B I B L I O T H E C A M V S E I M A R I S I E N S I S

SERIA ARCHAEOLOGICA

II

PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUMSFROM TÂRGU MUREŞ

EditorBERECKI SÁNDOR

IRON AGE COMMUNITIES IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN

PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM FROM TÂRGU MUREŞ

9–11 October 2009

Edited byBERECKI Sándor

Editura MEGACluj-Napoca

2010

CONTENT

Preface ..................................................................................................................................................................7

Mitja GUŠTINTh e Eastern Traces on the Slopes of the Eastern Alps. Some Examples of Iron Age Contacts along the Danube and Sava Rivers ....................................................................................................................9

Tiberiu Ioan TECAR–József-Gábor NAGYA Community from the First Iron Age from Gheorghieni–Valea Mare (Cluj County). Preliminary study .................................................................................................................. 15

Marija LJUŠTINATh e Late Hallstatt Communities in the Serbian Part of the Danube Basin .............................................. 59

Róbert SCHOLTZNew Data on the Scythian Age Settlement History of Szabolcs County, Hungary ................................. 79

Horea POP–Ioan BEJINARIULate Hallstatt–Early La Tène Settlement from Porţ–Paliș (com. Marca, Sălaj County, Romania) ........ 99

Jan BOUZEKTh e Beginnings of the La Tène Art in Bohemia and the East................................................................... 107

J. Vincent S. MEGAW–M. Ruth MEGAWA World Turned Upside Down. Th e Bronze Plaque from Stupava, okr. Malacky ................................. 115

Tiberius BADEREin wiederaufgebautes frühkeltisches Gehöft im Keltenmuseum Hochdorf/Enz ................................. 127

Zoltán CZAJLIK–Attila CZÖVEK–Péter CSIPPÁN–Balázs HOLL–Enikő MAGYARI–Szilvia SZÖLLŐSI–László RUPNIK–Lőrinc TIMÁRArchaeological and Palaeoenvironmental Data on Late Iron Age Settlements in South-Eastern Transdanubia (Tolna County) ...................................................................................................................... 149

Maya HAUSCHILD“Celticised” or “Assimilated”? In Search of Foreign and Indigenous People at the Time of the Celtic Migrations ....................................................................................................................................................... 171

János NÉMETITh e Problem of Hand-Made Pottery from La Tène (Celtic) Contexts in North-Western Romania. A Comparison with Neighbouring Regions –Tisza Valley and Transylvania ........................................ 181

Aurel RUSTOIU–Mariana EGRIDanubian Kantharoi – Almost Th ree Decades Later ................................................................................. 217

Peter C. RAMSLTh e La Tène Age Cemetery of Mannersdorf am Leithagebirge, Flur Reinthal Süd, Lower Austria and the Connections to Other Parts of the Middle European Corridor ................................................. 289

Marko DIZDARKantharoi of Autochthonous – “Pannonian” Origin from the La Tène Culture Cemetery in Zvonimirovo, Croatia ................................................................................................................................ 297

Iosif Vasile FERENCZ–Lucian Dan VAIDAMiddle La Tène Arrowheads from Transylvania ....................................................................................... 309

Károly TANKÓLa Tène Ceramic Technology and Typology of Northeast Hungarian Settlements (3rd–2nd Century BC) ...................................................................................................................................... 321

Maciej KARWOWSKIPrellenkirchen. Celtic Settlement in the Foreland of the Carpathian Basin ........................................... 333

Sándor BERECKI–Daniel Mihai CIOATĂAn Iron Age Homestead from Sângeorgiu de Mureș, Transylvania ........................................................ 349

Imola KELEMENTh e Archaeozoological Analysis of the Animal Bones from Sângeorgiu de Mureș–Roman-Catholic Cemetery ...................................................................................... 383

Gelu FLOREASarmizegetusa Regia. Un Certain Modèle Urbain ..................................................................................... 389

Cătălin Nicolae POPAA New Framework for Approaching Dacian Identity. Th e Burial Contribution ................................... 395

ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................425

Preface

The present volume is the result of the International Colloquium held at Târgu Mureş in 9–11 October 2009, entitled “Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin”, and includes

studies concerning the communities of the second half of the 1st millennium BC from the Carpathian Basin. Its theme continues the debates covered by the previous volume, concerning the communities of the Bronze Age from the same region (see ed. Berecki et al., “Bronze Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin”, Bibliotheca Mvsei Marisiensis, I), which also originates from another international meeting held in the same location.

