Home Plant Use and Cereal Cultivation Inferred from Integrated Archaeobotanical Analysis of an Ottoman Age Moat Sequence (Szigetvár, Hungary)
Article Open Access

Plant Use and Cereal Cultivation Inferred from Integrated Archaeobotanical Analysis of an Ottoman Age Moat Sequence (Szigetvár, Hungary)

An erratum for this article can be found here: https://doi.org/10.1515/opar-2024-1705
  • Andrea Torma , Katalin Náfrádi EMAIL logo , Sándor Gulyás and Pál Sümegi
Published/Copyright: April 30, 2024
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

Suleiman the Magnificent died during the siege of Szigetvár in 1566, close to the battlefield in Turbék Vineyard Hill site, Hungary. On the place of his death, a memorial place was established with a tomb, a mosque, a monastery, and a deep moat system north of the building complex. After its destruction, the memorial place was covered with demolished material and soil. This significant site was re-identified and excavated during the archaeological, historical, and geoarchaeological research work that started in 2015. As a result of the correlative evaluation of previously published sedimentological and chronological data, the filling of the moat accumulated during the seventeenth century. Our goal was the natural and anthropogenic vegetation reconstruction of the adjacent region of the memorial place and the plant utilization of the community living there. During the analyses, more than 30,000 plant remains were identified belonging to 77 taxa. The results gave indications for ploughed lands, vegetable and fruit cultivation, vineyards, pasture lands, forest patches, and trampled areas related to active human activity. The lithostratigraphic and geochronological results of the moat sequence coincide well with our carpological and anthracological data.

1 Introduction

Suleiman the Magnificent (1494–1566) was one of the greatest sultans that ever ruled the Ottoman Empire who led 13 campaigns and died during the siege of Szigetvár in 1566, close to the battlefield in Szigetvár – Turbék Vineyard Hill site, Hungary. At the location of his death, a memorial place was established with a tomb, a mosque, a monastery, and a deep moat system north of the building complex (Figure 1). According to written resources (Fodor, 2020) a new pilgrim town, which Ottoman name was Türbe Kasabasi, was established at the decision of the next Sultan (Selim II) of the Ottoman Empire (Pap et al., 2015).

Figure 1 
               Location of the Szigetvár – Turbék Vineyard Hill site, Hungary (Gulyás et al., 2022).
Figure 1

Location of the Szigetvár – Turbék Vineyard Hill site, Hungary (Gulyás et al., 2022).

How the former leader of the Ottoman Empire ended up in present-day Hungary is worth briefly summarizing. In the north-western part of Anatolia, the Ottoman Sultan, who founded the first Ottoman Dynasty at the end of the thirteenth century and the beginning of the fourteenth century, founded a relatively small country of a few thousand square kilometres. Then, through a steady and gradual expansion, they conquered Asia Minor, the Balkan Peninsula, and the city of Constantinople (modern Istanbul). By the fifteenth century, the Balkan countries, with the help of the Kingdom of Hungary, were fighting to the death against the Ottoman armies, which were expanding and conquering the Crimea, the western and northern Black Sea, the Azov Sea, and the Polish Kingdom of the late Middle Ages. Despite a preventive Christian war (with Bulgarian, Romanian, Albanian, Serbian, and Hungarian participants) throughout the Balkans, the key fortress of the Kingdom of Hungary, Nándorfehérvár (today’s Belgrade), was occupied after a second great siege in 1521, opening the way to Ottoman conquest of the interior of the Carpathian Basin. The Christian armies (Hungarian, Polish, Czech, and Croatian) defending the Kingdom of Hungary were annihilated by the Ottoman army which was led by Sultan Suleiman I at Mohács in 1526. In this battle, the Hungarian (and Czech) king (Louis II of Anjou, of Polish and French descent) was killed. After the war at Mohács, the Ottoman Empire gradually conquered a large part of the territory of the Kingdom of Hungary. At the same time, Egypt, Syria, Arab territories, almost the whole of the Middle East, Libya, and the coast of Algeria were conquered. Since they considered the Hungarian nobility to be related to the Turks, they established a vassal state dependent on the Ottoman Empire in the eastern part of the Carpathian Basin in the Transylvanian Basin (the Principality of Transylvania) and sought to conquer the Danube River valley. Their ultimate goal was to conquer the city of Vienna (which they called the Golden Apple), the centre of the Habsburg Empire.

The southern and central parts of the Kingdom of Hungary were conquered and integrated into the administrative system of the Ottoman Empire. While the northern and western parts of the Kingdom of Hungary became an integral part of the Habsburg Empire, which gave a legitimate ruler after the war at Mohács. During the conquest wars, the siege and capture of Szigetvár happened in 1566, defended by the Christian troops of the Croatian general Miklós Zrínyi (Nikola Šubić Zrinski). Sultan Suleiman, the leader of the Ottoman troops, was 72 years old by this time and died before the end of the siege, but the Sultan’s council concealed his death, and it was only after the siege and the release of the troops that his death was announced in Constantinople. The date of construction of the memorial place was put between 1577 and 1578 (Fodor, 2020; Hancz, 2014; Kitanics, 2014, Pap et al., 2015; Pap, 2019). Unfortunately, only sporadic historical data (tax documents, certificates) can be found about the location, environment, and land use of the memorial complex and the pilgrim town (Table 1).

Table 1

Historical sources of Szigetvár–Turbék Vineyard Hill site (Pap et al., 2015)

Source of information Places mentioned and their geographical nature Land use Installation of the site Vegetation, plants and crops mentioned
1. Cserenkó Ferenc (1566) Szemlőhegy hill, “up on the hill” No data No data No data
2. Budina Sámuel (1566) Szemlőhegy near the vineyards No data Grape
3. Ottoman source (1573) No data Orchard Not yet built-in Fruits (no species are mentioned)
4. Ottoman registry (1574) No data No data Tekke (dervish monastery), a mosque where Suleiman’s body was buried temporarily No data
5. Ottoman registry (1579) of Szigetvár and its neighbourhood Suleiman Khan’s monastery (kasaba) 1 Vineyard, 5 arable lands A settlement of two mahallas: Mehmed’s (son of Bajezid) with 23 households and Veli’s (son of Ali) with 28 households Grape, cereals
6. Evlia Çelebi (1664) On the top of a high mountain Garden-hill location Elongated building Garden, grape
7. Wagner, Ch. (1689) Hill (Türbe Daghi) Vineyards and orchards No data Cherry, grape
8. Urbarium (1692) Village of Turbék on a hill Orchard, vineyard and arable land Masonry church with high tower Fruit, grape, cereals
9. Urbarium (1692) Turbék vineyard hill Vineyards and orchards Abandoned Ottoman mosque Grape, fruit
10. Hoffinanz Ungarn (1693) Turbék No data marble chapels, lead roof, tower where Suleiman’s tomb once stood No data
11. Urbarium (1720) Vinayard hill Vineyard A mosque in the shape of a tomb Grape
12. Prothocollum (1717–1734) Ottoman fortification Arable land (corn) and uncultivated land where the fort once stood Ottoman walls, a fortress, and well Corn, grape
13. Prothocollum (1738) Ottoman fortification Arable land (corn) Tekke (dervis monastery) Corn
14. Urbarium (1747) Ottoman fortification Arable land No data Cereals
15. Contractus (1789) Ottoman fortification Arable land No data Cereals

Sources: 1: Ruzsás & Angyal, 1971; 2: Molnár, 1978; 3: Vatin, 2005; 4: Sinan Bey oğlu eski Sadrazam Şehit Mehmet Paşa Vakfı 1574; 5: Vass, 1993; 6: Çelebi et al., 2003; 7: Wagner, 1700; 8: [Archival document], (1604–1891); 9: [Archival document], 1692; 10: [Archival document], 1692; 11. [Archival document], 1693; 12. [Archival document], (1717–1734); 13: [Archival document], 1720; 14: [Archival document], 1738; 15: [Archival document], 1747.

In February 1664, Count Pál Esterházy, the prince of the Habsburg Empire and Palatine of the Kingdom of Hungary, during the winter campaign that was led by Miklós Zrínyi, made a feather drawing of the occupied tomb (Figure 2), in which it is visible that a moat surrounded the tomb fortress from the north. During this campaign, the complex was partially destroyed and then rebuilt. The life of the tomb and the pilgrim town ended in 1689 after the successful siege of the Szigetvár fortress and the occupation of the tomb by the Habsburg army. The buildings of the memorial site were demolished in 1692, the pilgrim town was abandoned, and the whole area was depopulated (Pap et al., 2015). The land was divided into an agricultural zone, where orchards, arable lands, gardens, and vineyards were established. The memorial place was covered with demolished material and soil. This significant site was re-identified and excavated only during the archaeological, historical, and geoarchaeological research work by Pál Fodor and Norbert Pap, which started in 2015. Following the complex identification of the site of the tomb (Pap et al., 2015), the location of the filled-up moat was identified by geoarchaeological drillings and then excavated under the supervision of archaeologists. During the fieldwork, several datable artefacts (an Ottoman medini, a denarius of Mathias II, and a Turkish knife) have come to light indicating the seventeenth-century origin of the moat sequence. Based on the chronological data (Figure 3), the moat must have been in use between 1651 ± 36 cal AD years and 1692 AD (Gulyás et al., 2022). Two major changes, erosion-accumulation events are notable in the sediment sequence of the profile based on lithological, sedimentological (Sümegi, 2020), geochemical, magnetic susceptibility, and chronological analyses (Gulyás et al., 2022). Based on chronological data, the older event must be placed to around 1670 ± 12 and 1674 ± 14 cal AD years (Gulyás et al., 2022), which is in line with historical dates marking the destruction of the site during the winter campaign of the Hungarian troops in 1664 (Fodor, 2020; Hancz, 2014; Kitanics, 2014; Pap et al., 2015; Pap, 2019). The second event corresponds to another destruction of the site (1684 ± 36 cal AD years), probably the re-occupation of the site in 1688/1689 (Fodor, 2020; Gulyás et al., 2022; Hancz, 2014; Kitanics, 2014; Pap et al., 2015; Pap, 2019).

Figure 2 
               Pál Eszterházy’s drawing about the memorial place from 1664. 1 = The tomb of Suleiman I. (türbe), 2 = interior of the Ottoman mosque, 3 = exterior of the Ottoman mosque, 4 = building of the halveti dervish (Ottoman monastery: závija) 5 = moat of the ottoman memorial place, 6 = the building of the Ottoman soldiers protecting the memorial place; red circle denotes sampling location.
Figure 2

Pál Eszterházy’s drawing about the memorial place from 1664. 1 = The tomb of Suleiman I. (türbe), 2 = interior of the Ottoman mosque, 3 = exterior of the Ottoman mosque, 4 = building of the halveti dervish (Ottoman monastery: závija) 5 = moat of the ottoman memorial place, 6 = the building of the Ottoman soldiers protecting the memorial place; red circle denotes sampling location.

Figure 3 
               The lithology of the profile with the geochronological data and archaeological findings (based on the study by Gulyás et al., 2022; Sümegi, 2020).
Figure 3

The lithology of the profile with the geochronological data and archaeological findings (based on the study by Gulyás et al., 2022; Sümegi, 2020).

This publication presents the results of anthracological and carpological analyses of the filling of the moat protecting the Dervish monastery, one of the most important elements of this excavation. We aimed to specify the archaeobotanical character of the memorial tomb and the eating habits of the population of the monastery and the pilgrim town. As there are only sporadic written sources and information about the memorial place and the pilgrim town, as well as about the environment of the site and its former inhabitants, our data provide new information on the natural flora, cultivated plants, and diet of people who lived there in the seventeenth century.

2 Materials and Methods

2.1 Location, Climate, and Natural Vegetation

Szigetvár is located in SW Hungary (Figure 1), in Baranya county, 33 km from Pécs and 40 from Kaposvár. The coordinates of the study site are 46°07′92″N and 17°84′58″E, 113 m a.s.l. The climate of the site is moderately warm and moderately dry (Figure 4). Continental and sub-Mediterranean climates characterize the site with warmer winters. According to the data of the nearest climate station (Pécs), its annual average temperature is 15.4°C, and its precipitation is 624 mm. The most important potential forest communities of the Somogyi flora are alder-ash (Alneto–Fraxinetum pannonicae) groves, oak–ash–elm gallery forest (Querco–Ulmetum), silver lime–turkey oak (Tilio argenteae–Quercetum cerris), hornbeam-sessile oak (Querco petraeae–Carpinetum praeillyricum), and beech forest (Vicio oroboidi-Fagetum; Marosi & Somogyi, 1990).

