In this chapter, the numerous rural settlements in the vicinity of the Roman town in Voorburg will be discussed, as well as the habitation history and possible origin of the inhabitants of the area. The chapter concludes with an overview of the rural community in the area.

INTRODUCTION

The subject of this section is rural habitation in the Cananefatian civitas from c. 250 BC to the middle of the 4th century. This period of six centuries is characterised by a dynamic intensity in the degree of habitation in the research area. In the Late Iron Age, it concerns relatively many sites, dispersed over the landscape. However, at the end of the Iron Age, in the course of the 1st century BC, the habitation declines to such an extent that it is hardly traceable in the archaeological record. Clearly demonstrable traces of habitation are present only around 50 AD in the research area. The degree of habitation increases further in the following century, but it slowly decreases at the end of the 2nd or beginning of the 3rd century. Most sites were abandoned by the second half of the 3rd century. This process continues until the beginning of the 4th century. Thereafter, habitation occurs sporadically in the area, but seems to disappear again around the middle of the 4th century. Only after about a century and a half are there any clear traces of habitation in the research area.

THE LATE IRONAGE ( 2 5 0 B C – 1 A D )

In the Late Iron Age, settlements were dispersed across the research area. In general, settlements consisted of one farmstead and seem to have a permanent character. They were only abandoned when the environmetal conditions prevented further habitation. Clear concentrations of sites are known in a few places, such as along the Lower Rhine, on the beach ridges near The Hague, and in the clay-on-bog area of Midden Delfland and Vlaardingen/Schiedam. Local environmental factors strongly influenced the habitation of these areas (see chapter 2). Van Heeringen posits that “…the coastal region was inhabited by groups of people whose essentially self-sufficient economy was based largely on agriculture. These people lived in scattered settlements, each comprising of a single farmstead.” .

Along the Lower Rhine, on the northern side of the civitas Cananefatium, lay the northern boundary of the Roman Empire. This boundary consisted of a chain of forts, smaller fortifications, and watchtowers, as well as civilian settlements and military infrastructure. This chain of Roman military structures has been defined by modern scholars using the Latin term limes. Between the 1st to the 3rd centuries, the concept of limes indicated a defined border of the Roman Empire, without referring explicitly to military structures. Only in the 4th century did the term mean a border area that was under the command of an army chief. Although the word limes is sensu stricto not a term from Roman times, it will be employed here within Whittaker's definition: “…a region within which military buildings were constructed both in advance of and behind the line of administered frontiers.” The research area was within a sector of these limes, containing no fewer than seven forts.

On the western side of the research area, along the North Sea and the Helinium, was also a zone of military installations that were part of the coastal defences. These installations were located on the beach ridges and the coastal barrier of Naaldwijk. In addition to the (small) fortifications, civil settlements also developed here. All these settlements were inhabited by the Roman military community. Within these communities were not only Roman soldiers, but also civilians who lived in the vicinity of the encampments. Along the Lower Rhine, this community also included inhabitants of rural settlements, so we are dealing here with a heterogeneous group of people. This chapter first presents a brief review of the creation, functioning, and cessation of the military occupation along the Lower Rhine. It is followed by a discussion of the structures built by the Roman military communities along the Lower Rhine and elsewhere in the area (table 3.1 and fig. 3.1). These data are supported by a wide range of retrieved material remains. Therefore, this chapter concludes with a characterisation of the military communities in the area based on the collected archaeological data.

GIVEN THE SCOPE of the project, this book constitutes a historical-archaeological synthesis in its entirety of the Carpathian-Danubian space during the eighth and the ninth centuries. Thus, through this book, we have offered narrative information and archaeological data regarding the history of the eighth and the ninth centuries.

Archaeological research on the early Middle Ages in the regions north of the Lower Danube has been steadily improving over the last six or seven decades. This study has been realized based on the data published in the specialized literature; however, we should be clear that many archaeological discoveries from the researched period still remain unpublished and thus publicly unavailable. Nevertheless, the data so far give us a rich trove of material, on the basis of which the early medieval history of the Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic regions can be reconstituted.