Th e main reason for choosing the Carpathian Basin as the central subject of both scientifi c meetings is its particular status – a region characterised by several contacts between western and eastern civiliza-tions, but also between the Mediterranean south and the temperate Europe, from prehistory until the mod-ern time. Th is area is crossed by two major axes, the Danube – a river which always was an essential route between Western and Eastern Europe, and the Amber Route which facilitated the economic and cultural connections between the Mediterranean space and distant populations from the Baltic shores.

Th e chronological interval of the Iron Age was chosen mainly because of the signifi cant accumula-tion of new archaeological data having the potential to off er new perspectives on the evolution of indigenous or newly come communities from this region. At the same time, both recent information and older results of the archaeological investigations are now integrated into a series of new interpretative models which off er the possibility to compare various cultural patterns from the Carpathian Basin with others recently proposed for diff erent contemporaneous geo-cultural entities from temperate Europe.

Last but not least, the chosen chronological interval was characterised by intense demographic, eco-nomic, social and spiritual dynamics, all having a major impact on the ways in which diff erent social and political entities from the Carpathian Basin defi ned themselves from an ethnic, political or military point of view before the Roman conquest. From this perspective, a series of careful and detailed investigations of the regional cultural interactions and interferences may reveal various mechanisms through which such communal identities were constructed, and also many cultural practices through which these characteristics were expressed.

In the present volume are included articles written by archaeologists from ten countries, covering a variety of subjects: studies concerning the circulation of diff erent specifi c artefacts, technologies or decora-tive motifs on smaller or larger areas of the Carpathian Basin, case-studies or syntheses concerning par-ticular cemeteries or rural and fortifi ed settlements, detailed analyses of the building techniques of certain communities, studies concerning particular ceramic categories, weaponry or jewellery, analyses of certain funerary practices. Th e list also includes some inter-disciplinary studies involving the use of aerial photog-raphy, archaeozoology and isotope analyses.

First, we would like to thank all the participants in the Colloquium (T. Bader, Z. Czajlik, M. Egri, I. V. Ferencz, M. Guštin, M. Hauschild, M. Jevtić, B. Križ, M. Ljuština, V. and R. Megaw, J. G. Nagy, H. Pop, C. N. Popa, P. C. Ramsl, A. Rustoiu, R. Scholtz, L. D. Vaida), but also the authors of the articles included in this volume, the collaborators, the support of family and friends, the management (Z. Soós) and colleagues from the Mureş County Museum.

Berecki SándorApril 2010

Târgu Mureş, RO

“CELTICISED” OR “ASSIMILATED”?IN SEARCH OF FOREIGN AND INDIGENOUS PEOPLE

AT THE TIME OF THE CELTIC MIGRATIONS

Maya HAUSCHILDInstitut für Vor- und Frühgeschichte

Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany

hauschil@uni-mainz.de

Keywords: Celtic migrations, mobility, isotope analysis, foreignness, east expansion

Th is article gives a short insight into an interdisciplinary project about “Mobility and Migration in the La Tène Period”, which has recently started in Germany.1 Th e research is done by colleagues from the departments of Vor- und Frühgeschichte and Anthropologie at the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz as well as the Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum in Mainz. Th e aim of this Iron Age project, conducted by archaeology and anthropology, is to fi nd evidence for indigenous and foreign individuals. Isotope analysis will show character and complexity of mobility and migration in selected landscapes of the core and expansion area of the La Tène culture. Th e so-called “Celtic Migrations” in the 4th and 3rd century BC are the historical background. During this time the La Tène culture expanded from its main area in Central Europe to Southern France, Northern Italy, the Danube region and Romania. Th e Celts extended their area to Greece and even reached Asia Minor (Fig. 7). But is this expansion of the La Tène culture identical with the historical Celtic Migrations?

Greek and Roman authors wrote about the “Celtic Migrations”. Th ey inform us about military events, associated with the Celtic expansion and the participation of Celtic mercenary soldiers in all historically transmitted warlike confl icts during these times (Tomaschitz 2002, Dobesch 2001, 693). Th e oldest Celtic raids are mentioned by Polybios (Hist. II, 18–34). Furthermore, most antique authors associate them with the conquest of Rome (Liv. 1–10; Plut. Cam. 22, 4; Diod. 19–20). Ancient sources about the prehistoric settlements in the Carpathian region are only fragmentary transmitted. Reports about the Celtic expansion to east into the middle Danube area and the Carpathian Basin are detectable in the works of Titus Livius and Pompeius Trogus. In his wandering legend of Ambicatus, Livy men-tions two simultaneous movements (Liv. V, 34): one to Italy and the other in an eastward direction into the Hercynian forest. Ambicatus, the king of the Bituriges, faced overpopulation in his empire and thus dismissed his two nephews Bellovesus and Segovesus. Instructed by the oracle, Segovesus moved into the Hercynian forest with a band of warriors, while Bellovesus and his troop invaded Northern Italy. “Hercynia silva” is the ancient term for the whole low mountain area from east of the Rhine to north of the Danube. Th erefore the Celts’ way through the middle Danube area into the Carpathian Basin can-1. Th is project is fi nanced by the Deutsche Forschungsgesellschaft (DFG). For useful hints and kind assistance I would like

