LIETUVOS ARCHEOLOGIJA. 2018. T. 44, p. 39–70. ISSN 0207-8694
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND
CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
MAARJA OLLI1, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH2
Department of Archaeology, Institute of History and Archaeology, University of Tartu, Jakobi St. 2, 51014, Tartu, Estonia, e-mail:
maarja.olli@ut.ee
2
Department of the Roman Provinces, Middle Ages and Modern period, Faculty of Archaeology, University of Leiden, Einsteinweg
St. 2, 2333 CC, Leiden, The Netherlands, e-mail: m.a.roxburgh@arch.leidenuniv.nl
1
Disc brooches from the Roman Iron Age are very diverse in style and execution throughout Europe. Their
diversity in the tarand cemetery areas of modern day Estonia and North Latvia is also very high, with
many unique traits and some multidirectional influences being observable. Therefore, regionality in the
tarand cemetery areas will be studied through these diverse brooches in order to see whether some motifs,
typological groups, or alloys were more preferred in some areas than in others. A typological and compositional approach has been adopted for this. Based on the distribution of certain groups of disc brooches, their
surface treatment, and the direction of the influences, two distinct areas can be seen: Northeast Estonia and
Southeast Estonia–North Latvia. The study shows how people in the tarand cemetery areas adopted foreign
techniques and stylistic features in accordance with local preferences and used them in their local culture.
Keywords: disc brooches, Roman brooches, tarand cemeteries, Roman Iron Age, Baltic archaeology.
Romėniškojo laikotarpio apskritos segės visoje Europoje pasižymi didele stilistine ir gamybos įvairove.
Dabartinės Estijos ir Šiaurės Latvijos teritorijoje esančiame tarand kapinynų paplitimo areale ši įvairovė
taip pat yra didelė, čia pastebima daug unikalių bruožų bei kai kurios daugiakryptės įtakos. Todėl regioniniai tarand kapinynų ypatumai nagrinėjami remiantis šių segių įvairove, siekiant įžvelgti, ar kurie nors motyvai, tipologinės grupės, lydiniai dominavo atskirose teritorijose. Tyrime naudojami tipologinis ir sudėties
analizės metodai. Atsižvelgiant į atskirų apskritų segių grupių pasiskirstymą, segių paviršiaus apdirbimą ir
įtakos kryptis, išskiriamos dvi teritorijos: Šiaurės rytų Estijos bei Pietryčių Estijos – Šiaurės Latvijos. Tyrimas atskleidžia, kaip tarand kapinynų paplitimo arealo bendruomenės perėmė segių gamybos techniką ir
stiliaus bruožus, juos pritaikė ir integravo į vietos kultūrą.
Reikšminiai žodžiai: apskritos segės, romėniškos segės, tarand kapinynai, Romėniškasis laikotarpis, Baltijos regiono archeologija.
INTRODUCTION
This study focuses on the disc brooches found in the
tarand cemetery area of Estonia and North Latvia.
Such cemeteries were a common burial practice in
the Roman Iron Age (ad 50–450 in Estonia, ad
1–400 in Latvia), and are found across a wide area
covering Southwest Finland and Ingria (Ingermanland), as well as the area included in our study (Fig. 1).
So far, no specific study has been dedicated to these
disc brooches as they have mainly been included in
the broader research of the material culture from
different countries or regions (Tallgren 1922; Moora
1938; Vassar 1943; Шмидехельм 1955; Laul 2001).
Furthermore only a few have been discussed in
papers dealing with brooches from the Baltic area
(Vaska 2013; Khomiakova 2015). Up to now little
discussion has occurred in respect to the different
40
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
Fig. 1. The distribution area of tarand cemeteries in the Roman Iron Age. Drawing by M. Olli after Lang 2018, p.175, Fig. 5.10.
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
subgroups within the broader disc brooch category
and no compositional analysis has been conducted
to study their production. (For the purposes of this
study, the term, ‘disc brooches’ includes not only
round examples, but also rectangular and cruciform
ones, as is customary in the research tradition (see
Bos 2007/2008, p.709).)
The aim of this paper was to conduct a detailed
study of these disc brooches, with a focus on regional differences within the study area. In order to see
whether some motifs, typological groups, or alloys
were preferred in some regions more than in others.
If such distinctions are observed, then it may be possible to say something about variations in regional culture. In addition, cultural contacts with regions outside
the tarand cemetery area are also considered in order
to identify local and non-local influences in the disc
brooch styles and in brooch production. The various
motifs used to decorate many disc brooches will also
be discussed together with their possible meanings.
This article combines a study of the stylistic and
typological features of these brooches and their production. But first it re-examines and compares the
existing typology and chronology to those outside regions thought to be the most influential for the forms
found in the study area: West Lithuania and the northern Roman provinces (Moora 1938, pp.100–105). In
addition, it groups and compares the stylistic features
to motifs used in these outside regions. Handheld XRay florescence spectrometry (HHXRF) was also employed using a qualitative, non-destructive approach,
to study the composition of the alloy from which
they were made. This was undertaken in order to see
whether it was possible to identify any standardised
alloy choices for the sub-groups and to better understand the nature of any surface treatments.
The article presents some new insights into the
variations in typological groups, then identifies any
regional preferences and looks at the influences behind any groupings in relation to the rest of Europe,
which would appear to be worlds apart from such a
distant, northerly area. Lastly it discusses the organisation behind their production.
41
HISTORY OF THE TYPOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
The disc brooches from the tarand cemetery
area have been studied in combination with other
Roman Iron Age brooches since the early 20th century. Initially, the evolutionary aspects were the
main focus, which resulted in the hypothesis that
disc brooches evolved naturally from a simple form
into more complex ones over time. This focus subsequently led to the creation of a broad chronology
(Tallgren 1922, pp.100–102). In addition, the connections between those from the tarand cemetery
area and those from the northern Roman provinces and Lithuania were first outlined (Moora 1938,
pp.100–105). To this day, latter forms a well-known
argument, recognised by many researchers (BanytėRowell, Bitner-Wróblewska 2005; Vaska 2013;
Banytė-Rowell et al. 2016). The disc brooches from
various Estonian regions, together with many other
finds from the period, have been studied by different scholars: Marta Schmiedehelm (Шмидехельм
1955, pp.146, 199) created a chronology for those in
Northeast Estonia, dating them mainly to the 3rd–4th
centuries. Artur Vassar (1943, pp.70–71) concentrated on the Central Estonian examples, Harri Moora
(1938, pp.100–105) on the North Latvian ones. Silvia Laul (2001, pp.108–114) focused on those from
Southeast Estonia and contributed to their typology
and chronology. Because two disc brooches were
found in Finland’s tarand cemetery area but not in
exclusively tarand cemeteries, their precise find contexts are unfortunately unknown (Kivikoski 1973,
pp.31–32) and they were not included in this study.
Also no disc brooches have as yet been found in the
Ingrian tarand cemeteries (Юшкова 2011) so they
could also not be included.
These earlier works mainly emphasise the typological and chronological issues of the time. Disc
brooches as well as many other types of brooches
and artefacts have also been connected to smaller
ethnic groups from different regions (Jaanits et al.
1982, pp.244–246), a viewpoint that has recently
42
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
been disputed in the light of new research approaches (Lang 2018, p.224).
Baiba Vaska (2013, pp.88–110) studied openwork ornamentation on Latvian finds and subsequently discussed the disc brooches found in tarand
cemeteries. She regrouped them and proposed
some new chronological aspects; in addition, she
discussed the meaning and origin of the motifs. The
meaning behind the diverse motifs on disc brooches
has also been discussed by various Estonian and
Latvian researchers. These researchers connected
them mainly with solar symbolism (Zemītis 2004,
pp.206–207; Vasks 2006; Jonuks 2009, pp.227–230;
Olli 2013, p.113).
Disc brooches have been widely studied across
the Baltic area. Around 30 disc brooches from
Lithuania that date to the C1b–C3 period (220–350)
have been studied by Mykolas Michelbertas (1986,
pp.122–124) and Rasa Banytė-Rowell (2001; 2009;
Banytė-Rowell et al. 2016). Olga Khomiakova
(2015) examined the various disc brooches from the
Dollkeim-Kovrovo culture area (Sambian Peninsula), revising their dating mainly to the B2, B2/C1 and
C1b periods (ca 1–225). Although the two areas are
neighbours, their disc brooch styles differ chronologically and typologically (Banytė-Rowell 2001).
Enamelled disc brooches have also been studied
in combination with other enamelled items from
Eastern Europe (Корзухинa 1978).
HISTORY OF ROMAN ALLOY RESEARCH
Ancient artefacts and their composition have
been the subject of scientific interest for well over
two centuries now. Roman brooches in particular
have been one of the most popular artefact groups,
attracting such attention mainly because they are
found in large numbers and are relatively easy to
categorise. A great deal of work has already been
done in understanding the production methods
and technical decisions of the artisans. For copperalloy brooches, the composition choices (with tin,
with zinc, or both, with or without lead) allow the
complex relationship between typology and composition to be studied and their origin to be debated
(Dungworth 1997, p.902; see also Smythe 1938;
Craddock 1988, 1990; Unglick 1991).
One technique available for the study of an
item’s composition is X-Ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF), which has been around for decades. The
device was initially a bulky, immobile, laboratory
apparatus, which, thanks to advances in miniaturisation, became increasingly portable; some models
can now even be easily carried to museums or excavation sites (see Gigante et al. 2005; Shugar, Mass
2012). Another benefit of these portable, handheld
(HHXRF) devices is that they are non-destructive
in their approach. Other methods have traditionally
required an object to be damaged through drilling or
scraping in order to obtain a sample for measuring.
In the case of a copper-alloy brooch, for example,
the patina would typically be scraped off in order to
reach a clean subsurface. Such damaging procedures
are plainly contrary to modern conservation practices and result in the greatly-reduced availability
of various collections. HHXRF avoids this problem
because it can be deployed as a surface measurement technique, but in this role it is important to
recognise its limitations. The X-rays only penetrate
a fraction of a millimetre below the surface of a copper-alloy object. This means that the measurements
are nearly always taken on a surface that has been
altered by corrosion processes. Previous research
has shown that this process involves the leeching of
copper (decuprification) and, to a lesser degree, zinc
(dezincification), both of which contribute to the
formation of the outer patina (Robbiola et al. 1998,
p.2108; Chiavari et al. 2007). It is, therefore, important to ask the right research questions, which, in
this case, involves measuring large numbers of typologically similar items in order to distinguish
between the basic compositional groups (see Bayley, Butcher 2004; Martinón-Torres et al. 2014; van
Thienen, Lycke 2017).
The alloy properties of disc brooches from
Northwest Europe were studied in detail by Justine
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
43
Fig. 2. Ternary diagrams displaying: a – the classification scheme (after Bayley, Butcher 2004, p.24, Fig. 7); b – ‘continental disc
brooches’ of Northwest Europe (after Bayley, Butcher 2004, p.176, Fig. 151); c – eye-series brooches (after Bayley, Butcher 1995,
p.115, Fig. 4:1); d – wire type A46 brooches (after Roxburgh et al. 2017, p.252, Fig. 5.3.16). Drawing by M. A. Roxburgh.
Bayley and Sarnia Butcher (2004, p.176) using the
same XRF principles as were employed for this paper. Their results suggested that whilst there was a
standardisation of design and surface decoration,
which is suggestive of well organised, large-scale
production, the alloy choice varied greatly (see
Fig. 2:b). This high variation was found to substantially differ with the results for many other brooch
types published in the same and more recent studies (see Bayley, Butcher 1995; 2004; Roxburgh et al.
