Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureş, 7–9 October 2011, BMM, V, Tg. Mureș, Mega, 2012.

Sándor Berecki

IRON AGE RITES AND RITUALS IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș 7–9 October 2011 BIBLIOTHECA MVSEI MARISIENSIS SERIA ARCHAEOLOGIC A V PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUMS FROM TÂRGU MUREȘ Editor SÁNDOR BERECKI IRON AGE RITES AND RITUALS IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN PROCEEDINGS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM FROM TÂRGU MUREȘ 7–9 October 2011 Edited by Sándor BERECKI Editura MEGA Târgu Mureș 2012 © Mureș County Museum, 2012 Executive editor: Zoltán Soós, Director Muzeul Judeţean Mureș CP 85, str. Mărăști nr. 8A, 540328 Târgu Mureș, România Descrierea CIP a Bibliotecii Naţionale a României IRON AGE RITES AND RITUALS IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN. International Colloquium (Târgu-Mureş ; 2011) Iron age rites and rituals in the Carpathian basin : proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureş, 7-9 Octomber 2011 / ed. by Sándor Berecki. - Târgu-Mureş : Mega, 2012 Bibliogr. ISBN 978-606-543-275-8 I. Berecki, Sándor (ed.) 903(4)(23 Carpaţi)(063) Editura Mega | www.edituramega.ro e-mail: mega@edituramega.ro Content Preface ...................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Hrvoje POTREBICA Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia ............................................ 9 Marcella NAGY–Pál SÜMEGI–Gergő PERSAITS–Sándor GULYÁS–Tünde TÖRŐCSIK Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár (Vas County, Hungary) in the Western Region of the Carpathian Basin. A Study in the Reconstruction of the Cultic Life of the Hallstatt Period in the Light of Archaeological and Scientific Analyses............................................................................... 31 Zoltán CZAJLIK–Géza KIRÁLY–Attila CZÖVEK–Sándor PUSZTA–Balázs HOLL–Gábor BROLLY The Application of Remote Sensing Technology and Geophysical Methods in the Topographic Survey of Early Iron Age Burial Tumuli in Transdanubia................................................... 65 Robert SCHOLTZ Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök.................................................................................................................... 77 László SZATHMÁRY Scythian Age Human Skeletal Remains from Tiszalök ............................................................................ 101 Florin GOGÂLTAN–József-Gábor NAGY Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania.................................................................................................................................................... 105 Imola KELEMEN The Archaeozoological Analysis of the Animal Bones Discovered in the Early Iron Age Pit at Vlaha–Pad .................................................................................................................................................. 133 Mircea BABEȘ–Nicolae MIRIȚOIU Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.)........................................................................................................................................ 139 Aurel RUSTOIU–Sándor BERECKI ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age. The Grave with Chalcidian Helmet from Ocna Sibiului .......................................................................... 161 Peter C. RAMSL Late Iron Age Burial Rites in Eastern Austria ............................................................................................ 183 Maciej KARWOWSKI An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg ................................................................................. 189 Jan BOUZEK The North-Western Part of the Carpathian Basin in the Period of Early Celtic Princes ..................... 213 Zoltán PILLING–Ferenc UJVÁRI Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma. Some New Data on Iron Age Burial Rite at the Southern Part of the Great Hungarian Plain ......................................... 217 Éva TANKÓ–Károly TANKÓ Cremation and Deposition in the Late Iron Age Cemetery at Ludas ..................................................... 249 Gertrúda BŘEZINOVÁ The Biritual Cemetery at Šurany–Nitriansky Hrádok, District of Nové Zámky, Slovakia................... 259 Martin FURMAN The Interpretative Value of Annular Ornaments for the Study of Early Celtic Populations in the Middle Danube Area .......................................................................................................................... 273 Gabriela BREZŇANOVÁ Reflections of the Contacts between Celtic Communities in North-West Romania and South-West Slovakia in the Grave Inventories ................................................................................... 289 János NÉMETI Funerary Rites and Rituals of the Celtic Cemeteries in North-Western Romania and a Comparison with the Funerary Discoveries in the Tisza Plain and Transylvania...................... 295 Tiberius BADER Meine Begegnungen mit den Keltenfürsten: am Beispiel der Fürstengräber von Ciumești und Hochdorf ................................................................................................................................................. 303 Paul PUPEZĂ The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves ................................... 317 Dragoș MĂNDESCU Killing the Weapons. An Insight on Graves with Destroyed Weapons in Late Iron Age Transylvania ...................................................................................................................... 343 Aurel RUSTOIU The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin. Intercommunity Communication Strategies ............................................................................................. 357 Marija LJUŠTINA–Miloš SPASIĆ Celtic Newcomers between Traditional and Fashionable: Graves 63 and 67 from Karaburma .......... 391 Cătălin Nicolae POPA ‘Till Death Do Us Part’. A Statistical Approach to Identifying Burial Similarity and Grouping. The Case of the Late La Tène Graves from the Eastern Carpathian Basin............................................. 401 Beatrice S. KELEMEN–Iosif Vasile FERENCZ–Cristian C. ROMAN–Delia M. ROMAN–Oana PONTA–Simon SIMION Cremated Human Remains from Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului / Platou. Additional Information Inferred by XRD, FT-IR and SEM/EDX Analyses .......................................... 413 Andreea DRĂGAN Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène......................................................................................................................................... 425 Milica TAPAVIČKI-ILIĆ–Vojislav FILIPOVIĆ A Late Iron Age Grave Find from Syrmia .................................................................................................. 453 Marcin RUDNICKI Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety ..... 461 Horea POP–Zsolt CSÓK The Tumuli Necropolis from Șimleu Silvaniei ........................................................................................... 493 Mariana EGRI ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia ... 503 Abbreviations...................................................................................................................................................... 531 Preface When the idea of the ‘Târgu Mureș Colloquiums’ had been contrived, I was only hoping that a Romanian regional museum like the one in Mureș County will be able to contribute to the scientific discussions regarding the Central and Eastern European archaeology. Yet, the youthful conception and openness for any new initiative of the institution’s management ensured a significant background for this bold initiative, providing the indispensable financial support, infrastructure and logistics. Now it is admissible – or maybe even necessary – looking back over the last four years of experience to draw conclusions, to review the successes and difficulties, or the eventual mistakes, and then getting strength from our results to raise the bar for ourselves and for the institution. Beginning with the first colloquium in 2008 we were committed to organize the events in a series, territorially focusing on the Carpathian Basin and alternating annually the Bronze and Iron Ages, the two succeeding conferences being connected by the common topics of discussions. After dedicating the first two colloquiums to the communities of the Bronze and then of the Iron Ages, the next two discussed the funerary and ritual practices of the same periods. Regarding the continuity, in the year of this volume’s release the Mureș County Museum organizes the colloquium entitled Bronze Age Crafts and Craftsmen in the Carpathian Basin, which predicts the topics of the Iron Age colloquium from the next year. So the reader of these lines is laying eyes on the works of the fourth ‘Metal Ages Colloquiums from Târgu Mureș’ comprising some of the papers presented during the meeting, complemented by further papers connected to the topic of funerary and ritual archaeology. The ‘archaeology of death’ and rituals, this abstract and sometimes immaterial topic, which assumes psychological processes and collective respectively individual social behaviours for the analysis of artefacts and features observed on the field, once again proved to be inexhaustible. The presented studies from almost the entire territory of the Carpathian Basin focused on the Iron Age collective behaviour of the social structures, the cultural interferences influencing common concepts and artefacts connected to rituals, the environment and structure of the cemeteries, the funerary rites and rituals and grave inventory analyses. The colloquium and now the first studies from this volume present the result of recent investigations or the revaluation of older Early Iron Age finds from Croatia, Hungary or Transylvania. Furthermore an insight into the funerary customs of the Late Iron Age communities from the Carpathian Basin (Austria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and Serbia) is provided, while the finds and features related to cults, rituals or afterlife beliefs are presenting in a new light the relationships and the ‘invisible’ interactions of the epoch. The increasing importance of the alternative and complementary methods – geophysics, archaeozoology, anthropology and statistics – for the research of the Late Iron Age is also evidenced in this volume. For the financial support of the colloquium and the volume I am thankful to the management of the Mureș County Museum. The Executive Unit for Financing Higher Education, Research Development and Innovation (UEFISCDI), through the PNII IDEAS Programme, the 2011 Exploratory Workshops sub-programme, substantially covered the costs of organizing the meeting. I am grateful for the trust and support of my family, colleagues and friends, who encouraged me in organizing the colloquium and editing the volume. Last, but certainly not least, I would like to express my gratitude to Professor J. V. S. Megaw, who despite his numerous engagements willingly helped the English revision of most of the studies, often completing them with useful observations. Sándor BERECKI August 2012, Târgu Mureș Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia Hrvoje POTREBICA University of Zagreb, Croatia hpotrebi@ffzg.hr Keywords: Hallstatt, religion, brothers in arms, priestess, cremation, situla art Writing about religious notions of prehistoric communities and cultures is always an ungratifying task. It is a phenomenon, whose existence is beyond any doubt, but at the same time it cannot be proven by any reliable written testimonies, and archaeological methods provide but a very limited and fragmented insight into the traces of cult practice. Even in cases in which clear archaeological evidence proves that some religious activities did indeed take place, their interpretation is a very dangerous and complex task. It would be nearly impossible, and certainly much too ambitious, to attempt to construct a general structure of religious systems relevant to individual communities on the basis of such an incomplete picture. With all this in mind, in this paper we will discuss just a few religious concepts which can be construed from the current archaeological material. But, before we begin, we have to consider the following question: is there such a thing as could be described as a ‘Hallstatt religion’ – both in terms of the cultural determination, and in terms of its spatial and chronological identification? We are faced with an almost identical problem when attempting to define the ‘Hallstatt culture’. The answer to this question lies primarily in the social organization of individual communities which can be