R. Karl, J. Leskovar [Hrsg.] (207), Interpretierte Eisenzeiten. Fallstudien, Methoden, Theorie. Tagungsbeiträge der 8. Linzer Gespräche zur interpretativen Eisenzeitarchäologie. Studien zur Kulturgeschichte von Oberösterreich, Folge , Linz, . Do you want payment in Iron or Salt? The economic basis of societal development in the European Iron Age Toby Heron Abstract This paper outlines the hypothesis for my PhD thesis. The hypothesis is that during the period of c. 800-450 BC (Hallstatt C-D3), a major factor in the development of the societies that can be observed during this time in Central Europe was the development of an indigenous economic system based primarily, but not exclusively, on iron and salt in the regions of Slovenia and Salzkammergut, Austria. Presented here is only the result of preliminary research, and it is likely the extent of this system was spatially wider, and temporally deeper. The objective of this paper is only to provide an evidential and logical basis from which the hypothesis can be rendered plausible. Zusammenfassung Dieser Beitrag stellt die Hypothese vor, die ich in meiner Doktorarbeit untersuche. Diese Hypothese ist, dass ein bedeutender, archäologisch beobachtbarer Faktor in der gesellschaftlichen Entwicklung im Zeitraum zwischen ca. 800-450 v.Chr. (Hallstatt C-D3) die Entwicklung eines indigenen Wirtschaftssystems war, das primär, wenn auch nicht ausschließlich, auf Eisen und Salz z.B. aus Slowenien und dem Salzkammergut in Österreich beruhte. In diesem Beitrag werden die vorläufigen Ergebnisse meiner Forschungen zu dieser Thematik vorgestellt; wobei von Anfang an anzumerken ist, dass das hier vorgestellte System wahrscheinlich räumlich weiter ausgedehnt war und eine größere zeitliche Tiefe hat als hier vorgestellt wird. Ziel dieses Artikels ist daher nur, die Evidenz und logischen Grundlagen der Hypothese vorzustellen, die sie plausibel genug für genauere, weitere Untersuchungen erscheinen lassen.  intrOductiOn World systems theory was a model conceived by Wallerstein (974) to explain the development of the capitalist world from the 5th and 6th centuries AD, to understand how areas become dependent on another, and changes in one induce changes in the other. While Wallerstein thought his model applicable to capitalist societies only (Wallerstein 975: 350; conceding some pre-capitalist exceptions as Rome, China, and Persia, p.6), archaeologists (Friedman, Rowlands 977) soon applied it to the past, making it an established theoretical framework within the discipline (e.g. Champion 995; Kristiansen 998) for understanding the economic and social impact of the movement of materials and goods (trade) at both microlevel for discerning social hierarchies through redistribution of goods, and the macro-level for explaining long distance trade between regions. Wallerstein’s model has traditionally been used to explain the developments of Europe during the Early Iron Age (e.g. Brun 994; Kristiansen 998; fig. ); specifically for the rise of the West Hallstatt chiefdoms as a periphery to the core Mediterranean economic system. Radical social and technological changes during the 8th and 7th centuries opened up the Mediterranean to Greek and Phoenician culture, leading to intensive interactions and rapid economic development, referred to by Collis (984: 39) as an ‘explosion of trade’, purportedly leading to the emergence of complex societies in central Europe through, mainly, gift exchange networks (Frankenstein, Rowlands 978). I do not dispute the importance and influence of the Mediterranean during this period per se, nor the utility of the world systems model in certain applications. However, it seems to mostly be an argument of convenience to explain events; and to be problematic when applied as a single preponderant explanation, becoming a peremptory, restrictive framework into which the evidence then is forced ex post facto. I contend that, while inter-polity interaction between central Europe and the Mediterranean undoubtedly had significance, the evidence for the economic and societal development of central Europe being at the mercy of the Mediterranean is wholly insufficient. Rather, central European development can be explained as an indigenous development without fallaciously and ill-fittingly reverse-engineering world systems theory and forcibly imposing it onto pre-nation state societies. 2 fig. 1: Europe in the 5th century B.C. (darker shading) conceptualised under the Mediterranean ‘world-economy’ model (after Brun 994: fig. 6.3). Taking a complex systems approach, this hypothesised emergent central European economic system is explicable by the mechanisms of growth, emergence, and dynamics of systems at all scales observed as universal phenomena in reality. Of irOn… The beginning of the Hallstatt culture (c. 800 B.C.) is largely a continuation of the preceding Urnfield period (Collis 984: 74), with settlement largely consisting of isolated hamlets and farmsteads (Wells 985: 72), and mixed subsistence strategies practiced, more weighted towards pastoralism particularly in the west, where settlement was more common on upland regions (Kristiansen 998: 29). Settlements and cemeteries indicate these communities rarely had more than 30-40 members (Kossack 959: 86). At this time, two important developments arose roughly simultaneously. First, there was the introduction of iron metallurgy. Its adoption was a long process, with sporadic occurrence of iron artefacts across Europe throughout the Bronze Age (e.g. Taylor 989: 74; see also Pleiner 980, fig. . fig. 2: Map of the hillforts which emerge from c. 800 BC in Slovenia (after Collis 984: fig. 7a). for more examples). After c. 800 B.C., iron metallurgy matures, becoming far more common, particularly in burial contexts (Pleiner 980: 384), and substantially larger objects such as swords, spearheads and axes appear (Wells 984: 94). Concurrent with the uptake of iron, a series of hillforts in modern day Slovenia emerge (fig. 2), such as Stična, Magdalenska Gora, Most na Soči, Novo Mesto, Šmarjeta, Brezje, and Vače, accompanied by large cemeteries (Wells 984: 89). Wells (98: 99) estimated from this that populations were on average c. 274 at Vače, 94 at Magdalenska Gora, and 577 at Stična – a colossal increase over the rest of central Europe at this time. It seems the inception of these central locations was of an economic nature. The emergence of these centres at the same time as the uptake of iron metallurgy proper was surely no coincidence. Much of Slovenia has access to high grade iron ores from rich deposits (Wells 984: 90; fig. 3), remaining a major iron producer into modernity. These centres, positioned in direct proximity to these ores (fig. 4), were the first to exploit them, as evident from substantial amounts of iron slag recovered from them (Rieth 942: 8-2; Müllner 908: 63). fig. 3: Geographic position of key mineral resources in Central Europe, along with traditionally proposed Baltic amber routes (arrows: A) Pomerania, B) Jutland) (after Mason 996: map 3). fig. 4: The proximity of Stična to surface iron ore deposits. Black circles = prehistoric iron-smelting sites; Stippled areas = iron ore deposits (after Wells 984: fig. 2). 