CEZ Mannheim, MAD 1479 and MAD 1480) revealed a
dendro-date around 1829/1828 BC (wane).
2. Inter alia: Hansen 2002, 151f.; Sørensen 2005;
Kienlin 2008a; Bertemes 2010, 154; Meller 2014, 628647.
3. Initially pointed out by Fischer 1956, 190; Knapp
1999; Strahm 2010, 168-174. See Meller forthcoming b.
4. All maps are taken from the simultaneously published article: Schwarz & Meller forthcoming.
5. It should be emphasised, however, that largely undecorated pottery was already present in the later Bell
Beaker Culture (Schwarz 2015, 686).
6. In this context, I owe thanks for the helpful comment to D. Kaufmann, Halle (Saale). See also Klassen
2004, 40 and Strahm 2010, 168.
7. Here, golden bracelets are used for the first time
as a marker of distinction in Central Europe, starting off
a long tradition (Metzner-Nebelsick 2010; Knoll et al.
2014). Interestingly, a golden bracelet was also included
in grave no. 75 at Fuente Álamo, Spain (Schubart 2012,
139-141). This is intriguing given that the El Argar Culture exhibits certain parallels with the Únětice Culture,
including apsidal houses, similarly standardised forms of
undecorated pottery, pithos burials, distinction through
precious metal ornaments (see Lull et al. 2013, 596-602).
In contrast to the Únětice Culture, the distinctive metal
used in El Argar is not gold, but silver.
8. Klopfleisch 1878, 553; Meller & Schunke 2016,
441-447; The information kindly provided by M. Küßner,
Thuringian State Office for Heritage Management and
Archaeology.
9. Only the weight of the Dieskau bracelet (149.51
grams) slightly deviates from that of the Leubingen
bracelet (199.4 grams).
10. Original quote: “Im Jahre 1874 wurde auf meinem Grundstück, ‘das Saure Loch‘ genannt, beim Drainieren mehrere Fuß unter der Erde ein Schatz gefunden,
bestehend aus verschiedenen alten römischen goldenen
Schmuckgegenständen, Armreifen, Spangen, Ringen,
Golddraht etc. Im Ganzen sollen es 13 Stück gewesen
sein.”
11. Advice kindly provided by K. Michel, Zurich,
based on the scanned letter by C. von Bülow (Filipp &
Freudenreich 2014, 745).
12. Unfortunately, in contrast to the axe and the ribbed
bracelet, this bracelet was not tested in The Pushkin State
Museum of Fine Arts in Moscow (see Born et al. 2015),
the archaeo-metallurgic examination remains to be done.
13. Although C. von Bülow mentions only ‘golden
jewellery objects […]’ (Filipp & Freudenreich 2014,
745), single gold weapons cannot be ruled out, seeing
that the existing axe was not reported as such either. The
indicated weight does not contradict this assumption.
14. Section cuts at the foot of the mound in spring
2017 and 2018 allowed for a recalculation (information
kindly provided by M. Küßner, Thuringian State Office
for Heritage Management and Archaeology; see Küßner,
Wechler forthcoming).
15. Leubingen: recalculation of the volume considering the diameter of (at least) 48 metres and a height of
8.5 metres (cf. Höfer 1906, 15); Helmsdorf: information
in Größler 1907, 4. Calculations kindly provided by T.
Schunke, State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt.
16. Even though H. Gößler presumes the disintegration of additional bronze objects as a possibility (Größler
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
1907, 23), I consider it rather implausible that larger objects should be affected by this given the existing bronze
finds.
17. The changes in these numeric ratios compared to
Meller 2015 and Meller 2017 are due to the fact that here
only those finds from the core area of the Central German Únětice Culture were taken into account, while those
from the northern periphery were not (cf. Meller 2013a,
516-517, Tab. 2)
18. A similar interpretation was proposed by K.
Randsborg (1995, 44-52) concerning Southern Scandinavian hoard finds.
19. B. Zich (2010; 2016) was the first to recognise different territories within the Circum-Harz group, which he
referred to as domains. However, the territories described
here deviate in number and boundaries from Zich’s ‘domains’.
20. Montelius 1900, 77-78; Jahn 1950; Maraszek
2012; Filipp & Freudenreich 2016.
21. Of course, the factor of time, i.e. the partial asynchronicity of the listed hoard and grave finds, must be
considered. Seeing as we are talking about coincidental
find extracts and, more generally, a model, this may not
be too significant in the light of the relatively large number of finds.
22. Currently, extensive casting experiments are carried out at the State Museum of Prehistory in Halle to
understand the former colours of the artefacts (see Wunderlich et al. forthcoming).
23. Cf. initial considerations regarding the social prestige associated with certain alloys in, e.g., Kienlin 2008b,
309.
24. The hoard finds of Dieskau III, Dederstedt and
Giersleben in particular appear to consist of a fahlore
copper containing many trace elements, with some 110
axes exhibiting an added content of more than 4% arsenic, antimony and nickel, what determines the colouration only insignificantly.
25. Großheringen (Zich 1996, 495, No. F152); Helmsdorf (see above); Körner (Zich 1996, 497, No. F184);
Leubingen (see above); Naundorf (Zich 1996, 533, No.
K161, 534, No. K163); Nobitz (Zich 1996, 509, No. H5);
Osmünde (Zich 1996, 428, No. E137 [‘Dieskau’], 462,
No. E614); Walschleben (Zich 1996, 504, No. F293);
Schkeuditz (Rummer et al. 2018). Furthermore, the golden axe from Dieskau I probably was found in a grave
within the Bornhöck mound (see above).
73
26. The two unalloyed halberd blades from Dermsdorf
represent unfinished cast blanks (Berendt et al. 2015). Information on the chemical composition kindly provided
by M. Küßner, Thuringian State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology.
27. It seems noteworthy that the halberds from the
northern periphery of the Únětice Culture exhibit tin alloys significantly more often than arsenic alloys compared to those found in the Únětice heartland (cf. Horn
2014, 155, Fig. 90).
