Re: Jastorf - Przeworsk

From: Torsten
Message: 65281
Date: 2009-10-23

Shchukin has two updates to this chapter, they follow here
(the notes are solely references, so they have been left out).

M. Shchukin
Rome and the Barbarians in Central and Eastern Europe
1st Century B.C. - 1st Century A.D.
'Chapter IV
The Jastorf culture seen narrowly and broadly: "Jastorf culture" and "Jastorf civilisation".

At the same time as southern subalpine regions were witnessing the complex development of Celtic civilisation, a no less complex development of a new entity was taking place in the north, in the marshy and forested plains of Schleswig-Holstein, Hannover, Mecklenburg and Brandenburg. The inhabitants of this area, still living in the Bronze Age, had been cut off by events in the south from their sources of raw materials and were compelled to master the new material of iron, which was abundant in the marshy ores of the region.

Having lost contact with the southern cultures of Hallstatt and early La Tène which had already mastered iron, the northerners were to develop indigenous and unique types of iron products. At that time the Jutland area of central and northern Denmark were becoming depopulated due either to climatic change or to some other factors. In contrast, the plains of northern Germany, from the Weser to the Oder and the lower reaches of the Elbe, were densely settled. Thus, parallel to the Celtic emergence and even earlier (at Hallstatt D stage), the Jastorf culture takes shape, displaying features and a structure fundamentally different from the refined and fantastic civilisation of the Celts.101

Gustav Schwantes, who devoted his long life to studying this culture, saw its basic characteristics as "sobriety", "circumspection", "sparseness", "utilitarianism", all of which can be conveyed by the single German word 'Nüchternheit".102 However, this characterisation is somewhat exaggerated and is applicable only to early Jastorf, when this culture is compared to the rich culture of the Celts. If one compares the early Jastorf culture with its eastern neighbour, the so-called Pomeranian Culture in Poland, in terms of the form and beauty of artefacts the latter is not very different, its urns (the same bomb-like vessels with high necks) are sometimes decorated with the primitive representation of the human face.

The utilitarian Jastorfers only made objects which were designed for generally lower the vessels - with the overall shape consequently changing from pitcher-like to basin-like.104 There is a gradual increase in the number of polished ceramics, normally black but sometimes with a brown tint. There is also a gradual tendency towards decorating the vessels with stuck on knobs: this is particularly noticeable in the middle, Ripdorf stage of this culture. Another distinctive decorative technique emerges: this consists of alternating polished and deliberately roughened sections on the body and shoulders of the vessel. The vessels of this culture are also distinguished by small ear-handles.

Throughout its existence the Jastorf culture cremated its dead. The remains collected from a funeral pyre were placed in an urn. Initially the urns were often surrounded with stones or hidden beneath small stone pavings. Later stones were entirely left out of funerary constructions. Quite often, particularly at the intermediate stage, the urns were covered with bowls or, in their absence, one assumes with wooden lids.105 The ritual placement of weapons in graves occurs only at the later stages, and can be connected with certain events which will be discussed below.

The second half of the 3rd century BC witnessed the collapse of Celtic expansion and the Celts retreat from Italy and Thrace. This was the period of "central European consolidation", corresponding to the transition from early to middle La Tène (i.e. from LTB to LTC), when the Celts' northern neighbours probably took advantage of the former's military failures.106 The Celts and local celticised populations disappeared from southern and central Germany towards the close of La Tène B. These changes led to a transformation of the Jastorf culture, within whose sphere these areas lay.107 Jastorf and La Tene were coming increasingly into closer contact; Celtic metal products and ceramics became ever more popular; Celtic items began appearing even in northern Germany and local craftsmen began imitating these new stylish decorations and implements.108
> Celtic and celtic-type fibulae became widespread and the Jastorf culture ceased being "Infibularis". In some areas early La Tène Celtic fibulae survived a long time, occasionally far out-living their prototypes. This caused German archaeologists considerable difficulties in chronological terms.109 As a result of internal change and Celtic influence, a middle Jastorf style emerged in the north of Central Europe: this marks the transition of Jastorf culture to its Ripdorf stage. Henceforth the Jastorf and La Tène styles function as two impulse waves, with a new wave cresting whilst the power of the first recedes.110

