Jan Bouzek – a man of many parts
Abstract
5
Full text
5 Jan Bouzek– aman of many parts Anthony Harding– Peter Pavúk Jan Bouzek’sinterests in the ancient world were wide and varied, ranging from Greek and Ro‑ man art, architecture and sculpture, through the Iron Age cities of Thrace, the Etruscans, the material culture of the Caucasus, the Aegean Bronze Age, to the prehistory of central Europe. The latter came about through his studies in the Prehistorický ústav [Institute of Prehistory] under Jan Filip, where so many of the prehistoric archaeologists of the Czech Lands studied in the 1950s; the classical studies through the Ústav pro klasickou archeologii [Institute of Classical Archaeology] under Antonín Salač and Jiří Frel. These studies gave him awide range of exper‑ tise, which he put to good use throughout his academic career. He was also deeply interested in and knowledgeable about philosophy, music, and literature in general. This volume brings together articles, written by his students and colleagues, on some of these topics. In doing so, we complement the arch of the two conference volumes commem‑ orating his 80th birthday, ‘Jan Bouzek and the Czech lands’ (published as Studia Hercynia XIX, 2015) and ‘ΕΥΔΑΙΜΩΝ. Studies in honour of Jan Bouzek’ (2018), reflecting as best as possible the wide scope of Jan’sscholarship. Knowing him well as we did, it is interesting to follow how the many topics, collaborations and interests of his emerged, developed and intertwined over the years. This short introduc‑ tory essay for the volume in his honour therefore targets less his personality and its lasting legacy per se but rather his academic work. 1 We cannot go into detail but try to follow the main themes, which kept Jan busy over afruitful 85 years, with articles still appearing posthumously. By doing so, we hope to have uncovered acertain structure in his academic development, with topics being gradually added one on top of the other. THE BEGINNINGS From the beginning, Bouzek was interested in both the classical world and that of prehistoric Bohemia. His earliest publications, in the 1950s, were more on Bohemia to begin with, then in the 1960s we see an increasing amount of papers on more Mediterranean matters. Throughout this period he was making important contributions in both areas. On the Central European end of the story, Jan dedicated aconsiderable time to the study of the Knovíz culture and other Late Bronze topics, which accompanied him throughout the years. After anumber of short contributions on Bohemian prehistory, amajor study was published in 1963 on the ‘problems of the Knovíz and Milaveč cultures’ (Bouzek 1963). His collaboration and friendship with Vít Vokolek and Drahomír Koutecký were among those that lasted throughout his career; he excavated aseries of Late Bronze Age sites with Koutecký, and in 1966 he published, with Koutecký and Evžen Neustupný, an important book on the Knovíz settlement of north ‑west Bohemia (Bouzek– Koutecký– Neustupný 1966). The work starts with the publication of the site at Radonice, with Bouzek covering the Bronze Age material, but moves from this fairly conventional site report to adiscussion of much wider 1 For aparallel assessment of Bouzek’swork in Czech, with additional valuable observations con‑ cerning his publications on Central European prehistory, see Smejtek 2021, 362–363.
6STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVI/1 interest: the settlement forms and patterns of the area under study, including diagrams that showed changes over time. While not exactly aproduct of the ‘New Archaeology’ (though Neustupný’scontribution was influenced by the palaeoeconomy school that was developing at the time), it was aremarkable step forward in the study of Bronze Age settlement patterns and counts as one of Bouzek’smost important achievements in the field. In 1958 he became employed as classical archaeologist at the Charles University and his actual material interests in Greece were more Early Iron Age in nature, as indicated already in the paper on Geometric pottery in the collection of the National Museum in Prague (1959). Bouzek combined the two interests with his approach to Aegean ‑European relations in the Bronze and Iron Ages, starting with along article in Památky archeologické in 1966, based on his dissertation, continuing throughout his life, and culminating in his ‘Swedish books’ (1985 and 1997), as Jan called them, since they were both published by Paul Åström in Göteborg. In 1969 Homerisches Griechenland was published, based on his first habilitation attempt, alas aborted for political reasons, aremarkable and wide ‑ranging study that covered ahuge amount of material from late Mycenaean and Dark Age Greece and the East Mediterranean, along with the implications for central Europe and the Balkans. The following book on Graeco- -Macedonian Bronzes (1973) was dedicated to aspecific category of objects on the northern borders of the Aegean, again with avery wide range of distribution. This was his second and successful attempt for habilitation at the Charles University. Along the same line was also alonger paper on the Attic Dark Age Incised Ware published also in 1974; the topic of northern intruders gave rise to another long ‑term friendship, with Sinclair Hood. Fig. 1: Jan Bouzek at Konopiště in 1979 (Photo Anthony Harding).
