Zagospodarowanie przestrzenne oraz struktura umocnień

Author:

Wadyl SławomirORCID

Abstract

The settlement complex at Pasym was made up of a hilltop stronghold, built on the highest point of the Ostrów Peninsula, and a settlement at the foot of the hill, on its south and east sides. The stronghold’s defences covered a stretch of 36 m. They included: rampart, which originally enclosed the central space on the peninsula side; a cobbled platform; and four dry ditches encircling the entire hill (Fig. 5.1). The rampart has been badly damaged by agricultural activities, and only its base is still discernible. It was most probably of earthen construction. The rampart had a maximum width of 7.5 m. It was separated from the stronghold interior by a shallow ditch overlain by a cobbled surface. This created a kind of paved platform that served as a communication route. The first of the ditches was dug at the foot of the rampart. Like the others, it surrounded the hill on the peninsula side. It was 5.5 m wide and its fill was over 1 m thick in many places. The second ditch was located 5 m east and south of ditch 1. It was up to 6.5 m deep. The height difference between the top and bottom of the ditch was just less than 1 m. The third ditch lay to the east and south of ditch 2. It was of modest dimensions, with a width of 2–3 m. The fill of this ditch was 1.2 m thick. The last of the ditches was 2.5–3 m away from ditch 3. It was by far the smallest one, measuring 1.8 m wide and no more than 0.5 m deep. The remains of palisades were discovered along the west and north-west edge of Okrągła Góra. One structure was recorded along the entire length of the hill’s perimeter and there were also several shorter sections. The latter may have been fences marking the boundaries of individual homesteads. The plateau of the stronghold measures 46×35 m. The remains of six dwellings (D1–D6) were discovered near its eastern perimeter (Fig. 5.7). These were divided into two groups: 1) those of large, regular shape – to which buildings D4, D5 and D6 were classified; 2) and those which were smaller and had more irregular ground plans – namely, buildings D1, D2 and D3. As the upper strata had been damaged, it was difficult to determine the structural details of these houses. Only feature 4, associated with building D4, was found to contain postholes, indicating that it was of post-built construction. However, none of the buildings themselves had any postholes, which probably indicates that they were log-built. Numerous lumps of daub were found inside these dwellings, evidencing the remains of walls and floors. Evidence recorded in buildings D1, D3, D4 and D5 showed that they had been divided into several parts. As well as their obvious residential use, they also undoubtedly served as work spaces. It is easiest to attribute a function to the elongated part of building D3, which represents the remains of a weaving workshop. It was not possible to ascribe a specific craft or trade to the remaining buildings. The tools, antler blanks and items associated with jewellery making recovered from these buildings show that the people who lived in them carried out a variety of tasks. None of the larger dwellings were discovered in the central part of the stronghold. This area was probably kept free from buildings of this type. The only features recorded there were small refuse pits and numerous postholes. It is highly likely that this was a public space. A fairly large settlement adjoined the stronghold on the south and east sides. Pits associated with this settlement were discovered at the outer edge of ditch 4. A wealth of settlement evidence came to light in trench 3/17. According to estimates, the settlement covered an area of around 1 ha. The type and thickness of deposits recorded in trench 3/17 suggest that this was the central part of the settlement. Given that only a limited part of the area at the foot of the stronghold has been examined, it is not possible to reconstruct the details of its layout.

Publisher

Wydział Archeologii Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego

Reference512 articles.

1. Adamowski W., Bromowska A. 2011. Forest return on an abandoned field - secondary succession under monitored conditions, Acta Universitatis Lodziensis Folia Biologica et Oecologica 7, 49-73.

2. Behre K.E. 1986. Anthropogenic indicators in pollen diagrams, Rotterdam.

3. Ambrosiani K. 1981. Viking age combs, comb making and comb makers in the light of finds from Birka and Ribe, Stockholm Studies in Archaeology, Stockholm.

4. Andrzejewski A., Sikora J. 2009. Drohiczyn średniowieczny i nowożytny w świetle badań z roku 2006, Podlaskie Zeszyty Archeologiczne 5, 153-195.

5. Antoniewicz J. 1950. Z zagadnień ochrony zabytków wczesnośredniowiecznego budownictwa obronnego na Warmii i Mazurach, Sprawozdania P.M.A 3, 51-77.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3