At the confluence of the Corded Ware and the Únětice cultures. The case of amber discs

STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVI/1, 44–60 At the confluence of the Corded Ware and the Únětice cultures. The case of amber discs Janusz Czebreszuk ABSTRACT The relationship between the Corded Ware Culture and the Únětice Culture is one of the topics present in the literature, which also gives rise to discussion. The article discusses amber discs and puts forward the thesis that these products belong to the elements that bind both the above ‑mentioned cultural traditions. Amber discs are known from three contexts: the Globular Amphora Culture, the Corded Ware Culture, and the Únětice Culture. In the first one there is also adecorated version, while in the other two only artefacts without ornaments are known. Therefore, the article focuses on the Corded Ware Culture and the Únětice Culture. The finds were collected and analysed contextually and chronologically. Analyses show that the use of these artefacts continued uninterruptedly from the beginning of the Corded Ware Culture (especially in its Jutland variant known as the Single Grave Culture), i.e., from the beginning of the 3rd millennium BC, to the classic Únětice Culture (beginning of the 2nd millennium BC). The article also discusses the type of cultural content with which amber discs were associated in the discussed ar‑ chaeological communities. KEYWORDS Amber disc; the Corded Ware Culture; the Únětice Culture; cultural connections. INTRODUCTION AND TYPOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION Cultural relations between the Corded Ware Culture (CWC) in abroad sense (also including the Single Graves Culture [SGC]) and the Únětice Culture, have been for years asignificant challenge for scholars (Müller 2000; Czebreszuk 2001, 114; Fröhlich– Becker 2015, 771; Schwartz 2015, 667–668, 697, Abb. 8; Spatzier 2015, 797; Meller 2019). Many are sceptical about the hypothesis that proposes contiguity in time between both traditions (e.g., Wolter‑ mann 2016, 127, with further references), and even more so as far as the possible influence of the CWC tradition on forming the Únětice world is concerned. Some researchers, however, increasingly advocate recently contrasting views (Müller 2000; Czebreszuk 2001, 114; Spatz‑ ier 2015; Meller 2019, fig. 3). Where else should the origin of princely barrows be sought for than in the CWC tradition? Among the traits linking both traditions, Meller enumerates, apart from barrows, wooden grave constructions, and apreference for weapons and large ampho‑ ras as grave goods (Meller 2019, 42). The most sophisticated body of research into the burial mounds was performed for the Circum ‑Harz group of the Únětice Culture (cf. Meller 2019). It has demonstrated that the oldest surviving barrows date to the mid ‑twentieth century BC (the Leubingen barrow was constructed in 1942 BC according to the dendrochronological age determination – Beckeretal. 1989). Recent still unpublished studies by the author of the ar‑ ticle on establishing the chronology of Únětice Culture tumuli of the Kościan group (Greater Poland) revealed an earlier date for the beginning of the barrow tradition. 