28. According to data from the SAM database (Krause
2003, CD-ROM).
29. A more precise analysis of the individual hoard
finds may produce even more meaningful results in the
future.
30. Whether this represents a female or male principle
cannot be ascertained at this point, but neither is relevant
for the argument.
31. Küßner, Wechler forthcoming. I owe many thanks
to M. Küßner from the Thuringian State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology for generously providing the unpublished site map.
32. The significance of spatial references in the mindscape of earlier societies is demonstrated, for example,
by the axial arrangement of medieval royal graves. Good
examples of this include the grave of Emperor Otto I,
the table tomb of Queen Editha, and the ‘Ernst Chapel’
(Ernstkapelle) housing the grave of Archbishop Ernst of
Saxony in the nave of Magdeburg Cathedral.
33. Zwenkau, ZW-10, building 26 (Stäuble 1997, 134,
147, Fig. 7; Huth & Stäuble 1998, 192-193; Schunke
2009, 304-309). I would like to thank H. Stäuble, Archaeological Heritage Office of Saxony, who headed the
comprehensive excavations at Zwenkau and provided the
map.
34. It must be kept in mind, however, that most weapon hoards represent accidental finds, discovered decades
or even more than a century ago. In some of these cases,
where the location is precisely known, it could be examined whether similar house constructions were located in
the immediate vicinity.
35. A similar site associated with the Corded Ware
Culture is known from Esperstedt, in the district of
Mansfeld-Südharz (Leinthaler et al. 2006, 65, Fig. 10).
Other discoveries displaying a similar basic form lack
corresponding finds, unfortunately, making the identification of similar structures from the Late Neolithic pe-
74
Acta Archaeologica
riod more difficult. Consequently, a precise classification
of the square enclosures at Großfahner, in the district of
Gotha, Großrembrach, in the district of Sömmerda, and
Stemmern, in the Börde district, is not possible at present (Spatzier 2017, 239-242). Another find that is quite
intriguing in this regard is the rectangular stone structure
inside the large Avebury circular compound near Stonehenge in England, which was discovered by ground-penetrating radar and remains undated, but could potentially
date earlier. It is reminiscent of the square Corded Ware
compound at Pömmelte but appears to be associated with
more ancient building foundations from the Neolithic period, as well (Barker et al. 2017).
36. Such contact between Bohemia and the regions in
Northern Germany is additionally suggested by the identical type of bronze used in the production of the halberds
found there (Rassmann 1993, 44-45).
37. I am entirely aware of the problem with applying the term ‘state’ to prehistoric societies, particularly in
Central Europe. Likewise, I am familiar with the discussion about the classification and terminological determination of distinct archaeological and ethnological finds.
See e.g., Eder 1980; Haldon 1993; Earle 1997; Lull &
Micó 2011 (including further academic sources).
38. I would like to thank S. Thomas (State Office for
Heritage Management and Archaeology Saxony-Anhalt)
for crosschecking and providing advice with regard to the
sociological interpretation of Max Weber’s writings.
39. Original quote: „oligopolistischen Ordnungen“.
40. Original quote: „Hierarchisierung und Vertikalisierung“.
41. Original quote: „Verfügung über das knappste und
wichtigste Gut […]: das Charisma“.
42. Original quote: „Amts- und Erbcharisma“.
43. Original quote: „Übernatürlichen als den imaginären Quellen des Wohlstands“.
44. Original quote: „Aus einem Repräsentanten der
Gemeinde gegenüber den Göttern kann der Häuptling
nunmehr zu einem Repräsentanten der Götter gegenüber
der Gemeinde werden, welcher allein über die Heilsgüter
verfügt - eine Umkehrung, die gleichbedeutend ist mit
der Transformation des Häuptlingstums in den charismatischen Staat.“
45. Original quote: „Veränderung[…] auf symbolischer Ebene“.
46. Original quote: „den Staat vom Häuptlingstum
unterscheidet“.
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
75
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Andrades Valtueña, A., A. Mittnik, F. M. Key, W. Haak, R. Allmäe,
A. Belinskij, M. Daubaras, M. Feldman, R. Jankauskas, I. Janković, K.
Massy, M. Novak, S. Pfrengle, S. Reinhold, M. Šlaus, M. A. Spyrou, A.
Szécsényi-Nagy, M. Tõrv, S. Hansen, K. I. Bos, Ph. W. Stockhammer,
A. Herbig & J. Krause. 2017. The Stone Age Plague and Its Persistence
in Eurasia. Current Biology 27 (23). 3683-3691.
Allentoft, M. E., M. Sikora, K.-G. Sjörgen, S. Rasmussen, M.
Rasmussen, J. Stenderup, P. B. Damgaard, H. Schroeder, T. Ahlström,
L. Vinner, A.-S. Malaspinas, A. Margaryan, T. Higham, D. Chivall, N.
Lynnerup, L. Harvig, J. Baron, P. Della Casa, P. Dąbrowski, P. R. Duffy,
A. V. Ebel, A. Epimakhov, K. Frei, M. Furmanek, T. Gralak, A. Gromov,
S. Gronkiewicz, G. Grupe, T. Hajdu, R. Jarysz, V. Khartanovich, A.
Khokhlov, V. Kiss, J. Kolář, Khokhlov, V. Kiss, J. Kolá, A. Kriiska,
I. Lasak, C. Longhi, G. McGlynn, A. Merkevičius, I. Merkytė, M.
Metspalu, R. Mkrtchyan, V. Moiseyev, L. Paja, G. Pálfi, D. Pokutta, Ł.
Pospieszny, T. D. Price, L. Saag, M. Sablin, N. Shishlina, V. Smrèka, V.
I. Soenov, V. Szeverényi, G. Tóth, S. V. Trifanova, L. Varul, M. Vicze,
L. Yepiskoposyan, V. Zhitenev, L. Orlando, T. Sicheritz-Pontén, S.
Brunak, R. Nielsen, K. Kristiansen & E. Willerslev. 2015. Population
genomics of Bronze Age Eurasia. Nature 522 (7555). 167-172.