to thank Dr. Martin Schönfelder (Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz), Mirjam Scheeres M.A. (Institut für Anthropologie Mainz), Sarah Scheffl er M.A. (Institut für Klassische Archäologie Bonn), Dr. Martin Grünewald (Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Mainz), Dr. Volker Grünewald (Institut für Vor- und Frühgeschichte Mainz) and Dipl.-Designer Irene Bell (Institut für Vor- und Frühgeschichte Mainz).

Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin, 2010, p. 171–180

172 | Maya Hauschild

not be located exactly. We can only fi gure out, that a wandering of Celtic tribes to the east took place. Pompeius Trogus dated the eastern expansion by mentioning this event parallel to the “Celtic invasion” into Italy, therefore at the beginning of the 4th century BC (Iust. XXIV, 4). At that time the Gauls assaulted Rome about 385 BC and coevally a Celtic migration to Pannonia took place. Additionally, in the 4th cen-tury BC, antique authors frequently report on the harassment of the Scythians from the north-east.

Although the historical tradition about a fi rst Celtic immigration into the present-day Transylvania at the beginning of the 4th century BC is acceptable, we do not get any information about the exact processes in the Carpathian–Danube area. Th e “Geography” of Ptolemy (III, 8, 3; III, 10, 3) alludes a diversity of Celtic tribes, among them Anarti, Taurisci and Brigolatii in Northern Dacia. For the 3rd cen-tury BC ancient authors mention Celtic raids through the Balkan area and to Asia Minor as well as the plundering of the Greek colonies along the Ionic coast like the sack of Delphi in 279 BC. But what do we really know?

Archaeological sources suggest a fi rst appearance of La Tène culture in the Middle Danube region already at the end of the 5th century BC (Zirra 1991; Szabó 1998, 51–52). Th e Carpathian–Danube area was during the late Hallstatt period already com-plexly populated with the presence of dif-ferent cultures, which developed during the early La Tène period from a substrate of dif-ferent groups of population. Objects of early

Fig. 1. Characteristic La Tène and local objects from the Celtic cemeteries in the Carpathian Basin (Zirra 1975, fi g. 4).

Fig. 2. Celtic locations and historically transmitted Celtic raids during La Tène period in the Carpathian Basin

(Szabó 1998, fi g. 51).

“Celticised” or “Assimilated”? | 173

La Tène character date a fi rst appearance of Celtic immigrants in the Carpathian–Danube area, among them fi bulae of early La Tène type like Dux, Münsingen or Certosa type, brace-lets with “Steckverschluss” or “Stempelenden”, “Hohlringe” and “Hohlbuckelringe” in bronze, typical La Tène weapons, snaffl es as well as wheel turned pottery (Fig. 1; Zirra 1971; Zirra 1975; Crişan 1978; Zirra 1981; Berecki 2008). In Romania the geographical distribution of fl at cemeteries with La Tène inventory seem to show the access way of the fi rst Celtic immigrants during the second half of the 4th century BC through the Mureș val-ley into the area of the Carpathians (Ferencz 2007; Rustoiu 2008). Th e Celts settled in close contact to the Scythians, Geto-Dacians, Th racians and Illyrians (Fig. 2). At the begin-ning of the middle La Tène, jewellery objects with own style developments refer to the for-mation of an eastern La Tène culture. Fibulae and ring jewellery with ornaments of “false-fi ligree” show a development of an autono-mous eastern art style, which probably was adopted during the Celtic remigration from the Th racian-Illyrian area (Fig. 3; Szabó 1975; Tonkova 2006). Th eir workshops are sup-posed in the Middle Danube region but could not be located exactly until now.

Th e fact, that antique literature shows the Celts as wandering tribes and mercenar-ies, frequently tempts to wrong ideas about the real processes and backgrounds of migration. Th e historical sources suggest the picture of a large group’s movement, whereby the term “migration” is oft en connected with an “inva-sion of population”. In the 19th century a trans-fi gured picture of the “Celtic invasion” still existed, visible in the creations of contempo-rary painters like the drawing of “Brennus and his Booties” by Paul Joseph Jamin (Fig. 4).

