die archÄologie der frÜhen ungarn - arup.cas.cz · to type h, geibig’s combination group 5,...

Römisch-Germanisches ZentralmuseumForschungsinstitut für Archäologie

Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 2012

SONDERDRUCK AUS:

RGZM – TAGUNGENBand 17

Bendeguz Tobias (Hrsg.)

DIE ARCHÄOLOGIE DER FRÜHEN UNGARN

CHRONOLOGIE, TECHNOLOGIE UND METHODIK

Internationaler Workshop des Archäologischen Instituts

der Ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften

und des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz

in Budapest am 4. und 5. Dezember 2009

Redaktion: Evelyn Garvey (New York); Reinhard Köster, Bendeguz Tobias (RGZM)Satz: Hans Jung (RGZM)Umschlaggestaltung: Reinhard Köster (RGZM)

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek

Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation inder Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografischeDaten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.

ISBN 978-3-88467-205-1ISSN 1862-4812

© 2012 Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums

Das Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Die dadurch begrün detenRechte, insbesondere die der Übersetzung, des Nach drucks, derEntnahme von Abbildungen, der Funk- und Fernsehsen dung, derWiedergabe auf photomechanischem (Photokopie, Mikrokopie)oder ähnlichem Wege und der Speicherung in Datenverarbei -tungs anlagen, Ton- und Bild trägern bleiben, auch bei nur auszugs-weiser Verwertung, vor be halten. Die Vergü tungs ansprüche des § 54, Abs. 2, UrhG. werden durch die Verwer tungs gesellschaftWort wahrgenommen.

Herstellung: Strauss GmbH, MörlenbachPrinted in Germany.

Falko Daim

Vorwort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX

Vor der Landnahme

Attila Türk

Zu den osteuropäischen und byzantinischen Beziehungen der Funde des 10.-11. Jahrhunderts im Karpatenbecken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Charlotte Hedenstierna-Jonson

Traces of contacts: Magyar material culture in the Swedish Viking Age context of Birka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Chronologische Fragen zum Fundmaterial des Karpatenbeckens

Péter Langó

Notes on the dating of Byzantine coin finds from 10th century context in the Carpathian Basin . . . . . . . . 49

Péter Prohászka

Bemerkungen zum byzantinischen Münzverkehr der ungarischen Landnahmezeit und der Staatsgründung im Karpatenbecken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

Gabriel Fusek

Chronologische Fragen der Nitraer Gräberfelder des 10.-11. Jahrhunderts:das Fallbeispiel Nitra-Šindolka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

Gabriel Nevizánsky · Jiří Košta

Die Ausgrabung eines frühungarischen Reitergräberfeldes in Streda nad Bodrogom (okr. Trebišov/SK) in den Jahren 1926 und 1937 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

Miklós Takács

Die Chronologie der Siedlungen und besonders der Siedlungskeramik des Karpatenbeckens des 8.-11. Jahrhunderts im Spannungsfeld zwischen den verschieden Datierungsmöglichkeiten und ihren Einwänden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

Zwischen Ost und West? »Fremde« Schwerter in »lokalem« Kontext

Naďa Profantová

Examples of the most important results of technological analyses of swords in the Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

III

INHALT

IV

Ádám Bíró

Dating (with) weapon burials and the »Waffenwechsel«. A preliminary report on new investigations of the so-called Viking-Age swords in the Carpathian Basin from a chronological point of view . . . . . . . 191

Valeri Yotov

The Kunágota sword guard and the dating of two bronze matrices for hilt manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . 219

Beiträge technologischer und naturwissenschaftlicher Untersuchungen zu archäologischen Fragestellungen

Adam Bollók

Chronological questions of the Hungarian Conquest Period: a technological perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . 229

Susanne Greiff

Silver grave goods from early Hungarian contexts: technological implications of debased alloy compositions with zinc, tin and lead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241

Nataša V. Eniosova

Tracing the routes of silver procurement to the early urban centre Gnëzdovo in the 10th/early 11th centuries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261

Mariela Inkova

A contribution to the problem of producing the Old Bulgarian belt-fittings from the 10th century . . . . . 277

Naďa Profantová

Ein tauschierter Steigbügel aus der Umgebung von Dobruška (okr. Rychnov nad Kněžnou/CZ) . . . . . . . . 295

Verzeichnis der Autorinnen und Autoren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309

Hinweis für den Leser:Kyrillische Buchstaben wurden wissenschaftlich transliteriert. In Ausnahmefällen wurde bei Eigennamen aufeine wissenschaftliche Transliteration verzichtet. Bei den Fundortangaben in den Gebieten der ehemaligenSowjetunion werden die heutigen Ortsnamen angegeben. Bei Kulturen bezeichnenden Fundorten wurdevon einer Änderung abgesehen.

NAĎA PROFANTOVÁ

EXAMPLES OF THE MOST IMPORTANT RESULTS

OF TECHNOLOGICAL ANALYSES OF SWORDS

IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC

Bohemians and Moravians are mentioned in official documents of the Carolingian Empire as tributary allies,

though alliance tends to be confined to limits. That is why the import of weaponry to these countries, expli-

citly of swords, was forbidden. But 74 or 76 swords, including the so-called seaxes (fig. 1), were found on

the territory of the Czech Republic, proving that the embargo at the will of the ruling ones did not prevent

trade if it proved profitable.

The sword is an expensive, exclusive and therefore chronologically very sensitive artifact. Nowadays we can

only get a glimpse of which other symbolic meanings clung to it throughout the Middle Ages. The work of

Czech archaeologists dealing with Bohemian finds of this sort is all but joyful. Bohemia itself, contrary to

Moravia, Slovakia and other territories, is encumbered by a mass of old sword finds, the find circumstan-

ces of which can hardly be established (fig. 2; tab. 1) 1. One of the few modern finds was discovered at

Kanín (Nymburk dist./CZ) in 20042, and even there it almost happened to be a random find on a cemete-

ry. This situation forces archaeologists to date rather on grounds of typology and technological analyses.

In this contribution, I will mention three examples of grave finds from the 9th and a fourth from the 10th

century. In the following tables, all sword finds from graves in Bohemia are summarized (tabs 1-3; figs 1b;2b-c).

Altogether we reckon 74 to 75 swords, including seaxes from the Czech Republic; almost half of them, 29

to 30, are from Bohemia. At the disposal for a further technological analysis were only 24: technological

analyses have been carried out on 5-6 of them, a little more of them have been X-rayed (tab. 1).

Unfortunately, known and mentioned in the foreign literature are only about half of the swords, i. e. 363.

Among the Czech finds, those from graves predominate with 22 examples4 – one from the river Vltava, six

without find circumstances (76%) (fig. 2a). The sword of St. Wenceslas (fig. 7) is preserved as ceremonial

object, i. e. as part of the crown jewels.

In the first part of this article I will offer a short overview of the sword finds from the territory. Although

we deal with published finds, they are barely known outside Czech literature, as is demonstrated by the

latest work on swords of the Ulfberht type5. It was the context of the Moravian sword of Petersen type X

(Geibig 12, I) which delivered the evidence for dating its occurrence to the middle of the 9th century6. The

second part of the article is devoted to a preliminary interpretation of the testimony of the Bohemian and

Moravian series of these finds.

9TH CENTURY

In the 9th century, swords of the type X are predominant in Bohemia and Moravia, and other exemplars

rarely appear – as extra type 1 or B/H or a seax (Stará Kouřim [Kolín dist./CZ]; Jindřichov [Cheb dist./CZ]).

An example of an accidental find, dated on grounds of typology and radiograms, is a sword from Plzeň-

Doudlevce with a newly discovered 8-shaped smith mark and an obvious vertical linear inlay decoration.

169Die Archäologie der frühen Ungarn

The typological determination of this sword remains uncertain; it is most probably a derivation of type H,

with affinities to type B, and the pommel ends in a similar way as the type B/H sword of Mikulčice (Hodonín

dist./CZ) grave 7157 or the sword of Sierninghofen (Upper Austria/A) and Tauchendorf (Carinthia/A)8. The

engraved decoration is not very clear, not even in the X-ray photographs (fig. 3, 1) 9. The application en

masse of damascene smith marks dates to the 8th and 9th centuries and still to the first half of the 10th cen-

tury, then it ceases10.

A very close parallel to this find stems from grave 65 at Břeclav-Pohansko (Břeclav dist./CZ) which belongs

to type H, Geibig’s combination group 5, with an almost invisible mark on the blade decorated with her-

ring bone damascene11. This sword is thought to be the oldest at this site: its production can be dated to

the beginning of the second quarter of the 9th century12. Other analogies are to be found in Moravia, as

grave 223/51 at Staré Město (Uherské Hradiště dist./CZ), now dated by Z. Klanica already to the end of the

8th century13, and eventually from grave 277/49 at the same site with the same dating14.

Most cognate from the Austrian finds is a sword from St. Georgen a.d. Gusen (Upper Austria/A)15 that

bears a similar mark. This spatha imitation of a B or H type sword with a strong tendency towards the

Immenstedt type has probably been made at the end of the 7th or during the 8th century; the grave dates

to the middle or the second half of the 8th century. The sword or spatha of the Immenstedt type from

Tauchendorf16 shows practically the same radiogram17 – Szameit dates it to the second half of the 8th cen-

tury and speaks about the possibility of a reparation of the original sword.