2.2 Sampling, Carpological, and Anthracological Analyses

Samples were taken at every 15 cm in a column for the archaeobotanical analysis. A total of 14 samples of ca. 30 L (per sample) were taken and wet-sieved to retrieve organic remains suitable for paleoecological studies. The archaeobotanical material was isolated in standard flotation equipment (Weiss & Kislev, 2004) in a laboratory, to avoid recent contamination. A sieve with 0.4 mm mesh was used to catch light fractions such as smaller seeds (e.g. poppy seed; Figueiral, Bouby, Buffat, Petitot, & Terral, 2010). Charcoals larger than 4 mm in size were counted (Asouti, 2003; Asouti & Austin, 2005; Chabal, Fabre, Terral, & Théry-Parisot, 1999; Keepax, 1988). We used identification atlases, professional publications (Cappers, 2006; Jacomet & Kreuz 1999; Jacomet, 2006; Nixon, Murray, & Fuller, 2011), and our recent comparative material for the identification of thousands of carpological remains (seeds/fruits). The charred wood remains were analysed by an optical microscope at 100, 200, and 500 × magnifications. Wood anatomical identification publication (Schweingruber, 1990) was used, as well as our own subfossil and fossil reference collection (Náfrádi, 2015) for the identification.

3 Results

3.1 Anthracology

During the flotation to recover the macrobotanical material, a high number (5,445 pcs) of charred wood fragments were found in the moat of the tomb. Some of the remains were poorly preserved due to overburning, and thus could not be identified to genus level. The results of the anthracological analysis are detailed in Table 2. Oak (Quercus sp.), maple (Acer sp.), alder (Alnus sp.), and poplar/willow (Populus/Salix sp.) genera were identified. In the charred charcoal material, coniferous fragments were identified, and a more precise identification was not possible due to overburning.

Table 2

The number and taxon of charred wood remains of Szigetvár – Turbék Vineyard Hill site, Hungary

Depth (cm) Preservation (+: well; –: poor) Total number of fragments Taxon
40–55 + 143 Quercus
55–60 120 Quercus
18 Overburnt Alnus
60–85 + 42 Acer
66 Alnus
209 Quercus
85–100 + 352 Quercus
100–115 + 25 Alnus
310 Quercus
115–130 109 Quercus
12 Populus/Salix
19 overburnt
130–145 75 Acer
89 Alnus
182 Quercus
42 Overburnt
145–160 + 24 Acer
32 Alnus
342 Quercus
160–175 112 Alnus
288 Quercus
302 Overburnt
175–190 + 376 Acer
440 Alnus
190–205 + 42 Acer
119 Alnus
526 Quercus
205–220 350 Overburnt coniferous
220–235 + 354 Alnus
235–250 + 181 Alnus
96 Populus/Salix
48 Overburnt

3.2 Carpology

As a result of the carpological analysis, 77 taxa of 14 samples were found that cover 32,557 remains of fragments (Tables 35). In the individual samples and the complex carpological assemblage, the diaspora of European black elderberry (Sambucus nigra [23,678 remains]), European dwarf elder (Sambucus ebulus [4,610 remains]), and greater celandine (Chelidonium majus [2,949 remains]) dominated; the number of these species (31,237) accounted for the ratio of 95.94% of the findings. Therefore, during quantitative evaluation, the number of these species was not considered, and we took the ratio of these three species to zero when assessing the dominance of each group/taxa, for better perspicuity. So the indicator elements with a lower ratio and their quantitative change became more evident in the examined profile.

Table 3

Cultivated plant remains of Szigetvár – Turbék Vineyard Hill site, Hungary

Species Charred/Preservation (+/+: charred and well preserved; −/+: non-charred and well preserved; +/−: charred and poorly preserved; −/−: non-charred and poorly preserved) Depth (cm)
40–55 55–70 70–85 85–100 100–115 115–130 130–145 145–160 160–175 175–190 190–205 205–220 220–235 235–250 Total number
+/+; −/+; +/−; −/− pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs
Hordeum vulgare +/+ 1 1 1 3
Hordeum vulgare L. var. polystichon Haller +/+ 6 3 3 73 5 90
Cerealia fragm. +/+ 35 36 40 33 32 2 51 12 241
Panicum miliaceum +/+ 2 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 12
Secale cereale +/+ 5 4 3 2 7 1 1 6 2 9 19 1 1 61
Triticum aestivum/nudum/turgidum +/+ 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 3 2 16
Triticum sp. +/+ 1 1 2
Number of cereals 42 49 46 5 44 4 3 46 5 84 74 19 2 2 425
Taxon richness 3 5 4 2 4 4 3 5 3 4 4 3 2 2 7
Brassica nigra +/+ 5 9 6 4 1 1 1 27
Lens culinaris +/+ 1 1 2
Linum usitatissimum +/+ 1 1
Pisum sativum +/+ 1 2 1 4
Papaver somniferum +/+ 1 1
Pastinaca sativa −/− 1 1
Number of leguminous, oil and fibre plants 1 5 9 7 5 1 2 4 1 1 36
Taxon richness 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 1 6
Corylus avellana +/+ 1 1 1 3
Juglans regia +/+ 1 1
Prunus avium/cerasus +/+ 5 3 5 3 10 4 2 32
Prunus cf. domestica +/+ 2 1 3
Vitis vinifera −/+ 10 2 16 6 1 1 1c 37
Number of fruits 15 5 23 9 1 1 2 2 10 4 3 1 76
Taxon richness 2 2 3 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 5
Total number of cultivated plants 58 59 78 21 50 6 7 48 9 94 79 23 2 3 537
Total taxon richness 6 7 8 6 7 6 7 7 6 5 6 6 2 3 18
Table 4

Weed remains of Szigetvár – Turbék Vineyard Hill site, Hungary (*during quantitative evaluation the number of these species were not considered)

Species Charred/Preservation (+/+: charred and well preserved; −/+: non-charred and well preserved; +/−: charred and poorly preserved; −/−: non-charred and poorly preserved) Depth (cm)
40–55 55–70 70–85 85–100 100–115 115–130 130–145 145–160 160–175 175–190 190–205 205–220 220–235 235–250 Total number
+/+; −/+; +/−; −/− pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs
Agrostemma githago +/+ 1 1
Bromus arvensis +/+ 2 1 3
Bromus secalinus +/+ 1 1 0 2
Carduus nutans −/− 2 3 1 1 7
Centaurea cyanus +/+ 1 1 2
Chelidonium majus* −/− 10 16 34 78 182 446 752 621 14 436 189 138 25 8 2,949
Chenopodium album −/− 37 10 15 52 52 18 7 15 13 2 32 27 16 6 302
Chenopodium hybridum −/− 5 3 3 14 14 4 5 2 1 1 1 12 7 3 75
Chenopodium murale −/− 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7
Datura staronium −/− 30 14 21 18 14 10 2 21 1 16 2 1 150
Descurainia sophia +/+ 5 2 3 1 4 1 1 1 18
Fallopia convolvulus +/+ 1 2 3
Galium aparine +/+ 1 1
Galium spurium +/+ 1 2 1 4
Glaucium corniculatum −/− 1 1
Hyoscyamus niger −/− 1 1 2
Lolium temulentum +/+ 1 1 2 1 5
Leonurus cardiaca −/− 1 1
Malva pusilla −/− 1 1
Picris hieracioides −/− 5 2 2 4 1 1 1 16
Polygonum aviculare agg. +/+ 1 1 2
Polygonum lapatifolium +/+ 1 1
Portulaca oleracea −/− 39 15 4 10 1 1 1 7 78
Sambucus ebulus* −/− 18 119 190 327 365 213 250 875 532 388 102 425 432 332 4,610
+/+ 2 1 5 13 16 1 4
Sambucus nigra* −/− 49 289 293 698 1,181 1,259 1,707 4,336 753 3,784 5,603 1,681 974 328 23,678
+/+ 1 3 6 16 71 292 292 57 5
Setaria glauca +/+ 1 1 1 3
Setaria viridis/verticillata +/+ 2 1 3
Sinapis arvensis +/+ 1 1 1 5 1 1 10
Solarum nigrum +/+ 1 1
Spergula arvensis −/− 1 1 1 3
Stachys annua −/− 1 1
Stellaria media −/+ 11 (6C) 3 1 1 1 17
Urtica dioica −/− 1 1 1 1 1 1 6
Number of weeds 214 484 570 1,214 1,832 2,036 3,032 6,189 1,319 4,694 5,942 2,290 1,469 679 31,964
Taxon richness 13 14 13 15 10 14 10 12 10 12 13 12 14 7 33
Table 5

Near-natural vegetation and ornamental vegetation remains of Szigetvár – Turbék Vineyard Hill site, Hungary

Depth (cm) Charred/Preservation (+/+: charred and well preserved; −/+: non-charred and well preserved; +/−: charred and poorly preserved; −/−: non-charred and poorly preserved) 40–55 55–70 70–85 85–100 100–115 115–130 130–145 145–160 160–175 175–190 190–205 205–220 220–2350 235–250 Total number
Species +/+; −/+; +/−; −/− pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs pcs
Eleocharis palustris +/+ 1 1 2
Carex vulpina +/+ 1 1 1 1 4
Schoenoplectus lacustris +/+ 1 1
Solanum dulcamara −/− 1 1
Alisma plantago-aquatica −/− 1 1
Carex flacca Schreb. +/+ 1 1 2
Carex hirta −/− 1 1
Barbarea stricta. −/− 1 1
Myosoton aquaticum +/+ 1 2 1 1 5
Ranunculus repens +/+ 1 1
Chenopodium polyspermum −/− 5 4 9
Chrysanthemum leucanthemum +/+ 1 1
Carex distans. +/+ 2 2
Betula pendula −/− 1 2 2 2 7
Fragaria vesca +/+ 1 1 1 3
Picea abies +/− 1 1C 2
Prunus spinosa +/+ 1 1
Rubus fruticosus −/− 1 1 2
Veronica hederifolia +/+ 1 1
Prunella vulgaris +/+ 1 1
Calamintha acinos −/− 1 1
Lamium amplexicaule. −/− 1 1 2
Medicago minima. +/+ 1 1
Plantago lanceolata +/+ 1 1
Ranunculus bulbosus −/− 1 1
Rumex crispus +/+ 1 1
Trifolium repens −/− 1 1
Number of seeds 4 0 3 9 5 6 1 3 9 1 3 6 5 1 56
Taxon richness 4 0 3 8 1 4 1 3 8 1 3 3 4 1 27

The carpological findings were diverse regarding charring and preservation (Tables 35). The wet condition of the moat helped preserving findings, half of the remains were carbonized, but still identifiable. The moat was periodically or permanently filled with water which preserved the seeds. As uncharred remains were also found in very deep layers, we do not consider it to be recent contamination.

In Tables 35, the preservation of certain carpological species and if they are carbonized or not are marked as +/+; +/−;−/+;−/− (+/+: charred and well preserved; −/+: non-charred and well preserved; +/−: charred and poorly preserved; −/−: non-charred and poorly preserved). In most cases, the species were either only carbonized or not carbonized in each sample. In general, the cultivated plants and their weeds were carbonized. Where a species was both carbonized and not carbonized, we indicated this by adding letter C (carbonized) in the sample depth, e.g. common grapevine (Vitis sp.) between 145 and 160 cm had 1 seed that was carbonized (1 C). However, where a given depth (sample) had a mixture of carbonized and not carbonized, we left the number of seeds and indicated next to it how many of these were carbonized (e.g. common chickweed [Stellaria media] 11 (6 C) = 6 out of 11 seeds were carbonized).

3.2.1 Cultivated Plants

About 20% of the analysed plant species are cultivated crops (18 species, 537 pieces remains). More categories could be distinguished in this group (Table 3).

3.2.1.1 Cereals

The majority of cultivated plants (Table 4), in terms of both species (41%) and the number of remains (74%), are cereals, although the majority of the grains were poorly preserved. Totally five cereal species turned up in the samples (Table 4). Barley (Hordeum distichon/vulgare) has the highest number among cereals (93 remains), and the majority is six-row barley (Hordeum polystichum). The number of rye (Secale cereale) is slightly lower, 61 remains. The number of common wheat/bread wheat (Triticum aestivum/nudum/turgidum, 16 remains) and common millet (Panicum miliaceum, 12 remains) is nearly similar in the samples of the moat. More than 200 cereal fragments were found that could not be identified at species level.

