MEROVINGIAN QUERN STONES FROM MAYEN Investigating the distribution of tephrite quern stones to the Netherlands in the Merovingian period

Max Koopman MA Thesis University of Amsterdam 2 Merovingian quern stones from Mayen: Investigating the distribution of tephrite quern stones to the Netherlands in the Merovingian period

Max Koopman Student no.: 10447296

MA Thesis Archaeology of North-Western Europe University of Amsterdam

Supervisor: Dr. A.A.A. Verhoeven Second reader: Dr. M.F.P. Dijkstra

03-04-2018 (Final version)

Front: Early medieval quern stone found in Borger (source: Harsema 1979, 28). ‘Do not take a pair of millstones—not even the upper one— as security for a debt, because that would be taking a person’s livelihood as security’

- Deuteronomy 24:6

2 1. Introduction 6 2. Production and use of tephrite quern stones 8 2.1 Geologic context 8 2.2 Production of tephrite quern stones 10 2.3 Use of tephrite quern stones 11 3.1 Historical overview of the Mayen quern stone production center 14 3.2 A decrease of production and exportation during the Merovingian period? 17 4. Mayen as a ceramics production center 19 4.1 Historical overview of the Mayen ceramics production center 19 4.2 The distribution of Mayen ceramics 20 5.1 The political situation and the organization of trade in the Netherlands during the Merovingian period 24 5.1 Political situation 24 5.2 Trade and exchange during the Merovingian period 28 5.3 Agents within the production and distribution of Mayen querns 31 6. The distribution of tephrite quern stones to the Netherlands during the Merovingian period 33 6.1 Methods 33 6.2 Problems 36 6.3 Distribution map 38 7. Distribution to the riverine area and Rhine estuary 40 7.1 The riverine area and Rhine estuary during the Merovingian period 40 7.2 Sites 41 7.3 Possible sites 43 7.4 Conclusion 45 8. Distribution to the western part of the Netherlands 46 8.1 The western part of the Netherlands during the Merovingian period 46 8.2 Sites 47 8.3 Possible sites 47 8.4 Conclusion 49 9. Distribution to the northern part of the Netherlands 50 9.1 The northern part of the Netherlands during the Merovingian period 50 9.2 Sites 51 9.3 Possible sites 52 9.4 Conclusion 52 10. Distribution to the eastern part of the Netherlands 54 10.1 The eastern part of the Netherlands during the Merovingian period 54 10.2 Sites 55 10.3 Possible sites 57 10.4 Conclusion 59 11. Distribution to the southern part of the Netherlands 60 11.1 The southern part of the Netherlands during the Merovingian period 60 11.2 Sites 61 11.3 Possible sites 62 11.4 Conclusion 63 3 12. Geographical, political and economic factors in the distribution of querns 64 13. Conclusion 68 Literature 70 List of images 84 Appendix 85

4 5 Merovingian quern stones from Mayen: Investigating the distribution of tephrite quern stones to the Netherlands in the Merovingian period

1. Introduction

For many centuries, the area around Mayen in Germany functioned as an important center for the production of ceramics. From prehistoric times onwards, the area around Mayen also produced quern stones. These querns were made out of tephrite, also known as basaltic lava. These quern stones were often exported over large distances. The exportation of ceramic wares from Mayen to the area that is now known as the Netherlands seems to have decreased in the 6th and 7th centuries.1 An interesting question concerns the supply of Mayen quern stones during the same period: did this also decline or did it remain constant? The distribution of these quern stones will be mapped in order to make a comparison with the presumed decline of ceramic imports from Mayen in this period. The results of this research will be placed within a historical and economic context. The outcome of this thesis will therefore not only contribute to the knowledge about the supply of these specific quern stones but also to the knowledge about trade and exchange in the Dutch areas during this period.

First, an overview of the production and use of tephrite quern stones is presented in chapter 2. This part will briefly explain the physical geographic processes which formed the tephrite sources of the Eifel region and how this material was worked to create quern stones. It will also clarify how these quern stones were used in daily life. Second, the existing literature about the Mayen area will be used in order to investigate what is already known about both the quern stone and ceramic production centers of this region. Third, archaeological publications about known Merovingian settlements within the Netherlands are inventoried and studied for presence of tephrite quern stones in order to create a map that offers an image of the distribution of these quern stones during the Merovingian period. The distribution of these quern stones will be compared to the supply of ceramics from the Mayen area to the Netherlands during this period in order to answer the question if the supply of ceramics and the supply of quern stones from the Mayen area are related or if they are independent. The research will also investigate if the distribution can be explained by the geographical location of the Merovingian settlements in which quern stones have been found. A more dense distribution in settlements close to the Rhine would seem likely.

1 Verhoeven 2014, 13 6 Besides the evaluation of the distribution and use, the results will be placed within a historical and economic context. A brief overview of the current knowledge about the historical background of this area during the Merovingian period will be presented. The political situation in this area during the Merovingian period will be outlined and the way in which political factors might have been of influence on the distribution of tephrite quern stones will be investigated. It will also outline how trade and exchange was organized during this period.

7 2. Production and use of tephrite quern stones

The quern stones from Mayen were made out of tephrite. Different names are used for this material within the existing literature, such as basaltic lava, Mayener lava, Niedermieniger lava or Aldernacher lava.2 This material was favored for the production of quern stones because of the fact that its composition makes it very suitable for grinding.3 When the stone is used it will not become smooth very fast and it will keep its coarse surface, which is needed for milling grain. This part will briefly explain the physical geographic processes which formed the tephrite sources of the Eifel region and how this tephrite was used in order to make quern stones. It will also clarify how the quern stones were used in daily life.

2.1 Geologic context

The Eifel area contains large amounts of tephrite sources and it is now generally accepted that almost all of the tephrite quern stones found in North-Western Europe originate from the Eifel region.4 The name tephrite is derived from the Greek word tephra, which means ashes. It is a rather porous stone with many cavities of which the edges are very sharp. It is mainly composed of clinopyroxene, calcic plagioclase, analcime, leucite and nepheline.5 The tephrite sources are a result of former volcanism in the area. The oldest volcanic activity in the Eifel dates back to the Tertiary Period and the youngest volcanic activity took place approximately 10.900 years ago. The Eifel contains two volcanic fields; the West- und Hocheifeler Vulkanfeld and the Osteifeler Vulkanfeld, the latter being located closer to the Rhine. These two areas together contain 117 known sites where tephrite was quarried for the production of quern stones, dating from the Neolithic period to the modern era. Prehistoric quern stone production has been proven for 22 of these sites.6 The Eastern and Western Eifel volcanic fields are two of the very few Quaternary volcanic fields in Central Europe. The Western Eifel volcanic field is the largest with a surface area of 600 square kilometers and contains around 240 extinct volcanoes, while the eastern volcanic field has a surface area of 400 square kilometers containing around 100 extinct

2 Parkhouse 1997, 99

3 Pohl 2010, 148-149

4 Parkhouse 1997, 3

5 Bowes 1989, 557

6 Mangartz 2006, 25 8 volcanoes.7 Because it is generally accepted within the existing literature that most of the tephrite quern stones that are found in North-Western Europe must have their origin in the Mayen area, this chapter will only focus on the geophysical properties of the volcanic field in the eastern Eifel. The center of this part of the Eifel is the Laacher See area, which lies in between the Rhine, the Nette and the Brohl rivers. All of the volcanism within this area is of Pleistocene age. Here, the volcanoes have produced a large number of lava streams with a basaltic to highly unsaturated, nepheline containing composition. Due to high proportions of built up gasses, volcanic eruptions in this area were so heavy that liquid and solid volcanic material were blown into the air, together with large amounts of other types of rocks. As a result, large parts of the Laacher See area are covered with thick deposits of volcanic tuffs.8 During the eruptions of the magma, which was rich in gas, streams of liquid lava broke out and eventually cooled down, creating solid layers of volcanic material. A good example of this phenomenon is the Bellerberg volcano, which is located near Mayen. Eruptions produced valuable deposits of volcanic materials, such as basaltic lava (tephrite) which was used for quern stones, and tuff stone which was extensively used as building material.9 The lava streams have produced huge formations of basalt pillars. When lava flows cool down relatively fast, forces of contraction will be build up. When the lava flows shrink in a horizontal direction, it can result in an enormous network of fractures that will form these basalt columns.10

According to Kars (1983) the choice for the Eifel region for the intense exploitation of tephrite can be explained by different geologic and geographic aspects of this area. The first is the above mentioned composition of tephrite. The surface of other types of stones of which quern stones were made in the past, such as granite and sandstone, can become smooth during the milling process. The surface of a tephrite quern stone makes it more suitable for grinding. The stone has many cavities of which the edges are very sharp. The stone will not become smooth after use: instead, new cavities will be opened, which will preserve the rough surface of a tephrite quern stone. If the surface of the quern stone eventually became too smooth after long-term use, it was quite easy to make it rough again, for instance by making grooves or pits in the surface of the stone. At the same time,

7 Gluhak 2010, 39-41

8 Kars 1983, 113

9 Hunold & Schaaff 2010,177-180

10 Smalley 1966, 110-113 9 tephrite is a quite fine crystalline and this makes it a viscous and hard wearing material. It is therefore unlikely that a fragment of the quern stone will end up in the flower. Another explanation for the popularity of the Mayen area was the fact that the tephrite sources are relatively easy to access in this area. The tephrite sources are located close to the surface, which makes it easy to reach them. Also, the above mentioned column formation, which is characteristic for many volcanic rocks, makes it easier to form the tephrite into round quern stones.11 Lastly, its location close to the Rhine is an important reason for the exploitation of tephrite within this area, because the river allows the easy exportation of quern stones to more remote areas. The relatively low density of tephrite makes the querns not really heavy so that they are easy to transport and handle.

Fig 1. Volcanic fields in the Eifel; the Mayen tephrite sources are marked with a square (Kars 1983, 111).

2.2 Production of tephrite quern stones

The basaltic lava pillars that form the sources for the quern stone production are one of the main reasons why the production took place in the Mayen area. Although production techniques varied over time, as will be outlined in the next chapter, the main principle of extracting the raw material and forming them into the desired shape stayed quite the same

11 Kars 1983, 117-118 10 over time. These pillars will form a good start for the production process of a quern stone because the producer will only have to take of a ‘slice’ of the basalt pillar and form it into the desired shape. At the same time, the column formations can be seen as a restricting factor for the production of quern stones: the diameter of a basalt pillar will form the maximum diameter of the quern stone.12 The composition of the stone makes it easy to work. During almost the entire history of the production center the production within the Mayen area seems to have been carried out by groups of people using tools and pack animals. A ‘slice’ of tephrite was first taken of a basalt pillar with the aid of a wedge and a hammer. Then, the piece of tephrite was formed into the desired shape by refining it with a hammer and chisel.13 The querns were not always finished within the Mayen area. During the Roman period it seems that several workshops existed around Mayen in which the querns were formed into the desired shape. During the Early Medieval period, however, evidence from trading settlements such as Dorestad and Haithabu suggests that (a part of) of the querns left the Mayen area in a semifinished form. They were formed into the desired shape within the trading settlements.14

2.3 Use of tephrite quern stones

Quern stones are tools that are used for grinding different kinds of material, mostly cereals. The first known quern stones from the Netherlands can be found in the southern part of Limburg. These were probably introduced by agrarian colonizers, which belonged to the so-called Linear Pottery culture, during the fifth millennium BC. These quern stones do not show the typical round form of the Roman and medieval quern stones that are made out of tephrite. These Neolithic flat quern stones often have a rounded rectangular form and are often made out of a coarse-grained stone, such as arkose.15 The first quern stones from Mayen seem to have appeared in the Netherlands during the Early Iron Age. Kars (1983) mentions that there are indications that tephrite quern stones already have been used in the western part of the Netherlands during the Late Bronze Age.16

12 Kars 1983, 118

13 Mangartz 2006, 26-31

14 Parkhouse 1997, 7-9

15 Harsema 1979, 7

16 Kars 1983, 114 11 The Iron Age querns often have the so-called Napoleons hat shape. The bedstones of these querns are not round and flat. Instead they are pointy at the bottom. This point was most likely placed in the ground to make the quern more stable during the milling process. During the Late Iron Age there seems to be a sudden switch to another kind of quern: the rotary hand quern, which consists of two flat round stones. First, there is the lower stone on which the material that has to be ground is placed, called the ‘bedstone’. The bedstone will remain in a fixed position during the milling process. Second, there is the upper stone which is called the ‘runner’.17 The upper stone will be brought in motion in order to grind the material that is placed in between the two stones. A hole was drilled in the middle of the two stones. A wooden shaft was placed in the bedstone and the runner could turn around this shaft freely. At the same time, there was enough space to pour in grain from the top to the grinding level. Another hole was drilled at the edge of the runner, which was most likely intended for a rope. This rope attached the runner to a stick which was used in order to rotate the quern by hand. The same principle can still be seen in use by contemporary societies in North Africa.18

Fig 2: Rotary hand quern stones used in contemporary Tunisia. (Harsema 1979, 21)

Some scholars have argued in the past that hand querns from Mayen were not used in a rotary motion: instead, the runner would continuously be turned 180 degrees clockwise and counterclockwise. This idea would support the symmetrical polishing of the runner

17 Feveile 2010, 133-134

18 Harsema 1979, 20-21 12 stones. This hypothesis resulted in the German name Pendelmühle for this type of quern stone. This would mean, however, that the runner has to be stopped continuously in order to change the movement of the stone. According to Harsema this is an unproductive and energy wasting technique. Contemporary societies in North Africa also use the rotating technique.19

Besides the production of these hand querns, the Mayen area also produced querns for use within larger power mills. The stones that were used within Roman watermills are well known examples. These stones are usually much thicker and have a larger diameter.20

Although the composition of tephrite quern stones does not allow the grinding surface to become smooth very fast, it is sometimes necessary to make it more rough. This can be done by means of ‘dressing’. One technique for doing this is called ‘grooving’ whereby many short parallel lines are carved in the surface of the quern stone with the aid of a hammer and a chisel. Another technique is called ‘pitting’ where the same is done by means of covering the surface with a very dense pattern of pits.21

19 Harsema 1979, 23-25

20 Hörter 1994, 33-35

21 Feveile 2003, 135 13 3. Mayen as a quern stone production center

The Mayen area functioned as a quern stone production center since the Neolithic period. This chapter will first give a brief overview of the history of this area in relation to quern stone production from prehistoric times to the modern era. After that, it will investigate what information the existing literature has to offer about the production and exportation of tephrite querns from the Mayen area during the Merovingian period.

3.1 Historical overview of the Mayen quern stone production center

The earliest production of querns is thought to have taken place around 5000 BC. This production took place at the edges of the Eifel tephrite sources, where the material is relatively easy to extract. The quern stones from this period have a bread-like form and are usually 40 to 50 centimeters in length.22 Because these querns have the same form as the natural stones that occur in the Eifel area, semifinished products from this period are often hard to recognize. Stone tools from this period have been found near the tephrite sources. These tools are made of hard basalt. There are some indications that the quern stones were extracted with the aid of fire. By heating the stone, existing cracks will widen and pieces of tephrite become separated from the pillar. The exportation of querns in this period was limited to areas within a 20 kilometer radius of the production center. During the Late Bronze Age (1200-750 BC), the querns still seem to have had the bread- like shape and the tools and techniques remained the same. In this period, a total of 12.500 cubic meters of stone was extracted, which was enough for creating 62.500 querns.23 The first exportation of querns to the Netherlands seems to have taken place during this period, as quern stones that are found within settlements in the western part of the country might date from this period.24 During the Early Iron Age the production was intensified. The quern stones were larger and took the shape of a boat. Hard basalt hammers were now used which made it possible to make the first stone quarries which were usually several meters deep. During the period from 750 to 450 BC a total of 150.000 cubic meters was quarried which was enough for the production of 750.000 quern stones. Examples of quern stones from this period have

22 Hörter 1994, 17-19

23 Mangartz 2006, 26

24 Van Heeringen 1985, 378 14 been found within settlements along the Dutch North-Sea coast.25 In the later part of the Iron Age the production was again intensified and the stone quarries became larger. The so-called Napoleons hat quern stones, which are characteristic for first part of this period, are larger and are pointy at the bottom.26 Iron tools were now used for the production of querns. During this period the first hand rotary querns started to appear. Because these querns have a hole in the middle, they could only be produced with iron tools. Both the Napoleons hat and the hand rotary querns were finished within the production center. During the period from 450BC to 0 AD, 480.000 cubic meters of stone were quarried which was enough for the production of around 2,4 million hand rotary querns. Examples of these querns are known from settlements in the northern part of the Netherlands. These were most likely transported over sea after they had reached the Rhine estuary.27

Fig 3: Neolithic/Bronze Age bread-shaped quern stones (left) and Iron Age ‘Napoleons hat’ quern stones (right). (Hörter 1994, 15)

The Mayen area continued to produce quern stones during the transition from the Late Iron Age to the Roman period. A wide variety of tools was used for the production process; stone tools were no longer used. Iron wedges were used for extracting the stones and zoological remains indicate the use of pack animals for the transportation of the finished querns to the Rhine. There are also indications that the miners used marking and measuring methods for a systematical exploitation of the tephrite sources. Besides hand rotary querns, there were also larger quern stones produced during the Roman period which were intended for use within larger constructions such as the famous Roman water

