Session: #324

Content:

In continental Bronze Age archaeology, the widely accepted definition of a hoard, according to W.A. von Brunn, is that it must contain at least two metal objects. R. Bradley presents a completely different perspective. He speaks of deposits, not hoards, and significantly expands the catalogue of behaviours to be part of a trans-European and longue durée process.
For decades, hoards research has focused exclusively on metal objects. On the one hand, this was the choice of scholars; on the other hand, many finds were discovered haphazardly and taken out of context, destroying or leaving behind less spectacular and durable items such as potshards, organic elements, stone objects, etc.
However, these items were also part of metal hoards. We also know of similar assemblages consisting of artefacts from other raw materials, as well as food deposits, human sacrifices and other relics of similar practises. All these acts are known from many periods, at least from the Mesolithic to the Modern Time.
We would like to discuss some questions together:
To what extent were the deposition practices of various goods (metal, stone, pottery, food, human and animal remains, etc.) similar?
Can we speak of a single phenomenon or behaviours that seem - from the perspective of 21st-century archaeology - similar?
What do the non-metallic elements discovered in these assemblages tell us about the metal hoards?
What interactions occurred between deposits containing and without metal artefacts by the same societies?
Deliberately selected artefacts and ecofacts deposited over an extended period (e.g. structured deposition) should be interpreted differently from a single act of deposition (like hoards)?
Societies with and without monetary systems perceive the value of goods differently, so we would like to focus on just one of these groups. We invite all scholars of the Stone, Bronze and Iron Ages to take part.

Session: #324

Theme & Session Format

Title & Content

Organisers