45JANUSZ CZEBRESZUK In addition to the above, one more cultural attribute was probably transferred between these two discussed traditions: amber discs. The aim of the article is to illuminate this is‑ sue. With the above in mind, we will focus on areas in the southwestern Baltic area (Cze‑ breszuk 2001, 11–15), mainly including the following modern regions: Schleswig ‑Holstein and Mecklenburg ‑Vorpommern in Germany and Pomerania, Kuyavia, and Greater Poland in Poland. It is apart of Europe where the Únětice influence zone is the closest to the amber‑ ‑bearing areas. What is more, it is also an area occupied by communities following different varieties of the CWC tradition. The south ‑west Baltic area of interest to us had at the turn of the third and second millennia BC (between 2500 and 1700 BC) its cultural specificity (Czebreszuk 2001). It was character‑ ized (among other traits) by the presence of features of both the CWC and Bell Beakers (BB) in asingle community (Czebreszuk– Szmyt 2019a) as well as the presence of early Únětice Culture influences. First (the proto and old ‑Únětice stages), this process was visible in the characteristics of ceramics (for example: Kozłowska 2004) and later (the classic ‑Únětice stage) – mainly in the presence of Únětice Culture metal artefacts (Blajer 1990). In our usage, an amber disc is to be understood as adisc ‑shaped artefact featuring various lateral sections (from oval to lenticular). Avery important feature that distinguishes it from ordinary disc ‑like beads is its size: diameter reaching 5 cm and more. Amber discs come in two versions: ornamented and unornamented. HISTORY OF THE USE OF AMBER DISCS Disc ‑shaped ornaments enjoyed awide spatial distribution across the earlier stages of the Neolithic (Klassen 2000, 191–206); nevertheless, those made of amber were known earliest in the south ‑east Baltic area. This was where the rich amber production thrived continuously beginning in the Mesolithic (Gimbutas 1985; Loze 1988), stretching through successive periods of prehistory (Loze 1975; Mazurowski 1983; Rimantiené 1984; 1989; 1992; Czarniauski 1985; Gimbutas 1985). The assemblage of amber artefacts– very diverse in typological terms– included also discs, as evidenced by finds, e.g., from Abora Iand Eini, Latvia, or Palanga, Lithuania (Gimbutas 1985) and Šentoji 4 (Rimantiené 1996). All the documented artefacts are of the unornamented type. Moreover, at that time, amber discs were known far to the north ‑east, as far as the Upper Volga and the White Sea coast (Gim‑ butas 1965, 256–257, fig. 5). In the early 3rd millennium BC, the earliest traits of the Globular Amphora Culture (GAC) began to emerge in the south ‑east Baltic area (Szmyt 1999). The assemblage characterising the GAC grew and incorporated amber artefacts, including discs (Gimbutas 1985; Szmyt 1999; Czebreszuk 2011, 36; Woltermann 2016, 129). They comprised both variants, with and without decoration, although those decorated were particularly characteristic of the above‑ ‑mentioned culture (Szmyt 1996; 1999; Czebreszuk 2002). Ornaments were applied with the dotted technique, creating radial patterns in the simplest cross forms. They are known to us from, e.g., Rańsk and Raszynek (Nosek 1967) or Ivanye and Szwarcenowo (Czebreszuk 2002). It should be pointed out that the dotted technique had along tradition in the south‑ ‑east Baltic area. Still, it was primarily used to adorn other artefacts than amber discs, as demonstrated by specimens from, e.g., Šventoji Iand II and the collection from the Curonian Spit (Gimbutas 1985). 