2017). Bayley and Butcher’s (2004 p.145) measurements on nearly 3,500 brooches suggested that individual brooch types were usually made of a specific
alloy, typically a bronze, brass, or gunmetal, which
is a mixture of the two (see Fig. 2:c and d for examples). Great variation in the alloy choice was also
44
suggested as evidence for manufacturing items from
whatever scrap metal was available at a particular
moment (Dungworth 1997, p.903). A highly varied distribution was likewise shown by a number of
other brooch types, including head-stud brooches
(Bayley, Butcher 2004, p.165), some of which were
enamelled, and sheath-footed brooches (Bayley,
Butcher 2004, p.183), which had been decorated
using tinning or mercury gilding techniques. Stijn
Heeren and Laurens van der Feijst (2017, p.155)
suggested that enamelled disc brooches are found
across all the western Roman provinces and whilst
evidence for their production centres is still missing,
they proposed that there was some regional variation. Little has been proposed about the production
location of openwork disc brooches, other than that
there may be a military connection as many of the
motifs appear on army equipment (Heeren, van der
Feijst 2017, p.162). There is, however, a disc brooch
subtype (type 60) with a two-piece spring construction and applied decoration that Heeren and van der
Feijst (2017, p.165) suggest was likely produced in
the Germanic areas north of the Rhine.
The compositional analysis of Estonian Roman Iron Age artefacts is not new (see Черных et
al. 1969), but a combined approach that includes
both typological and compositional analyses has
only recently emerged (Roxburgh et al. 2018). A
compositional analysis of some Roman Iron Age
artefacts has also been conducted in Lithuania (e.g.
Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, Jankauskas 1992) but it has
seldom been combined with a typological analysis
(Simniškytė 2002).
Enamelling, i.e. using the champlevé technique,
was a common decorative technique at this time
and was applied to many disc brooches. It has also
been suggested that tin was sometimes applied to
the areas around the enamel fields (Bayley, Butcher 2004, p.46). The earliest reference to tinning
used as a decorative technique was given by Pliny
in his Natural History. It was considered to have
been widespread through the Roman world (Meeks
1986, p.134) and was also used in the eastern Baltic
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
(Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, Jankauskas 1992; BitnerWróblewska, Stawiarska 2009). Tinning at this time
would have involved either dipping the object in a
bath of molten tin or rubbing the hot object with
a tin or pewter rod (Bayley, Butcher 2004, p.43). A
close relationship between lead and enamel has also
been suggested when considering these decorative
techniques (see Bateson, Hedges 1975). Not only is
lead present in enamel, it was also used as a wetting
agent to form a stronger bond between the enamel
and the metal.
HHXRF METHODOLOGY
As mentioned earlier, a handheld X-Ray florescence spectrometer (HHXRF) was chosen for collecting the compositional data. This surface measurement device had the advantage of being easy
to transport to the archives containing the bulk of
the Roman disc brooches. Whilst these devices can
be operated in a ‘point and shoot’ manner, they frequently come with a portable test bench, which, although reminiscent of the earlier, bulkier portable
machines, allows for a more stable working environment (for further reading see Potts, West 2008;
Shackley 2011; Smit 2012). A Bruker Tracer IIIsd
machine was used in this study and, as per the manufacturer’s standard operating guide, was fitted with
a yellow filter (position 1), which is recommended
for a dry atmosphere and the high mass elements
found in copper-alloys, and was set at 40kev-10um.
Trial testing was then conducted and the signal
was found to be stable at 60 second intervals. These
settings remained unchanged during the full datagathering phase. The output for each measurement
was saved as a PDZ file from which a spectrograph
could be viewed. These graphs were then individually checked for inconsistencies using the manufacturer’s own S1PXRF software. Two manufacturersupplied copper-alloy calibrations were used (Cu1
and, for high lead levels, Cu3) to convert the spectra
data into quantitative chemical weights (expressed
as a %). The elements subsequently measured using
45
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
these calibrations were Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, As,
Pb, Bi, Zr, Nb, Ag, Sn, and Sb.
One measurement per brooch was taken, typically on the front face but if impractical, along a
relatively flat edge. Once the weights were available,
an external normalisation of the dataset took place
using Microsoft Excel™. This had the effect of correcting the dataset for soil contamination and other
residues from light elements. Then the main elements that make up copper-alloys, namely copper
(Cu), zinc (Zn), tin (Sn), and lead (Pb), were normalised on an iron (Fe) and light element free basis.
This research method was developed in line with
a scheme published by Bayley and Butcher (2004,
p.24) who used ternary diagrams to visually display
the three component metals: tin (Sn), zinc (zn), and
lead (Pb) in their results. This visualisation method
is particularly useful as it allows clusters of results to
be compared to one another (see Fig. 2:a).
To aid repeatability, the Bruker machine’s calibration was checked by comparing its results to
those of a Niton XL3t GOLDD XRF analyser (with
the kind assistance of the Cultural Heritage Agency
of the Netherlands) using a shared set of copper-alloy samples. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 1 and while a small variation between
their measurements can be seen, it is insufficient to
impede the approach employed in this paper.
As mentioned earlier, the approach required
non-destructive measurements to be taken on uncleaned surfaces, an approach that is consistent with
previously published research (Tate 1986; Lutz, Pernicka 1995; Bayley, Butcher 2004; Roxburgh et al.
2016) and that is effective in the basic identification
of trends in bulk alloy types (Tate 1986, p.23). Once
this stage is achieved, however, the results are analysed interpretively rather than through the use of
destructive testing. And so, the reconnaissance role
of HHXRF is complete at that point.
For the HHXRF study, 69 brooches were se-
Table 1. Niton analyser versus Bruker analyser,
a comparison?
Sample
Cu (av.) Sn (av.) Zn (av.) Pb (av.)
Niton analyser
Bronze
79.0
15.0
0.0
5.5
Brass
84.0
0.0
12.0
4.5
Gunmetal (+Sn)
80.5
10.0
4.5
5.5
Gunmetal (+Zn)
79.5
6.0
8.0
6.5
Bronze
76.0
16.5
0.0
7.5
Brass
82.5
0.5
12.0
5.5
Gunmetal (+Sn)
79.0
10.0
12.0
6.5
Gunmetal (+Zn)
79.5
5.5
8.0
7.0
Bruker analyser
lected from the full dataset on the basis of their
availability as many items were not easily accessible.
This represents 64% of the known brooches and can
therefore be considered a representative sample of
the full dataset.
MATERIAL
At least 110 disc brooches have been found in
this paper’s research area (Moora 1938, p.100; Vassar 1943, p.71; Laul 2001, p.108) and 108 were included in the typological study (see the Appendix).
They are housed in the Tallinn University Archaeological Research Collection, the University of Tartu
Archaeological Collection, the Estonian History Museum, the National History Museum of Latvia, and
in various Estonian county museums. Any brooches,
which could not be physically located and for which
no picture or drawing was available, were excluded1.
The majority of the disc brooches were recovered from stone-lined burial areas, known as ‘typical’ and ‘single’ tarand cemeteries, which are the
main cemetery type for the Roman Iron Age (Lang
2007, p.192; 2018, pp.174–178). These cemeteries
1
One was found at Essu, Haljala, Virumaa and was supposed to have been cruciform (Moora 1938, p.115); the other is from
an unknown find spot and should have had a spoked central motif (Laul 2001, p.109).
46
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
are monumental, above-ground, communal places
where fragmented, cremated, and uncremated bones
were scattered together with burnt and unburnt
grave goods, mostly ornaments, tools, and pottery
(Lang 2007, p.203, p.206; Kivirüüt, Olli 2016; Olli,
Kivirüüt 2017). Intact burials are rare and the commingled nature of the cemeteries makes the creation
of a relative or absolute chronology for local items
difficult (Lang 2007, p.206; Vaska 2013, p.97).
TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY
The typology used in this paper is a combination
of previous classifications (Laul 2001, pp.108–114;
Banytė-Rowell 2009; Vaska 2013) and new observations. Although the brooches do not form a series
(Vaska 2013, p.97), they have been grouped on the
basis of similar features, namely decoration, size,
pin attachment, and production technology. A subgroup was created if there were at least two similar
specimens.
Four types of pin constructions were used for
disc brooches. For some of the brooches, no construction has survived but for the most the type
could be determined (see the Appendix). The majority of the disc brooches in the study area had an
eye-and-hook construction (Fig. 3:a), which is not
very common in the Baltic region, but does appear
on some Sambian Peninsula disc brooches dating
to the first centuries (Banytė-Rowell 2009, p.21;
Khomiakova 2015, p.18) as well as on enamelled
disc brooches in the Kiev culture area (Обломский
Fig. 3. Pin attachment constructions: a – eye-and-hook pin
construction, b – two cast lugs each having a hole that holds an
axial bar to which the pin is attached. Drawing by M. Olli.
2007, pp.302–303, 314, рис. 150.7, 151.3, 162.1) but
not, for example, in the northern Roman provinces.
It was also used in the Lower Rhine area, but at a
much later date, i.e. during the 8th century (Heeren,
van der Feijst 2017, p.265). The eye-and-hook construction appears to have been a local version of a
hinged pin, which consists of two cast lugs, each
with a hole that holds one end of the axial bar on
which the pin rotates (Fig. 3:b). Eight disc brooches
from the study area have hinged pins. In the Roman
world, this type of mechanism is widely used for
early, 1st-century plate brooches as well as enamelled
plate brooches from the second half of the 2st – late
3rd century (Heeren, van der Feijst 2017, pp.110, 113,
155).
One brooch has a tube construction that hides
the hinge (tubular variant) where the axial bar,
around which the pin was wound, was located in
a tube. Another enamelled brooch has a spring
mounted on a single lug, a construction used for
3rd century enamelled plate brooches from the
northern Roman frontier as well as other types of
brooches (Heeren, van der Feijst 2017, pp.137, 139,
155, 158). Tubular variants were also used for some
cross ribbed brooches (sometimes also referred to as
ladder brooches, three-crossbar brooches or Dreisprossenfibeln), likewise found in the tarand cemetery area (Laul 2001, p.105) and were widely used
elsewhere for various types of Roman brooches (see
Heeren, van der Feijst 2017, pp.106, 108).
It is possible to distinguish nine main disc
brooch groups as well as many subgroups (Fig. 4, 5;
Appendix). While the dates for some groups were
possible to revise, some problems existed with dating most of the locally-made brooches, especially on
the basis of relative chronology (no phasing having
been undertaken for items from tarand cemeteries). To create such a chronology, the accompanying
items need to be restudied and their dating compared to that of other similar items in Barbaricum,
but this research is outside the limits of this paper.
The brooches of the first group (16 items) are
decorated with a beaded rim and a central knob. The
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
Fig. 4. Disc brooches from groups 1–6. Drawing by M. Olli.
47
48
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
Fig. 5. Disc brooches from groups 7 and 8. Drawing by M. Olli.
subgroups are distinguished by the design around
the central knob. The first subgroup (1.1) has circles
around the knob and no openwork, the second (1.2)
an openwork cross in the middle, and the third (1.3)
either an openwork swastika or spokes in the middle.
All of them have an eye-and-hook pin construction.
They are fairly evenly distributed across Southeast
Estonia and North Latvia and one has been found
in Northeast Estonia. This group has not been previously distinguished, having instead been included
with the spoked type by Laul (2001, pp.108–109) but
because the brooches are too similar to each other, a
new subgroup was distinguished. They are dated to
the 4th–5th centuries (Laul 2001, p.114).
The brooches of the second group (27 items)
are small in size (17–25 mm in diameter, one being 36 mm) and have a raised centre, a rim that is
usually beaded, and a primary motif that is mainly
an openwork rhombus. Four subgroups can be distinguished: the first (2.1) has simple openwork cross
motif in the middle, the second (2.2) an openwork
rhombus, the third (2.3) an openwork rhombus
combined with a cross, and the fourth (2.4) an openwork sieve decoration. This group includes one other brooch, which is closed and lacks a beaded rim
and central motif, but is small in size. The brooches
of the first subgroup (2.1) lack small knobs on the
rim, which could make them typologically earlier.
All of the brooches of this group have an eye-andhook pin construction, except for one in subgroup
2.3 which has a tubular variant. It could be a copy of
the eye-and-hook group, especially as it was found at
a location outside the typical distribution area. This
group has been previously distinguished by both
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
Laul (2001, pp.108–109) and Vaska (2013, p.100).