Assendorp, J. J. (ed.). 1997. Forschungen zur bronzezeitlichen
Besiedlung in Nord- und Mitteleuropa. Internationales Symposium vom
9.-11. Mai 1996 in Hitzacker. Internationale Archäologie 38. Espelkamp
(Verlag Marie Leidorf).
Barker, D., J. Pollard, K. Strutt, M. Gillings & J. Taylor. 2017.
Squaring the Circle? Geophysical Survey across part of the Southern
Inner Circle of the Avebury henge. https://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/
archaeology/people/academics/gillings/documents/avebury-obeliskreport-2017/at_download/file (retrieved on 8.8.2018).
Bartelheim, M. & H. Stäuble (eds.). 2009. Die wirtschaftlichen
Grundlagen der Bronzezeit Europas. Forschungen zur Archäometrie
und Altertumswissenschaft 4. Rahden/Westf. (Verlag Marie Leidorf).
Bath-Bílková, B. 1973. K problému původu hřiven. Zur
Herkunftsfrage der Halsringbarren. Památky archeologické 64. 24-41.
Becker, B., K.-D. Jäger, D. Kaufmann & T. Litt. 1989.
Dendrochronologische Datierungen von Eichenhölzern aus den
frühbronzezeitlichen Hügelgräbern bei Helmsdorf und Leubingen
(Aunjetitzer Kultur) und an den bronzezeitlichen Flußeichen bei
Merseburg. Jahresschrift für mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte 72. 299-312.
Behrendt, S., M. Küßner & O. Mecking. 2015. Der Hortfund von
Dermsdorf, Lkr. Sömmerda - Erste archäometrische Ergebnisse. Gluhak
et al. 2015. 98-100.
Berger, D. 2012. Bronzezeitliche Färbetechniken an
Metallobjekten nördlich der Alpen. Eine archäometallurgische Studie
zur prähistorischen Anwendung von Tauschierung und Patinierung
anhand von Artefakten und Experimenten. Forschungsberichte des
Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle 2. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt
für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
Bertemes, F. 2010. Die Metallurgengräber der zweiten Hälfte des 3.
und der ersten Hälfte des 2. Jt. v. Chr. im Kontext der spätkupferzeitlichen
und frühbronzezeitlichen Zivilisationen Mitteleuropas. Meller &
Bertemes 2010. 131-162.
Bogen, C. 2006. Ein Jüngling mit Bernsteinschmuck - Eine
außergewöhnliche Bestattung der Aunjetitzer Kultur. Meller 2006.
124-130.
Born, H. & S. Hansen. 2001. Helme und Waffen Alteuropas.
Sammlung Axel Guttmann 9. Mainz (Zabern).
Born, H., D. Günther, A. Hofmann, M. Nawroth, E. Pernicka, W.
P. Tolstikow & P. Velicsanyi. 2015. Der Hortfund von Eberswalde Archäologie, Herstellungstechnik, Analytik. Vorbericht zu neuen wissenschaftlichen Untersuchungen. Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica
47. 199-218.
Bourdieu, P. 2014. Über den Staat. Vorlesungen am Collège de
France 1989-1992. Berlin (Suhrkamp).
Brandt, G. 2017. Beständig ist nur der Wandel! Die Rekonstruktion
der Besiedelungsgeschichte Europas während des Neolithikums mittels
paläo- und populationsgenetischer Verfahren. Forschungsberichte des
Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle 9. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt
für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
Breuer, St. 1990. Der archaische Staat. Zur Soziologie
charismatischer Herrschaft. Berlin (Reimer).
-. 1998. Der Staat. Entstehung, Typen, Organisationsstadien.
Reinbek bei Hamburg (Rowohlt).
von Brunn, W. A. 1959. Die Hortfunde der frühen Bronzezeit aus
Sachsen-Anhalt, Sachsen und Thüringen. Berlin (Deutsche Akademie
der Wissenschaften).
Bunnefeld, J.-H. forthcoming. Werkzeuge, Waffen oder Insignien?
- Zu den sogenannten gerippten „Doppeläxten“ der Aunjetitzer Kultur.
Meller & Bertemes forthcoming b.
Czebreszuk, J. 2011. Bursztyn w kulturze mykeńskiej. Zarys
problematyki badawczej. Poznań (Wydawnictwo Poznańskie).
Earle, T. 1997. How Chiefs Come to Power. The Political Economy
in Prehistory. Stanford (Stanford University Press).
Eder, K. 1980. Die Entstehung staatlich organisierter
Gesellschaften. Ein Beitrag zu einer Theorie sozialer Evolution.
Frankfurt am Main (Suhrkamp).
Ernée, M. 2013. Bernstein und der Zusammenbruch der klassischen
Aunjetitzer Kultur in Böhmen. Meller et al. 2013, 453-467.
Evers, M. 2012. Die frühbronzezeitliche Besiedlung der
Makroregion um Nebra. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Martin-LutherUniversität, Halle-Wittenberg. Halle (Saale).
Filipp, J. & M. Freudenreich. 2014. Dieskau Revisited I.
Nachforschungen zur „Lebensgeschichte“ des Goldhortes von Dieskau
und zu einem weiteren Grabhügel mit Goldbeigabe bei Osmünde im
heutigen Saalekreis, Sachsen-Anhalt. Meller et al. 2014. 743-752.
-. 2016. Dieskau und Helmsdorf - Zwei frühbronzezeitliche
Mikroregionen im Vergleich. Meller et al. 2016. 407-425.
Fischer, U. 1956. Die Gräber der Steinzeit im Saalegebiet. Studien
über neolithische und frühbronzezeitliche Grab- und Bestattungsformen
in Sachsen-Thüringen. Vorgeschichtliche Forschungen 15. Berlin (De
Gruyter).
