�n�tick� sekeromlaty se sedlovit�m �l�bkme v �ech�ch

�n�tick� sekeromlaty se sedlovit�m �l�bkem v �ech�ch.
Kamenn� symboly v dob� bronzu?

Jan Turek - Vladim�r Dan��ek

Tento �l�nek nahrazuje p��sp�vek J. Turka na symposiu v Kravsku: Symbolika poh�ebn�ho ritu zvoncovit�ch poh�r�.

V obdob� kultury �n�tick� se v �ech�ch a na Morav� objevuj� tak zvan� sekeromlaty se sedlovit�m �l�bkem. Jsou vyrobeny p�ev�n� z jednoho typu horniny a v hmotn� kultu�e star�� doby bronzov� p�edstavuj� relikt kamenn�ch n�stroj� a zbran� eneolitick�ch. Tento p��sp�vek si neklade za c�l �pln� soupis n�lez� t�chto kamenn�ch n�stroj� v �ech�ch a j�drem sledovan�ho souboru jsou p�edev��m exempl��e z nalezi�� v Praze a okol�.

P��slu�nost tohoto typu artefakt� do obdob� kultury �n�tick� byla rozpozn�na ji� A. Stock�m (Stock� 1928, 12, Tab. XIX). Jen ve dvou p��padech poch�z� n�lez sekeromlatu z jasn� definovan�ho n�lezov�ho celku. Jde o n�lez z kostrov�ho hrobu �. XXIII z Polep (Dvo��k 1926/1927) a ze s�dli�tn� j�my z ��blic (Neustupn� 1936-38, 122-125, obr. 1:4). V�t�ina ze zde prezentovan�ch n�lez� jsou zlomky poch�zej�c� p�ev�n� z povrchov�ch n�lez� na polykulturn�ch v��inn�ch s�dli�t�ch v Praze a okol�. Vzhledem k pom�rn� zna�n�mu mno�stv� t�chto artefakt� ulo�en�ch v r�zn�ch muzejn�ch sb�rk�ch jak v �ech�ch tak i na Morav� lze jen litovat �e jen tak mal� pod�l n�lez� poch�z� z jednozna�n� definovan�ch celk�. Ani jeden ze zn�m�ch kontext� nav�c nenapom�h� jednozna�n� interpretaci funkce t�chto p�edm�t�. Sekeromlaty b�valy nej�ast�ji interpretov�ny jako palice na roztlouk�n� m�d�n� rudy (Neustupn� 1936-38. Interpretace z�ejm� ztoto��uje sekeromlaty s masivn�mi mlaty s ob�n�m �l�bkem. Tyto mlaty, v�t�inou vyr�b�n� z valoun�, byly skute�n� pou��v�ny k t�k� pr�ci patrn� souvisej�c� s roztlouk�n�m hornin a jsou zn�m� z v�ce prav�k�ch obdob�. ��dn� pracovn� stopy na sekeromlatech se sedlovit�m �l�bkem v�ak nenasv�d�uj� podobn� hrub� a nesporn� abrazivn� funkci. Dal��m z argument� proti t�to interpretaci je fakt, �e zpracov�n� m�d�n� rudy prob�halo v�t�inou p��mo v m�st� lo�iska co� nesouhlas� s akumulac� n�lez� takov�chto �specializovan�ch� n�stroj� p�ev�n� ve st�edn�ch �ech�ch a nikoliv v bl�zkosti zn�m�ch lo�isek m�d�n� rudy. Jin� interpretace sp�e uva�uje o jejich d�evorubeck�m vyu�it� (Pleiner � Rybov� 1978, 364). V obou p��padech je v�ak t�eba p�ipomenout velkou metrickou variabilitu t�chto n�stroj�. Tak t�eba ve vzorku n�mi analyzovan�m se d�lka jednotliv�ch exempl��e pohybuje od 7,4 do 26,2 cm. Proto zva�ujeme-li praktick� vyu�it� sekeromlat� jako n�stroj� je z�ejm� mo�n� uva�ovat o v�ce r�zn�ch funkc�ch v z�vislosti na rozm�rech jednotliv�ch artefakt�, kter� si i p�es sv� r�zn� uplatn�n� uchov�valy podobnou formu.

