Poland's Oldest Stone Wall Unearthed in the Carpathians

Angela

Elite member
Messages
21,823
Reaction score
12,329
Points
113
Ethnic group
Italian
http://www.archaeology.org/news/3688-150915-poland-stone-wall

"MASZKOWICE, POLAND—Beneath the remains of a Bronze Age settlement, a team from Jagiellonian University, led by Marcin S. Przybyla, has unearthed Poland’s oldest-known stone wall. “In the whole of Central Europe there are only a dozen sites dated so early with more or less well-preserved stone fortifications. At that time, the use of stone as a building material was typical of the Mediterranean areas. In the temperate zone of Europe, until the Middle Ages, fortifications were built with wood and clay,” Przybyla explained in Science & Scholarship in Poland. A figurine from the site resembles statuettes usually found in Mycenaean Greece and the northern Balkans and offers another link to Bronze Age civilizations of the Mediterranean. The structure, which has been dated to between 1750 and 1690 B.C., was built on the top of a hill that had been flattened and expanded. The sandstone walls of the fortress, thought to have been nearly nine feet tall based upon the measurements of fallen rocks, were held together with clay. A deep, narrow trench and a narrow gate were also part of the site’s defense system. To read more about the Bronze Age, go to "The Minoans of Crete."

CPCGOoZWoAAnUIy.jpg


This is a better article from Science in Poland:
http://scienceinpoland.pap.pl/en/ne...ntal-stone-structures-in-the-carpathians.html

The researchers claim that:
"Its inhabitants were not indigenous people, living in Małopolska since the end of the Stone Age, but a small, no more than 12-person group of colonists from the south, from the territory of present-day Hungary" - Dr. Przybyła told PAP.

Other archaeological sites associated with the community archaeologists refer to as the Ottomány culture have been discovered in the Polish Carpathians. The best known is the fortified settlement in Trzcinica near Jasło, but that settlement is very definitely different from the one discovered in Maszkowice. In the former, the embankments were not built of stones, but the earth and wood."


Also:
"
Scientists were surprised by the size of the structure made by prehistoric builders. The top of the hill was flattened, creating a plateau with an area of 0.5 hectares. Tons of clay from the hill top were used to build a terrace on the gentle eastern and northern slope of the hill, which additionally expanded the area of the settlement. The wall is made of large, half-meter sandstone blocks held together with clay.

"From geophysical research we know that the wall was about 120-140 m long, surrounding the entire settlement from the east and north. Undoubtedly, besides being a retaining wall, it also hindered potential attackers’ access to the settlement"- added Dr. Przybyła."

I tried to find a picture of the figurine but had no luck.
 
Ed. Sorry Bicicleur,

I don't know how I did it, but I answered on your post instead of on a new one.:useless::rolleyes:

I need another cup of coffee...or I need to stop doing three things at once.
 
@Bicicleur,

Apparently, they've been investigating at this site since the start of the 20th century but just got to this depth.

I was wondering the same thing. It's not just the wall:

"On the slope, about 5 meters from the face of the wall, the defence system was further strengthened by an approximately 1.5 m deep, narrow trench with a triangular cross-section. Fortune smiled on the archaeologists, they were able to discover the remains of the entrance gate. It has the form of a narrow, 1.5 m corridor, crossing the wall and leading up through the clay embankment, toward the interior of the settlement. The walls of this passage were reinforced with large sandstone slabs "anchored" in the lowest layers of stones forming a retaining wall.

Archaeologists estimate the age of the settlement at between 1,750 and 1,690 BC based on radiocarbon analysis - organic remains accompanying the structures have been tested. According to Dr. Przybyła due to the size of the whole structure and the stone blocks used for its construction, it is a masterpiece of architecture much closer to solutions found in the Bronze Age civilizations in the Mediterranean than in any cultural traditions of Central and Western Europe. Archaeologists are considering the possibility that the applied know-how came from there."


I'm not sure it's the Mycenaeans. They earlier say the people came from Hungary. On the other hand, was there anything approaching this in the Hungary of that time?

The other question I have is what were they doing there? Was it a one off? Did this have legs or not?
 
Thank you Angela, very interesting! By the way:

"Its inhabitants were not indigenous people, living in Małopolska since the end of the Stone Age, but a small, no more than 12-person group of colonists from the south, from the territory of present-day Hungary" - Dr. Przybyła told PAP.
"Dwustuosobowa" (200-person) got translated as 12-person (which would be: "dwunastoosobowa"), apparently: :)

http://archeowiesci.pl/2015/09/03/p...kryli-prehistoryczne-fortyfikacje-z-kamienia/

– Jego mieszkańcami nie była rdzenna ludność, zamieszkująca Małopolskę od końca epoki kamienia, lecz niewielka, maksymalnie dwustuosobowa, grupa kolonistów przybyłych z południa, z obszarów leżących na terenie dzisiejszych Węgier – opowiada PAP dr Przybyła.