3 fig. 5: Early Iron Age mining galleries from Hallstatt. Composed of over 600 photographs exhibiting the systematic and deliberate strategy employed in this period. Nine gallery levels are represented, each two meters high, and totalling 20m deep and 5m wide (after Kern et al. 2009: 85). While iron may have been the primary domestic economy, these centres achieved a greater economic eminence still. There is evidence for bronze and glass production and trade in amber (Wells 98: tables 8-0) intensified during this period; with copper and tin having to be imported via long-distance trade connections, most likely to Tyrol, Styria, and Salzburg to the north, as possibly indicated by some finds (e.g. Moosleitner 977: 7; Mason 996: 06; Haevernick 958; 974). Being positioned at a nexus point along the amber route (fig. 3), they also seem to have been heavily involved in inter-regional amber trade to southwest Germany (Kimmig 975: 20), and Italy (Wells 98: 2). Contacts with Mediterranean city states evidently existed (Wells 984: 97), with particularly well documented commercial exchange with Italy (Mason 996: 90-6). However, all evidence points towards a predominantly endemic development with a clear economic foundation, 4 making notions of ‘peripheral’ or ‘dependent’ relations redundant. Rather, it seems that due to the coincidental fortune of its geographical position on a major nexus along trade routes between the Mediterranean and the rest of central Europe, along with an abundant source of easily accessible iron, societies in this area established a robust domestic iron extraction, processing, and possibly manufacturing industry; combined with an intensification of domestic bronze, glass and amber trade, processing and manufacturing. Since the latter industries pre-date iron production, it is logical to infer that their intensification was facilitated by the success of the former. Similar developments can also be observed elsewhere in central Europe, e.g. at Großeibstadt in Bavaria, and Bylaný in Bohemia (Wells 984: 99). It appears that after c. 800 BC with the adoption of iron metallurgy proper, populations across the east Hallstatt zone were consciously establishing communities with economic ambitions in mind. While many were primarily focused on the exploitation of iron, we see significant intensification in pre-existing industries, which can be understood as predominantly endemic developments, without a dependency on any ‘core,’ contra Kristiansen (998: 222). This becomes even more compelling when considering Hallstatt itself. … and Salt The second component of this hypothesis of an endemic central European economy is salt, especially from Hallstatt and the Dürrnberg bei Hallein. Here, I will only focus on Hallstatt. Hallstatt exemplifies the economically directed decisions communities were making in this period at an industrial scale to the superlative degree. The salt mine had been exploited since the Bronze Age, throughout the Iron Ages, the Roman period, and at substantial scales from 3 A.D., continuing on until the present day (Wells 98: 0). The prehistoric zenith occurred in the Early Iron Age, concurrent with the developments in Slovenia, but beginning a century earlier during the 9th, and lasting until the 4th century BC (Kern et al. 2009: 83; 57). Compared with the Bronze Age mining, the operation was highly organised, erecting substantial infrastructures within decades (fig. 5) and vastly increasing production (Kern et al. 2009: 85). Salt was extracted with systematic efficiency, alongside a direct concern with quality of product (Kern et al. 2009: 87-9). Contrary to the Bronze Age miners, who mainly exploited Haselgebirge with a c. 45% purity, the early Iron Age miners were only concerned with veins of around 80% purity (Wells 98: 7), with wastage of about 0% of the total mined salt discarded (Kern et al. 2009: 89). This is a substantial quantity, making it tempting to infer the possibility that there was a presence of mind for a Hallstatt ‘brand’. Mining seems to have been highly organised, including signalling and communication (Wells 98: ), allowing for a conservative estimate of more than two million cubic meters of salt to be mined (Kristiansen 998: 228), possibly significantly more. Ancillary activities were also required to support the mining enterprise (Kern et al. 2009: 09). Many items of the miner’s daily lives were repaired and reused after they were broken (Kern et al. 2009: 92, 87), suggesting various craftsmen were regularly required; as were vast quantities of timber for infrastructure within the mines (Wells 984: 84; Kern et al. 2009: 90), spruce and fir tapers for illumination, and sustenance (Kern et al. 2009: 92-3). Analysis demonstrates miners stayed underground for significant periods of time and ate a very nutrient rich stew akin to modern ‘Ritschert’, containing beans, barley, millet, meat, as well as hazelnuts, fruits, and cheese (Kern et al. 2009: 93-5). Based on the c. 2,000 graves known at the time, Wells (98: 99) estimated the average population of Hallstatt at c. 206 people. Recalculating this for the c. 6,000 graves estimated today (Kern et al. 2009: 2), this would rise to c. 67 individuals and, following criticism of Well’s estimates (Kristiansen 998: 23), could be higher still. Osteoanalysis of 25 skeletons finding both sexes and all ages represented (Kern et al. 2009: 37-8) indicates permanent occupation over successive generations, with musculoskeletal markers demonstrating both men and women endeavoured in particularly austere physical labour from early childhood with a strict, and highly efficient, division of labour (Kern et al. 2009: 40-). All this testifies to the monumental scale of the mining operations at Hallstatt, at a level of complexity traditionally expected from a state society. The prodigious scale of this organisation becomes most apparent with regards to their subsistence, because unlike the centres in Slovenia, the mountainous region of Hallstatt has very little sunlight, poor soils, and steep slopes nigh impossible tab. 1: Conservative estimates of weights (in tonnage) of ingredients of Ritschert that would be required to supply the population at Hallstatt using Peter Wells’ population calculation (updated). Only ingredients of significant weight are considered, based on a modern recipe (from https://www.gutekueche.at/ritschert-rezept7006), modified