Povrch sekeromlat� byl ve v�t�in� p��pad� zdrsn�n jemn�m otlouk�n�m � pemrlov�n�m (term�n u��van� nap�. ve stavebnictv� pro z�m�rn� zdrsn�n� plochy kamene). Zpravidla jen ost�� a partie �l�bku, kter� byly zakryty �vazem k top�rku, z�staly hladk�. Horn� ��st sekeromlatu je v�dy zbrou�ena do plochy, v n�kter�ch publikac�ch je tato plocha myln� pova�ov�na za spodn� ��st artefaktu, na kterou m�lo navazovat top�rko (Neustupn� 1936-38, 122-123, ), v Prav�k�ch d�jin�ch �ech je v�ak ��blick� sekeromlat ji� zobrazen spr�vn� (Pleiner � Rybov� 1978, 340 � Fig. 90:20). Ost�� sm�rem dol� m�rn� obloukovit� ustupuje. T�l sekeromlat� b�v� obl�, n�kdy m�rn� zahrocen�, �asto p�ipom�naj�c� spole�n� s tvarov�n�m sedla falus.

Velmi v�znamnou charakteristikou sekeromlat� se �l�bkem je volba kamenn� suroviny. V na�em souboru byly t�m�� v�echny p�edm�ty vyrobeny z porfyritu. Jde o efusivn� paleovulkanickou horninu, jej� metamorf�za �asto zt�uje petrografickou diagn�zu. Porfyrit m��e lok�ln� nab�vat r�zn�ch barev od �ern� a �ed�, p�es zelenavou a� po na�ervenalou a vyzna�uje se sv�tlej��mi �i tmav��mi vyrostlicemi. U n�s se porfyrity vyskytuj� p�edev��m v k�ivokl�tsko-rokycansk�m �i kozohorsk�m p�smu. Prvn� jmenovan� oblast je tvo�ena pruhem staropaleozoick�ch efusivn�ch prvohorn�ch hornin,kter� vystupuj� p�i z�padn�m okraji Barrandienu ve sm�ru severov�chod-jihoz�pad mezi K�ivokl�tem a Lhotou u Zbiroha, v d�lce 28 km a ��ce 4-6km. Petrografick� povaha efusiv je pom�rn� velmi m�lo zn�ma. P�smo je tvo�eno porfyrick�mi, zna�n� metamorfovan�mi horninami, v�t�inou velmi jemnozrnn�mi a felsitick�mi. Severoz�padn� ��st p�sma je budov�na p�ev�n� porfyrity, jihov�chodn� pak k�emenn�mi porfyry. Ve star�� dob� bronzov� tak, po obdob� z�v�ru eneolitu vyzna�uj�c�ho se heterogenn� volbou surovin, nast�v� op�t doba ur�it� fixace na jeden typ suroviny. Specificky volen� surovina se nav�c poj� s konkr�tn� typ artefaktu.

N�lezy sekeromlat� se sedlovit�m �l�bkem se z�ejm� v�� sp�e k pozd�j��m f�z�m �n�tick� kultury. Pro obdob� proto�n�tick� nejsou tyto n�stroje zat�m dolo�eny, v hrobech tohoto obdob� byly v �ech�ch dokumentov�ny jen 3 kamenn� sekery a p�ibli�n� stejn� po�et seker pazourkov�ch (Matou�ek 1982). Tak� n�lezy dal��ch typ� kamenn�ch sekeromlat� v �n�tick�ch hrobech jsou pom�rn� vz�cn�. Lze zm�nit vrtan� sekeromlaty z hrobu LVIII v B�ezn� u Loun (Pleiner � Rybov� 1978, 370-371, obr. 103:1) nebo z mohyly v Litoradic�ch (H�jek 1954,176, 133, Obr. 9:10), �i p��padn� sekeromlat z Dob�ichovic (Neustupn� 1943, 147, Abb. 9:2a, b). N�kter� z t�chto n�lez� v�ak mohou b�t druhotn� u��van� star�� sekeromlaty, tak jako tomu bylo v p��pad� neolitick�ho sekeromlatu v jednom ze staro�n�tick�ch hrob� v Praze - Jinonic�ch (J. Kov��k, nepublikovan� v�zkum z roku 1984).

Brand�sko � mal� sekeromlat vyroben� z �ern�ho jemnozrnn�ho porfyritu (obr. 3:4), ulo�en ve sb�rk�ch OM v Brand�se nad Labem.