3.2.1.2 Leguminous, Oil and Fibre Plants, Herbs

Lentil (Lens culinaris, two pieces) and pea (Pisum sativum, four remains) turned up in two and three samples. Opium poppy (Papaver somniferum, one remain) occurred only in one sample while black mustard (Brassica nigra, 27 remains) in seven samples. Both flax (Linum usitatissimum, one remain) and parsnip (Pastinaca sativa, one remain) turned up in only one sample (Table 3).

3.2.1.3 Cultivated Fruits

Only a small number of fragmented seeds/fruit stones of cultivated fruits were present in the samples of the moat filling. Nevertheless, these have an indicative value (Table 3). All hard-shell fragments were charred. In most samples, sweet cherry/sour cherry (Prunus avium/cerasus) fruit stones occurred (32 remains). Unfortunately, the exact identification of the fragmented seeds was not possible; however, it certainly was a cultivated form (Faust & Surányi, 1999; Necipoğlu, 1997). In addition, the hard-shell fragments of plum (Prunus domestica, three remains) and walnut (Juglans regia, one remain) were identified. Fragments of hazelnut (Corylus avellana, three remains) were found in three samples. Common grape vine (Vitis vinifera, 37 remains) seeds turned up in half of the samples, and most of them were fragmented; however, undamaged seeds occurred as well which may provide an opportunity to determine additional cultural varieties and types (Mravcsik et al., 2015). Most of the grape seeds were waterlogged, ten remains of charred grape seeds turned up only in one sample.

3.2.2 Arable and Ruderal Weeds

The species list and the number of weed remains per sample are detailed in Table 4. As we mentioned earlier, European black elderberry (Sambucus nigra), European dwarf elder (Sambucus ebulus), and greater celandine (Chelidonium majus) occurred with the highest values. White goosefoot (Chenopodium album), thorn apple (Datura stramonium), common purslane (Portulaca oleracea), and maple-leaved goosefoot (Chenopodium hybridum) turned up in much smaller, but still significant quantities. Other species are represented in much smaller numbers; however, weeds indicating the sowing season (Colledge, Conolly, & Shennan, 2004; Grabowski, 2011; Kreuz & Schäfer, 2011; Lempiäinen-Avci, Haggrén, Rosendahl, Knuutinen, & Holappa, 2017; Pelling, Campbell, Carruthers, Hunter, & Marshall, 2015; Pósa, Vinogradov, & Gyulai, 2020) have also been found among them, for example, corn-cockle (Agrostemma githago), field brome (Bromus arvensis), rye brome (Bromus secalinus), flixweed (Descurainia sophia), cornflower (Centaurea cyanus), false cleavers (Galium spurium), wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis), darnel (Lolium temulentum), and corn spurry (Spergula arvensis).

3.2.3 Near-Natural Vegetation

Many-seeded goosefoot (Chenopodium polyspermum), giant chickweed (Myosoton aquaticum), and true fox sedge (Carex vulpine) were the most frequent taxa among the elements of natural vegetation (Table 5). Common spikerush (Eleocharis palustris), blue sedge (Carex flacca), distant sedge (Carex distans), strawberry (Fragaria vesca), European blackberry (Rubus fruticosus), and common henbit (Lamium amplexicaule) turned up in few samples, while other taxa appeared in only one sample.

3.2.4 Ornamental Plants

The remains of European white birch (Betula pendula) and the cone and pine needles of Norway spruce (Picea abies) turned up (Table 5).

4 Discussion and Conclusion

4.1 Results in the Light of Erosion-Accumulation Events

Gulyás et al. (2022) marked two erosion-accumulation events according to grain size, geochemical analysis, and magnetic susceptibility data. These two intervals between 110–130 and 170–180 cm indicate an eroded soil covering the surrounding areas. These two zones are identified as erosion-accumulation events I (between 190 and 160 cm) and II (between 130 and 50 cm; Figure 5). Furthermore, the second event can be subdivided into two more zones, between 130 and 100 cm and between 100 and 50 cm (Gulyás et al., 2022).

Figure 4 
                  Walter–Lieth climate diagram based on the data of Pécs climate station in the same microlimatic position as Szigetvár – Turbék Vineyard Hill site 1. Monthly average temperature 2. Monthly averages (red dots) of the hottest months (multi-year average) 3. Monthly averages (blue dots) of the coldest months (multi-year average) 4. Monthly average precipitation 5. Precipitation maximum at the beginning of summer 6. Secondary autumn precipitation maximum (sub-Mediterranean climatic effect).
Figure 4

Walter–Lieth climate diagram based on the data of Pécs climate station in the same microlimatic position as Szigetvár – Turbék Vineyard Hill site 1. Monthly average temperature 2. Monthly averages (red dots) of the hottest months (multi-year average) 3. Monthly averages (blue dots) of the coldest months (multi-year average) 4. Monthly average precipitation 5. Precipitation maximum at the beginning of summer 6. Secondary autumn precipitation maximum (sub-Mediterranean climatic effect).

Figure 5 clearly shows the changes in the number of cereals, legumes, fruits, near-natural vegetation, weeds, greater celandine (Chelidonium majus), European dwarf elderberry (Sambucus ebulus), European black elderberry (Sambucus nigra), and charred wood remains in the profile from the bottom up. Even though only small amounts of remains were found for some plant groups, the curves show good correspondence. The quantitative variation of cereals is the opposite of that of natural vegetation. The reduction in the proportion of natural vegetation coincided with the first stage of erosion when Hungarian troops destroyed the memorial site during the winter campaign of 1664. Likewise, the peak in the amount of charcoal can be dated to this period. Taking into account geochemical analyses, including potassium variations (Gulyás et al., 2022), the charcoal peaks follow the potassium peaks exactly, confirming the presence of burning horizons (Figure 5). Probably the burning of the buildings during the re-occupation of the area in the second half of the seventeenth century contributed to the poor preservation of the remains, as the Christian troops ransacked the memorial site and partially destroyed it, but did not take the castle of Szigetvár (Gulyás et al., 2022).

Figure 5 
                  Main archaeobotanical groups and their number through the profile (*the number of Sambucus nigra [23,678 pieces], Sambucus ebulus [4,610 pieces], Chelidonium majus [2,949 pieces] remains were not taken into account in the calculation of dominance).
Figure 5

Main archaeobotanical groups and their number through the profile (*the number of Sambucus nigra [23,678 pieces], Sambucus ebulus [4,610 pieces], Chelidonium majus [2,949 pieces] remains were not taken into account in the calculation of dominance).

The highest number of cereals appeared during the first erosion-accumulation event. This probably suggests that the memorial place was cleaned up after the Hungarian troops had ransacked it, meaning that these cereal grains were re-accumulated multiple times before being thrown into the moat surrounding the memorial site. The spread of near-natural vegetation elements and that of greater celandine (Chelidonium majus), European dwarf elderberry (Sambucus ebulus), and European black elderberry (Sambucus nigra) is contrasting. The seeds of grape vine appeared after the first attempt of the Hungarian troops to re-occupy the area; however, only sporadic grape seeds were found, but they are nevertheless indicative. There are written historical records about the presence of vineyards on the site from the second half of the sixteenth century (Table 1, sources 3 and 5) that support grape production and wine consumption. The Ottoman Empire and the spreading Islamic customs, which prohibit the consumption of wine according to the Qur’an, did not restrict (Fodor, 1998) the development of viticulture in the conquered territories and wine consumption for Christian communities was allowed if they paid wine tax (Égető, 1993; Hegyi, 1976; Káldy-Nagy, 1985). This later, together with the wine trade tax, could have been a very significant amount based on written sources of taxation (Fekete, 1993; Pákay, 1984; Szakály, 1981) and, of course, Ottoman communities also paid tax for growing grapes (Káldy-Nagy, 1985). Tax sheets (Fekete, 1993; Pákay, 1984; Szakály, 1981) and written sources (Table 1) indicate that well-developed grape production subsisted despite wars (Andrásfalvy, 1961).

4.2 Evaluation of Chared Wood Remains

One of the prominent issues of our archaeobotanical analyses is how charred wood remains got into the moat of the tomb. On the one hand, the wood material may have derived from the firewood of the tomb’s heating system and come from household waste from the people living in the pilgrim town. On the other hand, the destruction and burning of the tomb in 1664 and in 1689/90 (Gulyás et al., 2022) may also have contributed to the accumulation and overburning of charred material.

The anthracological data indicate that non-native, planted coniferous trees might have existed in the vicinity of the tomb. These identified taxa have completely different properties. Oak and maple trees are hardwoods that possibly were used as structural elements such as columns or beams. Both taxa were used as beams, columns, furniture, monuments, entrances, or doors and as firewood (Hæggström, 1992; Rinaldi, Mazzanti, & Bosi, 2013). Contrarily, alder and poplar/willow trees are softwoods and are mainly used for making wattle fences, partitioning rooms, the construction of the walls of adobe houses and wells (Cywa, 2018; Murray, Murray, & Lindsay, 2009; Mighall et al., 2018).

Oak remains may have derived from the wood material of the bridge over the moat that was marked in the historical map from 1664 (Figure 2) as well. It is well known that Ottoman bridges were predominantly made of oak in the Carpathian basin (Papp & Gryneus, 2011). Additionally, oak utilization as construction wood (Papp & Gryneus, 2011) in Ottoman fortresses, baths, and usually everywhere in architecture was widespread as it can be used in many ways. Maple was only secondary compared to oak and could be used on surfaces as a wainscot wood (Cywa, 2018; Deforce, 2017) during the construction of the tomb, and in baths (Yeşilada et al., 1999). Signs of abrasion indicating filling up and re-accumulation could not be detected on charcoal samples. Coniferous charcoals were overburnt thus we were not able to identify them at a species level. However, the presence of spruce needles in the archaeobotanical assemblage might support their presence as ornamental trees in the monastery garden. Since the local ecological conditions of the study area differ from the natural needs of spruce and birch, these species could have been planted around the tomb or transported from a further site.

4.3 Cereal Cultivation in the Seventeenth Century

Besides charred wood remains a significant number (32,557 remains) of other macrobotanical remains were found, covering 77 taxa, so a detailed carpological analysis was performed.

A change in sustenance cannot be ruled out either, since as a result of the war, food production had to change towards the more mobile, extensive animal husbandry that required less human work, from the second half of the sixteenth century (Bartosiewicz, 1995). The dynamic growth of animal husbandry may also have been amplified by trade, so the population growth and urbanization in Italy, Germany, the Czech Republic, and Austria promoted the increase of living animal trade (Bartosiewicz, 1995).

The exposure of the site, its loess bedrock, the anthroposol soil (Capra, Ganga, Grilli, Vacca, & Buondonno, 2015) that formed from brown forest soil due to human impact (fertilization, agriculture), and the microclimatic conditions of the area (Figure 2) enabled diverse crop production even during the colder and wetter climatic period of the Little Ice Age in the seventeenth century. Barley (Hordeum sp.) is one of the oldest crops; it has been grown since the Neolithic in the Carpathian Basin (Gyulai, 2010). It has been used for making porridge, bread, beer, and as animal forage, nowadays as well (Sullivan, Arendt, & Gallagher, 2013). The significance of rye (Secale cereale) increased during the medieval period in the Carpathian basin (Gyulai, 2010). It was sewn together with wheat (Cossani, Savin, & Slafer, 2007). Rye spikes, rising above wheat, were pinched. In the case of a whole field when rye grew above the wheat, it was cut to make the wheat ripe. Rye is less demanding than wheat in terms of soil and climatic conditions (Nesbitt & Samuel, 1998). The utilization of rye is similar to wheat; it is used as bread flour and thatching roofs (de Moulins, 2007). Written historical records (Table 1) also mention ploughed lands already from the second half of the sixteenth century.

Cereal cultivation was widespread in the Carpathian Basin in the seventeenth century (Figure 6); at the same time, its significance decreased considerably compared to the sixteenth century. On the one hand, the whole basin became a war zone (Sümegi et al., 2016), which resulted in a population decrease, so the production area of cereals may have decreased as well.