I think that the sword from Plzeň-Doudlevce (Plzeň-město dist./CZ) must have been made at the end of the

8th century, it could have appeared in Bohemia slightly later18.

The most important and obvious one of the first 9th century graves in Bohemia, the so-called princely grave

from Kolín (Kolín dist./CZ), a double grave, contained an imported type M(?) sword. The pommel is not pre-

served, it could have been made of an organic material. The technological investigation first seemed to

reveal a welded damascene blade (figs. 4a, 8a; 4b) 19, but a more recent report is more skeptical about its

existence20. The sword set contained four luxury gilded silver fittings with niello decoration (fig. 4a, 2. 5-7). It represents a top product of the Carolingian workshops of the first or second third of the 9th cen-

tury21. Other Carolingian imports in the grave are glass and bronze vessels. Most luxurious was a silver

beaker, obviously from Aachen, from the beginning of the 9th century22. Only the axe and knife were local

products. Some think that most of the imports can be interpreted as »baptismal gifts«, and that we are

dealing with the grave of one of the 14 Bohemian princes that were baptized in 845 in Regensburg23. The

burial shows pagan signs – which of course do not contradict the baptism theory.

Of comparable importance was the so-called grave of the warrior from the third square of Prague Castle,

discovered in 1928 by I. Borkovský24. The grave consisted of a wooden chamber of 300× 125cm. It con-

170 N. Profantová · Examples of the most important results of technological analyses of swords

Fig. 1 a Comparison of numbers of sites and swords in Moravia and Bohemia. – b Comparison of numbers of the more frequent swordtypes in Moravia and Bohemia. – (Graphics N. Profantová).

a b


Fig. 2 a Bohemian swords according to their find circumstances. – b Bohemian swords according to theirtypes. – c Dating of the swords and seax from Bohemia. –(Graphics N. Profantová).

a b

c

Fig. 3 1 Plzeň-Doudlevce: detail of a sword with smithmark, drawn after a radiogram. –2 Prague Castle, equipment ofgrave III N 97 and a detail of theradiogram of the grip (Profantová 2005, 307 fig. 1).


Tab

.1O

verv

iew

of

war

rior

grav

es w

ith s

wor

d fin

ds in

Boh

emia

. *

old

finds

of

now

lost

sw

ords

(w

ith n

ot e

ven

a dr

awin

g).

– (S

lám

a 19

77;

Kra

jíc 1

978)

.

Nu

mb

erN

ame

of

site

Nu

mb

er

Posi

tio

n o

f sw

ord

Typ

e o

f sw

ord

X-r

ayO

ther

dis

cove

ry o

r n

oti

ceO

ther

fin

ds

Dat

ing

of

site

of

gra

ve(P

eter

son

)

1D

obřic

hov*

,gr

ave

?lo

st??

end

of 9

th-1

0th c

entu

ry

dist

r. K

olín

2Č

tyřk

oly-

Lště

ní*,

fr

om

2×

lo

stdi

str.

Bene

šov

seve

ral g

rave

s

3H

ořel

ice*

, gr

ave

?lo

st

dist

r. Be

roun

4Jin

dřic

hov*

,gr

ave

? sa

ex

? –

met

al c

ircle

, ve

ssel

2ndha

lf of

8th

-1st

half

di

str.

Che

b of

9th

cent

ury

5K

anín

,54

on

or

near

a b

ody,

YYe

s pa

tter

n w

eldi

ng

spur

s, b

ucke

t, k

nife

1stha

lf of

10th

cent

ury

dist

r. N

ymbu

rk

near

wai

st

5K

anín

,18

4?

XYe

ssp

urs,

ves

sel,

1st

half

of 1

0thce

ntur

ydi

str.

Nym

burk

arro

whe

ads,

st

rap-

end,

fitt

ing

6K

obyl

nice

,gr

ave

?al

ong

skel

eton

XYe

sla

nce,

ves

sel

end

of 9

th-1

st h

alf

of 1

0thce

ntur

ydi

str.

Kol

ín

7K

olín

, do

uble

-gra

vebe

twee

nM

??Ye

spa

tter

n w

eldi

ng??

, sp

urs,

sw

ord

set,

2nd

half

of 9

thce

ntur

ydi

str.

Kol

ínm

an,

wom

anbo

th s

kele

ton

acro

ss/s

ide

glas

s ve

ssel

s,w

ays

wel

ded

blad

eax

e, g

ombí

ky

(sph

eric

al b

utto

ns),

buck

le,

bron

ze b

eads

, je

wel

lery

ap.

8K

ouřim

, 55

long

sae

x;

Yes

swor

d se

t bu

cket

,m

iddl

e of

9th

cent

ury

dist

r. K

olín

sing

le-b

lade

?la

nce-

shoe

, bu

cket

, w

ithou

tve

ssel

, kn

ifecr

oss-

guar

d an

d po

mm

el

8K

ouřim

, 12

0

doub

le-e

dged

Yes

nosp

urs,

sw

ord

set,

9th

cent

ury

dist

r. K

olín

sh

ort

swor

d,ha

mm

er-a

xe,

with

out

buck

et,

vess

el,

cros

s-gu

ard

knife

and

so

on

9K

ovár

y-Bu

deč,

grav

e?

lost

go

mbí

kyen

d of

9th

-1st

hal

f of

10th

cen

tury

di

str.

Kla

dno

sphe

rical

but

tons

9K

ovár

y-Bu

deč,

grav

e?

lost

ax

e,gl

ass

10th

cent

ury

dist

r. K

ladn

o

10Li

bice

,gr

ave

4?

M

M

Podě

brad

y, lo

st?

spur

s en

d of

9th

-10th

cent

ury

cath

ol.

cem

eter

y,di

str.

Nym

burk


Tab

.1(c

ontin

ued)

.

10Li

bice

, 22

7A

alon

g

Y

Yes

from

one

pie

ce o

f no

t hi

gh

spur

s, b

uckl

e 1st

half

of 1

0thce

ntur

y A

crop

ol,

cem

eter

y I

left

thi

gh-b

one

qual

ity ir

on,

new

X-r

ay –

dist

r. N

ymbu

rk

mor

e so

phis

ticat

ed b

lade

–un

publ

ishe

d ye

t

11Li

bkov

ice

pod

Y

No

patt

ern

wel

ding

10

thce

ntur

yŘí

pem

*,

dist

r. Li

tom

ěřic

e

12Li

boch

ovič

ky*,

barr

ow

–lo

st

gom

bíky

-en

d of

9th

-1st

hal

f of

10th

cent

ury

dist

r. K

ladn

o sp

heric

al b

utto

ns

13Li

tom

ěřic

e,Y

N

o U

lfber

h+t

? 10

thce

ntur

y Bo

žka,

dist

r. Li

tom

ěřic

e

14Li

tom

ěřic

e;lo

st

?G

aube

´sbr

ick

yard

*,di

str.

Lito

měř

ice

15Pr

aha

hrad

,IIN

-199

X

Ye

s de

cora

ted

cros

s-gu

ard

axe,

buc

ket,

han

ger

last

thi

rd o

f 9th

cent

ury

dist

r. Pr

aha

1

16K

apro

va S

tree

t*,

lost

di

str.

Prah

a 1

17Po

čapl

y*,

grav

e?

alfa

N

o –

? 10

th-1

1thce

ntur

y di

str.

Lito

měř

ice

18Pr

aha-

Čak

ovic

e*,

–lo

st

? ?

di

str.

Prah

a 18

19Re

jšic

e*,

dist

r. gr

ave

? –

lost

?

?

Mla

dá B

oles

lav

20Ro

ztok

y,

Y

patt

ern

wel

ding

–

10th

cent

ury

Levý

Hra

dec,

dist

r. Pr

aha-

wes

t

21Ža

tec,

4

? X

Ye

s

X-r

ay s

naps

, 2

×

spur

s,tw

o ax

es,

1stha

lf of

10th

cent

ury

dist

r. Ža

tec

buck

et,

knife

, sh

ear,

arro

w h

eads


Fig. 4 a Kolín: examples of male grave finds in the Součkova cihelna (brickyard); detail of the blade (after Lutovský 1996, 44-49 figs 1-4; Pleiner / Plzák / Quadrat 1956, 319 fig. 3, 1). 8a Detail of the blade. Scarf-welded cutting edge with enhanced content of carbon.


site sword overall length blade length/ crossguardtype (cm) max. blade width length

(cm)

Jaroměř X 73? 62 10,8Kamýk X – – –Kanín 1 Y 89,7 76,5/5 13,2Kanín 2 X 87,5 75 13,8Kobylnice X 66; now only 60 N 45 N/4,6 11,7Křivoklát Y 93,4 84,4/? 12,9Libice 227a Y 91,8 ?/5,5 10,2Libice kat. hř M 90 77,5 10Libkovice Y 86 72 13,2Litoměřice Y 85,2 73,5 13,9Pardubice X(?) without/lost without/lost –Počaply 1936 alfa-/N 73,6 N 59,8 13,8Praha-Hrad X 95,5 81/5,5-5,6 13Roztoky-Levý Hradec Y 85 74 12Teplice (Museum Teplice) Y 62 N 51 N 10,2Žatec X 92,5 78/5,7 12

Tab. 2 Measurements of some swords from Bohemia (mainly 10th century). – (N = non complete).

