ARCHKRA044 The contrast between peripheral and traditional settlement areas in prehistoric times and the early

Faculty of Philosophy and Science in Opava
Summer 2025
Extent and Intensity
1/1/0. 4 credit(s). Type of Completion: z (credit).
Teacher(s)
doc. PhDr. Vratislav Janák, CSc. (lecturer)
Mgr. Andrea Hořínková, Ph.D. (seminar tutor)
doc. PhDr. Vratislav Janák, CSc. (seminar tutor)
Guaranteed by
doc. PhDr. Vratislav Janák, CSc.
Institute of Historical Sciences – Faculty of Philosophy and Science in Opava
Prerequisites
A basic overview of the issue of traditional and peripheral residential areas.
Course Enrolment Limitations
The course is also offered to the students of the fields other than those the course is directly associated with.
fields of study / plans the course is directly associated with
Course objectives
The subject is focused on the issue of defining so-called traditional and peripheral residential areas, their natural character and especially the difference in the purpose, form and dynamics of their settlement. Contrast between peripheral areas (worse natural conditions, settlement derived, primarily non-agricultural, discontinuous in time and space, relatively sparse) and traditional (better natural conditions, primarily agricultural settlement, (with exceptions) continuous in time, continuous in space and relatively dense) it begins with the onset of the Neolithic and can be seen in various forms until the beginning of the Middle Ages, in relics sometimes even today. It represents the relationship of the structure and dynamics of settlement primarily to social conditions. His tracking is one from important aspects of knowledge of Central European history. In our current concept of landscape archaeology, based on Anglo-Saxon patterns, but not enough attention is paid to it. The Oder Gate is an excellent example of a peripheral one residential area, relatively well known archaeologically.
Learning outcomes
Paper
Syllabus
  • 1. Forming the contrast between peripheral and traditional residential areas as one of the perspectives on the social dimension (archaeological) history of prehistoric and early medieval Central Europe, in the second half of the 20th century. 2. The Oder and Bečevská gates as basic components of the Moravian Gate corridor, their natural conditions, differences in geographical dislocation and resulting differences in the dynamics of the settlement process from the Neolithic to the the High Middle Ages. 3. The development of interdisciplinary knowledge of the history of the Oder Gate corridor and its forecourt until the beginning of the 20th century. (H. Hassinger, G. Stumpf, K. Žebera, J. Krejčí, E. Opravil, V. Janák, P. Kouřil). 4. Events of archaeological research in the corridor of the Oder Gate and on its northern forefield. 5. Project: "Survey of high-altitude settlements in the Pobeskydy between Bečva (Czech Republic) and Biała (Poland) - Badania pradziejowych osiedli wyżynnych na Podbeskidzia między Beczwą (Czech Republic) and Białą (Rzeczpospolita Polska)". 6. Settlement of the Oder Gate in the hunting-gathering period 7. Settlement of the Oder Gate in the Neolithic and Eneolithic 8. Settlement of the Oder Gate in the Bronze and Hallstatt Ages 9. Settlement of the Oder Gate in the protohistoric period 10. Settlement of the Oder Gate in the time of the castle and the beginnings of medieval colonization 11. Comparison of settlement of the Oder and Bečevská gates in prehistoric times and the early Middle Ages. 12. Comparison of settlement of the Oder Gate with settlement in traditional settlement areas using the example of the area Upper Silesian loess and Moravian valleys. 13. Model of settlement of peripheral territories in Central Europe from the Neolithic to the beginnings of medieval colonization and possibilities his explanation.
Literature
    required literature
  • Opravil, E.: Moravskoslezský pomezní les do začátku kolonizace. In: Wiegandová, L. (ed.): Archeologický sborník (Ostravské muzeum. Ostrava 1974, 113-133.
  • Janák, V. – Kouřil, P.: Problémy a úkoly archeologie v českém Slezsku a na severovýchodní Moravě. Časopis Slezského zemského muzea - série B 40, 1991, 193-219.
  • Janák, V. – Papáková, K. – Kováčik, P. - Hořínková, A. - Rataj, P.: Mapová predikce neolitického osídlení v Oderské bráně. In: Hořínková, A. – Kováčik, P. – Stuchlík, S. (eds.): Archeologický výzkum krajiny a aplikace ICT. Opava 2014, 247-277.
    recommended literature
  • Drechsler, A. – Hýbl, F. – Mikulík, J. – Peška, V. – Schenk, Z. – Svoboda, J.: Archeologie Přerovska. Přerov 2010.
  • Dohnal, V.: Kultura lužických popelnicových polí na východní Moravě. Fontes archaeologiae Moravicae 10, Brno 1977.
  • Čižmář, M. : Zur Stellung von Kotouč in der späten Latėnezeit. Acta Archaeologica Carpathica 29, 1990, 151 – 165.
  • Čižmář, M.: Púchovská kultur. In: Podborský, V. (ed.): Pravěké dějiny Moravy. Brno 1993, 420-423.
Teaching methods
Lecture, seminar
Assessment methods
Credit
Language of instruction
Czech
Teacher's information
A written test; paper
The course is also listed under the following terms Summer 2023, Summer 2024.
  • Enrolment Statistics (Summer 2025, recent)
  • Permalink: https://is.slu.cz/course/fpf/summer2025/ARCHKRA044