7EDITORIAL By now, these are no longer ‘the beginnings’ but we shall continue with this strain of Jan’sresearch, since it poses akind of fil rouge in his life, here. Long in coming, but possibly his most influential and widely quoted work, was the ‘first Swedish book’, The Aegean, Anatolia and Europe. Cultural Interrelations in the Second Millennium B.C. (1985), developing especially the Late Bronze Age aspects of the interconnections. This was followed by his ‘second Swedish book’, Greece, Anatolia, and Europe: Cultural interrelations during the early Iron Age (1997) and finally Studies in Homeric Greece (2018), an updated version of the Homerisches Griechenland volume. In these studies, topics such as amber played an important part, hardly surprising since it is one of the few indisputable materials that link the north and the south. Jan was the or‑ ganiser and aleading light in the Amber in Archaeology conference held in Liblice in 1990 (Becks– Bouzek eds. 1993). LATE 1960S TO EARLY 1990S The changed political situation after 1968 meant fewer possibilities to travel (to western coun‑ tries). Jan managed to fully use his last ‑minute stay at University of Tübingen (1967/68), with an Alexander von Humboldt fellowship, revising the text of the Homerisches Griechenland for publication. Upon his return, he learned that Jiří Frel, the head of the department until then, had remained in the U.S., which meant not only that Jan had to take over all his teaching and administrative duties, but also that there was now acertain political stain on the department. In such asituation, Jan tried to make the best of what was available at home, be it in collab‑ oration with Czech colleagues or studying the collections, both at the Charles University but also at the National Museum, or even in various smaller collections throughout the country. At about this time, he developed an interest in climate change as adetermining factor in ancient times. He published ashort article on the topic in Dějiny asoučasnost in 1969 and in other works at this time suggested it as afactor in both the start of the Lausitz culture and the decline of Bronze Age Greece. More substantial contributions on the topic came in particular in 1988 and 1993. In these articles, Bouzek tried to correlate events or processes in environ‑ mental history with archaeological phenomena; since he was not aphysical scientist himself his approach was to work with the data supplied by others to create anarrative that related closely to the archaeology, with which he was deeply familiar. The main outcomes of the collection studies were the three volumes of Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum, in collaboration with Jan Bažant, Marie Dufková, and Iva Ondřejová, covering the whole of the Charles University collection (1978, 1997) and the first part of the National Museum collection (1992). Along the same vein was his collaboration with János Szilágyi, presenting the Etruscan mirrors in Czech collections (1992), within the Corpus Speculorum Etruscorum project. Finally, though slim, he penned also the first volume of Corpus Signorum Imperii Romani, pre‑ senting the Roman sculpture from Syria and Asia Minor in Czech collections (1999). He was especially proud of being involved in these major undertakings, many of which were under the aegis of UNESCO. These major works were supplemented by numerous short papers on finds not covered, all of which he always tried to discuss with arange of foreign experts, such as Arthur Trendall, which was not at all easy in this period. The period of 1970s and 1980s saw also alot of Jan’stime dedicated to preparation of larger exhibitions, usually as atrio with Marie Dufková and Iva Ondřejová. Notable were exhibitions on the Greek and Roman portrait (1972), on Greek and Roman Art in general (1979, 1989) and especially the travelling exhibition on the Etruscans (1989), in collaboration with institu‑
8STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVI/1 tions in Eastern Germany, Hungary, and Poland. Alot of energy on Jan’spart went also into upkeep and presentation of the historical cast collection curated by the Charles University, part of which became permanently exhibited 50 years ago at the former Franciscan monas‑ tery at Hostinné in north ‑eastern Bohemia. The exhibition was opened in August 1969, with acatalogue issued in 1978. It served without much change until recently when it underwent amajor restructuring and renovation, being re ‑opened in May 2022. The second part of the cast collection was later exhibited in Litomyšl (1994), where it stayed for more than 15 years, now on display at the state castle Duchcov. Both at Hostinné, as well as in Litomyšl, Jan or‑ ganised aseries of smaller seasonal exhibitions, for most of which he produced also small catalogues, all in collaboration with the local curators Magda Čtvrtníková, Lenka Ondráčková (Kulichová), Tereza Klůsová, and later Lenka Vacinová. In addition, amajor conference on the Roman Portrait should also be mentioned, organised just before the fall of the Iron Curtain, and published in 1997. Further activity to which Jan devoted his time during the so ‑called Normalisation period was the study of the finds and especially the excavation records from the early Czechoslovak expeditions by Antonín Salač and Jan Nepomucký, which had never been fully published. This mainly means the two volumes on the 1925 excavation at Kyme, an Aiolian site on West Anatolian coast. While the first volume (1974) targeted the topography of the site and the presentation of the Salač collection in Prague, the second (1980) presented the actual results Fig. 2: Jan Bouzek and Zoja Benkovsky ‑Pivovarová at the conference Die Urnenfelderkulturen Mitteleuropas, Liblice, 21.–25.10.1985 (Archive of the Archaeological Institute, Czech Academy of Sciences, CFJ000001401).
