Oldtidsagre - Genstandskundskab

Nr.1 169
The “Celtic fields" and the similar ancient fields of Holland and Denmark
imply the use of a light plough of arð-type, and these fields are ploughed in two
directions-at least those of a broad form. On the other hand. the “I~Iochäcker" and
also the lynchet-fields in the mountains on both sides of the Rhine imply the use
of a heavy plough.
Ancient fields like those of Jutland or like the “Celtic fields" are not, so far,
found in Central Europe outside of Holland. This may perhaps be due to an early
appearance of the heavy plough in Central Europe.
The origin of the long, ridged field, the “I-Iochäcker", is not a simple problem.
It would not be right to consider this type of fields as a simple result of ploughing
with a one-sided mould-board plough. Above, I have mentioned the small narrow
fields or beds, separated with ditches, which vAN GIFFEN found beneath grave-mounds
at Zeyen. In North-\Vest Germany, the use of “Plaggenmist", i. e. the conveyance
of heath-turf or other kinds of humus to the fields, has been very common, and that
has contributed to raising the height of the fields (NIEMEIER und TASCHENMACHER
1939). However, as a general rule, the “Hochäcker" were ploughed with a heavy
plough with a mould-board on one side.
On the other hand, the use of a one-sided mould-board plough does not necessarily
entail the formation of ridged fields of the “I-Iochäcker"-type. In modern times.
this type of field has become obsolete, and the one-sided mould-board plough is
still in general use.
The lynchet-fields in the mountains on both sides of the Rhine are flat, without
traces of the “Hochäcker"-type. This does not exclude the possibility that they may
have been ploughed with a one-sided mould-board plough. It may also be, that
another heavy plough was used, perhaps some sort of a “turn-wrest plough", where
the mould-board may be shifted from side to side, so that all the furrows may fall
to one side.
I shall not here enter upon an investigation of the different plough-types and
their age, origin, and distribution. A considerable literature exists about this group
of problems. Since PAUL LEsER's important work on the subject was published,
1931, a few additional facts have come to light. A thing of particular interest is the
Tømmerby-plough from Middle Jutland, and the pollenanalytical dating of this specimen
to the Pre-Roman Iron Age (STEENSBERG 1936 and 1937, pp. 252 seqq.). It
must be admitted that the Tømmerby-plough is remarkably similar to the wheelplough
of historical times (LA BAUME 1937, pp. 23 seq.). However, the pollen-analytical
dating is not uncertain. And if the mould-board plough existed in Jutland during
the Pre-Roman Iron Age, it was probably at that time widely spread in Central Europe.
The fact, that the mould-board plough and the arð are used for different types
of fields, has been stressed by MEITZEN in his comparison between the Roman and
the Germanic way of tillage. ÄIEITZEN maintains (I, pp. 272-284) that the Romans
used the arð (“Haken”) without improving this simple implement essentially. Therefore,
the Roman farmers had to plough in two directions, which again necessitated