Aurel Rustoiu Shooting the Evil. Scythia

8/19/2019 Aurel Rustoiu Shooting the Evil. Scythia

1/25


2/25

WARRIORS,

WEAPONS, ANDHARNESS FROM

THE 5TH–10TH CENTURIESIN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN

Editor

Călin Cosma


3/25

Academia RomânăInstitutul de Arheologie și Istoria Artei din Cluj-Napoca

Seria Series Reihe

INTERFERENŢE ETNICE ŞI CULTURALEÎN MILENIILE I A CHR – I P CHR

ETHNIC AND CULTURAL INTERFERENCES IN THEST MILLENNIUM BC TO THE ST MILLENNIUM AD

ETHNISCHE UND KULTURELLE INTERFERENZEN IM JAHRTAUSEND V CHR – JAHRTAUSEND N CHR

Editori Editors Herausgeber der Reihe

Nicolae Gudea Călin Cosma Aurel Rustoiu

VOL XXII BAND


4/25

Warriors, weapons, and harnessfrom the 5th–10th centuries

in the Carpathian Basin

Mega Publishing House

Cluj-Napoca2015

Editor Călin Cosma


5/25

DP and cover:

Francisc Baja

Descrierea CIP a Bibliotecii Naţionale a României Warriors, weapons, and harness from the 5th–10th centuries in the Carpathian Basin /ed.: Călin Cosma. - Cluj-Napoca : Mega, 2014 Bibliogr. ISBN 978-606-543-551-3

I. Cosma, Călin (ed.)

623.44(498)"06/10"

© Călin Cosma, 2015

Cover image I:Reconstruction proposal of the Avar military chieftain from the cemetery at eiuș

(drawing Narcisa Șugar, Institute of Archaeology and History of Art, Cluj-Napoca).

E M | www.edituramega.roe-mail: [email protected]

Te volume was financed by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for ScientificResearch, CNCS – UEFISCDI, project number PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-0278


6/25

Contents

Nicolae GudeaÜber die gotischen Foederaten an den Grenzen der römischen Provinzen an der Unteren Donau ( Jahrhundert-Mittedes Jahrhunderts) Eine archäologische Behandlung im Licht der Waffen

Michel KazanskiLes influences steppiques dans l’équipement militaire et équestre des Slaves (V e–VIIe siècles)

Alpár Dobos W eapons and weapon depositions in the late row-grave cemeteries in Transylvania

Aurel RustoiuShooting the evil. “Scythian” arrowheads in Avar age graves from the Carpathian Basin

Gabriel T Rustoiu Marius Ciută A n avar warrior’s grave recently discovered at Unirea-Vereşmort (Alba county)

Ivan Bugarski A xe, Battle Axes and Battle Knives from Avar-Time Graves in Vojvodina

Jozef ZábojníkSaxe und andere Waffen westlichen Ursprungs auf dem Gräberfeld aus der Zeit des awarischen Khaganats in Valaliky-

Všechsvätých

Csiky Gergely A metrical approach in the study of Avar-age polearms

Szenthe Gergely R anderscheinungen einer Randkultur. Awarische Männerrepräsentation und mediterraner Einfluss inRandgebieten des Karpatenbeckens (erste Hälfte Jh N Chr)

Călin Cosma A var warriors in Transylvania, Sătmar and Maramureş, Crişana and Banat. Archaeological landmarks on the politicalstatus of western Romania in the Avar Khaganate

Naďa Profantová The horse harness, spurs and stirrups in Bohemia in 8th and 9th century

Michal HoleščákEarly medieval arrowheads from the area of todays Slovakia

Dan Băcueţ-CrişanEarly mediaeval arrows discovered in Sylvanian Basin (Romania)

Valeri Yotov The find of Sfântu Gheorghe Covasna County () questions which might be raised


7/25

Aurel DragotăBattle-axes in the cemeteries from Banat, Crişana and Transylvania (10th century)

Florin Mărginean A n insight on social status around the year 1000 AD, reflected by the funeral inventory of some graves found on the

Lower Mureș Valley*

Erwin Gáll

A n attempt to classify the stirrups dating from the 10th century and the first quarter of the 11th century in theTransylvanian Basin the CrișanaPartium and the Banat with an outlook to the Carpathian Basin


8/25

Shooting the evil. “Scythian” arrowheadsin Avar age graves from the Carpathian Basin1 Aurel Rustoiu

Academia Română – Filiala Cluj Institutul de Arheologie şi Istoria Artei Str Kogălniceanu – RO – Cluj-Napocaaurelrustoiu@yahoocom

Abstract Numerous “antiquities” – prehistoric or Roman objects “discovered” and reused in newfunctionalandsymbolicmanners–areknownfromAvaragegravesidentifiedintheCarpathianBasin

Amongtheseobjectsarenumerous“Scythian”bronzearrowheadsoftheendoftheEarlyIronAgeMostarrowheadscomefromfemaleburials(andrarelyfromthosebelongingtomenorchildren)fromdifferentcemeteriesintheGreatHungarianPlainTheseartefactswerecommonlyreusedasamuletsandsomewereincludedinmagicalorhealingrituals

Keywords“Skythian”arrowheadsAvarageCarpathianBasingravesamuletsmagic

Somestudiesofthelastdecadeshaveshownthattheweaponswerefarmorethansimplefi-ghtingtoolsastheyalsoplayedanimportantsymbolicrole Thischaracteristicisunderli-nedbytheirsocialsignificanceandalsobythemannerinwhichtheywererituallytreated

FurthermoretheweaponswereanimportantpartofthesymboliclanguagewhichcontributedtotheconstructionofdifferentindividualandcollectiveidentitieswithinmanycommunitiesTheywerethedistinctivesignofthewarriorclassandalsoofthe“citizens”thosewhowereallowedtoparticipateinthepubliclifeandintheprocessofdecision-takingForinstanceCaesar(BGVI)writesthattheCeltsfromGauldidnotallowthechildrentoparticipateinpublicgatheringsiftheywerebelowtheageatwhichwereentitledtobearweaponsAlongthesamelinesTacitus( GermaniaXIII)mentionsthattheGermans“transactno publicorprivatebusinesswithoutbeingarmedItisnothoweverusualforanyonetoweararmstillthestatehasrecognisedhispowertousethemTheninthepresenceofthecounciloneofthechiefsortheyoungman’sfatherorsomekinsmanequipshimwithashieldandaspearThesearmsarewhatthe“toga”iswithusthefirsthonourwithwhichyouthisinvestedUptothistimeheisregardedasamemberofahouseholdafterwardsasamemberofthecommonwealth” As aconsequencewithinseveralcommunitiesthe weaponsappearnotonlyin gravesbelonging towarriorsbutalsointhoseofsomecraftsmenorhealersassymbolsoftheirmembershiptothefree-menclassTheweaponsplacedbysomecommunitiesinchildren’sburials orthosesometimesfoundinthefemaleoneswhoseownerswereacknowledgedas“honorarymales”canbeinterpretedinthesamemannerasasymboloftheirvirtualbelongingtothewarriorclass