to conform with evidence from Hallstatt. Calculations have assumed an all-year round occupation. to cultivate. Hallstatt thus must have been supplied by communities from the lower plains; with table  showing conservative estimates of the tonnages in ingredients required for Ritschert alone (using the updated 67 population average). To maintain weight, an average modern human male requires c. 2,500 cals. per day, and women c. 2,000 cals. (taken from www.nhs.uk). Three meals of the Ritschert presented here provide 2,432.7 cals., with each portion at 80.9 cals. 2-3 portions per day thus have to be assumed. Since the following estimates are based on the burial numbers in the cemetery, they are not affected by variable working patterns, since the locally resident population needs sustenance whether working in the mine or taking days, weeks or even months off at any time. The tonnage required is quite striking, particularly given the necessary frequency, distances, and organisation the logistical operations demanded. Assuming, following Kossack and Wells (above), that typical farmsteads of the period had a population of c. 30-40, the population of Hallstatt is over an order of magnitude greater. It should therefore be possible to calculate (given a range of percent surplus such sized communities could possibly produce, taken from historical data) an estimate of how many farmsteads would be required to support Hallstatt’s population. This will be explored in my thesis, but I would hazard to guess that a large part of the Danube plain in Upper Austria, starting c. 40 km north of Hallstatt, will have been engaged in producing surplus to support Hallstatt. Considering that the cemeteries at 5 Uttendorf and Mitterkirchen may represent major nodes within this supply system, supplies could have travelled to Hallstatt from up to 00-50 km away. The success of the industrial-scale salt enterprise at Hallstatt is evident from the wealth of grave goods accompanying the burials from the cemetery, with the full range of prestige items which occur in other cemeteries of the time much more frequently than elsewhere and indicating the range and frequency of trade contacts (Wells 984: 85), even to distant places like Asia Minor, Africa, Italy, Hungary, Slovakia, southwest Germany, Transylvania and particularly Slovenia (see Kern et al. 2009: 30-35; Mason 996: 97). While there are no incredibly rich individual graves, on aggregate, the grave goods assemblage make Hallstatt the richest collection of wealth in Europe for its period (Collis 984: 79). Yet, the product from Hallstatt could only have been for a central European market. Salt can be transported some distance, but there are intrinsic limits on its distribution in premodern times. Moreover, it is unlikely that the Mediterranean was interested in Hallstatt salt, having its own supply – the Mediterranean – including sufficient solar energy required for low-cost evaporation techniques, as e.g. described by Livy (Ab Urbe Condita: .33.9) and Pliny the Elder (Nat. Hist.: 33.79-90). the emergence Of the firSt urban centreS nOrth Of the alpS From c. 600 BC, ‘princely’ hillfort settlements (Fürstensitze) with their associated tumuli (Fürstengräber) develop to the north and west of the Alps in southwest Germa- ny, and later spreading into eastern/central France and Moravia. Traditionally, this civilisation princière has been interpreted as a decidedly hierarchical chiefdom level society, based near-exactly upon a model of medieval feudal society (Frankenstein, Rowlands 978). The explanation for its emergence has conventionally been economic; as a reflex of trade relationships with the Mediterranean (e.g. Frankenstein, Rowland 978; Wells 980; Brun 994; Kristiansen 998). This explanation is based on several lines of evidence. Firstly, the establishment of Massalia, c. 600 BC. Secondly, the appearance of imported (and imitated) Greek pottery on many of the Fürstensitze, as well as in the Fürstengräber, along with luxury prestige imports. Thirdly, Greek influence such as the mudbrick wall at the Heuneburg, erected c. 600 BC (Wells 980: 95). Lastly, the position of the Fürstensitze on key waterways (Pauli 994: 68) such as the Heuneburg on the upper Danube, Mont Lassois on the Seine, etc. The control of exchange networks by means of these centres has been argued to lead to the development of more complex societies (Hodder 977) in a region relatively deficient in its own minerals (Collis 984: 82). Thus arose the interpretation of elite chiefs on the ‘periphery’ engaged in competitive exchange within a ‘prestige goods’ economy dependent on the Mediterranean ‘core’ (Frankenstein, Rowlands 978). There is no doubt relations between the Mediterranean and barbarian Europe existed, and intensified during the late Hallstatt period; the influence of the former certainly precipitated a significant degree of economic development in the latter. However, based on closer inspection of the evidence, as well as new data from recent excavations at the Heuneburg, the centre-periphery fig. 6: Distributions of Massaliot amphorae (left) and Attic black-figured ware (right) (after Kimmig 983: fig. 27, 28). 6 explanation of the Mediterranean as primum movens to explain the rise of the West Hallstatt chiefdoms can no longer be maintained. Firstly, there is the problem of the imported material themselves. When quantity rather than quality is considered, the connection immediately appears rather meagre, with just c. 24 black-figured Attic ware pots reconstructed out of some c. 300 sherds recovered at Mont Lassois, and only 70 or so sherds from the Heuneburg (Champion 994: 47). This is a stark contrast to c. ,000 complete vessels found at e.g. Vulci (Wells 984: 5) or the number of imports into the French Midi (fig. 6). Additionally, many luxury imports show evidence of repair and replacement work, indicating curation for significant periods before deposition (Bintliff 984: 67). Secondly, there are chronological implications. All imported ceramics, apart from two small black-figured sherds from the Heuneburg (manufactured around 540/530 BC), date to the Hallstatt periods D2-3 (Pare 99: 86). Some Fürstensitze developed from preceding Hallstatt C settlements (Champion 994: 47), with e.g. the Heuneburg established in the late 7th century (c. 630/620 BC), predating the foundation of Massalia by a generation or so (Fernández-Götz, Ralston 207: 262). The development of the West Hallstatt chiefdoms thus predates trade from the Mediterranean, and can be more logically explained by an internal evolution. Lastly, the prestige-goods model is also insufficient. The data provided by Frankenstein and Rowlands (978: 00) actually contradicts their argument, showing the imports were hardly redistributed