Today we must consider that this is usually an emigration of small parts of tribal communities, small groups or only single per-sons. Highly mobile individuals are for exam-ple young men, warriors or traders. In stable communities a certain mobility of individuals always is an inherent part of the population. Th erefore migration consists of more complex processes as only the historical sources could establish to (Prien 2005).

We have to distinguish between “mobility” and “migration”. Mobility is “the movement of single persons or groups over small or larger distance for diff erent purposes with the intention for returning to the place of departure”. Migration on the contrary is “the mobility of single persons or groups with a

Fig. 3. Bronze fi bula with “false fi ligree” from Mistřín (Moravia). 3rd century BC. Moravské Muzeum, Brno, Czech

Republic (Moscati 1991, 318).

Fig. 4. “Brennus and his Booties” by Paul Joseph Jamin (1893). Musée des Beaux-Arts in La Rochelle, France

(Tomaschitz 2002).

174 | Maya Hauschild

change of location over larger distance with the intention for a permanent settle down at the destination” (Ramsl 2003).

Precondition for “migration” is the existence of a permanent not regularly mobile population, which changes location due to resettlement. By contrast, “regular mobility” is about groups or persons, who never – or only particularly – settle down. Examples can be found in nomadism, the seasonal change of locations, in wandering craft smen or traders but also in the mercenary soldiers. Th e wander-ing of groups with a following settlement in developed landscapes, or also the marry-in into a family of another tribe is to understand as migration.

Changes and diff erences within the settlement in landscapes are signifi cant for mobility or migra-tion. Unfortunately for the 4th and 3rd century BC only few regions are explored for settlements in detail. Archaeological evidence for the time of the “Celtic Migrations” can be seen in the fl at cemeteries, which are representative for the period of LT B (Krämer 1985, 16–47; Eggl 2003). Th e inventory of graves is the “key” to each individual. On the basis of grave goods foreignness due to mobility is decucible. But we are detecting the “mobility of objects and manners” instead of the buried persons themselves (Pollex Et Al. 2005). It is diffi cult – or even impossible – to exactly determine the ethnical identity of individu-als based on several objects. Such objects could be brought in by way of exchange or trade (Brather 2004). For recognizing foreignness, diff erences in cultural assets as well as a signifi cant change in funeral traditions must be available. Precondition is the existence of diff erent civilizations with diff erent mate-rial (Fig. 5). Only in this case it will be possible to distinguish between regional fi nding territories within potential “foreign” and “indigenous” individuals.

Bioarchaeometric research, a subdiscipline of anthropology, is able to detect foreign individuals. A combination of archaeological and bioarchaeometric data is therefore necessary to verify foreign and

Fig. 5. Signifi cant objects in the core and expansion area of La Tène culture: 1. “Torques ternaire” from the Champagne region, France (Moscati 1991, 246); 2. “Oberrheinischer Scheibenhalsring” from Gäufelden-Nebringen, Southern Germany (Müller 1989); 3. “Sapropelitarmring” from Bohemia, Czech Republic (Drda–Rybová 1995, 187); 4. Bronze “Hohlbuckelring” in plastic style from Bohemia, Czech Republic (Moscati 1991, 270); 5. “Nussringpaar” from the Carpathian region, Romania (Moscati 1991, 277); 6. Helmet of a Celtic warrior from Monte Bibele, Northern Italy (Vitali 2006, 20, fi g. 3); 7. Celtic migrant in typical dressing of the 4th/3rd century BC (Schmuck der Kelten 1998, 57, fi g. 28); 8. Celtic warrior with typical weaponry of the 4th/3rd century BC (Violante 1993; map based on V. Kassühlke, RGZM).

“Celticised” or “Assimilated”? | 175

local individuals as extension of mobility and migration (Tütken Et Al. 2008). Scientifi c analyses can show a change of residence by one single individual between two geologically diff erent defi ned regions (Knipper 2004). Th e isotope analysis allows a certain evidence of indigenous as well as immigrated persons within a local community. Individuals, who are identifi ed as immigrants, furthermore can be studied for their potential place of origin. In this case it is only detectable from which geological range an individual came if the area has a diverse geology, but it is diffi cult to establish where an individual exactly immigrated from. In the same way it is detectable whether individuals all together migrated from a certain region or otherwise from diff erent geographical areas and the date of changing localities is verifi able, as well. Th e analysis is conducted on the basis of stable isotopes of heavy and light elements like strontium, lead, oxygen or sulphur, which are picked up with the food by people and animals and taken up through the food chain (Bentley 2006). Th e anthropological research is mainly based on the assignment of strontium and oxygen isotopes. Scientifi c analysing methods allow us nowadays to gain

relevant data from bone material: as evidence for mobility, the isotope signal from dental enamel will be compared to the isotope signal of the environment, in which the individual was buried. As the dental enamel of an individual indicates the environment during his childhood, it is detectable whether this person migrated to another area later in his life. Strontium data from the bone collagen on the other hand give us an idea of the local environment, in which an individual was buried (Fig. 6). Furthermore morphological and genetic markers give more information on his origin.