Figure 6 
                  Map of archaeobotanical finds of cereals in the Carpathian Basin during the seventeenth century. 1. Szentgotthárdi fort – Ilon, Grynaeus, & Torma, 2007, Gyulai, 2010. 2. Kőszegi fort – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 3. Pápa fort – Torma, 1996b, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 4. Tata fort – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 5. Esztergomi fort – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 6. Vác town (trade centre) – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001. 7. Szécsény fort – Torma, 1996a. 8. Sárospataki fort – Gyulai, Emődi, Mravcsik, & Pósa, 2013. 9. Debrecen town – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 10. Szolnoki fort – Hartyányi & Patay, 1970, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 11. Budapest – 1. osman site – Hartyányi & Patay, 1970, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 12. Budapest – 2. osman (Rácfürdő) – Hartyányi & Patay, 1970, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 13. Székesfehérvár – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 14. Dunaföldvári vár – Hartyányi & Patay, 1970, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 15. Szigetvár – Turbék Alsó Szőlőhegy site (in this manuscript). 16. Kaposvár – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 17. Pogányszentpéter (Christian monastery – sixteenth century, it was destroyed between 1526 and 1566) – Füzes, 1972, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 18. Sümeg – Sarvaly village (sixteenth century, it was destroyed between in 1536) – Skoflek, 1985, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. Written data: Lászlófalvi Velics & Kammerer, 1886, 1890, Szilágyi, 1895, Imreh, 1999, Rácz, 2020.
Figure 6

Map of archaeobotanical finds of cereals in the Carpathian Basin during the seventeenth century. 1. Szentgotthárdi fort – Ilon, Grynaeus, & Torma, 2007, Gyulai, 2010. 2. Kőszegi fort – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 3. Pápa fort – Torma, 1996b, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 4. Tata fort – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 5. Esztergomi fort – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 6. Vác town (trade centre) – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001. 7. Szécsény fort – Torma, 1996a. 8. Sárospataki fort – Gyulai, Emődi, Mravcsik, & Pósa, 2013. 9. Debrecen town – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 10. Szolnoki fort – Hartyányi & Patay, 1970, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 11. Budapest – 1. osman site – Hartyányi & Patay, 1970, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 12. Budapest – 2. osman (Rácfürdő) – Hartyányi & Patay, 1970, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 13. Székesfehérvár – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 14. Dunaföldvári vár – Hartyányi & Patay, 1970, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 15. Szigetvár – Turbék Alsó Szőlőhegy site (in this manuscript). 16. Kaposvár – Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 17. Pogányszentpéter (Christian monastery – sixteenth century, it was destroyed between 1526 and 1566) – Füzes, 1972, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. 18. Sümeg – Sarvaly village (sixteenth century, it was destroyed between in 1536) – Skoflek, 1985, Torma, 1996a, Gyulai, 2001, 2010. Written data: Lászlófalvi Velics & Kammerer, 1886, 1890, Szilágyi, 1895, Imreh, 1999, Rácz, 2020.

Military stockpiles were very important regarding grain sustenance due to constant wars, for the continuous provision of military supplies in the Carpathian Basin (Hartyányi & Patay, 1970). Ottoman travellers also referred to military and civilian warehouses in the seventeenth century (Fodor, 2020). Historical notes of military warehouses provide information about cereal composition collected in the form of taxation. At the same time, the archaeobotanical analysis of military warehouse finds indicates some differences compared to our archaeobotanical results (Hartyányi & Patay, 1970).

Figure 6 shows that even the smaller settlements in the sixteenth century had more substantial grain reserves and, on this basis, probably had a larger population. The smaller castles occupied by Christians and Ottomans (Szentgothárd, Kőszeg, Pápa, Tata, Esztergom, and Szécsény) had approximately the same, subordinate quantities of cereals, indicating that these castles may have had approximately insignificant population and military. The excavated türbe also falls into this category. However, the türbe was a religious centre (Fodor, 2020). At the same time, we have to note that the fossilization of the archaeobotanical material also influenced the preservation of the charred remains. The coincidental, subordinate cereal quantity of the six smaller-sized castles cannot be a coincidence – especially when compared to the quantity of excavated cereals from larger Ottoman castles (Kaposvár, Székesfehérvár, and Szolnok) or a principality centre (Sárospatak), or a larger commercial centre (Vác). This is particularly striking when compared with the fortress of Dunaföldvár which was occupied by Ottoman troops. It was built along the Danube River earlier which is the main staging area for the Ottoman armies. In the Dunaföldvár fortress, a large quantity of cereals was stored in military warehouses, far in excess of the number of soldiers stationed in the fortress, precisely for the marching armies (Gyulai, 2001, 2010; Hartyányi, Nováki, & Patay, 1967/1968).

As described earlier, the comparison of the archaeobotanical material shows that the quantity of cereals of the türbe was just as subordinate as that of the smaller castles (Szentgothárd, Kőszeg, Pápa, Tata, Esztergom, and Szécsény; Figure 6). This allows us to reconstruct a minimal garrison and population. However, the grain reserves of the major settlements and fortresses (Székesfehérvár and Szolnok) suggest a larger population in the seventeenth century. Based on this we might infer that the population of the smaller settlements – the peripheral ones – declined in the seventeenth century. At the same time, the population of the larger settlements increased which might be indicated in the larger number of cereals in the archaeobotanical material. This suggests that the population may have been resettled.

Hartyányi and Patay (1970) published the Ottoman archaeobotanical material of a presumably baking house with and oven, as well as grinding stones from Dunaföldvár. An iron mortar and a charred, wooden mortar were also discovered in the ruins of the baking house. Grain remains were found on the surface of the mortar. The recovered material was dominated by cereals, mainly wheat and rye. In smaller quantities, multi-row barley (Hordeum vulgare [three grains]), and double-row barley (Hordeum distichon [five grains]) were also recovered from the archaeobotanical assemblage. Based on the identical number of common wheat (Triticum aestivum/nudum/turgidum) and rye (Secale cereale), the double sowing of wheat and rye emerged. The reason for the difference in the composition of the cereals is the special importance of the türbe. As it was a religious centre, important personalities, including the leaders of the imperial armies, visited it (Fodor, 2020), while mainly conscript soldiers lived in the Dunaföldvár fortress. The finds from the türbe and Dunaföldvár suggest that the Ottoman military aristocracy consumed a different composition of food, including bread, then the common soldiers.

There could be several reasons for the dominance of barley (Hordeum sp.) in the archaeobotanical assemblage of the türbe. On the one hand, there was the already mentioned imperial – religious reason (Fodor, 2020); on the other hand, locally grown crops might be used, and it cannot be excluded that artificial selection among the cereals was already established at sowing time, compensating for the effect of the climatic change (regionally cooler and wetter climate in the seventeenth century, Rácz, 2020). Thus, rye (Secale sp.) and barley (Hordeum sp.) dominated. At the same time, barley (Hordeum sp.) also dominated in the grains recovered from Esztergom castle (Gyulai, 2001, 2010; Hartyányi et al., 1967/1968; Torma, 1996a), alongside the absolute dominance of millet, which is essential for feeding the common soldiers and less sensitive to growing conditions. A total of 12 remains of common millet (Panicum miliaceum) were found in the excavated section of the moat in Szigetvár. This is probably related to the prominent position of the türbe, as official, prominent Ottoman personalities have not been served millet dishes up, which were probably consumed by the permanent military guards of the türbe and/or the staff serving in the türbe.

4.4 Plant Use in the Vicinity of the Türbe

The high species and the individual number of certain plant species deriving from crops, weeds, and the near-natural vegetation may provide significant information about the former agricultural activities, and habitats surrounding the settlement. Based on the ecological needs of weeds, we can separate different floral categories (Behre, 1988), which provide information on habitat types (Table 6).

Table 6

Identified species, their habitat, and utilization

Taxon Category Habitat Utilization Total number
Hordeum vulgare Cereal Arable land Bread, porridge 3
Hordeum vulgare L. var. polystichon Haller Cereal Arable land Bread, porridge 90
Cerealia fragm. Cereal Arable land Bread, porridge 241
Panicum miliaceum Cereal Arable land Bread, porridge 12
Secale cereale Cereal Arable land Bread, porridge 61
Triticum aestivum/nudum/turgidum Cereal Arable land Bread 16
Triticum sp. Cereal Arable land Bread, porridge 2
Brassica nigra Leguminous, oil, fibre plants and herbs Vegetable garden Spice, tradicional medicince plant 27
Lens culinaris Leguminous, oil, fibre plants and herbs Vegetable garden Food, cooking 2
Linum usitatissimum Leguminous, oil, fibre plants and herbs Vegetable garden Oil, textile plant, traditional medicine plant 1
Pisum sativum Leguminous, oil, fibre plants, and herbs Vegetable garden Food, cooking 4
Papaver somniferum Leguminous, oil, fibre plants and herbs Vegetable garden Traditional medicince plant 1
Pastinaca sativa Leguminous, oil, fibre plants, and herbs Vegetable garden Food, traditional medicine plant 1
Prunus avium/cerasus Fruit Orchard Fruit, refreshing, brandy 32
Prunus cf. domestica Fruit Orchard fruit, brandy 3
Corylus avellana Fruit Orchard Fruit 3
Juglans regia Fruit Orchard Fruit, oil 1
Vitis vinifera Fruit Viticulture Fruit, refreshing, wine, and spirit of wine 37
Agrostemma githago Weed Arable land Toxic weed 2
Bromus arvensis Weed Arable land Weed 3
Bromus secalinus Weed Arable land Weed 2
Carduus nutans Weed Ruderal Weed, traditional medicinal plant 7
Centaurea cyanus Weed Ruderal Weed, traditional medicinal plant 2
Chelidonium majus Weed Ruderal Weed, traditional medicinal plant 2,949
Chenopodium album Weed Ruderal Weed, hunger bred, traditional medicinal plant 302
Chenopodium hybridum Weed Ruderal Weed 75
Chenopodium murale Weed Ruderal Weed 7
Datura staronium Weed Ruderal Toxic weed, traditional medicinal plant from the New World(!) 150
Descurainia sophia Weed ruderal Toxic weed, traditional medicinal plant from the New World(!) 18
Fallopia convolvulus Weed Ruderal Toxic weed 3
Galium aparine Weed Ruderal Weed, traditional medicinal plant 1
Galium spurium Weed Ruderal, arable land Weed 4
Glaucium corniculatum Weed Ruderal Weed 1
Hyoscyamus niger Weed Ruderal Weed, traditional and medicinal plant 2
Lolium temulentum Weed Arable land Weed 5
Leonurus cardiaca Weed Ruderal, arable land Weed, traditional medicinal plant 1
Malva pusilla Weed Ruderal Weed, traditional medicinal plant 1
Picris hieracioides Weed Ruderal Weed, traditional medicinal plant 16
Polygonum aviculare agg. weed Ruderal Weed, traditional medicinal plant 2
Polygonum lapatifolium weed Ruderal Weed, traditional medicinal plant 1
Portulaca oleracea weed Ruderal Weed, traditional medicinal plant 78
Sambucus ebulus Weed Ruderal Toxic weed 4,610
Sambucus nigra Weed Ruderal Fruit, medicinal plant 23,578
Setaria glauca Weed Ruderal Poultry food 3
Setaria viridis/verticillata Weed Ruderal Poultry food 3
Sinapis arvensis Weed Ruderal Oil and soap plant, traditional medicinal plant 10
Solanum nigrum Weed Ruderal Toxic weed 1
Spergula arvensis Weed Ruderal Poultry food 3
Stachys annua Weed Ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 1
Stellaria media Weed Ruderal Poultry food, traditional medicinal plant 17
Urtica dioica Weed Ruderal Poultry food, traditional medicinal plant 6
Eleocharis palustris Weed Wet ruderal Weed 2
Carex vulpina Weed Wet ruderal Textile plant 4
Schoenoplectus lacustris Weed Wet ruderal Weed 1
Solanum dulcamara Weed Ruderal Toxic weed 1
Alisma plantago-aquatica Weed Wet ruderal Weed 1
Carex flacca Weed Wet ruderal Textile plant 2
Carex hirta Weed Wet ruderal Textile plant 1
Barbarea stricta Weed Ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 1
Myosoton aquaticum Weed Wet ruderal Toxic weed 5
Ranunculus repens Weed Wet ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 1
Chenopodium polyspermum Weed Wet ruderal Weed 9
Chrysanthemum leucanthemum Weed Wet ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 1
Carex distans Weed Wet ruderal Textile plant, traditional medicinal plant 2
Betula pendula Natural and ornamental vegetation Forest, river bank Natural – ornamental and traditional medicinal tree 7
Fragaria vesca Natural vegetation Open woodland, forest edge Gathered natural and traditional medicinal plant 3
Picea abies Natural and ornamental vegetation Dry and wet forest Natural – ornamental and traditional medicinal tree 2
Prunus spinosa Natural vegetation Open woodland, forest edge Traditional medicinal tree and brandy 1
Rubus fruticosus Natural vegetation Open woodland, forest edge, ruderal Gathered natural and traditional medicinal plant 2
Veronica hederifolia Weed Ruderal Traditional medicince plant 1
Prunella vulgaris Weed Ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 1
Calamintha acinos Weed Wet ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 1
Lamium amplexicaule Weed Ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 2
Medicago minima Natural vegetation Meadow and ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 1
Plantago lanceolata Weed Ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 1
Ranunculus bulbosus Weed Ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 1
Rumex crispus Weed Ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 1
Trifolium repens Natural vegetation Meadow and ruderal Traditional medicinal plant 1

Besides the remains of cereals, the seeds of opium poppy (Papaver somniferum), lentil (Lens culinaris), pea (Pisum sativum), black mustard (Brassica nigra), flax (Linum usitatissimum), and parsnip (Pastinaca sativa) appeared as well, indicating horticulture (Behre, 1988; Jacomet & Kreuz, 1999; Jacomet, 2006). Legumes have been cultivated since the Neolithic in the Carpathian Basin (Gyulai, 2010), and their presence supposes an advanced farming activity and indicates the existence of a well-developed horticulture (Galluzzi, Eyzaguirre, & Negri, 2010). Parsnips could be consumed as roots and herbs (Asif, 2015; Leach, 1982).