Fig. 4b Kolín, sword analyses: Specimensetched by Nital: dark – pearlite, white –net and needles of ferrite. 3 Blade groundon its surface, black – patina of Fe3O4,white – metal with higher hardness, spotted – metal with lower hardness (afterPleiner / Plzák / Quadrat 1956, 318 fig. 2,1-2; 319 fig. 3, 12).

tained a sword across the right arm and was equipped with an axe, a dagger, a knife, a strike-a-light/shar -

pening steel and a flint stone, and a bucket (fig. 3, 2) 25. Here the only datable object seems to be the

sword. Some centimeters below the point of the sword some sort of fragments are to be seen on the

photograph which could be related to the position of the sword (perhaps the iron end of the scabbard?).

It belongs to type X26. It seems that the whole sword was wrapped in a textile; the scabbard was made of

wood, covered with leather and ended in an iron fitting.

The radiogram testifies a decoration under the crossguard of the sword and of the wrapping of the haft.

This simple decoration consisted of three circles connected with oblique lines under the crossguard, which

points more clearly to older sword types with a decorated guard. In this case, the position of the decora-

tion could as well point to some sort of iron plated ending of the scabbard that ended below the guard.

The blade and the decorated part could have corroded together. The find has been dated to the last quar-

ter of the 9th century27.

The wire-enwrapped handle shows parallels to the sword from grave III N 199 and a sword from grave 2

at Ždánice (Hodonín dist./CZ) that above all shows Old Carolingian elements (perhaps type Mannheim/

Speyer or Peterson’s extra type 1; no radiogram available), where fragments of wood and leather are pre-

served on the handle. This exemplar was safely dated to the 9th century28. The wrapping appears more

often on younger swords, e. g. on a sword with »Ingelred« inscription from the middle of the 10th century

from Krásná nad Hornádom (Košice/SK)29.

Less important is the 9th century grave at Kobylnice (Kolín dist./CZ) (fig. 5, 1) 30. Except for a type X sword,

it contained a vessel and the point of a lance at the left shoulder. Some time ago, this lance fragment has

fortunately been refound at the Museum of Kolín. It is a lance with an edged socket of 7.6-7.7 cm length31

(fig. 5, 3) which seems to be of western provenience. Both sword and lance could have been imported

from a Carolingian milieu. The vessel is decorated with comb impressions and is domestic 32. It stems from

the last third of the 9th or the very beginning of the 10th century.

The blade of the sword is 4.6 cm wide and shows a blood groove, 1 cm in diameter. The grip was 13.5 cm

long, the crossguard 11.7 cm long and 1.3 cm high (tab. 2). The pommel at the extreme end was 6 cm wide

and 3 cm high. The sword was to be analyzed by R. Pleiner, which never happened. The radiogram shows

a fibrous structure of an iron core, to which probably steel edges were welded. These can not be determi-

ned on the basis of the radiogram. The pommel could have been devided into a massive base and top pom-

mel/pommel bar; the interpretation of the photograph is unclear.

SWORDS IN THE 10TH CENTURY

The best example of a high quality imported sword with a pattern welded blade33 is the one from the war-

rior grave no. 54 at Kanín in the hinterland of the hillfort of Libice nad Cidlinou (Nymburk dist./CZ) (fig. 6,1) 34 of type Y. The grave further contained spurs, a bucket, and a high quality knife with a so-called wave-


axe spurs sword bucket/vessel lance Gombíkyset spherical

buttons

Mikulčice 3 14 4-5 7 + 2× meat, 8 with food – 3Bohemia 5 7-8× 3 5/3,8 with food 1 3

Tab. 3 Occurrence of basic types of graves with swords in Bohemia.


Fig. 5 Kobylnice (Kolín dist./CZ): lance, sword and vessel from the grave. – (Graphics N. Profantová).

shaped weld, which is comparable in quality to damascene/pattern welded blades35. Another sword from

Kanín, grave 184, has a new metallography, too36.

The type X sword from Bratří Čapků Street in Žatec (Žatec/CZ) was found in a male grave (no. 4), which

is also a burial outside the settlement fortification. The dead was equipped with spurs, two battle axes, a


Fig. 6 1 Kanín, grave 54 (Nymburk dist./CZ): type Y swordwith damascene blade (after Hošek/Mařík/Šilhová 2008, 316fig. 5, 1b). – 2 Litoměřice-Božka (Litoměřice dist./CZ): type Ysword with Ulfberht inscription (after Zápotocký 1965, 218fig. 14).

bucket and a knife (tab. 1) 37. On the first radiogram of

the sword from the 80s of the 20th century from Plzeň,

there were no traces of a pattern welding visible, but

the second radiogram from about 1998 in Teplice clear-

ly shows traces of a V motif on the blade38. A detailed

examination of the radiogram does, however, not sup-

port this conclusion – it rather excludes it. The position

of the find spot allows for two interpretations: either

we are dealing with a magnate from an independent

»court«39, or with one of the founders/castellans of the

hillfort of Žatec itself. The burial took place in the first

half of the 10th century; the fortress itself must have

been built, at least according to dendrochronological

dating, in the years 925-937 and 929-935, the main

building phase lasting from 928 to 93740, i. e. around

the time when this warrior was most probably buried

(axes of the Great Moravian type with triangular thorns

cease to be used in the first third of the 10th century; the

age of the departed remains unknown).

A damascene of the whole blade has newly been proved

on a type Y sword from Levý Hradec (Praha-západ

dist./CZ)41. A damascene mark on the blade of the St.

Wenceslas sword from Prague Castle has recently been

discovered. It has an oval shape, and there is evidence of

the use of weld untwistered damask (fig. 7) 42. Thanks

to this analysis, we were able to date the fabrication of

this crown jewel to the 10th, maximal to the beginning

of the 11th century: it could have belonged to the histor-

ical Wenceslas or one of the Boleslavs. Part of the sword

is a younger and therefore too long crossguard. The haft

stems from the 14th century, most probably made on

occasion of the coronation of Charles IV. The blade of

the St. Stephens sword also stems from the 10th centu-

ry – it came to Bohemia only in the High Middle Ages

(1304), however.

SWORDS WITH THE ULFBERHT INSCRIPTION FROM BOHEMIA AND MORAVIA

Swords with inscriptions on the blade have always

attracted attention. The oldest and most remarkable

group with names are swords with the Ulfberht inscrip-

tion. Their spread over all of Europe and their manufac-


Fig. 7 St. Wenceslas sword and detail (a) of the markinlay. – (After Bravermanová 2007, fig. 1, 2; photos J. Glocand J. Hošek).

a


ture have been covered by A. Stalberg, who found 166 blades of this type43. From the Czech Republic, she

only knows about Bohemian finds, none from Moravia44.

If one considers the total number of blades in Europe, the finds from Bohemia are of little importance, but

from the view of Bohemia, their distribution and appearance is of high value.

The first damascene blade was discovered by M. Zápotocký in Libkovice in 1965, in Moravia they were iden-

tified with certainty through radiograms and technological analyses only in the 90s of the 20th century45.

The first sword with this inscription has already been published in 1965; the number of the Moravian finds

is higher, though they were identified only recently. The total number of these swords from 9th and 10th

century Bohemia and Moravia is four (tab. 4).

Newly discovered was a blade with this inscription in grave 438/III at Mikulčice (Hodonín dist./CZ)46 which

dates to the end of the 9th century. The letters are hardly legible, but a different inscription seems to be

improbable, in view of this date. It could be a copy of the Ulfberh+t original from normal, hardened steel

(from four pieces) 47. It belongs to the X type.

Another Ulfberht sword comes from Nemilany (Olomouc dist./CZ) (fig. 8) 48 from a recently discovered buri-

al ground in the hinterland of Olomouc. The inscription belongs to type 249, pommel and crossguard are

missing, and according to the analysis of organic materials in the grave, these were most probably made

of wood50. The metallographic analysis of the blade proves its high quality, but no damascene. The mate-

rial was folded a few times (turned down/doubled up) and flattened, but the various layers do not display

a great variety in the quantity of carbon (fig. 8) 51. The blade must have been solid and firm, the grip made

of ash tree.

From Bohemia we only know of one type Y sword from Litoměřice (Litoměřice dist./CZ), from the hill Božka,

1.4 km from the centre of the fortress: the inscription reads ULFBERH + T, its length is 85 cm (fig. 6, 2). The

inscription is of type 1 or 3 according to Stalberg52. We are dealing with a grave find, other finds of which

are not preserved, neither a list of them53. Sword and grave can most probably be dated to the second half

site grave no. sword type/ inscription length datingmetal analyses (cm)

Litoměřice Y UlfBERH+T 85,2 10th/beginning of var. 1 11th century

Mikulčice G 438/III X/A unreadable letters: 95/75,8 2nd half of 9th century4-5

Nemilany without crossguard +ULFBERHT+ end of 9th/beginning and pommel/A type 2 of 10th century

Olomouc- V, caval pommel/11G +V?FBEH??? 14 fragments 2nd half of 10th/beginningUniverzitní ul. type 2 of a blade of 11th century

Tab. 4 Swords with the Ulfberht inscription from the Czech Republic, lower case marks damaged letters. – (After Zápotocký 1965;Košta 2005a; Kalábek 2001; Frait 2006; Bravermanová 2007).

sword type Bohemia Moravia note

X 7 24/10 Mikulčice Mikulčice dated to the middle of the 9th century, Prague dated to 870/880

Y 7 3 Mikulčice, archaic variantH/B 1 8 + 5 old Carolingian

without exact typeM 1-2 1α 1 –K, N, V 1-2? 2 + 5/6 + 1

Tab. 5 Overview of the most frequent sword types in Bohemia andMoravia. – (Bohemia by N. Profantová;Moravia according to Košta 2004;2005a; Frait 2006; Kalábek 2001).

of the 10th century54. This dating is in accordance with the growing importance of this centre, which was

only fortified at the end of the 10th century.