at all, while indigenously produced artefacts were (Frankenstein, Rowlands 978: 84). Some sort of exchange system of prestige goods existed within the west Hallstatt chiefs’ social ordering, but not an ‘economy’, as it is far too exclusive, and known since Adam Smith (202: 445) that an economy develops from the bottom up. In contrast, an ‘economy’ for wine can be demonstrated in the Rhône basin, where virtually every town, village, and hamlets shows some evidence of some access to Mediterranean wine (Dietler 200: 20). What is certain is the economic basis for the success of the west Hallstatt Chiefdoms, with a focus on production and manufacture. Excavations at the Heuneburg produced evidence for bronze production through several phases (Collis 984: 95; Wells 980: 83). Several weights have also been recovered, directly emblematic of an importance of commerce (Sievers 984: pl. 55; 974, fig. 7: Distribution of Iron bars in Central Europe during the Late Hallstatt (-4), and Late Hallstatt/La Tène (5-9) (after Kristiansen 998: fig. 08). fig. 8: Concentration of Late Hallstatt/early La Tène pyramidformed iron bars (rectangles) and Late Hallstatt gold finds (after Kristiansen 998: fig. 42). 56.795). Wheel-made pottery was also manufactured (Pare 99: 85), and evidence for coral-working present (Wells 980: 26). Evidence for central metal production has also been found at several other sites (Champion 982: 69; 994: 48). Also, metal items such as fibulae were produced in a much greater diversity of forms and numbers than the preceding period, it not being uncommon 7 fig. 9: Plan of the Heuneburg during the mud-brick wall phase (after Fernández-Götz, Ralston 207: fig. 2). in Hallstatt D for sites to produce several hundred alone (Pare 99: 9). The industrial scale of production becomes quite clear from the distribution of iron bars (fig. 7) and then their correlation with gold finds (fig. 8), even if these maps include the beginning of the La Tène period and thus are slightly skewed northwards. Whether produced for currency or manufacturing, or both, they had to have been imported. Thus, something must have been offered in exchange, and a sufficiently developed economy existed to acquire the materials to explain their existence in the archaeological record. This scale of production is supported by recent excavations at the Heuneburg. Rather than just consisting of an acropolis and suburbium, we now know was tripartite and covered c. 00 hectares (Fernández-Götz 207: 4). When the mud-brick wall was constructed, the preceding internal arrangement of the settlement (on the later acropolis) was demolished and new rows of orthogonally arranged houses built along a network of streets (Fernández-Götz, Ralston 207: 262). The lower town was established shortly after, and densely settled with workshops and houses (Fernández-Götz, Krausse 203: 476), as was the outer settlement, consisting of groups of enclosed 8 farmsteads of about -.5ha each, ordered into ‘neighbourhoods’ (fig. 9; Fernández-Götz, Krausse 203: 477). It has been estimated that the Heuneburg at this stage accommodated c. 5,000 people, more than the majority of contemporary Mediterranean poleis (Fernández-Götz 207: 4-5). With further hillforts within a 20km radius, the Heuneburg was likely the centre of power at the top of a regional settlement hierarchy (Fernández-Götz, Krausse 203: 477). It thus seems more plausible that the economic interest of the Mediterranean states was a consequence of the development of the west Hallstatt chiefdoms, rather than their cause, which is also indicated by the logic of the Heuneburg’s positioning on the Danube. Its location about as close to the source of the Danube as navigably possible suggests a relationship with the east, where it possibly could have been a deliberate decision to set up something akin to a port-of-trade to enable goods to penetrate as far west as possible. Thus, the emergence of the west Hallstatt chiefdoms is better explained as a consequence of the economic developments in the east Hallstatt zone during Hallstatt C, rather than in the Mediterranean. the ecOnOmic baSiS fOr SOcietal develOpment in central eurOpe The primary aim of this thesis is to explicate the link between the proposed economic system, based primarily on iron and salt, which arose from c. 800 BC, and the development of societal complexity in the early Iron Age throughout its extent, with its apogee embodied by the first urban centres north of the Alps after c. 600 BC. This will be attempted using a complex systems theoretical approach. Complex systems represent the interaction of, “large networks of components with no central control and simple rules of operating [which] give rise to complex collective behaviour, sophisticated information processing, and adaptation via learning or evolution” (Mitchell 2009: 3). Such systems are open and therefore operate inimically to states of equilibrium (Bentley, Maschner 2008: 246), through the simple interactions of many agents by which the system is composed – often nonlinearly, exhibiting structural contingencies (i.e. ‘no one best way’), positive feedback relationships, and ‘frustration’ (where it is impossible to satisfy the interests of all agents within system constraints; Sherrington 200: 77). The result is such systems which exhibit self-organising behaviours and emergent phenomena. As all human societies are open systems, thanks to the cycle of life and death where successive generations learn and bring about some degree of change, complexity theory is an expedient framework with which to approach archaeological problems like this. Unfortunately, limitations forbid any further discussion on complexity theory (a useful introduction to the key general concepts is provided by Bentley, Maschner (2008), and Kohler (202)), and consequently also neither permits a sufficient exposition to the extent complexity theory may be appraised onto the context of this thesis. Instead, it will have to be sufficient to discuss only one scale of the proposed system, which will be the level of interaction between individuals/households, as this is where the development of commodity economies is most relevant, where the logic being, innovations in salt production at Hallstatt and iron production in Slovenia set off cascade events which resulted in positive-feedback relations between interacting agents, ensuing the emergence of central place locations disposed to capitalise on these materials. Their emergence could only occur with the parallel development of a self-organising micro-regional system of interacting agents at the farmstead, hamlet, and household level, to satisfy the greatly increased energetic needs of the population within the major centres and the industrial sector of the population. Since surplus