Who then were the carriers of this initially peculiar and "sobre", Jastorf-culture? R. Hachmann's views on the subject were as follows. 'Whilst for a long time the Celts were shaping history, the Jastorf culture remained outside the limelight of history. Therefore we only know about their ways and history through archaeological evidence. Positive evidence allows us to conclude that the Celts were the carriers of La Tene culture, but nothing comparable exists for the Jastorf culture. We can only speculate that if La Tene culture is rooted in the emergence of the Celts, then Jastorf culture must he similarly linked to the emergence of the Germans or some part of them.111

Later, when the Jastorf culture territory emerges into the light of history, Roman military leaders, merchants and historians report various German tribes in the territory between the Rhine and Vistula. But contemporary historical, archaeological and philological analysis helps us to discern within this Teutonic territory another population, neither German nor Celtic but intermediate between the two, a third group, whose language has not survived to our times.112 This group could have occupied an area extending southwards to the mid-German plateau on the right bank of the Rhine, northwards to the river Ruhr and in parts even to the river Lippe, eastwards to the river Leine. This people was strongly celticised, and was at the same level of development as the Celts in the oppida. They also constructed fortified semi-towns, used the pottery wheel, were metal workers (a manufacturing centre has been discovered in the Siegerland locale), manufactured iron weapons (a cache of which has been found), and minted coins. Their burials recall those of the Jastorfers, consisting of urns containing calcified bones cleared of funeral pyre debris, although the ceramics are quite distinctive. The Romans of Caesar's and subsequent times, during the expeditions of Drusus and Tiberius, called them Germanics. But this territory contains a concentration of toponyms which can not be interpreted in terms of either German or Celtic languages. An intermediate people indeed, neither German nor Celtic!

A similar situation exists on the southern periphery of the Jastorf culture area, along both sides of the Thüringerwald.113 Perhaps this same intermediate people account for the Bodenbach-Podmokly group which formed in the northern Czech region during La Tène B2. Here too we find a mixture of Celtic, Jastorf and local elements ones of Bilendorf or Bialov type and of the Silesian-Platenica group of the Lusatian culture which had existed in this area since the Bronze Age.114

It is quite possible that a good number of such groups X, Y and Z in fact account for many of the tribes comprising what the Romans called "Germania libera". These groups were to become Germans not so much because of their origins and language, but because their political and historical fate was linked up with that of different German tribes, who were also experiencing a continuing process of change and development.

A paradox surrounds the term "Germani". Amongst surviving sources it first appears in the "History" by Posidonius (135-51 BC), a 52-volume work covering the period 146-96 BC, which survives in fragments cited by other authors. Fragments from his 30th volume contain reference to the Germans as occupying the right bank of the Upper Rhine adjoining Celtic areas and remarks on their habit of drinking a barbaric mixture of milk and wine as accompaniment to roast meat. But Posidonius does not use the name "Germani" for the Cimbri and Teutons who were emerging from the area of Jastorf development and whom all later authors were to recognise as Germans.115

The area in which Posidonius places the Germani was most likely occupied by the intermediate people, one group of whom probably bore the name "Germani"; later the name was extended to the entire population of the Rhine-Danube basin. The historic Germans, the heirs of the Jastorf culture, were most likely not related to the "Germani" mentioned by Posidonius and, strictly speaking, were not Germans, never called themselves by that name and do not label themselves as such even today.

The complexity of the ethnic-political situation in ancient Germany is emphasised by the fact that the unity of the Jastorf culture was only relative. The Jastorf culture divided into comparatively small territorial groups which developed separately from each other.116
> If the heartland encompassed eastern Hannover, Schleswig-Holstein and western Mecklenburg (i.e. Jastorf culture in the narrow sense), then surrounding it was a broad band of different cultural groups, whose similarity with the heartland and between themselves varied. Taken together, however, they comprised the Jastorf culture in a broad sense and constituted in effect Jastorf civilisation.117 Included in this is the Harpstedt-Nienburg group of the middle Weser, characterised by the very attenuated but equally crude Harpstedt pots and the superbly glazed Nienburg bowl-pots. The North Sea coastal monuments extending from Holland to the north of the Elbe comprise a special group. Excavations here have uncovered the so-called terpen or wurten, i.e. the many-layered settlements situated in sand dunes so as to avoid flooding during high tides. Some of these were continuously occupied up to the Middle Ages. The 'Stahlhauser" long-houses were built here, some up to 20 metres in length, one part of which was used as a residence while the other served as a barn. Comparatively few central and southern German settlements have been excavated, but these have yielded evidence of small column-structure buildings.