These brooches are thought to have been developed
locally in Southeast Estonia, which is also the main
area where they are found (Laul 2001, p.110). These
brooches are dated to the 4th–5th centuries (Laul
2001, p.114). However, considering the dating of
North Estonian and North Latvian disc brooches, an
earlier dating (3rd–4th centuries) might be possible
for the disc brooches of groups 1 and 2 but further
research into the accompanying finds needs to be
done to confirm that.
The brooches of the third group (16 items) have
sparsely placed knobs on the rim and an openwork
circulating motif in the middle. Three subgroups
have been distinguished on the basis of the motif:
triskele (3.1), closed cross (3.2) and four circles
(3.3). Three of them have a different central motif: a
whirlpool, a swastika with curved arms, and a wheel
with openwork circles. Their main area of distribution is Northeast Estonia but some have been found
in North Latvia and one in Northwest Estonia. This
group has also been distinguished by Vaska (2013,
pp.98–99), who pointed out that the Latvian decoration differs from the Estonian (Vaska 2013, p.99),
which has also been confirmed by this study. The
Latvian brooch, which has a wheel motif, resembles the group 4 brooches found in Latvia (below).
Brooches of this group mainly date to the 3rd century,
but subgroup 3.2 to the 4th century (Шмидехельм
1955, pp.146, 199). Two of the brooches have a hinged
pin fixed between two lugs but the others have an eyeand-hook construction. The former could have an
earlier date and perhaps be a copy, albeit crude, of the
hinged pin found in the Roman world. However, in
the absence of an exact find context in the cemetery,
a more precise dating would be difficult. The sparse
knobs on the rim connect this group stylistically with
provincial Roman examples (e.g. Exner 1939, Taf. 13;
Riha 1994, Taf. 51, type 3.15). The same can be said
of their motifs, as the triskele is a Celtic motif used
on Roman brooches in 1st-century Britain (Bayley,
Butcher 2004, p.173). The brooches from the second
subgroup are similar to 2nd–3rd-century openwork
49
brooches that match ones from various parts of the
Roman Empire (Exner 1939, Taf. 15; Hattatt 1989,
pp.345, 357). The same four-circle-motif is also
present on 2nd–3rd-century plate brooches found
in all the western provinces of the Roman Empire
(Heeren, van der Feijst 2017, p.155). The brooch
with openwork circles (A 110: 33) also resembles
Rhine-area enamelled brooches with similarly
placed circles (Exner 1939, Taf. 13, 1. III 21).
The brooches of the fourth group (seven items)
have openwork decoration, often have a side turned
in, and lack knobs on the rim. They bear only one
decorative element. Three brooches have a compass decoration (4.1), two almost identical ones an
openwork rhombus (4.2), and two others a swastika
and a rhombus combined with a cross. The compass
decoration of the first subgroup is more elaborate
than the Latvian one (another has been found in
Latvia but at an unknown location (see Vaska 2013,
p.106). The brooches of the second subgroup have a
centre identical to that of an enamelled disc brooch
from Slavēka Cemetery in North Latvia (AI 1194:
39), where another of this subgroup’s brooches was
found (AI 1194: 38). It can, therefore, be suggested
that they were made in one batch or at least to the
same production standard, possibly near Slavēka,
and perhaps based on the example of brooches from
Masuria or the Sambian Peninsula. This is because
almost identical brooches have been found there,
but with a different pin construction and an earlier date: 150–250 or a bit later (Khomiakova 2015,
p.25). The cemetery at Jaagupi in Southeast Estonia stands out as the main find spot for this group,
but they were probably made in North Latvia from
an original design or in imitation of a design from
elsewhere and brought to Estonia as a result of close
contact between the two areas. Furthermore, all of
the brooches have an eye-and-hook pin construction. The compass decoration has been dated to
the 3rd century (Vaska 2013, p.106). In Estonia, the
brooches of this group have a broader date to the
4th–5th centuries (Laul 2001, p.114) but subgroup 4.1
could be earlier (3rd century), based on the dating of
50
the decoration. If it is true that the brooches of subgroup 4.2 are copies of Sambian Peninsula brooches,
then a slightly earlier date: late 2nd–4th century can
be suggested. The other brooches of this group may
likewise date to the 3rd–4th centuries.
The brooches of the fifth group (13 items) are
characterised by decoration surrounding a central
knob or opening. A higher rim may or may not be
present around the openwork decoration. While
they are quite diverse in design, only three subgroups were distinguished: a baluster motif (4.1), a
whirlpool motif (4.2), and a wheel motif (4.3). One
brooch also has an openwork cross motif. Their
main distribution area is North Latvia, but a few
have been found in Southeast Estonia and isolated
specimens in East and Northeast Estonia. All but
one have an eye-and-hook pin construction. In Latvia these brooches date to the second half of the 3rd–
first half of the 4th century (Vaska 2013, p.99), but in
Estonia to the 4th–5th centuries or even later (Laul
2001, p.114). The wheel and baluster motifs are
common among Lithuanian disc brooches where
they date more closely to 220–350 (Michelbertas
1986, p.122). It is possible that brooches with these
motifs existed at the same time as the Lithuanian
ones and subgroup 5.2 may date earlier to the 3rd–4th
centuries, which would correspond to the dating of
the other group 5 brooches. The style of these first
three subgroups is also present in other ornaments
from Latvia, Lithuania, and the Sambian Peninsula
(Bitner-Wróblewska 2009, pp.385–399; Vaska 2013,
p.106; Banytė-Rowell 2001, annex II, pav. 70–72).
It seems that the brooches of this group, especially
subgroups 5.1 and 5.2, are stylistically more connected to the Baltic region and they are also found
in North Latvia, which is on the edge of the tarand
cemetery tradition.
The sixth group consists of enamelled disc
brooches (17 items), which, although quite different
in style, are linked by their enamelling. The three
subgroups (9 items): with a rhombus (6.1), cruciform (6.2), and four circles (6.3) motif are stylistically similar and found only in the tarand cemetery
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
area, which means they could be of local origin.
Most of the enamelled brooches were discovered
in Eastern Estonia and North Latvia. Subgroup 6.3,
which occurs only in Northeast Estonia and dates
to the 3rd–4th centuries (Шмидехельм 1955, pp.100,
120), is stylistically connected to subgroup 3.2,
which is also found in the same area. It can likewise
be suggested that the brooches of subgroups 6.3 and
3.2 were all made locally in a unique Northeast Estonian style. One subgroup 6.3 brooch has a hinged
pin, fixed between two lugs, which, in combination
with its difference in style to the subgroup’s other
brooches, means it could have a slightly earlier date.
The three brooches with a rhombus motif (6.1) are,
however, all very similar. While brooches like those
of the cruciform subgroup (6.2) occur in almost
every part of the Roman Empire in contexts dating
to the 1st–3rd centuries, they differ from the tarand
cemetery specimens in size (Roman examples being smaller) and decorative elements (Böhme 1972,
p.38; Riha 1994, p.154). It is thought that this subgroup originated with Roman brooches brought to
the tarand cemetery area via sea routes without Baltic mediators (Banytė-Rowell et al. 2016, p.144). Although a Roman origin can be attributed to no other
brooches from this area, the cultural ideas behind
the motifs could have travelled as knowledge instead
of as physical brooches. The enamelled brooches in
Southeast Estonia date to broadly the 4th–5th centuries or even later (Laul 2001, p.114; Vaska 2013,
p.99).
While the other eight brooches of this group are
stylistically different and do not form subgroups,
they have many similar stylistic elements, such as
rotating motifs (swastikas, whirlpools, and wheels),
lace and rhombus decorations, and the style of
edge decoration, many of which are common
among Eastern European enamelled disc brooches
(Корзухинa 1978). The brooches with four swastikas (RDM I 2746, AI 5101: CVIII: 1) are very similar in design to each other and to brooches found
in the Dnieper area (Kiev culture area, modern day
Ukraine) (Левада 2010, p.583, рис. 22). It is, there-
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
fore, likely that they originated in this area or were
strongly influenced by that culture. The style, execution, and pin construction of one enamelled brooch
(A 92: 5), which has an enamelled rhombus motif
in the middle, a single lug pin construction, and a
riveted catch, are not typical for tarand-cemetery
brooches, which leads to the suggestion that it may
have originated in the Dnieper area (Шмидехельм
1955, pp.217–219). Nevertheless other Eastern European regions should not be excluded as the only
confirmed production site for enamelled objects is
located in Northern Belarus (Bitner-Wróblewska
2011, pp.19–20 and the cited literature). The composite, enamelled disc brooch is likewise unique
among the tarand cemetery brooches (AI 1918: 23)
but the technique it exhibits is not uncommon in
the Dnieper area (Левада 2010, pp.580–584). The
brooch with a central enamelled rhombus (AI 1260:
5) surrounded by lace decoration has turned-in
sides, which is a common element of some tarandcemetery disc brooches (e.g. group 4). Another
enamelled brooch (AI 2626) demonstrates several
elements from different influences: the baluster motif found in subgroup 4.1 and the lace decoration
and whirlpool motif exhibited by many Dnieperarea enamelled brooches. A Dnieper-area origin has
already been suggested for it (Tamla, Kiudsoo 2009,
p.18). Nevertheless its origin remains open owing to
its hybrid nature: local style elements such as baluster and lace decoration and its extreme similarity to
a brooch fragment that was a stray find in Finland
(Kivikoski 1973, p.44).
The brooches of the seventh group (two items)
are decorated with small, semispherical depressions.
Both were found in Nurmsi tarand cemetery in
Central Estonia. The bigger, slightly more elaborate
brooch has a hinged pin fixed between two lugs (Fig.
5:7 (1)) while the smaller one has widely spaced
knobs on the rim and an eye-and-hook pin construction (Fig. 5:7 (2)). Both date to the 3rd century
(Vassar 1943, p.71). The knobs and pin construction
of the smaller brooch connect it to the third disc
brooch group and might therefore be a local version
51
of a bigger brooch. As no exact parallels exist for
comparison, it is thought that they were made locally in imitation of an older Pre-Roman Iron Age style
(Vassar 1943, pp.70–71). A couple of non-brooch
artefacts that exhibit similar depressions date to the
Roman Iron Age: a disc from the tarand cemetery at
Mūsina, Latvia (AI 1252: 1) and an item with a central part similar to a rosette tutulus brooch (see below) from the tarand cemetery at Jäbara, Northeast
Estonia (AI 2617: 56). A local origin is possible for
these brooches as they could be a hybrid between
the rosette tutulus form from the Sambian Peninsula
(see the ninth group below) and local traditions.
The eighth group contains two brooches from
the Roman Empire. The first dates to the 3rd century and belongs to a type of swastika brooches
with horsehead terminals (Fig. 5:8 (1), Buora 2005,
p.117). It was a stray find in a secondary context at
an excavation at the Livonian Order castle in Viljandi (Olli 2016). The second is a plate brooch with a
central knob decorated with red, turquoise, and blue
enamel (Fig. 5:8 (2)). It belongs to Exner group III of
enamelled brooches, which come from the northern
Roman provinces in the Rhine area and date to the
second quarter of the 2nd–early 3rd century (Exner
1939, pp.63, 103–105). Both have a hinged pin fixed
between two very finely made lugs. This level of fineness is unlike anything found on similar brooch pin
constructions from the tarand cemetery area, an observation that also reflects their Roman origin.
The ninth group likewise consists of two rosette-shaped tutulus brooches (for an image, see
Шмидехельм 1955, p.160, рис. 43:2). This type is
common for West Lithuania in the Late Roman Iron
Age (Banytė-Rowell 2009, pp.40–41). However, the
ones found in North Estonia are from the so called
Samland-style, which dates to the late 1st–early 2nd
century. It is interesting that this style has not been
found in either Lithuania or Latvia (Banytė-Rowell
2009, p.41), which suggests direct contact between
the Sambian Peninsula and Northeast Estonia
(Banytė-Rowell, Bitner-Wróblewska 2005, pp.112–
113). They have an eye-and-two-hook pin construc-
52
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
tion, the second hook probably being for fastening a
chain across the chest.