Horom��ice (okr. Praha-z�pad) �pln� zachovan� sekeromlat, sv�tle �ed� porfyrit, ulo�en�: St�edo�esk� muzeum v Roztok�ch u Prahy, p�. �.149/71, inv. �. 23098, zde nezobrazen.

Holubice (okr. Kladno) �pln� zachovan� sekeromlat, sv�tle �ed� porfyrit, ulo�en�: St�edo�esk� muzeum v Roztok�ch u Prahy, inv. �. 23059, zde nezobrazen.

Praha-Bohnice � Z�mka, zlomek b�itu se sedlem ze �ed�ho porfyritu (obr.5:2) a dva zlomky porfyritov�ch polotovar� sekeromlat� se sedlovit�m �l�bkem (obr. 5:3 a 4), ulo�eno v Muzeu hl. m. Prahy.

Praha � ��rka � sedm zlomk� sekeromlat�, v�echny vyrobeny z r�zn�ch druh� porfyritu (obr. 4:1-6 a 5:1), ulo�eno v Muzeu hl. m. Prahy.

Praha-Vino� � Kamenn� st�l, dva zlomky sekeromlat� z �ed�ho (obr. 3:3) a hn�do�erven�ho (obr. 3:2) porfyritu. Z t�to lokality poch�z� j�t� jeden �n�tick� sekeromlat vrtan� vyroben� rovn� z porfyritu (Turek � Dan��ek � Kostka 1998)

Praha � bli�� nalezi�t� nezn�m�. Mas�vn� sekeromlat s p�ev�n� pemrlovan�m t�lem a le�t�n�m ost��m a �l�bkem (obr. 2). Na vrchn� ploch� stran� se snad dokonce jev� ole�t�n� prou�ek snad jako poz�statek respektive otisk jak�hosi kl�nku, kter� mohl b�t zato�en do �vazu sekery k top�rku.

Z�py (okr. Praha-v�chod) � sekeromlat z tmav� hn�d�ho porfyritu (obr. 3:1), n�lez je ulo�en ve sb�rk�ch OM v Brand�se nad Labem (p�.�. 471/81).

Chceme-li se pokusit interpretovat v�znam kamenn�ch sekeromlat� v kultu�e �n�tick� je t�eba tak u�init v kontextu hmotn� kultury tohoto obdob�. V dob� pln� rozvinut� kultury �n�tick� byly ji� kamenn� sekery, jako hlavn� d�evoobr�b�c� n�stroj pln� nahrazeny sekerami bronzov�mi. Bronzov� sekery, kter� zn�me zpravidla z depot� se neobjevuj� v poh�ebn�ch n�lezech a ur�itou presti�n� roli v poh�ebn� v�bav� tak hraj� bronzov� d�ky, p��padn� v�jime�n� kamenn� �i bronzov� sekeromlaty (Pleiner � Rybov� 1978, 370-371, obr. 103:1, 2). Je mo�n�, �e zde diskutovan� kamenn� sekeromlaty byly jak�msi reliktem star��ch eneolitick�ch symbol� moci, nebo �e slou�ily k n�jak�m ritualizovan�m �i p��mo ritu�ln�m �kon�m a jako ur�it� projev konservatismu p�e��valy i v dob� �irok�ho uplatn�n� bronzu. Podobn� tomu bylo t�eba v p��pad� pazourkov�ch no��, kter� byly tradi�n� pou��v�ny na ritu�ln� por�ku a porcov�n� zv��at v egyptsk�ch z�du�n�ch chr�mech je�t� v obdob� Nov� ��e, ba i v dob� ��msk� (Ikram 1995, 69-70).