Burials of the north German population are known only in the eastern part: they are cremations, sometimes surrounded by a funerary mound. Male and female cemeteries were constructed separately. The ceramics display an intermingling of Jastorf and Harpstedt elements. In the east, the Jastorf cultural sphere in the broad sense encompasses the Warnow group of Mecklenburg and the Oder estuary, the related group along the Stettin coast, the Seen group of the south Mecklenburg lakes, and the Middle Elbe-Havel group.118

Special attention needs to be focussed on the Gubin group in the Oder-Neisse region. This is represented by two large cemeteries in Luboszyci near Zielona Gora and in Domaniowicy near Legnica. The Domaniowcy cemetery began with burials of the Pomeranian culture. At the time of the early "a" phase of NELT, it changes from a Pomeranian culture complex to one typical of the Gubin-type of Jastorf: this development occurs at the same time as the transformation of another Pomeranian culture burial complex in Nosocicy - only 20 kilometres to the east - into a Przeworsk cultural complex.120 The Gubin ceramics display some Przeworsk elements but earlier examples are generally similar to those of the Jastorf culture. These include polished and roughened bands on the vessels, urns covered with bowls, and the absence of weapons.

The historical events that caused the cultural changes in South-East Germany are unknown. One can only suggest that the Germans and non-Germans of the Jastorf culture were exerting pressure on the Celts and non-Celts of Central Europe. As a result a broad Jastorf-Celtic "contact" zone emerges in the middle reaches of the Elbe, in Saxony and Thuringia: simultaneously, northern groups proved to be under La Tène influence. The process of Latènisation had begun.

This development was accompanied not so much by a fundamental cultural transformation as by a relocation of monuments and groups, with old ones disappearing and new ones emerging. We know of at least 48 burial places in Northern Germany which were used through the early Jastorf and Ripdorf stages, whereas those spanning the Ripdorf and the later Seedorf number but two.121

The German pressure on the Celts increased progressively. The Jastorfers of Saxony, having probably partly absorbed the bearers of the local Billendorf culture, moved southwards into the Czech region, where a distinctive Bodenbach-Podmokly group was already emerging towards the end of LT B2. In turn, Celtic-type objects become widespread among the Jastorfers: these include mid- and late-La Tène fibulae, open-work belt tips, wheel-turned pottery, weaponry. The weapons (swords, spears, shield bosses) appear increasingly in burials, and warriors are increasingly placed in separate burial groups. The pottery remains three-part in design, but the long neck form disappears. The pottery consists primarily of bowl-pots, either polished or polished-and-roughened, often with small ear-handles or with stuck-on ornamental elements. Facetted rims appear and constitute a typical feature of the NELT epoch. The northern areas provide evidence of the popularity of metal Holstein belts made of square, decorated metal plates linked with chains: these are modelled on the chain-belts of Celtic women. These belts carry protruding crescent ornaments which, together with other occasional discoveries, might indicate more distant contacts with the Celtic-Illyrian population of southern Transdanubia.

These developments must have been gradual and probably spanned about two centuries. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to determine a chronology here, given that we have no exact absolute dates either for the upper limit of LT B or the beginning of LT C1, the beginning of NELT and its "a" and "b" stages, or the limits of LT C1 and LT C2.

It is also difficult to correlate historical and archaeological events even when datings exist for both. This is because an archaeological dating by its nature denotes a span of time while a historical dating fixes a point in time: thus, the time given by an archaeological dating may in reality span two or three different historical datings. This problem is magnified in relation to the Jastorf culture because the pace of change varies so much between its component groups.