found in a certain space, but also in the structure and character of the regional and supra-regional networks of such communities. The current modest knowledge on that structure suggests several general theses. The cultural phenomena of the wider region of central Europe, which are jointly described as the Hallstatt Cultural Complex, are actually rather heterogeneous. Within the basic internal conceptual division of the complex, Croatia belongs to its Eastern Circle, and some authors classify it in a more specific and narrower spatial unit of South-East Alpine Hallstatt Circle. These divisions are based on the material culture and organizational structure of various communities, and one can assume that the religious component of their cultures followed a similar pattern. It is evident that the main principles were common to the whole territory of the Hallstatt Cultural Complex, but their manifestations were sometimes very much locally tailored. The situation is even more complex in view of the fact that, in those rare cases in which a correlation can be made between the material and the spiritual culture of individual communities in a given area, similar characteristics of their material cultures is not necessarily paralleled by similarities in the spiritual aspects of their cultures, and vice versa. Traces of such phenomena can be found in some well-known religious systems, such as the Greek, in which, at least in its early phase, the names of individual deities stand for certain generic classes, rather than clearly defined entities. These classes consisted of, or reflected, whole ranges of religious principles, which were mostly local and, to a degree, diverse. The concept of main deities was a result of the process of synthesis of such local attributes, and also of imposition of some local concepts at a wider regional level. However, it is worth bearing in mind that this process occasionally went in the opposite direction, and that some specific and local religious principles were formalized under the name of the deity whose attributes were most appropriate. For this reason, additional names were sometimes used which expressed some Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 9–29 10 | H. Potrebica spatial and/or character features, much more than the names of deities such as Zeus or Athena, which provided the basic association. A question that remains open is whether religious principles, which are fundamentally abstract, were given some clear forms in the Hallstatt culture – forms that result in mythological systems and an adequate narrative component. Some elements of the material culture which can be traced by archaeological methods of exploration, such as small sculptures, figurative depictions on pottery and metal ware, and even narrative scenes represented on situlae, suggest that such deities and mythological systems did exist. We will try to point out several archaeological traces of individual concepts belonging to the religious systems of Hallstatt communities which populated the territory of Croatia. Tradition, symbolism and visual communication Solar cult The continuity of motifs of the solar circle, swastika and birds, which characterized the Urnfield culture in Central Europe (though usually expressed in a different technique), indicates that certain concepts and beliefs, such as those linked to the solar cult, had survived the transition to the Iron Age and were recognized, or taken over, by Hallstatt communities (Pl. 2). The presence of such elements seems to confirm the hypothesis that the Hallstatt society developed from a population belonging to the Urnfield culture, which had changed under the strong pressure of very influential concepts arriving from the East. The dynamic communication between communities of the Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age in the territory of Europe certainly resulted, inter alia, in a wide distribution of some religious concepts, which, through the process of their reception in the local systems, were turned into various cult amalgams, and their local evolution brought about ideas which had similar manifestations, although they appeared in temporally and spatially distant places. When discussing the solar cult in the religion of the Nordic Bronze Age, Kristiansen and Larsson reconstructed the mythological structure dominated by the Sun goddess with her solar chariot. She was closely connected with her brothers, the divine twins, who are reflected in Kristiansen’s concept of dual rulers (Kristiansen–Larsson 2005, 258–282, 294–308; Kristiansen 2001, 85–105). Interestingly, an important role in the religion of the Eastern Hallstatt Circle was played by a female deity with rather unclear attributes, while some recently discovered grave contexts suggest the existence of the concept of ‘brothers in arms’. However, for the time being there is no foundation that would justify the linking of these two phenomena. In any case, the presence of a solar dimension of religious notions can be felt in the Hallstatt Cultural Complex, but their power and strength of artistic expression varied, probably depending on how lively the Urnfield culture substrate was in individual local Hallstatt cultural groups. The evolution of the solar cult in the enormous territory reaching from Central, and even Northern, Europe to the Aegean reflected, to a certain extent, the change of the world view at the beginning of the Iron Age, and also a kind of general understanding of the main characteristics of the cult (Bouzek 1997, 34–43; Kristiansen–Larsson 2005, 251–319). Animal symbolism in Iron Age religion Given that archaeology founds its methods primarily on material culture, when discussing symbolism, we also rely to the greatest extent on the visual dimension of symbols. Although, at first glance, it appears that religious symbols are not difficult to identify, it is questionable whether this painstaking contextual analysis will provide relevant results, because in most cases it is difficult to discern when one and the same form or depiction has religious, social, heraldic or just decorative meaning. Within this category, animal symbols are probably most easily observed. Of a whole series of animals, we will mention just a few. Waterbirds Waterbirds, the dominant symbol of the Urnfield culture, occupy a very important symbolic niche within the combined, and sometimes hard-to-distinguish, context of the solar and chthonic cults, and in the Hallstatt Cultural Complex. From the very beginning of the Iron Age, they could be found on a variety of ornamental objects, ranging from fibulae to various pendants, on bronze vessels and other items. Finds of pottery vessels and rattles in the shapes of birds are interesting, such as those from Dalj (Hoffiler 1938, T. 36/13). This category also includes vessels with bird protomas, such as the pots from Turčišće-Dvorišće (Majnarić-Pandžić 1998, 236–237, fig. 60) and cups with handles shaped like birds’ heads, such as those from Martijanec and Dalj (Vinski-Gasparini 1961, T. VII/1; IX/1–2). It is worth noting that, in later phases Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia | 11 of the Hallstatt culture, the same types of vessels featured bulls’ heads or horns. However, the most important items are those to which a ritual purpose has been attributed, for example, wagon models, such as that from Glasinac, or the rattle from an unknown site in eastern Slavonia (Šimić 1995, 49). It is especially important that waterbirds emerged as a decorative element on horse gear at the very beginning of the Early Iron Age. This powerful religious symbol of a dual character has been directly associated with horses, which became an element of the identity of Hallstatt elites and a symbol of the highest social status. Good examples can be found in the Adaševci and Legrad hoards (Vinski 1955; Vinski-Gasparini 1973, 181, T. 127). The continuity of the meaning of waterbirds is almost certain: they carried the sun itself, or the solar deity, which travelled, with their assistance, across the sky, but also, with the change of the seasons, to the darkness of the other world, only to come back in spring and secure the regeneration of nature and a new cycle of life, which could easily be associated with the seasonal migration of most waterbirds. It is interesting that marshland, the habitat of many species of waterbirds, was often the location of intensive cult activities of Iron Age communities, especially in the north, where the sun cult also played a significant role and persevered long into the Iron Age. Bull Traditionally, the bull symbol is frequently linked to the said solar cult, and, in the Hallstatt environment, it has often been found in the form of handles and other parts of pottery (Fig. 1) and bronze vessels shaped like bovine heads and bodies. Since such vessels have been found almost always as elements of exclusive grave inventories, the conclusion can be drawn that the bull symbolism had not only the solar, but also a certain chthonic dimension. Interestingly, such representations were present in the entire Alpine region, but they have been found only within some important grave units, for example, the five such pots discovered in Kaptol (Potrebica 2009a, 166). In view of their wide, but specific, distribution, we Fig. 1. Urn from tumulus 10 at necropolis Kaptol–Gradci. can assume that this symbol had roots in the religious concepts of the Urnfield culture, and this indication is also provided by the small figure from the hoard in Poljanci (Vinski-Gasparini 1973, 183, T. 48/22). A much more plastic small sculpture of a bull has been found in a very important religious context dating from the Hallstatt period, in the famous cave of Býčí skála (The Bull Rock Cave) in Moravia. The very name of this locality contains a bull association (Nekvasil 1980). One should not forget the ancient symbolism of horns of consecration and bucrania, which has been present in Europe and Asia uninterruptedly for thousands of years. In Hallstatt contexts, bull horns have been found on handles of pottery and bronze cups; it is probably not by chance that they were present on receptacles intended primarily for drinking. An even better example is provided by Pannonian askoi with bovine representations on their handles, or handles shaped like bovine heads, examples of which have been found in Kaptol (Fig. 2) and Goričan (Potrebica 2009a, 167). They could be linked to the Dionysian aspects of bull symbolism (Harrison 1962, 431–436, fig. 134). Many bull-shaped figurines made of pottery discovered in the Colapian region, especially in the Fig. 2. Askos from tumulus 12 at necropolis shrine at Turska Kosa, have been interpreted as votive gifts Kaptol–Čemernica. replacing real animal sacrifices (Čučković 2004, 198–200). 12 | H. Potrebica On the other hand, the bull was one of the very important symbols in the mythology and religion of ancient Greece. It was one of the forms in which gods appeared (such as Zeus), but also monsters (Minotaur or the bull of Marathon or Crete). In addition to the highly emphasized fertility, present in all contexts relating to the bull, the solar-chthonic symbolism of the animal can hardly be missed. On the one hand, as a divine form, it represents the fertile power of the Sun, and on the other hand it stands for the dark, wild force which yields destruction and fall into the underworld (the Cretan bull, Pasiphae, Minotaur). This is precisely what makes the bull a sacred animal mastered by gods, and its wrongful treatment can result in the cruel punishment of mortals – for example, Odysseus’ crew, who killed Helios’ cattle (Odyssey XII, 339–450). The same reasons made the bull a highly esteemed sacrificial animal – it suffices to remember Nestor’s sacrifice to Poseidon (Odyssey III, 5–68). Therefore, it is not surprising that the bull occasionally appeared in various forms in the burial ritual of important individuals of the Bronze and Iron Ages, in the territory stretching from the region of Mycenae (Gallou 2005, 98–105) to the Balkans. In the well-known princely grave in Atenica, remains of tripartite (‘Indo-European’) animal sacrifices have been found, which included pigs, dogs and cattle, thus bringing to mind the Roman suovetaurilia (Čače 1985, 13–32). Boar The boar is a relatively frequent symbol, which has appeared in various cultures ever since the earliest times. In Europe, representations of boar can be found from the Bronze Age onwards, and they are particularly frequent in La Tène iconography and cult practice, where they appear in various forms, from small figurines to the depiction on the Gundestrup cauldron. Ever since Greek mythology, in which Hercules chased the Erymanthian boar and Meleagar the wild boar of Calydon, the boar hunt has been a strong religious symbol, recently researched in detail by Eibner (2001). She links the boar hunt to the hero cult, which became prominent precisely at the turn of the Iron Age, and which had a very strong mythological background, probably exceeding the framework of Greek mythology. The reference to the boar hunt can also be found in Celtic religion, where the hunt is presented as a deadly feat worthy of the greatest warriors, and the animal itself is often depicted as almost invincible and capable of changing its form. This feature is frequently present in other mythologiFig. 