For the first time, this work has included the majority of archaeological discoveries across a wide territory north of the Lower Danube, between the Tisza and the Dniester, in one study, going beyond current political boundaries. Over 2,500 archaeological points have been recorded and mapped in this book, reflecting the current level of our archaeological knowledge about the regions included into the research. Based on statistical data, we can observe an increase in the number of archaeological sites dating from the eighth– ninth centuries as compared to those from the fifth– seventh centuries, a phenomenon characteristic of most geographical areas in the Carpathian-Danubian space.

Although written sources regarding the early Middle Ages remain modest and controversial, archaeological data continue to accrue and can form the basis of synthetic studies of the history of the Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic regions. Narrative data were used in the context of the event and the phenomenon referred to by the medieval authors. Analysis of the history of archaeological investigations and the historiography of the problem allowed us to establish the current state of research regarding the history of the eighth– ninth centuries in a number of European states. The review of historiographical achievements allowed us to highlight the main results in this area as well as the diversity of issues addressed by researchers concerned with the early medieval history of the Carpathian-Danubian regions.

Archaeological Cultures

In the absence of written sources, archaeological discoveries have become the main source for reconstructions of the history, culture, and ethnicity of early medieval society in the Carpathian-Danubian regions. Archaeological cultures have been invented for the sake of the systematization, analysis, and evaluation of discoveries. However, attempts to draw a direct connection between archaeological cultures and ethnic groups have not always been sufficiently substantiated. Ethnic identities are important social components, but they are not typically directly represented in material culture or social structures. Ethnic constructions have thus gradually become controversial topics in archaeology. The historiographical debates mostly refer to interpretations of archaeological discoveries in the context of the concepts of “archaeological cultures” and “ethnic groups.” The Carpathian-Danubian space historically was not only a transit territory for nomadic populations from the east to Central and Southeastern Europe, but also an active area of cultural and ethnic interference. Thus, the ethnic and cultural attribution of archaeological discoveries from this region presents a difficult problem to solve. The attempts of archaeologists and historians to make cultural and ethnic evaluations of early medieval archaeological discoveries have been influenced by political situations, trends, and interests, as archaeological discoveries have been often used in a speculative way by politicians to justify annexations and territorial claims.

On one hand, there has been an attempt to show the regional peculiarities of archaeological cultures, but also to appreciate their homogeneity and uniformity. However, in the context of addressing problems regarding the continuity of habitation and ethnogenesis, archaeological cultures have been identified with certain groups of populations— the Romanic, the Slavs, the Avars, the Bulgarians, the Hungarians, the Romanians, and so on. The ethnic background of archaeological cultures is difficult to evaluate because they mostly reflect the material, rather than the ethnic, condition of society. The characteristic features of certain categories of pieces, such as ceramics, for example, may have ethnic relevance, but archaeologists cannot solve the problems of identity based solely on these materials. Archaeological pieces highlight the material aspects of culture and not the ones related to the mentality, spirituality, or language of those who had produced and used them. The concept of archaeological culture is also much broader than its association with a specific ethnic identity. The more so as ethnic identity is constantly changing.

THE BASIC PROBLEM addressed in this chapter will be a critical analysis of the research sources and the historiography of the research problem. Studying the historical sources and the extant historiography will allow us to determine both the volume and the quality of the information currently known, based on which our scientific research on the history of the Carpathian-Danubian space in the eighth and ninth centuries can be realized.

Historical sources are a set of information which constitutes the cultural heritage of mankind. Each work of historical research stems from analysis of the sources from which it can be developed. A separate critical analysis of narrative and archaeological sources and then their collation and dissection will allow us to support some conclusions about the historical realities to the north of the Lower Danube in the eighth and ninth centuries. However, we must consider the lack of internal narrative sources in reference to the history of the Carpathian-Danubian regions in the eighth and ninth centuries, while the number of external narratives is small and their content is often controversial.

Written Sources

In the absence of direct written sources, foreign internal narrative sources occasionally refer to the early medieval histories of the territories to the north of the Lower Danube, often having a very general or even contradictory character. Some Byzantine, Russian, Hungarian, and Oriental sources from the eighth and the ninth centuries describe certain events from the seventh– tenth centuries which have a direct or a tangential connection with either the territories to the north of the Danube or the people who lived in or passed through these areas. The style, the quality of the content, and the veracity of these early medieval sources have attracted the attention of historians for a long time. The most numerous narrative sources on the Carpathian-Danubian regions are Byzantine sources.