This work was supported by a grant of the Romanian Ministry of Education CNCS – UEFISCDI project numberPN-II-ID-PCE––- SeeforexampleWells

CompleteWorksofTacitusTacitusAlfredJohnChurchWilliamJacksonBrodribbLisaCerratoEditedforPerseusNewYorkRandomHouseIncReprinted SeeHenningRustoiu–RustoiuBereckiTănase–etc Nicolaescu-PlopşorWolskiRustoiuComşaHärkeetc ArnoldSimniškytė


9/25

90 A R

Ontheotherhandrecentanthropologicalstudiesindicatethatthingsingeneralhaveasocialhis-toryinthesamewayasthehumanbeingsandgainasocialbiographyinrelationwiththemNorsesagasArthurianlegendsorIrishliteratureandsometimesevenarchaeologicaldatashowthatthehe-roes’weaponswereconsideredashavingtheirownsoulidentityandnameHavingasoulandalifehistorylikethehumanbeingstheseobjectswentthroughasocialevolutionfrom“birth”to“death”

whichincludedaseriesofritesofpassagethatmarkedtheirlifetimeThisinterpretativeframeworkallowsabetterunderstandingofthemannerinwhichtheweaponsweretreatedfromaritualpointofviewOneillustrativeexampleisprovidedbytheritual“killing”oftheweapons(swordswerebentandotherelementsofthepanopliesofarmsweredestroyedbeforebeingplacedinburials)otherex-amplesincludetheplacingofweaponsinsanctuariesritualpitsorwaterbodies

However the symbolic meaning of the weaponry is not related solely to the real functional ob-

jects but also to those that had a mystic supernatural or magical origin This is the case of “found”

weapons the prehistoric ones which were recovered more or less accidentally during the Roman or

early medieval period These gained a new life history and a new social biography by being reused

practically and symbolically within the new environment This category includes weapons and tools

made of flint or other rocks which were “found” later and interpreted by different populations as

materializations of the thunderbolt or as arrows fired by supernatural beings fairies or elves

Thusaccording to the sympathetic magic these objects were useful as protection against thunderbolts or

aggressive supernatural beings For example prehistoric flint tools were inserted into the walls or

other construction elements of the houses from Western Europe or Scandinavia to protect them

against thunderbolts This custom is attested up to the modern times among some populations

from Eastern Europe for instance the Romanians used the so-called “thunderbolt stones” (tools

made of flint or metal recovered from the ground or water) In conclusion the manner in which

these “found” objects were used at the beginning of the medieval period indicates that both their

function and meaning were reinvented The archaeological contexts as well as their use indicate

that their functionality switched from the profane practical domain to the magical one by gaining

apotropaic properties

Takingintoconsiderationthesymboliccomplexityoftheweaponsbothregularand“supernatu-ral”theaimofthisarticleistoanalysetheroleandsignificanceofthe“Scythian”bronzearrowheadsoftheendoftheEarlyIronAgewhichwerefoundinaseriesofAvaragegravesfromtheCarpathianBasin

These“Scythian”arrowheadsarepartofacategoryofartefactswhichisquitecommonlyfoundinAvarageburialsfromtheCarpathianBasinThereuseofantiqueobjectsthatbelongedtoearlierperiodswasarelativelywidespreadphenomenonintemperateEuropeduringthesecondhalfofthestmillenniumADArchaeologistsnamedtheseartefactsdifferently(“antiquities”“archaika”“sur- vivals”“relics”etc)someofthemcamefromprehistoricorproto-historicsitesbutthemajorityofthemwereproducedduringtheRomantimesTheyweremostlyfoundingravesinWesternEuropecomingfromtheAnglo-Saxon orMerovingianenvironmentwhileinEasternEuropetheyap-pearedintheCarpathianBasinmainlyinburialsoftheAvarperiodIncertainEuropeanareassuch

“antiquities”werestillpresentincontextsdatedtotheendofthe stmillenniumandthebeginningofthendmillenniumAD

Theinterpretationofthesignificanceof“antiquities”inAvarageburialsisdirectlyrelatedtotheircontextofdiscoveryThusononehandtheirshapechronologyandprimaryfunctionhastobetakenintoconsiderationOntheotherhandtheirnewfunctionsandsubsequentsymbolicmean-ingareindicatedbytheirstateofpreservationatthetimeofreuseandtheeventualmodifications

KopytoffGosdenMarshallJoyetc PearceExcaliburthefamousswordofKingArthurisprobablythebestexample FogelinSchiffer Meaney–Gilchrist GilchristseefurtherinMeaney

Bărbulescu Meaney–EckardtWilliams MehlingPionPion KraskovskáGaramRustoiu GilchristUngermanDragotăRustoiu


10/25

91 Shooting the evil “Scythian” arrowheads in Avar age graves from the Carpathian Basin

oradaptationstheircolourtheirprecisepositionwithinthefuneraryinventoryinrelationto thecorpseaswellastheageandgenderofthedeceasedFromthispointofviewstudiesregardingthe„antiquities”discoveredinMerovingiangravesfromWesternEuropehaveshownthatsomeoftheseoldobjectswerereusedinthesamemannerasintheiroriginalcontext whilethefunctionofoth-erswasmodifiedthrougha practicalandorsymbolicreinterpretationThelattergroupconsistsof

severalcategoriesoffindsSomeofthemwerereusedasornamentsforexamplefragmentsofglassormetalvesselsweretransformedintobeadsorpendantsOtherartefactswereinvestedwithdifferentsymbolicmeaningsforexampletheblueglassbraceletsofLaTènetypewerereusedasamuletsLastlyaseriesof“ancient”objectswereonlyreusedasrawmaterialsbeingrecycledfordifferentpracticalscopes

The“antiquities”fromAvaragegravesintheCarpathianBasinillustrateaseriesofsituationswhichresemblethosefromtheWesternEuropeancontextsalbeitwithsomeparticularitiesthatchar-acterisethegeographicandculturalareainquestionThusthe“Scythian”bronzearrowheadsoftheendoftheEarlyIronAgefoundinAvaragecemeteriesanddiscussedbelowarepartoftheseregionalparticularitiesandofaspecificculturalenvironmentfromtheperiodinquestion

Fig. 1. Distribution area of the Vekerzug culture at the end of the Early Iron Age(dashed line) and distribution area of the Avar age finds (dotted line).