9EDITORIAL of the Czechoslovak expedition. The main results concerned the Isis Temple in the saddle of the Northern Hill and the Doric colonnade down at the Roman Agora. For along time, this was amain source of knowledge on Kyme, and study of the Salač collection offered Jan an opportunity to get acquainted with Hellenistic mould ‑made wares, which he consulted with Ulrich Hausmann and Jörg Schäfer. The logical next step was then the study and publication of the preserved documentation and excavation records for the 1923 and 1927 Salač/Nepomucký excavations at Samothrace, in the sanctuary of Great Gods (1985). In this case, the volume presented mainly architectural and epigraphic evidence, targeting the so ‑called Ionic temple and the nearby Milesian dedi‑ cation structure excavated on the western hill of the sanctuary. Work on both undertakings started already in early 1960s, but it became awelcome activity in the complicated period after 1968. On both occasions Jan was assisted by Iva Ondřejová, with vital help of Philippos Kostomitsopoulos on the Kyme volumes and Radislav Hošek on the Samothrace volume. Marie Dufková was always consulted on terracottas. As if not enough, this period is also when Jan started exploring anew region of interest, the Pontic. Mostly surrounded by countries in the Soviet bloc, this was less off ‑limits, with Jan and Iva enjoying several visits, most memorably to the Vani conferences in Georgia, organised by Otar Lordkipanidze. Bouzek’sactivities in the Black Sea region were supported also by John Boardman and his (then) student Gocha Tsetschladze, with whom Jan shared an interest in Early Greek colonisation. While Jan delivered several papers at various conferences on the topic, the more lasting monuments is first his book with Radoslav Hošek Antické Černomoří (1978) and especially through his book Studies of Greek Pottery in the Black Sea Area (1990). De‑ spite the title, this relatively thin book is not only about pottery, but also about terracottas, jewellery, coins and other small finds, offering thus abroad picture, so typical of his work. It is appropriate to mention here that in 2005 Bouzek also organised ‘The Third International Congress on Black Sea Antiquities (Pontic Congress)’ in Prague, published later in journal Eirene (2006, 2007). With little to no opportunity to excavate abroad, it comes as no surprise, that Jan was eager to take up the offer by the UNESCO for arescue excavation in Ceylon (as it was), today’sSri Lanka. Here accompanied by Petr Charvát, Jiří Břeň and Martin Kuna, Jan excavated and studied the vicinity of aAbhayagiri stupa and the associated monastery, covering alonger period of time, from the late Hellenistic to the 12th cent. AD. The resulting monograph (1993) was awarded the university prize by the rector of the Charles University. One wonders how one person, even though with help of colleagues, could manage as much output on such avaried range of topics. Somewhat helpful was the fact, that in the 1970s and early 1980s, there were not so many students, and the Institute was very much research ‑oriented. This was not due to lack of interest, but rather astrange outcome of central planning. However, with the political atmosphere easing up in second half of the 1980s, anew batch of students was admitted in 1986. This gave rise to the need of an excava‑ tion, and Bouzek signed an agreement with Jaroslav Tejral, on behalf of the Archaeological Institute in Brno, Czech Academy of Sciences, for afield school at the excavations at Mušov, aRoman outpost in Southern Moravia. It lasted till 1993/94, when the excavation continued under Balázs Komoróczy, and Jan moved to other destinations. This experience in turn gave Jan the ‘opportunity’ to explore yet another topic, that of Roman provincial archaeology, where he often paired with Iva Ondřejová. Here we would like to refer to their possibly most influential paper on the subject, on the ‘third zone’ along the Noric ‑Pannonian Limes (Bouzek– Ondřejová 1990a).