From Moravia we know of the find of a Petersen V type sword with hollow pommel from Olomouc-

Univerzitní-Street (Olomouc dist./CZ). Only a small part of the blade is preserved; the inscription is incom-

plete, but clearly identifiable. This exemplar can be dated to the second half of the 10th century or to the

beginning of the 11th century55. The find circumstances are unknown; one can only assume a connection

with the unruly time of the Polish occupation of Moravia at the beginning of the 11th century. According

to A. Stalsberg’s chronology, type V swords were manufactured in the first half of the 10th century56. In the

context of Bohemia one should therefore consider a dating to the 10th century as a whole. The fragmen-

tary inscription could belong to the second type. Four blades with the Ulfberht inscription are not a lot (fig.


Fig. 8 Nemilany (Olomouc dist./CZ): grave 8, sword anddetail of the Ulfberht inscription. – (After Selucká / Richterová / Hložek 2003, figs 1-3). a

10), but with the technological surveys of older finds their number could grow. Interestingly, no damasce-

ne/pattern welding was discovered in the case of the Nemilany find (fig. 8), which means that the inscrip-

tion does not necessarily prove this technique. Swords quite often have pattern welding or an inscription.

The blade of the St. Stephens sword in the St. Wenceslas treasure at Prague Castle stems from the 10th

century; this Nordic product came to Bohemia only in the High Middle Ages (1304), however.

SABRES

We know of Old Hungarian or Byzantine-Bulgarian sabres from Moravia, two of which were identified with

certainty: from warrior grave no. 64 at Nemilany (Olomouc dist./CZ) (fig. 9, 1) 57; it could represent a local

derivate of a sabre from the Carpathian Basin58. But more probably it is a product of Byzantine-Bulgarian

origin59, which could have come to Nemilany in connection with the Old Hungarians. A crossguard from a

classical sabre stems from settlement layers at Mikulčice (fig. 9, 3) 60. In Bohemia a sabre was found at

Soběnice in the land of Litoměřice61, i. e. nearby the centre of the second highest accumulation of swords

(3) after Libice. Unfortunately, it is not preserved, but the credibility of this find is supported by a rich col-

lection of Old Hungarian belt mounts and decorated mounts from a horse harness or horseman’s bags in

the Museum of Litoměřice62 – without find circumstances, though. The fragment of a sabre blade that can

be dated, through other finds, to the 10th-first half of the 11th century was found in the inner moat of the

hillfort at Vlastislav (fig. 9, 2; trench I/53 and IIIa/53)63. The remaining part of the single-edged blade is

21.6 cm long and 5 cm wide.

PARTS OF SWORDS IN SETTLEMENT CONTEXTS

Even in Bohemia it is possible to find fragments or parts of swords in settlement contexts. Their interpreta-

tion and specification are not always unambiguous, though. The crossguard of a sword from the 11th-12th

century was found at Břežánky64; it was 21.8 cm long. Another crossguard stems from the hillfort of Budeč(Kladno dist./CZ) from a late hillfort period layer under the floor in segment G265, but there still are no radio-

grams, and therefore the shape of the whole is unknown; its length is 8.5 cm, which is very small (tab. 2) 66.

From the same hillfort comes a cast bronze fitting of the scabbard (fig. 12, 1) which has parallels in the

Viking and eastern European milieu67. Another iron U-shaped fitting with simple animal heads at the ends

and the same parallels comes from Křinec (prehistoric hillfort in eastern Bohemia, unpublished). A last sim-

ple example comes from a grave in the cemetery of Praha-Lahovice (fig. 12, 2) 68, but the sword is missing

in the grave. The function of the fitting of the scabbard is probably symbolic.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of sword finds that relate to the 9th and 10th centuries is different in Bohemia and Moravia

(fig. 1). In the 10th century, the number increases in Bohemia (especially type Y), but there is a rapid decline

in Moravia at the same time. In the 10th century, this sort of finds most likely mirrors the transition of power

from Moravia to Bohemia which took place some time between 906 and 935 (accession of Boleslav I).

Meanwhile, there is a rapid decrease in swords as grave goods in Bohemia, notably in Central Bohemia and

to a lesser extent in other regions.


Graves with swords from the second half of the 10th/beginning of the 11th century are very rare (Počaply,

Příbram/CZ), whereas graves from the first half of the century are rather common (Kanín [2x], Libice, Žatec,

and probably also Levý Hradec [Praha-západ dist./CZ] and Libkovice [Litoměřice dist./CZ]) (tab. 1; fig. 2c).

More valuable are finds such as the swords from Olomouc (Olomouc dist./CZ), Vranovice (Brno-Country

dist./CZ) (type Y) or Holešov (Kroměříž dist./CZ) (type V or N?, originally wrongly attributed to type X) and

from Jaroměř (Náchod/CZ) (type X)69 or Křivoklát (Rakovník dist./CZ) type »Y«70. These point at least to the

importance of lesser known centres of the so-called »second order«.

The dating of accidental finds is only made possible by typology and technological analyses. Radiograms

represent a conditio sine qua non for further analyses, but as I can tell from my own experience, a single

image – if not made by a specially trained expert – is not always sufficient. The weld damascene in the cases


Fig. 9 1 Sabre blade from Nemilany (Olomouc dist./CZ), probably of Byzantine-Bulgarian provenance. – 2 Detail (after Kouřil 2003, 135fig. 13). – 3 Sabre blade from Vlastislav (Litoměřice dist./CZ). – 4 Sabre crossguard from Mikulčice (Hodonín dist./CZ) (fitting of the scab-bard) (after Měřínský 1986, 30 fig. 4, 1).

2 3

4

1


Fig. 10 Map of the sword finds with damascene (pattern welding no. 3) or smith mark (no. 4 triangle) and with Ulfberht inscription (1with Ulfberht; 2 with inscription, probably Ulfberht): 1 Břeclav-Pohansko (Břeclav dist./CZ). – 2 Kanín (Nymburk dist./CZ). – 3 Kolín (Kolíndist./CZ). – 4 Libkovice (Litoměřice dist./CZ). – 5 Litoměřice (Litoměřice dist./CZ). – 6 Mikulčice (Hodonín dist./CZ). – 7 Nemilany (Olomoucdist./CZ). – 8 Olomouc (Olomouc dist./CZ). – 9 Plzeň-Doudlevce (Plze/CZ). – 10 Praha and Praha-Hrad (Praha/CZ). – 11 Staré Město(Uherské Hradiště dist./CZ). – 12 Žatec(?) (Žatec/CZ). – 13 Holešov (Přerov/CZ). – (Profantová 2010).

Fig. 11 Pommel of a type X sword from thesmithy of Mikulčice. – (After Klíma 1985, 442fig. 10).

of the sword from Kolín (Kolín dist./CZ) and Kanín grave 54 (Nymburk dist./CZ) (fig. 6, 1) was impossible

to detect through the image, and other (destructive) analyses were necessary71. It is a high quality sword,

probably Carolingian (from Rhineland?), but most probably without pattern welding72. Weld damascene

technique (pattern welding) was discovered on a type Y sword from Libkovice during its conservation73.

Whereas a specific workshop (smithy), where swords were made and/or repaired, has been found at

Mikulčice that can be dated to the second half of the 9th century (fig. 11) 74, we can suppose the existen-

ce of such a workshop in Bohemia only in the second half of the 10th century75. The reparation of swords

is attested at Břeclav-Pohansko76. For Bohemia the most convincing example is the blade of the St.

Wenceslas sword (fig. 7) that was equipped with new parts (crossguard and pommel), and the very out-

worn blade served ceremonial needs77.

Most of the swords from the older find horizon are known from the eastern part of Central Bohemia, where

most of the skeleton graves in the second half of the 9th and the beginning of the 10th century are atte-

sted. From the distribution of the sword finds we can tell their absence in southern and southwestern

Bohemia, from where decorated fittings that probably belong to the sword set are known78, and therefore

it could simply be a matter of the state of the art. Among uncertain reports of sword finds from this area

appears the site of Brloh (Český Krumlov) in South Bohemia. Altogether, the appearance of swords can be

related to the following historical events and sheds light on the following historical aspects:

1. the change in the number of finds between Moravia and Bohemia in the first half of the 10th century

most probably reflecting a transition of political power from Moravia to Bohemia some time between

906 and 935 (from the fall of Moravia to the accession of Boleslav I),

2. the relation to centres of a certain importance before the establishment of the Přemyslid dynasty in the

10th century (Plzeň-Doudlevce, Plzeň-město dist., Kolín, [Stará] Kouřim, Kolín dist. and maybe Jindřichov,

Cheb dist.),

3. the relation to centres ruled by the Prague Přemyslid dynasty already at the turn of the 9th/10th century

(Kováry-Budeč, Kladno dist., Prague Castle, Městská část Praha 1 and maybe Levý Hradec, Praha-západ

dist.) on the one hand and by the Slavníks on the other hand (Libice and Kanín) (in the case of Budeč,

all exemplars are lost, but castellated bronze fittings from the scabbard indicate an eastern or northern

origin [fig. 12, 1] 79; in one case, we are dealing with the type G otherwise unknown in Bohemia),


Fig. 12 Kováry-Budeč (1)and Praha-Lahovice (2) (fitting of the scabbard). –(After Váňa 1995, 60 fig. 40,8; Beranová / Lutovský 2009,293 fig. 326). 1 2

1) Krajíc 1978.

