Quote:
Originally Posted by
torzio
which Halstatt culture...the 1200-900 when the celts mixed with the Illyrians in modern austria .......or ........800-600BC period when they mixed with italic and balkan peoples?
Hallstatt doesn't really start before 800, but this is what I wrote about the Channelled Ware, with some important quotations. We have proof of Psenicevo in Bulgaria being heavily E-V13, based on the leak we got. So I tried to investigate whether they can be connected with my Channelled Ware horizon theory for E-V13, as for the whole Incised Pottery groups of the region:
Going deeper, I see the big impact of Fluted Ware (= Channelled Ware, "Cannelure Hallstatt" in this article), as its called for Bulgaria in particular, which is part of the Channelled Ware horizon and related, at least culturally, to the centre of Gava:
Quote:
The Zimnicea-Novgrad is considered as �a totally different entity in comparison with the other groups�, i. e. the �Cannelure Hallstatt� community (Gumă 1995: 109), especially for its burial rite. But, the basic type of Zimnicea-Novgrad pottery ornamentation is cannelure, or fluted ornamentation (Alexandrescu 1978: 117-119; Gumă 1995: 131, pl. XIII). According to A. Alexandrescu, �the cannelures are regular d�cor� of Zimnicea-Novgrad cups (Alexandrescu 1978: 117). Also, these cups (or mugs) are the basic type of Zimnicea-Novgrad pottery; they have the form of truncated cone or hemisphere. M. Guma said that �the cups with higher and flat handles (of Zimnicea-Novgrad � A. R.), decorated by longitudinal flutes are similar with those from Vajuga representing the second stage of the Hinova-Mala Vrbica group� (Gumă 1995: 110).
So, in spite of presence of some incised ornamentation, it seems more plausible that Zimnicea-Novgrad culture belonged to the "cultures with fluted ornamentation of pottery". The first researcher of Zimnicea cemetery compared its ceramics with such cultures of "cannelure Hallstatt" as Vyrtop, Meri, Suseni (Alexandrescu 1978: 123).
But there was also this group:
Quote:
But, Saharna-Solonceni culture is characterized by almost total absence of fluted ornamentation (Кашуба 2000: 313). Fluted ornamentation is very rare in the Kozia culture also (Laszlo 1972: 214-215; Iconomu 1996). Thus, we cannot suppose that Zimnicea-Novgrad took part in the genesis Saharna-Solonceni or Kozia cultures.
However:
Quote:
The Sboreanovo group is defined usually as part of �Cultures with Stamped ornamentation of Pottery� of Northern Bulgaria. Fluted ornamentation of pottery, however, is also a typical or even dominant feature for Sboreanovo group (Гоцев, Шалганова 2004: 60-61; Czyborra 2005: 173). Besides, the main type of Sboreanovo vessel (Czyborra 2005: 99-101) is the so called �cantaros� (as well as Zimnicea-Plovdiv pottery (Alexandrescu 1973: 77-78, 81)). The �cantaros� is a big vessel with two handles and open mouth; this kind of vessel is found neither in Kozia, nor in Saharna-Solonceni.
Evidently, it looks more probable that the Vyrbitsa tradition of bronze axes production was brought into the Carpathian-Dniester region by some population belonging to the "cannelure Hallstatt" community. It could be the Hinova-Mala Vrbica group. It seems to be a more preferable idea, as we see some other metalware (bracelets and fibulas) in the Carpathian-Dniester region that seem to be associated with the coming of Hinova-Mala Vrbica population. The Hinova-Mala Vrbica group made a substantial contribution to the origin of Kishinev-Korlateni culture (Guma 1995: 108).
There is some other argument to this idea. As it follows from the mapping of V. A. Dergachev, the �axes with vertical lines� were spread in three areas chiefly: in central and western parts of Northern Bulgaria, in the Carpathian-Dniester region and in Transylvania � in the area of Gava culture (Dergacev 2002: 167-169, taf.123), The Gava culture is a �culture with fluted ornamentation of pottery� too.
It is really important that �axes with vertical lines� from the Carpathian-Dniester region and Transylvania have a special ring at the back side. This distinguishes them from the �Bulgarian� variant of �axes with vertical lines�. The �Bulgarian� variant of �axes with vertical lines� has no rings (as V. A. Dergachev points out, �isolated evidences� of axes �with ring� were found in Northern Bulgaria) (Dergacev 2002: 168, taf.123).
But �axes with vertical lines� from area of Hinova-Mala Vrbica group have this ring as well.