25 Mangartz 2006, 27

26 Harsema 1979, 17

27 Mangartz 2006, 28 15 mills.28 During the Roman period (0-450) an enormous amount of 3.412.500 cubic meters of stone was quarried, which was enough to create 17.062.500 querns. There are indications that the port of Andernach was enlarged in order to cope with this increase of export of quern stones. Several workshops existed around Mayen in the Roman period, in which the semifinished querns were made into functional querns. The querns were exported to many areas of the western part of the Roman Empire, including the British Isles. Hand rotary querns from Mayen have also been found in the unconquered parts of Germania.29 No Mayen querns seem to have reached Denmark during this period.30

Several scholars write about a sudden drop in or even a stop of export of querns during the Merovingian period, especially during the sixth and seventh centuries (this will be outlined in the next part of this chapter). Semifinished querns are found near the quarries that are thought to have been in use during the transition from the Roman period to the Merovingian period, but a lack of other types of finds makes it hard to date them properly. Many of these stones are simply dated as ‘early medieval’.31 The production and labor efficiency seem to have declined to pre-Roman levels in the Early Medieval period.32 During a large part of the Early Middle Ages, at least a part of the quern stones that left the Mayen area were most likely unfinished products: round tephrite stones without a hole in the middle. These semifinished querns were transported to trading posts, the so-called emporiae. They were finished in workshops within these emporiae. From there, the finished querns were shipped to their final users. Evidence in the form of unfinished querns and remains of workshops in trading posts such as Dorestad near Wijk bij Duurstede and Haithabu support this idea.33 During the entire Early Middle Ages, 450.000 cubic meters of stone were quarried which was enough for creating 2.250.000 querns. The Mayen area continued to produce querns until the end of the nineteenth century. From 1500 onwards, underground mines were constructed.34

28 Hörter 1994, 32-37

29 Mangartz 2006, 29-30

30 Hauken & Anderson 2014, 59

31 Hörter 1994, 40

32 Mangartz 2006, 31

33 Parkhouse 1997, 7-9

34 Mangartz 2006, 31 16 Annual production of (hand) querns 40000

30000

20000

10000

0 Late Bronze Age 750-450BC 450BC-0 AD Roman period Early Middle Ages

Fig. 4: Theoretical number of hand querns produced each year based on the amount of tephrite that was extracted in each period (After Mangartz, 2006)

3.2 A decrease of production and exportation during the Merovingian period?

What becomes clear from the above is that the production decreased during the Early Middle Ages or perhaps already during the Late Roman period. What remains unclear is the situation during the Merovingian period, especially during the sixth and seventh centuries. Also unclear is the volume of quern stone production during the Late Roman period (350-450), a period at which the manufacturing of ceramics reached its peak in Mayen.35 The question rises if the production made a sudden drop or even stopped for a certain period of time after the collapse of the Roman Empire or if the production of Mayen quern stones continued without interruption. More important is the question whether or not the markets for these quern stones remained the same or if certain areas were not supplied with querns after the fall of the Roman Empire. Several scholars write about a

35 Grunwald 2015a, 195 17 sudden decrease of production and exportation after the Roman period. Harsema (1979) states that there was most likely a serious decrease of export, but he does not refer to any sources on which he based these hypotheses.36 As noted above, Hörter (1994) states that a lack of other types of finds near the quarries makes it hard to draw any conclusions about the production during the Merovingian period.37 Mangartz (2006) states that the export via the Elbe and Weser suddenly stopped in the fifth century until the seventh century, but he does not report anything about the exportation via the Rhine during this period.38 An inventory of quern stones, which date from the Iron Age to the Late Medieval Period, found within four counties in the southeast of Britain, shows some interesting results. During the Roman period many tephrite quern stones from Mayen were used in these counties, especially within ‘Romanized’ urban and rural settlements, such as villas. Querns made out of puddingstone, which originates from Britain itself, were also used during this period. The Roman tephrite querns can be found within settlements dating up to the fifth century AD. The presence of Mayen querns in fourth and fifth century Britain is an indication of the continuity of production during the Late Roman period. No tephrite and puddingstone quern stones dating from the sixth and seventh centuries were found in this survey. This might indicate that both the local production of puddingstone querns and the importation of tephrite querns from Mayen ceased during this period. The earliest medieval tephrite querns analyzed within this survey date only from the eight century.39 The existing literature raises an image of a decrease in production and exportation of Mayen querns during the Merovingian period. At the same time, a presumed decline in population during and after the collapse of the Roman empire means that the consumer market for the Mayen quern stones was seriously downscaled. The distribution to the areas that are nowadays known as the Netherlands remains unclear.

36 Harsema 1979, 27

37 Hörter 1994, 40

38 Mangartz 2006, 31

39 King 1986, 95, 119 18 4. Mayen as a ceramics production center

Mayen was also an important center for the production of ceramics from the Roman period onwards. This part will first give a brief overview of the history of this area in relation to ceramics production in the Roman and medieval periods. After that, it will investigate what knowledge the existing literature has to offer about the production and exportation of ceramics from the Mayen area during the Merovingian period. It should be noted that the picture of distribution of ceramics might be incomplete due to a lack of (documented) archaeological finds.

4.1 Historical overview of the Mayen ceramics production center

Mayen was a producer of ceramics from the first to the fourteenth century. All of the ceramics that have been produced here in both the Roman and medieval period are wheel-thrown. The ceramics from this area are often described as ‘Mayener Ware’, ‘Eifelware’ or ‘Eifelkeramik’. Mark Redknap (1987, 1988, 1999) has studied the production and consumption of Mayen ceramics. It should be noted, however, that these studies are for a large part based on the archaeological evidence available in the 1980s. Redknap mainly studied the archaeological material from the pottery kilns in Mayen itself and paid less attention to the distribution of the ceramics. The provenance of ceramic wares from Mayen can often be attested with the aid of petrology. The clay of the Mayen wares is characterized by inclusions in the form of small fragments of volcanic material, such as augite and sanidine.40 As they are quite distinctive and different from ceramics from other production centers in the Eifel, ‘Mayener Ware’ is probably the most suitable name for this group of ceramics. The inclusions in the clay and the firing methods made the ceramic wares from Mayen to be very hard and it made them heat resistant. These characteristics of the Mayen wares, combined with the location close to the river Rhine, explain the popularity of the Mayen pottery on the market for many centuries.41 The first production of ceramics is presumed to have taken place in the middle of the first century AD. This Roman production likely continued in the second century and the production increased significantly around 350 AD.42 Mayen can be seen as a vicus during

40 Redknap 1988, 4-5

41 Grunwald 2009, 150

42 Grunwald 2015a, 195 19 the Roman period, which had a favorable location next to the road that led from Trier to Aldernach, where ports for long distance exportation were located. The main products during this period were coarse wares, which were intended for daily use. There are also indications for the production of finer ceramics and the so-called terra nigra wares, which are seen as luxury goods. Several kilns dating from different periods were found during archaeological excavations in Mayen. The Late Roman kilns in Mayen were situated on the northern bank of the Nette river. The eight kilns that have been found here all have the same rectangular shape. The structures have single flues and are semi-sunken. The oven floors are raised.43 None of these Roman kilns were excavated with the aid of modern techniques. Descriptions and photos from 1922 show that the Roman kilns consisted of stable structures made out of basalt and lava stone.44 During the Early Medieval period, the production center shifted to the other side of the river Nette. Near the Genovevaburg, several kilns have been found, along with production waste material. Some kilns show the same updraught principle as the Roman kilns but they show a greater variety of plans. There are also some crossdraught examples of medieval kilns found in Mayen.45 Although the production and settlement shifted to the south, the ceramics (Mayen ware MD) were still for a large part being produced within a specific Roman tradition. Both the ceramic forms and production techniques were still the same during the early sixth century.46 This would suggest an undisrupted continuity of production of ceramics after the end of the Roman empire. Most of the early medieval wares from Mayen show similarities with their Roman predecessors until the eight century. A change occurred in the tempering material in the Carolingian period. While the Roman and Merovingian wares were mainly tempered with feldspar, the Carolingian wares were tempered with quartz sand. During the end of the eight century Mayen started to produce hard-fired, watertight vessels, classified by Redknap as ‘Mayen Ware ME’.

4.2 The distribution of Mayen ceramics

Late Roman coarse Mayen wares can be found in many parts of the Roman empire, both up and down the Rhine. It is found in both military and civilian sites, reaching from

43 Redknap 1987, 88

44 Redknap 1999, 39-40

45 Redknap 1988, 4-6

46 Grunwald 2012, 144 20 Switzerland to Britain.47 The proportion of Late Roman Mayen wares within downstream settlements is often as high as within settlements in the vicinity of the production center. The ceramic assemblage of Maastricht during the period 350-450 AD, for instance, consists for up to 75 percent of Mayen wares.48 These Late Roman wares continued to be exported to areas both up- and downstream the Rhine and via the Mosel and Meuse until the late fifth century or the early sixth century.49 Although the above suggests a continuity of production from the Roman period to the later Medieval period, there are some indications that the consumer markets shrank during the Merovingian period. This idea is mainly based on the rise of local ceramic production centers during this period in certain areas which were previously supplied with Mayen wares.50 The question rises if these local industries must be seen as a result or a cause of a decline of exportation of Mayen ceramics. In the case of the Netherlands, Merovingian kilns were discovered in Maastricht which can be seen as an example of such a local workshop. As noted above, the ceramics spectrum of Maastricht consisted for up to 75 percent of Mayen wares in the early fifth century. Excavations in 1991 in Maastricht-Wyck unearthed the remains of four pear-shaped kilns from the Merovingian period. These kilns, together with two postholes, were the only Merovingian structures that were found during this excavation, but it is clear that other kilns and workshops existed in this area. Inside the kilns large quantities of sherds were found, which must be seen as production waste. The kilns were probably filled with this production waste after they were abandoned. All the structures contained sherds from different kilns and no distinctive layers of waste could be identified. This shows that al the kilns were abandoned simultaneously and filled with waste in the same moment. Radiocarbon dating of charcoal found within the kilns provided dates between 540-660 AD. The production probably exceeded the needs of the settlement, so (a part of) the ceramics that were produced here were intended for exportation. Unfortunately there are no Merovingian sites in the vicinity of Maastricht to corroborate this hypothesis. Apart from Maastricht, several other production centers are known from this period in the Meuse valley.51

47 Brulet et al. 2010, 420-422

48 Redknap 1999, 133-134

49 Grunwald 2012, 143

50 Grundwald 2015b, 455, Redknap 1999, 350

51 Van Wersch 2004, 19-31 21 Different studies can be used in order to investigate the distribution of Mayen ceramics during the Merovingian period. However, it should be noted that distribution maps of ceramics are as much an inventory of archaeological excavations as they are surveys of archaeological artifacts. In other words: these distribution maps are dependent on the available archaeological sources and they provide an incomplete picture. The studies of Redknap (1999) show that the distribution of the Mayen ceramics to upstream areas has decreased during the Merovingian period, when compared with the distribution during the Roman period. The Mayen ware MD is distributed in small amounts to Trier and to areas near the upper Rhine and the Main. The ceramics assemblages of upstream settlements near the Rhine, near the Main estuary and in Rheinhessen consist for 15 to 30 percent of Mayen coarse wares. The decrease of imports within Trier is explained by the emergence of a local industry in the period 600-670. Mayen ware MD is more frequent in downstream areas during this period, especially in the Rhine estuary. Mayen coarse wares, especially the so-called Wölbwandtöpfe, are present in multiple settlements and burial sites in the vicinity of the Rhine and Meuse estuaries.52 The ceramic assemblages of Merovingian settlements within the Dutch province of South-Holland, where there are no indications for local production, consist for 80 to 100 percent of wheel-thrown import ceramics. A part of these ceramics are thought to have been produced in Mayen.53 Grunwald (2015) states that there was a decline of exportation of ceramics from the first half of the seventh century until the end of the seventh century or the beginning of the eight century. According to Grunwald, the decrease in the seventh century cannot be explained by a collapse of trade relations: he again sees the rise of local production centers as the main reason for a decrease of exportation.54 It can be concluded that the distribution of Mayen ceramics continued in the Merovingian period, most likely on a reduced scale. At the same time, wether as a cause or a result of this decrease of distribution of ceramics, local ceramic industries emerge in former outlet areas during the Merovingian period. Later, the export of Mayen ceramics to the consuming markets of North-Western Europe increased again in the Carolingian period.55 This is corroborated by the research in Leiderdorp.56 The main Carolingian products were Kugeltöpfe and Tüllenkannen, which

52 Redknap 1999, 135-137, 350

53 Dijkstra 2011, 309

54 Grunwald 2015b, 455

55 Grunwald 2015a, 204

56 Dijkstra et al. in prep., 130 22 were exported to many parts of North-Western Europe during the ninth century.57 In the Low Countries the supply of ware displays a marked drop around 875 from which it never recovered. Mayen ceramics from the later Medieval period are only incidentally found within settlements in the Low Countries.58 The production continued during the period from the tenth to the twelfth century. According to Grunwald (2012) Mayen was still a major center for the production of ceramics intended for exportation during that period.59

57 Grunwald 2015a, 197-199

58 A.A.A. Verhoeven, personal communication, March 2, 2018

59 Grunwald 2012, 152-153 23 5.1 The political situation and the organization of trade in the Netherlands during the Merovingian period

This chapter provides an overview of the political and economic scene of the Netherlands during the Merovingian period (ca. 500-750). It will outline to what extent the area that is now known as the Netherlands was incorporated in the political sphere of the Frankish Empire and how this might have influenced the trade and exchange of goods. When studying the exchange of goods, a differentiation might be made between luxury or prestige goods, such as gold, and ‘common’ or staple goods (commodities) such as ceramics. The quern stones from Mayen can be viewed as commodities, since they are often found within settlements. A central topic within this chapter will be the role of elites within the trade networks of the Merovingian period. Although the exchange of luxury goods most likely happened within elite spheres, the degree of elite control of the trade of commodities is under debate. This chapter concludes with outlining the role of Mayen quern stones within these trade networks and the way in which querns were distributed to their consumers. It will try to determine which agents were responsible for both the production and distribution of querns. Were these exchanged under elite control or by ‘free entrepreneurs’?

5.1 Political situation

The current knowledge about the political situation during the Merovingian period is for the largest part based on written sources. It should be noted that from the Merovingian period little to no written sources about the political situation in the Netherlands are available. Archaeology is often of little use for the reconstruction of the rather complex political situation of this period. The Frankish kings belonged to the dynasty of Merovingians. The Merovingians ruled the Frankish empire, of which the ironic fate seems to have been that it alternately became united and then fell apart again during this period. The political heart of the Frankish empire was situated in North-Eastern Gaul.60 The influence of the Frankish empire on the Low Countries varied over time. It seems that Clovis already had ambitions to expand his empire in northern direction. In 491 he conquered the area around Tongeren.61 After this event, the historical sources become silent. During the sixth century Noord-Brabant and the areas along the Rhine and Meuse were not yet incorporated in the

60 Wood 1994, 55-59

61 Bachrach 1970, 24 24 Merovingian kingdom, although there might have been some Merovingian aristocratic presence in the areas in and around Nijmegen. This does not mean that there were no contacts between the elites of these areas and the Frankish empire during the early decades of the Merovingian period. After the death of Chlotarius I the Frankish empire was divided into three smaller kingdoms: Austrasia, Neustria and Burgundy. As can be seen on the map below, the southern part of the Netherlands was incorporated into Austrasia. The Mayen quern stone and ceramic industries were also situated in this kingdom.