Stillwhichistheoriginoftheseartefactsandhowthesewere“discovered”bythepeopleofthe Avar age? The majority of the graves of this period which contain “Scythian” bronze arrowheadsbelongtodifferentcemeteriesfromthenorthernpartoftheGreatHungarianPlainAttheendoftheEarlyIronAge(fromthesecondhalfofthethcenturyuntilthearrivalofthefirstCelticcolo-nistsaroundthemiddleofthe thcenturyBC)thisareawasinhabitedbypopulationshavingdiffer-entoriginssomecomingfromthenorthernPonticregionManyyearsagothispatternmadeM

MehlingPionPion

Inthesecasestheobjectsaremorecommonlyheirloomstransmittedfromonegenerationtoanotherwithinthesamefamilyoveralongerperiodoftime HaevernickPion Mehling–Pion Rustoiu


11/25

92 A R

Párducztodefinetheentireperiodfromtheregioninquestionasthe“Scythianage”( Skythenzeit ) Archaeologistsnamed latertheentirephenomenoneither theVekerzugcultureorAlföldgroupThecommunitiesofthisculturelivedinsmallruralsettlementsandusedeithercremationorinhu-mationasfuneraryritesometimeswithchariotsorhorsesplacedingraves Inthiscontextithastobenotedthatmaleburialsfrequentlycontainedarrowswithbronzeheads(sometimesseveralex-

amples)whichwereasymbolofthewarlikeidentitytogetherwithotherweapons Ingeneraltheso-called Skythenzeit coversfromtheculturalpointofviewdifferentculturalphenomenathatreflecttheamalgamationofthelocalcommunitieswithdifferentgroupsofwarriorswhoarrivedinthe th–thcenturiesBCfromvariousareasofthenorthernPonticregion

ThustheareainhabitedbyAvaragecommunitieslargelysuperposedtheoneoccupiedlaterbythecommunitiesoftheendoftheEarlyIronAgeintheGreatHungarianPlain(Fig )Thispatternwasdeterminedbythesimilaritiesinthepastoralisteconomylifestyleandpreferenceforaparticu-larenvironmentwhichcharacterisedthecommunitiesofthesetwoperiodsAsaconsequencesev-eralAvarsettlementsandcemeterieswerelocatedinareasinwhichtheprehistoriconespreviouslyfunctionedSometimestheysuperposed“Scythian”cemeteriesoftheendoftheEarlyIronAgethe“Avar”gravescuttingthroughthoseof theearlierperiodssotheirinventorywasinevitably“plun-

dered”ItisworthmentioningthatatÁrtándandSajószentpéterwheretheAvaragecemeteriessuperposethoseoftheendoftheEarlyIronAgewerealsofound“Scythian”bronzearrowheadsincontextsofthesecondhalfofthestmillenniumAD(seeTableandFig )

Fig. 2. Distribution map of the “Scythian” arrowheads found in Avar age graves – see Table 1 – (black dots: small – 1example; medium – 2–3 examples; large – 5 examples) and of the “Scythian” cemeteries superposed by Avar age ones

(black squares): 1. Ártánd; 2. Kunszentmárton; 3. Sajószentpéter; 4. Szentes; 5. Vámosmikola (see Kemenczei 2010a, 42).

Párducz Chochorowski

Kemenczei PárduczChochorowskiKemenczei Forthetypologyanddistributionofthe“Scythian”arrowheadsintheCarpathianBasinseePárduczChochorowski–KemenczeiKemenczei– Seealistof“Scythian”cemeteriessuperposedbythoseoftheAvarageinKemenczeia


12/25


TherearealsosomecasesinwhichAvaragesettlementsoccupytheareaofsomeold“Scythian”cemeteriesForexampleatHajdúnánásinnorth-easternHungarythesunkenhutsandtheirannexes(pitstrenches)belongingtotheAvarperioddestroyedgravesdatedtotheendoftheEarlyIronAge sothiscouldhavebeenanoccasiontorecover“Scythian”gravegoods

Lastlysome“Scythian”arrowheadscouldhavebeenobtainedupontheaccidentalidentification

ofsomeEarlyIronAgesitesgiventhatsuchartefactswerealsofoundinthesecontextsOnerecentdiscoveryfromnorth-easternHungary isrelevantAtDédestapolcsány– Verebce-bércintheBükkMountainswasidentifiedasettlementfortifiedwithearthrampartsandditchesbelongingtotheEarlyIronAgeThesettlementwasbesiegedanddestroyedinthesecondhalfofthe thcenturyBCuponthearrivalofthenorthernPonticScythiansinthisregionOverbronzearrowheadswhichwereusedduringthesiegewerefoundononesideofthefortificationona narrowareaeitherabovegroundoratashallowdepthundertheturflayer(Fig )ThiscaseisfarfromisolatedAquitesimilarsitewasidentifiedatSmolenice-MolpírinwesternSlovakiawherenumerous“Scythian”arrowheadswerefoundscatteredremainsofaviolentsiegeoftheEarlyIronAge TakingintoconsiderationthesetwocasesitisverypossiblethatsimilararrowheadscouldhavebeenalsofoundaccidentallyinthepastincludingintheAvarperiod

Fig. 3. “Scythian” arrowheads found in the area of the Early Iron Age fortress at Dédestapolcsány – Verebce-bérc (right,earth rampart with the findspots) showing the traces of a siege from the 7th century BC. Such arrowheads could have

been accidentally discovered in prehistoric sites also in the Avar period (after Szabó / Czajlik / Reméniy 2014).