Fokkens, H. & A. Harding (eds.). 2013. The Oxford Handbook of
the European Bronze Age. Oxford (Oxford University Press).
Gerloff, S. 1993. Zu Fragen mittelmeerländischer Kontakte und
absoluter Chronologie der Frühbronzezeit in Mittel und Westeuropa.
Prähistorische Zeitschrift 68. 58-102.
Gluhak, T., S. Greiff, K. Kraus & M. Prange (eds.). 2015.
Archäometrie und Denkmalpflege 2015. Jahrestagung an der JohannesGutenberg-Universität Mainz 25.-28. März 2015. Metalla Sonderhefte
7. Bochum (Deutsches Bergbaumuseum).
Größler, H. 1907. Das Fürstengrab im großen Galgenhügel am
Paulsschachte bei Helmsdorf (im Mansfelder Seekreise). Jahresschrift
für die Vorgeschichte der Sächsisch-Thüringischen Länder 6. 1-87.
76
Acta Archaeologica
Gronenborn, D. & W. Haak. 2018. Als Europa (zu) Europa wurde.
Die großen Migrationen im Neolithikum. Wemhoff & Rind 2018. 72-77.
Haak, W., I. Lazaridis, N. Patterson, N. Rohland, S. Mallick, B.
Llamas, G. Brandt, S. Nordenfelt, E. Harney, K. Stewardson, Q. Fu,
A. Mittnik, E. Bánffy, C. Economou, M. Francken, S. Friederich, R.
Garrido Pena, F. Hallgren, V. Khartanovich, A. Khokhlov, M. Kunst, P.
Kuznetsov, H. Meller, O. Mochalov, V. Moiseyev, N. Nicklisch, S. L.
Pichler, R. Risch, M. A. Rojo Guerra, C. Roth, A. Szécsényi-Nagy, J.
Wahl, M. Meyer, J. Krause, D. Brown, D. Anthony, A. Cooper, K. W.
Alt & D. Reich. 2015. Massive migration from the steppe was a source
for Indo-European languages in Europe. Nature 522 (7555) 207-211.
Hänsel, B. 1997. Gaben an die Götter: Schätze der Bronzezeit
Europas - Eine Einführung. Hänsel & Hänsel 1997. 11-22.
Hänsel, B. & A. Hänsel (eds.). 1997. Gaben an die Götter: Schätze
der Bronzezeit Europas. Berlin (Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte
Berlin).
Häusler, A. 2011. Beiträge zur vergleichenden Untersuchung
von Bestattungssitten vom Neolithikum bis zur frühen Bronzezeit.
Jahresschrift für mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte 92. 309-385.
Haldon, J. 1993. The State and the Tributary Mode of Production.
London, New York (Verso).
Hansen, S. 2001. Helme und Waffen der Bronzezeit in der
Sammlung Axel Guttmann. Born & Hansen 2001. 11-166.
-. 2002. „Überausstattung“ in Gräbern und Horten der
Frühbronzezeit. Müller 2002. 151-173.
-. 2010. Der Hort von Nebra: seine Ausstattung. Meller & Bertemes
2010. 77-89.
Harding, A., H. Hughes-Brock & C. W. Beck. 1974. Amber in
the Mycenaean World. The Annual of the British School at Athens 69.
145-172.
Hille, A. 2012. Die Glockenbecherkultur in Mitteldeutschland.
Veröffentlichungen des Landesamtes für Denkmalpflege und
Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt 66. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für
Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
Höfer, P. 1906. Der Leubinger Hügel. Jahresschrift für die
Vorgeschichte der Sächsisch-Thüringischen Länder 5. 1-59.
Horn, C. 2014. Studien zu den europäischen Stabdolchen.
Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 246. Bonn
(Habelt).
Huth, C. & H. Stäuble. 1998. Ländliche Siedlungen der Bronzezeit
und älteren Eisenzeit. Ein Zwischenbericht aus Zwenkau. Küster et al.
1998. 185-230.
Jacob, K.-H. 1911. Zur Prähistorie Nordwest-Sachsens. Übersicht
über die vorgeschichtlichen Perioden und deren wichtigsten Vertreter in
der Leipzig-Hallischen Gegend. Halle (Saale) (Leopoldina).
Jahn, M. 1950. Ein kultureller Mittelpunkt bei Halle, Saale während
der frühen Bronzezeit. Jahresschrift für mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte
34. 81-89.
Kainz, W. 1999. Bodenatlas Sachsen-Anhalt. Teil 1: Beschreibung
der Bodenlandschaften und Böden. Halle (Saale) (Geologisches
Landesamt).
Kienlin, T. L. (ed.). 2005. Die Dinge als Zeichen: Kulturelles Wissen
und materielle Kultur. Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen
Archäologie 127. Bonn (Habelt).
Kienlin, T. L. 2008a. Der „Fürst“ von Leubingen: Herausragende
Bestattungen der Frühbronzezeit als Bezugspunkt gesellschaftlicher
Kohärenz und kultureller Identität. Kümmel et al. 2008. 181-206.
-. 2008b. Frühes Metall im nordalpinen Raum. Eine Untersuchung
zu technologischen und kognitiven Aspekten früher Metallurgie anhand
der Gefüge frühbronzezeitlicher Beile. Universitätsforschungen zur
prähistorischen Archäologie 162. Bonn (Habelt).
Klassen, L. 2004. Jade und Kupfer. Untersuchungen zum
Neolithisierungsprozess im westlichen Ostseeraum unter besonderer
Berücksichtigung der Kulturentwicklung Europas 5500-3500 BC. Jysk
Arkaeologisk Selskabs skrifter 47. Aarhus (Jutland Archaeological
Society).
Klopfleisch, F. 1878. Kurzer Bericht über die erste Ausgrabung des
Leubinger Grabhügels. Neue Mitteilungen aus dem Gebiete historischantiquarischer Forschungen 14. 544-561.
Knapp, I. 1999. Fürst oder Häuptling? Eine Analyse der
herausragenden Bestattungen der frühen Bronzezeit. Archäologische
Informationen 22. 261-268.