Fig. 5: Map of the Frankish empire during the Merovingian period (After Shepherd, 1911)

To what extent the Frankish kingdom reached to the north is not entirely clear. There might have been some nominal control over Noord-Brabant and the Scheldt estuary, but the amount of direct political influence remains uncertain.62 Around 630, the Frankish king Dagobert visited the Kromme Rijn area and founded a church in the former Roman castellum, which he donated to the bishop of Cologne.63 This means that there was, at least in the middle of the seventh century, some Merovingian political interest in these areas. Influence of the Franks did only took place incidentally on a royal level. Because of

62 Van Es 1994, 83-85

63 Van Es 1994, 90-91 25 the power vacuum in the northern part of Austrasia, representatives of new Frankish elites could settle in these areas. These elites formed social networks in which the power was exercised.64

Next to the Franks, two other groups of peoples were present in the Netherlands during this period: the Frisians in the northern and western coastal areas and the Saxons in the eastern part of the Netherlands. For the Merovingian period, no written sources exist from Frisia. The result is that there are many different theories about the way in which this area was politically organized. These theories are often based on a combination of archaeological evidence and historical evidence dating from the Carolingian period or later, such as the Lex Frisionum.65 The main topic of debate seems to be if Frisia must be seen as one unified kingdom or if it was compromised of multiple smaller kingdoms during the Early Medieval period. Halbertsma (2000), for instance, advocated the idea that the coastal areas reaching from the Scheldt estuary to the Weser, sometimes combined with the areas around the Old Rhine were one single political unity (‘Frisia magna’) ruled by a single king.66 The power basis of this kingdom was situated in the modern-day province of Friesland. In recent years this image seems to have been largely abandoned, although Nicolay (2014) has incorporated many aspects of this theory in his recent publication.67 The political scene of sixth century Frisia is now often viewed as one which is characterized by warlords, instead of kings, which based their power on the loyalty of their followers (Gefolgschaften). These slowly evolved into small kingdoms and they transformed into bigger political unities during the seventh century. Around the time of the Frisian king Radbod (ca. 680-720) the Frisian territories probably became more unified since Radbod apparently had access to a large quantity of soldiers during his battles against the Franks.68 The power base of Frisia is thought to have been situated in the region of Westergo. One of the main arguments for this theory is the high concentration of gold finds in this area, which would indicate an early medieval power center. This idea has been criticized by Bazelmans, Gerrets and Pol (1998). They argue that one should take

64 Mostert 2009, 103

65 Dijkstra 2011, 359-362

66 Halbertsma 2000, 298-299

67 Nicolay 2014, 363-366

68 Heidinga 1999, 8-9, Dijkstra 2011, 363 26 post-depositional factors into account.69 The high concentration of golden finds, with a total weight of 1.5 kilograms, might also be the result of relatively favorable conditions for metal detectorists and the fact that in this region 60 percent of the ‘terp’ settlements were excavated from the second half of the nineteenth century onwards for their fertile soils. The large quantity of gold depositions in the Frisian areas is often seen as an indicator for an unstable social-political scenario in which multiple kings or warlords tried to assert or maintain their power.70 Bazelmans, Dijkstra and De Koning (2004) have argued that the center of the Frisian power was located in the riverine area in the modern-day provinces of South-Holland and Utrecht. Historical sources mention that Frisian kings such as Aldgisl and Radbod have resided in these areas. Again, they see the high amount of gold depositions in the northern part of the Netherlands not necessarily as an indicator of a process towards higher political complexity. Instead, it might be an indication for intensified political contacts with the middle part of the Netherlands caused by special social-political developments that took place there.71 The above shows that it is hard to reconstruct the social-political situation of Merovingian Frisia based on the archaeological record since this archaeological record might be interpreted in different ways. The third group of people are the Saxons, who inhabited the eastern part of the Netherlands. These Saxons, originating from the North-Sea coast would have expanded their habitation area in the centuries after the Roman empire. The Saxon cultural area is, however, hard to identify on the basis of the available archaeological material. The theories about the social-political character of the society of the Saxons is for a large part based on historical sources, mainly written from Frankish perspectives. Their society is often viewed as a confederacy of democracies, without a central (royal) authority, that only was united under one leader in times of war. The lack of elite burials in the Saxon area was used in order to support this idea. Recently this idea has been challenged and greater archaeological emphasis is now being placed on the formation of power and the search for ‘central places’. Examples of Saxon central places might be the fortresses found in the German Münsterland, although these date from later periods.72 The lack of archaeological visibility of elites might also have something to do with depositional factors.73

69 Bazelmans et al. 1998, 21

70 Dijkstra 2011, 364, Nicolay 2014, 231-232

71 Bazelmans et al. 2004, 8-9

72 Van der Velde 2011, 161-162

73 Nicolay 2014, 27-30 27 5.2 Trade and exchange during the Merovingian period

As stated above, a distinction can be made between luxury or prestige goods and commodities. A second distinction can be made between the ways in which goods could change of owner during the Early Medieval period. Trade was just one way in which goods could be exchanged. A lot of goods were acquired as a (reciprocal) gift, by means of taxation or even were robbed from another person or group. The exchange of luxury goods most likely happened within elite spheres. The degree of elite control over trade of commodities is under debate. A third distinction must be made between regional trade and long-distance trade. The quern stones from Mayen are, like Mayen ceramic wares74, viewed here as commodities that were exchanged mainly by means of trade. Since many remote areas were consuming Mayen querns (at least in the Roman and Carolingian periods) they should not be viewed only in the light of a regional economy but also as products that were part of long-distance trade. It should noted that the way in which trade and exchange were organized might have varied over time during the Merovingian period. During the sixth century, the economy of the Roman Empire might, despite a collapse of the imperial society, still have functioned in large parts of Europe.75 It is, however, unlikely that this was the case in the Netherlands. The seventh century and certainly the early eight century witnessed the emergence of emporiae all over North-Western Europe which can be seen as the result or even a cause of a changing economic scene. Early Medieval sources are often silent about trade and exchange, especially when it comes to commodities. In the case of Mayen querns, an exception might be a letter from Charlemagne to the king of Mercia written around 796 in which he mentions ‘black stones’.76 However, it is more likely that Charlemagne meant building materials instead of querns in his letter. Especially for the Merovingian period the knowledge about trade and exchange is for the largest part based on archaeology. Although artifacts can tell something about trading contacts between different areas, the way in which these contacts were organized and the role of (elite) agents will not always be archaeologically visible. This makes it hard to apply a single system of exchange to the Merovingian economy. Instead, it might be viewed as an economy that was organized along ‘diffuse and fuzzy lines’ , containing elements of different types of economies in which various forms of

74 Wickham 1998, 283

75 Hodges 1998, 6-7

76 Peacock 1997, 709 28 exchange coexisted.77 The Rhine was one of the main transport routes of North-Western Europe during the Early Medieval period and fulfilled an important role in the interregional and international trade. It linked the German Rhineland and the middle Meuse region with the areas around the North-Sea, Anglo-Saxon England and the Scandinavian world. The excavations of settlements found along this river in the Netherlands, especially those along the Old Rhine such as Oegstgeest and Katwijk Zanderij, show that these settlements had access to a wide variety of goods from different areas.78 Although these settlements show imported goods, harboring facilities and crafting activities, they are often not classified as trading settlements. It is often hard to identify trading settlements from the Merovingian period. The fact that Merovingian settlements contain a high amount of imports does not contribute to the current knowledge about how the distribution of imports took place.79 Based on the archaeological record of early medieval sites, some of the main products that were shipped via the Rhine were wine (in wooden barrels), grain, metal, ceramic wares and last but not least, quern stones from Mayen.80 These goods were unquestionably transported with ships. Unfortunately few Merovingian shipwrecks are known from the Netherlands; shipwrecks from the period 300-600 have not yet been found. From the seventh century, ships have been found mainly along the Rhine and along the coast. Except for canoes, many of these ships only survive in small wooden fragments. Also, many rivets which were used in shipbuilding have been found within Merovingian sites. The wood of many of these ship fragments, such as the ones found in Oegstgeest and Naaldwijk originates from the German Rhineland.81 This is another indicator for an extensive trade network that stretched along the river and beyond. Although no Merovingian wrecks containing tephrite querns are known, they were probably shipped in Rhine barges that would have had similarities with those that are known from the Roman period. A ship dating from the ninth century that was discovered at Lüttingen contained both unfinished querns and ceramics from Mayen.82 This supports the idea that there was, at least in the Carolingian period, an association between both Mayen

77 Theuws 2012, 43-44

78 Jezeer 2011, 113

79 Dijkstra 2011, 375-376

80 Dijkstra 2011, 308-310, 316

81 Brouwers et al. 2015, 6-22

82 Hörter 1994, 40-41, Grunwald 2015a, 204 29 industries, as Redknap (1987) has proposed earlier.83 A special role within the trade networks of the Early Medieval period is often attributed to Frisian sailors. They were the most prominent traders in North-Western Europe during this period. Historical sources dating from the seventh to the ninth century indicate that they were present in many countries.84 They might have controlled the Rhine trade from the late fifth century, but their role likely started in the late sixth or early seventh century.85 It should be noted that Frisian traders belonged to a small professional group that had experience in sailing over rivers, over sea or perhaps both and that not every ‘Frisian with a boat’ took part in this trade.86 Especially during the Carolingian period Frisian sailors played an important role in the distribution of Mayen querns to Britain and Scandinavia.87 However, between the late fifth and the early eight century exchange was mainly focused on trade on the continent via the Rhine. Only a very small amount of ceramics from the German Rhineland seem to have left the continent during this period.88 As shown in chapter 3, archaeological surveys seem to indicate that no tephrite querns have reached Britain during the same period.89 Although the above might suggest that trade was mainly based on a ‘free market’ in which Frisian shippers made grateful use of the opportunities that were available for them as they functioned as intermediaries in the trade between different areas, it is likely that there was some kind of elite control during this period. The elite should not necessarily be viewed as agents that tried to get a grip on the trade networks by means of taxation or tolls but may also be viewed as driving factors behind this trade, besides other agents as the peasantry and the church. The trade networks must perhaps be viewed as complex networks of close relationships. Because of the demand of the elite for prestige goods, some communities were encouraged to engage in long-distance trade in order to meet this demand. As this trade with ‘outsiders’ often took place beyond political boundaries, as has been shown above, long-distance exchange networks had their own rules, which did not necessarily follow the existing political structures. The elite became aware of the significance of these long-distance trade networks and tolls and customs were established

83 Redknap 1987, 90

84 Lebecq 1983, 269-274

85 Hodges 1982, 87-88

86 Dijkstra 2011, 320

87 Hodges 1982, 124-125

88 Dijkstra 2011, 318

89 King 1986, 95, 119 30 in order to control this exchange.90 A few sources from the late sixth and early seventh century indicate that there was a toll (teloneum) system within the Frankish empire that was managed by royal authorities. The teloneum was a tax on transport of goods and possibly also on the sale of goods, which was paid at toll stations. Ecclesiastical institutions could be exempt from paying toll but could also profit from the toll system as they were often granted the right on the interest of a certain toll station by the royal elite. It was also possible that the king granted an ecclesiastical institution the right to charge tolls itself.91 No written sources from the Merovingian period seem to support the existence of a toll system within the Rhine estuary. In the case of Zuid-Holland, the elite might have played different roles within trade and exchange. There may have been system in which the elite gave goods to their followers in order to maintain their power. Another possibility is that the agents that had access to commodities had to pay a proportion of their wares by means of toll.92 Several historical sources seem to suggest that trade during this period was first agreed by means of treaties between members of the elite. It is likely that Mayen products were traded in the Netherlands for raw materials such as wool, hides or salt.93

5.3 Agents within the production and distribution of Mayen querns

What becomes clear from the above is that the Rhine functioned as one of the main transport arteries within the trade networks of Europe during the Early Medieval period. The Frisians seem to have fulfilled an important role in distribution of commodities that came from the Rhineland. The elite might have fulfilled different roles within trade and exchange, both as initiators and controllers. What does not become clear, however, is on whose initiative tephrite querns were produced and distributed in order to meet the demands of the consumer markets. Early Medieval written sources are silent about this topic. The Mayen quern production was intensified during the Roman period. Military orders are often seen as the most important factor in the distribution of querns during this period. However, Roman civil settlements also often contain tephrite querns. The querns left Mayen as finished products during this period.94 As stated previously, from the late

90 Hodges 2012, 126-127

91 Ganshof 1958, 5-7, 14-20

92 Dijkstra 2011, 376

93 Hodges & Whitehouse 1983, 93-94

94 Mangartz 2006, 29 31 seventh century at least a part of the querns left Mayen in a semi-finished form and were shipped to emporiae in which they were finished. This makes it likely that there were contacts between the agents of the Mayen quarries and those within the emporiae during this period. As stated previously, it is uncertain if the querns were finished in Mayen during the sixth and early seventh century or if they left Mayen in an unfinished form during this period. Redknap (1999) imagines that the Mayen ceramic production center could have enjoyed aristocratic or monastic protection but he also thinks it is possible that it was an independent industry that could rely on its raw materials and its reputation regardless of outside help.95 As it is likely that the two industries of Mayen were associated, the same might have been true for the quern quarries. The fact that Mayen querns were often shipped over rather long distances during the Early Medieval period makes it almost inevitable that this trade happened under elite control. The same can be said about the production process. Although the number workers at the Mayen quarries during the Early Middle Ages was smaller than the number of workers the Roman period, which is estimated at 585 persons, there was probably still a large group of skilled workers present here during the Merovingian period.96 This makes it likely that there was some kind of organization, rather than that the quarrying was performed by different ‘free entrepreneurs’.

95 Redknap 1999, 135

96 Mangartz 2006, 31 32 6. The distribution of tephrite quern stones to the Netherlands during the Merovingian period

There are indications that the production of querns decreased in the Mayen area and that the markets shrank. As a result of a reduction of population, we have no clear image of the consumer market for quern stones or ceramics originating from Mayen. In order to get an idea about the supply of Mayen querns to the Netherlands during the Merovingian period, finds of tephrite within Merovingian contexts in the Netherlands will be plotted on a map.

Parkhouse (1997) already tried to produce a map of the distribution of tephrite querns during the Early Medieval period in North-Western Europe. However, his map can now be seen as outdated and incomplete because it only includes the data of pre-1997 excavations. The map shows finds dating from the entire Early Middle Ages and is therefore of little use for investigating the distribution during the Merovingian period. Parkhouse admits that due to this lack of chronological precision the map fails to demonstrate any significant changes in the distribution, for instance between the Merovingian and the Carolingian period.97 One could ask oneself what this archaeological survey of querns in the Netherlands can contribute to the knowledge of Early Medieval trade and exchange. The area now known as the Netherlands was far from a political, ethnical or economic unity during the Merovingian period. Focussing only on sites within the Netherlands, inevitably an incomplete picture of the pattern of exchange of tephrite querns will emerge. However, given the fact that the Netherlands can be seen as an area of interplay between different political or ethnic groups, it might contribute to the knowledge about the trade and exchange between these groups.

6.1 Methods

Different steps were taken in order to create an overview of the distribution of tephrite querns in the Merovingian period. Merovingian archaeology has traditionally been an archaeology of grave fields. However, in the last few decades more and more Merovingian settlements have been excavated. First, an inventory of known Merovingian settlements within the Netherlands was made by using different kinds of sources. Publications that

97 Parkhouse 1997, 4 33 cover the settlement histories of certain areas, such as South-Holland98 and Noord- Brabant99, combined with a dataset provided by my supervisor and a list of Merovingian settlements created by the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden100, formed the basis for this inventory. It should be noted, however, that a large part of these settlements have habitation phases that do not only date from the Merovingian period; many settlements already existed in the Roman period or continued into Carolingian period. Secondly, excavation reports of these settlements were studied for finds of tephrite, both in the form of (semi) complete querns and in the form of smaller fragments. Most of the excavation reports of (recent) excavations were available within the digital repository for Dutch archaeology.101 Archis, the database for archaeological finds in the Netherlands, was used in order to get an overview of Merovingian sites within the Netherlands. It was also used to create a list of early medieval querns. Many of the querns within this database, however, are inadequately dated. A large part of the reported querns within Archis are dated to a period reaching from 350.000 BC to 1999 AD! This makes the database useless for chronological research on this topic. Also, the material of the querns in the database is sometimes unclear; some records do not mention if one is dealing with a tephrite quern stone or a quern stone that is made out of another kind of material. The third step was plotting the results on a map in order to create an overview of the distribution of querns in this period. Different colors were used on the map: a green dot for a settlements that contains tephrite within a Merovingian context and a red dot for Merovingian settlements that do not contain any tephrite. Lastly, yellow dots were used for settlements that contain tephrite, but of which it remains uncertain if it dates from the Merovingian period or not. The map was created by using the open-source geographic information system application QGIS. Now that the political situation and the organization of trade and exchange have been outlined in chapter 5, the next chapters will look into further detail what the pattern of distribution of tephrite querns looks like in different parts of the Netherlands. This research will investigate five regions. This division in different regions is loosely based on the

98 Dijkstra 2011

99 Kimenai & Huijbers 2016, 257-304

100 Langbroek & Van Leeuwen 2014

101 https://easy.dans.knaw.nl/ 34 ‘archeo-regions’ that are used within Dutch archaeology. These archaeological regions are areas in which there is a lank between landscape and settlement history.102

Fig. 6: The five different regions of the Netherlands that have been investigated for presence of tephrite quern stones within settlements. 1. Riverine area and Rhine estuary, 2. Western (coastal) part of the Netherlands, 3. Northern part of the Netherlands, 4. Eastern part of the Netherlands, 5. Southern part of the Netherlands.

The first region will be the riverine area and Rhine estuary, which would be the most logical region to encounter tephrite querns due to the favorable location of the settlements next to the Rhine. The second region will be the western part of the Netherlands, with a focus on settlements in the coastal region. Coastal settlements are sometimes seen as special players within the trade networks of the Early Medieval period. Due to their favorable location near the North-Sea coast, these ‘marginal’ coastal settlements would have had access to different imported commodities and therefore they fulfilled an imported role in the exchange of these goods.103 The third region is the northern part of the Netherlands, especially the ‘terp’ area of Frisia. These areas are seen as having cultural and political links with the western coastal area. They are, however, also often viewed as

102 https://archeologieinnederland.nl/bronnen-en-kaarten/archeoregios-0

103 Loveluck & Tys 2006, 140-169 35 part of a so-called North-Sea culture and therefore they might have had more links to Scandinavia, Denmark and Northern Germany instead of with the rest of the Netherlands during the Merovingian period.104 The fourth region that will be investigated is the eastern part of the Netherlands. During a large part of the Merovingian period, the Frankish empire had little influence on this area. It is generally accepted that this part of the Netherlands was lying in the western ‘periphery’ of the Saxon cultural area during the sixth and seventh centuries.105The final region that will be investigated is the southern part of the Netherlands, corresponding to the modern-day provinces of Noord-Brabant and Limburg. These areas, especially the city of Maastricht, were situated near the core of the Frankish empire and therefore more cultural ties are expected with Belgium and the northern part of France. The Maastricht-Tongeren region, for instance, is often viewed as an important territory of early christianity, with bishop Servatius as a binding factor.106

6.2 Problems

Although a distribution map will provide a general image of the distribution of tephrite querns during this period, some problems regarding this approach must be taken into account before general conclusions can be made. Already mentioned above, the first point of critique is the fact that distribution maps of archaeological artifacts will almost always provide an incomplete picture. Merovingian archaeology has traditionally been an archaeology of grave fields and only in recent decennia the attention has shifted towards settlements. The fact that no Merovingian tephrite querns were found in a certain part of the Netherlands does not necessarily mean that no tephrite was distributed to these areas: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It might also have something to do with limited archaeological activity in these areas. Distribution maps of artifacts are maybe as much an inventory of archaeological excavations as they are a survey of archaeological finds. At the same time a concentration of dots on the distribution map does not necessarily mean that this area had better access to tephrite querns; a concentration might also mean that there has been more archaeological activity in this area.