46 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVI/1 Tab.1: The tendency of changes in the size of amber discs in dated assemblies of the Jutland SGC, according to Hübner 2005. (* = the second hole at the edge; n = multiple holes) Site / Catalog number Grave No Diameter (cm), disc 1 Diameter (cm), disc 2 Phase Average (cm) Finnerup/906 1 7.8 no data 1a 6.43 Pilgård. Skarrild Overby/977 1 7 6.9 1a Skarrild Mose. Skarrild Overby/990 1 5.8 5.7 1a Torupgårde/1173 1 5.9 5.3 1a Forum/1210 1 5.8 no data 1a Tjæreborg/1366 1 6.8 6.4 1a Kejlstrup/729 1 4.6 4.6 1b 5.51 Dons/767 1 3.4 1b Vester Nebel/769 1 6 2.8 1b Aalbækgårde/837 1 5.2 5 1b ‘Lillehøj’. Thyregodlund/857 1 6.8 6.8n 1b Thyregodlund/862 1 6 5.6 1b Fasterkjær/904 1 5.8 5.6 1b Hestkjær/911 1 3.5 1b Lille Hamborg/972 1 5.2 4.9 1b Skarrild Mose. Skarrild Overby/988 1 8.1 8* 1b Borbjerg/1016 1 4.2 1b Gørding/1031 1 5.6 no data 1b ‘Vesterhøj’. Ramme/1076 1 1.8 1b Kragelund/1085 1 6.4 6.4 1b Vittrup/1133 1 6.4 6.4 1b Villebøl/1167 1 9 1b Meils/1459 1 6.5 6.4 1b Snorup/1479 1 7.6 7.5 1b Meilby/1497 1 9.6 9.4 1b Kjeldgård. Bakgård/141 1 8 8n 1c 3.89 Kejlstrup/728 1 4 3.8 1c Thyregodlund/865 1 4 3.6 1c Bendichsminde. Øse/1380 1 3 1c Nebel/1405 1 4.6 4 1c Nørhå/6 1 3 2a 3.85 47JANUSZ CZEBRESZUK The GAC took over the raw material (amber), type (disc), and technique and ornamentation (crossing dotted lines) from the communities inhabiting the south ‑east Baltic zone. But they adapted all these features to suit their cultural requirements. Discs are found mainly in col‑ lective graves (particularly in the so ‑called Polish group: Wiślański 1966; Nosek 1967; Szmyt 1996) and less frequently in individual burials (particularly in the eastern group: Szmyt 1999). According to reconstructions performed where possible, amber discs used to be placed in the thoracic part of the skeleton (Czebreszuk 2002, 70). The GAC communities made amber discs adorned with cross ‑like patterns the evident symbol of their solar beliefs (Gimbutas 1997, 288–289; Czebreszuk 2002). About the same time, ca. 2800 BC, in Jutland (the south ‑west Baltic area), amber discs exclusively in undecorated types appeared in the earliest SGC graves (Ebbesen 1986; Hüb‑ ner 2005; Siemen 2016). They were mainly positioned with adult males (Damm 1991, fig. 37; Woltermann 2016, tab.13) though some were also recorded with women and children (Siemen 2016, 32). In the later phases of the SGC, amber discs were less frequently found and were smaller than in earlier periods of the culture (Woltermann 2016, tab.13). According to the data collected by Hübner (2005), amber discs found in unambiguously techno ‑stylistically dated assemblages belong to the phases 1a, 1b, 1c, 2a, and 2b (Tab.1), dated to 2850–2450 BC (Hübner 2005, Abb. 477). It has been observed that their size tended to decrease over time (Tab.1). While not excluding amore prolonged use of amber discs by SGC communities in Jutland (Siemen 2016), we can admit that also other CWC tradition branches in the south Baltic area (see below) used them over later periods. Site / Catalog number Grave No Diameter (cm), disc 1 Diameter (cm), disc 2 Phase Average (cm) Erslev/13 1 2.8 2a Torup/25 2 3.2 2a Suldrup/114 1 3.6 2a Stenhøje/918 1 5.4 2a Jersild/966 2 3 2 2a Kvaglund/1253 2 6.6 no data 2a Bakkegården/1501 2 4.9 4 2a Nørhå/5 2 3.4 2b 3.49 Nørhå/5 3 4.4 4.2 2b Nørre Dråby/19 1 3 2b Redsted/34 1 5.4 2b Redsted/35 3.8 2b Fragdrup/96 1 3.6n 3.2 2b Vranum/376 1 3.2 