IX. The Halberd in Bronze Age Europe: A Study in Prehistoric Origins, Evolution, Distribution, and Chronology

Seán P. Ó Ríordáin

doi:10.1017/S0261340900015411

IX. The Halberd in Bronze Age Europe: A Study in Prehistoric Origins, Evolution, Distribution, and Chronology

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 July 2011

Seán P. Ó Ríordáin

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Extract

The halberd is of sufficiently frequent occurrence and of a sufficiently distinctive character to be a most useful ‘type fossil’ by which may be traced connexions and the trend of cultural developments in prehistoric Europe. That another paper on the subject is not a superfluity in archaeological literature is evident from the lack of any paper dealing at once with the Irish and Continental material. That this paper should be written in Ireland is fitting because the amount of the Irish material is so large. When Coffey wrote his valuable paper on ‘Irish Copper Halberds’ (frequently referred to in the following pages), he had before him the material in the National Museum of Ireland, which comprised at that time 49 halberds. This number has in the meantime increased to 71, while the total number of Irish halberds of which I have been able to get particulars is 143, 67 having known localities. This body of material, which is considerably greater than that from any other country, makes it clear that the part played by Ireland in the story of the European halberd must have been an important one. When we come to study the typology, evolution, and distribution of the weapon, we shall get further proof of this importance.

Type: Research Article
Information: Archaeologia , Volume 86 , 1937 , pp. 195 - 321

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261340900015411 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © The Society of Antiquaries of London 1937

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 195 note 1} Abbreviations (others used are obvious in meaning): P.R.I.A. = Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy; J.R.A.I. = Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute; J.R.S.A.I. = Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries, Ireland; P.S.A.S. = Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, Scotland; Ebert = Reallexikon der Vorgeschichte, Berlin, 1924Google Scholar; Montelius: Die Chron. = Die Chronologie der ältesten Bronzezeit in Nord-Deutschland und Skandinavien (Braunschweig, 1900);Google ScholarP.Z. = Praehistorische Zeitschrift; A.u.h.V. = Lindenschmit: Altertümer unserer heidnischen Vorzeit; NMD = National Museum of Ireland, Dublin; B = Municipal Museum and Art Gallery, Belfast; BM = British Museum; NMS = National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh; NMW = National Museum of Wales, Cardiff; P = Private possession; Mainz = Römisch-Germanisches Central-Museum,.Mainz.

^{page 196 note 1} Coffey, P.R.I.A. xxvii (1908–1909), 94 (quoted as ‘Coffey’ in lists at end of this paper).Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 2} J.R.A.I. xxxi (1901), 295.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 3} pp. 95, 99, 113.

^{page 196 note 4} J.R.A.I, xxxvi (1906), 24.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 5} Catalogue of Day Collection (London 1913), 40, no. 285.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 6} p. 24.

^{page 198 note 1} Déchelette (ii, 275) deals with bronze saws of prehistoric date. None has been found in Ireland, but Wheeler (Prehistoric and Roman Wales, 163) notes one from Wales.

^{page 198 note 2} Bronze Implements, 263.

^{page 198 note 3} J.R.S.A.I. lix (1929), 113; Henry Morris, ‘Ancient Graves in Sligo and Roscommon’.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 1} P.R.I.A. iv, 565; Wilde, Catalogue, 450.

^{page 199 note 2} Evans, Bronze Implements, 270, 465.

^{page 199 note 3} Ibid. 282.

^{page 199 note 4} Ibid. 305, fig. 373.

^{page 200 note 1} Vol. v (1870–73), 425.

^{page 200 note 2} Illustrated, Ebert, iv, pi. 251; Wheeler, Prehistoric and Roman Wales, fig. 45; Kemble, Horae Ferales, 164; Evans, fig. 338, &c.

^{page 200 note 3} Wright, , Uriconium (1872), 298Google Scholar, and footnote, 65; Arch. Journ. ii, 414; ibid, xviii, 163.

^{page 200 note 4} pp. 141, 144, fig. 45.

^{page 200 note 5} lxxxiii (1928), 209.

^{page 200 note 6} Which are accepted by Davies, The Prehistoric and Roman Remains of Denbighshire, 18.

^{page 200 note 7} Miss Chitty suggests that the mistake arose through a hurried reading of ‘Wroxeter’ for ‘Wrexham’.

^{page 200 note 8} p. 460.