The second problem with investigating the distribution of tephrite during the Merovingian period is dating the querns. As shown above, minor typological differences in quern shape

104 Heidinga, 1999, 7-13

105 Van Beek 2011, 95

106 Willemsen 2014, 133-135 36 and size might be identified between querns from different periods. This would make it possible to date them on the base of their morphological features. However, the shapes and sizes of quern stones that are found within settlements are not always described within excavation reports. Moreover, a typology is often of very little use since querns are almost always broken or worn-out which makes it often impossible to classify them. The distribution map does not make a difference between a settlement were multiple (semi) complete querns are found and a settlement were only a small fragment of tephrite is found. Querns within early medieval settlements seem to be broken more often than querns within Roman settlements. Querns within Roman settlements often seem to be in a more complete state and still have diagnostic characteristics. It remains unclear why this is the case. Parkhouse (1997) states that this might have something to do with the fact that Roman quarries extracted stone that was less likely to become fractured. However, this image might also be the result of selective recovery of material during archaeological excavations.107 The fact that in early medieval settlements often only fragments of these querns survive makes it very hard to date them based on their morphological features. In this case they can only be dated based on their archaeological contexts. If no other (datable) artifacts, such as pottery or metal objects, are found within these contexts, their period of consumption remains uncertain. When a (fragment of a) tephrite quern is found within a Merovingian context, especially when dealing with small fragments, is does not necessarily mean that it is of a Merovingian production date. Formation processes of the archeological record should be taken into account. In some cases, quern stones are not found within their primary contexts and they might therefore be viewed as residual finds. A tephrite quern that was distributed to a settlement, consumed and then finally discarded in the Roman period might have lied on the surface in fragments as litter waste during the Merovingian period. A fragment of tephrite is then excavated within a Merovingian context, but this does not mean that is of a Merovingian production date. The problems mentioned above make it necessary to briefly outline the contexts in which the tephrite querns were found; the following chapters will therefore examine these contexts for each region of the Netherlands into further detail. To makes things worse, quern stones that were used during the Merovingian period do not necessarily have to be produced during the Merovingian period. This idea is supported by archaeological evidence from England. Studies on West Stow, an Early Anglo-Saxon settlement in eastern England, show a possible reuse of Roman querns. Of the seventy

107 Parkhouse 1997, 5-6 37 sunken-featured buildings that were found here, twenty contained quern stone fragments. Twelve of these huts contained fragments of tephrite querns. These fragments were identified as possible Roman reused stones which has served another purpose than grinding.108 A third problem is chronology. Chapter 3 has shown that there are indications for a sudden decrease of production and exportation during this period, but this does not mean that this situation lasted during the entire Merovingian period. Ideally, the Merovingian distribution should be investigated for different timespans to identify changes in distribution over time. However, the querns that are described within the majority of excavation reports do not always have very accurate dates and are often simply dated as ‘Merovingian’ or ‘early medieval’. This makes it almost impossible to order the dataset in a chronological way.

Another problem is the fact that excavation reports often pay little or no attention to stone artifacts in general. The study of natural stone is often dependent of the program of requirements for an archeological excavation. During the creation of this inventory of querns it was striking to see that the more extensive an excavation report is, the likelier it is that it contains a description of a quern within a Merovingian context.

6.3 Distribution map

The results of this archaeological inventory of Merovingian tephrite querns is shown in figure 6. At a first glance the map shows that, although there are more concentrations in certain areas, querns were distributed to all parts of the Netherlands. For the accompanying database, see appendix 1.

108 Frantzen 2014, 89-90 38 Fig. 7: Distribution map of Merovingian tephrite. The Old Rhine is shown as a dotted line. (Created with QGIS)

39 7. Distribution to the riverine area and Rhine estuary

Now that the distribution map has been presented, the following chapters will give a brief overview of the Merovingian settlements that contain (fragments of) tephrite quern stones in each part of the Netherlands. When one looks at geographical and economic factors, settlements near the Rhine and its distributary channels are the most likely to contain tephrite querns. Due to their favorable location along the river, ships loaded with querns coming from the Eifel area could reach these settlements relatively easy. It should be noted that the geography of the Rhine estuary during the Early Medieval period differed from the current one. The distribution map presented in chapter 6 might therefore provide an incomplete picture of the influence of geographical factors. Settlements within the Rhine estuary, especially on the banks of the Old Rhine, are often classified as coastal settlements within the existing literature. In this research, however, they are classified as riverine settlements because their connection to the Rhine is more important than their access to the North-Sea.

7.1 The riverine area and Rhine estuary during the Merovingian period

The Rhine splits into multiple smaller rivers in the Netherlands. The distribution map of the previous chapter shows a clustering of settlements along the Old Rhine, this area is often viewed as Frisian. As its name suggests, the current river is a remnant of the original Rhine that flowed here during the Merovingian period. The center of the riverine area is characterized by two early medieval centers: the ecclesiastical center Utrecht and the trading settlement Wijk bij Duurstede, the famous Dorestad. In view of the presence of a mint, which was already producing coins around 635109, Wijk bij Duurstede must have been an important center of trade during the Merovingian period. Unfortunately we are not very well informed about Merovingian Dorestad. Wijk bij Duurstede is viewed as an important transfer point of querns during its flourishing period. This period, however, probably only started after 690 and lasted until circa 850.110 The examples of Utrecht and Dorestad suggest that the connection with the Frankish empire only became intense in the later Merovingian period. The location of both centers next to the waterways coming from the heart of the Frankish empire and the close proximity of Frankish territories, which could have been reached relatively easy over land

109 Van Es 1994, 91

110 Kars 1980, 395 40 as well, makes it likely that the Frankish influence has been great since early Merovingian times. It is very likely that this part of the Netherlands already had connections with the Frankish empire at the time Dagobert instituted a mission post in Utrecht in the early seventh century.

During both the Merovingian and Carolingian period, settlements along the Oude Rijn have a quite uniform layout. Settlements such as Oegstgeest and Valkenburg, show building in which farms were build directly on the river banks. In this way the farmyards would have had easy access to the river, both for transport and efficient drainage. The accompanying agrarian fields lay directly behind the settlements.111 Imported goods that are found within settlements in the Rhine estuary, such as wine barrels, suggest strong commercial ties with upstream areas in Germany during this period. More important is the earlier mentioned fact that ceramic assemblages of Merovingian settlements in this estuary consist for a large part of Vorgebirge and some Mayen wares.112 This makes it more likely that these settlements also contain tephrite querns.

7.2 Sites

In this study area sixteen settlements were investigated. Five sites contained tephrite within Merovingian contexts and five contained tephrite that possibly dates from the Merovingian period. Numerous sites however, did not reveal any quern stones from the Mayen area. No reference was made to Merovingian tephrite querns stones in the publications of Alphen aan den Rijn Lemkes (Kok 2001), Bergharen Dorpstraat (Hermsen 2009), Houten Tiellandt (Noordam & Van Tent 1979), Leiden Roomburg (Hazenberg 2000), Oud-Leusden (Van Tent 1985) and Valkenburg De Woerd (Bult & Hallewas 1990). The excavation reports of the following sites mention (fragments of) tephrite quern stones within Merovingian contexts:

Leiderdorp Plantage (ca. 630-850) This site was settled during the late Merovingian and Carolingian period. It has remains of revetments and harbor activities. Different imported wares show that this settlement had

111 Dijkstra 2011, 168

112 Dijkstra 2011, 308-309 41 access to the Rhine trade network.113 Although the vast majority of tephrite that was found here dates from the Carolingian period, four fragments of tephrite were found within a Merovingian context.114

Leidsche Rijn / Utrecht A2 (ca. 575-775) Remains of seven farmyards were excavated here, containing dozens of buildings. Imported wares indicate contacts with multiple other regions. Several sherds of Mayen ceramics have been found here. A total of 60 fragments of quern stones was found here, most of them were made out of tephrite. No complete querns were found here and the fragments were relatively small. Some broken quern stones seem to have been reused as fishing net weights115, which indicates that tephrite was already used here long before the settlement was abandoned.

Oegstgeest Nieuw Rhijngeest Zuid (ca. 600-700) This settlement consisted of several adjoining yards with byre dwellings, outbuildings and buildings for grain storage. Several sherds of Mayen ceramics have been found here. During the earliest archaeological campaigns at this site some fragments of tephrite were found here.116 Their low amount was interpreted as a sign that this material was relatively scarce during the Merovingian period.117 During a later excavation 20 fragments of tephrite were found here, all of them within a Merovingian well. The fragments were small and most of them were burned. Striking is the fact that there was also a fragment of a sandstone quern found.118 This could be an indication for a scenario in which the Mayen quarries could not meet the demands of the consuming markets, so that these settlements had to use less suitable materials for grinding grain.

Oosterhout, Gld. (ca. 675-725) Remains of a late Merovingian settlement were excavated here; a well, water pits, rubbish pits and postholes. A large part of the ceramics that have been found here seem to be

113 Dijkstra & Verhoeven 2016, 679-681

114 Kars 2016, 364-365

115 Nokkert et al. 2009, 255, 359-361

116 Hemminga et al. 2006, 89, Hemminga et al. 2007, 69-71

117 Hemminga et al. 2006, 93

118 Jezeer et al. 2011, 90-91 42 produced locally, but some might have been imported from the German Rhine area. A total of 111 fragments of tephrite was found here. Most of the fragments are smaller than 60 millimeters. Eighteen fragments still show distinctive features of a quern stone.119

Vleuten Appellaantje (ca. 500-800) Settlement located on the bank of the Oude Rijn. Eighteen wells were found here, together with multiple postholes of buildings. Several artifacts, such as ceramics from the German Rhine area are indicators of trade contacts; they are interpreted as signs for a relatively stable Frisian-Frankish network. During the excavation, 26 fragments of tephrite were found here within Merovingian contexts. Although the settlement is dated to the Merovingian period, there were also a lot of artifacts from the Roman period found here. The tephrite fragments, however, seem to date from the Merovingian period.120

7.3 Possible sites

The excavation reports of the sites mentioned above show tephrite within Merovingian contexts. The excavation reports of the sites mentioned below do mention finds of tephrite, but it remains unclear if they date from the Merovingian period. This is often the result of a lack of information about the archaeological context in which the tephrite has been found. This is especially a problem when settlements already existed in the Roman period or continued into the Carolingian period.

Beuningen Centrum (ca. 200-900) Multiple settlement phases dating from the Roman to the Late Medieval period. Five wells dating from the late Merovingian or Carolingian period were excavated here. Many fragments of tephrite were found here during an excavation. They are dating from the Roman, the ‘Early Medieval’ and the Late Medieval period. Therefore it remains uncertain if any querns date from the Merovingian period.121

119 Ball et al. 2007, 91-93

120 Den Hartog et al. 2010, 135, 139-142

121 Kamp & Polak 2001, 50-54 43 Katwijk Zanderij (ca. 100-800) A settlement dating from the Roman, Merovingian and Carolingian period was uncovered here. Multiple houses and outbuildings, including barns, wells and sunken-featured buildings, have been found in various yards. The excavation report mentions several finds of tephrite but the date of these fragments remains unclear. Finds of Mayen ceramics, however, indicate contacts with the Eifel region during the Merovingian period.122

Koudekerk aan den Rijn Lagewaard (ca. 500-800) Settlement containing various yards with houses, outbuildings and trenches. The publication about this settlement only briefly mentions that twelve fragments of quern stones have been found here. It remains uncertain if these date from the Merovingian or Carolingian period. It also is not clear if these are fragments of tephrite or of another kind of material.123

Lent Schoolstraat (ca. 600-900) Traces of a Merovingian settlement; postholes, trenches and a well. The majority of the ceramics that have been found here are thought to have been produced locally, but it is likely that some of them are produced in the German Rhineland. Multiple fragments of tephrite were found here, dating from the Roman and ‘Early Medieval’ period. Since the settlement continues into the Carolingian period, it remains unclear if there was any tephrite distributed to this settlement during the Merovingian period.124

Wijk bij Duurstede (ca. 650-900) The sixth and early seventh century Dorestad is thought to have lied near the Roman castellum Levefanum, which has not been excavated. The earliest pottery that has been found in Wijk bij Duurstede dates from around 675 and the prosperous period of Dorestad is thought to have started after 690. A large part of the early medieval ceramics that have been found in Wijk bij Duurstede are produced in Mayen.125 Although the querns that were found in Wijk bij Duurstede have been intensively studied, their chronology remains

122 Van der Velde et al. 2008, 215, 279

123 Grinsven & Dijkstra 2007, 74-75

124 Harmsen et al. 2012, 57-58, 67-70

125 Van Es & Verwers 1980, 143 44 unclear.126 As stated above, Wijk bij Duurstede is viewed as an important trading post that functioned as a transfer point for tephrite querns during the Carolingian period. Based on the existing literature, little can be said about the role of Wijk bij Duurstede within the distribution of querns during the (early) Merovingian period. Recent excavations on the Veilingterrein have unearthed tephrite that dates from the late Merovingian or early Carolingian period.127

7.4 Conclusion

It can be concluded that a large part of the settlements in this area consumed tephrite during the Merovingian period. No complete quern stones have been found within the settlements this area. Although it is almost certain that this area was supplied with tephrite during the seventh century, nothing can be said about a possible stop of tephrite imports in this area during the sixth century. Many of the sites that existed in the sixth century continued into the seventh century. A large part of the sites that contain tephrite also contain Mayen ceramics, although the amount is often relatively small.

126 Kars 1980, 393-396, Parkhouse 1976, 181-188

127 Dijkstra et al. 2012, 357-359 45 8. Distribution to the western part of the Netherlands

This chapter will investigate the distribution of tephrite to the western part of the Netherlands, roughly corresponding with the modern-day provinces Noord-Holland, Zeeland and a large part of Zuid-Holland, between the Vlie and the Scheldt. The majority of the settlements in this study area can be classified as coastal settlements. It should be noted that the geographical shape of this area during the Early Medieval period differed from the current shape. The distribution map presented in chapter five might therefore provide an incomplete picture of the influence of geographical factors.

8.1 The western part of the Netherlands during the Merovingian period

The western coastal area was relatively well protected against the influence of the sea by sand dunes and sand ridges. During the Holocene period elongated sand ridges were formed, which lie above the sea level. During the Merovingian period, settlement territories were scattered across these sand ridges. Within these territories there were settlements in the form of a hamlet or buildings along a road or waterway, in the vicinity of the arable lands.128 From the late fifth century onwards, when the population of these areas started to increase again, the house building traditions of the western part of the Netherlands show quite uniform shapes, but they differ from the houses that are found in the northern Frisian areas. The structures of graves show similarities with other areas along the North-Sea, while the goods that are found within these graves also indicate connections with England and the riverine areas in the middle part of the Netherlands. It should be noted that early medieval graves have not been found in Noord-Holland, but this is most likely because of their poor archaeological visibility due to sedimentation.129 In the same way, coastal erosion and sedimentation had a big influence on the archaeological record so that many of the Merovingian settlements in this area have become archaeologically invisible. Dunes that have been formed after 1000 AD are covering archaeological traces from the Early Medieval period.. The research of early medieval settlements in the western coastal area of the Netherlands has recently been synthesized by Van der Velde (2017), but his works does not mention anything about Merovingian Mayen querns.130

128 Dijkstra 2011, 186-187

129 Dijkstra 2011, 349

130 Van der Velde 2017, 149-190 46 8.2 Sites

In this study area, ten settlements were investigated. Two sites contained tephrite in Merovingian contexts and four contained tephrite that possibly dates from Merovingian period. Numerous sites however, did not reveal any quern stones from the Mayen area. No reference was made to Merovingian tephrite querns stones in the publications of Limmen Zuidkerkenlaan (Van Raaij 1993a, 1993b), Medemblik (Besteman 1974), Schagen (Diederik 1982) and Serooskerke (Dijkstra & Zuidhoff 2011). The excavation reports of the following sites describe (fragments of) tephrite quern stones within Merovingian contexts:

Den Haag Frankenslag (ca 500-700) Settlement consisting of houses, sunken-featured buildings and trenches. Some of the sixth and seventh century ceramics that were found here are thought to have been produced in the German Rhine and Eifel area. A total of 10 kilograms of natural stone was collected here, of which a large part consisted of tephrite. The excavation report does not mention any further details about these tephrite finds.131 Therefore a more specific date other than ‘Merovingian’ cannot be provided.

Naaldwijk IV (ca. 500-700) Multiple postholes, trenches and two wells indicate a Merovingian settlement here. No Mayen ceramics are mentioned in the excavation report, but the Merovingian ‘rotgestrichen’ wares that have been found here are possibly produced in Mayen. One well that dates from the Merovingian period contains fragments of tephrite.132 Although this tephrite is found within a Merovingian context, the fragments might also be residual waste from the Roman period; the well contains ceramics and metal objects dating from the sixth and seventh centuries but it also contains fragments of Roman pottery. The excavation reports does not mention any further details about the size and shapes of the tephrite fragments.

