Bartosz Kontny

The paper summarizes the knowledge concerning the weaponry of the Przeworsk culture and neighbouring cultural units in the Roman Period (the Bogaczewo culture, Sudovian culture, Wielbark culture and other areas). It shows an impact of the Przeworsk culture model on the surrounding cultural milieus in the Early Roman Period and in the beginning of the Younger Roman Period. Later on a permeation of the north European patterns is noticeable and the Przeworsk model of the military equipment evidently became less attractive at that time. Explanation for the diffusion of the Przeworsk culture and Scandinavian models lays in their attractiveness and the participation in joint military actions (multi-ethnical retinues). It helped in adoption of the foreign elements of the military equipment, treated as useful souvenirs from these expeditions and becoming a good pattern for imitation.

A copper alloy chape was found by chance by a detectorist at Silna-several kilometers to the east of Międzyrzecz. It is a unipartite form with an openwork crescent decoration on the front side fastened to the scabbard with the use of a nail. One should attribute the item to the Roman type Novaesium, dated to the late 2 nd century and the first half of the 3 rd century. Outside the Roman limes, it was popular in the Elbe Circle as well as the Isle of Funen and the Jutland Peninsula during Subphases C1a and C1b. Some of the chapes of the said type (specifically the multipartite specimens) may be treated as barbarian replicas of Roman originals. However, it is not the case for the finding from Międzyrzecz. It is the second find of this type from the territory of Poland. It should be associated with the Wielbark Culture, which was situated in the Międzyrzecz region in the beginning of the Early Roman Period. It makes the finding very intriguing, as this cultural unit is characterised by the lack of weapons among the grave goods; therefore, the one in question sheds some light on the problem of armament in the Wielbark Culture.