Among fruits sweet cherry/sour cherry (Prunus avium/cerasus), plum (Prunus domestica), and walnut (Juglans regia) remain turned up in the moat of the tomb. Although walnut (Juglans regia) and hazelnut (Corylus avellana) grow in many forests of the Carpathian Basin and south-eastern Europe (Bottema, 2000; Pollegioni et al., 2017), they were already maintained and colonized in gardens in the late Medieval period and early modern ages (Islam, 2018).

Based on the historical records (Table 1) the production of cherry was likely in the vicinity of the tomb. Strawberry (Fragaria vesca), European blackberry (Rubus fruticosus), blackthorn (Prunus spinosa), and hazelnut (Corylus avellana) grow in open woodlands, and forest edges (Table 6) and were present in different parts of Europe and the Carpathian basin in the seventeenth century (Gyulai, 2010; Torma, 2003; Sánchez-Pardo, Marron, & Țiplic, 2020).

In addition to crops, a significant number of weed plant remains occurred as well. Based on weeds indicating the cultivation of winter cereals, ploughed lands were created and cereals were cultivated in the vicinity of the tomb and the pilgrim town. Weeds indicating ruderal areas appeared as well, such as field brome (Bromus arvensis), rye brome (Bromus secalinus), nodding thistle (Carduus nutans), hairy crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis), cleavers (Galium aparine) and red horned poppy (Glaucium corniculatum; Ujvári, 1957). All of the cereal weeds excavated in the moat of the tomb are considered obligatory weeds (Scholz, 1996). Among cereal weeds, the presence of corn-cockle is of great importance (Humphry, Mortimer, & Marrs, 2001; Spahillari, Hammer, Gladis, & Diederichsen, 1999; Rösch et al., 2014), which fully adapted to cereals (Radosevich, Holt, & Ghersa, 1997). Its saponin content (Holzner, 1982) can cause severe poisoning (Hanley & Whiting, 2005) if it gets into the flour, so it had to be separated from cereal grains.

In addition to cereal weeds, weed seeds of spring-sowing plants (Colledge et al., 2004; Hyvönen, Ketoja, & Salonen, 2003; Ujvári, 1957) appeared as well, such as darnel (Lolium temulentum) and corn spurry (Spergula arvensis; Behre, 2008; Pelling et al., 2015). At the same time, darnel (Lolium temulentum) appeared in rye, wheat, and flax fields in the Carpathian Basin, before mechanization and the use of chemical pesticides. The same characterizes corn spurry (Spergula arvensis); it appears together with spring cereals (Chamanabad, Ghorbani, Asghari, Tulikov, & Zargarzadeh, 2009; New, 1961).

Most summer weeds appear in ruderal and trampled areas as well, such as thorn apple (Datura stramonium), black henbane (Hyoscyamus niger), and nettle-leaved goosefoot (Chenopodium murale; Kreuz, Colledge, & Conolly, 2007; Rösch, Fischer, & Märkle, 2005; Spengler, 2019; Ujvári, 1957). Moreover, some weeds exist in ploughed lands, such as maple-leaved goosefoot (Chenopodium hybridum), hooked bristlegrass (Setaria viridis/verticillata), yellow foxtail (Setaria glauca), and white goosefoot (Chenopodium album) The two latter grow in ruderal areas as well (Behre, 2008; Wallace & Charles, 2013). So, ploughed lands and ruderal areas cannot be distinguished based on weeds, as they occur in both areas of human impact (Lundkvist, 2009; Möhler, 2004). One of the decisive factors in the development of these weeds is their light demand (Möhler, 2004). They exist in habitats characterized by open vegetation and in areas of human impact to different degrees as well.

Datura stramonium is commonly known as thorn apple which originated in Latin America (Singh & Singh, 2013). It was probably introduced to the Carpathian Basin by the Ottoman people based on the data available up to the seventeenth century (Kubinyi, 1842). At the same time, the archaeobotanical analysis of the plant was first carried out in the Carpathian Basin by Ferenc Gyulai and Árpád Kenéz, who analysed more than 55,000 remains from seven sites (Gyulai & Kenéz, 2018). Sporadic remains from the Early Bronze Age (Bell Beaker Culture), late Iron Age (Celtic culture), and Migration period (Sarmatian culture) suggest that the plant grew in the Carpathian Basin long before the first American introductions. A great amount, about 55,000 seeds of thorn apple (Datura stramonium), was found in a sixteenth- to seventeenth-century room in the castle of Hollókő, among the ruins. This not only raises but also confirms its conscious use (Gyulai & Kenéz, 2018).

Black henbane (Hyoscyamus niger) is a poisonous weed, all parts of the plant are toxic, especially its root and seed, but organic cultures and folk medicine used it in very small quantities, as a tranquilizer and painkiller, and in the case of rheumatism, spasm, and neural problems (Carter, 1996; Fatur, 2019, 2020; Fenwick & Omura, 2015; Gyulai & Kenéz, 2018; Long, Milburn, Bunting, & Tipping, 1999; Van den Berg, 2008; Van der Veen & Morales, 2015). Chenopodiaceae and Setaria taxa are also considered to be weeds nowadays but have been used by organic agriculture for feeding and grazing animals and as green manure. Thus, their appearance raises several land use possibilities in the study site, from horticulture to ploughed lands and trampled, ruderal areas (Bakels, 1999; Behre, 2008; Charles, Bogaard, Jones, Hodgson, & Halstead, 2002; Latalowa, Badura, & Jarosińska, 2003; Wallace & Charles, 2013). Regarding the number of weed seeds, the mass of seeds belongs to ruderal species indicating trampled areas, roads, and settlements (Lapteva & Korona, 2012; McPartland & Hegman, 2018), for example, motherwort (Leorunus cardiac), common knotgrass (Polygonum aviculare), and hawkweed oxtongue (Picris hieracioides).

The dominant species in the profile, greater celandine (Chelidonium majus), European dwarf elderberry (Sambucus ebulus), and European black elderberry (Sambucus nigra), of which thousands of remains were identified, prefer nutrient-rich, fresh habitats, such as the banks of the moat of the tomb. European black elderberry (Sambucus nigra) and greater celandine (Chelidonium majus) were gathered as well. In addition, greater celandine (Chelidonium majus) was a known herbal drug (Sárközi, Janicsak, Kursinszki, & Kery, 2006), while the fruit and flower of European black elderberry (Sambucus nigra) were consumed as herbal tea (Akbulut, Ercisli, & Tosun, 2009; Porter & Bode, 2017).

Several weed species refer to the presence of vineyards and orchards, such as the remains of hairy crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis), common purslane (Portulaca oleracea), common chickweed (Stellaria media), and dwarf mallow (Malva pusilla; Beneš et al., 2002; Poldini, Oriolo, & Mazzolini, 1998; Weiss & Kislev, 2004).

Among the archaeobotanical remains of near-natural vegetation elements, we can find plants that dominate in waterfront areas, floodplains, and wet ditches, such as common spikerush (Eleocharis palustris), true fox sedge (Carex vulpina), common club-rush (Schoenoplectus lacustris), European water-plantain (Alisma plantago aquatica), and blue sedge (Carex flacca). Several of these species exist in ruderal areas as well, for example, giant chickweed (Myosoton aquaticus) or small-flowered winter cress (Barbarea stricta; Hosch & Jacomet, 2001; Šoštarić & Küster, 2001).

The number of meadow species is low. This includes Carex distans (Distant sedge), which is a tolerant species to habitat and can be found in both floodplain vegetation and as a ruderal weed (Cappers, 1993; Nieuwhof, 2006; Święta-Musznicka & Latałowa, 2016). In addition, oxeye daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum) and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens) exist in floodplain, ruderal, and inhabited areas as well (Gyulai, Hertelendi, & Szabó, 1992; Henriksen & Robinson, 1996; Latalowa et al., 2003; Sillasoo, 2006). These plants were able to survive in shallow and periodically drying waters, including swamps, and puddles, and as a result, it can be assumed that the moat was wet for at least a part of the year during the seventeenth century.

The remains of birch (Betula sp.) and spruce (Picea abies) may indicate the presence of planted and artificially maintained forest patches or groves, possibly rows of trees or scattered trees near the moat (Beck, Caudullo, de Rigo, & Tinner, 2016; Kovačić & Nikolić, 2005; Šímová et al., 2019; Wistuba, Malik, Gärtner, Kojs, & Owczarek, 2013). The presence of both species is not typical on south-facing slopes at low elevation, which is warmer during summer and is in contradiction to their ecological needs. Moreover, spruce favours altitudes of 800 m above sea level and exists on the northern hillsides in the Carpathian Basin (Beck et al., 2016; Latałowa & van der Knaap, 2006; Šímová et al., 2019). As a result, both plants were probably planted in the Szigetvár – Turbék Vineyard Hill site in the seventeenth century, and it cannot be ruled out that their presence may have been related to the function of the memorial place and the pilgrim town (Alavijeh, 2012). It is possible that coniferous charcoals that could not be identified to the genus level belong to the Picea genus as well.

5 Summary

Based on written resources and our archaeobotanical and anthracological data, we could reconstruct the vegetation in the vicinity of the Ottoman memorial place for the seventeenth century. The agricultural utilization of the larger area was subordinated to food security. The composition of weed vegetation, cereals, and fruit remains implies active human presence, inhabited settlements, gardens, orchards, ploughed lands, and pasturelands. At the same time, it should be noted that according to the agricultural perception of nowadays, a significant proportion of plants classified as weeds today have been widely used by medieval cultures, for food, animal feeding, traditional (folk) therapies, including Islamic medical therapies. The results of archaeobotanical and charcoal data coincide with the reconstructed erosion-accumulation events (Gulyás et al., 2022). The ransack of the site during the winter campaign of 1664, the re-occupation of the site in 1689/90, and the final destruction of the türbe in 1692 appeared in both the archaeobotanical and anthracological, and the detailed sedimentological–geochemical analyses (Gulyás et al., 2022), supporting the written historical records.

Acknowledgements

Geoarchaeological investigations have been implemented by members of the University of Szeged, Interdisciplinary Excellence Centre, Institute of Geography and Earth Sciences, Long Environmental Changes Research Team. Support of Grants 20391-3/2018/FEKUSTRAT, GINOP-2.3.2-15-2016-00009 ‘ICER’ (and NKFIH 129265) are acknowledged by the European Union and the State of Hungary, Ministry of Human Capacities, co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund.

  1. Funding information: This research was funded by Grants 20391-3/2018/FEKUSTRAT and GINOP-2.3.2-15-2016-00009 “ICER” (and NKFIH 129265) by the European Union and the State of Hungary, Ministry of Human Capacities, co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund.

  2. Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and consented to its submission to the journal, reviewed all the results and approved the final version of the manuscript. A.T. – data Analysis. K.N. – data analysis; writing, review, and editing; visualization. S.G. – review and editing. P.S. – supervisor.

  3. Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.