Five brooches do not belong to any of these nine
groups owing to their design or shape. Several reasons could explain this. First, wider variation occurs
in individually produced items. Second, under certain circumstances, a craftsman may have had the
freedom to design ornaments in accordance with
a customer’s wishes, but they were still designed in
the style of the era and thus could have not differed
drastically from other disc brooches. Third, they
could be imports. If an artefact has an incongruous
style or the technology involved in its production is
foreign to the area, this may infer a non-local origin
or production during a different time period.
COMPOSITIONAL RESULTS
The following ternary diagram (Fig. 6) visualises
the alloy ratios of all 69 analysed brooches. This enables a direct comparison to the published results on
disc brooches from Northwest Europe as published
by Bayley and Butcher (2004, Fig. 151) (Fig. 2:b).
Table 2 also provides the normalised Cu, Zn, Sn, Pb
values for each measurement. Each dot represents
Fig. 6. Ternary diagram displaying the Sn-Zn-Pb alloy ratios.
Drawing by M. A. Roxburgh.
Table 2. Table of Compositional Results (%).
No.
Find ID
Type
Cu
Zn
Pb
Sn
1
AI 4262: 30
1.1
77.5
8.5
5.5
8.5
2
A 349: 71
1.2
83
6
6.5
4.5
3
A 7991: 23
1.2
59.5
3
8
29.5
4
A 17:92
1.2
88
3.5
4.5
4
5
A 10876: 20
1.2
62.5
2
29
6.5
6
AI 1239: 4
1.2
87.5
5.5
1
6
7
AI 2339: 8
1.2
31
1
45
23
8
AI 4262: 303
1.2
69.5
5
4
21.5
9
AI 3236: 291
1.3
57.5
0.5
41
1
10
AI 4161: 642
1.3
74
2.5
6.5
17
11
AI 1702: 2
2.0
64.5
1
28
6.5
12
AI 4262: 69
2.1
82
3
5
9.5
13
AI 1996: 45
2.1
79.5
3
7.5
10.5
14
AI 4262: 34
2.2
68
2
20
9.5
15
TÜ 320:177
2.2
68.5
3
5
23
16
AI 1996:159
2.2
79.5
3
9
8.5
17
AI 3235: 203
2.2
70.5
1.5
9
19
18
AI 1995: 43
2.2
63.5
1
24.5
11
19
AI 2901: 2
2.2
82.5
2.5
6.5
8.5
20
AI 1995: 62
2.2
27
2.5
44.56
26
21
TÜ 2668: 8
2.2
51.5
2.5
35
11
22
AI 4262: 88
2.2
85.5
5
2
8
23
TÜ 2668: 9
2.3
70.5
2.5
6
20.5
24
AI 3235: 202
2.3
76.5
8
5.5
10
25
AI 1993: 17
2.3
87.5
6
2
4.5
26
AI 4262: 403
2.3
77
4
9
10.5
27
AI 4262: 413
2.3
74.5
3
7
15.5
28
AI 2339: 11
2.3
35
1
43.5
20.5
29
AI 2415c: 4
2.3
32
5
11.5
52
30
AI 1996:103
2.4
89
3
2.5
5.5
31
A 9966: 72
2.4
74
2.5
7.5
16
32
A 110: 32
3.0
91
0.5
1.5
7
33
AI 1195: 138
3.0
86
2.5
6.5
5
34
AI 2655: 358
3.1
84
11.5
1.5
3.5
35
AI 3447: 3
3.2
86.5
5.5
3.5
4.5
36
AI 618
3.3
85.5
2.5
7
5
37
A 25: 4
3.3
91
2.5
3.5
3
38
AI 2655:104
3.3
92.5
6.5
0
1.5
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
Continuation of Table 2
No.
Find ID
Type
Cu
Zn
Pb
Sn
39
AI 1702: 33
4.0
54
2
25
19
40
AI 3236:75
4.0
65
6.5
23
5.5
41
RDM I 2745
4.1
82.5
1
6.5
9.5
42
AI 1702: 35
4.1
42
2.5
24.5
31
43
AI 3236: 250
4.1
91.5
1.5
6.5
1
44
RDM I 102
5.1
86
3.5
5.5
5
45
RDM I 2713
5.1
88.5
0.5
1.5
10
46
RDM I 103
5.2
88
5
4
3.5
47
AI 3236: 275
5.2
86.5
1.5
6.5
5.5
48
TÜ 2668:10
5.2
76.5
2.5
3.5
17
49
AI 1252:12
5.2
78
4.5
7.5
10
50
AI 1195: 124
5.2,
5.3
87
0
3
9.5
51
AI 1195: 107
5.3
84.5
0.5
6.5
8.5
52
AI 1237:1
6.0
46
2.5
39.5
12
53
AI 1918 23
6.0
88
4
8
0.5
54
AI 1260: 5
6.0
91.5
2
4.5
2
55
A 235: 12
6.0
88
6
4
2.5
56
AI 5101:
CVIII: 1
6.0
81
8
7
3.5
57
TÜ 2410: 416
6.1
35
2.5
5.5
56.5
58
AI 1237:9
6.1
51.5
2
31
16
59
AI 1194: 39
6.1
56.5
4.5
3.5
35.5
60
AI 4262: 804
6.2
58
6
23.5
13
61
AI 2604:161
6.3
89.5
7.5
0.5
2.5
62
AI 2655: 179
6.3
88.5
3
2
6.5
63
AI 2486: 169
7.0
64
1.5
24.5
10
64
AI 2486: 23
7.0
70
7
4
19.5
65
AI 3791: 3
8.0
24.5
7.5
58.5
9.5
66
AI 2013: 3
9.0
70
0.5
4.5
25
67
AI 2013: 4
9.0
83
0.5
3.5
13
68
A 313: 5
no
group
91.5
4
2
2.5
a single measurement on each of the disc brooches
and the results are very dispersed, populating the
bronze, leaded bronze and leaded gunmetal areas of
the graph as shown in Fig. 1a. Conversely the distribution pattern of the results is not comparable to the
clustered examples given in Figs. 2:c and 2:d.
53
DISCUSSION
Production of disc brooches
The alloy choices used in the production of the
disc brooches appear to be highly varied (see Fig. 6).
This result is a close match to those disc brooches
measured from continental Northwest Europe and
subsequently published by Bayley and Butcher (2004,
p.176; also see Fig. 2:b). They proposed that the level of design standardisation was very suggestive of
large-scale production, but the high variation in the
alloys suggests the opposite to a degree, or at least
that no standardisation existed in alloy choice for disc
brooches. There are many bow brooch types where
the alloy choice seems to have been strictly controlled
(see Fig. 2:c, d for examples). This, however, was not
the case for disc brooches, whose alloys range from
brass, through gunmetal, to bronze, with varying degrees of added lead in most cases. It can, therefore, be
suggested that the production organisation that led to
this variable alloy use was the same as for those found
in Northwest Europe. Perhaps large numbers of scrap
copper-alloy items were available to craftsmen at this
time, allowing the production of disc brooches to be
an outlet for recycled material.
A different hypothesis for this wide variation in
the alloy may be related to the nature of the non-destructive, surface measurement technique employed
by HHXRF and the original surface treatments employed by the craftsmen. As discussed above, both
tin and lead were applied to the surface of brooches
for various reasons. Tinning and lead wetting are
two techniques to be considered in particular, as
well as the lead that would have been present on
enamelled areas. These past techniques, when applied to the outer surfaces, would have been the first
part of a brooch to corrode after deposition in the
ground. In most cases, the visual evidence of these
outer surface treatments will have long disappeared
into the surface corrosion. The HHXRF technique,
which measures these corroded outer surfaces, may
therefore record variable levels of additional tin and
54
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
lead, left behind by the vanished surface treatment.
This has a twofold effect on the interpretation of the
disc brooch results. First, any attempt to measure
the brooch’s actual alloy composition becomes highly problematic because the additional lead and tin
caused by vanished surface treatments would mask
brass and gunmetal results in particular and create
artificially high tin bronze results as well. Whilst this
could be considered as a negative if the purpose was
to estimate a brooch’s basic alloy type, it can be seen
as a positive in that it could infer that more than one
metallic colour could have been visible on newly
decorated disc brooches. All uncorroded copper-alloy items have a bronze-like metallic colour that can
have a reddish, yellowish, or silvery tint. The surface
application of tin changes the area of application to
a white shiny metal colour, perhaps simulating silver
to some degree, while a lead or a lead-tin mix would
create a duller grey metallic colour.
A possibility, therefore, exists that a large percentage of the disc brooches had a white metal ‘silvery’ appearance, either in part or in whole, when
they were new and the highly variable HHXRF results are due to the varying amounts of these surface
colour treatments that have survived on the corroded surface. These colour treatments would certainly have set them apart from other copper-alloy
brooches, whose colour perhaps remained bronzelike. A visual inspection of all the brooches in this
study identified 21 that still had fragmentary patches of ‘silvery’ tin on their surfaces (20%). This is unlikely to have been the total number to have received
this treatment as visible signs of tinning are inclined
to disappear during the corrosion process. Furthermore this does not include the number of brooches
that have been over cleaned of all outer patina (see
the Appendix).
Decoration
Two main groups of motifs were used to decorate the disc brooches: rhombus and rotating motifs,
but other designs also occur on occasion.
The rhombus is the most commonly used motif on the disc brooches, mainly the small Southeast
Estonian brooches (group 2) but is also a central
motif on many of the enamelled brooches. It was
combined with a rotating motif of four circles where
a rhombus is surrounded by the circles and other
decorative elements. It also adorned other types of
contemporaneous ornaments: mostly pendants but
also other brooch types, neck rings, and bracelets
(Olli 2013, pp.63, 71–72, 110). Thus, it was a very
popular motif in Southeast Estonia at that time (Olli
2013, p.110). Disc brooches with a rhombus motif
were likewise in use in the Roman Empire, Britain,
Gaul, and the Rhine area during mainly the 1st century (Feugére 1985, Planche 147; Riha, 1994, p.154;
Bayley, Butcher 2004, p.155, Fig. 121). In addition, a
few disc brooches with an openwork rhombic centre
are known from the Sambian Peninsula and date to
the 1st–2nd centuries (B2/C1 and C1a) (Khomiakova
2015, p.25). In Latvia and Lithuania, it was used to
decorate various ornaments, but not so much disc
brooches (Vaska 2013, pp.102–104). Thus the rhombus, as the dominant motif of many disc brooches,
can be considered inherent to the local tarand cemetery area.
All the rotating motifs, including standard and
curved swastika, triskele, wheel, spiral, and four
circle motifs, share the common feature of seeming to rotate within the disc. They were also used to
decorate Roman Iron Age disc brooches throughout
Europe (see previous chapters).
All of the rhombus and rotating motifs are common in Roman, Germanic, Dnieper area, and Baltic ornamentation. This means that the motifs were
international to an extent, with some additional local preferences. It could be argued that certain cosmopolitan motifs were fashionable and that people
wanted to reproduce and refine them locally. They
were then adopted by the local culture because they
were aesthetically pleasing and fashionable at that
time. The symbolic meaning, however, has yet to be
determined but some motifs may have been more
suitable for the local cultural system than others.
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
Brooches, as a new form of clothing fastener, spread
into the tarand cemetery area in the early Roman
Iron Age (Lang 2007, p.206). Many of the motifs
depicted on disc brooches were likewise new in the
region as they do not have traceable origins in the
local material culture (Olli 2013, p.84). Therefore
a possibility exists that the beliefs connected to the
motifs and brooches themselves were also adopted
because they suited the local context. However, it is
very likely that only the motifs that suited the needs
of the local culture were taken in and the elements
that did not hold any meaning among the locals were
left aside (e.g. for a rosette form which was popular
among the Balts, see Vaska 2013, pp.106–107; for
popular types of Roman provincial brooches, see
Riha 1994, Taf. 51). It is known that the barbarians
in general reworked selected Roman item forms,
in addition to materials and techniques, for their
own purposes (Hakenbeck 2011, p.54 and the cited
literature). They also sometimes combined them
with local traditions, thereby creating new meaning (Ekengren 2009). The people of the tarand cemetery area likewise reworked selected Roman and
Baltic forms (and perhaps some others?), adopted
new techniques, and created new items in their own
style, imbuing them with their own meaning.