^{page 200 note 9} Archaeologia, xxxvi, 326.

^{page 202 note 1} P.S.A.S. lvii (1922–1923), 127.Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 2} Ibid. 128.

^{page 202 note 3} Ibid.

^{page 202 note 4} Ibid., iv (1863), 187; Childe, Prehist. of Scot. 100, regards the association as doubtful.

^{page 202 note 5} P.S.A.S. ix (1873), 428.Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 6} At least one of the Sluie axes certainly seems to have been tinned over part of its surface, but when this was done is another question. The author quoted above makes a good case for prehistoric tinning, a process which is doubted in Ebert, 14, 537 (article by Gotze).

^{page 203 note 1} P.S.A.S. xvi (1882), 409; Childe, Prehist. of Scot. 100.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 2} Childe, loc. cit.

^{page 203 note 3} Catalogue of Aberdeen Univ. Museum.

^{page 203 note 4} P.S.A.S. iv (1863), 396.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 5} Ibid., lvii (1922–1923), 132.

^{page 203 note 6} Ibid. xvi (1882), 240.

^{page 204 note 1} A very full account of the excavation at Leubingen, with reference to the earlier publications, to the excavator's notes, and description of the finds, is given by Höfer, in Jahresschrift für die Vorgeschichte der sächsisch-thüringischen Länder, v (1906), 1–59. Further references will be found in Ebert, vii, 286. See also Childe, Danube, 242.Google Scholar

^{page 207 note 1} Höfer, 18, suggests a similar method of mounting the copper double axes.

^{page 207 note 2} Höfer, nevertheless, argues against the ceremonial use of the Leubingen halberd and contrasts it with the Diskau ones.

^{page 208 note 1} Of the kind known in German as Böhmische säbelartige Ösennadel.

^{page 208 note 2} Seger in Ebert, i, 263.

^{page 208 note 3} The Merseburg arm-ring, Montelius, Die Chron. 42, fig. 107, is the only close parallel.

^{page 208 note 4} Jahresschrift für die Vorgeschichte der sächsisch-thüringischen Länder, v (1906), 89.Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 1} Höfer, op. cit., 90.

^{page 209 note 2} Op. cit, 90, footnote.

^{page 209 note 3} Bethge, in Mannus iii (1923), 42: ‘Das Tüllenbeil macht uns allerlei Kopfzerbrechen.’Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 4} 1920 ed., 26.

^{page 210 note 1} Discussed by Kossinna, , Mannus iii (1923), 55.Google Scholar

^{page 210 note 2} Chart in Hanover Museum.

^{page 210 note 3} ix, pl. 108 f.

^{page 210 note 4} ‘Die Fundumstände sind nicht ganz klar, die beiden Bronzen scheinen aber doch zusammen zu gehören.’

^{page 211 note 1} Jahresschrift für die Vorgeschichte der sächsisch-thüringischen Länder, iv (1905), 3;Google ScholarJacob-Friesen, , Zur Prähistorie Nordwestsachsens, 1911, 188 f.Google Scholar

^{page 211 note 2} See de Navarro, J. M. in Geographical Journ. lxvi (1925), 482.Google Scholar

^{page 213 note 1} Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, xxxiv (1902), 191.Google Scholar

^{page 214 note 1} Montelius, Die Chron. 50; Lisch, Mecklenburger Jahrbuch, xxix, 151.

^{page 214 note 2} Montelius, Die Chron. 48, with other references; Beltz, Die vorgeschichtlichen Altertümer des Grossherzogtums Mecklenburg-Schwerin, 155; also entry in Catalogue of Römisch-Germanisches Central-Museum, Mainz, where casts are preserved.

^{page 215 note 1} Meckl. Jahrbuch (1860–1), 138.

^{page 215 note 2} Germania, xvi (1932), Heft 4, 267.Google Scholar

^{page 216 note 1} As in Montelius, Civil. Prim, en Italie, i, b, pl. 4, fig. 9.

^{page 217 note 1} Götze-Festschrift, 84–9; Alt-Schlesien, iii, Heft 1, 5.

^{page 217 note 2} I remark further on this in dealing with typology.

^{page 218 note 1} Die Chron. 41. A full list of references is given. The objects from the hoard in the British Museum are reproduced in Childe, Danube, fig. 143.