production is a choice, and humans generally choose low-cost over high yield strategies without incentive (Boserup 965), this necessitates the development of a micro-economic system where the output of the industrial sector provides incentives for the energy producing sector to produce surplus so the industrial sector can subsist. This would result in a positive feedback loop: output from industry provides incentives and more efficient means for energetic production, which in turn provides more subsistence for the industrial sector. Given time this economy would ‘lock in’, with agents in the local economy becoming reliant on the output of the centre, and the centre on the output of all agents. This is exemplified at Hallstatt, where the mining population must have depended on the population of its hinterland for subsistence. In order for such a trajectory to develop, the first hurdle which must be satisfied is the energetic requirements. The Physiocrat economists of 8th century France, such as François Quesnay, realised this fact, where while they considered agriculture, industry, and commerce the principle components of a country’s wealth, the distinction between them is an abstraction, as the latter are causally dependent on agriculture – land being, “the source or material from which Wealth is extracted,” and “Human labour … the form which produces it” (from Higgs 897: 30, 8). In order to develop and intensify economic industries such as iron, bronze, salt, glass, etc. as we see in Slovenia, or salt at Hallstatt, a certain proportion of full-time specialists (or the entire population at Hallstatt) would have to engage in any combination of mineral extraction, processing, manufacture, and logistics. To support a population not engaged in energy production, the ratio of energy gained to human energy expended in subsistence production needs to be greatly increased, a major obstacle most small societies are unable to overcome (Ellen 982: 69). Salt and its widespread availability thanks to Hallstatt, I suspect, was the key enabling the populations of central Europe to do so. While salt is necessary dietary component for body function, the populations of the early Iron Age in central Europe could easily achieve the necessary intake of c. .5-3g daily by consumption of meat and cereals such as barley (the most saline domesticated cereal; Ashead 992: 7). Sufficient gains in energy produced per unit expended thus, I would suggest, resulted from the preservative properties of salt, particularly where pastoralist activities are concerned. Obviously, meat preservation for longer periods would be enabled by salting, reducing spoilage and providing more efficient allocation of nutrition over time, as animals would not need to be consumed soon after slaughter. Thus, each unit of meat per animal could go a lot farther, requiring (all else being equal) less animals to be slaughtered to support a population. This could either lead to increased herd sizes over time, or the same number of animals supporting a larger human population or non-energy productive class of people. Adding salt to livestock’s diet also provides a significant increase in reproductive rates and fitness in offspring in livestock (Digby et al. 20), a fact well understood in the ancient world (Aristotle History of Animals: 6.9; Plutarch Natural Questions: 3), as was utilising mainly males for meat, save a few for reproduction, since this has no effect on the reproduction rate of the population. Moreover, salt also increases milk yields when supplemented 9 to their diet (Phillips et al. 2000), again something well understood in the ancient world (Pliny Nat. Hist.: 3.4). Where the use of milk is concerned, salt is also crucial in the production of secondary dairy products such as cheese, for separating the whey from the curds and for killing the bacteria necessary for creating the curds, allowing it to be matured for very long periods. Thus, greater availability of salt would have allowed to preserve dairy products (Di Fraia 20: 30) for consumption by non-energy producing populations, making them a major commodity for trade and a previously untapped highly nutritious resource to communities. The wider availability of salt thus creates the necessary preconditions for the emergence and maintenance of a non-energy producing section of the population, free to pursue other useful productive activities, directing societies to develop along an economic foundation eventually resulting in commercial urban centres. This is particularly so since, aside from the initial material cost to acquire the salt, the exponential advantages in energetic gains come at essentially zero cost to human energy expended. This ratio (energy gained to human energy expended) is exactly what is needed to drastically increase to create the necessary positive feedback, with salt thus providing a solid explanation for how this was possible in the Iron Age. The only other avenue for increasing this ratio proposed at the conference, from horticulture, seems unlikely, since aside from minor efficiency gains through manuring, with Iron Age technology, increasing yields (energy gained) essentially has a linear relationship with human energy expenditure. However, it is possible that the development of economically based societies provided levels of divisions of labour allowing agriculturalists to devote more time to cultivation and the creation of surpluses for trade, therefore also meaningfully contributing to supporting a non-energy productive sector; but as a consequence of these systemic developments rather than a cause. Aside from being a culinary condiment which we are reminded of by the classical authors (providing prima facie evidence for economic demand), salt was also important in many other productive industries, such as leather processing, metallurgy, glass, medicinal and ritual, and creating textile dyes (Kern et al. 2009: 80; Di Fraia 20: 27; Ashead 992: 26). Salt thus would also have facilitated the development secondary industries into full 0 time professions, providing the trigger for a cascade effect in the development of a functional and bountiful local economy which positively fed-back to each other further increasing efficiency. The needs of e.g. miners for clothes, food, bronze tools, lumber for infrastructure etc. to sustain operations, increasing the more industrial the scale of the operation became, will presumably have created sufficient demand that eventually, full-time specialists would be required, such as foresters, carpenters, weavers, butchers, cheese-makers, tanners, bronze smiths, etc. These secondary industries would then also have fed back into each other, as forestry would create new pastures for pastoralists, increasing carrying capacity for