  4. Data availability statement: The data sets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

Akbulut, M., Ercisli, S., & Tosun, M. (2009). Physico-chemical characteristics of some wild grown European elderberry (Sambucus nigra L.) genotypes. Pharmacognosy Magazine, 5(20), 320.10.4103/0973-1296.58153Search in Google Scholar

Alavijeh, A. Z. (2012). Manifestation of plant, tree and human in Asian mythology. International Conference on Humanity, History and Society, IPEDR, 34, 180–183.Search in Google Scholar

Andrásfalvy, B. (1961). Pehmez. Data for our knowledge of our Osman viticulture. Dunántúli Tudományos Intézet Kiadványa, Kisebb tanulmányok, 87–95. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

[Archival document]. (1604–1891). Somogy County Archive Contracts 1789 (Hungarian National Archives), Kaposvár, Hungary.Search in Google Scholar

[Archival document]. (1692). Urbaria et Conscriptiones 50: 57; 8 (Hungarian National Archives), Budapest, Hungary.Search in Google Scholar

[Archival document]. (1692). Urbaria et Conscriptiones 136: 30; 3 (Hungarian National Archives), Budapest, Hungary.Search in Google Scholar

[Archival document]. (1693). Hoffinanz Ungarn W2279 (Hungarian National Archives), Budapest, Hungary.Search in Google Scholar

[Archival document]. (1717–1734). Prothocollum Parochia Magno Szigethana No. 1774 (Szigetvár Presbytery), Szigetvár, Hungary.Search in Google Scholar

[Archival document]. (1720). Urbaria et Conscriptiones 66: 21; 1 (Hungarian National Archives), Budapest, Hungary.Search in Google Scholar

[Archival document]. (1738). Prothocollum Parochia Magno Szigethana No. 1774 (Szigetvár Presbytery), Szigetvár, Hungary.Search in Google Scholar

[Archival document]. (1747). Urbaria et Conscriptiones 94: 30; 5 (Hungarian National Archives), Budapest, Hungary.Search in Google Scholar

Asif, M. (2015). Pharmacological activities and phytochemistry of various plant containing coumarin derivatives. Current Science Perspectives, 1(3), 77–90.Search in Google Scholar

Asouti, E. (2003). Woodland vegetation and fuel exploitation at the prehistoric campsite of Pinarbasi, south-central Anatolia, Turkey: The evidence from the wood charcoal macro remains. Journal of Archaeological Science, 30, 1185–1201.10.1016/S0305-4403(03)00015-3Search in Google Scholar

Asouti, E., & Austin, P. (2005). Reconstructing woodland vegetation and its exploitation by past societies, based on the analysis and interpretation of archaeological wood charcoal macro-remains. Environmental Archaeology, 10, 1–18.10.1179/146141005790083867Search in Google Scholar

Bakels, C. (1999). Archaeobotanical investigations in the Aisne valley, northern France, from the Neolithic up to the early Middle Ages. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 8(1–2), 71–77.10.1007/BF02042844Search in Google Scholar

Bartosiewicz, L. (1995). Cattle trade across the Danube at Vác, Hungary. Anthropozoologica, 21, 189–196.Search in Google Scholar

Beck, P., Caudullo, G., de Rigo, D., & Tinner, W. (2016). Betula pendula, Betula pubescens and other birches in Europe: distribution, habitat, usage and threats. In J. San-Miguel-Ayanz, D. de Rigo, G. Caudullo, T. Houston Durrant, & A. Mauri (Eds.), European atlas of forest tree species (pp. 70–73). Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European.Search in Google Scholar

Beneš, J., Kaštovský, J., Kočárová, R., Kočár, P., Kubečková, K., Pokorný, P., & Starec, P. (2002). Archaeobotany of the Old Prague Town defence system, Czech Republic: Archaeology, macro-remains, pollen, and diatoms. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 11(1–2), 107–120.10.1007/s003340200012Search in Google Scholar

Behre, K. E. (1988). The role of man in European vegetation history. In B. Huntley & T. Webb III (Eds.), Vegetation history (pp. 633–672). Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-94-009-3081-0_17Search in Google Scholar

Behre, K. E. (2008). Collected seeds and fruits from herbs as prehistoric food. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 17(1), 65–73.10.1007/s00334-007-0106-xSearch in Google Scholar

Bottema, S. (2000). The Holocene history of walnut, sweet-chestnut, manna-ash and plane tree in the Eastern Mediterranean. Pallas, 52, 35–59.Search in Google Scholar

Cappers, R. T. (1993). Seed dispersal by water: A contribution to the interpretation of seed assemblages. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 2(3), 173–186.10.1007/BF00198588Search in Google Scholar

Cappers, R. T. J. (2006). The reconstruction of agricultural practices in ancient Egypt: an ethnoarchaeobotanical approach. Palaeohistoria, 47(48), 429–446.Search in Google Scholar

Capra, G. F., Ganga, A., Grilli, E., Vacca, S., & Buondonno, A. (2015). A review on anthropogenic soils from a worldwide perspective. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 15(7), 1602–1618.10.1007/s11368-015-1110-xSearch in Google Scholar

Carter, A. J. (1996). Narcosis and nightshade. BMJ, 313, 1630–1632.10.1136/bmj.313.7072.1630Search in Google Scholar

Chabal, L., Fabre, L., Terral, J. F., & Théry-Parisot, I. (1999). L’Anthracologie. In C. Bourquin-Mignot, J. E. Brochier, L. Chabal et al. (Eds.), La botanique (pp. 43–104). London: Sweet and Maxwell.Search in Google Scholar

Charles, M., Bogaard, A., Jones, G., Hodgson, J., & Halstead, P. (2002). Towards the archaeobotanical identification of intensive cereal cultivation: present-day ecological investigation in the mountains of Asturias, northwest Spain. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 11(1–2), 133–142.10.1007/s003340200015Search in Google Scholar

Chamanabad, H. M., Ghorbani, A., Asghari, A., Tulikov, A. M., & Zargarzadeh, F. (2009). Long-term effects of crop rotation and fertilizers on weed community in spring barley. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 33(4), 315–323.10.3906/tar-0712-47Search in Google Scholar

Cywa, K. (2018). Trees and shrubs used in medieval Poland for making everyday objects. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 27(1), 111–136.10.1007/s00334-017-0644-9Search in Google Scholar

Colledge, S., Conolly, J., & Shennan, S. (2004). Archaeobotanical evidence for the spread of farming in the Eastern Mediterranean. Current Anthropology, 45(4), 35–58.10.1086/422086Search in Google Scholar

Cossani, C. M., Savin, R., & Slafer, G. A. (2007). Contrasting performance of barley and wheat in a wide range of conditions in Mediterranean Catalonia (Spain). Annals of Applied Biology, 151(2), 167–173.10.1111/j.1744-7348.2007.00177.xSearch in Google Scholar

Çelebi, E., Dankoff, R., Kahraman, S. A., Dağlı, Y., Kurşun, Z., & Sezgin, İ. (2003). Evliya çelebi seyahatnamesi. Topkapı Sarayı Kütüphanesi Bağdat 308 numaralı yazmanın transkripsiyonu (Vol. 7). Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.Search in Google Scholar

Deforce, K. (2017). Wood use in a growing medieval city. The overexploitation of woody resources in Ghent (Belgium) between the 10th and 12th century AD. Quaternary International, 458, 123–133.10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.059Search in Google Scholar

Égető, M. (1993). The history of peasant viticulture and winemaking on the Great Hungarian Plain from Middle Age to until the middle of the last century. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Search in Google Scholar

Fatur, K. (2019). Sagas of the Solanaceae: Speculative ethnobotanical perspectives on the Norse berserkers. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 244, 112151.10.1016/j.jep.2019.112151Search in Google Scholar

Fatur, K. (2020). “Hexing herbs” in ethnobotanical perspective: A historical review of the uses of anticholinergic Solanaceae plants in Europe. Economic Botany, 74, 140–158. doi: 10.1007/s12231-020-09498-w.Search in Google Scholar

Faust M. & Surányi D. (1999). Origin and dissemination of plums. Horticultural Reviews, 23, 179–231.10.1002/9780470650752.ch4Search in Google Scholar

Fekete, L. (1993). In the footsteps of the Turkish archival sources of Osman Submission. Budapest Orientál Reprints, Körösi Csoma Társaság – MTA Könyvtára, Budapest. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Fenwick, R. S., & Omura, S. (2015). Smoke in the eyes? Archaeological evidence for medicinal henbane fumigation at Ottoman Kaman-Kalehöyük, Kırşehir Province, Turkey. Antiquity, 89(346), 905–921.10.15184/aqy.2015.56Search in Google Scholar

Figueiral, I., Bouby, L., Buffat, L., Petitot, H., & Terral, J. F. (2010). Archaeobotany, vine growing and wine producing in Roman Southern France: the site of Gasquinoy (Béziers, Hérault). Journal of Archaeological Science, 371, 139–149.10.1016/j.jas.2009.09.024Search in Google Scholar

Fodor, P. (1998). Turkish politics in Hungary between 1520 and 1541. In G.P. Tóth (Ed.), Veszprém town in Osman period. Felolvasóülés Veszprém török kori emlékeiről (pp 7–16). Veszprémi Múzeumi Konferenciák 9, Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok Igazgatósága, Veszprém: Laczkó Dezső Múzeum Kiadványa. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Fodor, P. (2020). Turbek, Sultan Süleyman’s pilgrim town in Szigetvár in Ottoman Turkish written sources during the 16th-17th centuries. Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Research Centre for the Humanities. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Füzes, F. M. (1972). Preliminary report about cereal remains from monastry excavation at Pogányszentpéter during early 16 century. Thúry György Múzeum Évkönyve, Nagykanizsa, 285–290. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Galluzzi, G., Eyzaguirre, P., & Negri, V. (2010). Home gardens: Neglected hotspots of agro-biodiversity and cultural diversity. Biodiversity and Conservation, 19(13), 3635–3654.10.1007/s10531-010-9919-5Search in Google Scholar

Grabowski, R. (2011). Changes in cereal cultivation during the Iron Age in southern Sweden: a compilation and interpretation of the archaeobotanical material. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 20(5), 479–494.10.1007/s00334-011-0283-5Search in Google Scholar

Gulyás, S., Torma, A., Pap, N., Fodor, P., Kitanics, M., Gyenizse, P., … Sümegi, P. (2022). tackling erosion-accumulation events in a moat sequence from a unique Ottoman memorial place (Szigetvár, SW Hungary) using 14C and geoarcheological data. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 14(28), 1–12.10.1007/s12520-021-01479-xSearch in Google Scholar

Gyulai, F. (2001). Archaeobotanika (p. 221). Budapest: Jószöveg Mûhely Kiadó.Search in Google Scholar

Gyulai, F. (2010). Archaeobotany in Hungary. Seed, fruit, food and beverages remains in the Carpathian basin: an archaeobotanical investigation of plant cultivation and ecology from the Neolithic until the late Middle Ages. Budapest: Archaeolingua.Search in Google Scholar

Gyulai, F., Hertelendi, E., & Szabó, I. (1992). Plant remains from the early medieval lakeshore settlement Fonyód-Bélatelep (Lake Balaton, Hungary) with especial emphasis on the history of fruit cultivation in Pannonia. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 1(3), 177–184.10.1007/BF00191557Search in Google Scholar

Gyulai, F., Emődi, A., Mravcsik, Z., & Pósa, P. (2013). Reconstruction of the modern agri-cultural and cultural environment on the example of the excavations at Sárospatak. Gesta, 13, 67–71. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Gyulai, F., & Kenéz, Á. (2018). Tudatmódosító növények a hazai régészeti-növénytani anyagban. In Á. Pető & Á. Kenéz (Eds.), Régészeti növénytan: leletek, módszerek és értelmezés: Archaeobotanikai kézikönyv (pp. 73–87). Budapest: Archeolingua Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hæggström, C. A. (1992). Wooded meadows and the use of deciduous trees for fodder, fuel, carpentry and building purposes. Protoindustries et histoire des forêts. GDR ISARD-CNRS Les Cahiers de l’Isard, 3, 151–162.Search in Google Scholar

Hancz, E. (2014). Nagy Szulejmán szultán Szigetvár környéki sátorhelye, halála es síremléke az oszmán írott forrásokban. [I. Sultan Suleyman’s tent site, death and tomb around Szigetvar (Hungary) in Osman written sources.] (55-71). In N. Pap (Ed.), Szülejmán szultán emlékezete Szigetváron. [Sultan Suleyman’s memory in Szigetvar (Hungary).] (in Hungarian and Turkish).Search in Google Scholar

Hanley, M. E., & Whiting, M. D. (2005). Insecticides and arable weeds: effects on germination and seedling growth. Ecotoxicology, 14(4), 483–490.10.1007/s10646-004-1353-6Search in Google Scholar

Hegyi, K. (1976). On the fringes of a world empire. Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Henriksen, P. S., & Robinson, D. (1996) Early Iron Age agriculture: Archaeobotanical evidence from an underground granary at Overbygrd in northern Jutland, Denmark. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 5(1–2), 1–11.10.1007/BF00189430Search in Google Scholar

Holzner, W. (1982). Concepts, categories and characteristics of weeds. In W. Holzner, & M. Numata (Eds.), Biology and ecology of weeds (pp. 3–20). Hague: Geobotany 2.10.1007/978-94-017-0916-3_1Search in Google Scholar