Regionality in disc brooches
When brooch colour and groupings were examined, two regions came to the fore: Northeast Estonia and Southeast Estonia–North Latvia.
Most of the disc brooches were surface treated,
giving them a ‘silvery’ look, except in Northeast
Estonia where the bronze-like look predominated
among the locally produced items. The choice to
keep the bronze-like colour was probably deliberate and cannot be associated with technological
limitations because other types of contemporaneous brooches still bear visible signs of previous (‘silvery’) surface treatments (e.g. a head-shield brooch
from Erra tarand cemetery in Northeast Estonia,
A 313: 3, 3rd century). Unlike with the bronze-like
55
Northeast disc brooches, the ‘silvery’ look predominated among the Southeast Estonian and North Latvian disc brooches.
Differences likewise exist in the geographic
distribution of the various disc brooch groups
(Fig. 7). Group three brooches are mainly distributed on the Northeast Estonian coast. Southeast
Estonia is strongly distinguished by its small disc
brooches (second group), which have almost exclusively been found in the western part of the region.
North Latvia and Southeast Estonia have many similarities to each other, as the first, fourth, and fifth
groups are represented in both of these modern regions. The fifth group however is mainly confined to
North Latvia. It is remarkable that these disc brooch
groups are found only in certain regions and are absent in other areas where tarand cemeteries occur.
Enamelled disc brooches seem to be distributed
across the entire area where disc brooches occur,
but if the design is taken into consideration, it appears that certain motifs are concentrated in smaller
regions: the four-circle motif in Northeast Estonia
and the rhombus in Southeast Estonia and North
Latvia; these motifs and associated regions are also
connected to other disc brooch groups. The enamelling technique may well have been known by local
craftsmen and not just reserved for imported items
as it has been used on local brooches. According to
Anna Bitner-Wróblewska (2011, p.21), identical or
very similar ornaments in one region may reflect
the presence of a local workshop or a craftsman who
travelled on a local scale. The skill level of the local
craftsmen was very likely to have been quite high if
most of the enamelled brooches were made locally.
Disc brooches of a similar style are clearly concentrated in small regions, where they were probably produced in local workshops together with other
copper alloy items. Similar brooches that have been
found outside of these concentrations are probably
the result of travelling, trade, and other similar connections, which could also be how rare, non-local
types of disc brooches reached Finland, Central Estonia, and Northwest Estonia. The disc brooches of
56
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
Fig. 7. Disc brooch distribution in the tarand cemetery area: 1 – Virunuka, 2 – Jaagupi, 3 – Sadrametsa, 4 – Hõbeda, 5 – Truuta, 6 –
Tatra, 7 – Salenieki, 8 – Mūri, 9 – Vīksnas Kapusils, 10 – Leški, 11 – Ala-Pika, 12 – Gailīši, 13 – Kambja, 14 – Kardla, 15 – Kõnnu,
16 – Meeri, 17 – Paali, 18 – Slavēka, 19 – Unipiha, 20 – Jäbara, 21 – Kukruse, 22 – Laanemõisa, 23 – Lagedi, 24 – Pada, 25 – Ripuka,
26 – Toila, 27 – Tõrma, 28 – Türsamäe, 29 – Kõrenduse, 30 – Lahepera, 31 – Libriti, 32 – Mūsina, 33 – Jaunzemji, 34 – Aakre, 35 –
Jauntēvēns, 36 – Kalvi, 37 – Kaugars II, 38 – Kärde, 39 – Pikkjärve, 40 – Siksälä, 41 – Ulvi, 42 – Vagula, 43 – Nurmsi, 44 – Künnapuu,
45 – Viljandi, 46 – Triigi, 47 – Erra, 48 – Tarbja, 49 – Kirbu, 50 – Velna Kravanda, 51 – Järve, 52 – Malla. Drawing by M. Olli.
the first and second groups are quite homogeneous
in their style and manufacturing technique and so
could have been made for local use in larger numbers. Conversely the more elaborate brooches of the
other groups may have been produced in smaller
numbers, probably on a bespoke basis by specific
members of the community. The wearing of a disc
brooch inherent to a specific region might have
communicated the wearer’s ties to that region as well
as other possible social identities.
A noticeable distinction seems to exist between
the coastal area of Northeast Estonia and Southeast
Estonia–North Latvia. The regional variation in certain ornaments is one marker for localised production along the lines of regional identities (see Swift
2000, pp.232–233; Hakenbeck 2011, p.54). Although
style in itself cannot define cultural groups per se, it
provides a context for where they were active. It is
also important to compare both style and production elements because together they form a whole
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
(Conkey 1993, p.15). As the differences between
these two geographic areas (Northeast Estonia and
Southeast Estonia–North Latvia) are noticeable in
many ways, the existence of two cultural groups can
be proposed. Such a division can also be seen in the
occurrence of the Roman Iron Age pottery types, in
particular, the textile-impressed pottery in Southeast Estonia and North Latvia, and the Nurmsi-style
pottery in Northern, Western, and Central Estonia
(Lang 2018, pp.242–243). The South-North difference is also observable in the direction of long distance contacts.
Contacts with other areas
Thanks to the Amber Road, an ancient route
connecting the coastal areas of the Southeast Baltic Sea with the distant Mediterranean, trading was
intense during the first centuries (Nowakowski
1996, p.107). People very likely came from far and
wide to the southeast shore of the Baltic Sea to
trade and exchange ideas. Because of this connection with the wider world, crafts, skills, people, and
fashion must have spread throughout the region.
In addition to amber, other goods were exchanged
among the Balts, Germanic peoples, Romans, and
others, who came there to trade (Sidrys 2001,
pp.167–168). The different cultures and traditions
met, and favoured elements were taken back home
with the traders. Many trade routes existed (Sidrys
2001, p.160) and the existence of fixed trade relations between certain groups of people from different areas is possible. People knew what they
needed for their local market and for the people
from the tarand cemetery area it was not foreign
ornaments, it was scrap and raw metal (amongst
other things) and the know-how of different techniques (enamelling, tinning, etc.) to support local
needs. This was mainly due to the lack of locally
sourced raw materials which forced the importation of all copper-alloy related metals. The creation
and maintenance of trade relations played an important role in satisfying these needs.
57
This analysis clearly shows that influences from
various directions were present at that time. Northeast Estonian disc brooches differ from other disc
brooches, both in the tarand cemetery area and the
Southeast Baltic area. They have more in common
stylistically with provincial Roman brooches than
the Baltic or Dnieper area variants (although contacts also existed in those directions as well). It is
likely that the connections were via sea routes and
therefore more directly with Germanic peoples or
even traders from beyond the Roman frontier. Maybe in some trading centres along the southeast shore
of the Baltic Sea, new ideas were acquired and it is
not impossible that the traders from these distant
regions reached the shores of Northeast Estonia.
Similarities very clearly exist between West Lithuanian disc brooches and the Southeast Estonian
and North Latvian examples, these being especially
evident in brooches from group five, which mostly
occur in North Latvia. Contacts between the two areas were probably via land and river routes. Direct
connections must have existed as the decorative motifs reaching the tarand cemetery areas where adapted and subsequently applied to locally produced
disc brooches. It is also evident in examples of other
brooch types (Banytė-Rowell, Bitner-Wróblewska
2005, pp.114–116).
Judging by some of the enamelled brooches,
contact not only occurred with Western Europe,
but also areas further east, e.g. the Kiev culture
area, where brooches and other artefacts have been
found with similar decorations (Шмидехельм 1955,
pp.218–219; Корзухинa 1978; Левада 2010). The
existence of close ties between the Eastern European enamelling centres has already been suggested on
the basis of the many similarities in the design and
technological elements (Bitner-Wróblewska 2011,
p.15) and been confirmed by this study, which has
shown that some foreign stylistic elements were also
used on locally produced artefacts. Many brooches,
for example, share a similar edge decoration (group
6.1 brooches, A 235:12, AI 2616, RDM I 2746, AI
5101: CVIII: 1).
58
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
CONCLUSIONS
Disc brooches from all around Roman Iron
Age Europe are very diverse, which has led to the
identification of many regional differences. The
Roman Iron Age disc brooches found in the tarand
cemetery area of Estonia and North Latvia were
studied to detect further regional differences based
on typology, motifs, and composition. Contact
with other areas was also explored to identify influences from various non-local directions. The typology of the brooches was re-examined and nine
groups were subsequently distinguished. A large
number of the disc brooches were also analysed
using handheld X-Ray florescence spectrometry
(HHXRF).
Two geographic areas came to the fore as a result
of this study: Northeast Estonia and Southeast Estonia–North Latvia. Thus the presence of two cultural
groups can be suggested on the basis of the distribution of the typological groups, styles, and surface
treatments and the direction of the long distance
trade. The people living in the vicinity of the tarand
cemeteries were in active contact with others both
near and far and traded with them. Due to this contact, the craftsmen were technologically skilled and
mastered many techniques including surface treatments and enamelling methods. They created local
brooches based on foreign ideas and imported examples, but with a unique local touch. Access to raw
material was limited and therefore only production
on a local scale was possible, which may have been
targeted at and/or ordered by the local elite or specific groups of people.
Acknowledgements
Thanks go to Dr Rasa Banytė-Rowell (Lithuanian Institute of History) for consultation on Lithuanian disc brooches and also to Dr Jānis Ciglis (National History Museum of Latvia) for letting us use
his personal archive.
This publication was supported by the University of Tartu ASTRA Project PER ASPERA, financed
by the European Regional Development Fund and
institutional research funding IUT20-7 of the Estonian Ministry of Education and Research.
Translated by M. Olli
and M. A. Roxburgh,
English edited by J. A. Bakanauskas
APPENDIX. LIST OF BROOCHES INCLUDED IN THIS STUDY.
Find Location
Hinge
construction
Group
Subgroup
Visible
tin
Motif
Diameter,
mm
Area
Reference of
dating
Dating
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
?
1
?
no
?
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 3236: 215
Jaagupi, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-andhook?
1
1.1
no
35
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 4262: 30
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
1
1.1
no
30
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
A 10876: 20
Salenieki,
Makašānu, Rēzekne
eye-and-hook
1
1.2
yes
cross
34
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
A 17:92
Sadrametsa, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
1
1.2
no
cross
29
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
A 349 :71
Hõbeda, Kadrina,
Virumaa
eye-and-hook
1
1.2
no
cross
29
Northeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
A 7991: 23
Mūri, Baižkalna,
Cēsis
eye-and-hook
1
1.2
yes?
cross
36
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 1239:4
Vīksnas Kapusils,
Branti, Cēsis
eye-and-hook
1
1.2
no
cross
37
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 1993: 21
Truuta, Urvaste,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
1
1.2
no
cross
35
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 1993: 22
Truuta, Urvaste,
Võrumaa
?
1
1.2
?
cross
?
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 2339: 8
Tatra, Kambja,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
1
1.2
yes
cross
30
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 4262: 303
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
1
1.2
no
cross
33
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
?
Leški, Litenes,
Madona
eye-and-hook
1
1.3
?
whirlpool
?