herds, resulting in even more milk, meat, leather, and wool for weavers, cheese-makers, butchers, tanners, etc., creating more goods to trade and more energy to support these enterprises. Thus, intensification of production and collective enterprise with self-organised divisions of labour result in greater material outputs and thus the emergence of an affluent economy. While the cumulative effect of production of every agent benefits the whole, all agents act in their own selfinterest (Smith 202: 9). Transaction between agents only occur if both offer what the other needs. This is especially pronounced in economies without a universal medium of exchange (i.e. money), where there is only so much of some goods, like clothes, that people need. The economic system thus must be sufficiently diverse in goods and therefore industries that transactions between agents can reliably always take place. I suspect iron was crucial to solve this problem, providing a material with sufficient fungibility (where one unit in weight is easily exchangeable for another equivalent unit regardless of form), and marketability to the system, as well as having high utilitarian value from many practical and widespread applications, such as for tools. Thus, iron metallurgy likely also triggered an innovation cascade in the development of many secondary industries, as well as possibly acting as a medium of exchange itself. Indeed, thus far, the salt mining operations at Hallstatt during the later Bronze Age have been omitted from this discussion. Due to their scale, it can safely be deduced that they were also economically prosperous, providing an obvious rebuke to the hypothesis presented here: that we do not see similar developments occur at this time. I suspect that there was a trajectory for similar developments to occur using bronze instead of iron, but inher- ent problems with bronze itself and the collapse of late Bronze Age trade networks ultimately stopped it short. The first indication for this is that Hallstatt and other significant salt mining operations such as in the Carpathian Basin (Harding 205) took off roughly concomitantly with the intensification of the European bronze trade networks, and ceased roughly with the collapse of these trade networks. Secondly, the geographic, topographic and relatively sparse distribution of copper meant large populations could not be supported where it occurs, which inhibited the development of large centres which allow for sufficient levels of economic efficiency through divisions of labour, the development of other industries, and serve as major nodes for trade within a small world network drastically cutting down the path length between all individual agents within the network. Lastly, there are problems with bronze itself, which suffers from a major internal contradiction. On the one hand it can be made into highly valued prestige items, on the other, it is needed for tools, particularly after an ‘innovation horizon’ at c. 500 BC (Pare 203: fig. 29.4), when tools became increasingly more common and diverse (Primas 997: 23), and it was also widely circulated at an inter-regional scale as a rude form of currency (Primas 997: 23; Pare 203: fig. 29.3). Added to this is the problem of transport costs for many places, especially for tin, which would have made Bronze inherently far more expensive to produce than iron. Given the costs to import the materials for manufacture, it is probable the bronze industry was only economically sustainable for items of prestige or other high-value exchange, which is after all what it has been predominantly used for throughout (pre)history. A fundamental principle in economics is that resources are scarce and have alternative uses, and the key is how best to efficiently allocate these resources to where they are best utilised. In free-markets with competition of prices, ‘resources tend to flow to their most valued uses’ (Sowell 20: 23). Artificially raising prices tends to cause more to be supplied and less demanded (Sowell 20: 237), while conversely, putting limits on prices causes demand to outweigh supply, causing shortages (‘shortage’ in the economic sense meaning a lack of supply due to pricing, rather than ‘scarcity’ which is the actual lack of product relative to the population) (Sowell 20: 40; 43). I suspect that bronze being brought into utilitarian use for tools and currency acted effectively akin to instituting a price ceiling. As already mentioned, early Iron Age bronze production greatly surpassed Bronze Age levels, so a scarcity of the material seems unlikely. Rather, a shortage in the Late Bronze Age may be deduced, likely brought about by two connected factors. First was a problem with misallocation of resources: if the population within the system requiring low-value utilitarian items vastly outweighs that demanding highvalue items, then every unit of bronze used for local utilitarian means is one which cannot be used for long-distance trade to acquire crucial goods. If used as currency as well, this further reduced what could otherwise be used for trade. Thus, a shortage of bronze for long-distance trade for essential commodities like salt can arise, reduce inter-regional circulation and render industries (such as Bronze Age salt mining at Hallstatt) unprofitable, lead to their collapse, and break up long-distance connections in an already fragile, decentralised (and thus poorly connected) system. The second problem was a price problem, aggrandizing the first. If bronze smiths had to make more low value bronzes than high, this could lead to an unsustainable industry vis-à-vis the costs to import and produce the materials. With a lot more bronze in circulation and used as a currency, presumably most often for small local transactions, this could depreciate the value of the material overall. This could render bronze production unprofitable and thus cause a shortage and eventual collapse. If there was indeed a shortage, we should see signs in the archaeological record. What often occurs alongside shortages caused by price controls are quality deterioration (because it saves costs and demand outstrips supply and thus no incentive for suppliers to please buyers) and hoarding (to counter uncertainty of availability) (Sowell 20: 5-2). This is exactly what we see during the late Bronze Age in scrap hoards and shipwrecks containing large amounts of leaded bronze objects (usually axes), also commonly very carelessly manufactured (Huth 2000: 2; 27, fig. 2). While this is largely conjecture, the introduction of iron changes matters. Iron, after all, was; ) much more widely available and thus less costly to extract and transport; 2) found in more favourable locations amenable to the development of large centres like in Slovenia, with deposits surrounded