The paper deals with axes which make up one of the most prominent weapons of the Balts in the Roman Period. The axes from the Bogaczewo and Sudovian cultures are described here (Catalogue), although the parallels from the Dollkeim-Kovrovo culture are also taken into consideration. There are two main groups of axes: with asymmetric
bevelled head (Group I) and with overal symmetry of the
head (Group II) – see Fig. 1.
Group I may be divided into three subgroups:
1. Axes characterized by a strong asymmetry with a distinct toe and heel as well as a head bevelled from both sides (Bartlikowo, Grave 7 – Fig. 2:1; Stręgiel II, Grave 150 – Fig. 2:2). They have the following proportion indicators: L/S 3.28–4.42, S/O: 1.16–1.18 where L denotes the length of
the axe, S – the width of the cutting edge, O – the height of the eye (the values are of the tentative character).
2. Axes asymmetrical to a smaller extent, sometimes with almost straight upper line of the head, lowering only in the vicinity of the bit (Lisy, Grave 67 – Fig. 3:1; Radužnoe, Grave I – Fig. 3:2; Stara Rudówka, Grave 161b – Fig. 4:2; Sterławki Małe, Grave 342 – Fig. 3:3; axe no 1 from the collection of L.J. Pisanski – Fig. 4:1); proportions: L/S
3.26–4.05, S/O 1–1.55.
3. Chunky axe with marked out butt (no 2 from the collection of L.J. Pisanski – Fig. 5:1); proportions: L/S = 2.71, S/O = 1.
Some of them are decorated (both axes from the collection
of L.J. Pisanski and the one from Radužnoe). The chronology of the Group I embraces the Early RomanPeriod with the possible exception for the Subgroup I.3, which does not have grounds for precise dating.
Group I axes have been documented in the central and mostly in the northern part of ther Bogaczewo culture (Fig. 9). However they are proven for the other units of the West Balt circle too, i.e., stray find from Bugrovo (Бугрово), raj. Zelenogradsk – ex-Warglitten, Kr. Fischhausen in the Dollkeim-Kovrovo culture (Fig. 5:2; Group I.2) or Lithuanian
finds of the Type Malonaitis 5, e.g., Paragaudis, raj. Šilalė (the Lithuanian-Latvian Barrows culture). In Lithuania they prolonged to appear also in the Younger Roman Period, e.g., Pajuostis, raj. Penevėžys, Barrow XIII, Grave 1, and asymmetric items of slightly different morphology until the Early Middle Ages. Among the parallels the specimen from Hrustal’noe (Хрустальное), raj. Zelenogradsk – ex-Wiekau, Kr. Fischhausen, Grave XLIV were mentioned. Inasmuch it is not a symmetrical item it should be attributed to the Type Malonaitis 1d. Additionally the axe from ex-Sopoćkinie, Kr. Augustów (today: Spockin, vobl. Grodna in Belarus) should be rather excluded from the list of asymmetric Early Roman axes (Fig. 5:3). Apparently it comes from the territory of the borderland between the Bogaczewo and Striated Pottery cultures but actually it should be ascribed to the later Type Malonaitis 3a or 6a.
At the moment it seems that asymmetric axes appeared firstly in the Bogaczewo culture from which they spread to the north and north east, maybe even influencing axes of Râzan’-Oka Finns from the 3rd–4th c.
Group II embraces generally symmetrical specimens 10.3–20 cm in length. Their polls are usually convex or slightly flattened. They are needle-shaped in cross section, and their eyes rectangular or close to. One may distinguish three subgroups among them.
1. Slender ones with elongated-oval eyes hardly distinguished from the necks; the cutting edges are wide and fan-shaped (Bogaczewo-Kula, Grave – Fig. 7:1; Dłużec, Grave 72 and 140; Spychówko, Grave 147; possibly also Babięta, Grave 48a). As the Variety II.1.1 I treat the axes with wide bits but concurrently with marked out, i.e., narrowed
eks, i.e., Bartlikowo, Grave 384 (Fig. 7:3), Raczki, Grave 6a (Fig. 7:2) and Nowy Zyzdrój, Grave 186 (Fig. 7:4). Proportions: L/S 2.96–3.78, S/O 1.56–1.93. To a certain extent they resemble Type Żarnowiec after Kieferling (1994).
2. Thick axes with eyes oval in cross section, cheeks marked out from both sides, sometimes profiled; butts are flattened out occasionally and the blades outcurved not so much as in case of the Subgroup II.1 (Babięta, stray find; Babięta II, Grave 50; Bargłów Dworny, Grave 4a; Bargłów Dworny, stray find – Fig. 8:1; Bartlikowo, Grave 20; Judziki, Grave 12a – Fig. 8:2; Koczek II, Grave 121 – Fig. 8:3; Leginy, stray find; Raczki, Grave 6; Skomack Wielki, Grave 84; Spychówko, stray find? – Fig. 8:4); proportions: L/S 2.57–5.71, S/O 0.74–1.89.
3. In-between forms, i.e., thick but with indistincs butts (Machary, Grave 188; Nowy Zyzdrój, Grave 1; Paprotki Kolonia, Grave 67 – Fig. 11:3); proportions: L/S 3.42–3.79, S/O 1.06–1.36.
Basing on the chronological analysis of the grave finds one may establish the chronological range of particular subgroups as follows: Subgroup II.1: Phases B2–C2, II.2: B2–C1a, II.3: B2/C1–C1a.
There is one more axe which was attributed to the Bogaczewo culture, i.e., the stray find from Łazdoje (Fig. 6).
Such ascription is wrong as it meets the criteria of the Type Malonaitis 6d, appearing in the 4th–10th c. Although not precise such dating may suggest that the axe should be rather connected with the Migration Period Olsztyn group.
Some of the Bogaczewo culture axes show traces of the production, i.e., seam placed in their upper sides along the axis (Bargłów Dworny, stray find; Sterławki Małe, Grave 342; exemplar no 2 from the collection of L.J. Pisanski). It proves that axes were finally forged after bending on some rods which created the eyes. If we take into account the specimen from Bogaczewo-Kula one may infer that occasionally piece of iron was placed between the sides. Symmmetrical axes are proved for almost whole territory of the Bogaczewo culture except for its northermost
part where the ones of Group I prevailed (Fig. 9). It could mean local differences in the weaponry however such supposition should be checked in the future.
From the Sudovian culture we know smaller number of axes but such situation results from the poor state of research. Their shortage in the Gołdap group obviously should be linked with the burial rite which excluded weapons from the grave furnishing here. Sudovian axes, measuring 10.5–17.5 cm in length – represent exclusively Subgroup
II. Their butts are generally less distinct comparing with the Bogaczewo culture finds. Subgroup II.1 is represented by the specimens from Osowa, Barrow 8, Grave 2 (proportions: L/S 2.95, S/O 2.16), including Variant II.1.1 – Netta, Grave 30 (Fig. 10:1) as well as Szwajcaria, Barrow 8 (L/S 3.74, S/O 1.64), Barrow LXVIII, Grave 2 (L/S 3.81, S/O 1.38) and Barrow XCI, Grave 1 (L/S 3.93, S/O 1.08). The axe from Barrow
26 at Szwajcaria cemetery has very wide, fan-shaped cutting edge (proportions L/S: 2.77, S/O 2.13) which let us to find it as a less standard form of Variety II.1.2. Another unique form – Variant II.1.3 – comes from Szurpiły, Barrow XXII (Fig. 10:3); that one is slightly asymmetrical (L/S 3.48, S/O 1.2) reminding axes from the Group I.
One may join with the Subgroup II.2 the axe of the unkown locality in the Suwałki region (Fig. 11:1) and from Barrow XV, Grave A3 at Szurpiły (L/S 3.75, S/O 1.1).
Subgroup II.3 is represented by the item from Szwajcaria, Barrow 2, Grave 1 (L/S 3.07, S/O 1.61). There are no traces of the decoration spotted on the Sudovian axes however some traces of production in shape of seams were noticed (Szurpiły, Barrow XV, Grave A3 and
Barrow XXII; Szwajcaria, Barrow XCI, Grave 1; the axe from the Suwałki region). The symmetrical finds from the Sudovian culture are dated to Phase C1–C2, thus close to the chronology of the Bogaczewo culture specimens, naturally excluding Phase B2, preceding the advent of the Sudovian culture. Probably they were in common use among the Bogaczewo culture peoples even during the Phase C2. It cannot be proved, as the habit of placing the weapons among the grave goods
was abandoned in the Bogaczewo culture in the Subphase C1b. The parallels (Group II) from the Dollkeim-Kovrovo culture (Putilovo – Путилово, raj. Zelenogradsk; Hrustal'noe, Grave 14; Elanovka – Елaновка, raj. Bagrationovsk/ ex-Wackern), Grave 17; Poberež'e – Побережье, raj. Bagrationovsk/ex-Hochschnekeinen, Grave 3, Kotel'nikovo –Koтельниково, raj. Zelenogradsk/ex-Warengen; Ušakovo – Ушаково, raj. Gur'evsk) sometimes were found in features
together with dating elements which allows to elongate their chronology until Phases C2–3 (Kotel'nikovo, Grave 31).
As refers to the function of the axes one may consider the hafts’ size (Fig. 12). Basing on the finds of the handles from the Roman Period, i.a., from Scandinavian sacrificial bog sites one may imagine their length as 60–90 cm, i.e., having the range of the swords. Specifically the ones with
symmetrical heads were frequently found together with the other weapons. This leads to the conlusion that they served as a substitute of the swords alike the socketed axes. This does not exclude their different use and ethnographical analogies let us to imagine axes as multi-purpose tools, however with the primary military use.