10 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVI/1 EARLY/MID 1990S ONWARDS While early 1990s still saw acompletion of several activities started by Jan during previous decades, the changed political situation after 1989 opened up completely new possibilities. Now in his late fifties, Jan started on arange of activities, most of which were somehow intertwined. He became vice ‑dean for foreign matters at the Faculty of Arts (1989–1991), spent six months teaching at Tübingen and afurther spell in the U.S. (1992), the Institute of Classical Archae‑ ology gained independence, Jan became afull professor (1991), and after years of restriction on student numbers, possibilities opened up and the Institute started taking ten to fifteen new students every year, multiplying the size of the Institute (alas not in space) within afew years. Jan also travelled extensively and became famous (or infamous) for attending abroad range of conferences, literally right across the world. The gradual retreat from the Mušov excavation correlated with anew involvement, which would literally change his life. Mieczyslaw Domaradzki, from the National Archaeological In‑ stitute and Museum in Sofia (NAIM), was already running alarge collaborative project at asite on the banks of upper Maritsa River in south central Bulgaria, which he discovered during his surveys in 1980s. Jan was (according to his own words) very much tempted, but also hesitant, whether or not to engage in such alarge project. However, from 1994 onwards, he and Jiří Musil, as well as further collaborators and students, started going to Adjiska Vodenitsa, at about the time when it was identified as the Greek inland emporion Pistiros. The Prague team at first had atrench outside the main site, but after acouple of years moved inside the fortification and excavated one of the two main structures lining the street leading to the eastern gate in the fortification. The untimely death of Domaradzki in June 1998 brought yet another change with it– while the excavation continued to be coordinated by the Bulgarian colleagues, Jan, with his expert knowledge and seniority, became quite central within the collaborative project, which be‑ yond NAIM also involved colleagues from the National Historical Museum in Sofia (Gavril Lazov) and Bradford, later on Liverpool (Zofia Archibald). Domaradzki’sdeath was commemorated by amajor conference, the proceedings of which were edited by Jan and Lydia Domaradzka (2005). It is possibly no coincidence that the final publication series started appearing in Prague, but again as collective endeavour of the four teams. Altogether five volumes Pistiros– Excavations and Studies were published between 1996 and 2013, one Supplementum (published as Studia Hercynia XVII/1), followed by amonothematic volume on the coin hoard discovered by the Czech team in 1998, published as Pistiros VI in 2016. It was almost moving to see Jan’sde‑ termination to get this last volume out, controlling painstakingly whether all the coin pho‑ tographs and especially the many numismatic special signs were laid out in the correct way. In 1996, Jan was invited by the UNESCO Center in Beirut to carry out arescue excavation in the western part of Martyrs Square, not long after the ceasefire. While it was astrong experi‑ ence for Jan, accompanied by Radislav Hošek, Petr Charvát, Jiří Musil, Jana Kubková Maříková and the students, the Prague involvement did not continue. The finds were studied again in 2006 and the results of the excavations uncovering Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine strata were presented in aseries of articles in the journal Eirene. There was aplan to continue with other sites in the general area, and in 2008 Jan Bouzek, together with Jiří Musil, visited the sites of Sheikh Sa’ad and Tell Erfad, excavated originally by Bedřich Hrozný. Unfortunately, the worsening situation in Syria prevented them from continuing this promising endeavour. The relevant finds from Hrozný’sexcavations, which are still stored in Prague, were published by Jan Bouzek with Ladislav Boháč in 1997 and 1999. All these increased field activities, but also the increased size of the institute, prompted Jan to establish anew journal, to represent the dynamically developing institute. Studia Hercynia
11EDITORIAL started in 1997 as an annual publication, changing to appear twice ayear by 2011 (volume XV). Jan served as the main editor until 2014 and wrote himself numerous contributions. From the beginning some of the volumes were monothematic, usually proceedings of conferences– be it on Celtic art and archaeology (see below) or Classical traditions in the 19th and 20th century art and architecture. In the later years, Jan even published in the journal whole monographs, most notably Thracians and Their Neighbours: Their Art, Destiny and Heritage (2005) and Prehistory of Europe as seen from its centre: Czech lands from Paleolithic to the end of the La Tène period in European context (2011). Over the years his interest in local prehistory did not wane and it was only in his later years that he returned to some of his early interests, publishing ‘old debts’, mainly material publications, be it on Lusatian culture in Northwest Bohemia (Bouzek– Koutecký 2000), the Štítary culture settlement of Vikletice (Koutecký– Bouzek 2010), as well as the Knovíz culture cemeteries in Křepenice and Hřiměždice (Bouzek– Vokolek 2012). It was with great intensity, and already failing health, that he tried to get the ‘altar’ from Černý Vůl published (Bouzek– Vokolek 2016). This can be possibly linked also with his increased interest in Attic imports to central Europe and its possible influence on early Celtic art (Bouzek 2010; Bouzeketal. 2017). Celtic Fig. 3: Jan Bouzek visiting the site of Sboryanovo in 2004 (Photo by Milena Tonkova).