3. Trebenište. Helmet from grave 8 cal references to boars, including those of classical antiquity (after Benac 1987). (Odysseus’ episode with Circe). Representations of boar hunts are also present in Hallstatt situla art – for example, on belt buckles from grave 48/104 in Stična. Depictions of boar and boar tusks – serving as the proof and result of a successful hunt – have often been found in combination with warrior gear: from the famous Mycenae helmets made of boar tusks, to representations of boars made of precious metal foil on Greek-Illyrian helmets, such as the golden boar surrounded by two lions (Popović 1994, 128, fig. 96) on the helmet from Trebenište (Fig. 3). Perhaps this is something to bear in mind when we consider the exceptional find of the Hallstatt horse gear in tumulus 114 in Százhalombatta, where the cheek sections are made of boar tusks, and a similar find in tumulus V in Vaszar, containing two tusks and a number of other elements of horse gear (Patek 1993, 94–103, 129–134, Abb. 75/1–2; 107; Horváth 1969, 126–129, fig. 24/1–2). Another similar set of a horse gear comes from grave Benvenuti 278 in Este (Capuis–Chieco Bianchi 1992, 68, fig. 49). Sources often mention the pig or boar as a very important, if not the central, element of feasts, both at real-life social gatherings and mythological banquets. The piece of meat given to the best of the warriors or to the chief was particularly important. That piece of meat (lower and upper section of the leg) has often been found among grave goods, not merely as simple food, but also in the cult context in which pork, and especially this cut of meat, was considered to be a very appropriate chthonic food. Separate burials of entire pigs or boars, or their parts, are also rather frequent. In northern Croatia, grave goods in female La Tène burials often include parts of pig legs, while male graves frequently feature parts of pig heads, with Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia | 13 split lower or upper jaw bone. The best example of this is the best-researched La Tène cemetery in Croatia, in Zvonimirovo (Dizdar 2005, 90–91). It should be emphasized that pig bones do not only appear there as grave goods, but have also been found mixed with human remains from the burial pyre. It is therefore very likely that the pig/boar played an important role in terms of sacrifice to the chthonic deities during the incineration. Traces of pig sacrifice to chthonic deities, and pig burials dating from various periods, have been found all over Europe, from Greece, through the Balkans (Atenica), all the way to the La Tène shrine in Gournay, where the centre of the site is encircled with alternating trenches containing pig and human skeletal remains (Teegen 2002, 28–29). Stag Because of its antlers, renewed every year, the stag has been a symbol of fertility and cyclic renewal of life in many cultures and eras. In Greek religion, it was connected with Artemis, the goddess of the hunt. In Iron Age religion, it must have played a significant role, because it can often be found as an element of cult iconography: from the depictions cut into rocks in Scandinavia and Val Camonica, through pottery vessels such as those from Sopron, to hunting scenes in situla art, like those on the situla from Novo Mesto (Križ 1997, App. 3) and the belt buckle from Molnik (Puš 1991). The most famous portrayal of a stag might be the cult wagon of Strettweg, with one stag at each end of the wagon (Egg 1996, 14–62). On either side of both stags there are male figures, holding the stag by its antlers with the closer hand. Although the meaning of the stag within this figural composition, dominated by a central female figure, is hard to grasp (hunting?, sacrifice?), it definitely stems from a very specific mythological context, which was recognizable to the community of the time. In situla art, stags can be found in animal processions, and often also in hunting scenes. It seems that such depictions have an iconographic background, because, in them, hunting equipment most frequently consists of a bow and arrows, which were not used as fighting weapons by those communities, and the bowman is often portrayed kneeling behind a tree, with a hunting dog behind him. Interestingly, the same iconographic picture can be found in the eastern Mediterranean and in the Middle East, but in the period hundreds of years earlier (Turk 2005, 23–33, 41), making the thesis on Bronze Age roots of the Iron Age iconography of the stag by Jockenhövel and Knochea acceptable (Jockenhövel–Knoche 2001). Although finds such as the small stag figure from Sotin (Šimić 1995, 48) have been rare in the region covered by this paper, abundant discoveries of this nature have been made in cultures which were chronologically or spatially related to the Hallstatt culture. This is particularly true of nomadic communities in the east – for example, the Scythians, where the stag had an important role in their iconography and mythological structure, and probably also in their religious practice, especially that related to shamanism. Ram The ram was, quite naturally, one of the most frequent symbols in prehistoric religions worldwide because, from the earliest times, it was present in the everyday environment, and it was often at the very core of the economy of various communities. However, in the Hallstatt Cultural Complex, the universal symbolism of the ram, associated with fertility and fire, found its visual expression in but a few places. Probably the most outstanding example is the site in Novo Mesto. The finds from this centre of production of glass beads – one of the largest in Europe – include a large number of amber items. The masterpieces of glass miniature, found in the graves of Kapiteljska Njiva, are in fact polychrome beads shaped very realistically like rams’ heads. The presumably female grave 35, under tumulus V, contained some very rare gold leaves, and over a thousand glass beads and nearly two hundred amber beads. Within this huge number, the largest group of beads consisted of as many as ten whole or fragmented glass beads shaped like rams’ heads (Križ 2000, 62–65, T. 22–24). But they have also been found in other sections, for example, in grave XIV/41, and Fig. 4. Askoi from Dalj. 14 | H. Potrebica undoubtedly the prettiest pair was discovered in grave VII/28. Perhaps the best amber counterparts of those finds are two amber rams’ heads from grave VI/4 (Križ Et Al. 2009, 101–103, 139). Despite the fact that there are no iconographic representations of the ram in situla art, it appears that the animal had some deeper significance for the community, transcending the everyday economic dimension. On the other hand, a pair of Pannonian askoi discovered in Dalj feature handles in the shape of rams (Fig. 4). The same pottery set includes two cups with handles shaped like birds’ heads (Šimić 2004, 48, fig. 9). In this example, rams replaced cattle, found on the same type of vessels originating from the territory of the Kaptol group. It is difficult to say whether these differences are iconographic, religious or simply heraldic, but it can be observed that in these two cultures the two symbols occupied similar semantic fields. In this context, it might be worth mentioning the finding of a fibula with an amber bead on its bow in grave 145 of the Jezerine-Pritoka necropolis; the metal setting of the amber bead on the side of the spring is shaped like a bull’s head, while on the other side, the metal setting is extended to form the fibula foot, shaped like a ram’s head (Raunig 2004, 93–96, 179, T. XVII/1). In the territory inhabited by the Iapodi, both amber and glass rams’ heads have been found, completely corresponding to the examples from Dolenjska, and probably imported from that region. Horse In the symbolic world of prehistoric religions, the horse appears in innumerable shapes and aspects. It is in a continuous movement of space and time, and easily transforms its shape, as it moves from one world to another. Although it is connected to all the elements, the closest to it is water, which also brings the worlds together. The universal aspect of the horse symbol was embodied particularly well in Greek mythological horses (Milićević Bradač 2003). As the main determinant of the Hallstatt Cultural Complex, the horse must have had the central role in the religious life of the period. However, due to the pervasive presence of the horse in various aspects of the life of Hallstatt communities, it is difficult to identify elements of the material culture or archaeological contexts which undoubtedly belong to the sphere of cult or religion. Horse gear found in graves can always be interpreted as a status symbol of warrior-horsemen, and, in some exceptional cases of burials with wagons, as a part of the gear of the team which drew the wagon. Even in the case of prominent female graves in which unusual grave goods consisting of horse gear and wagon parts have been found, these can be interpreted as status symbols, and not necessarily religious symbols. In portrayals of rituals in which women (priestesses?) use them, horses and wagons serve the purpose of functional equipment used to perform cult activities, rather than being their active parts. In situla art, horse depictions rarely appear separated from figural scenes featuring people as the main protagonists, whether as horse riders, wagon drivers, or something else. In the same vein, numerous portrayals of horses with and without riders, appearing in all categories of material culture, cannot be attributed to the cult iconography with any degree of certainty. Even the plastic representations of horses abundant in, for example, the shrine at Turska Kosa (Čučković 2004, 198–200), and lead figurines on pottery vessels at the site of Frög, have been found most frequently in combination with horse riders, and have no independent meaning, which is to a certain extent also reflected in their shaping. Despite all this, there are indications that the horse must have had a very important place in the cult life of the communities of the period. Although no regular detailed analyses of incinerated osteological remains from Hallstatt graves have been carried out to date, in the rare cases in which such analyses have been made, the results suggest that horses were incinerated on the pyre together with the deceased. Here again we can interpret them as elements of equipment belonging to the deceased, similar to the weapons and clothes, but it is also possible that the horse played a second role: that of a sacrificial offering. The situation is somewhat clearer with later skeletal horse burials, for which we can provide the same interpretation as for the incineration burials, but in those situations in which they are not connected to any specific deceased, but occupy a separate place within the necropolis, it is almost certain that they had an additional symbolic meaning or a distinct function within the ritual. Horse burials in or out of graves within the boundaries of a necropolis can also be seen in the light of the horse, which served the deceased in his life as his mode of transport or for fighting or as a status symbol, becoming a sacrificial animal during the funeral ritual, or even obtaining the role of a psychopomp, which can be based on various mythological foundations. Another indirect confirmation of the role of the horse in Hallstatt religion stems from the relationship between powerful women and horses. In addition to horse gear and parts of wagons occasionally Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia | 15 found in the graves of such women, this relationship is sometimes also reflected in their attire, and this can be observed in two different ways. Functional elements of the attire, such as fibulae, were often decorated with horse motifs (Metzner-Nebelsick 2007), and sometimes parts of horse gear appeared as elements of the attire of such women (Metzner-Nebelsick–Nebelsick 1999). The bone miniature of a horse with rider discovered in tumulus 12 of the Kaptol–Gradci necropolis (Fig. 5), which is the most dominant female unit in the necropolis, probably belonged to a fibula (Potrebica 2009b, 137). Almost identical motifs were rendered on bone figurines from Italy, Vače and Nesactium (Marzatico 2009), which is also the finding site of the well-known monumental sculpture of the rider and the woman, which unites the sublime power of the hero and fertility cults (Kukoč 2001). Irrespective of whether those women occupied high places in social or religious structures, or perhaps both, the choice of such specific ornaments must entail an abstract meaning which goes beyond mere aesthetics. One can wonder, for example, whether the motif of Pegasus on the golden torque of the princess of Vix is but an inadvertent decorative element, or whether it bears some other significance. Let us not forget that Pegasus created Hippocrene, the ‘horse fountain’, which was the gathering site of all the Muses and a source of poetic inspiration. On the other hand, as with stags, horse sacrifices are clearly visible among the eastern neighbours of the Hallstatt Cultural Complex, especially among the Scythians, which raises the question of possible interpretation of the grave unit under tumulus 2 in Jalžabet, where the monumental chamber with dromos contained elements of horse gear, scale armour, three-edged arrows of the eastern type and bone arrow-heads for votive purposes. However, among the osteological remains, horses’ bones have been identified with near-certainty, while Fig. 5. Figure of a horse with a rider (probably the presence of human remains has not been from bone-plated fibula) from tumulus 12 at necropolis Kaptol–Gradci. established (Šimek 1998). Situla art For a society that has no written language, the visual narration is of paramount importance for their collective memory, which certainly includes the continuity of religious concepts. Thousands of pages have been written on all aspects of situla art, and especially on the meanings of the scenes depicted. Interpretations go from one extreme to another. The most controversial authors claim that these were imports, decorated with motifs that were completely foreign to the Hallstatt region. Even after it became clear that at least some of the situlae had been produced within the Hallstatt region, or intended for the region, the view was often held that the motifs were transposed for a merely decorative purpose, with no real understanding of their content. One of the theses holds that this was an imitation of the way of life of the Greek and Italian aristocracy by the barbarian elites from the north. Contrary to these, there are interpretations which attribute some deep symbolic, and sometimes even eschatological, significance to every single detail, be it a motif or a composition. Although situla art is usually linked to the toreutic technique, and in some cases even to a specific type of object (as suggested by its very name), it should be considered in a much wider context. The causes of physical emergence of situla art in northern Italy and Slovenia should be sought at the level of technology and development of workshops in the region, as well as in the changed structures of the communities that formed the standard audience and market for those workshops. Nonetheless, the key impulse for the development of situla artistic expression was undoubtedly the expansion of an orientalising style which, brought about by the eastern Mediterranean cultures, Phoenicians and Greeks, came to Italy, and was then transferred to Italian populations and the Hallstatt Cultural Complex. However, it is important to bear in mind that the form and content of that artistic expression most certainly exceeded the framework of toreutic technique, and that it probably appeared in some more complex and diversified forms on other media, such as, for example, textiles and wood. Unfortunately, due to the decaying nature of such materials, archaeology is denied insight into an entire world of expression, and all we are left with is the toreutic technique. Much has been written about 16 | H. Potrebica the long perseverance of situla art in the territory of present-day Dolenjska, which implies that centres of production were also located in the region. The fact that the dynamic development of a style can be traced on those items supports the thesis that there was more to it than mere conservative production and usage. If we take a closer look at the figural scenes rendered on situlae, we will soon realize that they consist of a range of motifs, semantic elements that have meaning at the levels of both content and symbolism. It is precisely this duality of meaning (because sometimes the same motif can serve a narrative function, and sometimes purely symbolic) and diversity of combinations of various semantic elements, that prevent us from deciphering the stories portrayed on some objects. We lack the key, that is, the general understanding of the world, including its mythological foundation, which the Iron Age viewers of the scenes undoubtedly did have. It is therefore difficult to say whether the stories that we read from the objects of situla art are linked to the concrete life of a community, or whether they present some general features of their way of life and worldview. By the same token, we are not sure to what extent some deeper meaning should be sought in spatial relations between individual elements and scenes, because, despite all the above, these are objects produced by the toreutic technique, which has its technological limitations, and one should not forget that they were produced by craftsmen who had to pay a lot of attention to the functional dimension of their products. Still, if we consider the motifs as individual units, we can get a hint of the meaning, which probably goes deep into the spiritual culture of the Hallstatt communities. Some of the scenes which frequently reoccur in very similar forms include the previously described scenes of boar or stag hunting, (competitions of?) musicians, feasts, warrior processions with horses and wagons, fist-fighting competitions, ploughmen and sexual intercourse. All these are accompanied with abundant processions of animals – in most cases, horned wild beasts. Their content and combinations allow several interpretations: these could be funeral processions, celebrations with games, feasts (court feasts, mythological or possibly funeral feasts), some form of hierogamy, suggested by simplegma, a formalized representation of the sexual intercourse – in some cases also on a throne (Pl. 3/2) – and frequent appearance of ploughmen on the same objects (Teržan 2001). All these are elements of the system of transition of power, which was obviously highly ritualized, as it was in all the Iron Age communities. The constant visual emphasizing of the system, primarily in the context of feasts at which the situlae could be seen, and in the grave contexts in which they have been found, undoubtedly contributed to the basic identity of the elite group at the top of the social ladder, whose status was based on the very stability and preservation of that system. In this respect, situlae reveal more of the ritualized social practice than of the specific mythological and religious content. Women within the religious system There are many indications that women had a special role within the Hallstatt religious system, and besides the well-known data concerning the region of interest of this paper, there is little to add (Potrebica 2005a, 79–80). Cult portrayals and the pronounced role of women in cult practice suggest that there was a female deity with an emphasized element of fertility. Whether this was the same deity which is usually linked to the solar cult or its counterpart, it is difficult to ascertain. However, in view of the fact that, in addition to being tied to the solar cult, it also manifested numerous chthonic elements, it definitely had a double identity, not rare among solar deities, even at the level of gender, as illustrated by the famous wagon from Dupljaja (Potrebica 2005b, 29–30). The position of women in the religion of Hallstatt communities of southern Pannonia is best reflected in some exceptional grave units, such as tumuli V and VI of the Čemernica necropolis in Kaptol. These graves contained an abundance of female and cult elements, and they were separated from the necropolis, thus forming a unity of their own to the north of the necropolis. Female graves that were presumably located under the tumuli contained a large number of high-quality receptacles, whose shape suggests that they had a cult-related function, and elements of horse gear which are rarely found in female graves. In addition, in tumulus V there were as many as 10 spindle whorls, the only whorls found in the entire necropolis (Pl. 2). Although the necropolis of Čemernica included other female burials, their sociological potential was evidently different, so they were located among warrior tumuli, within different conceptual units (Potrebica 2004, 121–122). Similar units have also been discovered on other sites of the Eastern Hallstatt Circle (Teržan 1986, 227–244, H121–122). Sometimes the finds included various cult objects, and frequently there were also marked items relating to spinning and weaving. These activities were evidently features of women in high positions, but they also had a religious dimension, which can be observed in various depictions, such Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia | 17 as those on pottery vessels – for example those from Sopron (Pl. 3/1) and Nové Košariská, and those of situla art (Teržan 1996; Eibner 1986, 39–48; Potrebica 2005a, 79–80). In classical mythology, the double aspect of weaving is probably best incorporated in Penelope, who manipulates her weaving and thus practically masters the space between life and death. She does not take an active part in events, but her decision determines the final outcome. Despite the fact that everybody is aware of this, nobody can force her to make a decision out of the ritual pattern, because, in some ways, she is untouchable. This aspect of her role is also interesting in the context of power transfer and inheritance, where hierogamy can also have a part to play, which is perhaps confirmed by representations of formalized sexual intercourse in situla art, especially when performed on a throne exceptionally occupied by a woman. This depiction (Pl. 3/2) is present on the belt buckle from Brezje pri Trebelnem (Barth 1999, Abb. 1; Teržan 2001, 210, fig. 6; Turk 2005, 29–31). Though the concept could be Aegean in origin, and it could have arrived in southern Pannonia via Italy and the Hallstatt communities in the area of the eastern Alps, or directly from the south, it is difficult to establish whether this was an element of cultural transfer or common spiritual heritage. Another problem is how to ascertain to what extent elements of grave inventories, such as horse gear, wagon parts, loom weights or spindle whorls, represent one’s social status or role within the community, and to what extent they are linked to the cult, either symbolically or operationally, as a tool for certain cult activities. The most recent contribution to this discussion has been provided by the excavation of tumulus 12 on the necropolis of Gradci (Potrebica 2009b, 135–138). This was the second-largest tumulus in the necropolis. It covered the only complete pyre construction discovered in Kaptol to date, which was, on its shorter side, connected to the central stone structure, which probably covered a wooden chamber. A large number of finds were discovered within the pyre construction, consisting of a range of diverse, fragmented receptacles, none of which was probably whole, and they had all been burnt on the pyre, together with the body. In addition to the receptacle shards, the pyre construction contained as many as 15 pyramidal weights, probably belonging to a loom. There were also various fragments of badly-damaged iron and bronze objects, mostly melted beyond recognition. Still, some fibulae could be detected, together with bell-shaped pendants, bronze chains with triangular pendants at their ends, made of bronze and iron sheet decorated with embossing, a small bronze plastically-shaped bird and a large number of cylindrical beads, probably from a necklace. The most important metal find is undoubtedly a number of cylindrical beads made of electrum, identical in shape to the bronze beads, which are the first discovered items made of precious metal in the context of Iron Age sites in the area of Kaptol. Other exceptional finds include several decorated objects made of bone (probably pendants from a necklace and ornaments from clothing), and a richly adorned wooden button, thus far without any known parallels. In the grave chamber, a sixteenth pyramidal weight has been found, together with pottery shards and a group of whole vessels, some of which contained human and animal (probably bird) bones and a number of small finds fully corresponding to finds from the