Knipper, C., P. Held, M. Fecher, N. Nicklisch, Ch. Meyer, H.
Schreiber, B. Zich, C. Metzner-Nebelsick, V. Hubensack, L. Hansen,
E. Nieveler & K. W. Alt. 2015. Superior in Life - Superior in Death.
Dietary Distinction of Central European Prehistoric and Medieval
Elites. Current Anthropology 56 (4). 579-589.
Knoll, F. & H. Meller. 2016. Die Ösenkopfnadel - ein ”Klassen”verbindendes Trachtelement der Aunjetitzer Kultur. Ein Beitrag zu
Kontext, Interpretation und Typochronologie der mitteldeutschen
Exemplare. Meller et al. 2016. 283-370.
Knoll, F., H. Meller & J. Filipp. 2014. ”Nordisch by nature”.
Die jungbronzezeitlichen, goldenen Eidringe Sachsen-Anhalts an der
südlichen Peripherie des Nordischen Kreises in ihrem Kontext. Meller
et al. 2014. 789-871.
Krause, R. 2003. Studien zur kupfer- und frühbronzezeitlichen
Metallurgie zwischen Karpatenbecken und Ostsee. Vorgeschichtliche
Forschungen 24. Rahden/Westf. (Verlag Marie Leidorf).
Kümmel, C., B. Schweizer & U. Veit (eds.). 2008.
Körperinszenierung - Objektsammlung - Monumentalisierung:
Totenritual und Grabkult in frühen Gesellschaften. Archäologische
Quellen
in
kulturwissenschaftlicher
Perspektive.
Tübinger
Archäologische Taschenbücher 6. Münster (Waxmann).
Küster, H., A. Lang & P. Schauer (eds.). 1998. Archäologische
Forschungen in urgeschichtlichen Siedlungslandschaften. Festschrift
für G. Kossack zum 75. Geburtstag. Regensburg (Universitätsverlag
Regensburg).
Küßner, M. 2015. Leubingen und Dermsdorf, Lkr. Sömmerda
- „Fürstengrab“, Großbau und Schatzdepot der frühen Bronzezeit.
Spazier & Grasselt 2015. 194-197.
Küßner, M. & K.-P. Wechler. forthcoming. Der Großbau von
Dermsdorf und die Kleinregion um Leubingen zur Zeit der Aunjetitzer
Kultur. Meller et al. forthcoming.
Kutzke, G. 1907. Das Helmsdorfer Hünengrab. Die Denkmalpflege
9. 128-130.
Leinthaler, B., C. Bogen & H.-J. Döhle. 2006. Von Muschelknöpfen
und Hundezähnen - Schnurkeramische Bestattungen bei Esperstedt.
Meller 2006. 59-82.
Lockhoff, N. & E. Pernicka. 2014. Archaeometallurgical
investigations of Early Bronze Age gold artefacts from central Germany
including gold from the Nebra hoard. Meller et al. 2014. 223-235.
Lomborg, E. 1973. Die Flintdolche Dänemarks. Studien über
Chronologie und Kulturbeziehungen des südskandinavischen
Spätneolithikums. Nordiske Fortidsminder B,1. Kopenhagen (Kgl.
Nordiske Oldskriftselskab).
Lull, V. & R. Micó. 2011. Archaeology of the Origin of the State.
Oxford (Oxford University Press).
Lull, V., R. Micó, Ch. Rihuete Herrada & R. Risch. 2013. Bronze
Age Iberia. Fokkens & Harding 2013. 594-616.
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
-. 2014. The social value of silver in El Argar. Meller et al. 2014.
557-576.
Maraszek, R. 2012. Gesegnetes Land - Frühbronzezeitliche Schätze
der Region um Dieskau. Stadermann 2012. 147-149.
Meinike, M. forthcoming. Zur Astronomie der Rondellanlage
Pömmelte-Zackmünde. Meller & Bertemes forthcoming a.
Meller, H. 2004. Der Körper des Königs. Meller 2004b. 94-97.
-. (ed.). 2004b. Der geschmiedete Himmel. Die weite Welt im Herzen
Europas vor 3600 Jahren. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege
und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
-. (ed.). 2006. Archäologie auf der Überholspur. Ausgrabungen an
der A 38. Archäologie in Sachsen-Anhalt Sonderband 5. Halle (Saale)
(Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
-. (ed.). 2008. LebensWandel. Früh- und Mittelneolithikum.
Begleithefte zur Dauerausstellung im Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte
Halle 3. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie
Sachsen-Anhalt).
-. 2010. Nebra: Vom Logos zum Mythos - Biographie eines
Himmelsbildes. Meller & Bertemes 2010. 23-73.
-. (ed.). 2011. Bronzerausch. Spätneolithikum und Frühbronzezeit.
Begleithefte zur Dauerausstellung im Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte
Halle 4. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie
Sachsen-Anhalt).
-. 2013a. Der Hortfund von Nebra im Spiegel frühbronzezeitlicher
Deponierungssitten. Meller et al. 2013. 493-526.
-. (ed.). 2013b. 3300 BC - Mysteriöse Steinzeittote und ihre
Welt. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie
Sachsen-Anhalt).
-. 2014. Die neolithischen und bronzezeitlichen Goldfunde
Mitteldeutschlands - Eine Übersicht. Meller et al. 2014. 611-716.
-. 2015. Armeen in der Frühbronzezeit? Meller & Schefzik 2015.
243-252.
-. 2017. Armies in the Early Bronze Age? An alternative
interpretation of Únětice Culture axe hoards. Antiquity 91. 1529-1545.
-. forthcoming a. Fürsten, Goldwaffen und Armeen. Überlegungen
zum Goldfund von Dieskau und dessen möglicher Herkunft aus dem
frühbronzezeitlichen Großgrabhügel Bornhöck bei Dieskau, Saalekreis.
Studia Hercynia.