2) Pokorný / Mařík 2006; Mařík 2009.

3) cf. Marek 2005 (more of the Moravian finds).

4) Another sabre from a grave in Soběnice (Litoměřice dist./CZ) islost now.

5) Stalberg 2008.

6) cf. Košta 2005a, 162; Geibig 1991, 144 f.

7) Košta 2005a, 174 fig. 10.

8) Szameit 1986, pl. 8, 2-4; 9, 2.

9) Extant length 76cm; blade length 61.5 cm; lenticular cross-guard length 5.5 cm, height 2.1 cm; deposited at the Museumof Plzeň, inv. no. 1149.

10) Ypey 1982, 312.

11) Vignatiová 1993, 95 fig. 7, 2.

12) Ibidem 97.

13) Klanica 1990, 60.

14) Hrubý 1955, 166 fig. 27, 3.

15) Szameit 1986, 390 pl. 1.

16) After V. Tovornik: Peterson H (Tovornik 1983, 136).

17) Szameit 1986, 392 fig. 1.

18) Profantová 1997, 110.

19) Pleiner / Plzák / Quadrat 1956, 318 fig. 2; 319 fig. 3.

20) Košta / Hošek 2008.

21) Militký / Profantová 2000.

22) Lutovský 1996, 54 fig. 8; Militký / Profantová 2000; Profan-tová 2011, fig. 3, 3. 5.

23) Lutovský 1996, 65 f.; Profantová 2011.

24) Borkovský 1941, 172 fig. 1.

25) Sláma 1977; Tomková 2005, 337 fig. 2.

26) The measures are to be found in tables 2-3.

27) Profantová 2005.

28) Dostál 1966, 193 pl. 66, 1.

29) Ruttkay 1976, 250 fig. 24, 4; 279 fig. 28, 4.

30) Dvořák / Filip 1946, 94 fig. 6, 6; inv. no. 4424 (new X-ray).

31) On the socket we can see the impression of a textile and a clearly visible rivet nearby the leaf to enforce the haft;Museum Kolín, inv. no. Dvořák collection 9879.

32) Dark gray vessel from the grave with wheeled, horizontally cutlip with three bands of antithetically combed incisions and twobands of triple waves; the decoration exceeds the maximalshoulder; vessel height 104mm, rim diameter 91mm; insidethere are vertical traces of a wooden tool (fig. 5, 2). Dvořák /Filip 1946, 94 fig. 6, 6; inv. no. 4424; the shape of the top isuntypical, maybe influenced by a foreign (Carolingian?) milieu.

33) Not all damascene blades are of excellent quality, cf. the situ-ation at Mikulčice (Košta / Hošek 2009; Košta 2005a).

34) Hošek / Mařík / Šilhová 2008, 312 fig. 2; 316 fig. 5; 318 fig. 6;322 fig. 10.

35) Ibidem 312 fig. 2; 313 fig. 3; 322 fig. 11.

36) Hošek / Mařík / Šilhová 2006.

37) Bubeník 1988, pl. 278.

38) Čech 2000, 173; 174 fig. 4.

39) Ceramic finds from other graves in the neighborhood of the»warrior« are identical to the ceramic finds from the fortifica-tion moat of a little court (Čech 2004, 65).

40) Ibidem 59.

41) Košta forthcoming; Sláma 1977, 151 fig. 36, 1.

42) Bravermanová 2007, 110 figs 1-2; technological analysis by J. Hošek.

43) Stalberg 2008, 99; 110 no. K 1.

44) Ibidem pl. 1.


4. the relation to the newly founded fortified centres that served as consolidation of the Přemyslid prince-

ly power outside Central Bohemia (Žatec/CZ, Litoměřice [Litoměřice dist./CZ], Jaroměř [Náchod dist./CZ]

and maybe Křivoklát [Rakovník dist./CZ]),

5. the relation to the military and administrative organisation – sword finds as a possible reflection of the

colonisation by princely allies outside the main centres, on rural courts (e. g. Libkovice [Litoměřice

dist./CZ]80, where the interpretation of the finds as witnesses of a colonisation seems to be more prob-

able than a relation to the province centre Mělník [Mělník dist./CZ] 10km away), and

6. the sword finds as random attestations of military conflicts (Kamýk).

The fragmentary situation of Bohemian and Moravian sword finds from the 10th century can be read, to

make the best out of it, as a testimony. A successful occupation of the country by the Přemyslid dynasty

led to a relatively quick marginalisation and following suppression of the symbolism of power at the buri-

als of the magnates that in addition stood in contrast to the Christian faith. At the same time, this success

led to a stabilisation of the power centres that lasted until the time of modern urbanisation (Prague, Žatec,

Litoměřice), which definitely devastated archaeological monuments that were, until then, still preserved.

Notes


45) Vignatiová 1993; Galuška 2003; Poláček 2000.

46) Košta 2005a, 179 pl. 1; 3; for metallography see Košta /Hošek 2009, 114 fig. 3.

47) cf. Košta / Hošek 2009, 119; 113 fig. 2; 114 fig. 3.

48) Kalábek 2001; 2009.

49) Stalberg 2008, 96 fig. 1.

50) Selucká / Richterová / Hložek 2003, 14.

51) Ibidem 15.

52) Stalberg 2008, 96 fig. 1.

53) For other measurements see tables 2-3.

54) Zápotocký 1965, 218 fig. 14.

55) Frait 2006.

56) Stalberg 2008, 97 fig. 2.

57) In a distance of only 5m from two horse graves (Kouřil 2003,133-135; fig. 13).

58) In association with the original classification of sabres, it isinteresting that from the northern part of Moravia comes anunpublished horse harness of the Old Hungarian type withmetall inlay.

59) See V. Yotov’s article in this volume.

60) Měřínský 1986, 30 fig. 4, 1.

61) Zápotocký 1965, 378.

62) Profantová / Lutovský 1992, 4-6 figs 1-3; Profantová 2008,153 fig. 5.

63) Váňa 1968, 157.

64) Klápště 1994, 110 fig. 63, 12.

65) Váňa 1995, 56 fig. 38, 8.

66) The crossguard is 8.2 cm long and was found at Olomouc,Univerzitní Street, but one side seems to be incomplete (Frait2006, 97 f.); a type V sword with rivet to connect pommel andgrip.

67) Gräslund 2001, 137 fig. 4b.

68) Beranová / Lutovský 2009, 293 fig. 326.

69) Pleiner / Plzák / Quadrat 1956, 321 fig. 4.

70) Sláma 1977, 62 f. fig. 17, 1.

71) Pleiner / Plzák / Quadrat 1956, 318 f. figs 2-3.

72) Košta / Hošek 2008, 10.

73) Zápotocký 1965, 225 fig. 15.

74) Klíma 1985, 442 fig. 10.

75) Košta 2005b, 170.

76) Vignatiová 1993.

77) Bravermanová 2007.

78) Profantová 1991; 1995; Metlička / Profantová 1997-1998, 317fig. 2, 1. Also in eastern Bohemia was the three-arm shapedbronze fitting from the sword set found, probably a Carolin-gian import from the 9th century (unpublished).

79) Váňa 1995, 60 fig. 40, 8.

80) cf. Klápště 2006, 39.

References

Beranová / Lutovský 2009: M. Beranová / M. Lutovský, Slované vČechách. Archeologie 6.-12. století (Praha 2009).

Borkovský 1941: I. Borkovský, Ein Wikingergrab auf der PragerBurg. Altböhmen u. Altmähren 1, 1941, 171-182.

Bravermanová 2007: M. Bravermanová, Pochází korunovační mečzv. Svatováclavský z pokladu po Přemyslovcích a je jeho čepeldokonce památkou po sv. Václavu. In: E. Doležalová / R. Šimů -nek (eds), Od knížat ke králům. Sborník u příležitosti 60. naroze-nin Josefa Žemličky (Praha 2007) 105-123.

Bubeník 1988: J. Bubeník, Slovanské osídlení středního Poohří (Dieslawische Besiedlung im Einzugsgebiet der mittleren Ohře)(Praha 1988).

Čech 2000: P. Čech, Mocenský vývoj v severozápadních Čecháchdo počátku 11. stol. In: L. Polanský (ed.), Přemyslovský stát ko -lem roku 1000. Na paměť knižete Boleslava II (7. února 999)(Praha 2000) 155-173.

2004: P. Čech, Založení Žatce a jeho podoba v 10. stol. In: P.Holodňák / I. Ebelová (eds), Žatec. Dějiny českých měst (Praha2004) 59-66.

Dostál 1966: B. Dostál, Slovanské pohřebiště střední doby hradištnína Moravě (Slawische Begräbnisstätten der mittleren Burgwall-zeit in Mähren) (Praha 1966).

Dresler / Měřínský 2009: P. Dresler / Z. Měřínský (eds), Archeologiedoby hradištní v České a Slovenské republice. Sborník příspĕvků

přednesených na pracovním setkání Archeologie doby hradištníve dnech 24.-26.4.2006. Archaeologia Mediaevalis Moravica etSilesiana Suppl. 2 (Brno 2009).