by fertile plains intersected by preexisting trade networks; 3) not requiring any alloying with other scarce materials, making it less costly to pro-  fig. 10: Theoretical model of economic development during the early Iron Age in central Europe. duce; 4) aptly suited for utilitarian items, providing a harder cutting edge, being more durable than bronze, and thus a more efficient material for tools, and 5) if used for commodity exchange was plentiful, marketable, and fungible enough for local low value exchange. This freed bronze up again as a resource for prestige items and longdistance higher-value exchange, rendering it profitable again, which is what we seem to see in the intensification of bronze production in the early Iron Age. Perhaps even more important was iron’s potential to trigger its own innovation cascade – of course allowed for by salt and the energy productive sector of society. There is a point of intensification of iron production where other agents would have to come in and fulfil supplementary roles to maintain production efficiency, with a division of labour naturally emerging as described above for Hallstatt and salt, with its own positive feedback effects into other economic sectors. For example, full time tree-felling would result in over-abundance of lumber, allowing more goods to be produced or services rendered, at a lower cost, allowing for more houses, wagons, boats, etc. to be built, with an increased supply of materials and demand allowing for the emergence of full time carpenters. Of course, more forests cleared also provides more useable land for agriculture, etc. This would likely have had system-wide ramifica- 2 tions, as more transport vehicles such as wagons and boats could be built, and thus more goods be transported more frequently. The positive effect to the logistics in the system cannot be overstated: economics is about allocating scarce resources which have alternative uses, and then turning them into outputs (Sowell 20: 5). If the resource is glucose/oxygen and the output is energy, then logistics functions as the systems blood supply. More goods transported more frequently means more efficient resource allocation, allowing for system-wide gains to production, more transactions per unit time, and thus more system-wide economic growth. While this affects all goods and industries, iron tools provide a significant system-wide benefit. Firstly, due to its availability, many more agents get access to metal tools. Secondly, having superior properties, they increase labour efficiency by lowering human energy expenditure per same unit work, lowering time required per unit work, resulting in higher output of production per same unit time. Once societies in central Europe during the early Iron Age were set on this economic developmental trajectory propagated by iron and salt, given time and a sufficiently stable environment, populations within the system would continue to self-organise leading to greater and greater efficiencies and economic growth. Parallel to this, new societal strategies would emerge to adapt to the requirements the system would bestow onto agents, such as new settlement structures, societal organisation, and political institutions. Figure 0 provides an illustrative delineation to conceive how the system functioned through the interplay of all its constituent parts. I hypothesise it was through such a process as this which developed from c. 800 BC in central Europe that provided the impetus for societal development resulting in providing the necessary conditions for the emergence of the first urban centres north of the Alps by c. 600 BC. cOncluSiOn I have attempted to establish, at least to the realm of the plausible, that from c. 800-600 BC, we can observe a sudden increase of societal complexity in central Europe – the formation of large hillfort centres in Slovenia and the industrial scale operations at Hallstatt. That these two regions were selected, and rose to prominence, is evidently due to the deliberate determination to exploit iron and salt resources. This, I maintain, stimulated the genesis of an endemic central European economic system based on (or at least enabled by) primarily those resources, which ultimately resulted in the emergence of the first urban centres in Europe north of the Alps in the West Hallstatt zone after c. 600 BC. The prosperity this system brought forth can not only be observed within the burial and settlement evidence within these regions themselves, but also from the intensification of other industries, e.g. glass, bronze, iron bars, weights, and amber, recovered from the archaeological record. These are of course, among some others like ceramics, the only materials which survive and thus are observable, but we can reasonably assume that the organic material economies also boomed during the same period as they have been demonstrated to be the most significant economies to agrarian societies, in the classical (Will 955-6: 57-9) and the medieval period (Pirenne 937: 57). While foreign powers certainly were engaged within this system, and likely had a significant effect on it to some degree, in no way is it necessary to evoke subservience, dependence, exploitative, or deferential reverence to said powers in order to explicate these developments. I contend societal development from Hallstatt C through to the end of Hallstatt D can all be explained through internal means. 3 bibliOgraphy Arthur, W.B. (990), Positive Feedbacks in the Economy. Scientific American 262: 92-99. Ashead, S.A.M. (992), Salt and Civilization. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Bentley, R.A., Maschner, D.G. (2008), Complexity Theory. In Bentley, R.A., Maschner, H.D.G., Chippindale, C. [eds.], Handbook of Archaeological Theories. Lanham: Altamira Press. Bintliff, J. (984), Iron Age Europe in the Context of social evolution from the Bronze Age through to Historic times. In: Bintliff, J. [ed.], European Social Evolution: Archaeological Perspectives. Bradford: University of Bradford. Boserup, E. (965), The conditions of agricultural growth; the economics of agrarian change under population pressure. London: Allen and Unwin. Brun, P. (994), From the Hallstatt to La Tène Period in the Perspective of the Mediterranean World Economy. In: Kristiansen, K., Jensen, J. [eds.], Europe in the First Millennium B.C. Sheffield: J.R. Collis Publications. Champion, S. (982), Exchange and ranking: the case of coral. In: Renfrew, C., Shennan, S. [eds.], Ranking, resource and exchange: Aspects of the archaeology of early European society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Champion, S. (994), Regional studies: a question of scale. In: Kristiansen, K., Jensen, J. [eds.], Europe in the First Millennium B.C. Sheffield: University of