ItmightbethereforeconcludedthatthepeopleoftheAvaragecouldhaveobtained“antiquities”likethe“Scythian”arrowheadsindifferentwaysalthoughmostofthemweremorelikelycollectedbyplunderingaccidentallydiscoveredgraves

ThefollowingquestionishowtheAvaragecommunitiesperceivedtheseoldobjectsrecovered

fromthegroundindifferentwaysandmostlyhowthesecametobeinvestedwithmagicalorapotropaicproperties?It isquitesurethatthe“antiquities”whichwerediscoveredmore-or-lessaccidentallybydifferentmedievalcommunitieswerenotperceivedastracesoftheprehistoricorRomanpastbutele-mentsofthenaturalenvironmentInthethcenturyBishopMarbodiusofRennes(in Liber lapidum )andtwocenturieslaterAlbertusMagnus(in De mineralibus )explainedthatprehistoricstonesorthosedisplaying differentengravedimagesincludingRoman gemstonesandcameoshaveanaturaloriginandwereimbuedwithsupernaturalpowersThusRGilchristhasconcluded“thatantiqueitemsplacedinmedievalgraveswerenotvaluedfortheirtemporalorbiographicalassociationsbutratherfortheirconnectiontothenaturalworldRomanantiquitiescamefromtheearthjustlikefossilsandprehistoricaxesandarrowheadsStonefossilsand‘foundobjects’suchasantiqueintagliosandprehistoriclithicswereregardedbymedievalpeopleasnaturalobjectsthatpossessedmiraculousproperties” Inother

Fodor SzabóCzajlikReméniy Hellmuth Gilchrist


13/25

94 A R

casesthecontextofdiscoveryplaysanimportantroleintheinterpretationofoldobjectsSomeoftheseplaceswereassociatedwithamythicalpastwhentheEarthwasinhabitedbygiantsorothersupernatu-ralbeingssotheunearthedobjectswereascribedtothem ThiscouldhavebeenthecaseoftheoldobjectsrecoveredfromtheareaofsomeprehistoricfortificationsforinstanceatDédestapolcsányTopreventtheeventualunwantedconsequencesofdealingwithsuchartefactsattheendofthe thcen-

turyADGallicpriestscomposedaseriesofprayersthathadtobereciteduponunearthingthemTheideasrelatedtotheirmagicalqualitiesalsocamefromthepopularbeliefsaboutthemythicalpastorthelegendaryrepresentationsofthesurroundingenvironmentThisisthecaseoftheaforementionedprehistoricstonetoolsandweaponswhichwereseenasmaterializationsof thethunderboltsOther“antiquities”wereappreciatedduetotheircolourasdifferenthuesprovidedprotectionagainstvariousperilsOneexampleisprovidedbytheglassbeadsorfragmentsofglassbraceletsoftheLateIronAge

Returningtothe“Scythian”arrowheadsfromAvaragegravesthequestioniswhetherthesewererecognizedasrealweaponsorasobjectswithadifferentfunctionSincethecompositebowwasoneoftheweaponsofchoicearealsignoftheethnicandwarlikeidentityoftheAvaragepopulationswhoarrivedintheCarpathianBasinfromtheAsiaticsteppesinthesecondhalfofthe thcenturyADonehastopresumethatthe“Scythian”bronzearrowheadswerecorrectlyidentifiedmorphologicallyand

functionallyMoreovernumerous“Avar”burialscontaincompositebowsfromwhichonlythelamel-laemadeofdeerantlerwerepreservedaswellasmanyarrowswithironheadsofdifferenttypesanddimensions(seeFig )Asaconsequenceifthe“Scythian”bronzearrowheadswerecorrectlyidenti-fiedthenthequestionishowtheywereinterpretedorreusedduringtheAvarperiod?Theanswertothisquestioncouldcomefromthesystematicanalysisofthecontextsofdiscovery

From the distribution point of view the analysed bronze arrowheads come from ten cemeteries

located with two exceptions in the northern and eastern part of the Great Hungarian Plain (Fig )

As already noted this region was characterised by a dense habitation also at the end of the Early

Iron Age when these artefacts were first used The arrowhead from grave no at Zamárdi on

the southern bank of the Balaton Lake could have circulated due to the individual mobility that was

specific to the Avar period although it could have also been “discovered” in a prehistoric site from

Transdanubia Another arrowhead comes from Budapest in the immediate vicinity of the former

area of the Vekerzug culture so its presence in an Avar age cemetery located on the right bank of

the Danube can be easily explained As concerning the frequency of the “Scythian” arrowheads in

the mentioned cemeteries some were single finds while other cemeteries include several graves

containing these artefacts A total number of graves containing such artefacts were identified (see

Table )

TableAvaragegraveswith“Skythian”arrowheadsintheirinventories

Place of

discovery

Grave

no

Gen-

der

Preservation Location in

grave

Secondary

use

Bibliography Observations

Alattyán(H) F Good Rightcollarbone Pendant Kovrigpl

Nearrightfemurglassandlimestone beads and one

shell Alattyán(H) F Good Onthechest Pendant Kovrig

pl

Alattyán(H) M Good Onthechest Pendant Kovrig–pl

Ártánd(H) – FC

Good Oneabovetheleftshoulderoneonthechestbetweentheribsinheartarea

Necklace(?) KralovánszkyFig –

A few glass beads aroundthe neck others in thepelvis area and near theleftknee

Ungerman–

Effros–seealsoKrämer Meaney–Ungerman–seealsoPaine Daim– SucharrowheadswerealsofoundinsitesdatedtotheendoftheEarlyIronAgeinTransdanubiaincludingtheareaoftheBalatonLakeKemenczeib


14/25


Budapest-Fehérváriút(H)

I F? Good ? Pendant? NagynoFig

Destroyedgrave

Felgyő(H) F Good Neck Necklace BaloghFig

Togetherwithglassbeads

Sajószentpéter(H)

F Good Oneneartherightcollarbone

Necklace VéghPl


Szob(H) F Good Neck Necklace Kovrigfig


Szob(H) F Good Neck Necklace Kovrigfig


Tiszafüred(H) F Good Neck Necklace Garampl


Tiszafüred(H) F Good Neck Necklace Garam

Together with glass beadsand one Roman bronzecoin The inventory alsocontainsacompletebroochwithabentfootinapurseplacedneartheleftarm


Together with a string ofbeads and two decoratedlead plaques Perforatedarrowhead


Stringofbeadsandbronzeplaques


String of beads and ovalbronzeplaque

Vác(H) M Good Nearleftfemur Pendant Tettamantipl

Together with a bronzetweezers attached to thebelt Other objects neartherightfemurincludingoneRomanbroochaflintpiece an obsidian piece

etcprobablyinapurseZamárdi(H) M Good Lefthand Amuletinthepurse

BárdosGaram–pl

Together with other ironand silver objects includ-ing one small Romanbronze coin some flintpieces one La Tène frag-mentarybraceletwithhol-lowknobs