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 3236: 291
Jaagupi, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
1
1.3
no
whirlpool
36
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 4161: 642
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
1
1.3
no
swastica
31
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 4252: 27
Sadrametsa, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
1
1.3
no
swastica
32
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
59
AI 4161: 591
New
dating
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
Find ID
CONTINUATION OF APPENDIX
Find Location
Hinge
construction
Group
Visible
tin
Subgroup
AI 1702: 2
Jaagupi, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
AI 1996: 45
Kambja, Kambja,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.1
no
AI 4262: 69
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.1
AI 4447: 1
Kõnnu, Võnnu,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
AI 1995: 43
Unipiha, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
AI 1995: 62
Unipiha, Nõo,
Tartumaa
AI 1996:159
Motif
Diameter,
mm
Area
Reference of
dating
Dating
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
cross
19
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
no
cross
25
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
2.1
no
cross
18
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
2
2.2
no
rhombus
19
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
eye-and-hook
2
2.2
no
rhombus
19
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
Kambja, Kambja,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.2
no
rhombus
19
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 2901: 2
Unipiha, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.2
no
rhombus
20
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 3235: 203
Paali, Kambja,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.2
no
rhombus
20
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 4161: 34
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
?
2
2.2
no
rhombus
16
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.115
4th–5th c.
AI 4262: 34
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.2
no
rhombus
17
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 4262: 88
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.2
no
rhombus
19
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
TÜ 2668: 8
Meeri, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.2
yes
rhombus
20
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
TÜ 320:177
Ala-Pika, Kanepi,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.2
yes
rhombus
18
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 1195: 65
Slavēka, Rauna,
Cēsis
tubular
2
2.3
no
rhombus
27
North
Latvia
AI 1993: 17
Truuta, Urvaste,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.3
no
rhombus
24
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 1995: 77
Unipiha, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.3
?
rhombus
26
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
4th–5th c.
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
19
no
New
dating
60
Find ID
CONTINUATION OF APPENDIX
Find Location
Hinge
construction
Group
Subgroup
AI 1996: 66
Kambja, Kambja,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.3
?
rhombus
?
AI 2339: 11
Tatra, Kambja,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.3
yes
rhombus
AI 2415c: 4
Kardla, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.3
no
AI 3235: 202
Paali, Kambja,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.3
AI 4262:
1164
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
?
2
AI 4262: 403
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
AI 4262: 413
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
TÜ 2668: 9
Visible
tin
Diameter,
mm
Dating
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
20
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
rhombus
21
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
no
rhombus
25
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
2.3
no
rhombus
?
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
2
2.3
no
rhombus
21
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
eye-and-hook
2
2.3
no?
rhombus
21
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
Meeri, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.3
no
rhombus
18
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
A 9966: 72
Gailīši, Taurenes,
Cēsis
eye-and-hook
2
2.4
possibly?
sieve
36
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.115
4th–5th c.
AI 1996:103
Kambja, Kambja,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
2
2.4
no
sieve
23
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
A 110: 32
Kukruse, Jõhvi,
Virumaa
two lugs
3
no
whirlpool
48
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
A 110: 33
Kukruse, Jõhvi,
Virumaa
?
3
no?
circles
60
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
A 111: 48
Järve, Jõhvi,
Virumaa
eye-andhook?
3
?
swastica
with
curved
arms
45
Northeast
Estonia
AI 1195: 138
Slavēka, Rauna,
Cēsis
eye-and-hook
3
no
wheel
50
North
Latvia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
A 110: 31
Kukruse, Jõhvi,
Virumaa
eye-and-hook
3
3.1
no
triskele
59
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
AI 2012: I: 13
Türsamäe, Vaivara,
Virumaa
eye-and-hook
3
3.1
no
triskele
55
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
Area
New
dating
3rd c.
61
Reference of
dating
Motif
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
Find ID
Find ID
Find Location
Hinge
construction
Group
Subgroup
AI 2655: 358
Pada, Viru-Nigula,
Virumaa
eye-and-hook
3
3.1
no
triskele
58
AI 3953: 1
Toila, Jõhvi,
Virumaa
?
3
3.1
?
triskele
AI 2012: I: 14
Türsamäe, Vaivara,
Virumaa
?
3
3.2
no
AI 2488: 9
Tõrma, Rakvere,
Virumaa
eye-and-hook
3
3.2
AI 3447: 3
Laanemõisa,
Rakvere, Virumaa
eye-and-hook
3
AI 3735: 4
Jäbara, Lüganuse,
Virumaa
?
A 25: 4
Lagedi, Jüri,
Harjumaa
AI 2012: II:
13
Visible
tin
Diameter,
mm
Reference of
dating
Dating
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
56
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
closed
cross
?
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.146
4th c.
no
closed
cross
65
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.146
4th c.
3.2
no
closed
cross
51
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.146
4th c.
3
3.2
?
closed
cross
47
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.146,
199
4th c.
two lugs
3
3.3
no
4 circles,
rhombus
62
Northwest
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
Türsamäe, Vaivara,
Virumaa
eye-and-hook
3
3.3
no
4 circles
62
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
AI 2655: 104
Pada, Viru-Nigula,
Virumaa
eye-and-hook
3
3.3
no
4 circles,
rhombus
55
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
AI 618
Ripuka, Laiuse,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
3
3.3
no
4 circles,
rhombus
67
East
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
AI 1702: 33
Jaagupi, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
4
in the
centre
swastica
38
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd–4th c.
AI 3236: 75
Jaagupi, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
4
no?
rhombus?
39
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd–4th c.
AI 1702: 35
Jaagupi, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
4
4.1
no
compass
43
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd c.
AI 3236: 250
Jaagupi, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
4
4.1
yes?
compass
41
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd c.
RDM I 102
Dzelzava, Jaunzemji eye-and-hook
4
4.1
yes
compass,
rhombus
67
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd c.
AI 1194: 38
Velna Kravanda,
Rauna, Cēsis
4
4.2
yes
rhombus
29
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
(2nd)
3 –4th c.
Area
New
dating
rd
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
eye-and-hook
Motif
62
CONTINUATION OF APPENDIX
CONTINUATION OF APPENDIX
Find Location
Hinge
construction
Group
Subgroup
AI 4866: 261
Kõrenduse, MaarjaMagdaleena,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
4
4.2
VM VMT
91: 6
Unknown
eye-and-hook
5
AI 1195: 107
Slavēka, Rauna,
Cēsis
two lugs?
5
AI 2604: 262
Jäbara, Lüganuse,
Virumaa
eye-and-hook
RDM I 2713
Libriti, Trikāta,
Valka
A 7991: 53
Visible
tin
Motif
Diameter,
mm
Area
Reference of
dating
Dating
New
dating
(2nd)
3rd–4th c.
rhombus
28
East
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
no
cross
31
unknown
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
5.1
yes?
baluster
48
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd–4th c.
5
5.1
yes
baluster
59
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.100
5th c.
3rd–4th c.
eye-and-hook
5
5.1
yes,
surface is
cleaned
baluster
59
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd–4th c.
Mūri, Baižkalna,
Cēsis
?
5
5.1, 5.2
?
whirlpool
and
baluster
?
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd–4th c.
AI 1252: 12
Mūsina, Rauna,
Cēsis
eye-and-hook
5
5.2
no
whirlpool
42
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd–4th c.
AI 2488: 10
Tõrma, Rakvere,
Virumaa
eye-and-hook
5
5.2
yes
whirlpool
63
Northeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd–4th c.
AI 3236: 275
Jaagupi, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
5
5.2
no
whirlpool
49
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd–4th c.
TÜ 2668: 10
Meeri, Nõo,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
5
5.2
yes
whirlpool
28
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd–4th c.
AI 1195: 124
Slavēka, Rauna,
Cēsis
eye-and-hook
5
5.2, 5.3
no
whirlpool,
wheel
51
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd–4th c.
AI 1984: 3
Lahepera,
Kodavere,
Tartumaa
two lugs
5
5.3
no
circle and
wheel
35
East
Estonia
RDM I 103
Jaunzemji,
Dzelzava, Madona
eye-and-hook
5
5.3
no,
surface is
cleaned
wheel
53
North
Latvia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
3rd–4th c.
RDM I 2745
Libriti, Trikāta,
Valka
eye-and-hook
5
5.3
yes?
wheel,
zigzag
82
North
Latvia
Vaska 2013,
p.106
4th c.
3rd–4th c.
A 235: 12
Ulvi, Viru-Nigula,
Virumaa
eye-and-hook
6
no
whirlpool
60
Northeast
Estonia
3rd–4th c.
63
no
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
Find ID
Find ID
Find Location
Hinge
construction
Group
Visible
tin
Subgroup
Motif
Diameter,
mm
Area
Reference of
dating
Dating
Kalvi, Viru-Nigula,
Virumaa
one lug
6
no?
rhombus
53
Northeast
Estonia
AI 1237: 1
Kaugars II, Rauna,
Cēsis
eye-and-hook
6
yes
cross,
wheel
70
North
Latvia
Vaska 2013,
p.99
4th c.
AI 1260: 5
Pikkjärve, Kanepi,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
6
possibly?
rhombus,
lace
71
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 1918 23
Kärde, Laiuse,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
6
yes
47
Central
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 2616
Vagula, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
6
yes
baluster,
lace,
whirlpool
120
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 5101:
CVIII: 1
Siksälä, Vastseliina,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
6
no
swastica
99
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
RDM I 2746
Libriti, Trikāta,
Valka
?
6
?
swastica
?
North
Latvia
Vaska 2013,
p.107
4th c.
TÜ 2264
Kirbu, Karula,
Võrumaa
?
6
no
triskele
31
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 1194: 39
Velna Kravanda,
Rauna, Cēsis
eye-and-hook
6
6.1
yes
rhombus
52
North
Latvia
Vaska 2013,
p.99
4th c.
AI 1237: 9
Kaugars II, Rauna,
Cēsis
eye-and-hook
6
6.1
yes
rhombus
58
North
Latvia
Vaska 2013,
p.99
4th c.
TÜ 2410: 416
Aakre, Rõngu,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
6
6.1
yes
rhombus
63
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 1253: 2
Jauntēvēns, Rauna,
Cēsis
eye-and-hook
6
6.2
?
cross
50
North
Latvia
Vaska 2013,
p.107
4th–5th c
AI 4262: 613
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
?
6
6.2
?
cross
54
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
AI 4262: 804
Virunuka, Rõuge,
Võrumaa
eye-and-hook
6
6.2
yes
cross
54
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.114
4th–5th c.
RDM 2719
Libriti, Trikāta,
Valka
?
6
6.2
yes
cross
?
North
Latvia
Vaska 2013,
p.107
4th–5th c
AI 2604: 161
Jäbara, Lüganuse,
Virumaa
eye-and-hook
6
6.3
no
4 circles,
rhombus
55
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.100
4th c.
New
dating
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
A 92: 5
64
CONTINUATION OF APPENDIX
CONTINUATION OF APPENDIX
Find Location
AI 2655: 179
Pada, Viru-Nigula,
Virumaa
AI 2486: 169
Hinge
construction
Group
Subgroup
two lugs
6
6.3
Nurmsi, Peetri,
Järvamaa
two lugs
7
AI 2486: 23
Nurmsi, Peetri,
Järvamaa
eye-andhook?
7
AI 3791: 3
Künnapuu, Jõhvi,
Virumaa
two lugs
8
VM 11501 A
Viljandi, Viljandi,
Viljandimaa
two lugs
AI 2013: 3
Triigi, VäikeMaarja, Virumaa
AI 2013: 4
Visible
tin
Motif
4 circles,
rhombus
Diameter,
mm
Area
Reference of
dating
Dating
60
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
no
100
Central
Estonia
Vassar 1943,
p.71
3rd c.
yes
63
Central
Estonia
Vassar 1943,
p.71
3rd c.
Roman
no
33
Northeast
Estonia
Exner 1939
p.63
125–200
AD
8
Roman
no
35
Southwest
Estonia
Buora 2005,
p.117
3rd (4th–
5th) c.
eye and 2
hooks
9
Rosette
tutulus
no
78
Northeast
Estonia
BanytėRowell 2009,
p.41
1st–2nd c.
Triigi, VäikeMaarja, Virumaa
eye and 2
hooks
9
Rosette
tutulus
no
80
Northeast
Estonia
BanytėRowell 2009,
p.41
1st–2nd c.
