Find of a Bronze Macehead from the Kraków-Częstochowa Upland in Poland

Abstract

The Upper Silesian Museum in Bytom houses an interesting find of a macehead discovered in the Michałowiec nature reserve (commonly known as the Michałowiec/Michałówka Forest). The reserve is located on the northern slope of a large rise of terrain of the Kraków-Częstochowa Upland (Polish: Jura Krakowsko-Częstochowska) that shelves toward the River Biała Przemsza valley. Regrettably, the exact coordinates of the find location are not known, and only very imprecisely defined forest limits where the discovery was made were indicated. The artefact in question is a reasonably well-preserved macehead of the so-called star-shaped type. The macehead was cast in a pre-prepared mould using a non-ferrous metal alloy with a dominant share of Cu, Pb, and Sb. A comparative analysis of maceheads with finds from the territory of Hungary and south-eastern Europe, as well as a concentration of such finds along the southern and the eastern borders of Poland allow for a supposition that such artefacts could also come from this direction. On the other hand, it cannot be excluded that the find is of local manufacture. Concerning its chronology, on the basis of analogies a wide time frame between the 12th and the first half of the 14th century can be proposed. The territory of the Kraków-Częstochowa Upland is a landscape that since the early 14th century has been marked by numerous works of military architecture. These were the background of the defensive system of the border of the Kingdom of Poland. Therefore, a high number of warriors could be at least temporarily stationed in this area. This can perhaps offer grounds to rather accept a later (that is, the 14th century) chronology of the artefact. Such a date can also be implied by its chemical composition.

Fantastic Flails and Where to Find Them: The Body of Evidence for the Existence of Flails in the Early and High Medieval Eras in Western, Central, and Southern Europe

“…In contrast to Eastern Europe and the Balkans, where physical finds of flail heads predominate, in Western, Central, and Southern Europe, primary textual and artistic references (carvings, statues, illuminated manuscripts, etc. (Figure A1)) are far more common (Hrynchyshyn 2014;Taavistainen 2004;Kotowicz and Skowro ński 2020;Imiolczyk and Zdaniewicz 2022;Shpakovsky and Nicolle 2013). The reasons for this may be twofold: firstly, the challenges arising in accessing Eastern European textual and artistic sources due to language barriers and present geopolitical tensions; and secondly, the misidentification of many archaeological finds outside of the Eastern regions of Europe, which may in fact be flail heads rather than weights or other artefacts, as discussed later.…”

“…One of Sturteva arguments against flails being used at all was the prevalence of reproduction pi passed off as genuine period artefacts (Sturtevant 2016a(Sturtevant , 2016b(Sturtevant , and 2017 while c pletely disregarding the widespread number of finds from Eastern Europe and sim artefacts which have surfaced in the Central, Western, and Northern reaches of the co nent (Taavistainen 2004;Terävä 2014). The level of decay observed on physical find dependent on the material of production and the inclement conditions in which they w A number of archaeological finds of "mace heads" may actually be flail heads due to the small-diameter holes being insufficient for a rigid wooden haft of appropriate thickness to maintain the necessary strength of the weapon when administering blows to the foe (Michalak 2019;Farcas 2016;Imiolczyk and Zdaniewicz 2022;Kotowicz 2008;Zdaniewicz and Adamiak 2011;Tihle 2017;Michalak 2006), despite similarities in the patterns of mace and flail heads observed (Skhorokhod and Blazhchek 2020;Daubney 2007;Michalak 2006;Florek 2019). One particular example is Figure 4.2 in the 2019 work of Michalak (Michalak 2019); in this case, the head was likely attached to a wooden handle via a piece of rope or suitably thick, or possibly plaited/braided, leather thonging knotted above and below the head (Zhirohov and Nicolle 2019;Michalak and Wolanin 2008), either of which would usually have rotted away with centuries in the ground and as such are not commonly observed when such items are dug up (Moreno 2015); a rigid iron shaft was also present (as a mace); the remains of this would have been recovered alongside the head (Michalak 2019), and indeed wooden hafts are observed in several cases where ground conditions were favourable to preservation (Tihle 2017).…”

“…A number of archaeological finds of "mace heads" may actually be flail heads due to the small-diameter holes being insufficient for a rigid wooden haft of appropriate thickness to maintain the necessary strength of the weapon when administering blows to the foe (Michalak 2019;Farcas 2016, Imiolczyk andZdaniewicz 2022;Kotowicz 2008;Zdaniewicz and Adamiak 2011;Tihle 2017;Michalak 2006) A number of archaeological finds of "mace heads" may actually be flail heads due to the small-diameter holes being insufficient for a rigid wooden haft of appropriate thickness to maintain the necessary strength of the weapon when administering blows to the foe (Michalak 2019;Farcas 2016, Imiolczyk andZdaniewicz 2022;Kotowicz 2008;Zdaniewicz and Adamiak 2011;Tihle 2017;Michalak 2006) (Image © Egon Wamers, permission kindly granted for non-commercial reproduction). (Wamers 1994;Taavistainen 2004) Several other examples have been found in the former territories of the Holy Roman Empire (c. 1200), which are now within the borders of Poland.…”