^{page 219 note 1} P.Z. i (1909), 113.Google Scholar

^{page 220 note 1} Die Chron. 43, and figs. 115, 116, 117, 118; P.Z. i (1909), 117.Google Scholar

^{page 221 note 1} In the list of German halberds I have treated such doubtful examples as belonging to Class I (with wooden hafts).

^{page 221 note 2} Montelius, Die Chron. 28, with references.

^{page 221 note 3} Ibid.

^{page 221 note 4} Ibid. 43. Illustration in Krone, Vorgeschichte des Landes Braunschweig, 73.

^{page 221 note 5} Deutsche Anthropologische Gesellschaft, XL. Hauptversammlung in Posen, August 1909.

^{page 222 note 1} Die Chron. 36. This is the number given by Dr. Bolesław Erzepki in figuring the find in Album Przedhistorycznych Zabytków.

^{page 222 note 2} Wielkopolska Czasach Przedhistorycznych, fig. 106.

^{page 222 note 3} See also von Richthoten, (who accepts the higher number), ‘Zum Stand der Vorgeschichtsfor-schung in Posen und dem Westlichen Kongresspolen’, in Mannus xvi (1924).Google Scholar

^{page 223 note 1} These examples have been frequently mentioned and figured, but not all the following references have been available to me: Montelius, Die Chron. 28; Schirwitz, R., ‘Zur Vorgeschichte des Harzes’, in Zeitschrift des Harz-vereins für Geschichte und Altertumskunde, Erstes Heft (1926), 1, pl. 11Google Scholar, 13; Klemm, , Handbuch der germanischen Altertumskunde (Dresden, 1836), 208, pl. xvGoogle Scholar, fig. I and II; Lindenschmit, , Die Altertümer unserer heidnischen Vorzeit (Mainz, 1877), iii, 6, pl. 1,Google Scholar figs. 4, 5; C. L. Schäffer, Beiträge an den deutschen Altertümern; Wagener, , Handbuch der vorzüglichen, … Altertümer (Weimar, 1842), 724Google Scholar, figs. 280–2, and others.

^{page 223 note 2} Die Chron. fig. 277, and 110.

^{page 223 note 3} P.Z. 29, footnote 23.

^{page 223 note 4} ‘Frühbronzezeitliche Stabdolche aus Niederösterreich’, in P. Z., XXV (L 934), 130.

^{page 225 note 1} Hahne, H., ‘Bericht über die Ausgrabung eines Hügels bei Anderlingen, Kreis Bremervürde’, in Jahrbuch des Prov. Museums Hannover, 1907/1908, 13. The inscribed rock is reproduced in Ebert, vol. 9, pl. 130.Google Scholar

^{page 226 note 1} Hahne suggests that this occurred twice, i.e. that the grave must be considered as originally neolithic and that the first discoloration occurred during that period. He suggests that in Bronze Age times the grave was cleared and re-used—a fire being again lighted in it. The correctness or otherwise of this theory need not concern us here, since Hahne is in any case agreed that the finds and the rock-scribing are contemporary. 2 Op. cit. 17, ‘… der ohne weiteres als ein Beil zu erkennen ist, dessen Klinge in beinahe spitzem Winkel gegen den Stiel angebracht und nach rechts gewendet ist.’

^{page 228 note 1} A ‘squeeze’of the stone which I received through the kindness of Dr. Schroller, of Hanover Museum, does not throw further light on the question. The stone is shown in Jacob-Friesen's Einführung in Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, 84, but not from a photograph, and the fact that the implement is shown there as an axe does not help.

^{page 228 note 2} For full references to these carvings see Ebert, iii, 226.

^{page 228 note 3} Antiquity, iii (1929), 155, ‘Rock Carvings in the Italian Alps’.Google Scholar

^{page 228 note 4} Peet, The Stone and Bronze Ages in Italy, says: ‘Finally it must be mentioned that the drawings show some analogy to the marks on many of the West European dolmens and menhirs, and also the rock-drawings in Asia Minor, the Canaries, and Morocco, but until the comparisons have been properly made on a large scale it would be merely misleading to attribute any value to the resemblances.’ See also on this point Lissauer, ‘Felsenbilder in Monte Bego’, in Zeitschr. f. Ethnologie, xxxii (1900), 401, where he points to resemblances to carvings on the dolmen Trou-aux-Anglais, near Versailles.Google Scholar

^{page 229 note 1} Brandenburgia, xl (1931), Heft 11–12.Google Scholar

^{page 229 note 2} Illustrated in Kraft, Die Stellung der Schweiz innerhalb der bronzezeitlichen Kulturgruppen Mitteleuropas, pl. III, 16.