The Byzantine Writings

The Byzantine writings regarding the Danube regions in the second half of the first millennium are quite general. If for the sixth– seventh centuries Byzantine reports on the situation in the Lower Danube and with the Empire's confrontations with these tribes were frequent, owing to the “activism” of Slavic and Avar populations, Byzantium's interest in the Danube region dropped significantly in the eighth century.

THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT and humans’ daily needs drove the inhabitants of the Carpathian-Danubian regions to practice certain economic activities during the early Middle Ages. The demonstrated demographic growth in the regions to the north of the Lower Danube in the eighth– ninth centuries shows that economic efforts were providing the population with the products necessary for living. The investigation of archaeological remains discovered in settlements from the eighth– ninth centuries contributes to our reconstruction of economic occupations and the level of their development. The diversity of landforms and natural resources facilitated the development of a human habitat and the practice of various economic activities characteristic of both sedentary and nomadic populations. Thus, the regions west of the Western Carpathians with flat ground were propitious for nomad populations practicing, in particular, cattle breeding, and the rest of the Carpathian-Danubian territories were inhabited by a sedentary population, mainly practicing agriculture.

Agriculture

In terms of their geographical distribution, most settlements from the studied period are located on lands favourable for agriculture, which, with its two branches— soil cultivation and cattle breeding— represents the main occupations of communities in the Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic space in the eighth– ninth centuries.

Soil Cultivation

Soil cultivation, as the most important branch of agriculture, was widely practiced by human communities north of the Lower Danube since the Neolithic Age. The economic importance of agriculture in these regions was reflected in a number of studies, benefiting from comparative analysis in the context of Central and Southeastern Europe in late antiquity and the early Middle Ages. Soil cultivation depends on a number of factors relating to the geographical, pedological, and technological order. Archaeological evidence regarding plant cultivation by the inhabitants of the Carpatho-Danubian-Pontic space in the eighth and the ninth centuries consists of farm utensils, constructions for the storage and processing of cereals, traces of grains, and the remains of straw, discovered in the charred form or as imprints on pieces of clay. Using animals as labour, both for everyday household needs and for farming, may be demonstrated by the remains of domestic animals such as horses and cattle and by the presence of pieces of harness.

THE EARLY MIDDLE Ages are of special importance for European history, as this period marks the genesis of many peoples, of state formation, and of the affirmation of feudal relations. This work spans almost two centuries, from the end of the seventh until the late ninth century. During this time a series of political, military, economic, social, and religious transformations took place. The lower chronological limit is marked by the migration of the Bulgars south of the Danube (680/ 681), and the upper limit coincides with the movement of the Hungarians from the Eastern European steppes to the Carpathian Basin (895/ 896). This span includes significant events in the history of Central and Southeastern Europe. The Avar Kaganate controlled not only the Pannonian Steppe but also some regions east of the Tisza up to the Western Carpathians, which has been proven by the Avar graves and cemeteries identified in these areas. The Bulgarians’ settlement south of the Danube and the creation of a new political power changed political realities in the region and directly contributed to the distancing of relations between Byzantium and the North-Danube regions. The situation in the ninth century directly affected the so-called political silence in the Carpathian-Danubian regions (Map 1). Political reshuffling in the North-Danube areas began with the liquidation of Avar power and was followed by the division of spheres of influence between the Franks, the Moravians, and the Bulgarians. The appearance of the Hungarians at the mouth of the Danube and their conflicts with the powers and populations in the region led to the establishment of their control over the Pannonian Steppe and some other regions east of the Tisza in the late ninth century and beginning of the tenth century.

Geographical Boundaries. The appearance and evolution of human beings was and is closely linked to natural factors, but human interactions with the natural environment have still only been modestly investigated. Therefore, during historical research, it is necessary to know the peculiarities of the geographical environment (relief, hydrography, climate, vegetation, etc.) and their connections with the anthropic factor.

The research is geographically bounded by natural landmarks, such as the Tisza, Danube, and Dniester Rivers to the west, east and south, to the southeast by the Black Sea coast, and to the north by the northern Bukovina region (Map 1).