-. forthcoming b. Das Fürstengrab von Leubingen neu betrachtet Zur Konstruktion von herrschaftlicher Legitimität mittels Bezugnahme
auf die Vorgängerkulturen. Meller & Bertemes forthcoming b.
-. forthcoming c. Zur unterschiedlichen Farbigkeit der Waffen
der mitteldeutschen Aunjetitzer Kultur und ihrer Interpretation als
militärisches Ordnungssystem. Meller & Bertemes forthcoming b.
-. forthcoming d. Religion und gesellschaftlicher Wandel vom
Endneolithikum zur Frühbronzezeit am Beispiel der Rondelle Pömmelte
und Schönebeck. Meller & Bertemes forthcoming b.
Meller, H., W. Arz, R. Jung & R. Risch (eds.). 2015. 2200
BC - Ein Klimasturz als Ursache für den Zerfall der Alten Welt? 7.
Mitteldeutscher Archäologentag vom 23. bis 26. Oktober 2014 in
Halle (Saale). Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle
12. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie
Sachsen-Anhalt).
Meller, H. & F. Bertemes (eds.). 2010. Der Griff nach den Sternen.
Wie Europas Eliten zu Macht und Reichtum kamen. Internationales
Symposium in Halle (Saale) 16.-21. Februar 2005. Tagungen des
Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle 5. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt
für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
-. (eds.) forthcoming a. Mensch und Umwelt im Ringheiligtum
77
von Pömmelte-Zackmünde, Salzlandkreis. Forschungsberichte
des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle 10/III. Halle (Saale)
(Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
-. (eds.). forthcoming b. Der Aufbruch zu Neuen Horizonten. Neue
Sichtweisen über die Europäische Frühbronzezeit. Abschlusstagung der
Forschergruppe FOR 550 vom 26.-29. November 2010 in Halle (Saale).
Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle. Halle (Saale)
(Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
Meller, H., F. Bertemes, H.-R. Bork & R. Risch (eds.). 2013.
1600 - Kultureller Umbruch im Schatten des Thera-Ausbruchs? 4.
Mitteldeutscher Archäologentag vom 14. bis 16. Oktober 2011 in
Halle (Saale). Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle
9. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie
Sachsen-Anhalt).
Meller, H., S. Friederich, M. Küßner, R. Risch & H. Stäuble
(eds.). forthcoming. Siedlungsarchäologie des Endneolithikums und
der frühen Bronzezeit. 11. Mitteldeutscher Archäologentag vom 18. bis
20. Oktober 2018 in Halle (Saale). Tagungen des Landesmuseums für
Vorgeschichte Halle. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und
Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
Meller, H., H. P. Hahn, R. Jung & R. Risch (eds.). 2016. Arm und
Reich - Zur Ressourcenverteilung in prähistorischen Gesellschaften.
8. Mitteldeutscher Archäologentag vom 22. bis 24. Oktober 2015 in
Halle (Saale). Tagungen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle
14. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie
Sachsen-Anhalt).
Meller, H. & K. Michel. 2018. Die Himmelsscheibe von Nebra. Der
Schlüssel zu einer untergegangenen Kultur im Herzen Europas. Berlin
(Propyläen).
Meller, H., N. Nicklisch, J. Orschiedt & K. W. Alt. 2015. Rituelle
Zweikämpfe schnurkeramischer Krieger? Meller & Schefzik 2015.
185-189.
Meller, H., R. Risch & E. Pernicka (eds.). 2014. Metalle der Macht Frühes Gold und Silber. 6. Mitteldeutscher Archäologentag vom 17. bis
19. Oktober 2013 in Halle (Saale). Tagungen des Landesmuseums für
Vorgeschichte Halle 11. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege
und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
Meller, H. & M. Schefzik (eds.). 2015. Krieg - eine archäologische
Spurensuche. Begleitband zur Sonderausstellung im Landesmuseum
für Vorgeschichte Halle (Saale) 6. November 2015 bis 22. Mai
2016. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie
Sachsen-Anhalt).
Meller, H. & T. Schunke, Die Wiederentdeckung des Bornhöck
- Ein neuer frühbronzezeitlicher „Fürstengrabhügel“ bei Raßnitz,
Saalekreis. Erster Vorbericht. Meller et al. 2016. 427-466.
Metzner-Nebelsick, C. 2010. Die Ringe der Macht - Überlegungen
zur Kontinuität frühbronzezeitlicher Herrschaftssymbole in Europa.
Meller & Bertemes 2010. 179-197.
Mödlinger, M., M. H. G. Kuijpers, D. Braekmans & D. Berger.
2017. Quantitative comparisons of the color of CuAs, CuSn, CuNi, and
CuSb Alloys. Journal of Archaeological Science 88. 14-23.
Montelius, O. 1900. Die Chronologie der ältesten Bronzezeit in
Nord-Deutschland und Skandinavien. Braunschweig (Vieweg).
Moos, U. 2006. Der Großgrabhügel auf dem Brüggeberg und die
frühen Eliten in der Schnurkeramik. Meller 2006. 98-105.
Moucha, V. 2005. Hortfunde der frühen Bronzezeit in Böhmen.
Prag (Archeologický ústav AV CR).
Müller, J. (ed.). 2002. Vom Endneolithikum zur Frühbronzezeit:
Muster sozialen Wandels? Tagung Bamberg 14.-16. Juni 2011.
78
Acta Archaeologica
Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 90. Bonn
(Habelt).
Olalde, I. S. Brace, M. E. Allentoft, I. Armit, K. Kristiansen,
T. Booth, N. Rohland, S. Mallick, A. Szécsényi-Nagy, A. Mittnik,
E. Altena, M. Lipson, I. Lazaridis, T. K. Harper, N. Patterson, N.
Broomandkhoshbacht, Y. Diekmann, Z. Faltyskova, D. Fernandes,
M. Ferry, E. Harney, P. de Knijff, M. Michel, J. Oppenheimer, K.
Stewardson, A. Barclay, K. W. Alt, C. Liesau, P. Ríos, C. Blasco, J.