AI 4447: 15
Kõnnu, Võnnu,
Tartumaa
eye-and-hook
no
group
Rosette
no
rosette
164
Southeast
Estonia
BanytėRowell 2001,
p.46
3rd–4th c.
A 313: 5
Erra, Lüganuse,
Virumaa
eye-andhook?
no
group
no
circles
35
Northeast
Estonia
Шмидехельм
1955, p.199
3rd c.
AI 2011: 2
Aakre, Rõngu,
Tartumaa
two lugs
no
group
no
24
Southeast
Estonia
Laul 2001,
p.117
AI 690
Tarbja, Paide,
Järvamaa
eye-and-hook
no
group
no,
surface is
cleaned
58
Central
Estonia
?
Malla, Viru-Nigula,
Virumaa
?
no
group
?
?
Northeast
Estonia
no
four loops
4th–5th c.
New
dating
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
Find ID
65
66
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
REFERENCES
Banytė-Rowell, R., 2001. Vakarų Lietuvos kapinynų
su akmenų vainikais kultūrinė sritis III a. – V a. pradžioje
(Unpublished PhD thesis). Vilnius University.
Banytė-Rowell, R., 2009. Vėlyvojo romėniškojo
laikotarpio rozetiniai smeigtukai ir segės su tutuliu.
LA, 34, 9–42.
Banytė-Rowell, R., Bitner-Wróblewska, A., 2005.
From Aestii to Esti. Connections between the Western Lithuanian Group and the area of distribution of
tarand-graves. In: Lang, V., ed. Culture and material
culture. Papers from the first theoretical seminar of the
Baltic archaeologists (BASE) held at the University of
Tartu, Estonia, October 17th–19th, 2003 (=Interarchaeologia, 1). University of Tartu, 105–120.
Banytė-Rowell, R., Bitner-Wróblewska, A., Reich,
C., 2016. West Lithuania as a Golden Bridge between
the Sea and the Baltic Hinterland in Northeast Poland
during the Roman and Migration Period. AB, 23, 140–
151.
Bateson, J.D., Hedges, R.F.M., 1975. The Scientific
analysis of a group of Roman-age enamelled brooches.
Archaeometry, 17 (2), 177–90.
Bayley, J., Butcher, S., 1995. The composition of
Roman brooches found in Britain. In: Mols, S.T.A.M.,
ed. Acta of the 12th International Congress on Ancient
Bronzes, Nijmegen 1992 (=Nederlandse Archeologische
Rapporten, 18). Nijmegen: Provinciaal Museum G.M.
KAM, 113–119.
Bayley, J., Butcher, S., 2004. Roman Brooches in
Britain: A Technological and Typological Study based
on the Richborough collection (=Reports of the Research
Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London, 68).
Society of Antiquaries of London.
Bitner-Wróblewska, A. 2009. Geometriniai motyvai baltų mene pirmaisiais amžiais po Kristaus /
Geometrical Motifs in Baltic Art in the first Centuries
AD. In: Butrimas, A., red. Baltų menas. Parodos katalogas / Art of the Balts. The Catalogue of Exhibition. Vilniaus dailės akademijos leidykla, 377–443.
Bitner-Wróblewska, A., 2011. East European
Enamelled Ornaments and the Character of Contacts
between the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea. In: Khrapunov, I., Stylegar, F.-A., eds. Inter Ambo Maria: Contacts
between Scandinavia and the Crimea in the Roman
Period: Collected papers (=Cultural-Historical Reports,
10). Kristiansand, Simferopol: Dolya publishing house,
11–24.
Bitner-Wróblewska, A., Stawiarska, T., 2009.
Badania technologiczne wschodnioeuropejskich zabytków zdobionych emalią. In: Bitner-Wróblewska,
A., Brzeziński, W., red. Bałtowie i ich sąsiedzi: Marian Kaczynski in memoriam (=Seminarium Bałtyjskie,
II). Warszawa: Państwowe Muzeum Archeologiczne,
303–352.
Bos, J.M., 2007/2008. Medieval brooches from the
Dutch province of Friesland (Frisia): a regional perspective on the Wijnaldum brooches, Part III. Disc
Brooches. Palaeohistoria. Acta et communications institute archaeologici universitatis Groninganae, 49/50,
709–793.
Böhme, A., 1972. Die Fibeln der Kastelle Saalburg
und Zugmantel. Saalburg Jahrbuch, XXIX, 5–112.
Buora, M., 2005. Nota sulla diffusione delle fibule
a svastica con terminazioni a testa di cavallo. Quaderni
friulani di Archeologia, XV, 117–122.
Chiavari, C., Rahmouni, K., Takenouti, H., Joiret,
S., Vermaut, P., Robbiola, L., 2007. Composition and
electrochemical properties of natural patinas of outdoor bronze monuments. Electrochimica Acta, 52 (27),
7760–7769.
Conkey, M.W., 1993. Experimenting with style in
archaeology: some historical and theoretical issues. In:
Conkey, M.W., Hastorf, C., eds. The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, 5–17.
Craddock, P.T., 1988. Copper alloys of the Hellenistic and Roman World: New Analyses and Old Authors. In: Jones, J.E., ed. Aspects of Ancient Mining and
Metallurgy: Acta of a British School at Athens Centenary Conference at Bangor, 1986. Bangor: Department
of Classics, University College of Wales, 55–65.
Craddock, P.T., ed. 1990. 2000 years of Zinc and
Brass, 2nd ed. (=British Museum Occasional Paper, 50).
London: British Museum Press.
Dungworth, D., 1997. Roman Copper Alloys:
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
Analysis of Artefacts from Northern Britain. JAS, 24
(10), 901–910.
Ekengren, F., 2009. Ritualization – Hybridization – Fragmentation. The Mutability of Roman Vessels
in Germania Magna AD 1–400 (=Acta Archaeologica
Lundensia, Series in Prima, 4 (28)). Lund: Department
of Archaeology and Ancient History, Lund University.
Exner, K., 1939. Die provinzialrömischen Emailfibeln der Rheinlande. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission, 29, 31–121.
Feugére, M., 1985. Les Fibules en Gaule Méridionale de la conquête à la fin du Ve siècle après J.-C.
(=Revue Archéologique de Narbonnaise, 12). Paris: Ed.
Du C.N.R.S.
Gigante, G.E., Ricciardi, P., Ridülfi, S., 2005. Areas
and Limits of Employment of Portable EDXRF Equipment for in situ Investigations. ArchéoSciences, Revue
d’archéométrie, 29, 51–59.
Hakenbeck, S., 2011. Local, regional and ethnic identities in early medieval cemeteries in Bavaria
(=Contributi di Archaeologia Medievale / Premio Ottone d’Assia e., 5). Firenze: All’Insegna del Giglio.
Hattatt, R., 1989. A Visual Catalogue of Richard
Hattatt’s Ancient Brooches. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Heeren, S., van der Feijst, L., eds., 2017. Prehistorische, Romeinse en middeleeuwse fibulae uit de Lage
Landen. Beschrijving, analyse en interpretatie van een
archeologische vondstcategorie. Amersfoort: Eigen Beheer.
Jaanits, L., Laul, S., Lõugas, V., Tõnisson, E., 1982.
Eesti esiajalugu. Tallinn: Eesti Raamat.
Jonuks, T., 2009. Eesti muinasusund (=Dissertationes archaeologiae Universitatis Tartuensis, 2). Tartu
Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Khomiakova, O., 2015. Disc Brooches of DollkeimKovrovo Culture. The Question of the Origin of Ornaments in the Southeast Baltic in the First Centuries
AD. AB, 21/22, 14–39.
Kivirüüt, A., Olli, M., 2016. Archaeological research on Aakre Kivivare tarand-grave. Archaeological
Fieldwork in Estonia 2015, 59−70.
Kivikoski, E., 1973. Die Eisenzeit Finnlands: Bildwerk und Text. Helsinki: Weilin & Göös.
67
Lang, V., 2007. The Bronze and Early Iron Ages in
Estonia (=Estonian Archaeology, 3). Tartu University
Press.
Lang, V., 2018. Läänemeresoome tulemised (=MT,
28). Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Laul, S., 2001. Rauaaja kultuuri kujunemine Eesti
kaguosas (500 e.Kr – 500 p.Kr) (=MT, 9. Õpetatud Eesti
Seltsi kirjad, 7). Tallinn: Ajaloo Instituut.
Lutz, J., Pernicka, E., 1995. Energy Dispersive XRay Fluorescence Analysis of Ancient Copper Alloys:
Empirical Values for Precision and Accuracy. Archaeometry, 38 (2), 313–323.
Martinón-Torres, M., Li, X.J., Bevan, A., Xia, Y.,
Zhao, K., Rehren, T., 2014. Forty Thousand Arms for a
Single Emperor: From Chemical Data to the Labor Organization Behind the Bronze Arrows of the Terracotta
Army. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 21
(3), 534–562.
Meeks, N.D., 1986. Tin-Rich Surfaces on Bronze
– Some Experimental and Archaeological Considerations. Archaeometry, 28 (2), 133–162.
Michelbertas, M., 1986. Senasis geležies amžius
Lietuvoje. I–IV amžius. Vilnius: Mokslas.
Moora, H., 1938. Die Eisenzeit in Lettland bis etwa
500 n Chr, II. Analyse (=Õpetatud Eesti Seltsi Toimetused, XXIX). Tartu: Õpetatud Eesti Selts.
Nowakowski, W., 1996. Das Samland in der römischen Kaiserzeit und seine Verbindungen mit dem römischen Reich und der barbarischen Welt (=Veröffentlichungen des Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars Marburg,
Sonderband, 10). Marburg, Warszawa: Vorgeschichtliches Seminar der Philipps-Universität Marburg.
Olli, M., 2013. Rooma rauaaegsed ehted ja ornamendid Eestis (unpublished MA thesis). Manuscript in
the library of Department of Archaeology at the University of Tartu.
Olli, M., 2016. Eksperthinnang Viljandist leitud
Rooma sõle kohta (Expertise). Manuscript in the Archive of the National Heritage Board, Tallinn.
Olli, M., Kivirüüt, A., 2017. Individual and collective based on the Viimsi tarand graves, North Estonia.
In: Kannike, A., Västrik, E.H., Tasa, M., eds. Body, Personhood and Privacy: Perspectives on Cultural Other
68
and Human Experience. Approaches to Culture Theory
(7th volume). University of Tartu Press, 271–292.
Potts, P.J., West, M., eds., 2008. Portable X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry: Capabilities for In Situ Analysis. Cambridge: RSC Publishing.
Riha, E. 1994. Die römischen Fibeln aus Augst und
Kaiseraugst. Die Neufunde seit 1975 (=Forschungen in
Augst, 18). Römermuseum Augst.
Robbiola, L., Blengino, J.M., Fiaud, C., 1998. Morphology and mechanisms of formation of natural patinas on archaeological Cu-Sn alloys. Corrosion Science,
40 (12), 2083–2111.
Roxburgh, M., Heeren, S., Huisman, H., van Os,
B., 2016. Early Roman copper-alloy brooch production: a compositional analysis of 400 brooches from
Germania Inferior. Journal of Roman Archaeology, 29,
411–421.
Roxburgh, M., Heeren, S., Huisman, H., van Os, B.,
2017. De koperlegeringen van Romeinse. In: Heeren,
S., van Der Feijst, L., eds. Prehistorische, Romeinse en
middeleeuwse fibulae uit de Lage Landen. Beschrijving,
analyse en interpretatie van een archeologische vondstcategorie. Amersfoort: Eigen Beheer, 243–258.
Roxburgh, M., Heeren, S., Huisman, H., van Os, B.,
2018. A Non-destructive survey of early Roman copper-alloy brooches using portable X-ray Fluorescence
Spectrometry. Archaeometry. Available from: https://
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/arcm.12414
[Accessed 4 September 2018].
Shackley, M.S., ed., 2011. X-Ray Fluorescence
Spectrometry (XRF) in Geoarchaeology. London:
Springer.