The following approximate sequence of events can only be proposed very hypothetically. At some early point of "latènisation", perhaps when the Podmokly group was emerging in the Czech locale, the pressure of population moving southwards caused an exodus of some of the bearers of east Jastorf culture together with their eastern neighbours of the Pomeranian culture. Perhaps the pattern of this relocation can be traced by mapping the distribution of crown-shaped neckrings (Kronenhalsringe). Isolated examples of these artefacts, a symbol of power or some other attribute of German leaders and definitely not intended as objects of trade, have been found far to the south-east of the area where they predominate, i.e. Denmark, Northern Germany and Western Pomerania.122 They have been found
in Rumania, contemporaneously with the Poianes,t,i-Lukashevka culture which bears many elements deriving from the eastern variant of Jastorf civilisation, particularly of the Gubin type.123 They have been found in the Ukraine, specifically in Vilkov within the Lvov area, in Zales'e within the Ternopol area, in Dashievo within the Vinnitsa area, and in the small village of Leski on the river Desna basin where four examples were found together (see illustrations 7, 16).124 All these discoveries were accidental and their relation either to local early Iron Age cultures or to the Zarubintsy culture which emerged here on the threshold of NELT remains unclear. But even if warrior bands headed by leaders who wore crown-shaped neckrings did not reach the Desna region, then they must have operated somewhere nearby and contributed, even if indirectly, to the conditions which gave rise to the Zarubintsy culture. These same conditions are also recorded in the northern Black Sea littoral at the turn of the 3rd-2nd centuries BC by the decree honouring Protogenos. At that time Olbia was newly-arrived Galatians and Sciri. We shall return to this later.

We could expect the next stage of basic change to come towards the end of the 2nd century BC, when, according to written sources, climatic change forced the inhabitants of Denmark and Northern Germany, in particular the Cimbri and Teutons, to move in search of new areas for settlement and thus to come into conflict first with the Celts and then with the legions of Marius.

But it remains unclear whether these marches caused the Celtic La Tène culture to shift from C2 to D1 or the cultures of the NELT area to cross from its early to middle stage or for that matter from phase "b" to "c" within the middle stage.*

Archaeology provides only indirect evidence of these marches. Perhaps it was the warriors returning from such expeditions to Denmark who brought with them trophies which were sacrificed to Germanic gods and cast into the marshes. This would explain the discovery in Denmark of the remains of chariots whose rich decorations included moustachioed Celtic masks125, as well as the famous Gundestrup silver cauldron decorated with a veritable pantheon of Celtic deities, probably the work of some eastern-Celtic-Thracian master from the middle Danube126 or a local artist who was familiar with Celtic and Dacian art objects.127 Perhaps at the same time other artefacts, such as the 3rd century BC Celtic cauldron found at Bro and the 5th-3rd century BC Graeco-Etruscan vessels found in an NELT burial at Lango, were brought northwards.128 Remarkable also is the discovery in Negovo on the Austro-Yugoslav frontier of a collection of some 20 Etruscan Alpine and Celtic bronze helmets: one of them bears the inscription "Harigasti Teiva", which is believed to be the oldest surviving example of an ancient German language.129 But it is not clear whether this discovery can be linked directly to the Cimbri.

The absence of fixed datings for the "a", "b" and "c" phases of NELT also prevents us from determining whether the Cimbri expeditions preceded, coincided with or followed on another major movement affecting the German and non-German tribes which archaeology has revealed. This development comprises the successive waves of change which affected material culture and settlement in Europe during the middle and beginning later stages of NELT: it was probably catalysed by the westward movement of the bearers of the Przeworsk and Oksywie cultures. A historical result of this process can be seen in the appearance in 58 BC on the Rhine of the forces of Ariovistus, which had already been on a continuous campaign for 14 years.130

This movement began in the early or middle stages of NELT, sometime between the mid-2nd and mid-lst centuries BC, during the prevalence of mid-La Tène fibulae variants A, B and C and the emergence of fibulae variants K, J and G/H. The westward movement of the "east Germans" left many traces, primarily in relation to the Przeworsk and Oksywie cultures,** and is manifest in the appearance of burials with bent weapons but without urns throughout the western regions as far as the Main.131