Želovce(SK) C Fragmentary Onthechestneartheneck

Pendant Čilinskápl

Inthemajorityofthecases(graves)thesearrowheadscomefromfemaleburialswhilethreeburi-alsbelongedtomen(ofwhichonlyonecontainedweaponsthusbelongingtothe“warriorclass”)one

gravewasofachildThelattercontextcontainedthesingledamaged(fragmentary)arrowheadallotherswerecompletewhenplacedintothegravesAtthesametimewithoneexceptioneachgravecontainedasinglearrowhead(Fig –)TheexceptionisagravefromÁrtándwhichwillbediscussedbelow(Fig )

As concerning their position in relation to the skeleton upon discovery the majority of the“Scythian”arrowheadswerefoundaroundtheneckonthechestorontheshouldersThisfactin-dicatesthattheywereusedaspendantswornaroundtheneck(whentheywerenotassociatedwithotherornaments)oraspartofsomestringsofglassbeadssometimesassociatedwithotherbeadsandpendantsmadeofdifferentmaterialsIntwocasesinthemalegravesfromVácandZamárdithear-rowheadswerefoundneartheleftfemurandthelefthandrespectivelyTheobjectswithwhomthesewereassociatedsuggestthatinthefirstcasethearrowheadwaseitherusedasabeltpendantorwaskeptinapursetogetherwithotheramuletsinthesecondcasethearrowheadmusthavebeenused

asamulettogetherwithotherobjectshavingthesamefunctionwhichwereagainkeptinapurse

Garam–Fig


15/25

96 A R

Fig. 4. Avar age graves containing “Scythian” bronze arrowheads. 1. Alattyán – grave no. 490; 2. Alattyán – grave no. 496; 3. Alattyán – grave no. 700; 4. Ártánd – grave no. 77–78; 5. Budapest-Fehérvári út (see Table 1 for the source of illustrations).


16/25


Fig. 5. Avar age graves containing “Scythian” bronze arrowheads. 1. Felgyő – grave no. 177; 2. Sajószentpéter– grave no. 1; 3. Szob – grave no. 39; 4. Szob – grave no. 105 (see Table 1 for the source of illustrations).


17/25

98 A R

Fig. 6. Avar age graves containing “Scythian” bronze arrowheads: Tiszafüred. 1. Grave no. 646; 2.Grave no. 769; 3. Grave no. 1157; 4. Grave no 1049 (see Table 1 for the source of illustrations).


18/25


Fig. 7. Avar age graves containing “Scythian” bronze arrowheads. 1. Tiszafüred – grave no. 1190; 2. Vác – grave no. 284; 3. Želovce – grave no. 52 (see Table 1 for the source of illustrations).


19/25

100 A R

Fig. 8. Zamárdi – grave no. 1392 containing one “Scythian” bronze arrowhead (no. 10) and a setof “Avar” iron arrowheads (no. 53–61) (see Table 1 for the source of illustrations).

a

–

b

–

–

–

–


20/25


Asaconsequenceitcanbesaidthatingeneralthepresenceof“Scythian”arrowheadsinAvarageburialsfollowsacertainpatternthathadasymbolicmeaningMorepreciselytheywerewornaroundtheneckeitherassinglependantsoraselementsofsomestringsofbeadsorwereattachedtothebeltasamulet–pendantsorwerekeptinpursesConsequentlygraveno–fromÁrtándstandoutduetothedifferentpositionofthearrowheadsfromitsinventoryFirstofallthisisadoubleburialThe

pitcontainedtheskeletonofawomanwhowasatleastyearsoldandthatofanewbornchildwhowaslaidneartheupperpartofherrightarmItcanbethereforepresumedthatbothdieduponchild-birthThewomanworeapairofbronzeearringsandastringconsistingofafewdifferentlycolouredglassbeadswhileotherbeadswerefoundonthepelvisandaroundtheleftkneebeingprobablysewnontheclothesOnebronzearrowheadwasfoundabovetheleftshouldersoitcouldhavebeenpartofthestringofbeadswornaroundtheneckasinthepreviouslymentionedcasesHoweverthisburialalsocontainsasecondarrowheadofthesametypeThisonewasfoundontheleftsideofthechestintheheartareabetweentheribsThisparticularfunerarycontextpointstoseveralwaysofinterpret-ingthefunctionalsignificanceofthisartefactincomparisonwithother“Scythian”arrowheadsfromtheAvarenvironment

A series of myths and beliefs encountered among different

populationsfromEuropeandAsiacollectedandcommentedbyethnographers anthropologists and historians of religion maycontribute to the interpretation of the significance of these ar-tefacts Some of these myths and beliefs were synthesised byMirceaEliadewhonotedwhilediscussingthesymbolismofdif-ferenttoolsandweaponsthatthereisawidevarietyofcomplexmeaningsthatstretchesoveralongerperiodThusthesymbolofthebowandarrowappearsinnumerousmythsritualsandbe-liefshavingdifferentmeaningsandimplyingdifferentinterpreta-tionsSomeofthesebeliefsregardingthesymbolicroleofthearrowsarealsoimportantforthisstudy

ForexamplethearrowssometimesplayedamagicalhealingroleSomepopulationsbelievedthatcertainillnessesandsuddenpainswerecausedbytheblowofsharpeninstrumentsoftenar-rowsbelonging tovariousdemons ormalefic spiritsAs a con-sequencethetreatmentsometimesrequiredthe“extraction”oftheseprojectilesanoperationcarriedoutbyshamansorhealerseitherthroughmassagingorothersymbolicpracticesofretrieval Amongsome populationsthe shamans“shot”the patients withthebowusingspecialmagicalarrowsThelatterinstrumentswerealsomeanttoappealorrecallthesoulsforhealingpurposesAsconcerningtheoriginofsomemagicalbowsandarrowsamongsomepopulationsfromCentralAsiaorthenorthernEurasianarea

itwasbelievedthatthey weremadeof abranch thathasfallendownfromtheCosmicTree

MirceaEliadeconsideredthatall ofthesebeliefsreflectedthedemonicand ambivalentnatureofthebowandarrowProbablyforthesamereasonmanypopulationsassociatedthearrowwiththe