pyre. One of the fragmented bone ornaments which stands out is a shard of the miniature depiction of a rider on his horse, probably a segment of a fibula. At the very edge of the tumulus mound, a peripheral incineration grave has been discovered, with remains buried in an urn with no grave goods. The distant location of this tumulus, its size, specific structure (pyre construction and chamber), extraordinary finds of rich attire with metal, bone and wooden ornaments and characteristic iconographic elements (horse rider), the discovery of unique beads made of precious metal and loom weights, indicate that the person buried in this grave was a woman of the highest rank. All of this, and the fact that within this tumulus there have been neither traces of other deceased nor any element that could be attributed to a man, suggest that this could have been a woman whose high status and exceptional importance stem from high rank within the religious structure of her community – in other words, some kind of priestess. Whether the urn discovered on the periphery belongs to this complex remains to be seen, as the complete contextual analysis of the tumulus is still in progress. If it does, it will open numerous possibilities of interpretation, including that linked to a sacrifice performed during or after the burial ritual. For the time being, all such considerations remain in the sphere of speculation. It would appear that in prominent female grave units, such as we can find in Kaptol, the religious component is emphasized more than the social. The question which remains unanswered is whether this is sufficient to presume that there was a class of priestesses which had its internal organizational structure and acted independently, in some aspects in parallel to the social structure (Potrebica 2005a, 79–80). If the religious and social structures within Iron Age communities were separate, they must have overlapped in certain aspects. Such overlapping is clearly visible in warrior graves, which display some pronounced 18 | H. Potrebica religious components, but it is much more important for the interpretation of significant female grave units with certain religious contents. In view of the small number of well-published finds of this nature, for the time being it remains difficult to establish a model of correlation between religion and social status. Tentatively, we could conclude that the high position of those women within the religious hierarchy was inevitably reflected in their position within the social structure, but the question remains open whether they originally belonged to the upper social class, and whether the expression of their identity within the framework of material culture of the funeral ritual was different simply because they also obtained a religious role. In other words, if there was a category of priestesses, were they selected exclusively from among the ranks of higher social classes, or could they include members from a much wider circle? Although there is no concrete evidence for either model, there are indications pointing in the direction of the former. Brothers in arms – the dual nature of heroes In the Hallstatt Cultural Complex, the concept of the warrior was inseparably linked to a whole range of social and religious connotations. On this occasion, we will focus on just one aspect of the grave ritual which is, along with the feasts, directly tied to the hero cult. These are the rare burials of pairs of warriors, seemingly of the same social status, which could be a distant echo of the ancient concept of ‘brothers in arms’ who fight together, but they also accompany one another to the other world. Graves of this kind that can be ascertained beyond any doubt are very rare. Grave 19 under tumulus VII in Novo Mesto, containing two Greek-Illyrian helmets, was a skeletal grave, but the bones in it had not been preserved, due to the soil’s acidity (Križ 1997, 50–52, 56–57; Egg 1999). For this reason, as with tumulus IX of the Čemernica necropolis in Kaptol (Vejvoda–Mirnik 1991, 12, 15–16, scheme 11) containing two almost identical receptacles (urns?), it has been defined as a dual male grave solely on the grounds of two sets of the usual warrior equipment. It would appear that two warriors of similar status had been buried in the same grave, but it is difficult to say whether the two burials were simultaneous. It is difficult to determine a more precise interpretative model, or to explain the relationship between the two warriors, on the basis of these finds alone. The best mythological model is certainly that of the twin heroes Castor and Pollux, or Patroclus and Achilles, but in both these cases their mutual ties are of a dual nature, as they are connected by blood and by arms. In addition to fighting together, such pairs are often also related through kinship (Potrebica 2005a, 77–79). We should not forget about the model of the dual social-religious structure of certain Bronze Age and Iron Age communities, relatively recently proposed by Kristiansen. It includes a pair of warrior-rulers, one of whom embodies the warrior component, and the other one the religious component, although in many aspects they overlap. Kristiansen substantiated such claims with certain elements of the grave ritual (Kristiansen 2001; Kristiansen–Larsson 2005, 258, 265). The recent discovery of what seems to be a dual princely grave under tumulus 6 of the Gradci necropolis near Kaptol has focused attention on this model. Although a careful consideration of the finds will only be possible once their conservation treatment is completed, for the time being it can be said that the grave probably contained the remains of two warriors with their rich warrior equipment. (The possibility that more than two deceased were buried in this grave cannot be ruled out.) The grave is the richest Hallstatt unit in Croatia. In it, remains of at least one helmet and belt set with a whetstone have been found, along with other weapons which came in two almost identical sets, each of them containing two iron battle axes, three iron spears, a sword and horse gear. Obviously, the same concept was at play here, but in this case at the highest social level. This grave unit will undoubtedly provide an important contribution to the understanding of the said concept of ‘brothers in arms’, and extend our insight into the warrior techniques employed in this region during the Early Iron Age (Potrebica 2005a, 77–79). It is interesting to note that among 29 pottery vessels found in the grave, there were several pots decorated with tin lamellas and one with bronze plates. The majority of vessels had been decorated with fluting, but traces of adhesive could be seen over various elements of fluted ornament, ignoring it completely. Two pots are particularly interesting: one of them is decorated with bronze plates, and the other one with tin lamellas with a meandering motif. At first sight, the pots appear completely different, but if the glued-on metal ornaments were removed, a fluted motif would become visible, identical on both vessels. The emphasized dual character of this grave suggests that this was a pair of identical pots, decorated with metal lamellas some time after they had been produced (or even used), precisely for the purpose of this extraordinary burial. Such an interpretation would correspond to the presumed concept of tumulus IX in the second necropolis in Kaptol, Čemernica. It is possible to imagine that, at least in this case, the method of pottery decoration Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia | 19 had a transformational role, in that a pot decorated with the fluting technique, in standard use by the local community, when decorated with a different technique became a universally recognizable cult vessel. Ritual feast Given the abundance of literature discussing the significance of feasts in various cultures of the world in all the periods of history, there is no need to repeat the basic tenets of the phenomenon. The concept of feasting was particularly emphasized in communities in which the social structure was dominated by warriors, and the mythological structure by heroes, and it is thus likely that, in its various forms, it was the backbone of the Iron Age social order across Europe. This paper will only consider some cult aspects of ritual and competitive feasts. The ritual feast was an important element of the warrior and heroic dimension of the Iron Age religion, in both the Mediterranean and the Balkans, and in the territory of the Hallstatt Cultural Complex. Situla art provides a range of depictions of feasts, but it is hard to establish whether these were social or religious events. Numerous sets of pottery and bronze feast ware found in graves indicate that feasting was an element of the identity of warrior elites in the Eastern Hallstatt Circle, but one needs to be careful when defining the ritual role of such sets. More precisely, sometimes it is difficult to specify whether receptacles found in graves belonged to a burial ritual, performed by living members of the community, or whether they were grave goods in the narrow sense of the word, intended for use by the deceased in their afterlife. In addition, the burial ritual is a multidimensional phenomenon, so that in some cases these categories come very close, or even overlap. Therefore, we should assume that some pottery items which had an active role in the beginning of the ritual and were used by the community of the living for cult purposes, at some moment obtained the role of grave goods, in which we find them today. Insisting on a clear separation between the social and cult functions of formal feasts, such as we find represented on situlae, and in which those situlae were also employed, might be an incorrect way of looking at the phenomenon. In many historical sources, funeral feasts illustrate the multifaceted meaning of feasting. Those feasts, organized after the burials of ancestors, had a clear ritual dimension, but at the same time they served to re-establish the balance in the community after the departure of one of its important members. In such situations, it was necessary to divide anew the power and resources in the community. In some historical societies, feasts were used to divide the material goods, and also the social functions of the deceased, among the living members of the community, in keeping with some strict pre-established rules (Potrebica 2005a, 75). In southern Pannonia, in addition to some exceptional bronze vessels, feast ware discovered in graves consisted mostly of pottery vessels, among which certain types have an obvious cult character, for example, kernoi and askoi. The kernos discovered in tumulus 2 of the Gradci necropolis in Kaptol (Fig. 6) fits into the small group of Central European kernoi which differ significantly from their Greek counterparts: as with their form, so with their function and context. This is the well-known shape of the Hallstatt pot with bent rim and three small bulbous receptacles on its shoulder, which are not closed by a bottom but linked to the main vessel and allow for free flow of liquids. These pots have always been found together with other cult-related objects, primarily in male graves containing weapons. All this indicates that Fig. 6. Kaptol–Gradci. Kernos from rich warrior graves, such as this one, sometimes also display tumulus 2. a strong religious component, in this case emphasized by the kernos (Potrebica 2005a, 75–76, fig. 1). The askoi from Goričan and Kaptol belong to a small group distributed mainly in Pannonia. Their handles, of bovine shape, testify to the important role the bull symbol played in the Hallstatt religion in this region, which has already been discussed, and in light of the role of askoi in ritual feasts, they could also reflect some Dionysian elements. Religious dimensions of the burial ritual In view of the very rare systematic excavation of the Early Iron Age settlements in Croatia to date, the vast majority of information on Hallstatt religious phenomena relates to the burial ritual and stems from excavation of necropolises. On top of elements directly connected to the burial ritual, in such contexts we 20 | H. Potrebica can also find traces of a general religious frame of reference. Generally, when exploring prehistoric and protohistoric periods employing the archaeological method, scientists often talk about religion, although they actually find and interpret traces of rituals. Rituals have a well-defined internal structure and mechanism, but they are not the only determinant of the religious system of a given community. When attempting to reconstruct the religious systems of prehistoric communities, this notion should not be overlooked. At the beginning of the Early Iron Age, the tradition of the Urnfield culture was