Apart from isolated discoveries and burials of eastern type, three compact groups of inhabitants originating from East Europe have been identified.132 One was situated where the Saale flows into the Elbe, another between the Saale and Unstrut rivers, and the third still further westward in the Wetterau region on the Main.133
> At the same time, the Podmokly population expanded its Czech territory, absorbed some elements of the Przeworsk culture (especially the novel facetted rims on vessels) and metamorphosed into the new Kobyly culture.134

At about the same time, the Gubin cultural group adopted a number of Przeworsk elements, but then disappeared leaving its territory vacant.135

Somewhat earlier, on the threshold of the "a" and "b" phases of NELT, a number of Jastorf burial complexes in Western Pomerania were abandoned and in their stead appeared burials of the neighbouring Oksywie culture.136 The Jastorfers were either displaced or rapidly assimilated by the Oksywie population.

It is quite possible that all these developments are links in the same chain of events, and that the appearance of Ariovistus on the Rhine was but one episode in it.

This is not meant to suggest, however, that the Suebi and Ariovistus originated from Polish territory and that the graves with Przeworsk weapons are Suebi burials. Both were part of a larger stream, and are not necessarily one and the same. These are developments can be seen through both the historical and archaeological focus.

In the north German heartland of the Jastorf culture changes were at this time less pronounced, although they are discernable. A burial ritual characterised by the presence of weapons developed here (Harsefeld near Hannover) during the later NELT phase. In some territories the late NELT is characterised by a declining number of monuments, occasionally so drastic as to indicate total depopulation. This was clearly the case in Altmark, south-western Mecklenburg, and the middle reaches of the Havel.138

The process of change in Central Europe culminated in the mid-1st century BC, concurrently with the predominance of fibula variants K, J, G/H and the emergence of arched fibulae M-N (Geschweiftfibeln); the collapse of oppida in Thuringia, Bavaria, Moravia and the Czech lands139; the abandonment of certain burial complexes in western Germany140; the disappearance of the Kobyly group in Czech lands; and in the Rhine area the intermediate population (between Germans and Celts), characterised by a highly evolved social structure as well as the production of wheel-turned pottery and coins, was displaced by the poorer and more primitive Jastorf culture.142

The unique and spectacular culture of the Grossromstedt Horizon emerged as a result. The population coalesced into large groups. The burial fields of the time were generally colossal, but were not used for very long. The burials contained many weapons. The burial ritual was apparently borrowed from the Przeworsk culture, whose bearers possibly constituted the most active part of the new population. Men and women were generally buried separately, this aspect of the ritual originating in the Elbe region.

The pottery is characterised by tall vessels which are black polished and have smoothly curved setms. This pottery is sometimes called "situlae" on the assumption that it imitates Italian bronze buckets: however, the origins of the form should be sought in northern Europe, especially in Denmark. The fibulae are mostly the late La Tene arched variant M-N and variant 0 is very common.

The population's expansion drive clearly went southward and westward. The monuments of this cultural horizon are found in Altenwald on the Main, near Bamberg, in Wetterau on the lower Main, occasionally on the left bank of the Rhine (the Landau burial), on the mid-Rhine at Gladbach, and also in southern Bavaria in the Manching region (the Kronwinkl and Uttenhof fen burials with Grossromstedt features). The main concentration of finds lies however in the mid-Elbe region, Saale and Saxony. The Tišice type monuments from the Czech lands may also be related to this horizon. The latter sites ought to represent only the late phases of the horizon, i.e. subsequent to the Marcomanni migrations of 9-6 BC.145 The dating of the sites, however, remains a subject of controversy.146

It is quite reasonable to juxtapose the Grossromstedt horizon with the Suebi tribal federation. However, the Suebi in question were probably not contemporaries of Caesar or Ariovistus. They were the Suebi of the later 1st century BC, against whom the campaigns of Domitius Ahenobarbus were directed.

The northern limits of the Grossromstedt horizon are unclear. Some elements of this entity, most probably the social rather than the ethnic, are scattered throughout Germany: these include men's burials with weapons, black-polished situlae vases, and arched fibulae. Nowhere do they display such a unity as in Thuringia and Saxony, the area of the Suebian tribe of the Hermunduri. We must remember that we are speaking here of a horizon, not an archaeological culture. Most of the bearers of the culture represented by this horizon can be assumed to have originated primarily in the Elbe region. The development of this culture also involve the "east German" bearers of the Przeworsk tradition: their role in the development of the social structure and external shaping of this culture was probably comparable to the role of the Celts in the formation of Przeworsk culture.'

