Emergence of Hilltop Settlements in the Southeastern Baltic: New AMS¹⁴C Dates from Lithuania and Revised Chronology

Abstract

The emergence of hilltop settlements presents a pattern of the first enclosed sites that reflect economic development in several regions within the Southeastern Baltic Bronze Age. This novelty reflects increasing social complexity, differentiating economic relations, as well as rising tension in the region. The phenomenon has received a great deal of interpretation, but chronological problems still remain understudied. Researchers tend to seek the start of hilltop settling practice from early to late II millennium BC. This paper presents 14C dates from 7 sites in inland Lithuania, where hitherto no absolute dates were published. The majority of absolute dates has been calibrated to the Hallstatt radiocarbon calibration plateau (ca. 800–400 cal BC) which is significantly later than previously presumed based on dates from Belarusian sites. However, several dates from previously dated hilltop settlements in the region predate the effect. These results indicate the start of hilltop settling practice around 11th–9th centuries cal BC. Review of new and previously published radiocarbon dates suggests a different internal development between SE Baltic coastal and inland regions, likely locating zones, where economic outside stimulus preconditioning emergence of hilltop settlements occurred earlier.

From Bronze Age Hillfort to Capital City New Radiocarbon Dates and the First Archaeobotanical Investigation at the Vilnius Castle Hill

“…Presented are uncalibrated and calibrated radiocarbon dates from the prehistoric periods of the Castle Hill -without going into a discussion on the Hallstatt radiocarbon calibration plateau (ca. 800-400 cal BC), as it has been previously discussed by Podėnas (2020).…”

“…4). These dates not only integrate the Castle Hill into the Eastern Baltic hillfort phenomenon (Podėnas 2020), but it also postulates the presence of an extensive cultural horizon and possibly permanent settlement. This early occupation layer was most likely partially destroyed during multiple episodes of construction on the territory, and therefore remained poorly understood by previous researchers.…”

Between Knowledge and Conjecture: An Emerging Discussion about the Baltic Mounds

“…Kokiu tikslu reikėtų atskirti Ķivutkalns (Latvija) nepiliakalnio ir piliakalnio etapus, jei tiek tvora, tiek pirmieji pylimai yra datuojami vėlyvuoju bronzos amžiumi (Graudonis, 1989)? Neseniai tyrinėtas Garnių I piliakalnis (Podėnas ir kt., 2018) parodė, kad anksčiau traktuoti kaip žemės įtvirtinimai yra kalvos reljefo dariniai, išryškėję dėl modernios mechanizuotos žemdirbystės, o ne 792-540 cal BC žmonių veiklos (Podėnas, 2020). Tačiau jie galėjo būti įsitvirtinę tvora, kurios liekanos vis dar yra netirtoje kalvos vietoje.…”

“…Kodėl būtent toks pirmųjų piliakalnių erdvinis paplitimas? Žiūrint tik į Lietuvos ribose esančius paminklus gali kilti įvairių minčių apie ŠR Lietuvoje susipykusius ir nežinia ko nepasidalijusius brūkšniuotosios keramikos kultūros gyventojus, tačiau, žiūrint į archeologiją ne dabartinių valstybių ribomis, Dauguvos upės reikšmė baltų piliakalnių kūrimosi metu -akivaizdi (Podėnas, 2020). Dauguvos, kaip svarbaus priešistorinio kelio, nulemti ekonominiai impulsai prisidėjo prie specifinio vėlyvojo bronzos amžiaus piliakalnių išplitimo.…”

Essential changes in the composition of copper alloys reveal technological diversities in the transition from the Earliest Iron Age to the Early Roman period in Lithuania

“…In the Late Bronze Age, hillforts or hilltop settlements in east and northeast Lithuania are quite contrasting (Podėnas 2020) (Fig. 1; Appendix).…”