Dvořák / Filip 1946: F. Dvořák / J. Filip, Slovanské nálezy na Ko -línsku. Pam. Arch. 42, 1946, 70-94.

Frait 2006: R. Frait, Mladohradištní meč z Univerzitní ulice v Olo-mouci. Zprávy Vlastivědného Muz. Olomouc 292, 2006, 97-102.

Galuška 2003: L. Galuška, K otázce raně středověkých mečů sdamascenskou čepelí. Nožířské listy. Občasník Technického Muz.Brně 7, 2003, 16 f.

Geibig 1991: A. Geibig, Beiträge zur morphologischen Entwick -lung des Schwertes im Mittelalter. Eine Analyse des Fundmateri-als vom ausgehenden 8. bis zum 12. Jahrhundert aus Sammlun-gen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Offa-Bücher 71 (Neumün-ster 1991).

Gräslund 2001: A. S. Gräslund, Birka between West and East. Offa58, 2001, 129-140.

Hošek / Mařík / Šilhová 2006: J. Hošek / J. Mařík / A. Šilhová, Me -tal lo graphic Examination of 10th Century Sword No. 184 fromKanín (Bohemia). In: Bitva na Bože i Kulikovskoje sraženie (isto-rija i kul’tura srednevekovoj Rusi, Rjazan) 308-320.

2008: J. Hošek / J. Mařík / A. Šilhová, Kanín, hrob 54. Průzkumhrobové výbavy (Kanín, Grave No. 54. Research on the GraveContents). Arch. Rozhledy 60/2, 2008, 310-328.


Hrubý 1955: V. Hrubý, Staré Město. Velkomoravské pohřebiště »NaValách« (Staré Město. Die großmährische Begräbnisstätte »NaValách«) (Praha 1955).

Kalábek 2001: M. Kalábek, Meč se značkou ULFBERHT (The Swordwith a Sign Ulfberht). In: M. Bém (ed.), Archeologické zrcadlení(Archaeological Reflections) (Olomouc 2001) 85-96.

2009: M. Kalábek, Hradištní lokality objevené na trase dálnič-ního obchvatu Olomouce (1999-2005) (Die auf der Trasse desAutobahngürtels Olmouc entdeckten Burgwallstätten [1999-2005]). In: Dresler / Měřínský 2009, 150-157.

Klanica 1990: Z. Klanica, K počátkům staromoravského kostrovéhopohřbívání. In: Staroměstská výročí. Sborník příspěvků ze slav-nostního zasedání u příležitosti 40 let archeologických výzkumůMoravského muzea ve Starém Městě a výročí objevu první velko-moravské zděné stavby ve Starém Městě Na valách (Brno 1990)57-64.

Klápště 1994: J. Klápště, Paměť krajiny středověkého Mostecka(Most 1994).

2006: J. Klápště, Proměna českých zemí ve středověku (Praha2006).

Klíma 1985: B. Klíma, Velkomoravská kovárna na podhradí v Miku-lčicích (Die großmährischen Schmiede auf der Unterburg inMikulčice). Pam. Arch. 76, 1985, 428-455.

Košta 2004: J. Košta, Výpověď souboru raně středověkých mečů zestaromoravského centra v Mikulčicích [unpubl. M.A.-thesis, Uni-verzita Karlova v Praze 2004].

2005a: J. Košta, Kollektion frühmittelalterlicher Schwerter ausdem großmährischen Zentrum in Mikulčice. In: Kouřil 2005,157-191.

2005b: J. Košta, Přehled vývoje mečů karolinského typu. Středo-český Sborník Historický 23, 2005, 159-172.

forthcoming: J. Košta, Raně středověký meč ze sbírek Středoče-ského muzea v Roztokách u Prahy v kontextu mečů Petersenovatypu Y. In: K. Tomková (ed.), Pohřebiště na Levém Hradci a jehopředpolí (Prague forthcoming).

Košta / Hošek 2008: J. Košta / J. Hošek, Zbraně z knížecího hrobuz 9. stol. v Kolíně z pohledu archeologie a metalografie (Wea-pons from the 9th-Century Princely Grave in Kolín from the Pointof View of Archaeology and Metallography). Acta MilitariaMediaevalia 4 (Kraków, Sanok 2008) 7-37.

2009: J. Košta / J. Hošek, Raně středověké meče s jednodílnoupolokruhovitou hlavicí (Typ Petersen X/Geibig 12, Var. I). Pohledarcheologie a metalografie (Frühmittelalterliche Schwerter miteinteiligem, pilzförmigen Knauf [Typ Petersen X/Geibig 12, Var. I]aus Sicht der Archäologie und Metallographie). In: Dresler /Měřínský 2009, 109-126.

Kouřil 2003: P. Kouřil, Staří Maďaři a Morava z pohledu archeolo-gie. In: J. Klápště / E. Plešková / J. Žemlička (eds), Dějiny ve věkunejistot. Sborník k příležitosti 70. narozenin Dušan Třeštíka(Praha 2003) 110-146.

2005: P. Kouřil (ed.), Die frühmittelalterliche Elite bei den Völ-kern des östlichen Mitteleuropas mit einem speziellen Blick aufdie großmährische Problematik. Spisy Archeologického ÚstavuAV ČR Brno 25 (Brno 2005).

Krajíc 1978: R. Krajíc, Vývoj a rozšíření raně středověkých mečů vEvropě, u západních Slovanů a rozbor materiálu z Čech a Moravy[unpubl. M.A.-thesis, Univerzita Karlova v Praze 1978].

Lutovský 1996: M. Lutovský, Kolínský knížecí hrob: Ad fontes (Für-stengrab von Kolín: Ad fontes). Sborník Národ. Muz. Praha 48,1994 (1996), 37-76.

Marek 2005: L. Marek, Early Medieval Swords from Central andEastern Europe. Dilemmas of an Archaeologist and a Student of Arms. Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis 2713 (Wrocław 2005).

Mařík 2009: J. Mařík, Libická sídelní aglomerace a její zázemí vraném středověku (Early Medieval Agglomeration of Libice andits Hinterland). Dissertationes Archaeologicae Brunenses / Pra-gensesque 7 (Praha 2009).

Měřínský 1986: Z. Měřínský, Morava v 10. století ve světle archeo-logických nálezů (Mähren im 10. Jahrhundert im Lichte derarchäologischen Funde). Pam. Arch. 77/1, 1986, 18-80.

Metlička / Profantová 1997-1998: J. Metlička / N. Profantová, ZumFund eines eisernen Riemenzeugbeschlages und zur Datierungdes Burgwalls bei Žinkovy, Bez. Plzeň-Süd. Saarbrücker Studienund Materialien zur Altertumskunde 6-7 (Bonn 1997-1998) 315-324.

Militký / Profantová 2000: J. Militký / N. Profantová, Das Fürsten-grab von Kolín. In: Wieczorek / Hinz 2000, 219-226.

Pleiner / Plzák / Quadrat 1956: R. Pleiner / F. Plzák / O. Quadrat,Poz námky k výrobní technice staroslovanských čepelí (Bemer-kungen zur Erzeugungstechnik altslawischer Klingen). Pam.Arch. 47, 1956, 314-334.

Pokorný / Mařík 2006: P. Pokorný / J. Mařík, Nález zbytku medemslazené potraviny ve výbavě raně středověkého hrobu na nekro-poli v Libici nad Cidlinou-Kaníně. Zhodnocení nálezu z hlediskarekonstrukce krajiny a vegetace (The Find of Honey-SweetenedCereal Food Residues from Early Medieval Burial Site near Libicenad Cidlinou. Evaluation of the Find from the Point of Landscapeand Vegetation Reconstruction). Arch. Rozhledy 58/3, 2006,559-569.

Poláček 2000: L. Poláček, Zweischneidiges Schwert. In: Wieczorek /Hinz 2000, 197.

Profantová 1991: N. Profantová, Přínos archeologie k poznáníčeských dějin devátého století. Stud. Mediaevalia Pragensia 2,1991, 29-60.

1995: N. Profantová, K datování kování z hradiště Libětice. Časo-pis Společnosti Přátel Starožitností 2, 1995, 99-101.

1997: N. Profantová, On the Archaeological Evidence for Bohe-mian Elites of the 8th-9th Century. In: D. Čaplovič (ed.), CentralEurope in 8th-10th Centuries. International Scientific Conference,Bratislava, October 2-4, 1995 (Bratislava 1997) 105-114.

2005: N. Profantová, Poznámky k meči z hrobu na 3. nádvoříPražského hradu. In: K. Tomková (ed.), Pohřbívání na Pražskémhradě a jeho předpolích. Castrum Pragense 7 (Praha 2005) 307-310.

2008: N. Profantová, Problém interpretace staromaďarskýchnálezů v Čechách. (Problem of Interpretation of Old MagyarFinds in Bohemia). In: T. Štefanovičová / J. Hulínek (eds), Bitka priBratislave v roku 907 a jej význam pre vývoj stredného Podu-najska (Bratislava 2008) 149-168.