Hosch, S. & Jacomet, S. (2001). New aspects of archaeobotanical research in central European Neolithic lake dwelling sites. Environmental Archaeology, 6(1), 59–71.10.1179/146141001790523204Search in Google Scholar

Humphry, R. W., Mortimer, M., & Marrs, R. H. (2001). The effect of plant density on the response of Agrostemma githago to herbicide. Journal of Applied Ecology, 38(6), 1290–1302.10.1046/j.0021-8901.2001.00681.xSearch in Google Scholar

Hyvönen, T., Ketoja, E., & Salonen, J. (2003). Changes in the abundance of weeds in spring cereal fields in Finland. Weed Research, 43(5), 348–356.10.1046/j.1365-3180.2003.00351.xSearch in Google Scholar

Ilon, G., Grynaeus, A., & Torma, A. (2007). About the research of the Osman Age palanquin in Szentgotthárd. (Über die Forschung der türkenzeitlichen Plankeburg von Szentgotthárd. Archäologische, botanische und dendrochronologische). Savaria, 31, 307–328. (in Hungarian with German summary).Search in Google Scholar

Imreh, I. (1999). The memory of our Transylvanian ancestors (1550-1850) social and economic history studies. Budapest: Telek László Alapítvány. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Islam, A. (2018). Hazelnut culture in Turkey. Akademik Ziraat Dergisi, 7(21), 259–266.10.29278/azd.476665Search in Google Scholar

Jacomet, S. (2006). Identification of cereals remains from archaelogical sites (2nd ed). Archaeobotany Lab, Integrative Prehistoric and Archaeological Science (IPAS). Basel: Basel University.Search in Google Scholar

Jacomet, S., & Kreuz, A. (1999). Archäobotanik. Aufgaben, Methoden und Ergebnisse vegetations- und agrargeschichtlic Forschung. Stuttgart: Verlag Eugen Ulmer.Search in Google Scholar

Káldy-Nagy, Gy. (1985). The censuses of the Sanjah of Buda between 1546 and 1590. Demographic and economic history data from the past of Pest county 6. Budapest: Pest Megyei Levéltár kiadványa. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Keepax, C. A. (1988). Charcoal analysis with particular reference to archaeological sites in Britain. [Doctoral dissertation]. University of London, London, UK.Search in Google Scholar

Kitanics, M. (2014). Szigetvár-Turbék: A szultán temetkezési helye a 17–18. századi magyar, német és latin források tükrében (Szigetvár-Turbék: location of the sultan’s burial site inferred from written Hungarian, German and Latin historical records of the 17–18th century) pp. (91–109). In N. Pap (Ed.), Szulejmán szultán emlékezete Szigetváron. Mediterrán és Balkán Fórum 8.Search in Google Scholar

Kovačić, S., & Nikolić, T. (2005). Relations between Betula pendula Roth (Betulaceae) leaf morphology and environmental factors in five regions of Croatia. Acta Biologica Cracoviensia Series Botanica, 47(2), 7–13.Search in Google Scholar

Kreuz, A., & Schäfer, E. (2011). Weed finds as indicators for the cultivation regime of the early Neolithic Bandkeramik culture? Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 20(5), 333. doi: 10.1007/s00334-011-0294-2.Search in Google Scholar

Kreuz, A., Colledge, S., & Conolly, J. (2007). Archaeobotanical perspectives on the beginning of agriculture north of the Alps. In S. Colledge & J. Conolly (Eds.), The origins and spread of domestic plants in southwest Asia and Europe (pp. 259–294). London: Routledge Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kubinyi, Á. (1842). Magyarországi mérges növények. Buda: Magyarországi Királyi Egyetem.Search in Google Scholar

Lapteva, E. G., & Korona, O. M. (2012). Holocene vegetation changes and anthropogenic influence in the forest-steppe zone of the Southern Trans-Urals based on pollen and plant macrofossil records from the Sukharysh cave. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 21(4–5), 321–336.10.1007/s00334-011-0333-zSearch in Google Scholar

Latałowa, M., & van der Knaap, W. O. (2006). Late Quaternary expansion of Norway spruce Picea abies (L.) Karst. in Europe according to pollen data. Quaternary Science Reviews, 25(21–22), 2780–2805.10.1016/j.quascirev.2006.06.007Search in Google Scholar

Latalowa, M., Badura, M., & Jarosińska, J. (2003). Archaeobotanical samples from non-specific urban contexts as a tool for reconstructing environmental conditions (examples from Elbląg and Kołobrzeg, northern Poland). Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 12(2), 93–104.10.1007/s00334-003-0011-xSearch in Google Scholar

Lászlófalvi Velics, A., & Kammerer, E. (1886). Hungarian Turkish treasury ledgers I. 1543-1635 (p. 526). Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Lászlófalvi Velics, A., & Kammerer, E. (1890). Hungarian Turkish treasury ledgers II. 1543-1635 (p. 770). Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Leach, H. M. (1982). On the origins of kitchen gardening in the ancient Near East. Garden History, 10(1), 1–16.10.2307/1586849Search in Google Scholar

Lempiäinen-Avci, M., Haggrén, G., Rosendahl, U., Knuutinen, T., & Holappa, M. (2017). Archaeobotanical analysis of radiocarbon-dated plant remains with special attention to Secale cereale (rye) cultivation at the medieval village of Mankby in Espoo (Finland). Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 26(4), 435–446.10.1007/s00334-017-0604-4Search in Google Scholar

Long, D. J., Milburn, P., Bunting, M. J., & Tipping, R. (1999). Black Henbane (Hyoscyamus niger L.) in the Scottish Neolithic: A Re-evaluation of Palynological Findings from Grooved Ware Pottery at Balfarg Riding School and Henge, Fife. Journal of Archaeological Science, 26, 45–52.10.1006/jasc.1998.0308Search in Google Scholar

Lundkvist, A. (2009). Effects of pre‐and post‐emergence weed harrowing on annual weeds in peas and spring cereals. Weed Research, 49(4), 409–416.10.1111/j.1365-3180.2009.00718.xSearch in Google Scholar

Marosi, S., & Somogyi, S. (1990). Magyarország kistájainak katasztere I, II. Budapest: MTA Magyar Földrajztudományi Kutató Intézet.Search in Google Scholar

McPartland, J. M., & Hegman, W. (2018). Cannabis utilization and diffusion patterns in prehistoric Europe: A critical analysis of archaeological evidence. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 27(4), 627–634.10.1007/s00334-017-0646-7Search in Google Scholar

Mighall, T., Timpany, S., Wheeler, J., Bailey, L., Bamforth, M., Gray, L., & Taylor, M. (2018). Vegetation changes and woodland management associated with a prehistoric to Medieval burnt mound complex at Ballygawley, Northern Ireland. Environmental Archaeology, 23(3), 267–285.10.1080/14614103.2017.1370856Search in Google Scholar

Molnár, I. (1978). Budina Sámuel históriája, magyarul és latinul Szigetvár 1566. évi ostromáról. – Szigetvári: Szigetvári Várbaráti Kör.Search in Google Scholar

de Moulins, D. (2007). The weeds from the thatch roofs of medieval cottages from the south of England. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 16(5), 385–398.10.1007/s00334-006-0035-0Search in Google Scholar

Möhler, C. L. (2004). Weed life history: Identifying vulnerabilities. In M. Liebman, C. L. Möhler, & C. P. Staver (Eds.), Ecological management of agricultural weeds (pp. 40–98). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511541810.003Search in Google Scholar

Mravcsik, Z., Gyulai, F., Vinogradov, S., Emődi, A., Rovner, I., & Gyulai, G. (2015). Digital seed morphometry for genotype identification–Case study of seeds of excavated (15th century Hungary) and current vinegrape (Vitis v. vinifera) varieties. Acta Botanica Hungarica, 57(1–2), 169–182.10.1556/ABot.57.2015.1-2.13Search in Google Scholar

Murray, H., Murray, J. C., & Lindsay, W. (2009). Medieval timber-lined wells in Elgin. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 139, 213–227.10.9750/PSAS.139.213.227Search in Google Scholar

Náfrádi, K. (2015). Identification and evaluation of charred wood remains derive from archaeological sites in geoarcheological research. [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.Search in Google Scholar

Necipoğlu, G. (1997). The suburban landscape of sixteenth-century Istanbul as a mirror of classical Ottoman garden culture. In A. Petruccioli (Ed.), Gardens in the time of the great Muslim empires: Theory and design (pp. 32–71). Leiden, New York.10.1163/9789004660823_005Search in Google Scholar

Nesbitt, M., & Samuel, D. (1998). Wheat domestication: archaeobotanical evidence. Science, 279, 1431–1431.10.1126/science.279.5356.1431eSearch in Google Scholar

New, J. K. (1961). Biological flora of the British Isles. Spergula arvensis L. Journal of Ecology, 49(1), 205–215.10.2307/2257434Search in Google Scholar

Nieuwhof, A. (2006). Changing landscape and grazing: Macroremains from the terp Peins-east, province of Friesland, the Netherlands. Vegetation history and Archaeobotany, 15(2), 125–136.10.1007/s00334-005-0011-0Search in Google Scholar

Nixon, S., Murray, M. A., & Fuller, D. Q. (2011). Plant use at an early Islamic merchant town in the West African Sahel: The archaeobotany of Essouk-Tadmakka (Mali). Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 20(3), 223–239.10.1007/s00334-010-0279-6Search in Google Scholar

Pap, N. (2019). The Pilgrime Town (Turbe Kasabasi) of Sultan Suleyman at Szigetvar. In P. Fodor (Ed.), Battle for Central Europe: the Siege of Szigetvar and the death of Suleyman the Magnificient and Nicholas Zrinyi (1566) (pp. 539–552). Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Research Centre for the Humanities.10.1163/9789004396234_028Search in Google Scholar

Pap, N., Kitanics, M., Gyenizse, P., Hancz, E., Bognár, Z., Tóth, T., & Hámori, Z. (2015). Finding the tomb of Suleiman the Magnificent in Szigetvár, Hungary: Historical, geophysical and archeological investigations. Die Erde, 146(4), 289–303.Search in Google Scholar

Papp, A., & Gryneus, A. (2011). Chronological Determination of the turk Baths in Budapest. Budapest Régiségei, 44, 259–273.Search in Google Scholar

Pákay, Zs. (1984). Additions to the Osman Age history of the Tapolca and Sümeg districts based on consensus of tax between 1531 and 1696. Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok Közleménye, 17, 233–271. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Pelling, R., Campbell, G., Carruthers, W., Hunter, K., & Marshall, P. (2015). Exploring contamination (intrusion and residuality) in the archaeobotanical record: case studies from central and southern England. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 24(1), 85–99.10.1007/s00334-014-0493-8Search in Google Scholar

Hartyányi, B., Nováki, G., & Patay, Á. (1967/1968). Remains of the plants’ fruits and remains from the Neolithic to the 18. century in Hungary. Magyar Mezőgazdaság Múzeum Közleményei, 1967/68, 5–84. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Hartyányi, B., & Patay, Á. (1970). Examinated of the excavated archeobotanical remains form Dunaföldvár – Öregtorony site (Hungary). Szekszárdi Balogh Ádám Múzeum Évkönyve, 1, 209–222. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Poldini, L., Oriolo, G., & Mazzolini, G. (1998). The segetal vegetation of vineyards and crop fields in Friuli-Venezia Gulia (NE Italy). Studia Geobotanica, 16, 5–32.Search in Google Scholar

Pollegioni, P., Woeste, K., Chiocchini, F., Del Lungo, S., Ciolfi, M., Olimpieri, I., … Malvolti, M. E. (2017). Rethinking the history of common walnut (Juglans regia L.) in Europe: Its origins and human interactions. PloS One, 12(3), e0172541.10.1371/journal.pone.0172541Search in Google Scholar

Pósa, P., Vinogradov, S., & Gyulai, F. (2020). The development of weed vegetation in the Pannonian Basin as seen in the archaeobotanical records. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 18(5), 7431–7444.10.15666/aeer/1805_74317444Search in Google Scholar

Porter, R. S., & Bode, R. F. (2017). A review of the antiviral properties of black elder (Sambucus nigra L.) products. Phytotherapy Research, 31(4), 533–554.10.1002/ptr.5782Search in Google Scholar

Rácz, L. (2020). Carpathian basin–the winner of the little ice age climate changes: long-term time-series analysis of grain, grape and hay harvests between 1500 and 1850. Economic- and Ecohistory, 16(1), 81–96.Search in Google Scholar

Radosevich, S. R., Holt, J. S., & Ghersa, C. (1997). Weed ecology: Implications for management. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Search in Google Scholar