...

* The materials at our disposal, concerning the invasion of the Cimbri and Teutons, abound in contradictions, which, naturally, causes a lot of problems. We could have repeated the phase of Strabo: "As for the Cimbri, some accounts of them are inaccurate, others - absolutely impossible" (Strabo, VII, 2, 1-2). "The accounts at first exceeded all credit, as to the number and strength of the approaching army, but in the end report provedmuch inferior to the truth, as they were three hundred thousand fighting men, besides a far greater number of women and children .... no man knew what people they were, or whence they came, that thus like a cloud burst over Gaul and Italy ...." (Plutarch, Caius Marius, XI).

Judging by the written sources, the place from which this invasion of the northern barbarians was launched could be located in Denmark. Strabo reported that these barbarians had lived on a peninsula but had had to abandon it due to the floods, though in his time (at the turn of the first century BC-first century AD) they still owned that land, which they had inhabited earlier. (Strabo. VII, 2, 1) Pliny the Elder called Jutland "the Cimbrian peninsula" (Pliny. IX, 96).
Strabo goes on: "The Boii had previously lived in the Hercynian forest, the Cimbri penetrated that area, but were repelled by the Boii and descended to the Istros, into the country of the Celtic tribe of Scordisci, then went into the area inhabited by the Teuristi and Taurisci (also Celts), and, finally, into the land of Helveti ... the latter went along with the Cimbri." (Strabo. VII, 2, 1-2)
In 113 BC the Teutons first encountered the Romans near Noreia in the Eastern Alps and defeated the troops of consul Papirius Carbo (Appianos, Celtica, 13).

Thus, huge population masses from Denmark passed through the territory of Germany into the Czech lands where the Boii lived, then descended as far as the Banat region and the Iron Gates on the Danube (the areas inhabited by the Scordisci), then moved westwards. Such massive migration (approximately three hundred thousand warriors) would have seriously affected all the archaeological cultures along the route of that movement. If we had dated the beginning of the North-European La Tène and the formation of the La Tène circle of cultures - as R. Hachmann did - to approximately the year 120 BC, then everything would be easy to explain. But now it turns out that the major changes in the cultures discussed did not take place at the time of that resettlement, but a hundred years earlier. As for the changes that took place on the threshold of the early and middle stages of NELT, these were no significant enough to correspond to such a massive migration. This is the first riddle.

The second riddle is this. In 113 BC, after their victory near Noreia, the Teutons had before them a virtually defenceless Italy, which they could easily have invaded. The main Roman forces were engaged in Africa, in the war against the Numidian king Jugurtha. However, instead of going to Italy, the barbarians, together with the Cimbri, went into southern Gaul and reached Toulouse. In 105 BC, near Arausio, they again defeated the Romans, and again Italy could have become an easy victim. The war in Africa was still going on, and the reorganisation of the Roman army, undertaken by Caius Marius, was not yet completed. However, the barbarians turned against the Belgae and moved into northern Gaul.

In 102 BC, having organized an army of the new type, Marius attacked the Cimbri and Teutons and defeated them thoroughly. First he beat the Teutons at Aquae Sextiae near Massilia, then, the very next year, he defeated the Cimbri, who had crossed the Alps. " ... Above sixty thousend were taken prisoners, and those that were slain were said to be twice as many .... plunder was taken by Marius's soldiers." (Plutarch, Caius Marius, 27)

If the northern barbarians had looked for lands to settle in Italy, then their actions seem totally irrational. But they probably did not want those lands; more likely, their goal was to conquer Celtica, and they were trying to achieve that aim in accordance with the balance of political forces (unknown to us) in the Celtic world at that time. It is that balance of forces which compelled some Celtic tribes to fight with them, while others (eg. the Helveti and Ambrones) found it expedient to support them. Probably, the changes which took place in the Celtic La Tène culture proper at the threshold of Stages C and D can really be connected with these events.