2011: N. Profantová, Karolínské importy a jejich napodobovánív Čechách (konec. 8.-10. stol) [Karolingische Importe und ihreNachahmung in Böhmen, bzw. in Mähren (Das ausgehende 8.-10. Jahrhundert)]. In: V. Turčian (ed.), Karolínská doba a Slo-vensko. Zborník Slovenského Národ. Múz. Arch. Suppl. (Bratis-lava 2011) 71-104.

Profantová / Lutovský 1992: N. Profantová / M. Lutovský, Staro ma -ďarské nálezy z Čech (Altmagyarische Funde aus Böhmen). Sbor-ník Společnosti Přátel Starožitností 3, 1992, 3-16.

Ruttkay 1976: A. Ruttkay, Waffen und Reiterausrüstung des 9. biszur ersten Hälfte des 14. Jahrhunderts in der Slowakei (II). Slo-venská Arch. 24 / 2, 1976, 245-395.

Selucká / Richterová / Hložek 2003: A. Selucká / A. Richterová / M.Hložek, Otázka technologie zhotovení meče s nápisem ULF-BERHT. Nožířské listy. Občasník Technického Muz. Brně 7, 2003,14 f.

Sláma 1977: J. Sláma, Mittelböhmen im frühen Mittelalter 1. Kata-log der Grabfunde. Praehistorica 5 (Praha 1977).

Stalberg 2008: A. Stalberg, Herstellung und Verbreitung der Ulf-berht-Schwertklingen. Eine Neubewertung. Zeitschr. Arch. Mit -tel alter 36, 2008, 89-118.

Szameit 1986: E. Szameit, Karolingerzeitliche Waffenfunde ausÖsterreich Teil 1. Die Schwerter. Arch. Austriaca 70, 1986, 385-412.

Tomková 2005: K. Tomková, Die frühmittelalterliche Elite aus derSicht der Gräberfelder auf der Prager Burg und ihren Vorfeldern.In: Kouřil 2005, 335-352.

Tovornik 1983: V. Tovornik, Die frühmittelalterlichen Gräberfeldervon Gusen und Aufhof bei Perg in Oberösterreich [unpubl. diss.,Univ. Wien 1983].

Váňa 1968: Z. Váňa, Vlastislav. Výsledky výzkumu hradiště v letech1953-55 a 1957-60 (Vlastislav. Ausgrabungen des slawischenBurgwalls in den Jahren 1953-55 und 1957-60). Pam. Arch. 59,1968, 5-192.

1995: Z. Váňa, Přemyslovská Budeč. Archeologický výzkum hra-diště v letech 1972-1986 (Praha 1995).

Vignatiová 1993: J. Vignatiová, Karolinské meče z Pohanska u Bře-clavi (Karolingische Schwerter aus Pohansko bei Břeclav). Sbor-ník Prací Fil. Fak. Brno 42 / E38, 1993, 91-109.

Wieczorek / Hinz 2000: A. Wieczorek / H.-M. Hinz (eds), EuropasMitte um 1000. Handbuch zur Ausstellung (Stuttgart 2000).

Ypey 1982: J. Ypey, Europäische Waffen mit Damaszierung. Arch.Korrbl. 12, 1982, 381-388.

Zápotocký 1965: M. Zápotocký, Slovanské osídlení na Litoměřicku(Die slawische Besiedlung in der Litoměřicer Gegend). Pam.Arch. 56, 1965, 205-391.


Abstract / Zusammenfassung / Rezum

Examples of the most important results of technological analyses of swords in the Czech RepublicMost of the swords from the older find horizon are known from the eastern part of Central Bohemia, where most of theskeleton graves are attested in the second half of the 9th and the beginning of the 10th century. In the 9th century, swordsof the X type are predominant in Bohemia and Moravia; rarely other types – like M, H or eventually K – appear. The bestexample of a high quality imported sword with pattern welded blade is the one from the warrior grave no. 54 at Kanínin the hinterland of the hillfort of Libice nad Cidlinou, or another from Libkovice pod Řípem. Swords with inscriptions onthe blade are known from Litoměřice in Bohemia and Mikulčice, Nemilany near Olomouc and Olomouc in Moravia. A spe-cific workshop (smithy) where swords were made or repaired has been found at Mikulčice and can be dated to the sec-ond half of the 9th century. Newly discovered was a damascene mark on the blade of the St. Wenceslas sword from PragueCastle, probably to be dated to the 10th, maximal the beginning of 11th century.

Beispiele für die wichtigsten Resultate der technologischen Analysen von Schwertern aus der Tschechischen RepublikDie Fundlage in Böhmen wird, im Gegensatz zu Mähren und der Slowakei, durch eine größere Zahl an älteren Schwert -funden erschwert, bei denen die Fundzusammenhänge nur schwer rekonstruierbar sind. Für das 9. Jahrhun dert sindGrabfunde von Schwertern der Typen M, H, K und von Saxen bezeichnend. In Böhmen sind die importierten Schwertermanchmal mit einer Marke versehen (Plzeň-Doudlevce); beim Schwert von Kolín wurde vermutet, dass es sich umgeschweißten Damaszener-Stahl handelt. Dies haben neue Analysen jedoch nicht bestätigt. Zu einem geläufigeren Typgehört das Schwert vom Typ X und mit einer gekanteten Tülle westlichen Ursprungs aus dem Grab von Kobylnice. BeimSchwert des Typs X von der Prager Burg (III N 199) war eine metallographische Analyse nicht mehr möglich. Allerdingszeigt die Röntgenaufnahme, dass der Griff mit ausgehämmertem Draht umwickelt und unterhalb der Parierstange verziertist. Die hölzerne(?) Scheide ist mit einem verzierten Blech beschlagen. Hochwertige importierte Schwerter des Typs Y mitdamaszierter Klinge stammen aus dem Kriegergrab Nr. 54 in Kanín im Hinterland des Burgwalls Libice nad Cidlinou undaus Libkovice am Fuße des Říp. Das Schwert aus Žatec wurde in den 80er- und 90er-Jahren des 20. Jahr hunderts zweimalgeröntgt. Während auf der ersten Aufnahme keine damaszierte Klinge sichtbar war, ist auf der zweiten eindeutig eine sol-che zu erkennen. Nach der neuerlichen Beurteilung ist anzunehmen, dass diese Interpretation voreilig war. Dagegen hatsich die Schwertklinge des hl. Wenzel aufgrund der tauschierten Marke als frühmittelalterlich herausgestellt. Sie wurdever mutlich um 1000 hergestellt. Die Zahl der mit einer Aufschrift versehenen Schwerter ist dank der technologischen

Analysen gestiegen: Litoměřice, Mikulčice Grab 438/III, Nemilany und Olomouc-Uni verzitní-Straße. Auf dem GebietTschechiens fanden sich auch Säbel: bei Grab 64 in Nemilany bei Olomouc handelt es sich um ein bulgarisch-byzantini-sches Produkt.Die Zahl der gefundenen Schwerter des 9. und 10. Jahrhunderts ist in Böhmen und Mähren unterschiedlich. Für das 10.Jahrhundert können wir ein Anwachsen der Zahl der Schwerter in Böhmen (vor allem der Typen X und Y) und gleichzei-tig einen Rückgang in Mähren verzeichnen.

Příklady nejdůležitějších výsledků technologických analýz mečů v české republice, především v čecháchPřes embargo na vývoz mečů z Karolinské a východofranské říše máme zdokumentováno z území České republiky 74 či 75mečů, včetně saxů. Samotné Čechy jsou totiž oproti Moravě, Slovensku i dalším zemím zatíženy velkým množstvím starýchnálezů mečů, k nimž nelze dobře rekonstruovat nálezové kontexty. Pro 9. století jsou typické hrobové nálezy mečů typu M,H, K a saxů. V Čechách jsou nejexkluzivnější nálezy – importy někdy opatřeny značkou (Plzeň-Doudlevce), v případě Kolínase uvažovalo i o svářkovém damasku, ten však nebyl novými analýzami potvrzen. Běžnější celek představuje hrob z Kobylnices mečem typu X a kopím s hráněnou tulejí západního původu. V případě meče z Pražského hradu (III N 199) rtg. snímekukázal jednak ovinutí rukojeti roztepávaným drátem a výzdobu pod příčkou meče plechové zdobené ukončení dřevěné?pochvy. Nejlepším příkladem kvalitního dovezeného meče typu Y s damaskovanou čepelí je hrob bojovníka č. 54 z Kanínav zázemí Libice n/Cidlinou, obdobný meč pochází i z Libkovic pod Řípem. Meč z Žatce byl podroben rentgenování 2x – v80.a 90. letech 20. století, z prvního snímku není užití damaskované čepele znatelné, interpretace 2. byla jako damasko -vání.Ovšem po posouzení obou snímků se domnívám, že předčasně. Naopak čepel meče sv. Václava se díky tauzovanéznačce ukázala jako raně středověká, vyrobená nejspíše před r. 1000.Meče opatřené nápisem díky moderním technologickým průzkumům přibyly: Litoměřice, Mikulčice, H. 438/III, Nemi lany aOlomouc, Univerzitní ul. Z území ČR pocházejí též nálezy šavlí, opět z H 64 z Nemilan u Olomouce, ta byla považovanáza derivát staromaďarské šavle, avšak jde o výrobek bulharsko-byzantského původu. Počty nalezených mečů, vztažené k9. a 10. století, jsou zásadně odlišné v Čechách a na Moravě. Pro desáté století zaznamenáváme nárůst počtu nálezů mečův Čechách (hlavně typ Y) a zároveň jejich prudký úbytek na Moravě. V 10. století odrážejí nejspíše přesun politické moci zMoravy do Čech někdy mezi lety 906-935 (nástup Boleslava I). Zároveň však situace v Čechách ukazuje na rychlejší ústupvkládání mečů do hrobů. Konkrétní dílna, kde se meče opravovaly i vyráběly, se našla jen v Mikulčicích.