Sv�j symbolick� v�znam mohla v p��pad� �n�tick�ch sekeromlat� hr�t tak� ortodoxn� volba specifick�ho typu kamenn� suroviny, ale i z�m�rn� zdrsn�n� jejich povrchu, co� mohlo m�t v�znam jako opak hladk�ho povrchu bronzov�ch odlitk�. V�znamn�m aspektem pro hodnocen� symboliky sekeromlat� se �l�bkem m��e b�t ji� zm�n�n� falick� tvar. Toto m��e snad m�t n�jakou souvislost se symbolismem mu�sk�ch patriarch�ln�ch princip� tak, jak jsou p�edpokl�d�ny pro p�edchoz� obdob� z�v�ru eneolitu (Neustupny 1967). Doklad falick� symboliky zn�me nap��klad z hrobu kultury zvoncovit�ch poh�r� ze Stehel�evsi (H�jek 1961). Falick� konotace jsou p�edpokl�d�ny tak� pro dal�� prav�k� kamenn� n�stroje (Patton 1993). Mu�sk� �i falick� symbolismus kamenn�ch seker je z�ejm� reprezentov�n tak� v neolitick�ch armorick�ch galeriov�ch hrobk�ch v Bretani, kde �ensk� figurky b�vaj� nal�z�ny ve vchodov�ch parti�ch a motivy seker v hlavn� poh�ebn� komo�e. M. Patton rovn� popisuje symbolick� ulo�en� sekery v hrobce �Grand Tumulus� v Man�-er-Hro�k v Bretani. Dva kulovit� z�v�sky a velk� kamenn� sekera s hrotit�m t�lem pronikaj�c�m do hlazen�ho kamenn�ho krou�ku. P�edm�ty byly z�ejm� z�m�rn� sestaveny tak, aby personifikovaly mu�sk� a �ensk� genit�lie v symbolick�m spojen� pohlavn�ho aktu (Patton 1993, 31, plate 2.2.). Podobn� symbolika m��e b�t spat�ov�na v rytin� na st�n� dal�� breta�sk� chodbovit� hrobky v Gavrinis zobrazuj�c� sekeru upevn�nou do obj�mky v top�rku (Patton 1993, 31, figure 2.6.).

Sekeromlaty se sedlovit�m �l�bkem v �esk� a moravsk� �n�tick� kultu�e mohou b�t snad pova�ov�ny za poz�statky eneolitick�ho symbolismu, kter� p�e�ily a� do pln� rozvinut� doby bronzov� pr�v� d�ky ur�it� ritu�ln� a spole�ensk� tradici.

The �n�tice saddle groove battle axes in Bohemia. Stone symbols in the age of bronze.

Several stone saddle groove battle axes were recorded in Bohemia and Moravia. These stone artefacts are usually unstratified isolated finds. Their connection to the early Bronze Age �n�tice Culture was established according to finds from a burial context at Polepy (grave XXIII, Dvo��k 1926/1927) and from a settlement pit excavated in Prague-��blice (Neustupn�, J. 1937). Their surface is usually purposely coarsend and only these parts that were originally covered with the hafting bondage remained polished. The butt of the battle-axes is usually rounded or slightly pointed resembling a phallus in its shape. These battle-axes appear in the fully developed �n�tice Culture, when the bronze axes and other bronze made woodworking tools were commonly used. The puzzle is the use of these stone battle-axes in the time of bronze tools. Some interpretations suggest them to be pounders for crouching the copper ore (Neustupn�, J. 1936-38, Pleiner � Rybov� 1978, 340 � Fig. 90:20, 364). This explanation does not seem to be supported by the varying dimensions of these artefacts (lenght 7-26 cm) and any traces of wear that could possibly suggest their use for this kind of work has not been recorded. Also the crushing and processing of ore is usually taking place right on the spot, where it was extracted. These battle-axes are however distributed all over the �n�tice settled area and they do not seem to concentrate around the known outcrops of the copper ore. The vast majority of saddle groove battle-axes were made of Proterozoic porhyrite, this igneous rock has its natural appearance in the K�ivokl�t-Rokycany area. The preference for this type of material is very strong. In the classical phase of the �n�tice Culture bronze became the common material for production of tools. After almost two thousand years of knowledge of copper metallurgy In Central Europe, stone was fully substituted by metal. This change seems to have been rapid and happened during some transition period, which was probably the Proto- and Early �n�tice Culture. Unfortunately tools and weapons appear only rarely in the burial context of the Early �n�tice Culture (Matou�ek 1982) and as the evidence of settlement finds is scarce it is very difficult to document this process of transition. Within the Proto-�n�tice cemeteries in Bohemia only 3 axes were recorded, two exotica flint axes imported from Northern Europe and one polished one. The bronze axes became common in the classical period of the �n�tice Culture, however the majority of them are known from hoards. In the classical �n�tice graves axes of both materials are generally rare. This means that axes were not used as funerary goods, they however appear in hoards as votive offerings. In the case of stone battle-axes the interpretation of their meaning is limited by the lack of information on the context of their deposition. I presume their use was mainly symbolic, a kind of relic of the old symbols of power as they were used in the Corded Ware Culture. Most of the woodworking was maintained by the new bronze tools so what practical function might these stone battle-axes have had? It may well be possible, that they were used for ritual purposes of some kind, such was the case of flint knives used in Egypt throughout the New Kingdom up to the Roman period for ritual butchering (for further discussion see Ikram 1995,69-70). This interpretation should be considered in the context of other characteristics of these battle-axes, such as the deliberate choice of the same raw material for most of them, great variability in their sizes, their pecked-roughened surface which seems to be in opposition to smooth metal and last but not least their distinctive phallic shape. This may suggest a certain continuity of the symbolism of male patriarch principles, as is presumed for the preceding Late Eneolithic period (Neustupn� 1967). The evidence of stone phallic symbols is known from the Bell Beaker grave from Stehel�eves in Central Bohemia (H�jek 1961). The phallic connotation of some prehistoric stone axes has also been considered (Patton 1993). Male or phallic symbolism of axes seems to be represented in some Neolithic Armorican gallery graves, where female figurines are found in the antechamber and an axe motive in the main burial chamber. M. Patton also describes a symbolic deposition found in a chamber of the Grand Tumulus of Man�-er-Hro�k in Brittany. Two spherical pendants and a large axe with pointed butt-end are penetrating a polished stone ring. These artefacts are probably supposed to act as a personification of male and female genitals arranged into the position of a symbolic intercourse (Patton 1993, 31, Plate 2.2.). A similar symbolic expression may be seen in the carving of a �hafted axe� found in the passage grave of Gavrinis (Patton 1993, 31, figure 2.6.).

It is possible that the battle axes with the saddle groove of the �n�tice Culture are a kind of stone relic of Eneolithic symbolism that survived into the period of the fully developed Bronze Age thanks to some kind of ritual or social tradition.

Dvo��k, F. 1926/1927: Poh�ebi�t� �n�tick� kultury v Polepech u Kol�na � Das Gr�brfeld der Aunjetitzer Kultur von Polep bei Kol�n, Pam�tky archeologick� 35, 22-44.

Edmonds, M. 1995: Stone tools and Society. Working Stone in Neolithic and Bronze Age Britain, Batsford, London.

H�jek, L. 1954: Ji�n� �echy ve star�� dob� bronzov�, La Bohême m�ridionale à l��ge du bronze ancien, Pam�tky archeologick� 45,115-192.

H�jek, L. 1961: Kostrov� hrob kultury zvoncovit�ch poh�r� ze Stehel�evsi - Ein Skelettgrab der Glockenbecherkultur aus Stehel�eves, Pam�tky archeologick� 62, 138-148.

Ikram, S. 1995: Choice cuts. Meat production in Ancient Egypt. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 69, Leuven.

Matou�ek, V. 1982: Poh�ebn� ritus ran� �n�tick� kultury v �ech�ch � Der Grabritus der fr�hen Aunjetitzer Kultur in B�hmen. Praehistorica X � Varia Archaeologica 3, Praha, 33-52

Neustupn�, E. 1967: K po��tk�m patriarch�tu ve st�edn� Evrop� � The beginnings of patriarchy in Central Europe, Praha.

Neustupn�, J. 1936-38: �n�tick� z�va�� a sekeromlaty se �l�bkem, Aunjetitzer Tongevichte und Rillen�xte. Pam�tky archeologick� 41, 122-125.

Neustupn�, J. 1943: Schnurkeramische Vorl�ufer der Aunjetitzer Hammer�xte aus Stein, Wiener Pr�historische Zeitschrift 30.

Patton, M. 1993: Statements in stone. Monuments and society in Neolithic Brittany. Routledge, London and New York.

Turek, J. 1997: N�lez misky typu �Lubla�sk�ch blat� z Prahy ��rky. �vahy o v�znamu eneolitick�ch opevn�n�ch v��inn�ch s�dli�t. The bowl of the �Laibacher Moor� type from Prague - ��rka. Thoughts on the social significance of Eneolithic fortifications. Archaeologica Pragensia 13, 29-37.

Turek, J. � Dan��ek, V. � Kostka, M. 1998: Kamenn� st�l - polykulturn� prav�k� s�dli�t� v Praze Vino�i. The non-destructive survey of the prehistoric site �Kamenn� st�l� at Prague - Vino�. Archaeologica Pragensia 14.