Eliade OneexampleoftheLateIronAgeintheLowerDanuberegionisrelevantforthemagicalroleofthearrowIntheDaciansettlementatPopeşti(GiurgiuCounty)insouthernRomaniaoneanthropomorphicceramicfigurinewasfoundinacontextdatedtothestcenturyBC(Fig )Insideitwasfoundoneironarrowheadindicatingthatthefigurinewasmodelledincludingthepiece(Palincaş–Fig –)Itisconsideredthatsuchceramicfigurinesalsomadeofothermate-rialswereusedinthenorthernBalkans(SîrbuaSîrbub)andalsointheNearEastortheMediterraneanaspartofsomemagicalpractices(whiteorblack)asakindof“voodoodolls”(FaraoneOgden–Collins

–)InthiscontextitcanbepresumedthatthefigurinefromPopeştiwasmodelledtogetherwiththearrowheadinsideittocause“pain”toanindividualwhowasembodiedbythefigurineaccordingtotheprinciplesofsympatheticmagicOntheotherhandonecanalsopresumethattheshamanwantedto“reconstruct”thecauseofthe“pain”feltbythesubjectinordertohealhimbyextractingthearrow Eliade–seealsoEliade–

Fig. 9. Anthropomorphic ceramic figurinehaving an iron arrowhead inside, usedin magical practices. It comes from the

Dacian settlement at Popeşti, in southernRomania, from an archaeological contextdated to the 1st century BC (see note 39).


21/25

102 A R

thunderandthethunderboltShootingarrowstowardsthethundersourceandthecloudyskyisat-testedfromAsiatoEuropeincludingamongtheThracianpopulationsThescopewastofendofftheevilorthedemonsrepresentedbythethunder

Ritualofferingsofminiaturebowsandarrowsuponchildbirthareattestedamongsomepopula-tionsthescopebeingtoprotectagainstevilspiritsTheseofferingsbroughtingoodluckinhunting

tothemenandfertilitytothewomenInthecaseofsomenorthernEuropeanorAsianpopulationssuchobjectsweresuspendedabovethecribAtthesametimearrowswereofferedwiththesamescopewithinmostoftheSiberiantribesinTibetandChina

Returningtothe“Scythian”arrowheadstheirapparentearthlyoriginandtheirrecoveryinpar-ticularcircumstancesandlocations(likethelargeEarlyIronAgefortificationswhosememorystillpersistedatthebeginningoftheMedievalAgeinalegendaryformas“fortressesofthegiants”forexample)probablyinvestedthemwithsupernaturalmythicaloriginsandpropertiesasinthecaseofother“foundobjects”whichwereusedasamuletsduringthesameperiodThesemagicalqualitieswereprobablyaccentuatedbytheirsmalldimensionsincomparisonwiththoseoftheironarrow-headsusedduringtheperiodinquestionwhichmadethemevenmore“alien”inthisenvironment Atthesametimethe greencolourofthebronzepatinaacquiredbythe“Scythian”arrowheadsalso

contributedtotheperceivedsupernaturalandmagicalpropertiesoftheseobjectsThisfactmayalsoexplaintheirinclusioninsomestringsofglassbeadshavingdifferentcolours Takingintoconsid-erationthesymbolismofthearrowamongvariouspopulationsfromAsiaandEuropethe“Scythian”bronzearrowheadsplacedinAvarageburials(commonlybelongingtowomen)couldbeinterpretedasmagicalminiatureobjectsoffereduponchildbirthtobringgoodluckfertilityorprotectionagainstillnessFurthermoretheiruseaspendantsinstringsofbeadsortheplacinginpursestogetherwithotheramuletsindicatetheintentionoftheownerstoconcentratealargenumberofobjectsor“instru-ments”abletoprotectthemagainstmultipleperils

Regardingtheinterpretationofthefunctionsfulfilledbythe“Scythian”arrowheadsitisimpor-tanttoalsonotethatonlyonewasfoundineverycontextsuggestingacertainfunctionalruleThesingleexceptionisthedoubleburialfromÁrtándAsalreadyshownthewomaninquestionhadonearrowheadwhichwasprobablyincludedinthestringofbeadswornaroundtheneckandwasacquiredwellbeforeherdeathThesecondarrowheadfoundbetweentheribsintheheart’sareacouldindi-catetheactionofashamanwhoperformedamagicalhealingritualattemptingtoresolveaproblemthatappearedperhapsduringchildbirthhistentativeseemstohavefailedaccordingtothearchaeo-logicaldataThisisonerareexampleofamagicalhealingritualthatcanbearchaeologicallyidentified

ConclusionsThe“Scythian”bronzearrowheadsbelongtotherelativelynumerouscategoryof“antiquities”discoveredinthefuneraryinventoriesoftheAvarperiodSimilarlytothemajorityofthe“antiquities”discoveredinEuropeduringthepost-RomanprovincialperiodthesecomemostlyfromfemaleorchildburialswhileinmaleburialsthesearerarelyfoundThisfactsuggeststhatsuch“relics”wereusedasamuletsahypothesisconfirmedbytheanalysisofarchaeologicalcontextsInthecaseof“Scythian”arrowheadsboththeethnographicanalogiesandthecontextsofdiscoverymorelikelyindicateamagicalhealingfunctionTheirwearingaroundtheneckaspendantsorpartsofsome

stringsofbeadsortheirplacinginpursestogetherwithotheramuletscontributedtothecreationofsomecomplexmagicalinstrumentsmeanttoprotecttheowneragainstmultipleperilsliketheevileyebadluckinfertilityetcwhilealsofendingoffillnessesorsuddenpainscausedbythe“shooting”actionsofsomedemonicspirits

The“Scythian”arrowheadsweremostlyfoundintheGreatHungarianPlainaregionwhichwasinhabitedbydifferentcommunitiesattheendoftheEarlyIronAgehavingstrongconnectionswiththe steppes from the northernBlack Sea regionDuring the Avaragea series ofsettlements andcemeterieswereestablishedabovesomeEarlyIronAgesitesleadingtotheaccidentaldestructionofcertain“Scythian”contexts(mainlygraves)whichalsocontainedsucharrowheadsTheirreuse formagicalpurposesasamuletsbecamerelativelypopularThequitelargenumberandthedistributionindicatethatatacertaindatesuchobjectsbecamequitewell-knownbeingdeliberatelysoughtand

purchasedAsaconsequencesomeofthesearrowheadscouldhavebeenexchangedThe“trade”with Eliade– Eliade ForthemagicalapotropaicpropertiesofthebeadsandcoloursseePaine


22/25


such“relics”wasalsosuggestedinthecaseofotherEuropeanregionsSeveralfragmentsofLaTèneblueglassbraceletswerefoundinthefuneraryinventoriesofsomeMerovingiangravesalbeittheseobjectswereproducedinCentralEuropeduringtheLateIronAgewhilemissingfromthewesternareasAsaconsequencetheirpresenceintheWesternEuropeanMerovingianenvironmentcouldberelatedtoatradeorexchangeofsuch“relics”duringtheperiodinquestion