This paper is the first attempt to summarize the state of research into the armament of the Bogaczewo and
Sudovian cultures. Swords ended up with a higher than expected position. While shaft-hole axes and socketed
axes played an important part, the military role of the so-called ‘fighting knives’ of the Roman period
was rejected, with the exception of Dolchmesser, which were recognized as true weapons. Polearms and
shields were used the most frequently. The latter, although fitting into the Central European pattern, had
local traits. The bow was recognized as hunting equipment. And horses had a rather auxiliary character.
Items with a Balt character that were discovered, for example, at Vimose Bog 1 and 2a and the sacrificial
sites at Balsmyr, Sorte Muld, Kragehul, Skedemosse, and Uppåkra seem to prove that Balts participated in
Scandinavian conflicts, which led to an exchange of ideas about such things as tactics and weapons.

The paper deals with the problem of swords in the West Balt circle. it has been stated that they lack here almost entirely, with the exception for several swords known. the author opposes such idea, showing new materials proving the usage of swords in the Balt cultural milieu, specifically swords from bog sacrificial sites (Wólka, Czaszkowo) and elements of swords' scabbards, fittings of baldric belts aimed to hang the scabbard, or sword's handle fitting discovered in graves without swords themselves. That phenomenon is observed both in the Roman (the Bogaczewo culture and Dollkeim-Kovrovo culture) and Migration Period (the Olsztyn group). It seems to prove that Balts frequently avoided placement of swords in graves what could be expressed by the value of swords (see long usage of broken and then sharpened swords) or ritual matters/beliefs (e.g. pars-pro-toto principle or taboo).