2 2b Nørre Gludsted/669 1 4.2 2b Vestterp/1373 1 4.4 no data 2b Vorbasse/1435 1 4.2 2b 48 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVI/1 No Findplace Region Country Grave no. Chronology (BC) Culture Literature Fig. 1 Barnisław Zachodniopomorskie Poland grave 78 2300–2100 CWC/proto ÚněticeC Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 58–59, ryc. 4:5 2:5 2 Barwice Zachodniopomorskie Poland 2000–1800 BrA2 Sarnowska 1969, 154; Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2012, 122 3:5 3 Brusy Kujawsko‑Pomorskie Poland 2000–1800 ÚněticeC Bukowski 2002, 31 3:2 4 Budowo Pomorskie Poland    Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 59 5 Dąbrowa Biskupia 21 Kujawsko‑Pomorskie Poland grave 214 2500–2300 CWC Budziszewski et al. 2008 2:3 6 Fockbek Schleswig‑Holstein Germany tumulus 3 Untergrabzeit SGC Hübner 2005, Kat. Nr. 1617 7 Grevenkrug Schleswig‑Holstein Germany tumulus 3 grób A Untergrabzeit SGC Hübner 2005, Kat. Nr. 1621 8 Iwno Kujawsko‑Pomorskie Poland 2400–2200 IwnoC Czebreszuk – Szmyt 2019 2:4 9 Lüningsdorf Mecklenburg‑Vorpommern Germany SGC Schuldt 1974, 112–113, Abb. 14; Woltermann 2016, 340 10 Menkin Brandenburg Germany Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 59 11 unknown Pomorze Poland Kowalski, Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 59 12 unknown Pomorze Poland Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 59 13 Przysieka Polska Wielkopolskie Poland 1900–1800 ÚněticeC Sarnowska 1969, 197 3:9 14 Schwaneberg 14 Mecklenburg‑Vorpommern Germany before 2500 CWC Rassmann 1993, 36, 167, Taf. 22d; Matuszewska 2011, tabl. 17:3 2:1 15 Schwedt Brandenburg Germany grave «Ucki II» CWC Woltermann 2016, 330, Abb. 78 3:8 16 Sellin Mecklenburg‑Vorpommern Germany grave 4 2200–2100 Spät Neolithicum Rassmann 1993, 36, 156, Taf. 18g 3:1 17 Skarbienice Kujawsko‑Pomorskie Poland 2000–1800 IwnoC Bukowski 2002, 31 18 Strasburg Mecklenburg‑Vorpommern Germany Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 59; Woltermann 2016, 343, Typ 5 19 Szczecin Płonia Zachodniopomorskie Poland 2200–2100/2000 ÚněticeC Bukowski 2002, 30 3:3 20 Szczecin‑Podjuchy 2 Zachodniopomorskie Poland 2400/2300–2100 CWC Czebreszuk – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2008, 61, tabl. 27:3 2:6 21 Śmiardowo Krajeńskie Wielkopolskie Poland grave 8 2000–1800 Únětice‑Iwno Bokiniec – Czebreszuk 1993, tab. 2, phase IIIa 3:4 22 Śmiardowo Krajeńskie Wielkopolskie Poland grave 79 2000–1800 Únětice‑Iwno Bokiniec – Czebreszuk 1993, tab. 2 3:7 23 Śmiardowo Krajeńskie Wielkopolskie Poland grave 3 2000–1800 Únětice‑Iwno Bokiniec – Czebreszuk 1993, tab. 2, phase IIIa 3:6 24 Wahlstedt Schleswig‑Holstein Germany tumulus Untergrabzeit SGC Hübner 2005, Kat. Nr. 1666 25 Witkowo Zachodniopomorskie Poland 2650–2300 CWC Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 58 2:2 Tab.2: Finds of amber discs in the study area between 2500–1800 BC. Summarising our reflections so far, we can conclude that both traditions of using amber discs were maintained until the late first half of the third millennium BC.This is when the GAC characteristics faded away from the entire territory of its distribution except for Kujawy (Szmyt 1999, 63–85). Neither is there any other information that would indicate any cultural relationship between the GAC and the Únětice Culture, therefore the GAC thread was omitted in the following discussion. In turn, the CWC survived