Rinaldi, R., Mazzanti, M. B., & Bosi, G. (2013). Archaeobotany in urban sites: The case of Mutina. Annali di Botanica, 3, 217–230.Search in Google Scholar

Rösch, M., Fischer, E., & Märkle, T. (2005). Human diet and land use in the time of the Khans – Archaeobotanical research in the capital of the Mongolian Empire, Qara Qorum, Mongolia. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 14(4), 485–492.10.1007/s00334-005-0074-ySearch in Google Scholar

Ruzsás, L. & Angyal, E. (1971). Cserenkó és Budina. Századok, 105(1), 57–69. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Sánchez-Pardo, J. C., Marron, E. H., & Țiplic, M. C. (2020). Ecclesiastical Landscapes in Medieval Europe. Oxford: Archeopress.10.2307/j.ctv15vwjrkSearch in Google Scholar

Sárközi, Á., Janicsak, G., Kursinszki, L., & Kery, A. (2006). Alkaloid composition of Chelidonium majus L. studied by different chromatographic techniques. Chromatographia, 63(13), S81–S86.10.1365/s10337-006-0728-7Search in Google Scholar

Scholz, H. (1996). Ursprung und Evolution obligatorischer Unkräuter. Schriften zu Genetischen Ressourcen, 4, 109–129.Search in Google Scholar

Schweingruber, F. H. (1990). Anatomy of European woods: An Atlas for the Identification of European Trees, Shrubs and Dwarf Shrubs/Anatomie Europäischer Hölzer: Ein Atlas zur Bestimmung Europäischer Baum-, Strauch- und Zwergstrauchhölzer. Birmensdorf: Verlag Paul Haup.Search in Google Scholar

Sillasoo, Ü. (2006). Medieval plant depictions as a source for archaeobotanical research. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 16(1), 61–70.10.1007/s00334-006-0036-zSearch in Google Scholar

“Sinan Bey oğlu eski Sadrazam Şehit Mehmet Paşa Vakfı”. (1574). evahir-i Zilhicce/981.; 1574.03.24-04.22 (h.sz. 981). 572 numaralı defter 27 sayfa ve 20. sıra.Search in Google Scholar

Singh, L. R., & Singh, O. M. (2013). Datura stramonium: An overview of its phytochemistry and pharmacognosy. Research Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 5(3), 143–148.Search in Google Scholar

Skoflek, I. (1985). Remains of seeds and fruits from Sümeg-Sarvaly in 16. century. Magyar Mezőgazdasági Múzeum Közleményei, 1984/85(1985), 33–44. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Šímová, A., Pánek, T., Gałka, M., Zernitskaya, V., Hájková, P., Brodska, H., … Hajek, M. (2019). Landslides increased Holocene habitat diversity on a flysch bedrock in the Western Carpathians. Quaternary Science Reviews, 219, 68–83.10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.07.009Search in Google Scholar

Šoštarić, R., & Küster, H. (2001). Roman plant remains from Veli Brijun (island of Brioni), Croatia. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 10(4), 227–233.10.1007/PL00006934Search in Google Scholar

Spahillari, M., Hammer, K., Gladis, T., & Diederichsen, A. (1999). Weeds as part of agrobiodiversity. Outlook on Agriculture, 28(4), 227–232.10.1177/003072709902800405Search in Google Scholar

Spengler, R. N. (2019). Dung burning in the archaeobotanical record of West Asia: where are we now?. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 28(3), 215–227.10.1007/s00334-018-0669-8Search in Google Scholar

Sullivan, P., Arendt, E., & Gallagher, E. (2013). The increasing use of barley and barley by-products in the production of healthier baked goods. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 29(2), 124–134.10.1016/j.tifs.2012.10.005Search in Google Scholar

Sümegi, P., Molnár, D., Náfrádi, K., Páll, D. G., Persaits, G., Sávai, S., & Törőcsik, T. (2016). The environmental history of Southern Transdanubia during the Medieval and the Ottoman Period in the light of palaeoecological and geoarcheological research. In G. Kovács & C. Zatykó (Eds.), Per sylvam et per lacus nimios. The Medieval and Ottoman Perid in Shoutern Transdanubia. Southwest Hungary the Contribution of the Natural Sciences (pp. 15–73). Budapest: Institute of Archaeology Research Centre for the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.Search in Google Scholar

Sümegi, B. P. (2020). A szigetvári Szulejmán türbe palánk északi árkának feltárása és üledékföldtani elemzése (Sedimentological investigations in the moat system of the Suleyman memorial, Szigetvár). In T. Törőcsik, S. Gulyás, D. Molnár, & K. Náfrádi (Eds.), Környezettörténet (pp. 447–454). Szeged: Geolitera Kiadó.Search in Google Scholar

Święta-Musznicka, J., & Latałowa, M. (2016). From wetland to commercial centre: The natural history of Wyspa Spichrzów (“Granary Island”) in medieval Gdańsk, northern Poland. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 25(6), 583–599.10.1007/s00334-016-0578-7Search in Google Scholar

Szakály, F. (1981). Hungarian taxation in the Osman occupation. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Search in Google Scholar

Szilágyi, S. (1895). Transylvanian parliament memories part 18. 1683-1686. Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Kiadványa. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Torma, A. (1996a). Archaeobotanical remains from the Middle Ages. [MSc Thesis]. Pécs University, Pécs, Hungary. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Torma, A. (1996b). Archaeobotanical finds from Medieval Pápa town (Hungary). Pápai Múzeumi Értesítő, 6, 325–328. (in Hungarian).Search in Google Scholar

Torma, A. (2003). Palaeobotanical assembleges from Mediaeval wells in Hungary. Antheus, 26, 245–255.10.2177/jsci.26.245Search in Google Scholar

Ujvári, M. (1957). Gyomnövények, gyomirtás. Budapest: Mezőgazdasági Kiadó.Search in Google Scholar

Van den Berg, M. (2008). A phytochemical analysis of some ancient narcotics, with comparative notes on some South African folk medical practices. [Doctoral dissertation]. North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.Search in Google Scholar

Van der Veen, M., & Morales, J. (2015). The Roman and Islamic spice trade: New archaeological evidence. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 167, 54–63.10.1016/j.jep.2014.09.036Search in Google Scholar

Vass, E. (1993). Szigetvár város és a szigetvári szandzsák jelentősége az Oszmán-Török Birodalomban 1565-1689. In L. Szita (Ed.), Tanulmányok a török hódoltság és a felszabadító háborúk történetéből. – Pécs (pp. 193–217). Habsburg berendezkedési tervek Magyarországon 1688–1689 (Az „Einrichtungswerk").Search in Google Scholar

Vatin, N. (2005). Un türbe sans maître. Note sur la foundation de la destination du türbe de Soliman-le-Magnifique à Szigetvár. Turcica, 37, 9–42.10.2143/TURC.37.0.2011699Search in Google Scholar

Wallace, M., & Charles, M. (2013). What goes in does not always come out: the impact of the ruminant digestive system of sheep on plant material, and its importance for the interpretation of dung-derived archaeobotanical assemblages. Environmental Archeology, 18(1), 18–30.10.1179/1461410313Z.00000000022Search in Google Scholar

Wagner, J. C. (1700). Johann Christoph Wagners Christlichund Türckischer Staedt- und Geschicht-Spiegel. Vorweisend Eine eigentliche Beschreibung aller der vornehmsten Städte, Vestungen und Schlösser der Christenheit und Türckey. Augsburg: Koppmayer.Search in Google Scholar

Weiss, E., & Kislev, M. E. (2004). Weeds & seeds. The Biblical Archaeology Review, 30(6), 32–37.Search in Google Scholar

Wistuba, M., Malik, I., Gärtner, H., Kojs, P., & Owczarek, P. (2013). Application of eccentric growth of trees as a tool for landslide analyses: The example of Picea abies Karst. in the Carpathian and Sudeten Mountains (Central Europe). Catena, 111, 41–55.10.1016/j.catena.2013.06.027Search in Google Scholar

Yeşilada, E., Sezik, E., Honda, G., Takaishi, Y., Takeda, Y., & Tanaka, T. (1999). Traditional medicine in Turkey IX: Folk medicine in north-west Anatolia. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 64(3), 195–210.10.1016/S0378-8741(98)00133-0Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2023-05-02
Revised: 2024-01-23
Accepted: 2024-01-29
Published Online: 2024-04-30

© 2024 the author(s), published by De Gruyter

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Regular Articles
  2. Social Organization, Intersections, and Interactions in Bronze Age Sardinia. Reading Settlement Patterns in the Area of Sarrala with the Contribution of Applied Sciences
  3. Creating World Views: Work-Expenditure Calculations for Funnel Beaker Megalithic Graves and Flint Axe Head Depositions in Northern Germany
  4. Plant Use and Cereal Cultivation Inferred from Integrated Archaeobotanical Analysis of an Ottoman Age Moat Sequence (Szigetvár, Hungary)
  5. Salt Production in Central Italy and Social Network Analysis Centrality Measures: An Exploratory Approach
  6. Archaeometric Study of Iron Age Pottery Production in Central Sicily: A Case of Technological Conservatism
  7. Dehesilla Cave Rock Paintings (Cádiz, Spain): Analysis and Contextualisation within the Prehistoric Art of the Southern Iberian Peninsula
  8. Reconciling Contradictory Archaeological Survey Data: A Case Study from Central Crete, Greece
  9. Pottery from Motion – A Refined Approach to the Large-Scale Documentation of Pottery Using Structure from Motion
  10. On the Value of Informal Communication in Archaeological Data Work
  11. The Early Upper Palaeolithic in Cueva del Arco (Murcia, Spain) and Its Contextualisation in the Iberian Mediterranean
  12. The Capability Approach and Archaeological Interpretation of Transformations: On the Role of Philosophy for Archaeology
  13. Advanced Ancient Steelmaking Across the Arctic European Landscape
  14. Military and Ethnic Identity Through Pottery: A Study of Batavian Units in Dacia and Pannonia
  15. Stations of the Publicum Portorium Illyrici are a Strong Predictor of the Mithraic Presence in the Danubian Provinces: Geographical Analysis of the Distribution of the Roman Cult of Mithras
  16. Rapid Communications
  17. Recording, Sharing and Linking Micromorphological Data: A Two-Pillar Database System
  18. The BIAD Standards: Recommendations for Archaeological Data Publication and Insights From the Big Interdisciplinary Archaeological Database
  19. Corrigendum
  20. Corrigendum to “Plant Use and Cereal Cultivation Inferred from Integrated Archaeobotanical Analysis of an Ottoman Age Moat Sequence (Szigetvár, Hungary)”
  21. Special Issue on Microhistory and Archaeology, edited by Juan Antonio Quirós Castillo
  22. Editorial: Microhistory and Archaeology
  23. Contribution of the Microhistorical Approach to Landscape and Settlement Archaeology: Some French Examples
  24. Female Microhistorical Archaeology
  25. Microhistory, Conjectural Reasoning, and Prehistory: The Treasure of Aliseda (Spain)
  26. On Traces, Clues, and Fiction: Carlo Ginzburg and the Practice of Archaeology
  27. Urbanity, Decline, and Regeneration in Later Medieval England: Towards a Posthuman Household Microhistory
  28. Unveiling Local Power Through Microhistory: A Multidisciplinary Analysis of Early Modern Husbandry Practices in Casaio and Lardeira (Ourense, Spain)
  29. Microhistory, Archaeological Record, and the Subaltern Debris
  30. Two Sides of the Same Coin: Microhistory, Micropolitics, and Infrapolitics in Medieval Archaeology
  31. Special Issue on Can You See Me? Putting the 'Human' Back Into 'Human-Plant' Interaction
  32. Assessing the Role of Wooden Vessels, Basketry, and Pottery at the Early Neolithic Site of La Draga (Banyoles, Spain)
  33. Microwear and Plant Residue Analysis in a Multiproxy Approach from Stone Tools of the Middle Holocene of Patagonia (Argentina)
  34. Crafted Landscapes: The Uggurwala Tree (Ochroma pyramidale) as a Potential Cultural Keystone Species for Gunadule Communities
  35. Special Issue on Digital Religioscapes: Current Methodologies and Novelties in the Analysis of Sacr(aliz)ed Spaces, edited by Anaïs Lamesa, Asuman Lätzer-Lasar - Part I
  36. Rock-Cut Monuments at Macedonian Philippi – Taking Image Analysis to the Religioscape
  37. Seeing Sacred for Centuries: Digitally Modeling Greek Worshipers’ Visualscapes at the Argive Heraion Sanctuary
Downloaded on 5.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/opar-2022-0359/html
Scroll to top button