Following the traces oF the earliest corded ware in Moravia and steppe eleMents in its content

Peška J. 2023. Following the traces of the earliest Corded Ware in Moravia and steppe elements in its content. Sprawozdania Archeologiczne 75/1, 141-174. The earliest Corded Ware is very poorly represented in Moravia (several type A, Moravian-type, hammer-axes, settlements with the so-called Wellenleistentöpfe: Olomouc-Slavonín, Horní lán) and the situation is not much better even in the earlier Moravian Corded Ware Culture (MCWC) period (the Palonín settlement, graves at: Dub nad Moravou, Hradisko u Kroměříže, Němetice). Among the local MCWC (over 90%; 2700/2600-2400/2200 calBC) we find a number of components linking this to Eastern Europe both in the burial ritual (grooves around graves, internal construction, burials in the frog position, graves of metallurgists) and in the material content (daggers/razors with a tang, hammer-shaped pins, a beaker decorated with a cord and a fishbone motif) with numerous analogues in the Yamna and Catacombna cultures of the Carpathian, Balkan and northern Pontus. Most surprising is a group of MCWC graves with grooves at the bottom, interpreted as burials on all-wood four-wheeled ceremonial wagons with direct counterparts in the Maikop, Yamna, and Catacombna cultures of eastern Europe.


InTroduCTIon
Since the origin of the Corded Ware civilization in Eastern Europe is generally accepted, the range of Eastern elements in its content in Moravia is not surprising.The question remains, however, as to which part of them can be associated directly with the steppe elements appearing in the interior of Europe at the beginning and during the 3 rd millennium BC.
At the turn of the Late and Final Eneolithic, several cultures with different origins appear in the field of Moravian prehistory (Postbaden Jevišovice Culture, Bošáca, Globular Amphora Culture, Makó/Kosihy-Čaka?, Strachotín-Držovice horizon) (Fig. 1).The relationships to the earliest Moravian Corded Ware Culture (MCWC) are particularly evident in the late phase of Jevišovice Culture with a noticeable interference of the Coţofeni III and even more Livezile cultures from western Transylvania (air distance 450 km) in the period 2780-2560 calBC (Peška 2011;Ciugudean et al. 2022).To these is added a specifically equipped skeletal burial of a young child (Kroměříž 3 -Miňůvky) in a large grave pit with a double-sided decorated lublan bowl and an askoid jug (Peška 2011, fig. 1).We are able to map the path of the shift of part of the population across Eastern Slovakia in the Late Baden environment (Zemplín, Spiš, Šariš: Horváthová and Chovanec 2006), but also, for example, by material and a cremation (?) at Trebatice in via SW Slovakia (Němejcová-Pavúková and Klčo 1986), and echoes can even be seen in the content of the Řivnáč culture in Central Bohemia (Zápotocký and Zápotocká 2008, fig. 65: 171, 172;tab. 34: 1;78: 2).Important is the fact that this happened in the period 3000/2900-2800/2600 calBC, which is the time of the ongoing invasion of the holders of the Yamna culture (Yamna Culture) into the interior of Europe (Ciugudean et al. 2023).The relatively strong settlement at the end of the Jevišovice Culture may then account for the absence or only sporadic presence of the earliest and earlier CWC in Moravia.