Monographien des RGZMBand 64 (2. Auflage 2006)

315 S. mit 197 Abb., 12 Farbtaf.ISBN 3-88467-094-8

48,– €

Falko Daim · Ernst Lauermann (Hrsg.)

Das frühungarische Reitergrab von Gnadendorf (Niederösterreich)Das Reitergrab von Gnadendorf ist aus verschiedenen Gründen außer -gewöhnlich. Zu nächst wurde es außerhalb des damaligen ungarischen Sied -lungsgebietes angelegt, weiters handelt es sich bei dem Bestatteten umeinen 14-jährigen, kampf erfahrenen Jungen, und drittens verfügt das Grabüber eine vorzügliche Ausstattung. Das Grab wirft einige grund legende Fra-gen auf, denn sämtliche Fundge genstände scheinen lange in Ge brauch ge -wesen zu sein. Außerdem haben zwei 14C-Datierungen einen Bestattungs-zeitpunkt erst um das Jahr 1000 ergeben. Treffen die natur wissenschaft -lichen Datie rungen zu, stellt sich die Frage, warum man den Knaben weitweg von den ungarischen Siedlungen mit wertvollen, aber teils sehr altenSachen bestattet hat. Bedenkt man, dass der ungarische Stämme bund umdie Jahrtausendwende die Umstruktu rie rung zu einem »modernen« mittel-alterlichen Staat auf christlichen Grund lagen erlebte, könnte es sein, dassdie Bestattung von Gnadendorf als Demonstration gegen diese Verände-rung gedacht war.Das vorliegende Buch enthält neben einer detaillierten Fundvorlage zahl -reiche Studien, die »den Fall Gnadendorf« aus unterschiedlichen Perspek -tiven beleuchten.

AUS DEM VERLAGSPROGRAMM

Mosaiksteine. Forschungen am RGZMBand 2 (2., verbesserte Auflage 2007)

68 S. mit 49 Farb- u. 29 sw-Abb.ISBN 3-88467-101-4

16,50 €

Falko Daim (Hrsg.)

Heldengrab im NiemandslandEin frühungarischer Reiter aus Niederösterreich

»Heldengrab im Niemandsland« erscheint anlässlich der gleichnamigen Ka -binettausstellung des RGZM im Kurfürstlichen Schloß Mainz (14. Septem-ber bis 19. November 2006). Das aufwändig ausgestattete Werk fasst inmehreren Bei trägen die Forschungsergebnisse zum Grab von Gnadendorfsowie zum historisch-archäologischen Umfeld zusammen. Ein umfassenderArtikel von Mecht hild Schulze-Dörrlamm thematisiert darüber hinausge-hend die archäologischen Belege für die frühungarischen Raubzüge in derersten Hälfte des 10. Jahrhunderts. Die lange Zeit fast unbesiegbaren Reiterge langten bis nach Oberitalien, an die Atlantikküste und die heutige däni-sche Grenze, bis sie 955 vom Heeresaufgebot König Ottos I. bei Augsburgvernichtend geschlagen werden konnten.

Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums, MainzErnst-Ludwig-Platz 2 · 55116 Mainz · Tel.: 0 6131/ 91 24-0 · Fax: 0 6131/ 91 24-199E-Mail: [email protected] · Internet: www.rgzm.de · www.shop.rgzm.de


Hajanalka Herold

Zillingtal (Burgenland)Die Awarenzeitliche Siedlung und die Keramikfundedes Gräberfeldes

Die Bearbeitung der frühmittelalterlichen Siedlung (7.-8. Jahrhundert n.Chr.)sowie der Keramikfunde des zugehörigen Gräberfeldes konzentriert sich aufdrei Schwerpunkte: awarenzeitliche Siedlungsbefunde und Siedlungsstruk-turen im Karpatenbecken, Keramikproduktion und Keramik gebrauch in derAwarenzeit sowie awarenzeitliche Traditionen in Zillingtal bei der Beigabevon Keramikgefäßen ins Grab.Bei den Siedlungsbefunden interessiert vor allem die frühmittelalterlicheWie derverwendung der römischen Ruinen. Die Auswertung des Fund mate -rials konzentriert sich auf die Keramikfunde, mit denen zusammen auch dieKeramikgefäße des awarenzeitlichen Gräberfeldes untersucht werden. Dazudienen archäologische und archäometrische Analysen sowie Methoden derexperimentellen Archäologie. Die gewonnene Chronologie der Grabgefäßeund die anthropologischen Daten der Bestatteten bilden die Basis für dieAnalyse der awarenzeitlichen Traditionen bei der Beigabe von Keramikgefä-ßen in die Gräber.

Monographien des RGZM, Band 80,1-22 Bände, zus. 438 S., 120 Abb.,

240 Farbtaf., 4 Beil.ISBN 978-3-88467-133-7

272,– €


RGZM – Tagungen, Band 131. Auflage 2012, 262 S.mit 127 z. T. farb. Abb.

ISBN 978-3-88467-191-737,– €

Lutz Grunwald · Heidi Pantermehl · Rainer Schreg (Hrsg.)

Hochmittelalterliche Keramik am RheinEine Quelle für Produktion und Alltag des 9. bis 12. Jahrhunderts

Durch die Tagung »Hochmittelalterliche Keramik am Rhein« gelang es, fürdas 9. bis 12. Jahrhundert eine Bilanz des derzeitigen Forschungsstands zudiesem »Leitfossil« der archäologischen Wissenschaft zu ziehen. Der vor -liegende Band bietet mit seinen 21 Beiträgen nicht nur einen wichtigenÜberblick über den aktuellen Forschungsstand zur entlang des Rheins anzu-treffenden hochmittelalterlichen Keramik. Ausgehend von den unterschied -lichsten, in der Schweiz, Frankreich, Deutschland und den Nieder landenangesiedelten Forschungsvorhaben erweitert er darüber hinaus den Blickvon einzelnen Fundstellen und Töpferregionen auf überregionale Betrach-tungen und Zusammenhänge hinsichtlich der Warenarten, ihrer Produktionund des Handels mit keramischen Gütern. Einige Beiträge liefern für be -stimmte Regionen am Rhein zudem erstmals eine Beschreibung der dort indieser Zeit vorhandenen Tonwaren. In der Zusammenschau der Einzeldar-stellungen ergeben sich neue Einblicke sowohl in die regionale Wirtschafts-geschichte als auch in die großräumigen Entwicklungstendenzen, die in die-ser Epoche das Leben und den Alltag der Menschen entlang des Rheinsprägten.



Monographien des RGZM, Band 92268 S. mit 270 meist farbigen Abb.ISBN 978-3-88467-172-6 (RGZM)

76,– €

Monographien des RGZM, Band 98288 S. mit 89 Abb., 32 Taf.

ISBN 978-3-88467-188-7 (RGZM)72,– €

Ljudmila Pekarska

Jewellery of Princely KievThe Kiev Hoards in the British Museum and TheMetropolitan Museum of Art and Related Material

In the capital of Kievan Rus’, princely Kiev, almost 70 medieval hoards havebeen discovered to date. The hoards contained gold and silver jewellery ofthe ruling dynasty, nobility and the Christian Church. They were unique toKiev and their quantity and magnificence of style cannot be matched by any-thing found either in any other former city of Rus’, or in Byzantium. Most ofthe objects never had been published outside the former Soviet Union.During the 17th-20th centuries, many medieval hoards were gradually un -earthed; some disappeared soon after they were found. This book providesa complete picture of the three largest medieval hoards discovered in Kiev:in 1906, 1842 and 1824, and traces the history and whereabouts of otherlost treasures. Other treasures took pride of place in some of the world’stop museums.This publication highlights the splendid heritage of medieval Kievan jew-ellery. It illustrates not only the high level of art and jewellery craftsmanshipin the capital, but also the extraordinary religious, political, cultural andsocial development of Kievan Rus’, the largest and most powerful EastSlavic state in medieval Europe.

Aleksandr I. Ajbabin

Archäologie und Geschichte der Krimim FrühmittelalterObwohl die Archäologie und Geschichte der byzantinischen Krim ein gutuntersuchtes Thema ist, wurden die Forschungsergebnisse jenseits des rus-sischen Sprachraums nur schwach rezipiert. Die hier vorgelegte Monographie des international renommierten Archäo-logen Aleksandr I. Ajbabin, die aus einem gemeinsamen Projekt des RGZMund der Ukrainischen Akademie der Wissenschaften hervorgegangen ist,soll dabei helfen, diesen wesentlich vom Spannungsverhältnis von Steppen -völkern und Byzantinischem Reich geprägten Raum neu und verstärktwahr zu nehmen. Die gründlich überarbeitete und erweiterte Übersetzung des erstmals 1999in russischer Sprache erschienenen Werkes präsentiert dem deutschenPublikum eine umfassende Übersicht über das teilweise schwer zugänglichpublizierte Fundmaterial und seine Chronologie.

die archÄologie der frÜhen ungarn - arup.cas.cz · to type h, geibig’s combination group 5,...

Documents