Ancient Warriors

o, realmente, al estudio de los ocho ejemplares que han sido devueltos España, como corolario de obras anteriores, fundamentalmente la publicada en 2014 por el mismo Graells junto a Alberto Lorrio y Fernando Quesada (2014). La monografía se justifica ampliamente por el hecho de aprovechar la oportunidad de estudiar a fondo un buen grupo de estos cascos, gracias a su donación por parte del propietario anterior-Christian Levett-, al Gobierno de Aragón. Es, como dicen los editores de la obra, «la culminación parcial de un proceso de recuperación de patrimonio expoliado».

The village of Pet Mogili is located in the southern part of the Nova Zagora plain, where it reaches the lower ground between the Svetiiliiski and Monastery Hills and connects with the low parts of the relief in the neighbouring Tundzha geomorphological region (Fig. 1–2).
Looters excavated the barrow in the end of 2005 and the beginning of 2006. On the top of the mound, they dug a rectangular trench, 2 m wide, 4 m long and 5.50 m deep (Fig. 4). Various artefacts were found in the soil from the ditch: fragments of various ceramic vessels (including black-glazed wares, both Thracian grey-colour wheel-made and handmade vases, amphorae), parts of iron objects (including a fragment of a spearhead), many pieces of wooden beams, and flakes of bronze. In the western part of ditch, the looters unearthed a wooden structure that continues towards the base of the mound. Because of this attemted intervention in the barrow, The National Institute for Monuments of Culture and the Ministry of Culture of Bulgaria organized a committee, on to the barrow. The commission which decided that o be made rescue excavations should be organized of the already demolished burial structure. Thus, at the beginning of 2006, rescue investigations of the mound were undertaken.
The tumulus is part of a necropolis that comprises four mounds in the Golyamata Mogila (Large Mound) locality (Fig. 5–6). The Large Tumulus (Fig. 7) is the largest, about 50 m in diameter and with a maximum height of about 6 m (elevation 178 m). The investigations focused on the southwestern quadrant of the barrow, that covered the looted burial structure.
Stratigraphy (Fig. 8–9)
A mound of homogeneous black soil with an approximate diameter of 26 m and height 2, 30 m was piled on the top of the hill. On top of it, there were split stones of various size (from very small to very large) and potsherds (primarily amphorae). The next layer is of a black soil (probably ancient chernozem), with an approximate diameter of 23–24 m and 1.80 m high in the central part. Over the second layer, a layer of different colour and texture follows, predominantly of white clay with crumbly blue-green stones. Streaks of grayish-whitish earth interspersed with lumps of black earth could be seen in this layer. This embankment has an approximate diameter of 36–40 m and a maximum height of 2.50 m. The height of 1.30 m in the central part indicates that the mound has spread over time. No artefacts were found in these layers. On the top, there is a layer of grey-brown soil, 0.40–0.50 m thick, while in the parts where there were later digs (by looters or others) it reaches a depth of 1.00–1.20 m.
Features
The excavation revealed ten graves in the top layer of the mound (southwestern quadrant), at depths between 0.10 and 0.50 m (Fig. 10). Probably, the deceased were laid in plain pits. The bodies were in extended supine position with folded arms and heads to the west (Fig. 11). In one of the graves, traces of a 0,60 m wide wooden coffin were revealed grave goods. The exact date of the burials cannot be determined, but all graves are Christian. The looted burial structure (no. 11, Fig. 12) was built on an already existing small mound, probably from the Bronze Age. Three pits were dug into one another at the top of that mound. The first one is oval-shaped with measurements of 5.50 x 7.20 m and a depth of 0.80 m. The second pit is rectangular with sloping walls, maximum dimensions of 3.50 x 4.50 m and depth of 0.40 m.