Vega Miguel, R. Menduiña García, A. Avilés Fernández, E. Bánffy, M.
Bernabò-Brea, D. Billoin, C. Bonsall, L. Bonsall, T. Allen, L. Büster,
S. Carver, L. Castells Navarro, O. E. Craig, G. T. Cook, B. Cunliffe,
A. Denaire, K. Egging Dinwiddy, N. Dodwell, M. Ernée, C. Evans,
M. Kuchařík, J. Francès Farré, C. Fowler, M. Gazenbeek, R. Garrido
Pena, M. Haber-Uriarte, E. Haduch, G. Hey, N. Jowett, T. Knowles,
K. Massy, S. Pfrengle, P. Lefranc, O. Lemercier, A. Lefebvre, C. Heras
Martínez, V. Galera Olmo, A. Bastida Ramírez, J. Lomba Maurandi,
T. Majó, J. I. McKinley, K. McSweeney, B. Gusztáv Mende, A. Modi,
G. Kulcsár, V. Kiss, A. Czene, R. Patay, A. Endrődi, K. Köhler, T.
Hajdu, T. Szeniczey, J. Dani, Z. Bernert, M. Hoole, O. Cheronet, D.
Keating, P. Velemínský, M. Dobeš, F. Candilio, F. Brown, R. Flores
Fernández, A.-M. Herrero-Corral, S. Tusa, E. Carnieri, L. Lentini, A.
Valenti, A. Zanini, C. Waddington, G. Delibes, E. Guerra-Doce, B. Neil,
M. Brittain, M. Luke, R. Mortimer, J. Desideri, M. Besse, G. Brücken,
M. Furmanek, A. Hałuszko, M. Mackiewicz, A. Rapiński, S. Leach, I.
Soriano, K. T. Lillios, J. L. Cardoso, M. Parker Pearson, P. Włodarczak,
T. D. Price, P. Prieto, P.-J. Rey, R. Risch, M. A. Rojo Guerra, A. Schmitt,
J. Serralongue, A. M. Silva, V. Smrčka, L. Vergnaud, J. Zilhão, D.
Caramelli, T. Higham, M. G. Thomas, D. J. Kennett, H. Fokkens, V.
Heyd, A. Sheridan, K.-G.Sjögren, P. W. Stockhammer, J. Krause, R.
Pinhasi, W. Haak, I. Barnes, C. Lalueza-Fox & D. Reich. 2018. The
Beaker phenomenon and the genomic transformation of northwest
Europe. Nature 555 (7695). 190-196.
Olshausen, O. 1886. Spiralringe. Zeitschrift für Ethnologie 18.
433-497.
Otto, T., H. Thrane & H.Vandkilde (eds.). 2006. Warfare and
society. Archaeological and social anthropological perspectives.
Aarhus (Aarhus University Press).
Piotrovski, Ju. Ju. (ed.). 2013. Bronzezeit. Europa ohne Grenzen.
4.-1. Jahrtausend v. Chr. Katalog zur Ausstellung in St. Petersburg
(Staatliche Eremitage) und Moskau (Staatliches Historisches Museum)
2013-2014. St. Petersburg (Tabula Rasa).
Primas, M. 1988. Waffen aus Edelmetall. Jahrbuch des RömischGermanischen Zentralmuseums 35. 161-185.
Radivojević, M., J. Pendić, A. Srejić, M. Korać, C. Davey, A.
Benzonelli, M. Martinón-Torres, N. Jovanović & Z. Kamberović. 2018.
Experimental design of the Cu-As-Sn ternary colour diagram. Journal
of Archaeological Science 90. 106-119.
Randsborg, K. 1995. Hjortspring. Warfare and sacrifice in early
Europe. Aarhus (Aarhus University Press).
Rasmussen, S., M. E. Allentoft, K. Nielsen, L. Orlando, M. Sikora,
K.-G. Sjögren, A. G. Pedersen, M. Schubert, A. Van Dam, C. M. O.
Kapel, H. B. Nielsen, S. Brunak, P. Avetisyan, A. Epimakhov, M. V.
Khalyapin, A. Gnuni, A. Kriiska, I. Lasak, M. Metspalu, V. Moiseyev,
A. Gromov, D. Pokutta, L. Saag, L. Varul, L. Yepiskoposyan, T.
Sicheritz-Pontén, R. A. Foley, M. M. Lahr, R. Nielsen, K. Kristiansen &
E. Willerslev. 2015. Early Divergent Strains of Yersinia pestis in Eurasia
5,000 Years Ago. Cell 163 (3). 571-582.
Rassmann, K. 1993. Spätneolithikum und frühe Bronzezeit im
Flachland zwischen Elbe und Oder. Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte
Mecklenburg-Vorpommerns
28.
Lübstorf
(Archäologisches
Landesmuseum für Mecklenburg-Vorpommern).
Rummer, M., T. Held, T. Reuter & V. Hubensack. 2018. Eine
Bestattung mit Beigaben der frühen Bronzezeit aus Schkeuditz,
Lkr. Nordsachsen - Ausgrabung, Restaurierung und Rekonstruktion.
Ausgrabungen in Sachsen 6. Arbeits- und Forschungsberichte zur
sächsischen Bodendenkmalpflege Beiheft 33 147-156.
Schmidt, B. & W. Nitzschke. 1980. Ein frühbronzezeitlicher
„Fürstenhügel“ bei Dieskau im Saalekreis. Vorbericht. Ausgrabungen
und Funde 25. 179-183.
Schubart, H. 2012. Die Gräber von Fuente Álamo. Ein Beitrag
zu den Grabriten und zur Chronologie der El Argar-Kultur. Madrider
Beiträge 32. Wiesbaden (Reichert).
Schunke, T. 2009. Die frühbronzezeitliche Siedlung von
Zwenkau, Ldkr. Leipziger Land. Untersuchungen zur Chronologie und
Beobachtungen zur Wirtschaftsweise und sozialen Differenzierung
anhand der keramischen Funde. Bartelheim & Stäuble 2009. 273-319.