12 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXVI/1 art in general was atopic he liked to discuss and he organised and published together with Venceslas Kruta several meetings on the subject at the National Museum in Prague– ‘Numis‑ matique et archéologie, les Celtes de Bohême et la Gaule aux IIe–Ier siècles av. J.‑C.’ in 1999; ‘Figuration et abstraction dans l’art de l’Europe ancienne (VIIIe–Ier siècle av. J.‑C.)’ in 2000, and ‘Images et techniques: l’art des anciens Celtes et de leurs contemporains’, in 2005 (published in Studia Hercynia and in Acta Musei Nationalis). POPULAR BOOKS FOR MORE GENERAL AUDIENCE Any account of Jan Bouzek’sactivities would not be complete without mentioning his books in Czech for amore general audience. One can recognise three periods of activity. In the first, three books presented new discoveries in the Mediterranean (1979), Periclean Athens (1990, with Iva Ondřejová) and the Thracians (1990). These were followed in the mid‑1990s by three small ‑scale booklets presenting the result of avery fruitful collaboration with Zdeněk Kra‑ tochvíl, aphilosopher interested in Heraclitus and other early Ionian philosophers (1994, 1995, 1996). This was avery personal and eclectic account of Early Greek Art. In the early 2000s, Jan started anew quest, delivering his collected knowledge to broader readership, producing aseries of books which, while trying to present up ‑to ‑date archaeo‑ logical research, used amore popular language and less (if any) references in the text. The books covered the Etruscans (2003), aPrehistory of the Czech lands in European context (2005), the Celts of the Czech lands in European context (2007)– both serving as the basis for the English language overview from 2011 mentioned above. These were followed by two more contemplative volumes: Art and Mind (2009) and Birth of Europe (2013), which gave Jan more freedom and in which he explored classical antiquity to agreater degree from the perspective of anthroposophy, with which he was closely familiar for decades. His last book, published posthumously, targeted the Greek myths (2020). CONCLUDING WORDS It is hard to give afull and rounded picture of Jan Bouzek’scareer in archaeology. He covered so many fields, was so widely read, and had friends in so many disparate areas of archaeology and classical studies, that no one person– or even two– can aspire to do justice to his output and his influence on others. Even if in his later years (which nowadays is how younger read‑ ers and listeners remember him) his conference comments could sometimes seem rather long ‑winded and not always to the point, he actually had such astore of knowledge and was endowed with such deep insight that it was always fruitful to listen to what he had to say; one could always learn from him. Any assessment of the importance and value of his published output is bound to be are‑ flection of the age in which it is written. While some of his earlier studies are now superseded (especially those on climate questions) in the light of more recent discoveries, they represent ascaffold on which others have built. There is no doubt that Bouzek made major contributions to several fields, perhaps in the most influential way in the study of Aegean ‑European relations in the Bronze and Iron Ages, in Macedonian bronzes, in amber studies and most recently in the Pistiros excavation reports. This is all quite separate from his qualities as aperson, aman of the utmost integrity even in difficult times, someone to whom generations of students and fellow scholars looked up as amentor, guide, and friend. We count ourselves among that number.