8.3 Possible sites

The excavation reports of the sites mentioned below do mention finds of tephrite, but it remains unclear if they date from the Merovingian period:

131 Magendans & Wagendorp 1998, 19-25, 28, 37

132 Van der Feijst et al. 2015, 62, 278 47 Bloemendaal Groot Olmen (ca. 475-900) Settlement phases dating from the late fifth to the ninth or tenth century. The site consists of several yards with farms and outbuildings. The majority of the Merovingian wheel-turned ceramics that were found here have been produced in Mayen, indicating trading contacts with the Eifel. A striking detail is that from the earliest phases of the settlement (ca. 475-600) no fragments of tephrite have been found, while the amount of German Rhineland and Eifel ceramics from this period is quite high.133 Although the excavation report mentions fragments of tephrite querns, it remains unclear if these date from the (later) Merovingian period or the Carolingian period.134

Castricum Oosterbuurt (ca. 675-850) Late Merovingian and Carolingian settlement containing several houses. The excavation report does not mention where the Merovingian wheel-turned ceramics were produced and therefore no possible trade contacts can be identified based on the ceramic assemblage. One fragment of tephrite that was found here is dated as ‘early medieval’ and it is therefore uncertain if this fragment dates from the (later) Merovingian period.135

Heiloo Zuiderloo (ca. 600-900 ) A large number of tephrite quern fragments have been found here within farmyards east of the Hogeweg that date from late Merovingian or Carolingian period. Some of the querns may have been reused as fireplace stones. Many of the querns of the querns show similarities with the Drentish quern type ‘Buinen’ which was used from the seventh to the ninth century.136

Uitgeest Dorregeest (ca. 100BC-900AD) Settlement phases dating from the Roman period onwards. Some fragments of round tephrite querns have been found here. They date from the Roman or Early Medieval period and therefore nothing more specific can be said about their age.137

133 De Koning 2015, 436

134 De Koning 2015, 332

135 Hagers & Sier 1999, 103, 128

136 Houkes 2017, 47-48

137 De Koning 2016, 523-524 48 8.4 Conclusion

Due to low archaeological activity and natural processes such as the formation of dunes after 1000 AD, not many Merovingian sites are known in the western coastal area. Two to six of the ten settlements that were investigated contained tephrite within a Merovingian context. Therefore it can be concluded, based on the archaeological picture, that at least some of the settlements in this area consumed tephrite during the Merovingian period. No chronological differences in distribution can be identified for this area. The case of Bloemendaal Groot Olmen shows that during the early Merovingian phase possibly no tephrite was consumed here. However, many ceramics from the German Rhineland and Eifel were consumed here during the same period. Apart from Bloemendaal, the majority of the other sites in this area also show import ceramics from the German Rhineland and Eifel area. The as yet unpublished early medieval settlement research at Texel might provide more interesting data concerning the supply of Mayen querns to Noord-Holland during the Merovingian period.

49 9. Distribution to the northern part of the Netherlands

This chapter will investigate the distribution of tephrite to the northern part of the Netherlands, roughly corresponding with the modern-day provinces Groningen and Friesland. Like the settlements in the western part of the Netherlands, the majority of the settlements in this study area can be classified as coastal settlements. It should be noted that the geographical situation of this area during the Early Medieval period differed from the current geography. The distribution map presented in chapter five might therefore provide an incomplete picture of the influence of geographical factors.

9.1 The northern part of the Netherlands during the Merovingian period

Unlike the western coastal region, the northern part of the Netherlands was not protected against the influence of the sea by sand dunes. This made it necessary that the inhabitants of this region created artificial dwelling mounds, known as ‘terps’, on which the settlements were build. During the Roman period, the growth in the amount of settlements in the Frisian terp region seems to stop and habitation seems to have vanished around 300-325, most likely due to the collapsing Roman empire which caused economic and political problems. During the period 375-425 the area seems to have become inhabited again. Based on the archaeological record, these inhabitants are currently viewed as ‘newcomers’, coming from Southern Scandinavia, the Elbe-Weser area and Schleswig- Holstein.138 These inhabitants of the Frisian homelands are often viewed as skilled sailors and they were important nodes within the early medieval long-distance trade. The sailing tradition of the Frisians probably arose as a consequence of the landscape conditions of the northern part of the Netherlands, which can be characterized as a ‘waterscape’.139 Therefore, it is likely hat the Frisians fulfilled an important role in the distribution of tephrite querns. Striking is the fact that many settlements in this area were supplied with ‘Frankish’ ceramics during the Merovingian period. In Wijnaldum, for instance, the ceramic assemblage of the period 550-650 is characterized by a large number of Mayen imports.140 These contacts with the Eifel area make it very likely that these areas would also have been supplied with tephrite querns during the same period. The terp area is also famous for the various prestige goods that have been found here, such as golden brooches. These

138 Dijkstra et al. 2008, 271-272

139 Heidinga 1999, 12

140 Gerrets & De Koning 1999, 96-97 50 artifacts are not only seen as indicators of long-distance trade and exchange but also as signs of gift exchange between members of elite groups.141 Although the political and economical theories about this region are very interesting, the archeological evidence for this is relatively poor. One big culprit for this is the commercial excavation of terps during the period from 1840 to the Second World War. Terps were quarried in order to extract the relatively fertile soil for agricultural purposes. In this way hundreds of terps have vanished and little to no archaeological attention was paid to many of them during this period. After the Second World War, archaeological interest in this region became more apparent, resulting in systematical excavations such as in Wijnaldum.142 The dissertation of Knol (1993) tells us that tephrite was consumed in the northern coastal region from the Roman period onwards.143 Although many of the (older) excavation reports of this area do not mention natural stone objects, a couple of the recent excavations have revealed tephrite.

9.2 Sites

In this study area, seven settlements were investigated. Two sites contained tephrite within Merovingian contexts and one contained tephrite that possibly dates from the Merovingian period. Numerous sites however, did not reveal any quern stones from the Mayen area. No reference was made to Merovingian tephrite querns stones in the publications of Anjum, Birdaard (Nicolay 2010), Foudgum (De Langen 1992), and Wijnaldum (Besteman et al. 1999). The excavation reports of the following sites describe (fragments of) tephrite quern stones within Merovingian contexts:

Hallum (ca. 425-1200) Settlement with sod houses dating from the entire Early Medieval period. Like in Wijnaldum, several sherds of Mayen imports were excavated here, indicating contacts with the Eifel area. A total of twelve fragments of tephrite quern stones have been found here, dating from the Early Medieval period to the High Medieval period. It is interesting to see that the vast majority of these fragments have been found in a layer that is associated with the Merovingian period. Because this layer is only dated as

141 Nicolay 2014, 11-12

142 Gerrets 1999, 23-24

143 Knol 1993, 87 51 ‘Merovingian’ in the excavation report, nothing can be said about a change in distribution to this settlement within the Merovingian period.144

Leeuwarden Oldehoofsterkerkhof (450-900) Settlement containing several sod houses. The ceramic assemblage of this settlement during the Merovingian period consists for 10 percent of ceramics produced in the Eifel area. Fragments of tephrite have been found here, dating from the Roman to the Late Medieval Period. Most important is the fact that the settlement contained tephrite within Merovingian contexts. The excavation report mentions finds of tephrite within contexts dating to the ‘Early Medieval Periods A and B’ (450-725).145

9.3 Possible sites

The excavation report of the site mentioned below does mention finds of tephrite, but it remains unclear if they date from the Merovingian period:

Ezinge (ca. 600BC-1000AD) Settlement phases dating from the Iron Age to the High Medieval period. Several houses and sunken-featured buildings date from the Merovingian period. Again, many of the coarse wheel-thrown ceramics that have been found here within Merovingian contexts are likely to have been produced in Mayen. Fragments of tephrite querns have been found here, dating from the Iron Age to the Middle Ages. Many of the querns have been dated as ‘Medieval’, so little can be said about the distribution in the Merovingian period. One exception might be a quern fragment that dates to the seventh or eight century based on its typological features.146

9.4 Conclusion

Although some Merovingian sites are known in this area, not many can be studied for tephrite querns. Two to three of the seven settlements that were investigated contained tephrite within a Merovingian context. Therefore it can be concluded, based on the archaeological picture, that at least a part of the settlements in this area consumed tephrite

144 Tuinstra et al. 2011, 116, 195-200

145 Dijkstra et al. 2008, 126, 175-177

146 Nieuwhof et al. 2014, 132-133, 178-180 52 during the Merovingian period. Because of the fact that only a few settlements have been systematically excavated and that many excavation reports do not deal with natural stone, this amount is likely to have been higher. No chronological differences in distribution can be identified for this area.

53 10. Distribution to the eastern part of the Netherlands

This chapter will investigate the distribution of tephrite to the eastern part of the Netherlands, roughly corresponding with the modern-day provinces Drenthe, Overijssel and a part of Gelderland. The distribution of querns to Drenthe from prehistoric times onwards has been studied by Harsema (1979). Although his work provides an interesting chronological overview of the use of querns in this eastern part of the Netherlands, not many examples of early medieval querns are discussed. As previously mentioned, Harsema thinks that the distribution of querns experienced a sudden decrease after the Roman period. Based on finds of querns in Drenthe a typology was made. It is interesting to see that between type B (Westerwijtwerd), which was used in the period 100-400 and the type C (Buinen), which was in use during the period 600-800, no intermediate type is described within this typology.147 This would either mean that it is unknown which type of quern was in use during this intermediate period or that the distribution of querns indeed stopped during the Late Roman and/or Merovingian period.

10.1 The eastern part of the Netherlands during the Merovingian period

This part of the Netherlands is traditionally viewed as lying in the western ‘periphery’ of the Saxon cultural region. These Saxons, originating from the North-Sea coast, would have expanded their habitation area in the centuries after the collapse of the Roman empire. The Saxon cultural area is, however, hard to identify on the basis of the available archaeological material. Only a few finds of typical Saxon or Anglo-Saxon ceramics are known from the eastern part of the Netherlands. During the transition from the Roman period to the Early Middle Ages the population declines and larger settlements disappear. On a regional scale, however, there seems to be a continuity of habitation.148 Although this area only became incorporated into the Frankish empire between 750 and 800, it is likely that there was already some Frankish economic and political influence during the seventh century.149 The eastern part of the Netherlands is known for the locally produced ‘Hessens-Schortens’ pottery, which was the most common used type of pottery during the period 400-900. This group of ceramics does not show major typological changes over time and therefore it is

147 Nicolay et al. 2008, 468-469

148 Van der Velde 2011, 147-148

149 Van Beek 2009, 89-90 54 often hard to provide an accurate date for early medieval find assemblages in this area. Dating Mayen querns that are found in this region might therefore be even more difficult. The Hessens-Schortens pottery is found in large parts of the northeastern Netherlands and Germany and therefore it is hard to link this material to cultural groups. Merovingian ’Frankish’ imports are known from this area, but they often do not make up for more than 15 percent of the ceramic assemblages of settlements. The percentages are higher in settlements near the Yssel river. In other settlements in the eastern part of the Netherlands these ‘Frankish’ imports are often completely absent.150 However, settlements that lie west of the Yssel river, such as Kootwijk and Hoog-Buurlo, consist for 80 to 90 percent of Frankish imports during the sixth and seventh centuries.151 This archaeological picture suggests that trade relations with the German Rhineland and Eifel area were less intense in the eastern part of the Netherlands (east of the Yssel) when compared to the earlier discussed areas. Therefore, it might be interesting to compare this picture with the consumption of tephrite querns.

10.2 Sites

In this study area, nineteen settlements were investigated. Four sites contained tephrite within Merovingian contexts and six contained tephrite that possibly dates from the Merovingian period. Numerous sites however, did not reveal any quern stones from the Mayen area. No reference was made to Merovingian tephrite querns stones in the publications of Dalen Westakkers (Kooi 1994a), Enschede-Elferink Es (Scholte Lubberink 2014), Peelo (Kooi 1994b), Pesse-Eursinge (Lanting 1977), Raalte Boeteler Enk (Van der Velde et al. 2002a), Schipborg (Van Giffen 1943) Vasse-De Steenbrei (Pronk 2015) and Zutphen-Eme (Bouwmeester 2000) The excavation reports of the following sites describe (fragments of) tephrite quern stones within Merovingian contexts:

Ede Paasbergterrein (ca. 650-750) During an archaeological excavation several houses and sunken-featured buildings were found here. The sunken-featured buildings were clustered, which suggests that this was an activity zone for crafts. Twelve fragments of tephrite were found here, with a total weight of 618 grams. This area was probably not settled during earlier or later periods, so

150 Van Beek 2009, 99-100

151 Heidinga 1986, 134 55 the quern stone fragments that were found here date with some certainty from the Merovingian period. Also, several sherds of Merovingian pottery containing volcanic inclusions suggests contacts with the Eifel area.152

Hoog-Buurlo Braamberg (ca. 500-700) Settlement (situated west of the Yssel river) consisting of a byre-dwelling, a possible outbuilding and two sunken-featured buildings. The ceramic assemblage of this settlement consists entirely of Merovingian wares; some of them have been produced in Mayen. In one posthole of the byre-dwelling fragments of a tephrite quern stone were found.153

Midlaren (ca. 200 BC-AD 1100) Settlement with multiple habitation phases. Eleven houses from the Merovingian period have been identified here. Although the Merovingian ceramic assemblage of this settlements consists for the largest part of handmade pottery that was most likely produced locally, seven sherds from the German Rhineland were found here.154 A total of 159 fragments of tephrite querns was found here. They make up the largest group within the natural stone artifacts found on this site. Although a large part dates from the Merovingian period, the majority of the Early Medieval querns are found within contexts which have an ample dating range within the period 500-800. One fragment has a relatively accurate context date of 500-600. This is the only example within this survey of a fragment of tephrite within a certain sixth century context. Since it is only one fragment, it might however also be waste from an earlier period. It is very interesting to see that the inhabitants started to create their own querns made from other kinds of stone during the transition from the Late Roman period to the Early Middle Ages.155 This might be an indication that the trade relations collapsed and therefore the inhabitants were forced to create their own grinding tools during a period of time. However, some tephrite fragments also seem to date from this period.

152 Hoven 2014, 35-36, 42-43

153 Jongeling 2017, 41-47, 65, 76

154 Verhoeven 2009, 305, 319

155 Nicolay et al. 2008, 467-487, 724-729 56 Pesse Oostering (ca. 500-700) Two wells dating from the Merovingian period indicate a settlement here. The ceramic assemblage of this settlement does not indicate any trade contacts with the Eifel area; it consists entirely of handmade pottery. However, fragments of tephrite have been found within one of the Merovingian wells. No accurate date other than ‘Merovingian’ can be provided for these fragments.156

10.3 Possible sites

The excavation report of the site mentioned below do mention finds of tephrite, but it remains uncertain if they date from the Merovingian period:

Colmschate (ca. 275-700) This settlement contained three houses and several outbuildings. Although the ceramic assemblage of this settlement consists for the largest part of handmade pottery, a few sherds of Mayen ceramics have been found here. It remains unclear if these sherds date from the Late Roman or the Merovingian period. Several fragments of tephrite querns have been excavated here. Again, it remains unclear if these date from the Late Roman or the Merovingian period.157

Enter De Akkers (ca. 300-600) Settlement dating from the Roman and Merovingian period, containing several houses and sunken-featured buildings. The excavation report does not seem to mention any imported ceramics from the Merovingian period. Fifteen fragments of tephrite were found here, but they are not accurately dated.158

Norg (ca. 650-900) Settlement containing several houses, outbuildings, sunken-featured buildings and wells. The ceramic assemblage consists almost entirely of local handmade pottery. One fragment of a tephrite quern was found here, dating from the late Merovingian or early Carolingian period. More interesting is the find of a fragment of another type of volcanic

156 Tulp et al. 2010, 49, 81

157 Vermeulen et al. 2009, 30, 73, 79

158 Hulst 2004, 90 57 rock: a crust of a so-called volcanic bomb. Archaeologists have interpreted this fragment as an indication that tephrite was extracted from volcanic blocks during the period of a renewed trade in querns and that there was no organized quarrying in the Mayen area. The fragment might be an indication that the tephrite reached the settlement in the form of an unworked volcanic block.159

Putten Husselerveld (ca. 550-900) Settlement that probably consisted of only one farmyard during the Merovingian period. Ceramic imports from the Merovingian period are absent within this settlement, while the Carolingian period shows imports from Mayen and other German production centers. A large number of tephrite fragments was found here. In order to get an idea about the date of these querns, the archaeologists tried to refit the fragments in order to reconstruct them. The outcome of this project was disappointing and therefore no accurate date can be given to these quern fragments.160

Odoorn (ca. 475-825) This extensively excavated settlement contains several farmyards with byrehouses, outbuildings, fences and wells. Hessens-Schortens ceramics seem to make up the vast majority of the ceramic assemblage of this settlement. The excavation report mentions fragments of tephrite but it notes that there is only a remarkable small amount of them present within this settlement. No further details about a possible date are mentioned.161

Zelhem Soerland (ca. 600-800) Settlement containing houses, outbuildings, sunken-featured buildings and wells. Imported ceramics only make up for 1,6 percent within the entire ceramic assemblage of this settlement. Merovingian imports might be completely absent. Many fragments of tephrite have been found here but they are not accurately dated.162 Therefore it remains uncertain if these were consumed during the Merovingian period.

159 Melkert 2015, 48-49

160 Blom et al. 2005, 128, 151

161 Van Es 1979, 206

162 Van der Velde et al. 2002b, 48-50, 52 58 10.4 Conclusion

Although the absence of imported ceramics makes it often difficult to date early medieval assemblages in this area, some interesting conclusions can be made. Although the distribution of ceramics to this area does not raise a picture of intense trade relations with the German Eifel and/or Rhineland, the quern distribution shows that settlements east of the Yssel river were using tephrite querns stones. The pattern of distribution of Mayen querns does not necessarily follow the Mayen ceramics distribution pattern. Four to ten of the nineteen settlements that were investigated contained tephrite within a Merovingian context. Therefore it can be concluded, based on the archaeological picture, that at least some of the settlements in this area consumed tephrite during the Merovingian period. The querns found in Midlaren, which are made out of other materials, might indicate that the supply of querns stopped for a period of time during the Late Roman or Early Merovingian period. At the same time, this settlement also contained a fragment of tephrite within a sixth century context.