If those were Mycenaeans (Achaeans), then apparently a group of Achaeans settled in Poland before coming to Greece.

Because this stone wall is dated to 1750-1690 BC, while Achaeans/Mycenaeans invaded Greece much later, around 1600 BC:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycenaean_Greece

It seems that Achaeans lived in Hungary & Poland before they established history's first Greek-speaking kingdom in Mycenae.

This discovery reminds me of the theory, according to which action of Homer's epic tales was taking place in the Baltic Sea:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Baltic_Origins_of_Homer's_Epic_Tales
 
Another similar Bronze Age settlement (but with wooden fortifications) was "Carpathian Troy", Trzcinica:

http://www.karpackatroja.pl/0_1_2.html

Not far from the Carpathian Troy, the big cultural centre from the beginnings of the Bronze Age, local farmer during fieldworks found three golden bracelets tied with golden wire on the surface of field.

Two of them are made of spiral, quite thick, golden wire, third bracelet is made of slightly thinner doubly folded one. They weight 61,76 grammes.

These artefacts originate from the Carpathian Basin, dated to the Bronze Age when area of Trzcinica was inhabited by transcarpathian population [from Hungary as well], which represented the highest level of social development. Probably they could be connected with the Otomani-Fuzesabony Culture, which perfectly known metallurgy of bronze and gold.

Unusually noble man was discoverer, who reported discovery to Historic Preservation Officer, indicated the place where he discovered it and handed gold artefacts to the Subcarpathian Museum in Krosno.

In the place where the bracelets were discovered the archaeological explorations will be conducted soon. They explain whether these unique artefacts were hidden in this place intentionally, were grave furnishings, or maybe there was the defensive settlement and the artefacts were lost accidentally.

Soon gold will be displayed in the Subcarpathian Museum in Krosno, and then on the constant display at the Carpathian Troy.
 
Myceneans arrived in their new lands with chariots and bronze swords

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Age_sword

Bronze Age swords appear from around the 17th century BC, in the Black Sea region and the Aegean, as a further development of thedagger.

it was tought that the Myceneans introduced the chariot in the Balkans
now it is believed to be the other way around, chariots in the Balkans are dated before the Mycenians
(unfortunately I don't remember where I read this)
IMO some people related to the Mycenians arrived in the Balkans and Hungary and spread from there with chariots and bronze swords

Maybe E-V13 ? TMRCA estimated 4300 year

ThracianBulgariaSvilengrad (P192-1)
800-500 BCE1b1b1a1b Z1919Genetiker 1/9/15 1+ 0 – op 5 no subclades tested
 
Achaeans/Mycenaeans (speakers of Proto-Greek) originally came from the steppe (Seima-Turbino phenomenon?):

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1a_Y-DNA.shtml#Greek

Little is known about the arrival of Proto-Greek speakers from the steppes. The Mycenaean culture commenced circa 1650 BCE and is clearly an imported steppe culture. The close relationship between Mycenaean and Proto-Indo-Iranian languages suggest that they split fairly late, some time between 2500 and 2000 BCE. Archeologically, Mycenaean chariots, spearheads, daggers and other bronze objects show striking similarities with the Seima-Turbino culture (c. 1900-1600 BCE) of the northern Russian forest-steppes, known for the great mobility of its nomadic warriors
Hungary is just an extension of the Eurasian steppe, so yes, they could stay in Hungary for some time, before moving to Greece.

And apparently some part of them also went north to Poland, including Maszkowice which is located at the Dunajec river.

Dunajec is connected with Vistula, and Vistula with the Baltic Sea - so yeah, Homer's characters could live in Maszkowice... :)

Trzcinica ("Carpathian Troy") is located at the Ropa river, connected with Wisloka, which is connected with Vistula too.

 
Thank you Angela, very interesting! By the way:

"Dwustuosobowa" (200-person) got translated as 12-person (which would be: "dwunastoosobowa"), apparently: :)
That certainly makes more sense :) Otherwise I was like - wtf - 12 persons?? That would be mom, dad, grandma and 9 kids.
 
bicicleur said:
it was tought that the Myceneans introduced the chariot in the Balkans
now it is believed to be the other way around, chariots in the Balkans are dated before the Mycenians

The oldest chariots come from the Sintashta culture (believed to be Proto-Indo-Iranian) of the Eurasian steppe.

