Publications on hillforts, like those in other areas of archaeological research, serve as important sources of knowledge. Their significance has grown in recent years as the number of new hillfort excavations has decreased considerably, and accordingly earlier publications are now referenced more frequently. By 2024, a total of 48 works on hillforts had been published. The question is, however, whether these studies meet the definition of a ‘comprehensive publication’ and whether the data they present is reliable and provides a suitable basis for future research.
A comprehensive publication is a presentation of research material, usually in printed form, containing sufficient data in case the original material is lost. It is in the context of this definition that we here evaluate the Soviet-era publication of excavation results, using the excavations at the hillfort of Narkūnai (eastern Lithuania), conducted between 1976 and 1978 (Lietuvos Archeologija [Lithuanian Archaeology], vol. 5, 1985, pp. 5–49), as a case study. The material from these excavations is well preserved. Due to various restrictions during the Soviet period, the publication of excavation results was very limited. This can be seen from the fact that there are no photographs of the excavations and very little attention is paid to the pottery. Since the scope of research publications is determined by a variety of factors, in order to determine how comprehensive it is, the Narkūnai publication was compared with other works on hillforts published in the recent past. The coefficient obtained shows that the publications from the Soviet period are not comprehensive and do not cover all the research material. Therefore, it is necessary to republish studies on the major hillforts, applying the current advances in archaeological science in the fields of research and dissemination.
Factors which suppress or interfere with the deciphering of aerial photography whilst searching for traces of ancient habitations are called noises. The main kinds of noises currently identified in Lithuania are land improvement or land reclamation, woods, urbanisation and reservoirs. Altogether, they make a fair level of noise, thus the search for traces of habitations based solely on aerial photography in Lithuania is not possible.
Journal:Archaeologia Baltica
Volumes 21-22 (2015): Horizons of Archival Archaeology, pp. 90–109
Abstract
Since 2010, several archaeological sites in Lithuania have been geomagnetically surveyed, as part of a German-Lithuanian cooperation project. Within the framework of this cooperation, the Ėgliškiai/Anduliai cemetery, the Taurapilis barrow site, Taurapilis and Opstainiai/Vilkyškiai (outer settlements), and Jakai/Sudmantai (the enclosure) have been investigated. In almost all the sites, features and structures were detected that enable us to make some initial statements about the structure and dimensions of the archaeological monuments. For some sites, the surveys also provided very precise and hitherto unknown information about the context of the settlement. These new results show clearly the potential of non-invasive, especially geomagnetic, methods for archaeological purposes. However, it should be admitted that only a combination of several methods and tools enables a maximum level of knowledge and information on the scientific value and potential of archaeological sites and landscapes. The task for the coming years must therefore focus on the application and combination of further noninvasive geophysical (ground penetrating radar, electrical resistivity) and remote sensing methods in archaeological surveys.
Journal:Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis
Volume 27 (2013): Krikščioniškosios tradicijos raiška viduramžių – naujausiųjų laikų kasdienybės kultūroje: europietiški ir lietuviški puslapiai = The Development of Christian Tradition in Every-day Culture in the Late Middle Ages and Early Modern Period …, pp. 221–225