59 11. Distribution to the southern part of the Netherlands

The last area that will be investigated is the southern part of the Netherlands, roughly corresponding with the modern-day provinces Noord-Brabant and Limburg. These areas were situated closer to the center of the Frankish empire and therefore more ties with the Frankish heartland might be expected. More ‘Frankish’ imported ceramics are expected within settlements in this area compared to the other four regions. On the other hand, many of the settlements in this area are in a way connected to the Meuse and therefore they might have been supplied with ceramics produced in the Meuse valley instead of Eifel wares.

11.1 The southern part of the Netherlands during the Merovingian period

One of the most important Merovingian centers in the southern part of the Netherlands was Maastricht. As previously mentioned, the Maastricht-Tongeren region is often viewed as an important region for early Christianity, with Saint Servatius as a connecting factor. The city is probably the most important center in the middle part of the Meuse valley during this period. The general picture of Maastricht during the sixth and seventh centuries is that of a center that is quickly growing in importance in a region that used to be sparsely inhabited.163 In the Roman period Maastricht was supplied with high amounts of Mayen coarse wares, but the majority of the Merovingian coarse wares that have been found here are likely to have been produced in local kilns.164 Unlike in the province of Limburg, no regional centers from the Merovingian period are known in Brabant. In Brabant, more settlements are known from the Merovingian period than from earlier periods. The region must be seen as an almost deserted area during the fifth century. After the Frankish empire gradually expanded to the north-east, to the area of Austrasia, this situation started to change. Brabant came into contact with the industrial areas between Maastricht and Cologne. The rural society of this area during the earliest phases of the Merovingian period is often viewed as egalitarian. This presupposes that trade and exchange mainly was the initiative of individuals. However, in the course of the sixth century the area was colonized and a local elite seems to have emerged.165 Within the well investigated Meuse- Demer-Scheldt region settlements with multiple phases can be found, which consist of

163 De Groot et al. 2011, 15-16

164 Beck 2015, 33

165 Verwers 1998, 319 60 several farmyards. Settlements with only one habitation phase that consist of a single farmyard have also been found.166 Although some studies have been done on Merovingian ceramics that have been found in Brabant, it remains unclear where the majority of these ceramics have been produced. Verwers (1998), for instance, presents an overview of Merovingian pottery found in Brabant but does mainly focus on biconical pots found in graves. The provenance of these ceramic wares is not discussed at all. When one looks at geographical factors, it is likely that settlements in Brabant would contain relatively less Mayen ceramics and more ceramics that have been produced in the Meuse valley or other southern (local) production centers.

11.2 Sites

In this study area, eighteen settlements were investigated. Two sites contained tephrite within Merovingian contexts and three contained tephrite that possibly dates from the Merovingian period. The majority of the sites however, did not reveal any quern stones from the Mayen area. No reference was made to Merovingian tephrite querns stones in the publications of Alphen Centrum (Mostert 2013), Alphen Kerkakkers (De Koning 2005), Berkel-Enschot (Weterings 2013), Boxmeer Sterckwijk (Blom & Van der Velde 2015), Breda-West (Koot & Berkvens 2004), Escharen (Verwers 1998), Goirle (Bink 2005), Grubbenvorst (Van Es 1973), Sittard Haagsittard (Stoepker 1992), Someren Waterdael III (De Boer & Hiddink 2012), Venray Antoniusveld (Spanjer 1997), Voerendaal (Willems 1986, 1987, 1988) and Weert Kampershoek (Tol & Van der Mark 1985, Dijkstra 1998). The excavation reports of the following sites describe (fragments of) tephrite quern stones within Merovingian contexts:

Alphen Molenbaan (ca. 500-1250) Settlement with multiple houses dating from the Early to the Late Medieval period. The majority of the Merovingian coarse wares that have been found here (dating from the period 500-700) are thought to have been produced in the Eifel. Ten fragments of a tephrite quern have been found here within a well that dates from the Merovingian period. Another fragment of tephrite was found within a house which dates from the same period. No specific date other than ‘Merovingian’ is attributed to these fragments.167

166 Kimenai & Huijbers 2016, 259-263

167 Meijlink 2005, 18, 59-60, 70 61 Hulsel Kerkekkers (ca. 600-750) Settlement which consisted of one or two houses with an outbuilding. The origins of the majority of the Merovingian wheel-thrown ceramics are not discussed within the excavation report. One sherd shows volcanic inclusions, which is characteristic for Mayen wares. Multiple fragments of tephrite were found here. Some of them are interpreted as a possible ritual deposition which was performed when the settlement was abandoned.168

11.3 Possible sites

The excavation report of the sites mentioned below do mention finds of tephrite, but it remains uncertain if they date from the Merovingian period:

Horst Meterik (ca. 630-1000) Settlement that was continuously inhabited for nearly 400 years. One house dating from the later Merovingian period was found here. While the excavation report mentions Mayen imports from the Carolingian period, the origin of the Merovingian imports is not discussed. 21 Fragments of tephrite have been found on this site. No accurate date is given to these fragments and therefore it remains unclear if these fragments date from the (later) Merovingian period or not.169

Uden (ca. 600-900) Settlement containing two or three houses and one or two outbuildings. The excavation report mentions ceramic imports from Mayen, but they date from the Merovingian or the Carolingian period. One big fragment of a tephrite quern was found here. Based on its original diameter of 48 centimeters, this quern dates from the period 600-900. Therefore it also remains unclear if this quern fragment dates from the Merovingian or Carolingian period.170

Veldhoven-Zilverackers (ca. 650-700) Settlement dating from the second half of the seventh century, consisting of a main building, a sunken-featured building and a well. The well was dated with the aid of

168 De Leeuwe 2008, 50, 72

169 De Koning et al. 2009, 145, 151

170 Van Hoof & Jansen 2002, 56-59 62 dendrochronology to the year 656. Several small fragments of tephrite have been found here. These fragments were found outside the seventh century structures but it cannot be excluded that this tephrite was used in the Merovingian settlement.171

11.4 Conclusion

Two to five of the eighteen settlements that were investigated contained tephrite within a Merovingian context. Therefore it can be concluded, based on the archaeological picture, that at least some of the settlements in this area consumed tephrite during the Merovingian period. Given the fact that there was no or insufficient archaeological data available for a lot of settlements within this study area, the inventory of this part of the Netherlands might give a wrong picture about the distribution. The same can be said about the ceramic assemblages of this area: the majority of the ceramics that have been found in Alphen Molenbaan seem to have been produced in Mayen, but the origins of many ceramics found in other settlements are uncertain.

171 Verhoeven 2018, 4, 11 63 12. Geographical, political and economic factors in the distribution of querns

Now that the distribution of querns has been mapped, it is interesting to investigate which factors have been of influence on this distribution. Political struggles between Frisians and Franks were frequent during the Merovingian period: around 650 the Frisians conquered the middle part of the Netherlands. In 689 Pippin II successfully fought the Frisians. When Pippin II died in 714, the Frisians under king Radbod attacked the Dutch riverine area and in 719 Charles Martel defeated the Frisians again.172 These events might have resulted in a limited supply of querns for certain periods of time during the Merovingian period. However, as stated previously, Frisian sailors have fulfilled an important role within the quern trade and therefore Mayen querns are to be expected within settlements in the western and northern coastal areas of the Netherlands. This research has shown that both tephrite querns and Mayen ceramics are indeed found within Frisian settlements dating to the Merovingian period. The Frisian ‘middlemen’ had easy access to Mayen products for the Frisian homelands. The research has also shown that Merovingian tephrite quern stones can be found within the Saxon areas as well. Conflicts between the Saxons and the Frankish Empire only became intense in the Carolingian period. During the Merovingian period the eastern part of the Netherlands can be viewed as rather autonomous, although contacts between Saxon and Frankish elites during this period are likely.173 The above shows that there were no political boundaries in the distribution of querns, at least not during the entire Merovingian period. Looking at the distribution map of chapter 6, it seems that both the settlements that are located next to a waterway and those that are not located near a waterway were supplied with querns. This map, however, does not show all of the geographic circumstances. Therefore it is useful to plot the results on the paleogeographic map of around 800 AD. Although the map shows the geographic situation after the Merovingian period, the situation would not have differed much from that of the sixth and seventh centuries. Large parts of the country consisted of peat areas (figure 8) that were, unlike the clay and sandy areas, mostly uninhabited during this period. Figure 9 shows that although many of the settlements are not located at a close distance from the larger rivers or the sea, they could still be reached by boat via smaller waterways. Transport by boat was faster and easier than transport over land. It is likely that many of the querns that are found within

172 Nicolay 2014, 24

173 Van der Velde 2011, 161-162 64 Merovingian settlements were first transported in larger ships to so-called transshipment points from which smaller boats, such as the canoes that have been found in early medieval settlements174, transferred the querns to their final destination. Querns could reach the western and northern Frisian coastal areas via the Old Rhine and the North Sea or via the Almere (later Zuiderzee). As can be seen on figure 9 the majority of the settlements in the southern and eastern part of the Netherlands could also have been reached by (smaller) boats during the Early Medieval period. The ship remains that have been found at Midlaren, for instance, support this. The above does not mean, however, that settlements which are located next to a waterway had a privileged position in obtaining Mayen querns.

Fig. 8: Paleogeographic map of 800AD indicating different types of soils. Peat areas are marked in red-brown. These areas were virtually uninhabited during the Early Medieval Period. (Vos & De Vries 2013)

174 Brouwers et al. 2015, 9-10 65 Fig. 9: Paleogeographic map showing Merovingian settlements and waterways. Settlements containing tephrite are marked as a green dot. Yellow dots are used for settlements containing tephrite which possibly dates from the Merovingian period. Red dots mark Merovingian settlements in which no tephrite has been found. (Created with QGIS, after Vos & De Vries 2013)

66 Figure 9 shows that almost all of the settlements that have been investigated during this research where in a way connected to a waterway, including those settlements in which no tephrite has been found. However, it is also possible that carts that were drawn by animals were used for the transport of quern stones over land to settlements that were not connected to the larger waterways. Pohl (2011) has estimated that early medieval carts that transported quern stones could travel about 20 kilometers a day.175 Unlike the peat areas (figure 8), the coastal areas, the clay areas and the inland sandy areas were relatively suitable for habitation. Although no tephrite has been found in many of the settlements, it can be concluded that the querns were distributed to almost all of the inhabitable parts of the Netherlands during this period. An exception might be the (south of the) current province of Limburg. A geographical explanation for this might be that it was hard to reach these upstream areas via the Meuse. The lack of finds of querns might, of course, also be the result of post-depositional processes or relatively limited archaeological activity on rural sites in this area or the limited attention paid to quern stones in excavation reports.

175 Pohl 2011, 171-172 67 13. Conclusion

Mayen functioned as an important production center of quern stones from prehistoric times to the modern period. Previous research on the Mayen quarries has suggested that the production of querns decreased during the Early Medieval period when compared to the Roman period. This research investigated to what extent the supply of quern stones from Mayen to the Netherlands continued during the Merovingian period (ca. 500-750) by investigating their presence within Merovingian sites. It is often hard to date tephrite querns because of the fact that they usually survive only in small fragments. This makes existing typologies often of little use for dating Mayen querns. Therefore, querns are almost always dated based on their archaeological contexts. If a quern is found within a Merovingian context, it does not always mean that it dates from the Merovingian period, as it might be an older residual finds. This research has shown that almost all of the inhabitable parts of the Netherlands were being supplied with Mayen querns during the Merovingian period. A possible halt of quern stone imports for a short period of time during the sixth or seventh century cannot be excluded based on this archaeological survey. It became clear that it is hard to identify chronological differences in distribution between the sixth and seventh centuries, mainly because of the fact that querns are often inaccurately dated as ‘Merovingian’ or ‘early medieval’ within excavation reports. Only one quern fragment in this inventory has been found within a clear sixth century context. It is likely that querns were imported on a smaller scale during the sixth century and that the amount of imports increased during the course of the seventh century, when populations figures raised and larger trading settlements started to appear all over North-Western Europe.

There was an association between the two Mayen industries. Although the main focus of this research lies on Mayen querns, it also showed that many Merovingian settlements within the Netherlands contain Mayen ceramics, although often in low quantities when compared to other wares. This shows that earlier assumptions that the Mayen ceramic industries collapsed after the Roman period might be wrong. If there really was a discontinuity for e.g. one or two decades this would be impossible to see because of the fact that Mayen ceramics often have an ample dating range. Mayen seems to have been able to maintain its role as ceramics supplier on a smaller scale, despite competition from other (local) production centers. It is likely that the presence of the nearby quern stone industry and harboring facilities contributed to this continuity.

68 As stated previously, it became clear that often little attention is paid to quern stones (and natural stone in general) within archaeological publications, especially when it comes to dating the querns. If more attention is paid to dating querns, for instance by dating them as sixth or seventh century querns instead of just dating them as ‘Merovingian’ or ‘early medieval’, chronological changes in the distribution patterns can be identified. Archaeologists should be encouraged to pay more attention to quern stones or natural stone in general. The Programs of Requirements (PvE’s in Dutch archaeology) of archaeological excavations should mention the evaluation of the occurrence of tephrite within dated contexts. This research only focussed on Mayen querns found within the Netherlands. Future research on the distribution of Merovingian Mayen querns to other countries, especially to countries through which the Rhine does not flow, is recommended in order to get an idea of the distribution patterns of Mayen querns on a wider (European) level.

69 Literature

Bachrach, B.S., 1970: Procupius and the Chronology of Clovis’s Reign, Viator. Medieval and Renaissance studies 1, 21-31

Ball, E.A.G. & Van den Broeke, P.W. (eds.), 2007: Opgravingen op ’t Klumke te Nijmegen- Oosterhout: boeren uit het midden-neolithicum, de ijzertijd en de Merovingische periode op een zandrug in de oostelijke Betuwe. Nijmegen (Archeologische berichten Nijmegen 6).

Bazelmans, J., Gerrets, D. & Pol, A., 1998: Metaaldetectie in het Friese koninkrijk. Kanttekeningen bij de centrumfunctie van noordelijk Westergo in de Vroege Mid- deleeuwen, De Vrije Fries 78, 9-48.

Bazelmans, J., Dijkstra, M.F.P. & De Koning, J., 2004: Holland during the first millenium, in: Lodewijckx, M. (ed.) Bruc ealles well. Archaeological essays concerning the peoples of north-west Europe in the first millenium AD. Leuven (Acta Archaeologica Lovaniensia Monographiae 15), 1-36.

Beck, T., 2015: Opgravingen in de St.-Servaaskerk te Maastricht (1981-1989). Het aardewerk. Amsterdam (Master thesis Universiteit van Amsterdam).

Beek, R. van, 2009: Reliëf in Tijd en Ruimte. Interdisciplinair onderzoek naar bewoning en landschap van Oost-Nederland tussen vroege prehistorie en middeleeuwen. Wageningen.

Besteman, J.C., 1974: Carolingian Medemblik, Berichten van de Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek 24, 43-106.

Besteman, J.C., Bos, J.M., Gerrets, D.A., Heidinga, H.A. & Koning, J. de (eds.), 1999: The excavations at Wijnaldum. Reports on Friesland in Roman and Medieval times. Vol. 1. Rotterdam/Brookfield.

Bink, M., 2005: Goirle Huzarenwei. Definitief Onderzoek. Den Bosch/Deventer. (BAAC- rapport 04.0134).

70 Blom, M.C. & Velde, H.M. van der (eds.), 2015: De archeologie van Boxmeer Sterckwijk. 4500 jaar wonen, werken en begraven langs de Maas. Amersfoort (ADC Monografie 18)

Blom, M.C. & Waveren, A.M.I. van (eds.) 2005: Nederzettingssporen uit de Ijzertijd tot in de Volle Middeleeuwen. Een archeologische opgraving op het Husselerveld te Putten, gemeente Putten (Gld.). Groningen (ARC-Publicaties 121).

Boer, E. de, & Hiddink, H. 2012: Opgravingen in Waterdael III te Someren 2: Bewoningssporen uit de latere prehistorie, de vroege en volle middeleeuwen. Amsterdam (Zuidnederlandse Archeologische Rapporten 50).

Bouwmeester, H.M.P., 2000: Eme in de Romeinse en Frankische tijd. Archeologisch onderzoek naar de nederzetting en het grafveld op de terreinen van het Laaksche veld en de Laaksche tuin in de Ooyerhoek, gemeente Zutphen. Deventer (BAAC-rapport 98.045).

Bowes, D.R., 1989: The Encyclopedia of igneous and metamorphic petrology. New York.

Brouwers, W., Jansma, E. & Manders, M., 2015: Middeleeuwse scheepsresten in Nederland. De vroege middeleeuwen 500-1050, in: Archeobrief 2015, 19-3, 6-24.

Brulet, R., Vilvorder, F. & Delage, R., 2010: La céramique Romaine en Gaule du Nord. Dictionnaire des céramiques. La vaisselle à large diffusion. Turnhout.

Bult, E.J. & Hallewas. D.P. (eds.), 1990: Graven bij Valkenburg III. Het archeologisch onderzoek in 1987 en 1988. Delft.

Diederik, F., 1982: Molenweg, Waldervaart. Een Vroeg-Middeleeuwse nederzetting te Schagen, Westerheem XXXI, 53 - 68.