Socketed axes are a well-documented category of finds in the Balt territory during the Roman Period, the Migration Period, and the Early Middle Ages. They have their direct prototypes in the Early Iron Age in the West Balt Barrow Culture, as indicated by their substantial size and morphology, especially the bulge of the socket and the way the edge tapers to the axe base (Fig. 1). Socketed axes recorded in the Bogaczewo and Sudovian Cultures (List 1) have sockets of different depth, usually reaching the base of the edge; the socket end is usually wedge-shaped or flat. The sockets are round in cross-section and carefully finished, although sometimes a longitudinal seam is noticeable. None retain horizontal rivets or nails used to fasten the handle. The length of the axes ranges between 10 and 16 cm, socket diameter – between 2.3 and 4.4 cm. The blade is flared out on both sides, usually symmetrically (this does not apply to the majority of the later finds from Lithuania)...
For the rest see the summary in the text.

Dragon (?) from Łabapa. Studies on Certain Decorated Barbarian Heads of Shafted Weapons from the Roman Period
The paper presents the head of shafted weapon from the Bogaczewo Culture cemetery at Łabapa, Węgorzewo County, grave 63 (Fig. 1:1). It was identified by the author in the Prussia Collection held in the Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Berlin. The grave furnishing has been reconstructed based on archival data. Together with the head of shafted weapon, it was equipped with, i.a., an item resembling a lance-shoe. Probably it was a conical javelin-head, known from the Przeworsk Culture in the Pre-Roman and Roman Periods, but it was also quite popular in the West Balt Circle. The head of a shafted weapon belongs to type II.2.1 after P. Kaczanowski (1995). In the Bogaczewo culture such forms are dated to the Early Roman Period (specifically phase B2) and to the very beginning of the Younger Roman Period. The specimen is decorated with the punched zig-zag pattern. We deal with a variety of so-called negative triangles pattern. The term was coined by P. Kaczanowski and J. Zaborowski (1988) but their conclusions demand revision as the number of heads of shafted weapons decorated in that way is almost doubled. The author proposes to divide the whole group into five types: 1 – classical version of negative triangles (Fig. 2:1, 2); 2 – decoration in the shape of a zig-zag-shaped ribbon flanked by triangles (A – with volute-shaped terminal [Fig. 2:3.4]; B – without scroll-like endings [Fig. 2:5]); 3 – negative quadrangles (Fig. 2:7); 4 – parquet/herring-bone ornament (Fig. 2:8); 5 – zig-zag lines (Fig. 2:9; the specimen from Łabapa may be classified as this type). Additionally, there are a few mixed forms (Fig. 2:6). The chronology of heads of shafted weapons decorated in that way is limited to phase B2b and the very beginning of the Younger Roman Period. Some conclusions may be drawn from the distribution map (Fig. 3). However, these conclusions cannot be ultimate as individual types are not so numerous yet. Nevertheless, it may be deduced that the hypothesis connecting this pattern with the specific decoration of the Wielbark Culture pottery (P. Kaczanowski, J. Zaborowski 1988) seems false. This motif has also been confirmed in the areas distant from the Wielbark Culture and the popularity of this motif as a weapons decoration preceded the peak of its use to decorate the Wielbark Culture pottery, which in turn reached its zenith in the Younger Roman Period. The pattern was treated as simply geometric. However, it could be equaled with the earlier Celtic and later Scandinavian motifs of paired dragons/snakes (Fig. 4) designed in zig-zag outlines (see the volute terminals close to animals’ heads). Is this a simplified version of that motif? This is the question for future iconographical studies.

The article is meant as a commentary to the reference in Tacitus (Germania 45,3) to 'fustis', i.e., a non-metal trauma weapon of the Balt Aestii who have been identified with the Dollkeim-Kovrovo Culture. The word 'fustis' was understood by the Romans as a straight or a wavy stick. From the surviving Roman soldiers' gravestones, the fustis appears to have been used as a coercive measure, in restraining an unruly crowd or during tax collecting. The written and the archaeological sources are analysed for evidence on the use of cudgels/clubs from the metal age. Examples are invoked from ethnography of cudgel use in hunting and combat (from a distance and at close range). The Balt 'fustis' has been interpreted also as a battle axe. The author challenges this view stressing that in writing of the fustis Tacitus makes it plain that it was not made of metal. An argument is made for the use of 'fustis' as a hunting cudgel, something that is confirmed in the West Balt Barrow Culture, the predecessor of the Dollkeim-Kovrovo Culture. One explanation is that when Tacitus wrote his account the latter was still at an early stage when conservative cultural features presumably were still strong; alternatively the information about 'fustis' is an archaism drawn from the period of the West Balt Barrow Culture.