in various regions until at least 2300 BC (Furholt 2003), including the southern Baltic coast between Mecklenburg and Pomerania. Traditions of using amber discs survived in this form until the Únětice Culture inception in 2300–2200 BC. 49JANUSZ CZEBRESZUK No Findplace Region Country Grave no. Chronology (BC) Culture Literature Fig. 1 Barnisław Zachodniopomorskie Poland grave 78 2300–2100 CWC/proto ÚněticeC Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 58–59, ryc. 4:5 2:5 2 Barwice Zachodniopomorskie Poland 2000–1800 BrA2 Sarnowska 1969, 154; Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2012, 122 3:5 3 Brusy Kujawsko‑Pomorskie Poland 2000–1800 ÚněticeC Bukowski 2002, 31 3:2 4 Budowo Pomorskie Poland    Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 59 5 Dąbrowa Biskupia 21 Kujawsko‑Pomorskie Poland grave 214 2500–2300 CWC Budziszewski et al. 2008 2:3 6 Fockbek Schleswig‑Holstein Germany tumulus 3 Untergrabzeit SGC Hübner 2005, Kat. Nr. 1617 7 Grevenkrug Schleswig‑Holstein Germany tumulus 3 grób A Untergrabzeit SGC Hübner 2005, Kat. Nr. 1621 8 Iwno Kujawsko‑Pomorskie Poland 2400–2200 IwnoC Czebreszuk – Szmyt 2019 2:4 9 Lüningsdorf Mecklenburg‑Vorpommern Germany SGC Schuldt 1974, 112–113, Abb. 14; Woltermann 2016, 340 10 Menkin Brandenburg Germany Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 59 11 unknown Pomorze Poland Kowalski, Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 59 12 unknown Pomorze Poland Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 59 13 Przysieka Polska Wielkopolskie Poland 1900–1800 ÚněticeC Sarnowska 1969, 197 3:9 14 Schwaneberg 14 Mecklenburg‑Vorpommern Germany before 2500 CWC Rassmann 1993, 36, 167, Taf. 22d; Matuszewska 2011, tabl. 17:3 2:1 15 Schwedt Brandenburg Germany grave «Ucki II» CWC Woltermann 2016, 330, Abb. 78 3:8 16 Sellin Mecklenburg‑Vorpommern Germany grave 4 2200–2100 Spät Neolithicum Rassmann 1993, 36, 156, Taf. 18g 3:1 17 Skarbienice Kujawsko‑Pomorskie Poland 2000–1800 IwnoC Bukowski 2002, 31 18 Strasburg Mecklenburg‑Vorpommern Germany Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 59; Woltermann 2016, 343, Typ 5 19 Szczecin Płonia Zachodniopomorskie Poland 2200–2100/2000 ÚněticeC Bukowski 2002, 30 3:3 20 Szczecin‑Podjuchy 2 Zachodniopomorskie Poland 2400/2300–2100 CWC Czebreszuk – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2008, 61, tabl. 27:3 2:6 21 Śmiardowo Krajeńskie Wielkopolskie Poland grave 8 2000–1800 Únětice‑Iwno Bokiniec – Czebreszuk 1993, tab. 2, phase IIIa 3:4 22 Śmiardowo Krajeńskie Wielkopolskie Poland grave 79 2000–1800 Únětice‑Iwno Bokiniec – Czebreszuk 1993, tab. 2 3:7 23 Śmiardowo Krajeńskie Wielkopolskie Poland grave 3 2000–1800 Únětice‑Iwno Bokiniec – Czebreszuk 1993, tab. 2, phase IIIa 3:6 24 Wahlstedt Schleswig‑Holstein Germany tumulus Untergrabzeit SGC Hübner 2005, Kat. Nr. 1666 25 Witkowo Zachodniopomorskie Poland 2650–2300 CWC Kowalski – Kozłowska‑Skoczka 2011, 58 2:2 SOURCES Some tens of finds of amber discs (Tab.2; Figs. 1–3) can be listed for the south ‑west Baltic area. The discs concerned are dated from the middle of the 3rd to the early 2nd millennium BC.Table 2 contains all the finds of amber discs, but below we shall discuss only the most informative ones. 50 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVI/1 Fig. 1: Location of the cited finds. The numbers on the map correspond to the numbers in Table 2. SCHWANEBERG 14 (Rassmann 1993, cat. no. 