Dijkstra, J. (ed.), 2012: Het domein van de boer en de ambachtsman. Een opgraving op het terrein van de voormalige fruitveiling te Wijk bij Duurstede: een deel van Dorestad en de villa Wijk archeologisch onderzocht. Amersfoort (ADC Monografie 12/ADC rapport 3100).

71 Dijkstra, J. & Nicolay, J.A.W. (eds.), 2008: Een terp op de schop. Archeologisch onderzoek op het Oldehoofsterkerkhof te Leeuwarden. Amersfoort/Groningen (ADC Monografie 3).

Dijkstra J. & Zuidhoff, F.S. (eds.), 2011: Kansen op de kwelder. Archeologisch onderzoek op negen vindplaatsen in het nieuwe tracé van de Rijksweg N57 en de nieuwe rondweg ter hoogte van Serooskerke (Walcheren). Amersfoort (ADC Monografie 10).

Dijkstra, M.F.P., 2011: Rondom de mondingen van Rijn en Maas. Landschap en bewoning tussen de 3e en 9e eeuw in Zuid-Holland, in het bijzonder de Oude Rijnstreek. Leiden (Dissertation Universiteit van Amsterdam).

Dijkstra, M.F.P. & Verhoeven, A.A.A., 2016: Synthese. Vroegmiddeleeuws Leithon in een breder perspectief, in: Dijkstra, M.F.P., Verhoeven, A.A.A. & Van Straten, K.C.K. Nieuw licht op Leithon. Archeologisch onderzoek naar de vroegmiddeleeuwse bewoning in plangebied Leiderdorp-Plantage. (Themata 8.) Amsterdam, 652-682.

Es, W. A. van, 1973: Early Medieval Settlements, Berichten van de Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek 23, 281-287.

Es, W.A. van, 1979: Odoorn: frühmittelalterliche Siedlung. Das Fundmaterial der Grabung 1966, Palaeohistoria 21, 205-225.

Es, W.A. van, 1994: Friezen, Franken en Vikingen, in: Van Es, W.A. & Hessing, W.A.M. (eds.), Romeinen, Friezen en Franken in het hart van Nederland. Van Traiectum tot Dorestad 50 v. C. - 900 n. C. Utrecht, 82-119.

Es, W.A. van & Verwers, W.J.H., 1980: Excavations at Dorestad 1. The harbour: Hoogstraat I. Amersfoort (Nederlandse Oudheden 9).

Feijst, L.M.B. van der (ed.), 2015: De nederzetting te Naaldwijk IV. De opgravingscampagne van 2011. Amersfoort (ADC Rapport 3608).

Feveile, C., 2010: Mayen Lava Quern Stones from the Ribe Excavations 1970-1976, in: Bencard, M. & Brinch Madsen, H. (eds.) Ribe Excavations 1970–1976, Vol. 6. Jutland Archaeological Society. Højbjerg. 133-56. 72 Frantzen, A.J., 2014: Food, Eating and Identity in Early Medieval England. Rochester.

Ganshof, F.L., 1958: Het tolwezen in het Frankisch rijk onder de Merowingen, in: Mededelingen van de Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België 20, 1-27.

Gerrets, D.A., 1999: The Erosion of the Wijnaldum-Tjitsma terp: Aspects of cultural heritage management, in: Besteman, J.C., Bos, J.M., Gerrets, D.A., Heidinga, H.A. & De Koning, J. (eds.) The excavations at Wijnaldum. Reports on Friesland in Roman and Medieval times. Vol. 1. Rotterdam, 23-32.

Gerrets, D.A. & Koning, J. de, 1999: Development of the settlement on the terp Wijnaldum- Tjitsma, in: Besteman, J.C., Bos, J.M., Gerrets, D.A., Heidinga, H.A. & De Koning, J. (eds.) The excavations at Wijnaldum. Reports on Friesland in Roman and Medieval times. Vol. 1. Rotterdam, 73-125.

Giffen, A.E. van, 1943: Opgravingen in Drenthe tot 1941. Meppel.

Gluhak, T.M., 2010: Petrologisch-geochemische Charakterisierung Quartärer Laven der Eifel als Grundlage zur Archäometrischen Herkunftsbestimmung Römischer Mühlsteine. Johannes Gutenberg Universität. Mainz.

Grinsven, P.F.A. van & Dijkstra, M.F.P., 2006: Een nederzetting achter het torentje. De lokale bewoningsgeschiedenis van Koudekerk aan den Rijn tot het jaar 1000. Koudekerk aan den Rijn.

Groot, T. de, Müller, A., Soeters, G.C. & Theuws, F.C.W.J., 2011: Context, in: Lauwerier, R.C.G.M, Müller, A. & Smal, D.E. (eds.) Merovingers in een villa. Romeinse villa en Merovingisch grafveld Borgharen-Pasestraat. Onderzoek 2008-2009. Amersfoort (Rapportage Archeologische Monumentenzorg 189), 13-18.

Grunwald, L., 2009: Die Mayener Keramikproduktion im Mittelalter, in: Glauben, A.M., Grünewald, M.B. & Grunwald, L. Mayen am Übergang von Spätantike zu frühem

73 Mittelalter, in: Wagener, O. (eds.), Der umkämpfte Ort - von der Antike zum Mittelalter.. Frankfurt am Main (Beihefte zur Mediävistik 10), 150-156.

Grunwald, L., 2012: Anmerkungen zur Mayener Keramikproduktion des 9. bis 12. Jahrhunderts, in: Grunwald, L., Pantermehl H. & Schreg, R. (eds.), Hochmittelalterliche Keramik am Rhein. Eine Quelle für Produktion und Alltag des 9. bis 12. Jahrhunderts. (RGZM Tagungen 13). Mainz, 143-160.

Grunwald, L., 2015a: Produktion un Warendistribution der Mayener Ware in spätrömischer und frühmittelalterlicher Zeit, in: Later, C., Helmbrecht, M. & Jecklin-Tischhäuser, U. (eds.) Infrastruktur und Distribution zwischen Antike und Mittelalter. Studien zu Spätantike und Frühmittelalter 8. Hamburg, 191-207.

Grunwald, L. 2015b: Den Töpfern auf der Spur – Orte der Keramikherstellung im Licht der neuesten Forschung: Ein Résumé unter Berücksichtigung der Mayener Keramikproduktion, in: Den Töpfern auf der Spur – Orte der Keramikherstellung im Licht der neuesten Forschung: Ein Résumé unter Berücksichtigung der Mayener Keramikproduktion. RGZM Tagungen 21. Mainz, 449-461

Hagers, J.K. & Sier, M.M., 1999: Castricum-Oosterbuurt, bewoningssporen uit de Romeinse tijd en middeleeuwen. Amersfoort (Rapporten Archeologische Monumentenzorg 53).

Halbertsma, H., 2000: Frieslands oudheid. Het rijk van de Friese koningen, opkomst en ondergang. Utrecht.

Harmsen, C., Den Braven, A. & Hendriks, J. (eds.), 2012: Archeologisch onderzoek in de Lentse Schoolstraat in Nijmegen-Lent. Nederzettingssporen uit de vroege en volle middeleeuwen. Nijmegen (Archeologische berichten Nijmegen 33).

Harsema, O.H., 1979: Maalstenen en handmolens in Drenthe van het neolithicum tot ca. 1300 A.D, in: Molens in Drenthe. (Museumfonds Publicaties 5) Zwolle, 1-35.

Hartog, C.M.W. den, (ed.) 2010: Appelllaantje. LR55: Een vroegmiddeleeuwse nederzetting aan de Wilhelminalaan bij Vleuten. Utrecht (Basisrapportage archeologie 30). 74 Hazenberg, T., 2000: Leiden-Roomburg 1995-1997: archeologisch onderzoek naar het kanaal van Corbulo en de vicus van het castellum Matilo. Amersfoort (Rapportage Archeologische Monumentenzorg 77).

Heeringen, R.M. van, 1985: Typologie, Zeitstellung und Verbreitung der in die Niederlande importierten vorgeschichtlichte Mahlsteine aus Tephrit, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 15, 371-83.

Heidinga, H.A., 1986: Midden-Nederland tussen Friezen, Franken en Saksen, Westerheem 35. 128-140.

Heidinga, H.A., 1999: The Wijnaldum excavation: searching for a central place in Dark Age Frisia, in: Besteman, J.C., Bos, J.M., Gerrets, D.A., Heidinga, H.A. & De Koning, J. (eds.) The excavations at Wijnaldum. Reports on Friesland in Roman and Medieval times. Vol. 1. Rotterdam, 1-16.

Hemminga, M. & Hamburg, T. 2006: Een Merovingische nederzetting op de oever van de Oude Rijn. Leiden (Archol-rapport 69).

Hemminga, M., Hamburg, T., Dijkstra, M., Cavallo, C., Knippenberg, S., Van Lith, S.M.E., Bakels, C.C. & Vermeeren, C., 2007: Vroeg Middeleeuwse nederzettingssporen te Oegstgeest. Leiden (Archol-rapport 102).

Hermsen, I., 2009: Vissen in het verleden van Bergharen. Archeologisch onderzoek van prehistorische en middeleeuwse bewoningsresten aan Dorpstraat 35 te Bergharen - Gemeente Wijchen. Nijmegen (Archeologische Berichten Wijchen - Rapport 7).

Hodges, R., 1982: Dark Age economics: the origins of town and trade AD 600-1000, London.

Hodges, R., 1998: Henri Pirenne and the question of demand, in: Hodges, R. & Bowden, W. (eds.) The sixth century. Production, distribution and demand. Leiden. (The transformation of the Roman world 3), 2-14.

75 Hodges, R., 2012: Dark Age Economics. A New Audit. London.

Hodges, R. & Whitehouse, D., 1983: Mohammed, Charlemagne & The Origins of Europe: Archaeology and the Pirenne Thesis. New York.

Hörter, F., 1994: Getreidereiben und Mühlsteine aus der Eifel. Ein Beitrag zur Steinbruch- und Mühlengeschichte. Mayen.

Hoof, L.G.L. van & Jansen, R., 2002: Archeologisch Onderzoek A50 te Uden. Bewoning uit de ijzertijd en de vroege, volle en late middeleeuwen. Leiden (Archol Rapport 12).

Houkes, R.A., 2017: Natuursteen, in: Dijkstra, M.F.P. & Moesker, T. (eds.) Begraven bewoning uit de Vroege Middeleeuwen. Archeologische proefsleuven en opgravingen aan de Hoogeweg in Heiloo, plangebied Zuiderloo-Elzenwal (UWP 5), gemeente Heiloo. Amsterdam (Diachron publicatie 63). 35-48.

Hoven, E. (ed.), 2014: Definitief archeologisch onderzoek, Ede Paasbergterrein. Leusden (Synthegra Rapport S120341).

Hulst, R.A., 2004: Wierden, Enter-De Akkers. Definitief archeologisch onderzoek. Deventer (BAAC-rapport 02.038).

Hunold, A. & Schaaff, H., 2010: The ancient quarry and mining district between the Eifel and the Rhine: aims and progress of the Vulkanpark Osteifel Project, in:. Bloemers, J.H.F., Kars, H., Van der Valk, A. & Wijnen, M. (eds.) The Cultural Landscape & Heritage Paradox. Protection and Development of the Dutch Archaeological-Historical Landscape and its European Dimension. Amsterdam. 177-186.

Jezeer, W. (ed.), 2011: Een Merovingische nederzetting aan de monding van de Rijn. Een archeologische opgraving te Oegstgeest Nieuw Rhijngeest-Zuid. Amersfoort (ADC rapport 2054).

Jongeling, J.A.M., 2017: Zicht op de Braamberg. Rapportage van het archeologisch onderzoek (proefsleuven en boringen) op de Braamberg te Hoog Buurlo (6-21 mei 1981). Delft (Master thesis Universiteit van Amsterdam). 76 Kamp, J.S. & Polak, M., 2001: Archeologisch onderzoek aan de Molenstraat te Beuningen (1997-1998). Amersfoort (ROB Rapportage Archeologische Monumentenzorg 92).

Kars, H., 1980: Early-Medieval Dorestad, an Archaeo-Petrological Study. Part I: General Introduction. The Tephrite Querns, in: Berichten van de Rijksdienst voor Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek 30, 393-422.

Kars, H., 1983: Het maalsteenproduktiecentrum bij Mayen in de Eifel, Grondboor en hamer 37. Oldenzaal, 110-120.

Kars, H., 2016: Natuursteen, in: Dijkstra, M.F.P., Verhoeven, A.A.A. & Van Straten, K.C.K. Nieuw licht op Leithon. Archeologisch onderzoek naar de vroegmiddeleeuwse bewoning in plangebied Leiderdorp-Plantage. (Themata 8.) Amsterdam, 360-374.

Kimenai, P. & Huijbers, A., 2016: Westelijk Noord-Brabant in de vroege middeleeuwen, in: Ball, E.A.G. & Van Heeringen, R.M. (eds.) Westelijk Noord-Brabant in het Malta tijdperk. Synthetiserend onderzoek naar de bewoningsgeschiedenis van het westelijk deel van het Brabants Zandgebied. Amersfoort (Nederlandse Archeologische Rapporten 51).

King, D., 1986: Petrology, Dating and Distribution of Querns and Millstones. The Result of Research in Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and Middlesex, Institute of Archaeology Bulletin 23, 65-126.

Knol, E., 1993: De Noordnederlandse kustlanden in de Vroege Middeleeuwen. Groningen (dissertation Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam).

Kok, R.S., 2001: Archeologische inventarisatie gemeente Alphen aan den Rijn. Alphen aan den Rijn.

Koning, J. de, 2005: Alphen in de vijfde eeuw: definitieve opgraving van een vroeg- middeleeuws nederzettingscomplex op de Kerkakkers te Alphen (Alphen-Chaam). Amersfoort (ADC rapport 518).

77 Koning, J. de (ed.), 2009: Een vroegmiddeleeuwse nederzetting op het Meterikseveld (630 tot ca. 1000 na Chr.). Definitieve opgraving te Horst a/d Maas (L.), Meterik. Zaandijk.

Koning, J. de, 2015: Onder het stuifzand. Overstoven vroegmiddeleeuwse nederzettingen bij Bloemendaal, de opgravingscampagnes Groot Olmen 2005, 2006 en 2007. Zaandijk.

Koning, J. de, 2016: Terug naar Dorregeest… Uitgeest-Dorregeest, offerplaats, nederzetting en kerk. Bewoning en grafritueel vanaf de late Ijzertijd tot de late middeleeuwen. Zaandijk (Hollandia reeks 500).

Kooi, P.B., 1994a: Een opgraving op de Westakkers te Dalen. Nieuwe Drentse Volksalmanak 111, 131–145

Kooi, P.B. 1994b: Project Peelo: het onderzoek in de jaren 1977, 1978 en 1979 op de es, Palaeohistoria 33/34 (1991-1992), 165-285.

Koot, C.W., & R. Berkvens (eds), 2004: Bredase Akkers Eeuwenoud. 4000 jaar bewoningsgeschiedenis op de rand van zand en klei. Breda (Rapportage Archeologische Monumentenzorg 102 / Erfgoedstudies Breda 1).

Langbroek, M. & Van Leeuwen, J., 2014: Kleine Encyclopedie van vroegmiddeleeuws Nederland, in: Willemsen, A.M. (ed.) Gouden Middeleeuwen. Nederland in de Merovingische Wereld, 400-700 na Chr. Zutphen. 198-211.

Langen, G.J. de, 1992: Middeleeuws Friesland. De economische ontwikkeling van het gewest Oostergo in de vroege en volle middeleeuwen. Groningen.

Lanting, J.N., 1977: Bewoningssporen uit de IJzertijd en de vroege Middeleeuwen nabij Eursinge, gemeente Ruinen, Nieuwe Drentse Volksalmanak 94, 41-79.

Lebecq, S., 1983: Marchands et navigateurs Frisons du haut moyen âge, Vol. 1 Essai; Vol 2. Corpus des sources ecrites. Lille.

Leeuwe, R. de, 2008: Nieuwe huizen in Hulsel. Een laat-Merovingische nederzetting met een nieuw huistype op een nieuwbouwlocatie. Leiden (Archol-rapport 112). 78 Loveluck, C.P. & Tys, D., 2006: Coastal Societies, Exchange and Identity along the Channel and Southern North Sea Shores of Europe, AD 600-1000, Journal of Maritime Archaeology 1, 140-169.

Magendans, J.R. & Waasdorp, J.A., 1989: Franken aan de Frankenslag: een vroeg- middeleeuwse nederzetting in ’s-Gravenhage. Den Haag (VOM-reeks 2).

Mangartz, F., 2006: Vorgeschichtliche bis mittelalterliche Mühlsteinproduktion in der Osteifel, in: Belmont, A. & Mangartz, F. (eds.) Mühlsteinbrüche. Erforschung, Schutz und Inwertsetzung eines Kulturerbes europäischer Industrie (Antike-21. Jahrhundert). Mainz, 25-34.

Meijlink, B.H.F.M. (ed.), 2005: Archeologisch onderzoek in het tracé van de rondweg Alphen (gemeente Alphen-Chaam) in opdracht van de Provincie Noord-Brabant. Amersfoort (ADC Rapport 399).

Melkert, M.J.A., 2015: Natuursteen en keramisch bouwmateriaal, in: Loopik, J. & Dijkstra J (eds). Vroegmiddeleeuwse boerderijen onder een es in Norg, gemeente Noordenveld. Archeologische opgraving Esweg Fase II. Amersfoort (ADC Rapport 3912). 48-50.

Mostert, M., 2009: In de marge van de beschaving. De geschiedenis van Nederland, 0-1100. Amsterdam.

Mostert, M., 2013: Alphen Centrumplan. Opgraving. Den Bosch (BAAC rapport A-11.0133).