Onerelativelysimilarsituationissuggestedbytheamphora-shapedglassbeadstranslucentwhiteorgreyishandrarelybluewhichwereproducedintheMediterraneanenvironmentduringthe th–rdcenturiesBCfromwheretheyreachedtheCelticcommunitiesintheCarpathianBasinDuringthe AvarperiodsuchbeadsarealsocommonlyencounteredinstringsdiscoveredinfemaleburialsThispresenceindicatesnotonlythatthesebeadswhichplayedanapotropaicroleweredeliberatelyse-lectedbutwerealsoexchangedacrosstheentireCarpathianBasinFurthermorethispracticeseemstoanticipatethesubsequentwidespread“trade”withreligiousrelicsdatingfromthefirstcenturiesoftheChristianperiodThelatterplayeduptoapointtheroleof“antiquities”fromthe“pagan”envi-ronmentoftheearlyMedievalAgelikeintheCarpathianBasinduringtheAvarperiod

Bibliography

Arnold 1995 B. Arnold, “Honoray males” or women of substance? Gender, status or power in Iron-Age Europe. Journal of

European Archaeology 3.2, 1995, 153–168.Balogh 2010 C. Balogh, A Felgyő, Ürmös-tanyai avar kori temető. C. Balogh, K. P. Fisch (Eds.), Felgyő, Ürmös-tanya.

Bronzkori és avar kori leletek (Szeged 2010), 185–382.Bárdos / Garam 2009 E. Bárdos, É. Garam, Das awarenzeitliche Gräberfeld in Zamárdi-Rétiföldek (Budapest 2009).Bărbulescu 2001 M. Bărbulescu, Toporul preistoric cu inscripţie de la Sucidava. C. Cosma, D. Tamba, A. Rustoiu (Eds.), Studia

Archaeologica et Historica Nicolao Gudea dicata. Omagiu profesorului Nicolae Gudea la 60 de ani (Zalău2001), 203–206.

Chochorowski 1985 J. Chochorowski, Die Vekerzug-Kultur. Charakteristik der Funde (Warszawa-Kraków 1985).Čilinská 1973 Z. Čilinská, Frühmittelalteriches Gräberfeld in Želovce (Bratislava 1973).Collins 2008 D. Collins, Magic in the Ancient Greek World (Oxford 2008).Daim 2003 F. Daim, Avars and Avar archaeology. An introduction. H.-W. Goetz, J. Jarnut, W. Pohl (Eds.), Regna and

Gentes. The relationship between Late Antique and Early Medieval peoples and kingdoms in the transfor-mation of the Roman world (Leiden-Boston 2003), 465–570.

Dragotă / Rustoiu 2011

A. Dragotă, G. T. Rustoiu, Monede romane perforate în descoperirile funerare din sec. X–XI. C. Cosma (ed.),Studii de arheologie şi istorie. Omagiu profesorului Nicolae Gudea la 70 de ani (Cluj-Napoca 2011), 443–450.Eckardt / Williams 2003 H. Eckardt, H. Williams, Objects without a Past? The use of Roman objects in early Anglo-Saxon graves.

H. Williams (Ed.), Archaeologies of remembrance. Death and memory in past societies (New York 2003),141–170.

Effros 2003 B. Effros, Merovingian mortuary archaeology and the making of early Middle Ages (Los Angeles – London

2003).Eliade 1968 M. Eliade, Notes on the symbolism of the arrow. J. Neusner (Ed.), Religions in antiquity. Essays in memory

of E. Ramsdel Goodenough (Leiden 1968), 463–475.

Eliade 1997 M. Eliade, Şamanismul şi tehnicile arhaice ale extazului (Bucureşti 1997; Romanian translation of Le cha-manisme et les techniques archaïques de l’extase, Paris – Editions Payot 1983).

Pion


23/25

104 A R

Faraone 1991 C. A. Faraone, Binding and burying the forces of Evil: the defensive use of “voodoo dolls” in Ancient Greece.

Classical Antiquity 10.2, 1991, 165–205.Fodor 2011 I. Fodor, Skita temető Hajdúnánás határában. Archaeologia Cumanica 1, 2011, 11–26.Fogelin / Schiffer 2015 L. Fogelin, M. B. Schiffer, Rites of passage and other rituals in the life histories of objects. Cambridge

Archaeological Journal 25, 2015, 1–13; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0959774315000153.Garam 1995 É. Garam, Das awarenzeitliche Gräberfeld von Tiszafüred (Budapest 1995).Garam 2010 É. Garam, Kugeln – Kapseln – Taschen – Scheiben in awarenzeitlichen Gräbern. Bayerische

Vorgeschichtsbläter 75, 2010, 147–167.Gilchrist 2008 R. Gilchrist, Magic for the dead? The archaeology of magic in later medieval burials. Medieval Archaeology

52, 2008, 119–159.Gilchrist 2012 R. Gilchrist, Medieval life: Archaeology and the life course (Woodbridge 2012).

Gosden / Marshall 1999 C. Gosden, Y. Marshall, The cultural biography of objects. World Archaeology 31.2, 1999, 169–178.Haevernick 1968 T. E. Haevernick, Perlen und glasbruchstücke als amulette. Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen

Zentralmuseums Mainz 15, 1968, 120–133.Härke 2004 H. Härke, The Anglo-Saxon weapon burial rite: an interdisciplinary analysis. Opus 3, Moskow, 2004, 197–207.Hellmuth 2006 A. Hellmuth, Smolenice-Molpír im Licht skythischer Angriffe auf die hallstattzeitlichen Siedlungen nördlich

und südlich der mährischen Pforte. Slovenská Archeológia 44.2, 2006, 191–208.Henning 1991 J. Henning, Schmiedegräber nördlich der Alpen. Germanisches Handwerk zwischen keltischer Tradition

und römisches Einfluss. Saalburg Jahrbuch 46, 1991, 65–82.Joy 2009 J. Joy, Reinvigorating object biography: reproducing the drama of object lives. World Archaeology 41.4, 2009,

540–556.Kemenczei 1994 T. Kemenczei, Pfeilspitzen from Früh-Skythentyp aus Ostungarn. Folia Archaeologica 43, 1994, 79–99.Kemenczei 2009 T. Kemenczei, Studien zu den Denkmälern skytisch geprägter Alföld Gruppe. Inventaria Praehistorica