In the course of the research project about 16 cemeteries will be analysed. Th e locations are distributed from the core to the expansion area of the La Tène culture (Fig. 7). Th ese selected locations are “key-places” of discovery, which means the cemeteries are of superior scientifi c importance within their region. Further criteria are, whenever possible, a high number of LT B graves as well as the use by more than one generation. To gain signifi cant evidence, the geological relation of the selected cemeter-ies must also be regarded. An important selection criterion for the graves particularly examined is the occurrence of regionally signifi cant grave goods, which are wide distributed, in combination with well preserved skeletal remains, including teeth. Th at is why bone preservation restricts the selection consid-erably. Some locations from Southern Germany, Switzerland, Bohemia and Northern Italy are currently analyzed. For the eastern expansion area, samples from Hungary have already been taken. Examinations still are outstanding for Romania. Th e cemetery of Pişcolt off ers interesting research approaches.

Fig. 6. Strontium isotope analysis (modifi ed by M. Scheeres according to Knipper 2004, 630, fi g. 18).

176 | Maya Hauschild

Fig. 7. Selected cemeteries for isotope analyses in the core and expansion area of La Tène culture at the time of the Celtic Migrations (map based on V. Kassühlke, RGZM).

Fig. 8. Distribution of “Oberrheinische Scheibenhalsringe”; 30. Gäufelden-Nebringen “Baumsäcker”, Southern Germany; 82. Pişcolt, Romania (Müller 1989, Beilage 6).

“Celticised” or “Assimilated”? | 177

An important location within the core area of La Tène culture is the cemetery of Gäufelden-Nebringen in Southern Germany (Krämer 1964). Th is necropolis probably belonged to a small commu-nity or several small homesteads, maybe of families. First results of isotope analyses detected a high number of mobile people, among them warriors, women and children. Th e cemetery is characterized by rich jewel fi ttings in female graves. Common additions are precious neck rings, so-called “Scheibenhalsringe”. Th eir close distribution suggests their origin within the Upper Rhine area (Fig. 8; Müller 1989). Some exam-ples were also found in the eastern expansion area, for example in the cemetery of Pişcolt in Romania (Németi 1988; 1989; 1992; 1993; Zirra 1998). In the Middle Danube area, as well as in the Carpathian Basin this kind of neck rings is very unusual. Th is fact suggests that “Scheibenhalsringe” may be traces of a Celtic migration from the Upper Rhine region into the east. In the fl at cemetery of Pişcolt, excavated by J. Németi in 1970, almost 200 graves of LT B had been discovered, among them cremation as well as inhumation buri-als. Pişcolt grave 108, in which a female person was buried with such a “Scheibenhalsring”, off ers interest-ing questions for future studies (Németi 1993). Th e grave’s inventory seems to include foreign as well as local elements: Beside the neck ring (Fig. 9/1), eight fi bulae Dux and Münsingen type (Fig. 9/2–9) and a pair of “Hohlbuckelringe” (Fig. 9/10–11) can be identifi ed as characteristic La Tène jewellery. Two wheel turned ceramic vessels are also typical elements of Celtic pottery (Fig. 9/13–14). Only a one-handled vessel can be identifi ed as indigenous Geto-Dacian pottery (Fig. 9/15; Zirra 1976; 1978).

Fig. 9. Inventory of grave 108 from Pişcolt (Romania); 1–11. Bronze; 12. Iron; 13–15. Ceramic (Müller 1989, pl. 52).