Nicolay, J.A.W. (ed.), 2008: Opgravingen bij Midlaren: 5000 jaar wonen tussen Hondsrug en Hunzedal. Groningen (Groningen archaeological studies 7).

Nicolay, J.A.W., 2010: Terpenbewoning in oostelijk Friesland. Twee opgravingen in het voormalige kweldergebied van Oostergo. Groningen (Groningen archaeological studies 10).

79 Nicolay, J.A.W., 2014: The spendour of power. Early medieval kingship and the use of gold and silver in the southern North Sea area (5th to 7th century AD). Groningen (Groningen archaeological studies 28).

Nieuwhof, A. (ed.), 2014: En dan in hun geheel: De vondsten uit de opgravingen in de wierde Ezinge. Groningen (Jaarverslagen van de Vereniging voor Terpenonderzoek 96).

Nokkert, M., Aarts, A.C. & Wynia, H.L. (eds.), 2009: Vroegmiddeleeuwse bewoning langs de A2. Een nederzetting uit de zevende en achtste eeuw in Leidsche Rijn. Utrecht (Basisrapportage Archeologie 26).

Noordam, J.W. & Van Tent, W.J., 1979: Houten: bewoning uit de Romeinse tijd en de Middeleeuwen, Jaarverslag Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek 1978, 44-45.

Parkhouse, J., 1976: The Dorestad Quernstones, Berichten van de Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek 26, 181-188.

Parkhouse, J., 1997: The Distribution and Exchange of Mayen Lava Quernstones in Early Medieval Northwestern Europe, in: De Boe, G. & Verhaeghe, F. (eds.) Exchange and Trade in Medieval Europe: Papers of the Medieval Europe Brugge Conference Vol 3. Zellik (IAP Rapporten 3), 97-106.

Peacock, D., 1997: Charlemagne’s black stones: the re-use of Roman columns in early medieval Europe, Antiquity Volume 71, 709-715.

Pohl, M., 2010: Quernstones and Tuff as indicators for Medieval European trade patterns, Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 20, 148-153.

Pohl, M., 2011: Querns as makers for the determination of Medieval Northern European Trade Spheres. In: Williams, D. & Peacock, D. (eds.) Bread for the People. The Archaeology of Mills and Milling. Oxford (BAR British Archaeological Reports International Series 2274), 169-177.

80 Pronk, E.C. 2015: Van palenkrans tot palissade. Een opgraving van een grafveld uit het Laat Neolithicum en de Midden tot Late Bronstijd en een herenhof uit de Merovingische tijd. Plangebied de Steenbrei 3 te Vasse, gemeente Tubbergen. Weesp (RAAP-rapport 2836).

Raaij, M. van, 1993a: Limmen: Zuidkerkelaan I, in: Woltering, P.J. & Hagers, J.K.A. eds.), Archeologische kroniek van Holland over 1992. I Noord-Holland, Holland 25, 315-316.

Raaij, M. van, 1993b: Limmen: Zuidkerkelaan II, in: Woltering, P.J. & Hagers, J.K.A. (eds.), Archeologische kroniek van Holland over 1992. I Noord-Holland, Holland 25, 318-320.

Redknap, M., 1987: Continuity or change: the Mayen tradition from 4th-14th centuries, in: Chapelot, J., Galinié, H. & Pilet-Lemière, J. (eds.) Actes du premier congrès international d'archéologie médiéval 1985. Paris, 87-99.

Redknap, M., 1988: Medieval pottery production at Mayen: Recent advances, current problems, in: Gaimster D.R.M., Redknap, M. & Wegner, H.H. (eds.) Zur Keramik des Mittelalters und der beginnenden Neuzeit im Rheinland. Medieval and later pottery from the Rhineland and its markets. BAR International Series 440. Oxford, 3-37.

Redknap, M., 1999: Die römischen und mittelalterlichen Töpfereien in Mayen, Kreis Mayen-Koblenz, in: Wegner, H.H. (eds.), Berichte zur Archäologie an Mittelrhein und Mosel 6. Trier (Trierer Zeitschrift Beiheft 24), 11-401.

Scholte Lubberink, H.B.G., 2014: Enschede-Elferink Es. Van enkelgraf tot esgreppel. Sporen van bewoning, begraving en agrarisch gebruik uit de prehistorie, Middeleeuwen en Nieuwe tijd. Zwolle (Publicaties Archeologisch Depot Overijssel 3).

Smalley, I.J., 1966: Contraction crack networks in basalt flows, Geological Magazine 103, 110-114

Spanjer, M. 1997, Bewoning op het Sint Antoniusveld, in: Stoepker, H. (ed.), De weg terug. Archeologische ontdekkingen langs de A73 bij Venray, 57-61.

81 Stoepker, H., 1992: Die mittelalterliche Niederlassung Haagsittard, in: Bauchhenß, G., Otte, M. & Willems, W.J.H. (eds), Spurensicherung: Archäologische Denkmalpflege in der Euregio Maas-Rhein. Mainz am Rhein (Kunst und Altertum am Rhein 136), 379-386.

Tent, W.J. van, 1985: De opgravingen bij Oud-Leusden, Flehite: tijdschrift voor verleden en heden van Oost-Utrecht 17-1/2, 10-17.

Theuws, F., 2012: River-based trade centres in early medieval northwestern Europe. Some ‘reactionary’ thoughts, in: Gelichi, S. & Hodges, R. (eds.) From one Sea to another. Trading Places in the European and Mediterranean Early Middle Ages. Proceedings of the International Conference Comacchio, 27th-29th March 2009. Turnhout, 25-45.

Tol, A. & Mark, R. van der, 1995: Boerderijen uit de Vroege en Volle Middeleeuwen, in: Roymans, N. (ed.) Opgravingen in de Molenakker te Weert. Campagne 1994, Zuidnederlandse Archeologische Rapporten 1, 20-25.

Tuinstra, S.J., Veldhuis, J.R. & Nicolay, J.A.W. (eds.), 2011: Hallum, een welvarend dorp aan de monding van de Middelzee. Een archeologische opgraving te Hallum, gemeente Ferwerderadeel (Fr.). Groningen (ARC-Publicaties 205).

Tulp, C. (ed.), 2010: Pesse, Oostering - Korfbalveld Gemeente Hoogeveen (Dr.). Een Archeologische Opgraving. Zuidhorn (Steekproefrapport 2010-11/10).

Velde, H.M. van der & Kenemans, M.C. (eds.), 2002a: Aanvullend Archeologisch Onderzoek op de toekomstige Industrielokatie op de Boeteler Enk: De Zegge Vi. Bunschoten (ADC Rapport 137).

Velde, H.M. van der & Kenemans, M.C. (eds.), 2002b: Archeologisch onderzoek op de toekomstige woningbouwlocatie Soerlant III te Zelhem. Bunschoten (ADC Rapport 135).

Velde, H.M. van der, 2011: Wonen in een grensgebied. Een langetermijngeschiedenis van het Oost-Nederlandse cultuurlandschap (500 v. Chr-1300 na Chr.). Amersfoort (Nederlandse Archeologische Rapporten 40).

82 Velde, H.M. van der, 2017: Middeleeuwen en nieuwe tijd, in: Heeringen, R.M. van & Velde, H.M. van der (eds.) Struinen door de duinen. Synthetiserend onderzoek naar de bewoningsgeschiedenis van het Hollands duingebied op basis van gegevens verzameld in het Malta-tijdperk. Amersfoort (Nederlandse Archeologische Rapporten 52), 149-190.

Verhoeven, A.A.A., 2008: Handgemaakt en gedraaid aardewerk uit de middeleeuwen, in: Nicolay, J.A.W. (ed.), Opgravingen bij Midlaren. 5000 jaar wonen tussen Hondsrug en Hunzedal, Groningen (Groningen Archaeological Studies 7), 308-325.

Verhoeven, A.A.A., 2014: Aardewerk uit de Middeleeuwen en Nieuwe Tijd. Syllabus bij het groepsmateriaalpracticum Europese archeologie (Editie 2014). Amsterdam.

Verhoeven, A.A.A., 2018: Veldhoven-Zilverackers: rapport over de veldcursus door de Universiteit van Amsterdam in 2010. (Themata 9.) Amsterdam.

Verwers, W.J.H., 1998: North Brabant in Roman and Early Medieval times, V: Habitation history, Berichten van de Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek 43. 199-359.

Weterings, P., 2013: Berkel-Enschot Streepstraat. Inventariserend veldonderzoek door middel van proefsleuven. Den Bosch/Deventer (BAAC-rapport A-13.0063).

Wickham, C., 1998: Overview: production, distribution and demand, in: Hodges, R. & Bowden, W. (eds.) The sixth century. Production, distribution and demand. Leiden. (The transformation of the Roman world 3), 279-292.

Willems, W.J.H., 1986: De Romeinse villa te Voerendaal. Opgraving 1985, Archeologie in Limburg 28, 143-150.

Willems, W.J.H. & Kooistra, L.I., 1987: De Romeinse villa te Voerendaal. Opgraving 1986, Archeologie in Limburg 32, 29-38.

Willems, W.J.H. & Kooistra, L.I., 1988: De Romeinse villa te Voerendaal. Opgraving 1987, Archeologie in Limburg 37, 137-147.

83 Willemsen, A.M. (ed.), 2014: Gouden Middeleeuwen. Nederland in de Merovingische Wereld, 400-700 na Chr. Zutphen.

Wood, I., 1994: The Merovingian kingdoms, 450-751. London.

List of images

Front: Early Medieval quern stone found in Borger. (Harsema 1979, 28) Figure 1: Map of volcanic fields in the Eifel (Kars 1983, 111) Figure 2: Rotary hand quern stones used in contemporary Tunisia. (Harsema 1979, 21) Figure 3: Neolithic/Bronze Age querns and Iron Age querns (Hörter 1994, 15) Figure 4: Table of annual quern production in Mayen (After Mangartz 2006, 24-34) Figure 5: Map of the Merovingian Frankish empire (After Shepherd 1911) https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merovingian_dynasty#/media/File:Merovingian_dynasty.jpg Figure 6: Map showing the different regions of this research (Created with QGIS). Figure 7: Distribution map of Merovingian tephrite quern stones (Created with QGIS) Figure 8: Paleogeographic map of 800AD showing Merovingian settlements and waterways. (After Vos & De Vries 2013) Figure 9: Paleogeographic map of 800AD indicating different types of soils. Vos, P. & De Vries, S., 2013: 2e generatie palaeogeografische kaarten van Nederland (versie 2.0). Deltares. Utrecht. Downloaded on 27-12-17 from www.archeologieinnederland.nl

84 Appendix

The table below shows the database that was used for creating the distribution map. It shows the settlements for each region, the estimated date and its coordinates (Amersfoort RD coordinates). It also shows if tephrite querns were found and the archaeological publication of the settlement.

Riverine area and Rhine estuary

Settlement Date Tephrite X Y Publication quern stone

Alphen aan den Rijn 525-900 NO 150160 461050 Kok 2001 Lemkes

Bergharen Dorpstraat 550-1250 NO 174073 429465 Hermsen 2009

Beuningen Centrum 200-900 ROM/ 181500 430500 Kamp & Polak 2001 MER/CAR

Houten Tiellandt 600-900 NO 139866 449647 Noordam & Van Tent 1979

Katwijk Zanderij +- 475-800 MER/CAR 88410 467583 Van der Velde 2008

Koudekerk aan den Rijn 500-800 MER/CAR 101000 461000 Grinsven & Dijkstra 2005 Lagewaard (TEPHR?)

Leiden Roomburg 50-900 NO 95500 462750 Hazenberg 2000

Leiderdorp Plantage 630-850 MER 96350 463100 Dijkstra et al 2016

Leidsche Rijn 575-775 MER 133675 455262 Nokkert et al. 2009

Lent Schoolstraat 600-900 MER/CAR 187988 430526 Harmsen et al. 2012

Oegstgeest Nieuw 600-700 MER 90922 465064 Hemminga et al. 2006 / Rhijngeest Zuid Hemminga et al. 2007 / Jezeer 2011

Oosterhout, Gld. 675-725 MER 186900 432670 Ball & Van den Broeke 2007

Oud-Leusden 550-750 NO 153500 460000 Van Tent 1985

Valkenburg 525-900 NO 90300 465230 Bult & Hallewas 1990 De Woerd

Vleuten Appellaantje 500-800 MER 129750 457000 Den Hartog 2010

Wijk bij Duurstede 650-900 MER/CAR 152000 443100 Dijkstra 2012/Kars 1984

Western part of the Netherlands

Settlement Date Tephrite X Y Publication quern stone

Bloemendaal 475-900 MER/CAR 100000 493000 De Koning 2015 Groot Olmen

85 Settlement Date Tephrite X Y Publication quern stone

Castricum 675-850 MER/CAR 106850 506350 Hagers & Sier 1999 Oosterbuurt

Den Haag Frankenslag 500-700 MER 84000 457000 Magendans & Waasdorp 1989

Heiloo Zuiderloo 600-900 MER/CAR 108476 512852 Dijkstra & Moesker 2017

Limmen Zuidkerkenlaan 500-750 NO 108128 509472 Van Raaij 1993a, 1993b

Medemblik 600-800 NO 137000 531000 Besteman 1974

Naaldwijk IV 500-700 MER 73840 444800 Van der Feijst 2015

Schagen 500-900 NO 115382 533055 Diederik 1982

Serooskerke 675-725 NO 31086 397779 Dijkstra & Zuidhoff 2011

Uitgeest Dorregeest 100BC-900AD ROM/ 109520 505800 De Koning 2016 MER/CAR

Northern part of the Netherlands

Settlement Date Tephrite X Y Publication quern stone

Anjum 650-1200 NO 204252 598960 Nicolay 2010

Birdaard 300-1100 NO 187767 589791 Nicolay 2010

Ezinge 600BC-1000AD MER/CAR 225378 591925 Nieuwhof et al. 2014

Foudgum 400-750 NO 191872 595569 De Langen 1992

Hallum 425-1200 MER 181430 591250 Tuinstra et al. 2011

Leeuwarden 450-900 MER 182000 579750 Dijkstra et al. 2008 Oldehoofster-kerkhof

Wijnaldum Tjitsma 175-950 NO 159846 587707 Besteman et al. 1999

Eastern part of the Netherlands

Settlement Date Tephrite X Y Publication quern stone

Colmschate 275-700 ROM/MER 210683 473565 Vermeulen et al, 2009

Dalen 600-800 NO 247160 524160 Kooi 1994a Westakkers

Ede Paasbergterrein 650-750 MER 174530 451290 Hoven 2014

Enschede-Elerink Es 500-600 NO 257240 470897 Scholte Lubberink 2014

Enter De Akkers 300-600 ROM/MER 236200 479130 Hulst 2004

Hoog-Buurlo Braamberg 500-700 MER 186406 465478 Jongeling 2017

Midlaren 200BC-1100AD MER 241328 570729 Nicolay 2008

86 Settlement Date Tephrite X Y Publication quern stone

Norg 650-900 MER/CAR 227150 565600 Loopik & Dijkstra 2015

Odoorn 475-825 MER/CAR 249415 549510 Van Es 1979

Peelo 500-900 NO 234477 559926 Kooi 1994b

Pesse 500-1100 NO 226312 532712 Lanting 1977 Eursinge

Pesse Oostering 500-700 MER 227100 531900 Tulp et al. 2010

Putten Husselerveld 550-900 MER/CAR 168250 474525 Blom et al. 2005

Raalte Boeteler Enk 600-800 NO 216500 488500 Van der Velde & Kenemans 2002

Schipborg 500-750 NO 240932 566053 Van Giffen 1943, Waterbolk 1989

Vasse-De Steenbrei 500-750 NO 253350 495300 Pronk 2015

Wijster 200-600 NO 231144 537137 Van Es 1967

Zelhem Soerland 600-800 MER/CAR 221000 447000 Van der Velde et al. 2002

Zutphen Eme 350-700 NO 211000 463000 Bouwmeester 2000

Southern part of the Netherlands

Settlement Date Tephrite X Y Publication quern stone

Alphen Centrum 650-750 NO 124937 388368 Mostert 2013

Alphen Kerkakkers 450-725 NO 124780 387720 De Koning 2005

Alphen Molenbaan 500-1250 MER 124750 387450 Meijlink 2005

Berkel-Enschot 650-750 NO 138000 399000 Weterings 2013

Boxmeer Sterckwijk 550-850 CAR+ 194415 406424 Blom & Van Der Velde 2015

Breda-West 270-1050 NO 111096 399010 Koot & Berkvens 2004

Escharen 500- NO 180062 416130 Verwers 1998

Goirle 300-550 NO 133100 393720 Bink 2005

Grubbenvorst 500-700 NO 207577 381357 Van Es 1973

Horst Meterik 630-1000 MER/CAR 199325 385326 De Koning et al. 2009

Hulsel Kerkekkers 600-700 MER 140450 377950 De Leeuwe 2008

Sittard Haagsittard 600- NO 188717 334440 Stoepker 1992

Someren Waterdael III 500BC-1250AD CAR+ 176775 377176 De Boer & Hiddink 2012

Uden 600-900 MER/CAR 169692 408181 Van Hoof & Jansen 2002

Veldhoven Zilverackers 650-700 MER? 153436 380844 Verhoeven 2018

Venray Antoniusveld 600-750 NO 195714 393115 Stoepker et al. 1998

Voerendaal 350-700 NO 193004 321644 Willems 1986, 1987, 1988

Weert Kampershoek 650-900 NO 176839 362343 Tol & v.d Mark 1995 Dijkstra 1998 87 88