194 SECTIONAL ADDRESSES 



on copies of Oriental models made in Central Europe. Remember 

 further that all the types on which we have relied enjoyed a long popularity 

 in the Orient : seals that could serve as models for Danubian II ' pinta- 

 deras ' were current in Crete and Asia Minor throughout the third 

 millennium and later. Battle-axes for comparison to those of Danubian III 

 were brandished equally long in central Anatolia and first appear in 

 peninsular Greece in Middle Helladic times. The type-fossils of 

 Period IV only came into fashion in the East in the third millennium 

 and fashions did not change abruptly. Knot-headed pins were still being 

 worn in the third (Hittite) settlement at Kusura during the second 

 millennium. Ingot-torques, racquet pins, lock-rings and earrings with 

 flattened ends are common in Caucasian graves well after 1500 B.C. The 

 archasological ' synchronisms ' so far considered are really just upper 

 limits. 



Accordingly till geologists present their demands with more unanimity 

 and confidence, it is permissible to remind you of other comparisons 

 between Central European and south-eastern phenomena that entail 

 substantially lower dates for our prehistoric periods. Characteristic of 

 Danubian II are cubical blocks of clay, with one, or rarely two, cups 

 hollowed out in them and perforated at the corners. These have been 

 convincingly explained as clay copies of Early Minoan block vases of 

 stone. Thus interpreted, they would bring the limits of Danubian II 

 down into the third millennium under axiom 4. 



Found allegedly in an Aunjetitz grave of period IV at Nienhagen in 

 Central Germany was a clay cup ; its curious handle is strikingly like 

 those of the metal Vapheio cups of Late Minoan I, most popular between 

 1600 and 1500 B.C. Parallels between Aunjetitz weapons and those of 

 the Mycenaean Shaft Graves of roughly similar age have already been 

 mentioned — -and explained away. Still the amber beads from these and 

 later Mycenaean graves should re-enforce the arguments for a parallelism 

 between Central European Aunjetitz and Late Helladic Greece. The 

 amber trade was a mainspring of the Aunjetitz commercial system. Did 

 it involve nothing more than barter between barbarians in Denmark, 

 Bohemia and Upper Italy ? The brilliance of the Early Bronze Age in 

 Bohemia would become much more intelligible if that region were already 

 connected by the amber trade with civilised Greece. The probability of 

 such a connection is enhanced by Piggott's recognition among the amber 

 beads from Kakovatos (Nestor's Pylos) of massive forms and space- 

 plates in the Danish style such as often occur in graves contemporary 

 with Aunjetitz. All these pointers converge upon a date for the be- 

 ginning of the Central European Bronze Age a full thousand years later 

 than the upper limits deduced from the metal ornaments. 



Such considerations are, however, frankly speculative and can if needful 

 be dismissed. It is less easy to explain away certain actual ^Egean or 

 Egyptian imports found in an apparently Early Bronze Age context in 

 Central Europe. Segmented fayence beads occur in four graves near 

 Szeged associated with pottery of the Perjamos type and in two Moravian 

 graves with Aunjetitz pottery. Though the blue glaze is generally less 

 well preserved, these beads. Dr. Stone assures me, agree perfectly in form 

 and technique with those from Wiltshire and from Grave 1808A at Abydos, 