Schurtz, H. 1902. Altersklassen und Männerbünde. Eine
Darstellung der Grundformen der Gesellschaft. Berlin (Reimer).
Schwarz, R. 2013. Das Mittelneolithikum in Sachsen-Anhalt - Die
Kulturen und ihre Erdwerke. Meller 2013b. 231-238.
-. 2014. Goldene Schläfen- und Lockenringe - Herrschaftsinsignien
in
bronzezeitlichen
Ranggesellschaften
Mitteldeutschlands.
Überlegungen zur Gesellschaft der Aunjetitzer Kultur. Meller et al.
2014. 717-742.
-. 2015. Kultureller Bruch oder Kontinuität? - Mitteldeutschland im
23. Jh. v. Chr. Meller, Arz et al. 2015. 671-713.
Schwarz, R. & H. Meller. forthcoming. Migrationen im Mittelund Spätneolithikum in Mitteldeutschland. Forschungsberichte des
Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt für
Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
Spatzier, A. 2017. Das endneolithisch-frühbronzezeitliche
Rondell von Pömmelte-Zackmünde, Salzlandkreis, und das RondellPhänomen des 4.-1. Jt. v. Chr. in Mitteleuropa. Forschungsberichte des
Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte Halle 10. Halle (Saale) (Landesamt
für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt).
-. forthcoming. The enclosure complex Pömmelte-Schönebeck.
The dialectic of two circular monuments of the late 3rd to early 2nd
millennium BC in Central Germany. Meller & Bertemes forthcoming b.
Spazier, I. & T. Grasselt (eds.). 2015. Erfurt und Umgebung.
Archäologische Denkmale in Thüringen 3. Langenweißbach (Beier und
Beran).
Stadermann, J. (ed.). 2012. Au(g)enblicke. Streifzüge durch die
Elster-Luppe- und Saale-Elster-Aue 2. Halle (Saale) (Arbeitskreis
Döllnitz).
Stäuble, H. 1997. Die frühbronzezeitliche Siedlung in Zwenkau,
Landkreis Leipziger Land. Assendorp 1997. 129-147.
Strahm, C. 2010. Die ökonomischen und ideellen Bedingungen
der Formation frühbronzezeitlicher Eliten. Meller & Bertemes 2010.
163-175.
Sørensen, M. L. S. 2005. The Grammar of Drama: An Analysis
of the Rich Early Bronze Age Grave at Leubingen, Germany. Kienlin
2005. 283-291.
Vachta, T. 2016. Bronzezeitliche Hortfunde und ihre Fundorte in
Böhmen. Berlin Studies of the Ancient World 33. Berlin (Topoi).
Vandkilde, H. 1996. From Stone to Bronze. The Metalwork of
the Late Neolithic and Earliest Bronze Age in Denmark. Jutland
Archaeological Society Publications 32. Aarhus (Aarhus University
Press).
Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries
-. 2006. Warriors and warrior institutions in Copper Age Europe.
Otto et al. 2006. 393-422.
-. 2014. Breakthrough of the Nordic Bronze Age: Transcultural
Warriorhood and a Carpathian Crossroad in the Sixteenth Century BC.
European Journal of Archaeology 17 (4). 602-633.
-. 2017. The Metal Hoard from Pile in Scania, Sweden. Place,
Things, Time, Metals, and Worlds around 2000 BC. The Swedish
History Museum Studies 29. Aarhus (Aarhus University Press).
Virchow, R. 1874. Bericht über den „Bornhök“. Zeitschrift für
Ethnologie 6. 152-153.
Voegelin, E. 2002. Ordnung und Geschichte 1: Die kosmologischen
Reiche des Alten Orients - Mesopotamien und Ägypten. München
(Wilhelm Fink).
Watts, J., O. Sheehan, Q. D. Atkinson, J. Bulbulia & R. Gray.
2016. Ritual human sacrifice promoted and sustained the evolution of
stratified societies. Nature 532, 228-231.
Weber, M. 1922. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriss der
Sozialökonomik 3. Tübingen (Mohr).
-. 1978 (1922). Economy and Society. An Outline of Interpretive
Sociology. London, Berkeley (University of California Press).
Wemhoff, M. & M. M. Rind (eds.). 2018. Bewegte Zeiten.
Archäologie in Deutschland. Katalog zur Sonderausstellung in Berlin
vom 21. September 2018 bis 6. Januar 2019. Petersberg (Imhof).
Woltermann, G. 2016. Die prähistorischen Bernsteinartefakte
aus Deutschland vom Paläolithikum bis zur Bronzezeit. Methodische
Forschungen
zu
Lagerstättengenese,
Distributionsstrukturen
und sozioökonomischem Kontext. Universitätsforschungen zur
prähistorischen Archäologie 290. Bonn (Habelt).
Wunderlich, C.-H., J.-H. Bunnefeld & H. Meller. forthcoming.
Buntmetall. Farbigkeit, Glanzverhalten und ästhetische Eigenschaften
von Legierungen der Anjetitzer Kultur. Meller & Bertemes forthcoming.
Zich, B. 1996. Studien zur regionalen und chronologischen
Gliederung der nördlichen Aunjetitzer Kultur. Vorgeschichtliche
Forschungen 20. Berlin, New York (De Gruyter).
-. 2010. Die frühbronzezeitliche Umgebung des Fundes mit der
Himmelsscheibe von Nebra. Meller & Bertemes 2010. 97-117.
-. 2016. Aunjetitzer Herrschaften in Mitteldeutschland - ”Fürsten”
der Frühbronzezeit und ihre Territorien (”Domänen”). Meller et al.
2016. 371-406.
Author’s address:
Harald Meller
Landesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt
- Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte Richard-Wagner-Straße 9
06114 Halle (Saale)
Germany
e-mail: hmeller@lda.stk.sachsen-anhalt.de
79