^{page 229 note 3} Aveneau de la Grancière, ‘Fouille du Tumulus …’, in L'Anthropologie, ix (1898), 134. Referred to by Bosch-Gimpera in Préhistoire, ii, 229–37.Google Scholar

^{page 230 note 1} This seems to be, in a more elaborate form, a similar feature to the arc-shaped setting of stones so frequent under cairns and tumuli: Ríordáin, Ó, Journ. Cork Hist, and Arch. Soc. xxxviii (1933), 81, with references to barrows in the Netherlands (van Giffen); Childe, Prehistory of Scotland, 109.Google Scholar

^{page 231 note 1} Report of the Keeper tor 1926, quoted in Antiquity, i (1927), 233.Google Scholar

^{page 231 note 2} Manuel, ii, 198, footnote 4.

^{page 232 note 1} Childe expresses this opinion in Danube, 244, footnote 4.

^{page 232 note 2} P.Z. iv (1912), 35.Google Scholar

^{page 232 note 3} The Palace of Minos at Knossos, ii, 173.

^{page 232 note 4} Evans mistakenly distinguishes between this and the illustration of it in Horae Ferales, pl. x, 4.

^{page 232 note 5} Illustrated in Evans, op. cit. 172.

^{page 233 note 1} Tsountas, Dimini ki Sesklo. I have to thank Mr. C. C. Cremin for this reference. The weapon is also reproduced by Childe, Dawn, 77, who however does not specifically discuss it.

^{page 234 note 1} Montelius, La Civ. Prim, en Italie, part II, pl. 118 and text, col. 579.

^{page 235 note 1} Peet, The Ages of Stone and Bronze in Italy, fig. 165.

^{page 235 note 2} Montelius, La Civ. Prim. en Italie, part II, 614, 615, with references.

^{page 235 note 3} Bull. di Pal. Ital. xxix (1903), 158, fig. 7.Google Scholar

^{page 235 note 4} For the figures of these halberds I make use of my own drawings from the originals in the B.M., the Ashmolean Museum, and in Brussels, as well as the illustrations in H. and L. Siret, Les Premiers Ages du Métal dans le Sud-Est de l'Espagne (quoted below as ‘Siret’).

^{page 235 note 5} Siret, Texte, 196.

^{page 236 note 1} Siret, pl. 33.

^{page 236 note 2} Op. cit., pl. 33.

^{page 236 note 3} Op. cit., pl. 32.

^{page 236 note 4} Op. cit., pl. 33.

^{page 236 note 5} Op. cit., pl. 33.

^{page 236 note 6} Op. cit., pl. 33.

^{page 238 note 1} An examination of the piece in question in Brussels had already convinced me, before I noticed Siret's statement, that it was hafted as a halberd.

^{page 238 note 2} Siret, pl. 63.

^{page 238 note 3} Siret, pl. 63, pot of Type 6 on pl. 62.

^{page 238 note 4} Op. cit., pl. 63.

^{page 238 note 5} Op. cit., pl. 66.

^{page 239 note 1} Siret, pl. 66.

^{page 239 note 2} W. Pleyte, Nederlandsche Oudheden, pl. XI, and p. 49.

^{page 239 note 3} As Pleyte's book was published in 1877, the statement that the pot is such as is ‘associated with the Celtic or Gallo-Belgic civilization’ (die wij tot de Keltische of Gallo-Belgische beschaving brengen) does not help.

^{page 242 note 1} Les Premiers Ages, 219.

^{page 243 note 1} P.R.I.A. xxvii (1908–1909), 94.Google Scholar

^{page 243 note 2} P.Z. i (1909), 115, and Ebert, i, 297.Google Scholar

^{page 243 note 3} Mannus, ix, 157.

^{page 243 note 4} This is the only meaning that Schmidt's text can be made to yield, but he then makes the quite inexplicable statement that the halberd from Bethkenhammer is the only one he knows which falls into the division IIa. This is surely unsustainable in view of the fact that the example from Jagersberg, and even that from Canena (which is the theme of his paper), definitely have blades fastened by rivets on the metal shaft. Seger accepts Schmidt's statement, and treats of the Kuttlau halberd as the second known example of type IIa (Alt-Schlesien, iii, 1, 5).