178 | Maya Hauschild

If this woman from the grave 108 can be identifi ed by strontium isotope analysis as a foreign individual, which model of mobility or migration is to prefer? Did she marry-in? And if so, did she migrate alone or perhaps with the whole family? If she can be identifi ed as a local individual, was she born as a member of the autochthonous population and integrated into Celtic society? Or was she the local born child of a fi rst generation Celtic group, which set out this cemetery? Which population has been dominant in this region? Is the cemetery of Pişcolt a proof for a peaceable coexistence of diff erent populations in this time? Or can we still speak about a “Celtic invasion” to the east? And what about the social status of this buried woman? Only a few persons were outfi tted with such valuable jewellery like a “Scheibenhalsring” with coral elements. Th e red coral has been imported since the Early Iron Age from the Mediterranean area and already had been favoured in rich fi tted graves of the late Hallstatt and early La Tène period, especially in the burials of princely seats (Koenig 1987; Müller 1989, 17–18). During the 4th and 3rd centuries BC “Scheibenhalsringe“ with coral inlays became more rare in contrast to objects with elements of enamel or red glass.

Many questions result from all the cemeteries we have to analyse. Graves with mixed inventory may indicate a coexistence of diff erent cultures. Th e cemetery of Pişcolt off ers a wide spectrum of burial gift s, which include not only Celtic elements but also Scythian and Dacian fi nds.

Finally, the following questions remain:Are the “Celtic Migrations” verifi able? Yes, they are. But before we can speak about “migration”,

we fi rst have to verify “mobility” in a smaller context. Th e “Celtic Migrations”, like ancient sources tell us about, are very complex. Mobility and migration of foreign individuals are known as archaeological and historical hypotheses, which until now have not been verifi able. Within an interdisciplinary col-laboration of archaeology and anthropology, it is possible to verify or falsify these hypotheses. Th en, in a second step, it can be possible to detect migration. Th ereby, it is necessary to fi nd the real background and reasons for such an important period, which left many traces in history and archaeology.

Which models about mobility and migration are possible? Reconstructing the real processes will be subject of an intensive research. Warrior graves with characteristic La Tène weaponry like sword, lance, shield and more rarely with helmet seem to document a Celtic military aristocracy with high mobility (Szabó–Petres 1992; Szabó 1995; Ginoux 2003). But what can we fi nd out about the remaining part of the community? Are there any other social or hierarchic groups detectable? Did probably complete families travel over long distance to settle down in newly explored territory? Or could it be a matter of marry-in into indigenous societies, thus new connections to foreign landscapes were possible?

And last but not least, there will remain the same question: What happened with a population, which was confronted with indigenous people? Can we speak about a “celticised” autochthon popula-tion? Or have Celtic people been assimilated? Was there a peaceful coexistence between diff erent tribes or communities?

A specifi c search for foreign people in settled landscapes of the expanded La Tène culture as well as in the contact areas towards the neighbouring cultures like Scythians, Dacians or Th racians might visualize processes of mobility and migration. Th e resulting questions are complex. An interdisciplinary research based on archaeology and anthropology as well as on further sciences like geology enables the reconstruction of models regarding the settlements from diff erent areas. Recognizing foreign and indig-enous individuals will hopefully give some answers in the future.

Bibliography

Bentley 2006 Bentley, A. R., Strontium isotopes from the earth to the archaeological skeleton: A review, Journal of Archaeological Method and Th eory, 13, 135–187.

Berecki 2008 Berecki S., Th e chronology of the Celtic Discoveries from Transylvania, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (ed.), Funerary Practices of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Central and South-Eastern Europe, Proceedings of the 9th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology Bistriţa, Romania May 9th–11th, 2008, Cluj-Napoca, 47–65.

Brather 2004 Brather, S., Ethnische Interpretationen in der frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie. Geschichte, Grundlagen und Alternativen, Berlin/New York.

“Celticised” or “Assimilated”? | 179

Crişan 1971 Crişan, I. H., Das Keltenproblem in Siebenbürgen, ArchRoz, 23, 555.Crişan 1978 Crişan, I. H., Die Anfänge der Latènezeit bei den Geto-Dakern, Dacia N. S., 12, 143–154.Dobesch 2001 Dobesch, G., Überlegungen zum Heerwesen und zur Sozialstruktur der Kelten, IN: Heft ner, H.–

Tomaschitz, K. (Hrsg.), Gerhard Dobesch. Ausgewählte Schrift en, Köln–Weimar–Wien, 577–683.Drda–Rybová 1995 Drda, P.–Rybová, A., Les Celtes de Bohême, Paris.Eggl 2003 Eggl, C., Ost-West-Beziehungen im Flachgräberlatène Bayerns, Germania, 81, 513–538.Ericson 1985 Ericson, J. E., Strontium isotope characterization in the study of prehistoric human ecology,