still present in the territory of the Eastern Hallstatt Circle, including Croatia. This tradition was reflected in the predominance of an incineration burial ritual. On the eastern edge of Croatia, in the Danube region, that is, in the area populated by the Dalj group, the graves were flat, and they remained so till the end of the Early Iron Age, with a small number of skeletal graves appearing in the second half of the 8th century BC, explained by influences from the Balkans. On the western fringes of Croatia, in the area of the Budinjak group, the Early Iron Age brought about tumuli and in time also the skeletal burial. Due to such developments, this group has been viewed in the context of the Dolenjska cultural group. The predominant cultural phenomena of central Croatia were tied to the Kaptol group, the closest of the said groups to the general features of the Eastern Hallstatt Circle. The characteristic burial ritual of this group was incineration burial under tumulus. However, the huge disproportion between the number of tumuli and the presumed size of the local community suggests that burial under tumulus had a strong religious significance. In other words, such a rite was reserved only for individuals whose transition from the social to the mythological structure of a given community was considered essential to preserve its continuity. Therefore, the burial ritual, the material manifestation of which is found in an archaeological context, can be seen as a way of communication of the living social structure of a community with the other world, the divine sphere in which the community is present in its mythological aspect. Individuals not participating in the process are not relevant for the continuity of the community as a whole, so they were not subjected to the burial ritual described, and, from the point of view of archaeology, they are invisible in the landscape (Potrebica 2004, 123). Incineration as transformation In some burials, it is obvious that incineration was more than a technical method of preparation of the body for interment, and that it also had a religious dimension, because incineration sites (those that can be defined as separate units) follow the pattern of other consecrated locations in that they are always protected with tumuli. If we look at incineration as an act of ritual transformation, then the spot in which it is performed is a part of the consecrated space of the community practicing the ritual, and as such it has to be delineated in the landscape, and also physically protected from profanation. In such cases, the tumulus protects the grave as an area sanctified by the burial ritual, while the incineration site is protected only when sanctified by an appropriate ritual. In both cases, it should be borne in mind that such burials were reserved for members of social and religious elites. Consumption and continuity In excavated tumuli, parts of vessels are sometimes found which allow for a clear determination of the shape of the vessel, but at the same time it is obvious that these are just fragments, since other segments of the vessels are missing. In most cases, such vessels display distinct burning marks, whether in their changed colour, surface damage or deformation caused by high temperatures. In addition, the majority of such vessels belong to the types that were in everyday use, probably utilized for food preparation, processing and storage. In view of the fact that graves often contain strewn material brought from the funeral pyre, we can assume that these fragments were brought to the grave in the same fashion, and that they are not elements of grave goods placed in the grave, but rather that the vessels contained sacrificial food and drink offerings which were on the pyre together with the body of the deceased. If this was indeed the case, it would be yet another argument corroborating the thesis that incineration was not just a technical process of preparation of the body for interment, but an act which had its own ritual dimension. The presence of such vessels on the pyre evokes associations with the concept of consumption: the deities consume offerings of food and drink. In an act of cremation, fire serves as a transformational element or means of consumption, as a visible and palpable presence of gods on earth. It is difficult to say whether food and drink offerings were merely a part of the inventory necessary for the rite of passage from one world to another, or whether there was an eschatological link between the food’s consumption Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia | 21 and the body’s consumption. Death was never perceived as the end of being, but was often seen as a passage to another level of existence. In order to achieve that passage, the deceased had to transform and leave behind all that could prevent them from reaching the new level, primarily their bodies. Therefore, all burial rituals actually follow the archetypal concept of separation of body and soul, which has been present in human cultures ever since the Palaeolithic era. The purpose of the burial ritual is, inter alia, to facilitate that separation. In the case of inhumation, we often encounter the notion that flesh should be separated from bones to allow the soul to leave the body. Traces of such practice can be found in almost every culture in which inhumation was a predominant ritual, especially in cases in which communities used graves for several interments over a certain period of time. In Bronze Age Greece and other Mediterranean cultures, the living feared the dead and deemed that they were present for as long as there was flesh on their bones. In burials in stone chests from the period, only the last entombment was made in keeping with the norm, and the body was laid together with properly distributed grave goods, whereas bones resulting from previous burials had been moved aside without much attention. A similar situation can sometimes be encountered in graves of the Iron Age communities in the Adriatic hinterlands and in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It seems that, in this case, the grave was perceived as a kind of transitional transformational space. It was not so much an eternal home of the deceased, as it was a place in which the deceased stayed during the transitional period, until they left this world for good. Before the bones were completely clean, the body itself served as a portal, a link between the worlds or levels of existence, and the dead could still play active roles in the life of the living community. Once the bones were clean, the soul had departed the body and entered another dimension which was seen as clearly separated from the world of the living, so that the soul had lost its power of interfering with the world it had left behind. In order to speed up the process, many cultures employed various procedures of exposing dead bodies to the elements, or animals, possibly (but not obligatorily) followed by a second interment. In some communities, the process was further emphasized by dismemberment and removal of flesh from the bones. Certain aspects of some similar customs were present until recently in some cultures – for example, in Tibet and Nepal. In some Pacific cultures, the dead body (or, more frequently, the head) is cooked to free the bones of flesh, and this practice probably served as a pretext for various cannibalistic myths. All of this could be based on the archetypal distinction between red-life-flesh/blood and white-death-bones. In this respect, cremation is the perfect, cleanest and most effective method of removal of flesh from the bones and liberation of the soul of the deceased. At its core, the concept of consumption is corporeal, and it is often linked to the idea of fertility in many of its connotations. Traces of food and drink offerings on the pyre attribute a sacrificial character to the incineration of a prominent member of the community. In the act of cremation, one or more deities consume the body of the deceased through fire, and thus liberate his soul from its bodily ties. In such cases, food and drink offerings make the entire process more attractive for the desired deities, securing their kind disposition towards the deceased. The astounding consumption potential of the fire is also reflected at the level of linguistics, so that in many languages fire ‘devours’ things. From the earliest religions, through classical antiquity to modern-day Christianity, there are numerous examples of soul salvation and resurrection achieved through a metaphoric or literal consumption of the body, perceived, at the moment of death, as a burden to the spirit. In one aspect, the customary consumption of the flesh of the deceased in the Indian tradition of Aghori yogis is believed to be an act of purification of the human body from sin (Oestigaard 2005, 47–59, 315–318). Similar concepts can be found in the ritual of endocannibalism performed, for example, by the Yanomamö tribe in the Amazon. After cremating the dead body, they grind the remains to dust, which is then mixed with plant soup and drunk by close relatives and friends of the deceased, and followed by a feast. They believe that this is the only way to ensure that the soul and living force of the dead can re-enter the circle of life. Moreover, they are convinced that a different treatment of the ashes could upset or even harm the deceased (Chagnon 1992, 135–137). Receptacles for food preparation or storage which were used as urns could also be related to the concept of consumption. The incineration transformed the body of the deceased into food for the gods. Accordingly, bodily remains were placed in food containers to be offered at the last sacrificial feast, which would liberate the soul of the deceased. Human sacrifice Within the grave ritual, one can distinguish between several categories of religious phenomena. The most important among them is the cult-related activity of the living community, evidenced by 22 | H. Potrebica archaeological traces of various rituals performed during the construction of the grave, ranging from libation and funeral feasts held on the tumulus, accompanied by ritual breaking of vessels, to entire cult structures which, once used, were also protected by tumuli. The most dramatic form of such activity was sacrificing of human beings. In several cases, in the area covered by a tumulus there was a dominant grave of a prominent individual, but also other smaller graves with remains sometimes interpreted as sacrificed humans. The first published papers on the Čemernica necropolis near Kaptol included near-regular reports on multiple incineration burials under tumuli which appeared to have been simultaneous (Vejvoda–Mirnik 1974, 592–610). However, detailed data analysis, revision excavation of the necropolis, and experience gained by excavating another necropolis within the same locality, indicate that these could have been various groups of grave goods within the same grave units, or grave chambers. Subsequent exploration of the Gradci necropolis has confirmed and better documented the existence of multiple burials under major tumuli, but it is unlikely that these were the results of human sacrifice. Grave 1 under tumulus 6 is probably the result of a subsequent burial, a thesis corroborated by not only stratigraphic, but also chronological and typological data. The central grave of the tumulus appears to be a dual grave, but in this case it could be better explained by the concept of ‘brothers in arms’. The peripheral female burial under tumulus 12 still cannot be directly linked to the rich central female grave of the tumulus. Generally, multiple burials in closed units of the Early Iron Age have often been interpreted as human sacrifice, especially when it comes to female remains. But such claims have not been substantiated by real scientific arguments, and contextual analyses have often shown that they were projections of some of our ideas on the religious life and burial ritual of prehistoric communities, rather than hypotheses based on some relevant evidence. In addition, the notion of sacrifice, especially human sacrifice, is very specific and cannot be proven merely by concurrent burials. Nonetheless, while, in the context of necropolises, the interpretation of peripheral burials as sacrificed humans is questionable, it is the most probably explanation of burials in the context of settlements, such as the skeleton in the pit within the site of Sv. Petar Ludbreški (Šimek 1979, 106–119). Cult areas One of the key points missing from current knowledge on the Hallstatt religion is cult areas, almost unknown in southern Pannonia. The highly structured cult and some clearly-defined rituals – from burial rituals to those depicted in figural representations on pottery – indicate that places