If not Myceneans, then who introduced chariots to the Balkans? Some previous immigrants from the steppe?
 
Another expenssion of farmers from South (Hungary) into the north during warmer times. This time it was Minoan Warm Period.

GISP2.jpg


Did someone figure out what material culture they belonged too?
 
The oldest chariots come from the Sintashta culture (believed to be Proto-Indo-Iranian) of the Eurasian steppe.

If not Myceneans, then who introduced chariots to the Balkans? Some previous immigrants from the steppe?

If their were Myceneans then most likely they have spread from West Steppe by shores of Black Sea, not Baltic. I think they have brought R1b to Greece, and as such they couldn't live farther North in lands of R1a folks.
 
Another expenssion of farmers from South (Hungary) into the north during warmer times. This time it was Minoan Warm Period.

GISP2.jpg


Did someone figure out what material culture they belonged too?

Your wish is my command! :)

Seriously, good graphic and very much on point. This was apparently a Carpathian related Bronze Age tell culture. It's amazing in that these cultures followed the exact same trajectory as the one that can be seen in the Neolithic Balkan cultures. Poor climatic conditions with sparse settlements, low population, then, with improving climate, increased production, an elite, specialization, metallurgy, large settlements, and this phase followed by worsening climate, exhausted soil and abandonment of the tell.
http://www.academia.edu/2530591/Int...Bronze_Age_Tell_Sites_in_the_Carpathian_Basin

This particular one is called the Ottomány culture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottomány_culture

The only wrinkle here is that the fortified sites are made of stone, which is unheard of in this area and these cultures. Of course, you already had monumental stone architecture, including fortifications, in Helladic Greece in 2600 BC. So, I think you're right and the flow was south/north. What were they after, however? Minerals? Amber? Could they have been making bronze swords?

These were areas where Bronze hoards with a lot of Bronze swords have been found. (Say that really fast! :)) Interestingly, this site dates to about 1700 BC. Later on (Gamba et al) we find this:
KyjaticeHungaryLudas-Varjudilo [BR2]M1270-1110 BCJ2a1

Gamba et al: http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/141021/ncomms6257/full/ncomms6257.html
On Kyjatice culture: https://books.google.com/books?id=h...=onepage&q=Kyjatice culture in Poland&f=false

One of the papers mentions a relationship to Urnfield culture. I vaguely remember that Maciamo was speculating that Urnfield culture people might have had a more "southern" component? I can't find it now
 
Your wish is my command! :)

Seriously, good graphic and very much on point. This was apparently a Carpathian related Bronze Age tell culture. It's amazing in that these cultures followed the exact same trajectory as the one that can be seen in the Neolithic Balkan cultures. Poor climatic conditions with sparse settlements, low population, then, with improving climate, increased production, an elite, specialization, metallurgy, large settlements, and this phase followed by worsening climate, exhausted soil and abandonment of the tell.
http://www.academia.edu/2530591/Int...Bronze_Age_Tell_Sites_in_the_Carpathian_Basin

This particular one is called the Ottomány culture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottomány_culture

The only wrinkle here is that the fortified sites are made of stone, which is unheard of in this area and these cultures. Of course, you already had monumental stone architecture, including fortifications, in Helladic Greece in 2600 BC. So, I think you're right and the flow was south/north. What were they after, however? Minerals? Amber? Could they have been making bronze swords?

These were areas where Bronze hoards with a lot of Bronze swords have been found. (Say that really fast! :)) Interestingly, this site dates to about 1700 BC. Later on (Gamba et al) we find this:
KyjaticeHungaryLudas-Varjudilo [BR2]M1270-1110 BCJ2a1

Gamba et al: http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/141021/ncomms6257/full/ncomms6257.html
On Kyjatice culture: https://books.google.com/books?id=h...=onepage&q=Kyjatice culture in Poland&f=false

One of the papers mentions a relationship to Urnfield culture. I vaguely remember that Maciamo was speculating that Urnfield culture people might have had a more "southern" component? I can't find it now
They were contemporary of Unetice culture, but they could have been migrants from south, I think, due to use stone and clay structure for walls, technique foreign in these area. Let them dig some more, perhaps some more clues will come next year or even some bones?
 
Ed. Sorry Bicicleur,

I don't know how I did it, but I answered on your post instead of on a new one.:useless::rolleyes:

I need another cup of coffee...or I need to stop doing three things at once.