The third and smallest pit is also rectangular dug in the bottom of the second one, with dimensions 1.50 x 2.70 m and 0.25 m deep. A wooden sarcophagus (Figs. 12–13) was built in the third pit. The sarcophagus was destroyed by the looters almost entirely. Separate parts of its base and the vertical walls were preserved in situ (Figs. 13–15). According to the preserved wooden pieces, the dimensions of the sarcophagus were 2.65 x 1.30 m. The wooden sarcophagus is extremely crudely built of massive oak planks. On the planks of the floor, there were traces of white powder (?) (Fig. 15). The deceased was cremated outside of the grave and the burnt remains were laid in the wooden sarcophagus. Then the grave goods were placed in the sarcophagus and it was probably closed with a cover of wooden beams. Then the pit was filled with split stones, rising to a height of 0.70 m and forming a small mound. Over the stone tumulus, there was a cover, probably of perishable materials – wood, wattle, etc. Thereby, the soil could not seep between the stones and an airtight chamber was formed enabling the preservation of the wood.
Funerary rituals were performed above the stone mound and around it in a radius of about 10 m. Potsherds (including amphorae, red-figure pottery, grey monochrome ceramic vessels and handmade pots), burnt bone fragments and small charcoals were discovered between the stones of the mound (Figs. 16–17). A mound of chernozem and white soil was piled above the ritual platform.
Grave no. 12 is of interest (Fig. 18). It is cremation carried outside the tumulus. The burnt remains were collected, cleaned (probably washed) and placed in a ceramic vessel (cinerary urn), buried in the mound. The homogeneity of the mound in this part makes it difficult to determine whether the container was placed in a separate pit or in the one dug for the Grave no. 11. The grave is associated with the rich burial No. 11, which is apparent from the intact ritual platform above it and the sherds of krater-like vessels that are near the urn and the ritual platform. In the cinerary urn, parts of two highly corroded iron fibulae and an iron knife were found mixed with the cremated bones.
Grave no. 11
The vast majority of the finds were revealed in a fragmented state, overlooked or neglected by the robbers.
Weaponry
The elements of the offensive weapons and the armour of the deceased warrior were unearthed in the western part of the wooden sarcophagus.
Offensive weapons
In the grave, numerous pieces of a sword were found. Its type cannot be precisely determined because of their fragmentation and active corrosion. Judging by separate elements, it could be assumed that the fragments belong to a machaira, xiphos or akinakes (Cat.no. 11.1; Fig. 21). More fragments of spearheads were found (Cat.nos. 11.2–3; Fig. 22, 1) with a preserved part of the wooden shaft in one of the sockets (Fig. 22, 1-б); a spear-butt (σαυρωτήρ) (Cat.no. 11.4; Fig. 22, 2); two types of arrowheads, some with wooden shafts coloured in red (Cat.no. 11.5; Fig. 23–24); several shafts of arrows that became stuck to a metal object that is not related to them (Fig. 24, 1); as well as fragments of a scabbard or sword handle (Fig. 32, 2).
Armour
In the Pet Mogili burial, there were also iron scales (Cat. no. 11.6, Fig. 25–27) that belong to an object that is not fully preserved or deposited in its entirety. The scales are applied to leather (Fig. 25). The typological and chronological similarity between the scales from Gorski Izvor and Pet Mogili as well as the undertaken analysis indicate that the piece of armour placed in the Large Tumulus near the village of Pet Mogili is a scale helmet.The elongated-conical shape and dimensions (total height c. 35–40 cm) of the object support its identification as a scale helmet (Fig. 26). Apart from the chronology of the burial and the use of specific types of armour during this period, another primary argument for interpreting the object, as a scale helmet is a bimetal (gold and iron) socket (Cat.no. 11.7, Fig. 27, 1). The object is hollow; and was attached to another part, resembling a small stand (Fig. 27, 1). A scale helmet in Vasil Bojkov Collection has a similar socket (Marazov 2011, 94, Cat.no. 6, Marazov and others 2012, 141, 158, Cat.no. 6). Onthe helmet from the private collection, this extra piece is mounted at the top of the calotte, as is the case with the Pet Mogli helmet (Figs. 26, 2; 27, 2). The small size (length 6 cm, see Cat.no.11.7), the shape and the place of the object, as well as the similar example in Vasil Bojkov Collection give us reason to identify the shaft from Pet Mogili as an element on the calotte of the scale helmet used by the warrior. The discovery of bell cuirass elements in the Large Tumulus near the village of Pet Mogili is also one of the main arguments that a scale helmet was placed in Grave 11. We suppose that elements from a bell cuirass were preserved in the grave on the base of an iron fragment (No. 11.8, Fig. 28, 1). The piece is the most
specific detail of the bell cuirass conical extension.....