^{page 244 note 1} A study of the figure in Wilde, Cat. Bronze, 492, and, in the Museum, of the objects represented does not convince one that he is correct in suggesting that the Rock Forest halberd was attached in this way to a metal shaft or that the bronze tube in question is anything but part of a trumpet. Metal shafts are represented in South Germany by two finds, and in Hungary by one.

^{page 245 note 1} Archaeology of Ireland, 63.

^{page 247 note 1} Coffey, P.R.I.A. xxvii (1908), 108Google Scholar, 109; Schmidt, ‘Der Dolchstab in Spanien’, in Opuscula Archaeologica Oscari Montelio, 69; Márton, , P.Z. (1931) 18Google Scholar; Förtsch, , ‘Steinzeitlicher Dolchstab aus Bornitz bei Zeitz’, in Jahresschrift für die Vorgeschichte der sächsisch-thüringischen Länder, iii (1904), 29.Google Scholar

^{page 247 note 2} Op. cit., fig. 7. I have been able to identify this piece in the National Museum collection.

^{page 247 note 3} Reproduced also by Åberg, La Civilisation énéolithique dans la Péninsule Ibérique, figs. 128, 129, 130. The find-place is written Monte Abrahão.

^{page 248 note 1} Repeated from Forrer, Reallexikon, pl. 20, 3.

^{page 248 note 2} These Professor Kühn regards as representations of boomerangs, as he informed me in conversation.

^{page 248 note 3} Figured by Ebert, x, pl. 133.

^{page 248 note 4} Mentioned by Bosch-Gimpera, , Préhistoire, ii (1933), 257, footnote 1.Google Scholar

^{page 250 note 1} Op.cit.

^{page 250 note 2} I have handled the cast of this weapon in Halle Museum. The original is still in private possession. Förtsch's illustration is evidently a photograph of the cast.

^{page 250 note 3} Geschichte Schleswig-Holsteins, 305, Abb. 375.

^{page 250 note 4} i Ibid., Abb. 269–72.

^{page 250 note 5} Menghin, , ‘Die neolithische Ansiedlung von Merimde-Benisalâme und ihre Bedeutung für die Entwicklung des Neolithikums in Westeuropa’, in Proceedings of the First International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, London (1932), 177Google Scholar; Idem, Weltgeschichte der Steinzeit, 360, pl. 41, 11; Junker, , ‘Vorläufiger Bericht über die zweite Grabung der Akademie auf der vorgeschichtlichen Siedlung Merimde-Benisalâme’, with addendum by Menghin, , in Anzeiger der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien (1930), 21.Google Scholar

^{page 251 note 1} Piggott, ‘The Neolithic Pottery of the British Isles’, in Arch. Journ. lxxviii (1931), 77.Google Scholar

^{page 251 note 2} It may here be remarked that in a cist (grave 9) in the yet unpublished Bronze Age cemetery at Keenogue, Co. Meath, were found with the skeleton of a child a food-vessel and a boar's tusk.

^{page 251 note 3} K. Weule, Der Krieg, 51.

^{page 251 note 4} du Chatellier, ‘Dolmen à galerie de Lestridiou (Finistère)’, in Bulletin monumental (1877), 184, and Époques préhistoriques, (1889), 176.

^{page 252 note 1} Illustrated in du Chatellier, La Poterie, pl. 1, 4.

^{page 252 note 2} Op. cit.

^{page 254 note 1} Márton discusses the question of the relative age of the rectangular and circular varieties of shaft-hole. The former type is found in the main in tools and weapons from the period of the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age, but he further states that the feature is widely, chronologically and geographically, distributed, and is not as infrequent as is held by Schroller. Nor does he agree with Schroller that the rectangular form belongs to a time when the round boring was still unknown. The occurrence of such a feature in a Maglemose context is unique among the material of that period.

^{page 254 note 2} Kunkel, Pommersche Urgeschichte in Bildern, pl. 32.

^{page 254 note 3} The following references mention the object, but are not available to me: Zeitschrift des Harzvereins für Geschichte und Altertumskunde, lix (1926)Google Scholar; Schirwitz, K., Zur Vorgeschichte des Harzes; Katal, d. Präh. etc., Ausstellung Berlin (1888), 527Google Scholar. It is also figured and described by Lindenschmit, A.u.h.V. iii, 6, 1, 7.