in which certain cult activities took place had to be clearly defined within the zone occupied by the community. The structure of past excavations has resulted in a slightly better understanding of such places when relating to the burial ritual. The burial ritual as such has already been discussed, but when considering places of cult, we should also encompass incineration sites, which were in some cases also ritual areas. Those are the cases in which the incineration of the dead body had a ritual character, making the site consecrated, which called for its clear definition and adequate protection. The necropolis cannot be seen only as the location of burial of dead members of the community, but also as an area in which cult activities took place, occasionally or continuously, with the participation of the living community. On the basis of some rare finds, the assumption can be made that such activities were not always directly linked to the funeral, but possibly also to a certain ancestor cult. The best example is provided by cult locations within the necropolis at Turska Kosa. This exceptional site, in the vicinity of Topusko, contained several cult locations within a biritual necropolis. In all of them, there were deliberately fragmented pottery vessels and soot, and cult location I stands out because of a large number of pottery figurines portraying people of both sexes and animals, predominantly horses (Fig. 7). The area is separated off from the rest of the space and visible as an ellipsoidal mound. Its oldest layers, dated to the 9th–7th century BC consist of fireplaces in clayey soil, while later layers, dated to the period between the 6th and 3rd century BC, mostly contain quartz sand which had been exposed to high temperatures. Because of the fireplaces and a large quantity of animal bones discovered in earlier layers, Čučković has connected this sanctuary to the incineration ritual or fire offering, in other words, rituals linked to burial activities, while he has associated the later phase of the sanctuary to rituals relating to metal-production activities, due to the quartz sand and slag (Čučković 2004, 192–209). The thesis on horsemen figurines or depictions on pottery as portrayals of heroized ancestors is certainly acceptable, but the parallel finds made in other sites, such as Frög, undoubtedly point to the possibility of a more complex underlying mythological structure. Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia | 23 Fig. 7. Pottery figurines from Turska kosa (after Čučković 2004). Although the position of the sanctuary at Turska Kosa suggests the former, in our opinion, the structure of past excavations has yielded a distorted perception of the necropolis as the focus of cult activities of Hallstatt communities in this region. The cult area must have been incorporated into the settlement and formed an important part of it, or it could have been separated off as a distinct unit located in the immediate vicinity of the settlement. The existence of such an area is indirectly suggested by the thesis of a separate, conditionally called priestly, class within a community or individual clan. The emphasized religious aspect of the grave inventories buried with some prominent members of the warrior aristocracy, who belonged to the leading social class of the period, also indicates that there must have been a separate area within the settlement dedicated to the activities of some ‘official’ cult, which probably played an important role in strengthening and reinforcing the social structure of the Hallstatt communities. Unfortunately, there has been almost no excavation of Hallstatt settlements in Croatia. In the rare sites which have been explored to a certain extent, such as Sigetec and Sv. Petar Ludbreški, not all the functional parts of the settlements have been found, and the explored surfaces were relatively small and damaged by agricultural activities. Because of this, there is almost no data on possible cult structures within the settlements, with the exception of the human sacrifice discovered in the settlement in Sv. Petar Ludbreški. It consisted of a skeletal burial in the sitting position, in a pit by the fireplace, indicating that a member of the community had been sacrificed for the protection of the settlement. Even in the rare cases in which cult areas can be clearly delineated, the mythological background is missing – a mythological background such as would turn those locations into sources of religious experience for a population from a wider region, as was the case with the Greeks and other peoples. ✴✴✴ In this overview of some religious concepts of the Hallstatt community in the territory of today’s Croatia, we have touched upon some general problems relating to the religious phenomena of the period. First and foremost is the lack of exploration of settlements. Because of this, there are no data on the formal position of the cult within the social structure of the community, which would permit a deeper understanding of the religious phenomena described. The rare information on shrines is insufficient for 24 | H. Potrebica establishing their general character. The places of cult known to date are mostly local and linked directly to the activities of the community they belong to, sharing all of its specific features. Some of them were used continuously for a long period of time, for example the one by the settlement at Turska Kosa, reflecting the continuity of a stable community in that area. However, it is also possible that these places of cult were an important active factor in the homogeneity of local communities, which helped preserve their integrity during important cultural transformations. None of this excludes the possibility of existence of shrines which were not tied only to one specific community, or whose importance surpassed a community’s boundaries. Such shrines, like the one frequently quoted in Gorica near Grude (Truhelka 1899; Čović 1976, 252–254), could have been places of pilgrimage, that is, the focus of gathering and exchange of spiritual and material culture among individual Hallstatt communities. If these places did exist, it would be very important to identify their special location in relation to the local community – that is, whether they were linked to a specific community and acted as a catalyst of its power, or whether they stood as distinct religious centres, which is presumably the case with the Gorica shrine. If the latter is confirmed, it will pose a range of questions concerning the parallelism of secular and religious centres of power. Despite all the local characteristics which reflect the high level of heterogeneity of the Hallstatt culture, there are still some general features that permit the treatment of Hallstatt religious phenomena as a separate unity. Although manifestations characteristic of that unity, some of which are mentioned in this paper, share some more or less pronounced similarities with Mediterranean, primarily Greek, manifestations, after careful consideration of communication routes in this region, I believe that these similarities are primarily a result of a common ‘Indo-European’ conceptual heritage, rather than of direct contacts. However, it was this common, conditionally-speaking mythological, heritage that allowed communication between different communities and members of different communities. Certain elements of spiritual culture may have arrived in the Hallstatt region through chain transfer, by the intercession of a line of Iron Age centres and elite groups belonging to them, but the potential of individual mobility should not be forgotten, either. References Barth 1999 Benac 1987 Bouzek 1997 Capuis–Chieco Bianchi 1992 Chagnon 1992 Čače 1985 Čović 1976 Čučković 2004 Dizdar 2005 Egg 1996 Egg 1999 Eibner 1986 Eibner 2001 Barth, F. E., Zu den im Situlenstil verzierten Gürtelblechen aus Brezje, Slowenien, ArchKorr, 29, 1, 57–59. Benac, A. (ed.), Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Sarajevo. Bouzek, J., The Aegean, Anatolia and Europe: Cultural Interrelations During the Early Iron Age, SMA, 122, Jonsered. Capuis, L.–Chieco Bianchi, A. M., Este preromana. Vita e cultura, IN: Este antica dalla preistoria all’eta Romana, 42–108. Chagnon, N. A., Yanomamo: the last days of Eden, San Diego. Čače, S., Obredi uz kneževski grob u Atenici i tragovi arhaičnog kraljevstva u Iliriku, Radovi Filozofskog fakulteta u Zadru, 24, II, 13–32. Čović, B., Od Butmira do Ilira, Sarajevo. Čučković, L., Kolapijani, IN: Balen-Letunić, D. (ed.), Ratnici na razmeđu istoka i zapada. Starije željezno doba u kontinentalnoj Hrvatskoj, Zagreb, 173–210. Dizdar, M., Groblje latenske kulture u Zvonimirovu – prilog poznavanju pogrebnih običaja i vjerovanja Tauriska u Podravini, Histria Antiqua, 13, Pula, 85–98. Egg, M., Das hallstattzeitliche Fürstengrab von Strettweg bei Judenburg in der Obersteiermark. RGZM, 37, Mainz. Egg, M., Waffenbrüder? Eine ungewöhnliche Bestattung der Frühlatènezeit in Novo mesto in Slowenien, Jahrbuch RGZM, 46, 331–322, T. 11–20. Eibner, A., Die Frau mit der Spindel. Zum Aussagewert einer archäeologischen Quelle, IN: Jerem, E. (ed.), Hallstatt Kolloquium Veszprém 1984, Budapest, 39–48. Eibner, A., Die Eberjagd als Ausdruck eines Heroentums?, IN: Gediga, B.–Mierzwiński, A.–Piotrowski, W. (eds.), Sztuka epoki brązu i wczesnej epoki żelaza w Europie środkowej, Polska akademia nuak – Oddział we Wrocławiu, Prace Komisji Archeologicznej Nr. 14 & Muzeum Archeologiczne w Biskupinie, Biskupińskie Prace Archeologiczne, Nr. 2, Wrocław–Biskupin, 231–280. Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia | 25 Gallou 2005 Gallus 1934 Harrison 1962 Hoffiler 1938 Horváth 1969 Jockenhövel–Knoche 2001 Krieger und Salzherren 1970 Kristiansen 2001 Kristiansen–Larsson 2005 Križ 1997 Gallou, Ch., The Mycenaean Cult of the Dead, BAR, 1372. Gallus, S., Die Figuralverzierten Urnen vom Soproner Burgstall, ArchHung, 13, Budapest. Harrison, J., Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion, London. Hoffiler, V., Dalj (valée du Danube), Corpus vasorum antiquorum 2, Beograd. Horváth, A., A vaszari és somlóvasarhelyi Hallstatt-kori halomsírok, VMMK, 8, 109–134. Jockenhövel, A.–Knoche, B., Zu den bronzezeitlichen Wurzeln des alteisenzeitlichen Hirchbildes, IN: Gediga, B.–Mierzwiński, A.–Piotrowski, W. (eds.), Sztuka epoki brązu i wczesnej epoki żelaza w Europie środkowej, Polska akademia nuak – Oddział we Wrocławiu, Prace Komisji Archeologicznej Nr. 14 & Muzeum Archeologiczne w Biskupinie, Biskupińskie Prace Archeologiczne, Nr. 2, Wrocław–Biskupin, 119–172. Krieger und Salzherren. Hallstattkultur im Ostalpenraum (exibition catalogue), Mainz. Kristiansen, K., Rulers and warriors: symbolic transmission and social transformation in Bronze Age Europe, IN: Haas, J. (ed.), From Leaders to Rulers, New York, 85–105. Kristiansen, K.–Larsson, T. B., The Rise of Bronze Age Society, Cambridge. Križ, B., Novo Mesto IV, Kapiteljska njiva – gomila II in gomila III. Carniola archaeologica, 4, Novo Mesto. Križ 2000 Križ, B., Novo Mesto V, Kapiteljska njiva – gomila IV in gomila V. Carniola archaeologica, 5, Novo Mesto. Križ Et Al. 2009 Križ, B.–Stipančić P.–Škedelj Petrič, A., Arheološka podoba Dolenjske, Novo Mesto. Kukoč 2001 Kukoč, S., Ikonografska analiza skulpture iz Nezakcija, Diadora, 20, 1–22. Majnarić-Pandžić 1998 Majnarić-Pandžić, N., Brončano i željezno doba, IN: Dimitrijević, S.–Težak-Gregl, T.– Majnarić-Pandžić, N., Prapovijest, Zagreb. Marzatico 2009 Marzatico, F., Il cavaliere di Mechel in Valle di Non (Trentino), IN: Bagley, J.–Eggl, Ch.– Neumann, D.–Schefzik, M. (Hrsg.), Alpen, Kult und Eisenzeit. Festschrift für Amei Lang zum 65. Geburtstag, Studia honoraria, 30, Rahden/Westf., 205–210. Metzner-Nebelsick Metzner-Nebelsick, C., Pferdchenfibeln – Zur Deutung einer frauenspezifischen 2007 Schmuckform der Hallstatt- und Frühlatènezeit, IN: Blečić, M.–Črešnar, M.–Hänsel, B.– Hellmuth, A.–Kaiser, E.–Metzner-Nebelsick, C. (eds.), Scripta praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan, Situla, 44, Ljubljana, 707–735. Metzner-Nebelsick Metzner-Nebelsick, C.–Nebelsick, L., Frau und Pferd – ein Topos am Übergang von der –Nebelsick 1999 Bronze- zur Eisenzeit Europas, MittAGW, 129, Vienna, 69–106. Milićević Bradač 2003 Milićević Bradač, M., Greek mythological horses and the world’s boundary, OpArch, 27, 379–391. Nekvasil 1980 Nekvasil, J., Die Býčí skála-Höhle, IN: Lessing, E., Hallstatt. Bilder aus der Frühzeit Europas, Münich–Vienna, 94–99. Oestigaard 2005 Oestigaard, T., Death and Life-Giving Waters. Creamation, caste and cosmogony in karmic traditions. BAR, 1353. Patek 1993 Patek, E., Westungarn in der Hallstattzeit, Quellen und Forschungen zur prähistorischen und provinzialrömischen Archäologie, 7, Acta humaniora, Weinheim. Popović 1994 Popović, Lj., Antička grčka zbirka, Beograd. Potrebica 2004 Potrebica, H., Tumuli in the Hallstatt landscape: continuity and transformation, IN: Šmejda, L.