The summary is too long, according to the requirements of the Academia, so you can see the full summary in the article

Scopo di questo lavoro è la revisione della documentazione riguardante la panoplia trovata nella tomba 103 di Braida di Vaglio grazie a un'analisi filologica e allo studio del più ampio contesto delle armi e armature italiche rinvenute nell'area nord-lucana e nella Daunia ofantina tra il VI e l'inizio del V sec. a.C.

The papers collected in this volume are dedicated to different case studies, focusing on the archaeological and cultural contexts of ancient weapons, their practical and symbolic use, and the complexity of their technological features.

Ergonomic design, the finest selection of materials, and high-developed technological background: pre-, protohistoric and classical weapons have always been some of the most appreciated items by warfare specialists all over the world. Modern archaeology goes beyond the interest in the exterior appearance of ancient weapons and considers the single objects as starting points to explore new research avenues. Far from being objects for amateurs and collectors, ancient weapons become protagonists in historical and scientific reconstructions, with a huge potential as sources of knowledge.

In Nuragic Sardinia, warrior ideals were woven into the production of iconic bronze statuettes and related warrior panoplies, all presented at central sanctuaries as ceremonial offerings. To unveil the syntax of Nuragic warrior imagery of the Final Bronze Age and Early Iron Age, this study employs network analysis and develops a dual anthropological perspective of transculture and warriorhood
on the analytical outcome. The network analysis revealed warrior features of weaponry in Sardinia shared with certain other regions in the Near East, the Mediterranean and Europe. The interconnection of strong and weak ties revealed warrior identities on scales varying from local to supraregional. Overall, the study confirms that weaponry, and perhaps even warriors, were transcultural commodities which were appropriated on local and regional levels. The study makes it clear that Nuragic polities appropriated what we can term ‘transcultural warriorhood’ and made it local in a manner of speaking in the island’s politics and beliefs. Whilst Nuragic warrior representations undoubtedly possess a local stylistic character, they also reflect a sense of belonging to, and knowledge
of, other communities in which war, cult and metal intersected with political forms of power at this time.

For more than 150 years, the prehistoric civilizations of  the East Mediterranean have fascinated and attracted numerous scholars interested both in the various manifestations of  the respective social order within this geographical zone, and by the role and impact these civilizations may have had on the neighbouring regions.
As one would expect, our knowledge is growing continuously, triggered by new archaeological research, the progress of  interdisciplinary investigations of  archaeological science, and the diversification of theoretical approaches interpreting material culture from an anthropological perspective. The speed of these accumulations is increasing rapidly, while the number of  studies and the variety and complexity of the themes is also continuously growing. That is why the periodic organization of  conferences on welldefined themes and the publication of  the respective volumes are absolutely necessary, not only in order to be able to integrate the new data into the broader picture, but also for the redefinition of  the state of research within certain working areas and to show the experimental investigation of  new research directions.
The present volume is the outcome of  a conference with the same title organized at Tulcea, Romania, between the 10th and the 13th of  November 2017, dedicated to the memory of  Professor Alexandru Vulpe. Four prestigious institutions, two from Romania (the Gavrilă Simion Eco-Museum Research Institute, Tulcea and the Vasile Pârvan Institute of  Archaeology, Bucharest) and two from Germany (the Institut für und Frühgeschichte und Vorderasiatische Archäologie, Heidelberg and the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Eurasien Abteilung, Berlin), with the generous support of  the Mayor’s Office in Tulcea, managed to bring together over 50 scholars, most of  them friends, colleagues, collaborators, students or simply acquaintances of  Professor Vulpe. The intention of  the organizers was to provide a suitable environment for sharing opinions and experience, and for an open and positive discussion, to recognize the current state of  research on the topic, and to establish stronger connections for future collaboration in this field.
Contacts among human communities from various cultural areas, the circulation of  people, ideas and objects, or the identification of  the main communication routes as well as their role in shaping prehistoric societies are likely to remain forever topics of  intense discussion within archaeology. The relations between the Carpathian-Balkan area and the Aegean during the Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age was one of  the main themes of  study for Alexandru Vulpe. As a supporter of  the idea of  Ex oriente lux, Vulpe always argued for the major role played by the Helladic civilization in the cultural development of  the Carpathian Balkan area. The lectures delivered at the Tulcea conference and the papers published in the present volume highlight once again the complexity of  these connections and the multitude of  perspectives revealed when approaching such a theme.
Although the title of  the volume indicates the main geographic areas in question, contributions from other cultural areas (i.e. Central Europe, the Middle Danube, Northern Pontic area, etc.), whose societies were in close contact with those of  the Balkans, were also welcome. The four sections grouping the studies in the volume had not been established from the very beginning; they are the result of  the subjects approached by the authors. Reading the papers attentively, one notices the diversity of  the subjects and approaches and, in most cases, the novelty of  the ideas expressed. We hope that the publication will provide research with a reference volume, opening new perspectives on the matters discussed. The present work is the result of  the common effort of  all authors, spanning a period of  over three years. We wish to thank all contributors for their promptness and seriousness in answering our invitation to the volume, as well as for the openness and patience showed during the entire editing process. We are very much indebted to the Mayor’s Office of  the community of  Tulcea for the financial help and for the hospitality provided to the participants of  the conference. Special thanks go to Douglas Fear (Heidelberg) for the careful language editing of  the contributions to this volume.