Sheffield. Champion, T.C. (995), Centre and Periphery: Comparative Studies in Archaeology. London: Routledge. Collis, J. (984), The European Iron Age. London: Batsford. Dietler, M. (200), Archaeologies of Colonialism: Consumption, Entanglement, and Violence in Ancient Mediterranean France. Berkley: University of California Press. Digby, S.N., Chadwick, M.A., Blache, D. (20), Salt intake and reproductive function in sheep. Animal 5: 207-26. Di Fraia, T. (20), Salt Production and Consumption in Prehistory: towards a complex systems view. In:Vianello, A. [ed.], Exotica in the Prehistoric Mediterranean, Oxford: Oxbow. Ellen, R., (982), Environment, Subsistence and System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fernández-Götz, M. (207), Urbanization in Iron Age Europe: Trajectories, Patterns, and Social Dynamics. Journal of Archaeological Research, -46. Fernández-Götz, M., Krausse, D. (203), Rethinking Early Iron Age urbanisation in Central Europe. Antiquity 87: 473-487. Fernández-Götz, M., Ralston, I. (207), The Complexity and Fragility of Early Iron Age Urbanism in West-Central Temperate Europe. Journal of World Prehistory 30: 259-279. Frankenstein, S., Rowlands M.J. (978), Early Iron Age society in southwest Germany. Institute of Archaeology Bulletin 5: 732. Friedman, J., Rowlands, M.J. (977), Notes towards an Epigenetic Model of the Evolution of ‘Civilization’. In: Friedman, J., Rowlands, M.J. [eds.], The Evolution of Social Systems. London: Duckworth. Haevernick,T.E. (974), Die Glasfunde aus den Gräbern vom Dürrnberg. In: Moosleitner, F., Pauli, L., Penninger, E. [Hrsg.], Der Dürrnberg bei Hallein II. München: Beck. 4 Harding, A. (205), Salt exploitation in the later prehistory of the Carpathian Basin. Documenta Praehistorica 42: 2-27. Higgs, H. (897), The Physiocrats: Six Lectures on the French Économistes of the 8th Century. London: Macmillan and Co. Hodder, I. (977), Some new directions in the spatial analysis of archaeological data at the regional level (macro). In: Clarke, D.L. [ed.], Spatial Archaeology. London: Academic Press. Huth, C. (2000), Quality and Quantity in Late Bronze and Early Iron Age Exchange System. In: Guimlia-Mair, A. [ed.], Ancient Metallurgy between Oriental Alps and Pannonian Plain. Trieste: Università di Trieste. Kauffman, S.A. (994), Whispers form Carnot. In: Cowan, G.A., Pines, D., Meltzer, D. [eds.], Complexity: Metaphors, models, and reality. Boulder: Westview. Kern, A., Kowarik, K., Rausch, A.W., Reschreiter, H. (2009), Kingdom of Salt: 7000 years of Hallstatt.Vienna: Natural History Museum. Kimmig, W. (975), Die Heuneburg an der oberen Donau. Ausgrabungen in Deutschland 950-975, Teil I. Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum Monographien : 92-2. Kimmig, W. (983), Die griechische Kolonisation im westlichen Mittelmeergebiet und ihre Wirkung auf die Landschaften des westlichen Mitteleuropa. Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 30: 3-78. Kohler, T. (202), Complex Systems and Archaeology. In: Hodder, I. [ed.], Archaeological Theory Today. Cambridge: Polity Press. Kossack, G. (959), Südbayern während der Hallstattzeit. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Kristiansen, K. (998), Europe Before History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lloyd, C. (986), Explanation in Social History. Oxford: Blackwell. Mason, P. (996), The Early Iron Age of Slovenia. BAR International Series 634, Oxford: BAR. Mitchell, M. (2009), Complexity: A Guided Tour. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Moosleitner, F. (977), Hallstattzeitliche Grabfunde aus Uttendorf im Pinzgau (Österreich). Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 7: 5-9. Müllner, A. (908), Geschichte des Eisens in Innerösterreich von der Urzeit bis zum Anfang des XIX Jahrhunderts. Teil : Krain, Küstenland und Istrien.Vienna:Von Halm & Goldmann. Pare, C. (99), Fürstensitze, Celts and the Mediterranean World: Developments in the West Hallstatt Culture in the 6th and 5th Centuries BC. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 57: 83-202. Pare, C. (203), Weighing, Commodification, and Money. In: Fokkens, H., Harding, A. [eds.], The Oxford Handbook of the European Bronze Age. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pauli, L. (994), Case Studies in Celtic Archaeology. In: Kristiansen, K., Jensen, J. [eds.], Europe in the First Millennium B.C. Sheffield: University of Sheffield. Phillips, C.J.C., Chiy, P.C., Arney, D.R., Kärt, O. (2000), Journal of Dairy Research 67: -2. Pirenne, H. (937), Economic and Social History of Medieval Europe. New York: Harcourt. Pleiner, R. (980), Early Iron Metallurgy in Europe. In: Wertime, T.A., Muhly, J.D. [eds.], The Coming of the Age of Iron. New Haven:Yale University Press. Rieth, A. (942), Die Eisentechnik der Hallstattzeit. Leipzig: Barth. Sherrington, D. (200), Physics and Complexity. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 368: 75-89. Sievers, S. (984), Die Kleinfunde der Heuneburg: Die Funde aus den Grabungen von 950-979. Heuneburgstudien V. Römisch-Germanische Forschungen 42, Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Smith, A. (202) [776], Wealth of Nations. Ware: Wordsworth. Sowell, T. (20), Basic Economics: A Common Sense Guide to the Economy. New York: Basic Books. Taylor, T. (989), Iron and Iron Age in the Carpatho-Balkan Region: Aspects of Social and Technological Change 200-400 B.C. In: Sørensen, M.L.S., Thomas, R. [eds.], The Bronze Age-Iron Age Transition in Europe: Aspects of continuity and change in European societies c. 200 to 500 B.C. BAR International Series 483(I), Oxford: BAR. Wallerstein, I. (974), The Modern World-System I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press. Wells, P.S. (980), Culture contact and culture change: Early Iron Age central Europe and the Mediterranean world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wells, P.S. (98), The Emergence of an Iron Age Economy: The Mecklenburg Grave groups from Hallstatt and Stična. Mecklenburg Collection Part III. American School of Prehistoric Research, Bulletin 33, Harvard: Peabody Museum. Wells, P.S. (984), Farms, Villages, and Cities: Commerce and Urban Origins in Late Prehistoric Europe. London: Cornell University Press. Wells, P.S. (985), Mediterranean trade and culture change in Early Iron Age central Europe. In: Champion, T.C., Megaw, J.V.S. [eds.], Settlement and Society: aspects of West European prehistory in the first millennium B.C. Cambridge: Leicester University Press. Will, E. (955-6), Archėologie et histoire ėconomique. Etudes d’Archėologie Classique : 49-66. Toby Heron School of History, Philosophy, and Social Science Bangor University College Road Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2DG United Kingdom Email: hiu4b3@bangor.ac.uk 5 6