Archeologické rozhledy

Great Moravian agglomerations: Central places with agricultural hinterlands, local marketplaces, or autarkic settlements oriented towards agricultural primary production?

2026-09-24T14:46:47+00:00

The paper compares various models of the relationship between the Great Moravian central agglomerations (e.g. Mikulčice, Pohansko near Břeclav, Staré Město) and their agricultural hinterland. The first is the traditional model, according to which the centres and the surrounding agricultural settlements were interconnected by a complex hierarchical network, within which the movement of food from the rural hinterland to the centre and the movement of craft products and services from the centre to the countryside took place. There was debate only about the degree of dependence of the agglomerations on the supply of agricultural products and the economic and social principles underlying this transfer. It was primarily a question of whether there was a functional local market in Great Moravia, situated in or around the centres, and whether the relations between rural settlements and centres were primarily based on free market principles. In addition, a group of scholars argues that the Great Moravian agglomerations were essentially autarkic in terms of their subsistence and did not need any agricultural hinterland, or even argued that such a hinterland did not exist at all. The paper reflects on the genesis of these interpretive models and tries to assess their plausibility.

A few notes in the defence of the Great Moravian market system

2026-09-24T14:48:44+00:00

The recent text by J. Macháček (2026) attempts to review the debate concerning the nature of the relationship between Great Moravian centres and their hinterlands. Among other points, it also criticises the model of the Great Moravian market system that I originally developed as part of the wider economic, geographic, and political model of the Great Moravian polity (Hlavica 2023). In the following text, I will analyse Macháček’s key arguments and highlight the problematic conclusions on which he bases his position. Additionally, I will point to the grounding of the author’s criticism in an incomplete understanding of certain economic and anthropological concepts. My primary aim is to demonstrate that his criticism of the Great Moravian market model is insufficient to warrant its rejection.

The environmental perspective of the relationship between Great Moravian centres and their hinterland

2026-09-24T14:49:45+00:00

The paper presents a critical review of the interpretative model of the relationship between Great Moravian centres and their hinterland formulated by Jiří Macháček (2026), from an environmental and empirically based perspective. Based primarily on archaeobotanical analyses of the Mikulčice-Valy site, supplemented by archaeozoological data and new findings from settlements in the broader hinterland of the centre, the work endeavours to refine the methodological foundations of archaeobotanical interpretation and critically evaluate reductionist approaches that lead to a dichotomous understanding of the ‘centre–hinterland’ relationship. Using taphonomic models, the ecological evaluation of habitat requirements of wild species and spatial distribution of archaeobotanical assemblages, it is documented that Mikulčice-Valy cannot be interpreted either as an exclusively consumption centre dependent on redistribution from the hinterland, or as a unit that is fully self-sufficient in terms of the food supply. Empirical data, on the contrary, point to a complexly organised economic system in which the centre had its own production and processing capacities, combined with functionally differentiated and ecologically adapted links to the wider settlement hinterland. The study emphasises the need to abandon the schematic dichotomy of centre and hinterland in favour of an empirically testable model of the economic organisation of Great Moravian centres.

The limits of models in the debate on Great Moravian centres

2026-09-24T14:49:42+00:00

The paper examines the limits of existing models used to interpret the functioning of Great Moravian centres through the case study of Bojná-Valy in Western Slovakia. While recent debate has been structured around Jiří Macháček’s triad of models (agrarian hinterland, autarky, and local market) critically revised by Michal Hlavica, this study argues that such frameworks are insufficient when applied to non-standard sites. Bojná-Valy, lacking a clear settlement hinterland and displaying strong military and logistical characteristics, cannot be fully explained by any of these models. Instead, it is interpreted as a specialised control and provisioning node, combining institutional redistribution, strategic resource management, and limited, segmentary exchange. The case highlights the coexistence of multiple economic mechanisms and underscores the need to distinguish between market exchange as a systemic integrative force and as a secondary by-product of logistics and control. More broadly, the paper suggests that the Great Moravian system was hierarchical, networked, and functionally differentiated, requiring more flexible interpretative models beyond rigid dichotomies.

Feeding power

2026-09-24T14:49:44+00:00

Even after 150 years of archaeological research on fortified centres, to which key central functions in early medieval Central Europe are generally attributed, we still do not have a clearer idea of how their populations were supplied with basic goods in practice. This text follows on the discussion opened by Jiří Macháček (2026) for Great Moravian agglomerations. It presents a systematic analysis of possible subsistence strategies, consistently linking them to the social profile of the inhabitants of the centres and to the property regimes that determined the forms of exchange. The evaluation of individual models is based not only on archaeological evidence, but also on written sources from the 11th–12th century. The author concludes that it is not possible to postulate a single universal mechanism; it is more likely that there was a concurrence of multiple strategies that overlapped and were used to varying degrees by different social groups for different commodities. Therefore, the ‘hinterland’ should not be understood as a homogeneous economic zone around the centre, but as a variable network of relationships and related commodity flows, which could reach even significantly distant regions.

Editorial

2026-08-28T06:52:34+00:00

Jan Kysela – Petra Goláňová – Tomáš Mangel – Jan Mařík (eds.): Reflections of the Iron Age. Studies dedicated to Natalie Venclová. Institute of Archaeology of the CAS, Prague – University of Hradec Králové – MUNI Arts – Faculty of Arts Charles University, Praha – Brno – Hradec Králové 2026.

2026-09-24T14:47:52+00:00

Ladislav Varadzin – Lukáš Reitinger (eds.): Vyšehrad ve středověku. Archeologický ústav AV ČR, Praha, Praha 2025.

2026-09-24T14:47:53+00:00