Journal of Human Evolution, 14, 503–514.Ferencz 2007 Ferencz, I. V., Celţii pe Mureşul Mijlociu, Sibiu.Ginoux 2003 Ginoux, N., L'excellence guerriére et l'ornamentation des armes aux IVe et IIIe s. av. J.-C.,

découvertes récentes, EC, 35, 33–67.Knipper 2004 Knipper, C., Die Strontiumisotopenanalyse: Eine naturwissenschaft liche Methode zur Erfassung

von Mobilität in der Ur- und Frühgeschichte, Jahrbuch RGZM, 51, 589–685.Koenig 1987 Koenig, M.-P., L'emploi du corail dans la parure hallstattienne d'Alsace, Cahiers Alsaciens

d'Archéologie, d'Art et d'Histoire, 30, 91–105.Krämer 1964 Krämer, W., Das keltische Gräberfeld von Nebringen (Kr. Böblingen). Mit einem Beitrag von

Holger Preudschoft , Stuttgart.Krämer 1985 Krämer, W., Die Grabfunde von Manching und die latènezeitlichen Flachgräber in Südbayern,

Stuttgart.Moscati 1991 Moscati, S. (ed.), Th e Celts, Bompiani.Müller 1989 Müller, F., Die frühlatènezeitlichen Scheibenhalsringe, Mainz.Németi 1975 Németi I., Contributions concernant le facies laténien du nord-ouest de la Roumanie à la

lumière de découvertes celtiques de Pişcolt (Dépt. de Satu-Mare), Alba Regia, 14, 187–197.Németi 1988 Németi I., Necropola Latène de la Pişcolt, jud. Satu-Mare I, Th raco-Dacica, 9 (1–2), 49–73.Németi 1989 Németi I., Necropola Latène de la Pişcolt, jud. Satu-Mare II, Th raco-Dacica, 10 (1–2), 75–114.Németi 1992 Németi I., Necropola Latène de la Pişcolt, jud. Satu-Mare III, Th raco-Dacica, 13 (1–2), 59–112.Németi 1993 Németi I., Necropola Latène de la Pişcolt, jud. Satu-Mare IV, Th raco-Dacica, 14 (1–2), 117–

129.Pollex Et Al. 2005 Pollex, A.–Premyslaw, S.–Alt, K. W., Zum Nachweis von „Fremden“ im archäologischen Befund,

EAZ, 46, 279–294.Prien 2005 Prien, R., Archäologie und Migration. Vergleichende Studien zur archäologischen Nachweisbarkeit

von Wanderungsbewegungen, Bonn.Ramsl 2003 Ramsl, P., Migrationsphänomene (?!) in der Frühlatènezeit, MAGW, 133, 101–109.Rustoiu 2008 Rustoiu, A., Th e Celts from Transylvania and the indigenous communities from Northern

Balkans. Cultural exchanges and individual mobility, EphemNap, XVIII, 25–44.Schmuck der Kelten 1998

Schmuck der Kelten, Begleitbuch zur Ausstellung “Schmuck der Kelten” der Abteilung für Vorgeschichte der Naturhistorischen Gesellschaft Nürnberg, Nürnberg.

Szabó 1975 Szabó M., Sur la question du fi ligrane dans l'art des celtes orientaux, Alba Regia, 14, 147–155.Szabó 1995 Szabó M., Guerriers celtiques avant et après Delphes. Contribution à une période critique du

monde celtique, IN: Charpy, J.-J. (ed.), L'Europe celtique de Ve au IIIe siècle avant J.-C. Contacts, échanges et mouvements de populations. Actes du deuxième symposium international d'Hautvillers 8–10 octobre 1992, Sceaux, 49–67.

Szabó 1998 Szabó M., Die Kelten im Karpatenbecken (vom 5. Jh. v. Chr. bis zu Christi Geburt), IN: Kemenczei T.–Kovács T.–Szabó M. (Hrsg.), Schätze aus der Keltenzeit in Ungarn. Kunst im Karpatenbecken im 1. Jahrtausend vor Christus. Sonderausstellung Keltenmuseum Hochdorf/Enz 1998/1999, Schrift enreihe des Keltenmuseums Hochdorf/Enz 3, Eberdingen, 51–70.

Szabó–Petres 1992 Szabó M.–Petres É. F., Decorated weapons of the La Tène Iron Age in the Carpathian Basin, Budapest.

Tomaschitz 2002 Tomaschitz, K., Die Wanderungen der Kelten in der antiken literarischen Überlieferung, Wien.Tonkova 2006 Tonkova, M., Infl uences réciproques dans l'orfèvrerie des Th races et des Celtes au IVe–IIIe siècle

av. J.-C., IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (ed.), Th racians and Celts. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Bistriţa 18–20 mai 2006, Cluj-Napoca, 265–278.