^{page 256 note 1} Many of them are represented in Evans, Stone Implements, from Great Britain, as well as in Clark, The Mesolithic Age in Britain. They occur in Campignian sites in Northern Europe.

^{page 256 note 2} While correcting the proofs of this paper I have noticed Nordman's article in Finsk Museum, xxii (1915), 39, in which he draws attention to Danish flint blades, one of those figured by him being similar to some of our North of Ireland examples. He sees in them a further example of the connexion between the Danish Stone Age antiquities and those of copper and bronze in Central and Southern Europe.Google Scholar

^{page 256 note 3} The Historical Geography of Early Ireland, 66 map, 61.

^{page 257 note 1} One of these is that shown by Professor Macalister in his Ancient Ireland, fig. 2.

^{page 276 note 1} Prehistory of Scotland, map II.

^{page 276 note 2} Op. cit. 97.

^{page 277 note 1} Childe, Dawn, maps III and IV; Fox, Personality of Britain, fig. 8.

^{page 284 note 1} A halberd from Slovakia is mentioned by Childe, Danube, 243, but I cannot get confirmation of this as the reference is evidently incorrect.

^{page 284 note 2} Bull. Pal. Ital. xxix (1903), 158Google Scholar, fig. 7; ibid., xxxvii (1912), 127.

^{page 286 note 1} Bronzezeitliche und früheisenzeitliche Chronologie, part III, 8.

^{page 286 note 2} Åberg, loc. cit., figs. 174, 175; Montelius, La Civ. Prim., pl. 36, nos. 9, 11, 25; pl. 128, no. 11; pl. 129, nos. 16, 22.

^{page 290 note 1} Figured by Åberg, La Civ. Énéol., fig. 141. He only calls them ‘blades’.

^{page 290 note 2} Op. cit. 164.

^{page 290 note 3} Âges préhistoriques de l'Espagne et du Portugal, fig. 286.

^{page 292 note 1} One such pick-like implement, having an axe-blade at the other side of the socket, is figured by Rostovtzeff, Iranians and Greeks in South Russia, pl. V, I, and comes from a seventh-century B.C. grave. Another such is figured in Ebert, i, pl. 36, and comes from Anan'ino (article by Tallgren). It is dated in the middle of the first millennium B.C.

^{page 292 note 2} Finsk Museum, xxii (1915), 96.Google Scholar

^{page 293 note 1} L. Ashton and B. Gray, Chinese Art, pl. 3a.

^{page 293 note 2} Márton published one Chinese halberd, but did not go into the problem.

^{page 293 note 3} A. M. Tallgren, ‘Die bronzenen Speerspitzen Ostrusslands mit zwei Ausschnitten im Blatt’, in Opuscula … Montelio, 115.

^{page 293 note 4} Articles by Prinz (‘Der Dolchstab im Alten Babylonien’) and Schmidt (‘Zum altbabylonischen Dolchstab’) in P.Z. iv (1912).Google Scholar

^{page 294 note 1} P.Z. XXV (1934), 130–44Google Scholar. See especially 138 ft.

^{page 294 note 2} Die Chron. 100.

^{page 294 note 3} P.Z. i (1909), 113.

^{page 294 note 4} Bronzezeit Süddeutschlands, 86.

^{page 294 note 5} Bronzezeitliche und früheisenzeitliche Chronologie, part III, 86.

^{page 295 note 1} P.Z. xxii (1931), 18.Google Scholar

^{page 295 note 2} Real, i, 298.

^{page 295 note 3} Die Kupferzeit, 131.

^{page 295 note 4} In Ebert, i, 298.

^{page 295 note 5} Palace of Minos, ii, 170.

^{page 295 note 6} Subsequent to the writing of these notes there has been published Der ostskandinavische Norden während der ältesten Metallzeit Europas (Lund 1936), by Forssander, J. E., who (p. 97) handles the problem more comprehensively than most other writers, and, while he continues to accept the Iberian origin of the halberd, gives full weight to Anglo-Irish influence in the development of the North-European group of halberds and in general in the growth of early metal cultures of northern Germany and Scandinavia.Google Scholar

^{page 296 note 1} Montelius, in his article on ‘Der Handel in der Vorzeit’, P.Z. ii (1910), uses lunulae, but not halberds, as evidence of trade between Ireland and Scandinavia. Åberg (Civ. Énéol. 170, footnote 2) mentions the fact that halberds are distributed over Denmark and southern Sweden.Google Scholar

^{page 297 note 1} Macalister, Archaeology of Ireland, 94, pl. 1.