V. A. Dergachev suggested that these �axes with vertical lines and a special ring� appeared as a result of some synthesis of Transylvania and Northern Bulgaria metalwork traditions (Дергачев 1997: 58; Dergacev 2002: 168).
Where did this synthesis take place? We can suppose that it was the Hinova-Mala Vrbica area.
Thus, the �axes with vertical lines and a special ring� were spread in the �cultures with fluted ornamentation of pottery� mainly. And, as it results from the mapping (Dergacev 2002: taf. 123;
Quote:
I think that all these facts bring the idea that sickles and axes of Vyrbitsa type spread in the Carpathian-Dniester region simultaneously. It was in the first half of Ha A1, when Noua culture was replaced by Kishinev-Korlateni (see: Дергачев, Бочкарев 2002: 236). And just the Kishinev-Korlateni people brought this tradition.
Quote:
It was pointed out that an axe and a piece of casting-form of Vyrbitsa tradition were found in the Radovanu settlement (Uşurelu 2003: 216). The �Radovanu facies� (or �Late Koslogeny culture�, as many researchers refer to it) is supposed to be the ancestor of �Cultures with Incised Ornamentation of Pottery� community in the Lower Danube and Carpathian-Dniester regions (including such early groups as Sihleanu-Rimnicele, Tamaoani, Holerkani-Hanska, Balta). Thus, this is considered as evidence that early groups of �Cultures with Incised Ornamentation of Pottery� community in the Lower Danube region were a main and direct heir of the Vyrbitsa metalwork tradition (Uşurelu 2003: 217).
Quote:
But more important is the fact that in Dobruja and Muntenia "the Late Bronze Age tradition of metal production came abruptly to the end simultaneously with the end of Koslogeny culture and with penetration of Pre-Babadag or Babadag I here" (Дергачев 1997: 50).
So, it looks like the Babadag culture was a newcomer in the Lower Danube area.
https://www.academia.edu/4338117/Axe...es_Ha_A_Ha_B1_
Quote:
A new period in Thrace, referred to as the Early Iron Age, started with general changes in many aspects of the local Late Bronze Age culture: pottery style, burial rites, and metal types. At the same time, all of the features of this period bear similarities to the previous period, supporting the theory of a gradual, though short transition between the two ages. The first phase of the Early Iron Age, called Fluted ware horizon, started with the LH IIIC period and continued through the Protogeometric period, according to Aegean periodisation. The LH IIIC is still the Late Bronze Age in the Aegean, and following the direction of the spread of iron technology from south to north, it would be more correct to consider this phase a transitional period than a real Iron Age. �The horizon of the fluted ware� is characterised by decreased contacts with the Aegean region. Simultaneously Thrace became strongly dependent on the Carpatho-Danubian region because of its potential to provide metal sources. This development is most visible in the new pottery style that appeared throughout Thrace. At this time, limited traces of migration are visible in the archaeological records, both within Thrace (the cremation burial at Manole) and from Thrace (the site of Troia), with movement in the direction northwest to southeast. The real Iron Age starts with the next phase, called Psenicevo, when contacts with the Aegean were restored and became more evident than ever before. Thrace became part of the geometric koine, recalling the situation during the Late Bronze Age.
Quote:
On the other hand, Psenicevo is very similar to the Ostrov, Basarabi and Babadag groups to the north and should be contemporary with them. In general, the first stage of Psenicevo should be synchronised with Ostrov and Babadag II, and the second stage with Basarabi and Babadag III. These pottery styles mark the geometric koine during the Early Iron Age, a result of restored contacts between the Balkans and the Aegean region, as well as the return of Greece and Anatolia to a leading role during this period.
https://www.academia.edu/7794465/Thr...ures_in_Thrace
The issue is, that the Channelled Ware horizon encompassed practically all areas which later appear E-V13 heavy and gave birth to Incised Ware groups or at least heavily influenced them. Psenicova, with its proven presence of high levels of E-V13, just proves that "it happened" at that time already, which was a given, because the Fluted Ware horizon rolled over the country before. But this doesn't answer the question as to whether E-V13 was part of a Gava subgroup, a Belegis subgroup, or another one taking part in the Channelled Ware horizon. It just proves that after the Channelled Ware horizon, unlike before, E-V13 was present and strong in areas like Svilengrad, in groups like Psenicevo. That's like looking at post-Bell Beaker cultures and stating that R1b was now in Western Europe. My guess is that for most of the regions involved the Channelled/Fluted Ware horizon and early Hallstatt were for E-V13 similar to Bell Beakers for R1b in Western Europe.