13EDITORIAL SELECTED WORKS BY J. BOUZEK REFERRED TO IN TEXT: CVA CZ-1 = Bažant, J.– Bouzek, J.– Dufková, M. 1978: Corpus vasorum antiquorum. Tchécoslovaquie 1, Prague, Université Charles 1. Praha. CVA CZ‑2 = Bažant, J.– Bouzek, J.– Dufková, M. 1990: Corpus vasorum antiquorum. Tchécoslovaquie 2, Prague, Musée national 1. Praha. CVA CZ-3, = Bouzek, J.– Bažant, J. 1997: Corpus vasorum antiquorum. République Tchèque 3, Prague, Université Charles 2. Praha. CSE HU -CZ = Szilagyi J.Gy.– Bouzek, J. 1992: Corpus Speculorum Etruscorum. Hongrie– Tchécoslovaquie. Roma. CSIR CZ = Bouzek, J.– Dufková, M.– Hošek, R.1999: Corpus signorum Imperii Romani. Czech Republic– Roman sculpture from Syria and Asia Minor in Czech collections. Praha. Bažant, J.– Benda, K.– Bouzek, J. 1979: Antické umění včeskoslovenských sbírkách. Exhibition catalogue, Národní galerie vPraze, Valdštejnská jízdárna, srpen ‑listopad1979. Praha. Beck, C.W.– Bouzek, J. eds. 1993: Amber in archaeology. Proceedings of the second International Conference on Amber in Archaeology, Liblice, 1990. Praha. Boháč, L.– Bouzek, J. 1999: Hellenistic and Roman finds from Bedřich Hrozný’sexcavations at Tell Erfad, Syria, 3. And addenda. Eirene 35, 47–60. Boháč, L.– Bouzek, J.– Grace, V. 1997: Hellenistic and Roman finds from Bedřich Hrozný’sexcavations at Tell Erfad, Syria, 1‑2. Eirene 33, 122–157. Bouzek, J. 1959: Attická geometrická keramika vNárodním Museu vPraze avjiných československých sbírkách. Sborník Národního Musea vPraze 13/3, 97–101. Bouzek, J. 1963: Problémy knovízské amilavečské kultury [Problems of the Knovíz and Milaveč cultures]. Sborník Národního muzea AXVII, 57–118. Bouzek, J. 1966: The Knovíz settlement of north -west Bohemia [Knovízské osídlení severozápadních Čech]. Fontes Archaeologici Pragenses 10. Praha. Bouzek, J. 1966: The Aegean and Central Europe. An introduction to the study of cultural interrelations, 1600–1300 B.C. Památky archeologické 57, 242–276. Bouzek, J. 1969: Homerisches Griechenland. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Philosophica et Historica Mono‑ graphia 29. Praha. Bouzek, J. 1974: Graeco -Macedonian Bronzes (Analysis and Chronology). Acta Universitatis Carolinae Philosoph‑ ica et Historica, Monographia 49. Praha. Bouzek, J. 1974: The Attic Dark Age Incized Ware. Sborník Narodního Muzea vPraze A28/1, 1–56. Bouzek, J. 1979: Objevy ve Středomoří. Praha. Bouzek, J. 1985: The Aegean, Anatolia and Europe. Cultural Interrelations in the Second Millennium B.C. SIMA 29. Göteborg. Bouzek, J. 1988: Climatic changes and the pattern of interaction in Bronze Age Europe. Památky archeologické 79, 451–466. Bouzek, J. 1990: Thrákové. Praha. Bouzek, J. 1993: Climatic changes. New archaeological evidence from the Bohemian Karst and other areas. Antiquity 67/255, 386–393. Bouzek, J. 1997: Greece, Anatolia and Europe. Cultural Interrelations during the Early Iron Age. SIMA 122. Jonsered. Bouzek, J. 2005: Thracians and Their Neighbours. Their Art, Destiny and Heritage. Studia HercyniaIX. Praha. Bouzek, J. 2003: Etruskové, jiní než všechny ostatní národy. Praha. Bouzek, J. 2005: Pravěk českých zemí vevropském kontextu. Praha. Bouzek, J. 2007: Keltové našich zemí vevropském kontextu. Praha. Bouzek, J. 2009: Umění amyšlení. Jak se lidské myšlení zrcadlí vdílech výtvarného umění ajak umění ovlivňuje naše vnímání imyšlení. Praha.