943, Taf. 22:b–e; Matuszewska 2011, tab.17, cat. no. 622). An indi‑ vidual inhumation has been registered under abarely distinguishable mound. The deceased lay in aNE ‑SW orientation on astone pavement in acrouched position on the left side with the head to the NE and face to the SE. An amber disc (5.6 cm in diameter) with two small holes at the edges on one side has been documented (Fig. 2:1) at the thoracic part of the skeleton. In addition to the body, the grave contained aflat axe, aflint chisel, pottery fragments, and two tiny amber beads (which disintegrated on exploration). The axe suggests that the buried person was amale. It is not easy to specify amore precise chronology regarding the CWC: probably earlier phases of its development, rather contemporary with the GAC (the axe and especially flint chisel can point towards this time). In terms of absolute chronology, the most probable date of the grave is no later than the mid‑3rd millennium BC. WITKOWO, GRAVE 1. This was an inhumation of two individuals (Kowalski– Matuszewska– Teul 2010, 221) in acrouched position next to each other in aN ‑Sorientation, with their heads to the Sand faces to the E. The disc (its maximum cross ‑section reaching 9 cm) with aslight irregularity on one side (Fig. 2:2) was discovered in the region of the waist of one of those buried (Ko‑ walski– Matuszewska– Teul 2010, fig. 4:2). The burial has been associated with the second phase of the CWC in the Lower Oder region based on pottery traits (two vessels and sherds of three others) (Kowalski– Matuszewska– Teul 2010, 230). In terms of absolute dating, this phase spans from 2650 to 2300 BC (Matuszewska 2011, 113). DĄBROWA BISKUPIA 21, FEATURE 214 (GRAVE) (Budziszewskietal. 2008). This inhumation was found in aN ‑Spit. The bones have not sur‑ vived. Doubts arise as to the number of buried individuals: an adult or two (an adult and achild, 51JANUSZ CZEBRESZUK Fig. 2: Discs analysed in the article. 1– Schwaneberg, 2– Witkowo, 3– Dąbrowa Biskupia, 4– Iwno, 5– Barnisław, 6– Szczecin ‑Podjuchy. 52 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVI/1 cf. Budziszewskietal. 2008, 35–38). Grave goods consisted of two vessels, astone shaft ‑hole axe, an amber disc (Fig. 2:3) with atruncated edge (amaximum diameter of 7 cm) and arich assemblage of flint artefacts (47 specimens, inc. many arrowheads). The arrowheads indicate that it was likely an archer’sgrave. The amber disc was found in the middle part of the burial pit (Budziszewskietal. 2008, ryc. 2:D). The grave was probably established towards the end of the CWC, in 2500–2300 BC (cf. Budziszewskietal. 2008, 61). SZCZECIN PODJUCHY 2 This was agrave with astone framing (Czebreszuk– Kozłowska ‑Skoczka 2008, 61, tabl. 27:1–7). No information is available on the place where adisc, about 8 cm in diameter, was found. This disc had an opening in the centre and several small perforations (Fig. 2:6). The burial also contained aflint dagger and astone axe as grave goods. Stylistic features of four recorded vessels suggest linking the burial to the phase 3a of the CWC in the Lower Oder area, dating between 2400/2300 and 2100 BC (Matuszewska 2011, cat. no. 719, tab.19). The grave goods indicate that the buried individual was amale. IWNO, SITE 2, GRAVE II (Czebreszuk– Szmyt 2019). This was agrave, probably an inhumation in an E ‑W oriented pit at least 1 m long that contained an adult positioned in