THE EArLIEST CordEd WArE In MorAVIA
The earliest corded ware according to the traditional Buchvaldek classification -find group I (FG I) -is very poorly represented in Moravia and is represented by finds of Atype hammer-axes, or Moravian type with the possibility of a longer lifetime (graves of local development: Velešovice I, 1985, H 1, Vážany nad Litavou), coming mostly from isolated finds (Fig. 2).The easternmost evidence of the A-horizon settlement are fragments of the so-called Wellenleistentöpfe and corded beakers from Olomouc-Slavonín (Peška 2000) as intrusions in chronologically younger features.Of special note is the collection of A-type and Moravian-type hammer-axes from layer B in Jevišovice, including blanks indicating local production (Šebela 1997).It is a significant evidence of the synchronization of the MCWC with the Jevišovice culture.Sporadic grave units with simple equipment of corded beakers and bowls are available from Central Moravia (Hradisko u Kroměříže III, H1; Němčice nad Hanou (Fig. 3).The absence of A-amphorae as well as the new excavations documenting grave complexes of the Early Corded Horizon in Moravia testify to the gradual colonization of the area.The situation is not much better even in the earlier MCWC (FG II), which perhaps includes the settlement with a pair of pits from Palonín, graves from Dub nad Moravou, Hradisko I H1, Hradisko II, H2, Uhřice u Kyjova, mounds from Němetice (no.7 and 1 with a Silesian hammer-axe) and a grave with a faceted hammer-axe and copper necklace from Dětkovice in the Vyškov region, accompanied by an ancient beaker (Fig. 4).Neither of the above-mentioned find groups is a full-fledged form of settlement activity, so we must expect a gradual infiltration into the existing structure of the domestic settlement.
More than 90% of the MCWC inventory belongs to the local development, where corded beakers (except for type B1) together with classical Dřevohostice jugs, but also beakers decorated with a fish bone motif (Fischgrätenbecher), considered older in the western CWC groups, but surviving at least during Phase IIIa in Moravia, are common in the graves at the beginning.We have hundreds of grave units from smaller group, originally mound-type, chronologically rather closed burials with rich ceramic production of their own (amphora-shaped jugs, amphorae, derivatives of Dřevohostice jugs), but more with designs in the Carpathian Basin (Balkan and Ökörhalom jugs, egg-shaped pots, Moravian-type bowls, other types of amphorae, etc).The division of the local development into three phases, IIIa-IIIc according to L. Šebela is still a subject of discussion (the separate appearance of distinctive ceramic types in Moravia does not apply to the Carpathian Basin, etc.).
Recent excavations have repeatedly provided evidence of the existence of agricultural settlements from the period of local development (Peška et al. 2021) with sunken pits, yet without evidence of dwellings (Olomouc-Slavonín, Horní lán, Vřesovice, Hulín-Pravčice 1, Prostějov -industrial Zone: Fojtík 2019; Peška et al. 2021).The Makó/Kosihy/ Čaka influence is also strongly present in the settlement component.The first series of absolute data are available (Fig. 5), which indicate the presence of a local MCWC in the period 2700/2600-2400(2200) BC.No data are available from earlier periods (unlike, for example, Bohemia).

ConTACTS WITH EASTErn EuroPE
Elements linking our region with Eastern Europe appear in the MCWC funeral ritual and inventory.The number of graves with ring ditches is slowly increasing (Holubice VII, Babice u Šternberka, Archlebov), where a burial from Babice equipped only with a chipped tool could be a "candidate" to represent the earliest period of corded ware (absolute dating unfortunately failed) (Fig. 6).It is not difficult to find a number of analogues to them across the Yamna Culture range from Serbia to Ukraine (e.g., Bugaj et al. 2018;Sava et al. 2019;Dergachev 2023, pl. 7: B1; 9: C1; 21: 1; 27: G1; 30: C1 etc.).However, as we can see from examples in Bohemia, the hypothesis of the earliest non-ceramic graves may not be valid more generally (Dobeš et al. 2021).Outside the Central Moravian specificity of graves with grooves or other internal arrangements, which will be discussed later, there is an interesting full-circuit construction of one grave from Olomouc-Slavonín, Horní lán (H 164) with analogies in the environment of, for example, the Yamna or Catacombna cultures (Fig. 7; Dergachev 2023, pl.2: B2; 15: B5; 36: B18; 61: D8 etc.).The so-called frog position of the lower limbs in burials is known in the CWC e.g., Silesia (Kietrz), eastern Slovakia (Lesné), Bell Beaker Culture in Lesser Poland (Samborzec), but also in the Nitra culture in Slovakia (Jelšovce) and the Únětice culture in Moravia (Suchohrdly) or in SW Slovakia (Nitra-Dolné Krškany), in Bohemia (Kbely, Cerhenice) and from eastern Germany (Nohra).It has direct analogies in the graves of the Yamna Culture in Hungary (Kétegyháza), Balkan, Ukraine and southern Russia (Bátora 2021;Włodarczak 2021;Dergachev 2023, pl. 10: 12;13: C6;14: C10;15: B6 etc.).Apparently it is only a matter of time before it appears in the contents of the MCWC.
Similarly, the custom of depositing stone axes, split axes and arrowheads with male burials also appears to a lesser extent in the MCWC (Fig. 15) with numerous counterparts in the Yamna Culture (Agulnikov and Sava 2004, fig. 55: 5, 59: 3, 6;Agulnikov 2008

LoCAL or nonLoCAL?
We can thus ask ourselves what in the material content of the MCWC is actually of domestic or Central European origin?First of all, the local pottery (amphora-shaped jugs, Dřevohostice jugs, Nagyrév jugs, un/decorated two-and four-eared amphorae, egg-sha- A southern origin (Vučedol, Ljubljana Moors) may be claimed for the chip-carved decorated footed bowls (so far only in Lower Austria) (Kern 2011, fig.2), the Ig-type bone belt hook, or their imitations from the Jevišovice Culture (Brno -Líšeň: Šebela 1999, pl.3: 1), the Czech-type of belt hook have a north-eastern origin (Baltic), but they are directly related to the corded environment.