Shugar, A.N., Mass, J.L., eds. 2012. Handheld XRF
for Art and Archaeology. Leuven University Press.
Sidrys, R.V., 2001. Roman Imports among the
West Balts: Commerce or “Beads for the Natives”? In:
Butrimas, A., ed. Baltic Amber. Proceedings of the International Interdisciplinary Conference: Baltic amber
in natural science, archaeology and the applied arts,
13–18 September 2001, Vilnius, Palanga, Nida (=Acta
Academiae Artium Vilnesis, 22). Vilniaus Dailės akademijos leidykla, 157–169.
Simniškytė, A., 2002. Roman Period Metal Half-
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
moon Shaped Pendants with Knobs in Eastern Baltic
Region. AB, 5, 95–122.
Smit, D., 2012. Handheld X-ray fluorescence analysis of Renaissance bronzes: practical approaches to
quantification and acquisition. In: Shugar, A.N., Mass,
J.L., eds. Handheld XRF for Art and Archaeology. Leuven: Studies in Archaeological Sciences, 37–74.
Smythe, J.A., 1938. Roman objects of copper and
iron from the north of England. Proceedings of the University of Durham Philosophical Society, 9, 382–405.
Swift, E., 2000. Regionality in Dress Accessories in
the Late Roman West. Montagnac: Éditions Monique
Mergoil.
Tallgren, A.M., 1922. Zur Archäologie Eestis I. Vom
Anfang der Besiedelung bis etwa 500 n. chr. Dorpat:
Druck von C. Mattiesen.
Tamla, Ü., Kiudsoo, M., 2009. Ancient Hoards of
Estonia. Catalogue of Exhibition. Tallinn: Institute of
History.
Tate, J., 1986. Some problems in analysing museum material by non-destructive surface sensitive techniques. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics
Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials
and Atoms, 14 (1), 20–23.
van Thienen, V., Lycke, S., 2017. From commodity
to singularity: The production of crossbow brooches
and the rise of the late Roman military elite. JAS, 82,
50–61.
Unglick, H., 1991. Structure, composition and
technology of late Roman copper alloy artifacts from
the Canadian excavations at Carthage. Archaeomaterials, 5, 91–110.
Vaska, B., 2013. Ornamentation on Roman Iron
Age jewellery in Latvia made in openwork technique.
AL, 14, 88–110.
Vasks, A., 2006. The Kalnazīverti pectoral ornament: archaeology and folklore. AL, 7, 9–14.
Vassar, A., 1943. Nurmsi kivikalme Eestis ja tarandkalmete areng (Unpublished PhD thesis). Manuscript
in the University of Tartu Library.
Volkaitė-Kulikauskienė, R., Jankauskas, K., 1992.
Iš senosios Lietuvių amatininkystės istorijos (alavas
senuosiuose lietuvių papuošaluose). LA, 8, 135–164.
DISC BROOCHES OF THE ROMAN IRON AGE FROM THE TARAND CEMETERIES OF ESTONIA AND NORTH LATVIA
Zemītis, G., 2004. Ornaments un simbols Latvijas
aizvēsturē. Rīga: Latvijas vēstures institūta apgāds.
Корзухинa, Г.Ф., 1978. Предметы убора з
выемчатыми эмалями V – первой половины VI в.
н. э. в Среднем Поднепровье (=Археология СССР,
E1–43), Ленинград: Наука.
Левада, М.E., 2010. Сухоносивка. In: Urbaniak,
A., Prochowicz, R., Jakubczyk, I., Левада, M., Schuster,
J., red. Terra Barbarica: studia ofiarowane Magdalenie
Mączyńskiej w 65. rocznicę urodzin (=Monumenta Archaeologica Barbarica. Series Gemina, II). Łódź: Instytut Archeologii Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego; Warszawa:
Fundacja Monumenta Archaeologica Barbarica, 557–
594.
Обломский, А.М., ред., 2007. Памятники
киевской культуры в лесостепной зоне России
(III – начало V начало в. н.э.) (=Раннеславянский
мир. Археология славян и их соседей, 10). Mосква:
Институт Археологии РАН.
Черных, E.H., Хоферте, Д.Б., Барцева, Б., 1969.
Металлургические группы цветного металла I
69
тысячелетия н.э. из Прибалтики. Краткие сообщения о докладах и полевых исследованиях института археологии, 119, 109–120.
Шмидехельм, М.Х., 1955. Археологические памятники периода разложения родового строя на
северо-востоке Эстонии (V в. до н. э. – V в. н. э.).
Таллин: Эстонское государственное издательство.
Юшкова, М.А., 2011. Эпоха бронзы и ранний
железный век на Северо-Западе России (диссертация на соискание ученой степени кандидата
исторических наук; Unpublished PhD thesis).
Институт истории материальной культуры РАН,
Санкт-Петербург.
ABBREVIATIONS
AB – Archaeologia Baltica
AL – Archaeologia Lituana
JAS – Journal of Archaeological Science
LA – Lietuvos archeologija
MT – Muinasaja teadus
ROMĖNIŠKOJO LAIKOTARPIO APSKRITOS SEGĖS IŠ ESTIJOS
IR ŠIAURĖS LATVIJOS TARAND KAPINYNŲ
Maarja Olli, Marcus Adrian Roxburgh
Santrauka
Straipsnio objektas yra dabartinės Estijos ir
Šiaurės Latvijos teritorijoje tarand kapinynų paplitimo areale aptinkamos Romėniškojo laikotarpio
(50–450 m. po Kr. Estijoje ir 1–400 m. po Kr. Latvijoje) apskritos segės. Iki šiol šioje teritorijoje rastos apskritos segės nebuvo tyrinėtos, dažniausiai jos
buvo platesnių įvairių šalių ir regionų materialinės
kultūros tyrinėjimų sudėtinė dalis.
Straipsnio tikslas – nuodugniai ištirti Romėniškojo laikotarpio tarand kapinynų paplitimo areale aptinkamas apskritas seges, didžiausią dėmesį skiriant regioniniams skirtumams. Siekiama nustatyti,
ar kurie nors motyvai, tipologinės grupės, lydiniai
dominavo atskirose teritorijose, ir tarand kapinynų
paplitimo areale identifikuoti galimas kultūrines
grupes. Be to, mėginant nustatyti vietos ir išorės įtaką apskritų segių stiliams ir gamybai, atsižvelgiama
ir į kultūrinius santykius su išoriniais regionais.
Straipsnis sujungia stilistinius ir tipologinius apskritų segių bei jų gamybos bruožų tyrimus. Tyrimų
metu buvo patikrinta esama segių tipologija ir chronologija bei palyginta su kitų, spėjama, didžiausią
įtaką aptariamojoje teritorijoje rastų segių formoms
turėjusių regionų (pirmiausia Vakarų Lietuvos ir Ro-
70
MAARJA OLLI, MARCUS ADRIAN ROXBURGH
mos provincijų) duomenimis. Pagal segių puošybą, jų
dydį, adatos tvirtinimo būdą ir gamybą buvo išskirtos
devynios grupės. Lydinio, iš kurio pagamintos segės,
sudėtis buvo analizuojama rankiniu rentgeno spindulių fluorescenciniu spektrometru (HHXRF) kokybiniu nedestrukcinu metodu, siekiant išsiaiškinti
galimus tipologinių grupių ir lydinio sudėties dėsningumus, taip pat įgyti žinių apie paviršiaus apdirbimo
pobūdį.
Remiantis tyrimais, išskirtos dvi teritorijos: 1)
Šiaurės rytų Estijos, 2) Pietryčių Estijos ir Šiaurės Latvijos. Šios dvi kultūrinės grupės išryškėjo pagal segių
grupių paplitimą, stilių, paviršiaus apdorojimą ir ilgo
nuotolio prekybos kryptis. Romėniškojo laikotarpio
tarand kapinynų paplitimo areale gyvenę žmonės aktyviai prekiavo ir bendravo tiek su kaimyninių, tiek
su tolimesnių regionų gyventojais. To rezultatas buvo
aukštas amatininkų technologinis lygis, įvairių paviršiaus apdorojimo technikų, tokių kaip alavavimas ir
dengimas emaliu, išmanymas. Segių kūrimas buvo
grindžiamas išorės idėjomis ir prototipais, suteikiant
dirbiniams vietinių bruožų. Nors iš kitų regionų
importuotų vario lydinių apskritų segių nėra daug,
vietos segių stilistikoje ir gamybos technikoje juntama baltų, Romos provincijų, Germanijos ir Dniepro
arealo įtaka. Kadangi žaliavos prieinamumas buvo
ribotas, buvo gaminama nedideliu mastu, tik vietos
naudojimui, produkcija greičiausiai buvo skirta ir/ar
užsakoma vietos elito ar kitų žmonių grupių. Žvelgiant į vietoje pagamintų segių paplitimą matyti, kad
jos buvo naudojamos lokaliai, žmonių, laidotų tarand
kapinynuose.
ILIUSTRACIJŲ SĄRAŠAS
PRIEDAS
Šioje studijoje aptariamų segių sąrašas.
LENTELIŲ SĄRAŠAS
1 lent. Analizės rezultatų palyginimas („Niton“
ir „Bruker“ analizatoriai).
2 lent. Sudėties analizės rezultatai (%).
1 pav. Tarand kapinynų paplitimo arealas Romėniškuoju laikotarpiu. M. Olli brėž. pagal Lang 2018,
p.175, Fig. 5.10.
2 pav. Trijų komponentų diagrama: a – klasifikacijos schema (pagal Bayley, Butcher 2004,
p.24, Fig. 7); b – „žemyninės apskritos segės“ Šiaurės vakarų Europoje (pagal Bayley, Butcher 2004,
p.176, Fig. 151); c – akinės segės (pagal Bayley,
Butcher 1995, p.115, Fig. 4:1); d – A46 tipo segės
(pagal Roxburgh et al. 2017, p.252, Fig. 5.3.16).
M. A. Roxburgh brėž.
3 pav. Adatos tvirtinimo konstrukcija: a – kilputės ir kabliuko konstrukcija, b – dvi auselės su
skylutėmis, laikančiomis ašį, prie kurios pritvirtinta
adata. M. Olli pieš.
4 pav. 1–6 grupių apskritos segės. M. Olli pieš.
5 pav. 7, 8 grupių apskritos segės. M. Olli pieš.
6 pav. Sn-Zn-Pb lydinio proporcijų trijų komponentų diagrama. M. A. Roxburgh brėž.
7 pav. Apskritų segių paplitimas tarand kapinynų areale: 1 – Virunuka, 2 – Jaagupi, 3 – Sadrametsa, 4 – Hõbeda, 5 – Truuta, 6 – Tatra, 7 – Salenieki,
8 – Mūri, 9 – Vīksnas Kapusils, 10 – Leški, 11 –
Ala-Pika, 12 – Gailīši, 13 – Kambja, 14 – Kardla,
15 – Kõnnu, 16 – Meeri, 17 – Paali, 18 – Slavēka,
19 – Unipiha, 20 – Jäbara, 21 – Kukruse, 22 – Laanemõisa, 23 – Lagedi, 24 – Pada, 25 – Ripuka, 26 –
Toila, 27 – Tõrma, 28 – Türsamäe, 29 – Kõrenduse,
30 – Lahepera, 31 – Libriti, 32 – Mūsina, 33 – Jaunzemji, 34 – Aakre, 35 – Jauntēvēns, 36 – Kalvi, 37 –
Kaugars II, 38 – Kärde, 39 – Pikkjärve, 40 – Siksälä,
41 – Ulvi, 42 – Vagula, 43 – Nurmsi, 44 – Künnapuu,
45 – Viljandi, 46 – Triigi, 47 – Erra, 48 – Tarbja, 49 –
Kirbu, 50 – Velna Kravanda, 51 – Järve, 52 – Malla.
M. Olli brėž.
Vertė J. Žukauskaitė
Gauta 2018-04 03
Priimta 2018-06-19