The extraordinary grave of the Early Migration Period warrior from Juszkowo, Pruszcz Gdański com.
During excavations held by the Archaeological Museum in Gdańsk in July 2010 at Juszkowo, near Pruszcz Gdański, an isolated grave from the Early Migration Period was found apart from numerous features from the Early Iron Age, Roman, Medieval and modern periods. It was an inhumation grave of an approximately 30 year old male, equipped with a long double‑edged sword: the so called Asian spathae. The weapon has a lot of parallels in the areas inhabited by the Huns and subordinated peoples like the Alans or the Gepids. Such a form of sword was also proved for regions reached by Barbarian armies led
by the Huns, i.e. in western or southern Europe. However, the find from Juszkowo is unique so far to the north. Additionally, a sword bead of amber was documented in the Juszkowo grave, which is a quite typical
addition to an Asian spatha. The next element of grave furnishing was an iron brooch representing the Hăneşti type or a late form of crossbow fibulas (a tendril or with solid catch‑plate). Furthermore, a belt buckle of gilded bronze with silver inlays was spotted in the grave furnishing. It belongs to the Strzegocice‑Tiszaládány‑Kercz type, known from a wide zone between the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea with particular concentrations in the middle Danube basin and Pannonia. The interment from Juszkowo should be dated to phase D2. It was a period of the abandonment in the area in question: the earlier settlement of the Wielbark culture ceased to exist. Moreover, the Wielbark culture burial rites excluded weapons fromgrave equipment. Therefore the question arises: who was buried at Juszkowo? In trying to answer this question, the authors suggest taking into consideration the possible return of warriors fighting in the south, submitted to the Huns, but also other possibilities, e.g., the existence of military outposts organized by the Huns to control the region, important to maintain contact with Scandinavia.

First Roman Period enamelled spur
from the territory of Poland
Summary
In  the  village  Janówek,  Augustów  province  (north-eastern Poland) a Roman Period brass spur was found by chance (Fig. 1, 2). It is the first enamelled specimen of that kind found in Poland. It is close to subgroup E5 by J. Ginalski, well known from the Przeworsk culture (iron items), dated to phases B2b –C1a  but popular also in the Wielbark culture (copper alloy ones) from B 2/C1–C1a. However they are documented also for the Transcarpathian Ukraine, Volhynia, spotted rarely in the western fringes of the Elbian circle, Bohemia, Slovakia, Lower Austria and – singly – in northern Germany and the isle of Funen. Several spurs of type Ginalski E5 come from the West Balt circle, specifically from the Bogaczewo culture (List 1); here they are dated to B2b–C1a . Sporadically they may be found in Lithuania and in the Dollkeim-Kovrovo culture. Enamelled spurs have been known as yet exclusively from the territories to the east and south-east from NW Poland (Fig. 4). The finds from Janówek may be ascribed to variety IIIae according to O. A. Radyush (Fig. 3). Good parallels come from the region of Ostrovec, obl. (region) Hrodna, Crimean necropolis at Skalistoe III, raj. (district)
Bahčisaraj, or generally from the Ukraine (more slender artefacts), the upper Neman, upper and middle Seym and Psel catchment area.
The chronology of the find from Janówek is not very precise. Among the analogies only the find from Skalistoe III may be dated – to stage
C1b . However, it seems very late when compared to the chronology of its general form, close to type Ginalski E6, not exceeding sub-phase C1a. The appearance of the spur should be linked with the phenomenon of champlevé enamel decoration. Specimens ornamented in that way are known from the E and NE Europe, including the territory of Poland (List 2). It is assumed that they were made both by local and wandering artisans. The analysis of enamel contents as well as execution of the Janówek spur shows traits of the eastern Roman workshops (see the analysis by T. Stawiarska). Therefore it seems that we are dealing with a piece of work of a mobile craftsman well acquainted with the Roman know-how. There is another puzzle, viz. cultural affiliation of the spur in question. The region to the south of Augustów is lacking precise description of the cultural situation in the late 2 nd  and early 3 rd  century. We seem to be dealing with a mixture of the Bogaczewo and Sudovian culture elements here. One cannot exclude a possible influence of the Goths wandering to the south-east in these times. Maybe they shared the central European model of the spur with the eastern Europeans who embellished it in their own way?