acrouched position or achild. This feature was constructed out of stones, including some larger ones (Czebreszuk– Szmyt 2019, 22). An amber disc (6.2–6.5 cm in diameter, Fig. 2:4) and aflint tool have been registered at the western end of the grave. At its eastern end, two vessels, afragment of astone shaft ‑hole axe and an ochre lump have been found. The grave is associated with the earliest phase of the Iwno culture (BB2), aregional (Kuyavia) variant of the BB (Czebreszuk 1996, 131–139), dated to 2300–2100 BC.The axe suggests that it was amale’s/boy’sgrave. BARNISŁAW, GRAVE 78 This was aN ‑Soriented individual inhumation with several stones in the fill (Kowalski– Kozłowska ‑Skoczka 2011, 48–59, figs. 4–6). Only the teeth survived from the skeleton, indicating that the deceased had its head directed to the S(Kowalski– Kozłowska‑ ‑Skoczka 2011, fig. 4:1). As suggested by the relatively small space (little more than 1 m), the body was probably buried in acrouched position. Among the grave goods there were ten vessels (intact or fragmented), more than ten flint artefacts (inc. eleven arrowheads) and an amber disc 6.4 cm in diameter (Fig. 2:5) positioned in the deceased’sthoracic area. The pottery characteristics relate the burial to: the CW tradition (Kowalski– Kozłowska‑ ‑Skoczka 2011, fig. 4:3), the BB – in most forms, the proto ‑Únětice and the old ‑Únětice (Kowalski– Kozłowska ‑Skoczka 2011, 51–53). The archer’sset among the grave goods can indicate amale, and the state of the preserved teeth (developed buds in molars; cf. Kowalski– Kozłowska ‑Skoczka 2011, 49, note 8) implies that aboy was interred. The grave can be dated from 2300 to 2100 BC. SELLIN 8 (Rassmann 1993, cat. no. 728). The find consisted of adestroyed amber disc (the longest pre‑ served diameter was 3.4 cm) with alarge central opening (Fig. 3:1) and atype Ib flint dagger. It came from abarrow destroyed by looters and was associated with the early stage of the local Late Neolithic (ca. 2200–2100 BC, cf. Rassmann 1993, Abb. 30). The dagger can indicate amale’sburial. 59JANUSZ CZEBRESZUK In: S. Czopek– S. Kadrow (eds.): Mente et rutro. Studia archaeologica Johanni Machnik viro doctissimo octogesimo vitae anno ab amicis, collegis et discipulis oblata. Rzeszów, 219–233. Kozłowska, D. 2004: Cmentarzysko zwczesnego okresu epoki brązu. Szczecin ‑Płonie (Buchholz, Kreis Greifenhagen), stanowisko 2 [Ein Gräberfeld der Früher Bronzezeit. Szczecin ‑Płonie (Buchholz, Kr. Greifenhagen), Fundstelle 2]. Folia Praehistorica Posnaniensia 12, 81–130. Kozłowska ‑Skoczka, D. 2012: Epoka brązu– wczesna epoka żelaza– katalog zabytków [The Bronze Age– Early Iron Age– Catalogue of the Archaeological Finds]. In: K. Kowalski– D. Kozłowska ‑Skoczka (eds.): Zaginione– Ocalone. Szczecińska kolekcja starożytności pomorskich. Szczecin, 119–192. Loze, I. 1975: Neolithic Amber Ornaments in the Eastern Part of Latvia. Przegląd Archeologiczny 23, 49–82. Loze, I. 1988: Poselenija kamiennogo veka Lubanskoj Niziny. Mezolit, rannyj isrednij neolit [Stone Age settlement in the Luban Lowlands. Mesolithic, Early and Middle Neolithic]. Riga. Makarowicz, P.2003: Northern and Southern Bell Beakers in Poland. In: J. Czebreszuk– M. Szmyt (eds.): The Northeast Frontier of Bell Beakers. Proceedings of the symposium held at the Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań (Poland), May 26–29, 2002. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1155. Oxford, 39–49. Matuszewska, A. 2011: Kultura ceramiki sznurowej na Dolnym Nadodrzu [The Corded Ware culture in the Lower Oder]. Poznań. Mazurowski, R.1983: Bursztyn w epoce kamienia na ziemiach polskich [Amber in the Stone Age in Poland]. Materiały Starożytne iWczesnośredniowieczne 5, 7–130. Meller, H. 2019: Princes, Armies, Sanctuaries. The Emergence of Complex Authority in the Central German Únětice Culture. Acta Archaeologica 90/1, 39–79. Melleretal. eds. 2015 = Meller, H.– Arz, H.W.– Jung, R.– Risch, R. eds.: 2200 BC– Ein Klimasturz als Ursache für den Zerfall der Alten Welt? Tagungen des Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte Halle (Saale) 12. Halle/Saale. Müller, J. 2000: Zur Radiokarbondatierung des Jung‑ bis Endneolithikums und der Frühbronzezeit im Mittelelbe ‑Saale ‑Gebiet (4100–1500 v.Ch.). Berichte der Römisch -Germanischen Kommission 80, 31–90. Nosek, S. 1967: Kultura amfor kulistych w Polsce [La civilisation des amphores globulaires en Pologne]. Wrocław. Rassmann, K. 1993: Spätneolithikum und frühe Bronzezeit im Flachland zwischen Elbe und Oder. Lübstorf. Rimantiené, R.1984: Akmens Amzius Lietuvoje [Stone Age in Lithuania]. Vilnius. Rimantiené, R.1989: Nida. Senųjų baltų gyvenvietè [Nida. Old Baltic settlement]. Vilnius. Rimantiené, R.1992: The Neolithic of the Eastern Baltic. Journal of World Prehistory 6/1, 97–143. Rimantiené, R.1996: Šventosios 4‑oij radimvieté [Šventoji, site 4]. Lietuvas Archeologija 14, 5–79. Sarnowska, W. 1969: Kultura unietycka w Polsce [The Únětice culture in Poland]. Wrocław. Schäfer, K. 1987: Die Schmirtenauerkultur. Zur Ordnung der frühern Bronzezeit im Netze -Warthe Raum. Bonn. Schuldt, E. 1974: Der Bernstein im Neolithikum Mecklenburgs. Jahrbuch für Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg 1973, 99–120. Schwartz, R.2015: Kultureller Bruch oder Kontinuität– Mitteldeutschland im 23. Jh. v.Chr. In: Melleretal. eds. 2015, 671–713. Schwenzer, S. 2004: Przysieka Polska– Ein Grabfund in der Ungebung der frühbronzezeitlichen Siedlung in Bruszczewo. In: J. Czebreszuk– J. Müller (eds.): Bruszczewo. Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in einer prähistorischen Siedlungskammer Groβpolens / Badania mikroregionu zterenu WielkopolskiI. Forschungsstand– Erste Ergebnisse– Das östliche Feuchtbodenareal / Stan badań– Pierwsze wyniki– Wschodnia, torfowa część stanowiska. Poznań– Kiel– Rahden, 317–342. Siemen, P.2016: Single Grave Culture Amber from Jutland. Fontes Archaeologici Posnanienses 52, 13–40. Spatzier, A. 2015: Pömmelte ‑Zackmünde– Polykultureller Sakralort oder Ortskonstanz im Heiligtum während einer kulturellen Transformation? In: Melleretal. eds. 2015, 793–801. Szmyt, M. 1996: Społeczności kultury amfor kulistych na Kujawach [Communities of the Globular Amphora culture in Kuiavia]. Poznań. Szmyt, M. 1999: Between West and East. People of the Globular Amphora Culture in Eastern Europe: 2950–2350 BC.Baltic ‑Pontic ‑Studies 8. Poznań. 60 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVI/1 Wiślański, T. 1966: Kultura amfor kulistych w Polsce północno -zachodniej [Die Kugelamphorenkultur im Nordwesten Polens]. Wrocław. Woltermann, G. 2016: Die prähistorischen Bernsteinartefakte aus Deutschland vom Paläolithikum bis zur Bronzezeit. Bonn. Janusz Czebreszuk Adam Mickiewicz University at Poznań, Faculty of Archaeology 7 Uniwersytety Poznańskiego str. PL61‑614 Poznań [email protected]