Talk:Tollense valley battlefield

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: European / German

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	German military history task force

Speculations

The last para of the section on significance contains seemingly farfetched socio-political speculations. A German speaking editor may please check the reference provided. Tytire (talk) 23:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mention of alternative hypotheses ?

It might be useful to detailed such hypotheses as done in the German page. "6 Deutungungen und Hypothesen der Ereignisse im Tollensetal 6.1 Hypothese des Kampfes regionsferner Gruppen 6.2 Hypothese des Kampfes um Handelswege" --Japarthur (talk) 08:34, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a battle?

Latest interpretation is doubting the battle hypothesis. Jantzen also sees the number of participants in the conflict less today than it was years ago, when it was assumed that thousands of warriors collided. “I’m not repeating the number,” he said. More than 12,000 human bones were recovered and about 140 individuals examined by anthropologists. Most of them died of stab wounds and cuts, and some arrowheads were still stuck in the bones.

Jantzen assumes that the majority of those found were among the defeated. The victors would probably have taken their dead and buried them. However, no Bronze Age graves were found on the surrounding areas. The victims were looted and left lying. Another indication that it was not a cavalry battle is the texture of the horse bones. The investigations would have shown that the horses were actually not old enough to ride. They could have been carried as a trade item.

Battle of Tollense Valley 4,250 years ago was a massacre of 1,400 Bronze Age merchants | Daily Mail Online Creuzbourg (talk) 22:32, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where did the Urnfield info come from?

The info box has both Nordic Bronze Age and Urnfield cultures mentioned on one side. The article from what I can see mainly talks about Nordic Bronze Age and not Urnfield. Am I wrong?Kennet Mattfolk (talk) 22:10, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discovery of a bronze statuette

A significant new find, a bronze female statuette, was made in the Tollense river at the known Bronze Age valley crossing (site Weltzin 13) by Ronald Borgwardt in 2020.

The small bronze figurine (14.7 cm tall) has an egg-shaped head with a prominent nose, looped arms, a neckring, two knobs signifying breasts, a belt, an indication of a female sex and two slightly differently shaped legs.

In the 19^th century a similar female statuette was found near the village of Klein Zastrow, just a few kilometres from the valley crossing, but mostly these figurines are known from Zealand and Scania. Belts are only present on the statuettes from Zealand and northern Germany, and their presence suggests a close connection between the figures from these areas.

Typological evidence places the figure from the Tollense river to the Late Bronze Age (Periods V–VI). Some time ago the figures were discussed as possible balance weights, but their small number does not support this theory. With a mass of 155 g, however, the new figure could be seen as a multiple of 26 g, the previously proposed weight unit of the time.

The new find further suggests a connection between the find spots of the statuettes and routes of communication. There is little evidence to support an interpretation as a goddess. The deposition of the new figure at a valley crossing where hundreds of years before a violent conflict happened, might indicate that this was still a place of commemoration.

Source: Praehistorische Zeitschrift 2022; 97(1): 110–129 - Thomas Terberger, Ronald Borgwardt, Joachim Krüger, Sebastian Lorenz, Jens-Peter Schmidt, Lorenz Rahmstorf - Worship or weight? A Bronze Age ‘goddess with a necklace’ from River Tollense (NE Germany)

https://doi.org/10.1515/pz-2022-2035 Courtemanche Gilles (talk) 06:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional source

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/warriors-from-the-south-arrowheads-from-the-tollense-valley-and-central-europe/C4F6ECB759833BFD337D37ADAE564C4B# 194.233.152.187 (talk) 17:55, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What was refuted?

The text currently reads, "Fighters of one of the groups were thought to have come from a distant region, as they had a diet including millet, which was allegedly not widely known in the North at that time, but this latter claim has been refuted."

What was refuted? That their diet included millet, that millet was not widely known, or both? This phrasing is confusing.

Poihths (talk) 21:46, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]