Angela, Angela, beware
strange things are happening
don't underestimate your supranatural powers
 
Angela, Angela, beware
strange things are happening
don't underestimate your supranatural powers

How come I don't know the Lotto numbers then?:grin:
 
LeBrok said:
If their were Myceneans then most likely they have spread from West Steppe by shores of Black Sea, not Baltic. I think they have brought R1b to Greece, and as such they couldn't live farther North in lands of R1a folks.

Proto-Greeks could be a mix of R1a with R1b.

According to Myres et al. 2010, R1b in Greece consists entirely of L23(xM412), U152 and M269(xL23).

Poland also has quite a lot of these types of R1b:

R1b subclades in Greece, Myres et al. 2010 (n=171):

L23(xM412) -------------- 0,082
U152 ---------------------- 0,041
M269(xL23) -------------- 0,012


M269 all ------------------ 0,135 (= 13,5%)

R1b subclades in Poland, the same source (n=202):

U106(xU198) ------------- 0,0594
L23(xM412) -------------- 0,0544
U152 ---------------------- 0,0347
S116*(xM529xU152) ---- 0,0101
M529(xM222) ------------ 0,0099
M269(xL23) -------------- 0,005
M412(xL11) -------------- 0,005
L11*(xU106xS116) ------ 0,005

M269 all ------------------ 0,1835 (= 18,35%)

R1b subclades in Slovakia, the same source (n=276):

S116*(xM529xU152) ---- 0,043
U106(xU198) ------------- 0,04
L23(xM412) -------------- 0,036
U152 ---------------------- 0,025
L11*(xU106xS116) ------ 0,007
M412(xL11) -------------- 0,007
M529(xM222) ------------ 0,004

M269 all ------------------ 0,163 (= 16,3%)
M343*(xM73xM269) ----- 0,007

R1b subclades in Czech Rep., the same source (n=87):

L23(xM412) -------------- 0,057
S116*(xM529xU152) ---- 0,057
U106(xU198) ------------- 0,057
U152 ---------------------- 0,034
M529(xM222) ------------ 0,011

M269 all ------------------ 0,218 (= 21,8%)

R1b subclades in Hungary, the same source (n=113):

L23(xM412) -------------- 0,062
S116*(xM529xU152) ---- 0,044
U152 ---------------------- 0,035
U106(xU198) ------------- 0,035
M269(xL23) -------------- 0,009
M529(xM222) ------------ 0,009
M412(xL11) -------------- 0,009

M269 all ------------------ 0,204 (= 20,4%)

Source:

Data from Supplementary Table S4: http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v19/n1/suppinfo/ejhg2010146s1.html
 
L23(xM412) is common in Greece (8,2%), Hungary (6,2%) Czech Rep. (5,7%), Poland (5,4%), etc., but very rare in Germany (0,6%).

Only 2 out of 321 Germans had L23(xM412) = 0,6%. Compared to 14/171 Greeks, 7/113 Hungarians, 5/87 Czechs and 11/202 Poles.

By the way, LeBrok, it seems that you have this branch as well, because R1b1b2a stands for L23(xM412) - as far as I know.
 
L23(xM412) is common in Greece (8,2%), Hungary (6,2%) Czech Rep. (5,7%), Poland (5,4%), etc., but very rare in Germany (0,6%).

Only 2 out of 321 Germans had L23(xM412) = 0,6%. Compared to 14/171 Greeks, 7/113 Hungarians, 5/87 Czechs and 11/202 Poles.

By the way, LeBrok, it seems that you have this branch as well, because R1b1b2a stands for L23(xM412) - as far as I know.

I've been told that I have L51, and probably U106/S21.
 
So far we don't have any Mycenaean Y-DNA samples, but we do have a few samples of mtDNA from Grave Circle B royal cemetery:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grave_Circle_B,_Mycenae

http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml

One of these samples is U5a1a - let's see what Maciamo wrote about U5a1a (he has linked it more strongly with R1a than with R1b):

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_U5_mtDNA.shtml#history

The Bronze Age shows a different picture. U5a1 (mostly U5a1a) suddenly supersedes U5b in Germany in remains from the Corded Ware and Unetice cultures, both linked with the advance of Indo-Europeans speakers from the Pontic Steppe in southern Russia and Ukraine. U5a1 also turns up in the Andronovo culture in southern Siberia, another culture linked with the Indo-European migrations. U5a1a was also found in elite graves from Mycenaen Greece, the period associated with the introduction of the Proto-Greek branch of Indo-European languages into Greece.

Wilde et al. (2014) tested mtDNA samples from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe dating from the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age (Yamna culture and Catacomb culture) and found U5a1 in samples from all periods, confirming that this maternal lineage was found among the original Proto-Indo-European speakers.

Iron Age remains tell the same story. U5a1/U5a1a shows up in an Indo-European kurgan burials from Kazakhstan (Lalueza-Fox et al. 2004) and from Khakassia in the Altai (Keyser et al. 2009), in kurgans from the Scytho-Siberian Pazyryk culture in Mongolia and southern Siberia (Pilipenko et al. 2010), in Scythian and Scytho-Sarmatian remains from Ukraine (Nikitin et al. 2011) and southern Russia (Dersarkissian 2011), and even in the classical Celtic La Tène culture in southern Germany (Knipper et al. 2014).

U5a1a therefore appears very strongly correlated with the Indo-European migrations during the Bronze Age and the Iron Age. More amazingly U5b was never found in any kurgan burial or other Indo-European remains in Asia, which means that the U5b samples from the Corded Ware, Unetice or Urnfield cultures in central Europe could represent the lineages of the indigenous inhabitants of the region who were absorbed by the Indo-European invasions. Another possibility is that U5a1a is associated with the R1a branch of the Indo-Europeans, and that other varieties of U5 would have been carried by R1b people. It is noteworthy that of the two Indo-European branches only Y-haplogroup R1a was found in the above remains from Eastern Europe, Central Asia and Siberia. Consequently the only conclusion that can be drawn from them is that U5a1a is linked to R1a. But could it also be associated with R1b ?

Although European DNA found in Central Asia and Siberia is almost always of Indo-European origin, most countries have mixed R1a-R1b populations, making it difficult to distinguish maternal lineages between the two. The Tajiks are an exception. They possess 30% of R1a and only 3% of R1b, which makes it the only clearly R1a-dominant region in Central Asia or Siberia. Tajikistan also happens to be the Asian country with the highest percentage of U5 (7.5%), and most of it is U5a1, with a small minority of U5b1c. This confirms again the association between U5a1 and R1a.

There is strong evidence that R1b people only carried U5 maternal lineages, but perhaps not so much of the U5a1 variety, or at least not as overwhelmingly as R1a people.

Several U5 subclades other than U5a1a have been found in Central Asia, including U5a2a, U5b1c2, and U5b2a (U5b2a1, U5b2a2, U5b2a4 and U5b2a5). Although these were probably brought by the Indo-Europeans, it remains unclear whether they are linked to R1a or R1b people.

The other mtDNA haplogroup found in Grave Circle B is K, but unfortunately there is no info on what exact subclade it could be:

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_K_mtDNA.shtml#history

Finally, the last sample was probably H, but it is uncertain*. And even if H, then we don't know what subclade exactly.

*"Cambridge Reference Sequence compatible in the region sequenced with various haplogroups including H, HV1, J, U, U3 and U4."

============================

As for U5a1a from Grave Circle B, it was carried by individual Z59 (Zeta 59), which is this one (reconstruction):

1) Zeta 59 with hair:

Image2-6.jpg


(the one on the left):

Untitled.jpg


2) Zeta 59 without hair:

image.jpg


(the one on the left):

gallery_1649_101_293818.jpg


Let's also take a look at Maciamo's map showing the modern distribution of U5 (all of it, not just U5a1a - unfortunately):

mtDNA-U5-map.png
 
There is considerable similarity between phenotypes of Zeta 59 (above), and of some of these figures in the video below:


That said, the majority of population were "Pelasgians", i.e. pre-Indo-European peoples conquered by invading Proto-Greeks.

"Pelasgians" is the most commonly used umbrella term for that (major) part of Ancient Greek population which was of Non-IE origin. But actually, ancient written sources recorded more names of indigenous tribes of Greece from times before the Indo-European conquest, such as:

Pelasgians
Eteocretans (= Minoans)
Cydonians
Leleges
Telchines
Tyrsenians
Aones
Temmices
Hyantes
Syes
Abantes
Carians
Cranaeans
Kadmeans
Lapithes
Myrmidons
Dryopes
Danaans
Caucones
Korybantes
Kouretes
Teucres

Etc., etc.

For example Herodotus mentioned, that Athenians were more "Pelasgic" (native pre-Greek) in terms of ancestry, than Spartans.

According to Herodotus, Attica was originally inhabited by Cranaeans (one of Pelasgic tribes), who got conquered by Proto-Greeks.
 

This thread has been viewed 12943 times.

Back
Top