Tütken Et Al. 2008 Tütken, T.–Knipper, C.–Alt, K. W., Mobilität und Migration im archäologischen Kontext: Informationspotential von Multi-Element-Isotopenanalysen (Sr, Pb, O), IN: Bemmann, J.–Schmauder, M. (Hrsg.), Kulturwandel in Mitteleuropa, 11, Köthen, 1–30.

Violante 1993 Violante, A., I Celti: a sud delle Alpi, Milano.

180 | Maya Hauschild

Vitali 2006 Vitali, D. (ed.), I Bronzi degli Etruschi e die Celti nella Valle dell'Idice, Quaderni del Museo Archeologico „Luigi Fantini“, 3, Monterenzio.

Zirra 1971 Zirra, V., Beiträge zur Kenntnis des keltischen Latène in Rumänien, Dacia N. S., 15, 172–238.Zirra 1975 Zirra, V., Infl uence des Gèto-Daces et de leurs voisins sur l'habitat celtique de Transylvanie,

Alba Regia, 14, 47–64.Zirra 1976 Zirra, V., Über die Henkelgefäße im ostkeltischen Raum (Transsilvanien), IN: Mitscha-

Märheim, H.–Friesinger, H.–Kerchler, H. (Hrsg.), Festschrift für Richard Pittioni zum siebzigsten Geburtstag. I Urgeschichte, Wien, 777–819.

Zirra 1978 Zirra, V., Th e decorated Celtic pottery of Transylvania, Dacia N. S., 22, 125–141.Zirra 1981 Zirra, V., Latènezeitliche Trensen in Rumänien, HBA, 8, 115–171.Zirra 1991 Zirra, V., Les plus anciennes fi bules en Roumanie, Dacia N. S., 35, 177–184.Zirra 1998 Zirra, V. V., Die relative Chronologie des Gräberfeldes von Pişcolt (Kr. Satu Mare, Rumänien),

IN: Müller, F. (Hrsg.), Münsingen-Rain: Ein Markstein der keltischen Archäologie. Funde, Befunde und Methoden im Vergleich, Bern, 145–160.

List of fi gures

Fig. 1. Characteristic La Tène and local objects from the Celtic cemeteries in the Carpathian Basin (Zirra 1975, fi g. 4).

Fig. 2. Celtic locations and historically transmitted Celtic raids during La Tène period in the Carpathian Basin (Szabó 1998, fi g. 51).

Fig. 3. Bronze fi bula with “false fi ligree” from Mistřín (Moravia). 3rd century BC. Moravské Muzeum, Brno, Czech Republic (Moscati 1991, 318).

Fig. 4. “Brennus and his Booties” by Paul Joseph Jamin (1893). Musée des Beaux-Arts in La Rochelle, France (Tomaschitz 2002).

Fig. 5. Signifi cant objects in the core and expansion area of La Tène culture: 1. “Torques ternaire” from the Champagne region, France (Moscati 1991, 246); 2. “Oberrheinischer Scheibenhalsring” from Gäufelden-Nebringen, Southern Germany (Müller 1989); 3. “Sapropelitarmring” from Bohemia, Czech Republic (Drda–Rybová 1995, 187); 4. Bronze “Hohlbuckelring” in plastic style from Bohemia, Czech Republic (Moscati 1991, 270); 5. “Nussringpaar” from the Carpathian region, Romania (Moscati 1991, 277); 6. Helmet of a Celtic warrior from Monte Bibele, Northern Italy (Vitali 2006, 20, fi g. 3); 7. Celtic migrant in typical dressing of the 4th/3rd century BC (Schmuck der Kelten 1998, 57, fi g. 28); 8. Celtic warrior with typical weaponry of the 4th/3rd century BC (Violante 1993; map based on V. Kassühlke, RGZM).

Fig. 6. Strontium isotope analysis (modifi ed by M. Scheeres according to Knipper 2004, 630, fi g. 18).Fig. 7. Selected cemeteries for isotope analyses in the core and expansion area of La Tène culture at the time

of the Celtic Migrations (map based on V. Kassühlke, RGZM).Fig. 8. Distribution of “Oberrheinische Scheibenhalsringe”; 30. Gäufelden-Nebringen “Baumsäcker”,

Southern Germany; 82. Pişcolt, Romania (Müller 1989, Beilage 6).Fig. 9. Inventory of grave 108 from Pişcolt, Romania; 1–11. Bronze; 12. Iron; 13–15. Ceramic (Müller

1989, pl. 52).