Another fact should be noted, namely, that in the Celtic world during LT-D the rite of the "archaeologically untraceable" burials became widespread15. In this connection the following passage from Pliny the Elder is noteworthy: "In the ancient times the most definite sign of victory was the giving of a green stem of a plant to the victor. This meant that the conquered gave up their rite to own land, to use the productive and beneficial strength of the soil, even to bury the dead in the ground. This rite, as far as I know, is still retained by the Germans." (Pliny. XXII, 8). In the light of this evidence, could we perhaps surmise that those Celtic tribes which adopted the ritual of the "groundless burials" were under some form of dependence from the Germans?

The third riddle is the following one. In the descriptions of the written sources - and this has already been pointed out16 - the Cimbri and the Teutons appear to be strongly Celticised. Their leaders have Celtic names: Boeorix, Lugius, Cesarix. Sertorius, who later led an uprising in Spain against the central Roman government, served in his young years as an officer in the army of Marius, and near the Aquae Sextiae undertook to spy out the enemy camp, put on Celtic dress and learned the Celtic language. (Plutarch. Sertorius, III). The Cimbri and Teutons had Celtic weapons: helmets made to resemble the heads and jaws of wild beasts, long and heavy swords, and large shields. It would have been difficult to go down the icy slopes of the Alps - as the Cimbri used to do (Plutarch. Caius Marius, 23) - on the relatively small oval shields with a protruding boss, which were widely used in the north of Europe. Only the large Celtic shields with a longitudinal rib could serve as a sledge.
Even taking into account the twenty years of constant clashes of the Cimbri and Teutons with the Celtic tribes, and their mutual military expeditions, the Celticisation of the Cimbri and Teutons would seem to have gone too far. Perhaps, they started their military actions in Gaul already in a Celticised state? One could suppose that taking part in those raids of the Cimbri and Teutons were not so much those bearers of the Jastorf culture who came from Jutland, but rather the Germans from the southern regions of that culture (understood in the broad sense of the term), for instance, from the Bodenbach-Podmokly group, which was just then transforming into the Kobyly group. It may be for that reason that no archaeological evidence of northern influence has so far been discovered along the migratory routes of the Cimbri and Teutons.

And the final riddle concerns those written sources which seem absolutely improbable. For instance, Posidonius, the contemporary of the events discussed, spoke of the Cimbri migrating as far as the Maeotis. (Strabo, VII, 2, 2). Plutarch called the Teutons "Celto-Scythians", said that they were mixed tribes coming from the area between Celtica and "that part of Scythia which is near Pontus", and compared them to the Cimmerians. (Plutarch. Caius Marius, IX) If that were true, then these arrivals from Denmark and northern Germany should have reached the regions inhabited by the carriers of the Przeworsk, Poienes,t,i-Lukashevka and Zarubintsy cultures. However, at the turn of the 2nd-1st centuries BC all these cultures were at the peak of their development, and we know of no major changes in them caused by the arrival of a new population. On the other hand, S.P. Patchkova has suggested that the Dolinyany cemetery in the Bukovina region was founded just at that time by a group of arrivals from the middle reaches of the Oder.18

However, as will be shown in the following chapters, the really major changes involving the whole of Central and Eastern Europe, were taking place at the turn of the 3rd-2nd centuries BC. To that time, too, relates the migration of the population from the nucleus of the Jastorf culture to the south and east, the formation of the Bodenbach-Podmokly and Gubin groups, and, later, of the Latenised cultures mentioned above. If the massive migrations of the barbarians from Jutland and northern Germany did take place, they should have occurred exactly one hundred years before their first clash with the Romans. Both the Cimbri and the Teutons could have taken part in these migrations, which could have reached as far as Maeotis. Later on, these tribes (possibly, at the head of various groups of population from the areas on the north-eastern boundaries of the Celtic world) tried to conquer Celtica and would have succeeded, had they not been deferred by the legions of Marius. The legends about the migration from the northern homeland - retained in the barbaric milieu - were interpreted by mistake by the classical authors as relating to the near past. If that explanation is correct, then the riddles discussed above can be solved.

** These processes are analysed thoroughly in the monograph by Karl Peschel19.'


Torsten