Hungariae 12 (Budapest 2009).Kemenczei 2010a T. Kemenczei, Bemerkungen zur Kontinuität und Diskontinuität auf ausgewählten Gräberfeldern des

Donau-Theis-Gebietes. Archaeologiai Értesitő 135, 2010, 27–51.Kemenczei 2010b T. Kemenczei, Funde der skythisch geprägten Alföld-gruppe in Transdanubien. Folia Archaeologica 54,

2010, 101–125.Kopytoff 1986 I. Kopytoff, The cultural biography of things: commoditization as process. A. Appadurai (Ed.), The social life

of things. Commodities in cultural perspective (Cambridge 1986), 64–91.Kovrig 1963 I. Kovrig, Das awarenzeitliche Gräberfeld von Alattyán (Budapest 1963).Kovrig 1975 I. Kovrig, The Szob cemetery. É. Garam, I. Kovrig, J. G. Szabó, G. Török, Avar finds in the Hungarian National

Museum (Budapest 1975), 157–208.Kralovánszky 1994 A. Kralovánszky, Az Ártánd-Kapitány-dűlő késő avar kori temető. A Debreceni Déri Múzeum Évkönyve,

1994, 37–104.Krämer 1965 W. Krämer, Zur Wiederverwendung antiker Gefässe im frühen Mittelalter. Germania 43, 2, 1965, 327–329.


24/25


Kraskovská 1971L. Kraskovská, Laténske a rímske relikty v slovansko-avarských hroboch na Slovensku. Sborník praci filoso-fické fakulty brněnské university 16, 1971, 127–131.

Meaney 1981 A. L. Meaney, Anglo-Saxon Amulets and Curing Stones. BAR British Series 96 (Oxford 1981).Mehling 1998 A. Mehling, Archaika als Grabbeigaben. Studien an merowingerzeitlichen Gräberfeldern (Rahden / Wetstf.

1998).Nagy 1973 M. Nagy, A Fehérvári úti avar temető. Budapest Régiségei 23, 1973, 59–87.Nicolaescu-Plopşor / Wolski 1975 D. Nicolaescu-Plopşor, W. Wolski, Elemente de demografie şi ritual funerar la populaţiile vechi din România

(Bucureşti 1975).Ogden 1999 D. Ogden, Binding spells: curse tablets and voodoo dolls in the Greek and Roman world. V. Flint et al. (Eds.),

Witchcraft and magic in Europe. Ancient Greece and Rome (London 1999), 1–90.Paine 2004 S. Paine, Amulets. A world of secret powers, charms and magic (London 2004).

Palincaş 1995 N. Palincaş, Figurină de lut cu caracter magic descoperită la Popeşti, jud. Giurgiu. SCIVA 46.2, 1995, 93–104.Párducz 1973 M. Párducz, Probleme der Skytenzeit im Karpatenbecken. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum

Hungaricae 25, 1973, 27–63.Pearce 2013 M. Pearce, The spirit of the sword and spear. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 23.1, 2013, 55–67.Pion 2011 C. Pion, À propos d’objets protohistoriques et Romains deposes dans les tombes mérovingiennes de Belgique.

Societe tournaissiene de geologie, prehistoire et archeologie 12, 6, 2011, 165–184.Pion 2012 C. Pion, La pratique du remploi dans les sépultures mérovingiennes de Belgique entre recyclage, esthétique

et symbolique. Cahiers des thèmes transversaux ArScAn 10, 2009–2010 (Nanterre 2012), 47–55.Rustoiu 2008 A. Rustoiu, Războinici şi societate în aria celtică transilvăneană. Studii pe marginea mormântului cu coif de

la Ciumeşti (Cluj-Napoca 2008).Rustoiu 2015 A. Rustoiu, Magic and memory. Prehistoric and Roman “antiquities” in Avar period graves from the

Carpathian Basin (in print).Rustoiu / Berecki 2015 A. Rustoiu, S. Berecki, Weapons as symbols and the multiple identities of the warriors. Some examples from

Transylvania (in print).Rustoiu / Comşa 2004 A. Rustoiu, A. Comşa, The Padea-Panagjurski Kolonii group in southwestern Transylvania. Archaeological,

historical and paleo-anthropological remarks. A. Pescaru, I. V. Ferencz (Eds.), Daco-geţii. 80 de ani decercetări arheologice sistematice la cetăţile dacice din Munţii Orăştiei (Deva 2004), 267–276.

Simniškytė 2007 A. Simniškytė, Weapons in Iron Age women’s graves. A. Bliujienė (Ed.), Weapons, weaponry and man (In

memoriam V. Kazakevičius). Archaeologia Baltica 8 (Klaipėda 2007), 283–291.Sîrbu 1993a V. Sîrbu, Credinţe şi practici funerare, religioase şi magice în lumea geto-dacilor (Galaţi 1993).Sîrbu 1993b V. Sîrbu, Credinţe şi practici magico-vrăjitoreşti la traco-geto-daci. Banatica 12, 1993, 129–175.Szabó / Czajlik / Reméniy 2014 G. V. Szabó, Z. Czajlik, L. Reméniy, Traces of an Iron Age armed conflict. New topographical results from the

research into Verebce-bérc at Dédestapolcsány I. Hungarian Archaeology. E-Journal 2014 Spring, 1–7.Tănase 2010

D. Tănase, Prelucrarea metalelor în lumea barbară la Dunărea mijlocie şi inferioară în sec. VI–VII (Timişoara2010).Tettamanti 2000 S. Tettamanti, Das awarenzeitliche Gräberfeld in Vác-Kavicsbánya (Budapest 2000).


25/25

106 A R

Ungerman 2009 Š. Ungerman, Archaika in den frühmittelalterlichen Gräbern in Mähren. P. M. Vlčková, J. Mynářová, M.

Tomšášek (Eds.), My things changed things. Social development and cultural exchange in Prehistory, Antiquity, and the Middle Ages (Prague 2009), 224–256.

Végh 1964 K. Végh, A sajószentpéteri avarkori leletek. A Miskolci Herman Ottó Múzeumi Közleményei 6, 1964, 15–23.

Wells 2007 P. S. Wells, Weapons, ritual and communication in Late Iron Age Northern Europe. C. Haselgrove, T. Moore

(Eds.), The Later Iron Age in Britain and Beyond (Oxford 2007), 468–477.

Documents

Aurel Rustoiu Shooting the Evil. Scythia