BurIALS on WAGonS In THE MCWC?
The biggest surprise for us is a group of MCWC graves with grooves on the bottom with a clear concentration in Central Moravia (Fig. 22) with a new interpretation.Such a construction is unprecedented in our country (Fig. 21).The dimensions, the spatial projection of the reconstructed prehistoric wagons (Figs.23) convince us that we are dealing with grooves as traces of the placement of a four-wheeled wagon, or with burials on an all-wood ceremonial wagon with clear counterparts in Maikop, Yamna and Catacombna cultures (Gej 2004;Novozhenov 2012;Dergachev 2023, pl.2: A3; 47: B2; 52: A1-2; 153: E3-4 etc.).The average to below-average equipment illustrates the social significance of the burial itself in an elevated and centralized location, carrying a stamp of social prestige over other graves.Placement in the grave may have been preceded by a ceremonial journey with the corpse, e.g., from his house, which may have already been made on a cart.Wagon burials are encountered in Central Europe so far only in Central Moravia (local MCWC) at a time approximately at the level of the Late Yamna Culture and Early Catacombna cultures (mid-3 rd millennium BC) (Fig. 24).As in the intact area of the Yamna Culture, they can be considered an integral part of the so-called Yamna package.Yet, with one exception (Plachidol in Bulgaria), wagon burials are not encountered elsewhere than in the North Pontic and Caucasian areas at that time (Fig. 22).This is an Eastern European phenomenon transmitted during the 3 rd millennium BC to the interior of Europe (the question remains which way exactly?) and one of the clearest pieces of evidence of direct contact with the Eastern European area.

ConCLuSIon
We have to remember that we are spatially not that far from the recognized boundary of the Yamna Culture intrusion in Transdanubia (Görnyü, Környe) and in Burgenland (Neusiedl am See) (Harrison and Heyd 2007, fig. 49), a light influence in the content of the Polish CWC (Koniusza, Balice, Święte: Kośko et al. 2018;Włodarczak 2021, fig. 10).Similarly to Moravia, a number of eastern -steppe elements are also seen in Lower Austria in the makeup of the local group of Corded Ware culture (Kern 2012).Another example is a grave from Wien-Essling with a Manych-type dagger of North Pontic-Caucasian form made of copper with elevated arsenic content, the westernmost find of its kind in Europe (Zimmermann 2003;2007, 53-58, fig. 34).The contents of the already mentioned grave from Bleckendorf have a general eastern provenance, and wagon graves in central Germany are also associated with the eastern European steppe region (Profen), but the question is whether they are not more likely to be related to the GAC, the custom of chariot burials being clearly of eastern European origin.
From the genetic analyses so far, we know that the MCWC matches the genetic profile known so far (mainly from Bohemia) with the highest proportion of steppe genes compared to contemporary and subsequent cultures.By comparing Y haplogroups, we can conclude that partially contemporary groups of individuals (CWC, Bell Beaker Culture, Únětice Culture), despite their geographical proximity, remain genetically distinct (Fig. 25).
Everything points to the fact that Moravia, with the exception of the changes at the end of the Jevišovice Culture and the arrival of the two beakers cultures, remained aloof from the direct penetration of the people of the Yamna Culture into the centre of Europe, since the invasion of probably part of the foreign population to the Jevišovice Culture holders cannot be directly linked to these migrations (the background lies in the environment of the Coţofeni and Livezile cultures), but an indirect consequence of the migration waves caused by the events in the North Pontic area up to Tisza cannot be excluded either.Nevertheless, we are able to trace a number of links and contacts with Eastern Europe and, more specifically, with the North Pontic-Caucasian region in the content of cultures at the turn of the 4th/3rd millennium BC.The archaeological findings so far, in the form of individual (mound) burials and a selection of artefacts, demonstrate the interpenetration of individuals (or small groups) rather than the direct intervention of steppe nomads, but better still the influence of progressive commodities as part of the "Yamna package" in the regions lying west of the Tisza.While we cannot rule out the possibility that the foreign intervention at the end of the Jevišovice Culture in Moravia was not triggered by general changes and movements in the more southern patrimonies of central Europe and, as a consequence, that the appearance of CWC in our area itself is not originally and partly genetically related to shifts in the Yamna region, we must continue to look for direct evidence for these claims.

Fig. 1 .
Fig. 1.Map of cultural representation of the Late Eneolithic period in Moravia.Map by P. Grenar