^{page 297 note 2} Macalister, loc. cit. 42, with references.

^{page 297 note 3} Childe, Prehistory of Scotland, 94.

^{page 297 note 4} Mahr: Article on ‘Archaeology’ in Saorstát Handbook, 223. For good illustrations of the Tarxien stones see Sir Zammit, T., ‘The Prehistoric Remains of the Maltese Islands’, in Antiquity, iv (1930). 55.CrossRef Google Scholar

^{page 297 note 5} Macalister, loc. cit. 130.

^{page 297 note 6} R. de Serpa Pinto, ‘Activité minière et métallurgique pendant l'âge du bronze en Portugal', in Anais da Faculdade de Ciencies do Porto, xviii.

^{page 298 note 1} Ebert, i, 297.

^{page 300 note 1} i.e. Krummschwerter: see Forssander, , Bulletin de la Société Royale des Lettres de Lund, 1934–1935, v, 33.Google Scholar

^{page 300 note 2} ‘Prehistoric routes between Northern Europe and Italy defined by the Amber trade’, in The Geographical Journal, lxvi (December 1925), 481.Google Scholar

^{page 301 note 1} See Childe's summary of the Saxo-Thuringian culture and its connexions in Danube, 242.

^{page 301 note 2} e.g. Evans, Bronze Implements, fig. 306, from Arreton Down.

^{page 302 note 1} The grain of the wood shows. That a straight mark across a blade is not sufficient to enable us to declare it to be a halberd is shown by some of the specimens from El Argar (e.g. Siret, Les Prem. Ages, pl. 26, nos. 16, 21) which are unquestionably knife-daggers—being very small—but were attached to straight-ended, not arched or notched, hafts.

^{page 303 note 1} Prehistory of Scotland, 100.

^{page 304 note 1} In discussing segmented beads Leeds demonstrates the practically unmodified continuance of the El Argar culture almost to 1200 B.C. (Homenagem a Martins Sarmento, 402).

^{page 304 note 2} The difference in date between the first Irish and the El Argar halberds suggested by this reasoning is such that the argument is not materially affected by the difference in opinion of the two schools of thought deriving the bell-beakers respectively from Spain and from central Europe.

^{page 304 note 3} Unless we accept the dating of Karo (in Die Schachtgräber von Mykenae), who would put the shaft-graves about a century later, and so our whole chronology would be brought down by this amount.

^{page 305 note 1} Childe, and Burkitt, , ‘Chronological Table of Prehistory’, in Antiquity, 1932;Google ScholarBeringer, , P.Z. XXV (1934), 143; Åberg, Bronzezeitliche und früheisenzeitliche Chronologic.Google Scholar

^{page 305 note 2} This paper was written before the appearance of Professor Childe's, ‘The Antiquity of Nordic Culture’, Wiener Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte und Linguistik, iv (1936), 517,Google Scholar and ‘The Antiquity of the British Bronze Age’, American Anthropologist, N.S., 39 (1937).Google Scholar I am, therefore, glad to be able to add this note in proof and to remark that Professor Childe's researches from a different angle have also led him to emphasize the importance of Irish metallurgists in the general scheme of the European early Bronze Age.

^{page 312 note *} I have to thank Miss Lily F. Chitty for bringing this example to my notice.

^{page 313 note *} I have to thank Miss Lily F. Chitty for bringing this example to my notice.

^{page 313 note †} I have listed the halberds from Posen and Lithuania with the German ones. This arrangement is more convenient in view of pre-war literature on the subject and particularly because of Kossinna's typological scheme.

^{page 316 note *} I am indebted to Mr. W. F. Grimes for information regarding the Nantes halberds, and to Miss Lily F. Chitty for bringing the note in Mr. Leeds's article to my notice.

^{page 316 note †} Mr. Leeds mentions a hoard of eight flat celts and a halberd from the bed of the River Loire. There is no record of this on the Nantes Museum labels or in the Catalogue. Little value can be attached to evidence of association of objects from the bed of a river.

^{page 317 note *} It is more convenient to list together the halberds from Scandinavia (Denmark and Sweden are the only countries represented).

Article contents

IX. The Halberd in Bronze Age Europe: A Study in Prehistoric Origins, Evolution, Distribution, and Chronology

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests