Home Page
English
Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România, 1983 - 2012.
Rapoarte preliminare de cercetare arheologică

Raport de cercetare arheologică

Teleac | Comuna: Ciugud | Judeţ: Alba | Punct: Gruşeţ - Hârburi | Anul: 2018

Anul   2018
Epoca
Epoca bronzului;
Hallstatt
Perioade
Epoca bronzului târziu;
Hallstatt mijlociu
Categorie
Domestic
Tipuri de sit
Aşezare fortificată
Localizare pe hartă   Localizează pe harta României
Judet   Alba
Localitate   Teleac
Comuna   Ciugud
Punct
Gruşeţ - Hârburi
Sector   
Toponim   
Persoane implicate și instituții
NumePrenumerolInstituție
Anghel Dan Universitatea "1 Decembrie 1918", Alba Iulia
Bălan Gabriel Muzeul Naţional al Unirii, Alba Iulia
Burlacu-Timofte Raluca Muzeul Naţional al Unirii, Alba Iulia
Ciugudean Horia responsabil Muzeul Naţional al Unirii, Alba Iulia
Ciută Beatrice Universitatea "1 Decembrie 1918", Alba Iulia
Hansen Svend Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Eurasien Abteilung, Berlin, Germany
Höhler-Brockmann Hajo Römisch-Germanische Kommission, Frankfurt am Main
Kalmbach Johannes Römisch-Germanische Kommission, Frankfurt am Main
Mărcuți Florentina Arheolog independent
Matiş Anca Muzeul Naţional al Unirii, Alba Iulia
Rustoiu Gabriel Tiberiu Muzeul Naţional al Unirii, Alba Iulia
Uhnér Claes Römisch-Germanische Kommission, Frankfurt am Main
Cod RAN    1133.01
Raport Archaeological research at the Teleac hillfort started in 2016 as part of the LOEWE project „Prähistorische Konfliktforschung: Burgen der Bronzezeit zwischen Taunus und Karpaten” (nota 109). The 2018 fieldwork comprised of (1) geomagnetic prospections inside and outside the fortification system and (2) excavations of the settlement.
Geomagnetic prospection
The Teleac hillfort has been surveyed during four campaigns since 2016. The survey in 2018 was carried out during a three week campaign in May. All surveys have been conducted with a five- channel SENSYS MAGNETO®-MX ARCH magnetometer mounted on a two-wheel cart with the sensors employed at 50 cm distances from each other. A Leica DGPS system was used for geo-referencing with a positional accuracy of ±0.02/±0.02m with the rover on the magnetometer. Raw data processing and interpolation was made with SENSYS MonMX, DLMGPS and MAGNETO®- ARCH software, and Oasis Montage 8 was used for post-processing. Analysis and data evaluation was made in QGIS 2.18.
The main aims of the 2018 survey were to investigate all non-forested areas north of the hillfort and around the north-west corner of the fortification system (Pl. 1/1, A), a ramp leading up to a presumed gate at the southeastern side of the settlement (Pl. 1, B), and a potential fortification at the lower western part of Jidovar Hill (Pl. 1/1, T8. The areas surveyed in 2018 are displayed in greyscale on the magnetogram). The magnetogram of the new areas surveyed north and north-west of the hillfort are consistent with the results of previous surveys in the sense that there are very few anomalies indicative of archaeological features, and it can be stated with a high degree of certainty that areas immediately outside the hillfort not were used for habitation. The magnetogram show several paths and unfortified roads, of which some are used today. There are also a few large concentrations of metal scrap close to the remnants of a few modern buildings and along sections of the modern unfortified roads (Pl. 1/1).
The magnetogram of the ramp to the south of the hillfort is not that informative. It has a few parallel linear anomalies with low nT values that probably are indicative of modern vehicle traffic. There are two narrow hollow roads adjacent to the ramp that may be the result of transports in and out of the hillfort when it was habited in prehistory. These two roads could however not be surveyed due to dense vegetation and steep terrain and it is therefore not possible to compare them to the results from the ramp.
The lower part of Jidovar Hill was originally surveyed in 2016 but was redone at a 90 degree angle against the supposed rampart in order to produce a more informative magnetogram. The survey recorded curvilinear bands with values between 5 and 8 nT. These anomalies start at the gate in Teleac’s northern rampart and follow the lower section of the hill to a terrace edge that runs to the ridge that demarcates the southern extent of the hillfort. The recorded nT values of these anomalies are generally less than the values recorded at the massive northern rampart, and the area has a modern unfortified road that disturbs the picture somewhat. The anomalies certainly follow the local terrain in a way that resembles a fortification that makes good use of the topography, but at this point it is impossible to determine with certainty if some of the curvilinear anomalies represent a fortification or if perhaps all of them were formed by agricultural activities.
About 40 ha have been surveyed with a magnetometer in Teleac since the start of the project. The main result of this undertaking is a better understanding of the internal settlement structure and use of land inside and outside the hillfort. There is good correlation between magnetic anomalies and excavated features and it evident that several parts of the settlement were densely occupied and spatially well organised with some areas set aside for various activities. It is also evident that the absolute majority of the population lived inside the fortifications as all surveyed areas outside the hillfort are essentially empty of anomalies indicative of occupation.
Excavations
The archaeological excavations continued in Trench 5 at the Gruşet Plateau, and Trench 6 and 7 in the Lower Settlement, all of which were started in 2017. A new trench (T8) was opened at the lower part of Jidovar Hill in order to investigate the supposed earliest fortifications at the site (Pl. 1/1).
Trench 5 (16 x 10 m) (Pl. 3/2) was oriented N-S and organized in quadrants of 2x2m, numbered 1 to 8 from N to S and with the letters A to E from W to E. The trench was extended 3 m towards the north with a width of 2 m starting at the north-east corner in order to examine the defensive rampart; and 10 x 2 m towards the south to investigate the buffer zone behind the fortification towards the Gruşet Plateau. Three major structures were identified and partly excavated in Trench 5’s planum 3 in 2017 (the rampart, building A21, and the buffer zone between the settlement on the Gruşet Plateau and the area next to the rampart), and excavations of these structures continued at the beginning of the 2018 campaign. The remains of a wall (A29, Pl. 2/2) and two fire installations (A30, Pl. 2/1 and A33) that belonged to building A21 were excavated in the beginning of July. Another level was identified under the floor of building A21, consisting of a floor with several reconstruction phases in the Eastern part. This second level (Planum 4-5) was labelled A61 (Pl. 2/3) and it is an earlier building with the same outline as A21. Several fire installations were discovered inside A61, some of them with reconstruction phases: A51, A52 (Pl. 2/4), A57 (Pl. 2/6), A58 and A59. The western part of the structure had several features of oval and round shape, marked by burnt soil, charcoal and ashes (Pl. 2/3). Such a large concentration of different types of fire installations makes evident that building A61 was used for specialized high temperature production activities. Since the context has several finds of slag and paraphernalia for casting such as clay spoons (e.g. Pl. 4/8) it seems clear that it was a metal workshop.
A third level (Planum 6) is marked by a wooden floor (A95) (Pl. 2/7), preserved mainly in the north-eastern part of the trench. No other major structures belong to this level.
The earliest features in T5 (Planum 7: A76, A105, A99, A102, A103 and A104) were located directly above the archaeological sterile soil and they were superimposed by structures A 61 and A21. The hearth A107 was situated under Planum 7 and directly overlapped by floor A105 of the sunken feature A76 (Pl. 2/8). The A105 floor had two fire installations (A99 and A102) that were smaller than the ones associated with A21/A61 (Pl. 2/5). Two pits (A98 and A103) started at the bottom of A76 and a very large pit A115 was located further west in the trench center. Another large sunken feature (A75) from the early phase of habitation was found at the western side of the trench.
The substructure of the wooden framed box earth rampart (A28) was investigated in the northern part of the trench. It had yellow compact soil, in which several postholes were identified. The soil was deposited over the yellow, archaeological sterile soil.
The buffer zone between the fortification system and the settlement further south on the Gruşet Plateau, dates back to the early phase of habitation which is shown by a continuous layer of reddish burnt soil directly above the archaeological sterile soil. A layer with Basarabi-type ceramics was identified in the southern extension of the trench, in quadrants 10-11A, at the depth of 0.70m. Two iron objects were also found in the same layer. The extremely rich materials discovered in
T5 consist of ceramic vessels, zoomorphic and anthropomorphic clay figurines, miniature wheels, sling shots, loom weights and spoons (Pl. 4/8), as well as bone objects (different types of pins), stone grinders and pestles, and bronze and iron implements (Pl. 4/7).
Trench 6 (10 x 10 m) was opened in 2017 in the lower part of the settlement and similar to trench 5 it was completely excavated in 2018. It is located close to the possible western entrance of the settlement, on the right side of the dirt road that leads from the village to the northern fortification system. The 2018 campaign identified 32 new features, including a surface dwelling and several storage and waste pits. The surface building A36 was located in the north-eastern part of the trench. The structure continues outside the trench, but approximately 8 x 2 m was situated inside the trench. The main parts of the structure consists of large amounts of daub from the southern wall together with three large postholes (A40 (Pl. 3/7), A50 and A55), a perpendicular shallow ditch in the middle of the dwelling, which probably was used for the erection of the A56 (Pl. 4/1) and A57 posts). The remains of a burnt wooden floor (A44, Pl. 3/8) were identified under the level of debris accumulated from the final stage of the structure (daub fragments, pottery sherds and animal bones, A37, Pl. 3/6). The pits A23 (Pl. 3/3), A28, A29, A30
(Pl. 3/4), A32 (Pl. 3/5), A38, A52 and A59 were allsmaller than the ones associated with A21/A61 (Pl. 2/5). Two pits (A98 and A103) started at the bottom of A76 and a very large pit A115 was located further west in the trench center. Another large sunken feature (A75) from the early phase of habitation was found at the western side of the trench.
The substructure of the wooden framed box earth rampart (A28) was investigated in the northern part of the trench. It had yellow compact soil, in which several postholes were identified. The soil was deposited over the yellow, archaeological sterile soil.
The buffer zone between the fortification system and the settlement further south on the Gruşet Plateau, dates back to the early phase of habitation which is shown by a continuous layer of reddish burnt soil directly above the archaeological sterile soil. A layer with Basarabi-type ceramics was identified in the southern extension of the trench, in quadrants 10-11A, at the depth of 0.70m. Two iron objects were also found in the same layer. The extremely rich materials discovered in T5 consist of ceramic vessels, zoomorphic and anthropomorphic clay figurines, miniature wheels, sling shots, loom weights and spoons (Pl. 4/8), as well as bone objects (different types of pins), stone grinders and pestles, and bronze and iron implements (Pl. 4/7).
Trench 6 (10 x 10 m) was opened in 2017 in the lower part of the settlement and similar to trench 5 it was completely excavated in 2018. It is located close to the possible western entrance of the settlement, on the right side of the dirt road that leads from the village to the northern fortification system. The 2018 campaign identified 32 new features, including a surface dwelling and several storage and waste pits. The surface building A36 was located in the north-eastern part of the trench. The structure continues outside the trench, but approximately 8 x 2 m was situated inside the trench. The main parts of the structure consists of large amounts of daub from the southern wall together with three large postholes (A40 (Pl. 3/7), A50 and A55), a perpendicular shallow ditch in the middle of the dwelling, which probably was used for the erection of the A56 (Pl. 4/1) and A57 posts). The remains of a burnt wooden floor (A44, Pl. 3/8) were identified under the level of debris accumulated from the final stage of the structure (daub fragments, pottery sherds and animal bones, A37, Pl. 3/6). The pits A23 (Pl. 3/3), A28, A29, A30 (Pl. 3/4), A32 (Pl. 3/5), A38, A52 and A59 were all of round shape in planum and bell shaped in section. Most of them were probably used as storage pits and later filled with waste such as daub, potsherds, animal bones and broken loom weights. It should however be noted that some also contained bronze objects.