The paper recalls the information provided by Tacitus concerning the boats of the Suiones (Germania 44), situated somewhere in Scandinavia. The Roman historian claimed that the power of the Suiones was founded on their men, weapons and also a fl eet. The boats were characterized by the same shape of their two ends, i.e. the stern and the stem were symmetrical; vessels were sailless and paddles, fastened to the sides, were used instead of oars. The author sheds light on this mention, presenting the current state of knowledge with reference to boatbuilding in the Baltic Sea region. He excludes the possibility that we are dealing with logboats and suggests they are more likely to be double-ended clinker built boats, i.e. ones characterized by the overlapping of the edges of two adjacent strakes, although it is hard to say whether their planks were sewn together or fi xed with iron rivets. Taking into account the chronology of the data mentioned by Tacitus, i.e. 1st century AD, the former seems slightly more plausible. Probably, they possessed no horns as spectacular technical elements, as being very strange from the Roman perspective, they would have been noticed by Tacitus’ informant. The crew paddled probably in the sitting position, as in the case of the boat from Hjortspring. In conclusion, the author suggests that despite being seaworthy, such boats were not meant to carry heavy burdens, i.e. they were defi nitely not trading vessels but transport boats, just like the Nydam A, B and C boats from the 3rd and 4th centuries. Nevertheless, large amounts of Roman goods were brought into the Baltic Sea, including mass orders (swords) and fragile glass vessels. Therefore, it seems possible that Roman vessels entered the region not only in 5 AD (Augustus’ fl eet appeared here on a spying mission – see: Augustus, Res Gestae Divi Augusti 26, 4; Pliny the Elder, Naturalis Historia II, 167; Strabo VII, 2, 1) but also later, to be precise, in the 3rd century, so maybe one day a Roman merchant ship will be found in the depths of the sea.

In 2009 divers from the Masurian Volunteer Search and Rescue in Giżycko discovered a wreck of a wooden boat. Because the sunken 'barge' (as it was called by the discoverers) is located on a busy sailing route, it is seldom visited by the divers and they do it mainly during winter when there is no traffic on the lake. The students from the Student Association for Underwater Archaeology at the University of Warsaw have prepared a project of an inventory of the sunken artefact. It has been funded by the Consultative Council for the Students' Scientific Movement. The project was implemented in the late December, 2015. The wreck was measured, described in details and wood samples were taken. Radiocarbon and dendrochronological dates let to assume that the watercraft had been built in the second half of the 19th century, but sank probably in the 1940s. It is not possible to determine the type of boat with certainty: the kurenkahn and odrzak are taken into consideration, however, Niegocin boat is too short for such identification, so perhaps this was indeed a barge.

The paper presents the preliminary results of the underwater survey of the logboat resting on the bottom of Łańskie Lake in Poland. It is dated to the 16th c. It wass published in popular series of the Institute of Archaeology, Universuty of Warsaw (for the full text see: www.archeo.uw.edu.pl/auw).
The whole volume of

During testing of hydroacoustic equipment (sonar) conducted by the
team of the Institute of Archaeology, University of Warsaw in the Lake
Golenicko-Dobropolskie (NW Poland), an astounding archaeological relic was discovered by chance, i.e. resurrection-egg-shaped rattle
(Polish pisanka). It is made of clay and richly decorated, i.a. with incised cross-shaped motives and punctured dots (Fig. 2, 3). The item
was found sticking out of the ground on the surface of medieval stronghold, unknown so far, situated on the island in the western part of the
lake (Fig. 1). Such rattles are dated to the time-span from 11th until
13th cent. They were quite popular in the Kievan Rus’ but also in the
territory of Poland and – rarely – also in north-eastern Germany and
southern Scandinavia. Great majority of egg-shaped rattles is glazed
which is not the case of the described finding. However, it also differs
from non-glazed ones as its ornament is much more elaborate than
the others. Symbolic meaning of such finds is frequently connected
with their apotropaic value but they are treated as symbols of new life
and resurrection as well.

Late Migration Period brooch from Puck

The paper presents the brooch with rung-shaped widening on foot, so called Schlusskreuzfibel, found during town excavations in Puck on a secondary layer. This is a form typical of the West Balt circle in the Late Migration Period Phase E1. However it was found in the non-Balt territory, i.e., the area formerly inhabited by the peoples of the Wielbark culture. The authors present complex cultural situation in region of the Vistula River estuary with possible residual post-Germanic settlement structures (e.g., the area of Pruszcz Gdański) and small groups of newcomers migrating from the West Balt circle, specifically the Sambian Peninsula, but also from Scandinavia or southern Europe (warrior grave from Juszkowo).

Nurkowanie z zatrzymanym oddechem dostarcza wielu wspaniałych przeżyć. Stanowi ono jednak dopiero preludium do prawdziwego nurkowania, tj. zanurzania się pod wodę w sprzęcie powietrznym. Bartosz Kontny Archiwum magazynu Rejs http://kormoran.aplus.pl