In the spring and summer of 2024, excavations carried out at the site located at 1 T. Kosciuškos Street in Vilnius revealed cultural layers dating from the late 13th to the 20th century, as well as remains of wooden structures dating back to the 13th–14th centuries. These findings provided new insights into the development of this part of Vilnius during the early stages of the city’s formation. Equally intriguing is the history of the site from the 17th to the 18th century, which is associated first with a manor estate that once stood there and, from the 19th century onwards, with the operation of a detention facility on the site. This article analyses the archaeological and historical contexts of these discoveries, presents the research results, and offers interpretations based on the collected data.
Heritage crimes, including illicit excavation, looting, and the destruction of archaeological sites, have lasting repercussions that reach beyond physical damage. They erode vital links to humanity’s past and deprive future generations of cultural knowledge. Archaeologists, heritage professionals, and the wider scientific community—dedicated to preserving and understanding cultural heritage—are among the most deeply affected by these crimes. Such damage compromises scientific research, leading to permanent loss of knowledge and assaulting directly the work of those who safeguard these sites. Yet, despite the significant pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage suffered by heritage professionals, legal frameworks often emphasize punishing offenders over recognizing and compensating victims, leaving the scientific community’s interests unaddressed.This article examines the impact of heritage crimes on archaeologists and heritage professionals, advocating for more attentive approach to their potential formal recognition as victims within criminal justice proceedings. Drawing on survey data, case law, and expert interviews, it highlights the urgent need for legal systems to acknowledge the multifaceted harm inflicted by these crimes. By addressing this oversight, the article aims to support a more comprehensive approach to heritage protection, reinforcing cultural heritage as a public good essential to collective memory and identity.
This study presents the first examination of an Egyptian mummified crocodile from the collection of the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra National Preserve (Ukraine). Archival research established that the specimen was donated to the Archaeological Museum at St. Volodymyr’s University in 1860 by Dr. Joseph Shkuratovsky who likely obtained it in Upper Egypt in the mid-19th century. The mummy had never been studied by Egyptologists, bio-archaeologists, or zoologists. Radiocarbon dating and chemical analysis of embalming substances were conducted using standard protocols. The radiocarbon results suggest a Ptolemaic Period origin (332–30 BC), although possible reservoir effects may have influenced the date. Beyond presenting this unique find to a wider audience, a key objective was to explore possible morphological criteria for distinguishing the Nile crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) from the West African crocodile (Crocodylus suchus), both sympatric species present in ancient Egypt. Drawing on Etienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire’s early observations and subsequent morphometric data, the structure of the external mandibular fenestra in this specimen was examined and compared to other examples, both modern and archaeological. The fenestra of the examined specimen exhibits features more typical of C. suchus. However, it is of importance to note that crocodile mummies cannot be assumed to represent C. suchus without a robust series of genetically confirmed specimens. Thus, the present observations are preliminary and should be regarded as a working hypothesis to be tested against other larger, well-documented datasets and utilizing DNA analyses. Morphological examination also revealed evidence that the crocodile was intentionally killed – likely by a single, precise stab wound to the neck – and that the injury was carefully concealed, suggesting a broader and more deliberate practice of sacrificial killing than previously recognized. This study contributes new archaeological, historical, and morphological data to the growing body of research on animal mummification in ancient Egypt, while underscoring the need for further work on species identification criteria.
This article aims to present the archaeobotanical material collected during archaeological excavation carried out in 2024 at Kosciuškos Street 1, Vilnius City, covering the 14th century settlement phase. The excavation uncovered wooden structures, among which, a 14th century wooden building with a masonry stove was identified (this was a fully exposed room measuring 11.52 m² that contained a masonry stove of 1.6 × 1.3 m). The abundance and diversity of plant remains revealed aspects of the diet of Vilnius inhabitants who settled at the outskirts of the Curved Castle (Curvum castrum) in the 14th century, as well as the natural environment that surrounded them.
This article explores the technological aspects of the Iron Age pottery production in Lithuania and what these aspects can reveal about the society of the period. In order to reveal new insights into the subject, ceramic petrography and chemical analysis via pXRF were employed alongside visual examination of the surface of over 500 ceramic sherds from across Lithuania. Each step of ceramic production was reconstructed and interpreted according to the Chaîne opératoire approach, to the extent the material allowed. The results indicate that the most observable change in the operational chain of ceramic production occurred in the surface treatment, while other aspects of production – ranging from temper use to firing conditions – remained relatively stable throughout the Iron Age. Additionally, ceramic petrography revealed a long-lasting variety of ceramic pastes across the entire assemblage. This variety was also observed in the outer layers of rusticated wares. The evidence collected suggests that this variation resulted from conscious decisions by potters, leading to the conclusion that most homesteads likely interpreted new surface-treatment techniques in their own ways and produced their own pottery.