A30 (Pl. 3/4) was a pit with special character. It was located directly south of building A36 and contained several complete, or damaged but complete, ceramic vessels of various shapes and sizes that were arranged at the base of the pit (Pl. 4/2) together with a few broken stone grinders.
The pottery from Trench 6 is of characteristic Teleac Late Bronze Age types, apart from a Wietenberg sherd that was found in a secondary position in pit A52.
Trench 7 was a 6x6m extension of T6 towards the south. The main features found include a sunken building (A1, Pl. 4/3), three pits (A2, Pl. 4/4, A3 and A5), and one posthole (A4, PL. 4/5). The material collected consists of daub, pottery, figurines, loom weights and animal bones. The pits have round shape in planum and bell shaped in profile. The most interesting case is A2, which reached the depth of 2.3 m. The lower extremities of a human skeleton were deposited in the wider lowest part of the pit. It seems that the bones were intentionally deposited, as the margins of the pit were lined with burnt daub and sherds. It could not be determined if the bones belong to an inhumation that later was disturbed by re-opening and re-filling the pit or if they were already disarticulated when they were placed inside.
The stratigraphy of Trench 6 and Trench 7 is similar and consists of one level of plough soil, followed by a mixed cultural level over a thin uniform layer with small pebbles mixed with clayey yellow soil that constitute the historic ground level from which the majority of the features start.
Trench 8 (2 x 10 m) (Pl. 4/6) was positioned to the West of Jidovar Hill in order to investigate the possible fortification system and the curvilinear anomalies mentioned in the section on geomagnetic prospection above. The trench did not contain any undisturbed archaeological features, and the mixed finds were made up of Late Bronze Age pottery, a few fragments of Middle Bronze Age pottery (Wietenberg culture), animal bones and modern iron debris. Two low terrace edges were identified, and it is clear that the area has been disturbed by agricultural activities. This does not mean that the lower part of Jidovar Hill was unfortified. Some of the magnetic anomalies and the foundations of the large terrace edges to the south of Trench 8 could be part of a rampart, but it is impossible to determine this without new excavations
Rezumat
English Abstract
Bibliografie
Note Bibliografice 109 H. Ciugudean, C. Uhnér, S. Hansen, G. Bălan, G. T. Rustoiu, R. Burlacu-Timofte, B. Ciută, J. Kalmbach, Teleac, com. Ciugud, jud. Alba, punct: Gruşeţ – Hârburi, în Cronica Cercetărilor Arheologice din România, campania 2016, a LI- a Sesiune naţională de rapoarte arheologice, Muzeul Naţional de Istorie a României, Bucureşti, 24–27 mai 2017, Bucureşti, 2017, p. 144-146; C. Uhnér, S. Hansen, H. Ciugudean, G. Bălan, R. Burlacu-Timofte, Structura şi demografia aşezării de la Teleac: o fortificaţie din Transilvania de la sfârşitul epocii bronzului – începutul epocii fierului, în Apulum LIV, seria Archaeologica et Anthropologica, 2017, p. 211-245; H. Ciugudean, C. Uhnér,
S. Hansen, G. Bălan, G. T. Rustoiu, R. Burlacu-Timofte, M. Tache, J. Abuladze, D. Zhvania, S. Jokhadze, B. Ciută, J. Kalmbach, A. Matiş, M. Bleoancă, D. Anghel, Teleac, com. Ciugud, jud. Alba, punct: Gruşeţ – Hârburi, în Cronica Cercetărilor Arheologice din România, campania 2017, a LII- a Sesiune naţională de rapoarte arheologice, Muzeul Naţional de Istorie al Transilvaniei, Cluj-Napoca, 15–17 noiembrie 2018, Bucureşti, 2018, p. 137-139.
Sursa   Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România
Editor   INP
Limba   RO


Copyright: autorii rapoartelor și Institutul Național al Patrimoniului, CIMEC, 2020.
Coordonator: Bogdan Şandric. Documentarişti-analişti: Alina Iancu, Iuliana Damian, Oana Borlean. Consultant: Irina Oberländer Târnoveanu. Proiectare ASP şi HTML: Cosmin Miu