–Turek, J. (eds.), Spatial analysis of funerary areas, Plzeň, 115–128. Potrebica 2005a Potrebica, H., Halštatski religijski fenomeni na tlu Hrvatske, Histria Antiqua, 13, Pula, 73–84. Potrebica 2005b Potrebica, H., Greek Elements in the Religious Phenomena of the Eastern Hallstatt Circle, IN: Acts of the XIVth UISPP Congress, Section 12: The Iron Age in Europe, BAR, 1378, 29–35. Potrebica 2009a Potrebica, H., Religijski aspekti keramičkih nalaza u pogrebnom ritualu starijeg željeznog doba, Histria Antiqua, 18, 1, Pula, 163–172. Potrebica 2009b Potrebica, H., Kaptol–Gradci (istraživanje 2008.), Hrvatski arheološki godišnjak, 5/2008, Zagreb, 135–138. Puš 1991 Puš, I., Molnik, sedež prazgodovinskih knezov, Ljubljana. Raunig 2004 Raunig, B., Umjetnost i religija prahistorijskih Japoda, Akademija nauka i umjetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine, Djela LXXXII, Centar za balkanološka ispitivanja, Knjiga 8, Sarajevo. 26 | H. Potrebica Šimek 1979 Šimek 1998 Šimić 1995 Šimić 2004 Teegen 2002 Teržan 1986 Teržan 1996 Teržan 2001 Truhelka 1899 Turk 2005 Vejvoda–Mirnik 1974 Vejvoda–Mirnik 1991 Vinski 1955 Vinski-Gasparini 1961 Vinski-Gasparini 1973 Šimek, M., Sv. Petar Ludbreški – nalaz metalurške radionice, Podravski zbornik, 79, 106–119. Šimek, M., Ein Grabhugel mit Pferdebesttatung bei Jalžabet, Kroatien. IN: Das Karpatenebecken und die Osteuropäische Steppe. Südosteuropa – Schriften Band 20, PAS, Band 12, München, 493–510. Šimić, J., Umjetnost pretpovijesti Istočne Slavonije i Baranje (exhibition catalogue), Osijek. Šimić, J, Grupa Dalj, IN: Balen-Letunić, D. (ed.), Ratnici na razmeđu istoka i zapada. Starije željezno doba u kontinentalnoj Hrvatskoj, Zagreb, 35–78. Teegen, W.-R., Tieropfer und Tierbestattungen der Kelten, IN: Rieckhoff, S.–Cain, H.-U. (Hrsg.), Die Religion der Kelten (exhibition catalogue), Mainz am Rhein, 26–31. Teržan, B., Zur Gesellschaftsstruktur während der älteren Hallstattzeit im OstalpenWestpannonischen Gebiet, IN: Jerem, E. (ed.), Hallstatt Kolloquium Veszprém 1984, Budapest, 227–244, H121–122. Teržan, B., Weben und Zeitmessen im Südostalpinen und westpannonischen Gebeit, IN: Jerem, E.–Lippert, A. (Hrsg.), Die Osthallstattkultur, Budapest, 507–536. Teržan, B., Dolgoživ spomin. Prežitki halštatskega obredja v pustnih šegah na Slovenskem?, ArhVest, 52, 207–219. Truhelka, Ć., Dva prahistorijska nalaza iz Gorice (Ljubuškog kotara), Glasnik zemaljskog muzeja, XI, Sarajevo, 339–395. Turk, P., Podobe življenja in mita. Exhibition catalogue. Ljubljana. Vejvoda, V.–Mirnik, I., Halštatski kneževski grobovi iz Kaptola kod Slavonske Požege, ArhVest, 24, 592–610. Vejvoda, V.–Mirnik, I., Prethistorijski Kaptol, IN: Potrebica, F. (ed.), Kaptol 1221.–1991., Kaptol, 9–28. Vinski, Z., „Tračko-kimerijski“ nalaz Adaševci u Srijemu, Rad Vojvođanskih muzeja, 4, Novi Sad, 27–42. Vinski-Gasparini, K., Iskopavanje kneževskog tumula kod Martijanca u Podravini, VAMZ, 3rd series, 2, 39–66. Vinski-Gasparini, K., Kultura polja sa žarama u sjevernoj Hrvatskoj, Monografije 1, Filozofski fakultet Zadar, Zadar. List of figures Fig. 1. Urn from tumulus 10 at necropolis Kaptol–Gradci. Fig. 2. Askos from tumulus 12 at necropolis Kaptol–Čemernica. Fig. 3. Trebenište. Helmet from grave 8 (after Benac 1987). Fig. 4. Askoi from Dalj. Fig. 5. Figure of a horse with a rider (probably from bone-plated fibula) from tumulus 12 at necropolis Kaptol–Gradci. Fig. 6. Kaptol–Gradci. Kernos from tumulus 2. Fig. 7. Pottery figurines from Turska kosa (after Čučković 2004). List of plates Pl. 1. Kaptol–Čemernica. Pottery finds from tumulus 5. Pl. 2. Pottery finds from tumulus 5 at necropolis Kaptol–Čemernica. Pl. 3. 1. Pot with cult images from tumulus 27 at Sopron (after Krieger und Salzherren 1970); 2. Belt buckle from Brezje (after Barth 1999). Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia | 27 Plate 1. Kaptol–Čemernica. Pottery finds from tumulus 5. Plate . Kaptol–Čemernica. Pottery finds from tumulus 5. 28 | H. Potrebica 5 – – Plate 2. Pottery finds from tumulus 5 at necropolis Kaptol–Čemernica. Plate . Pottery finds from tumulus 5 at ne ropolis Kaptol–Čemernica. Religious Phenomena of the Hallstatt Communities of Southern Pannonia | 29 Plate 3. 1. Pot with cult images from tumulus 27 at Sopron (after Krieger und Salzherren 1970); 2. Belt buckle from Brezje (after Barth 1999). after Plate . . Pot it n ult ima es from tumulus at opron . elt u le from re e after . The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár (Vas County, Hungary) in the Western Region of the Carpathian Basin A study in the reconstruction of the cultic life of the Hallstatt period in the light of archaeological and scientific analyses Marcella NAGY*–Pál SÜMEGI**– Gergő PERSAITS**–Sándor GULYÁS**–Tünde TÖRŐCSIK** *Vas Megyei Múzeumok Igazgatósága, Savaria Museum Szombathely, Hungary nagymarcella@freemail.hu **University of Szeged, Department of Geology and Palaeontology Szeged, Hungary sumegi@geo.u-szeged.hu persaitsg@yahoo.de gulyas-sandor@t-online.hu sumegi43@freemail.hu “[…] I meanwhile; Will pour these offerings to the infernal gods.”1 Keywords: Iron Age, Hallstatt period, bronze hoard, cult, multi-disciplinary research In connection with the major investment of a wind turbine farm to be installed at the administrative boundary of the settlement of Ikervár, relevant archaeological excavations were conducted between May 2010 and February 2011 on the construction site of the wind turbines and of its assembly area, as well as prior to the construction of the service road to connect the individual wind turbines on a bank called Pinkóci-, Malomfeji- and Csontházi/Agg erdő-dűlő. The humus layer was removed over an area of nearly 17,000 m2 in total which was the subject of archaeological research. The excavation area was located on a relatively high ground surface, more specifically on top of a hill long since formed into the shape of an island by the Rába River and the Gyöngyös Creek. The surface, by virtue of the gravel layers deposited by the watercourses, was totally covered with humus, yellow sand and fine red gravel (Pl. 1/1). The archaeological field reconnaissance discovered only a few pottery fragments some five or six in total. However, at a depth of 40 cm, a small quantity of prehistoric sherds dating primarily to the Neolithic and the Iron Age was collected when the humus layer was removed by machines. Objects that appeared subsequent to the removal of the humus layer and the cleaning of the surface could be clearly identified from the undisturbed yellow, loess, and fine red gravel covered subsoil. The sites excavated (Pinkóci-, Malomfeji-, Csontházi/Agg erdő-dűlő) were interconnected and integral parts of each other as well as their 1 The Persians by Aeschylos – Atossa’s funerary sacrifice (Hegyi 2003, 39). Translation by R. Potter. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 31–64 32 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik continuations. The Pinkóci- and Malomfeji-dűlő were separated by an abandoned gravel pit that had been exploited in the past. Certainly plenty of valuable artefacts and related information must have been lost during the period of mine operation. This mine pit has a precipitous side and is located barely 25 m from the find-spot of the bronze hoard, the subject of this preliminary archaeological communication. Other finds supplemented the site which dated to the Neolithic and the Iron Age. These comprised the only surviving semi-subterranean dwelling of a settlement dating to the Avar Age, a few cremation graves of a Roman cemetery comparatively rich in mortuary gifts that could be dated appropriately by bronze coins; a few pits dating to the Urnfield culture that contained ceramics and bronze artefacts, inter alia an opulently decorated bronze knife; and another semi-subterranean structure dating this time to the early Bronze Age (Pl. 1/2). Circumstances related to the discovery of the bronze hoard Archaeological features dating to the Iron Age were concentrated in the area of Pinkóci-dűlő and consequently declined in intensity on the lower western surface of the salvage site, more specifically in the area of Csontházi/Agg erdő-dűlő. The archaeological coverage of the area witnessed a very intense prehistoric settlement from the Neolithic on. Of the artefacts dating to the latter period, the decorated female idol, the third example found in Vas County. As a typical artefact of the Transdanubian Linear Pottery culture, this is of particular importance. A smaller part of these archaeological features can be associated with a settlement of the Neolithic Transdanubian Linear Pottery culture whilst preponderance can be linked to a settlement of the Hallstatt period of the Early Iron Age and to its cemetery. The bronze hoard considered as unique in Transdanubia contained bronze jewellery, a bronze belt plaque, a funnel and sieve filter made of sheet bronze, bronze vessels, and other gold and silversmith’s products, some fifty objects in all discovered in situ, more specifically in a side recess that forming a shaft some 2 m deep. This is the most significant archaeological feature of the site. Owing to the fact that similar Transdanubian hoards have until now not been found with the archaeological context intact, this bronze hoard should provide crucial information for future research into the Hallstatt period. This site, nevertheless, had another significant archaeological feature – its wide stretching section dating to the Iron Age and its horizontal structure which could be traced uninterrupted over a length of nearly 900 m. Particular areas for the purpose of different activities were identified. Sectors that certainly functioned for residential purposes could be distinguished in addition to a vacant plot of 300–400 m2 that could be defined as a sanctuary. It was surrounded by a fire place and discrete archaeological features in the following order: deer antler → the bronze hoard → a rabbit skeleton → a hearth. These particular objects had been consciously arranged linearly with regard to form and size. The bronze hoard mentioned above was found in one of these – presumably – ritual features. A group of four or five vessels dating to the Hallstatt period was found in what may be presumed to have been the focus of the vacant area (Pl. 2).2 Such a pit has been defined as a sacrificial pit by the archaeologist in charge of the excavation. Another, dug in the shape of a well similar to the foregoing example was discovered in Malomi-dűlő at the village of Sé in Vas County in what is considered as the adjacent vicinity to the site above. The intact decorated vessel found in the pit can be dated to the sixth century BC. The feature excavated in 1973 contained a vessel decorated with engraved meander motifs. This complex was described as “a small, round, precipitous pit” with cattle bones and skulls “placed on the flat surface of the bottom of the pit”, where the aforementioned décor bowl was found (Károlyi 2004, 158, fig. 230; 210). The nature of the site – ‘house’ or funerary monument? As has been referred to in the introduction above, particular sectors for the purpose of different activities were identified on the site. To understand the probable functions of the archaeological features it was necessary to separate the settlement, the funerary structures and other areas from each other. The excavated structures can be classified into two basic categories. The size of the semi-subterranean structures with one or more post holes, rounded corners, and rectangular ground plan was on average 3 × 4 m. Contingent upon its adaptation to the structure of the salvage site and the nature of the artefacts unearthed in the archaeological features, this feature may be classified as a funerary 2 The primary processing of the archaeological material from the salvage site is in progress. Therefore, this communication should be considered as a preliminary report. The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 33 monument (Brandkammergrab) as opposed to a residential building as traditionally understood (Pl. 3/3). The artefacts in all cases were located along one of the perpendicular sides of the structure. The other perpendicular side of the structure was raised. Not rough but fine pottery, as well as more unique artefacts, dominated. For instance, decorated and painted objects, graphite streaked vessels and bowls, lids of small ornamented pots, richly embellished spindle-whorls and loom weights, elaborated antler tools and pieces of antler, as well as small bone and metal objects. Of the latter, a bone awl and an iron knife, as well as a bronze awl and an embellished bronze knife must be mentioned. A more systematic assessment, further context analysis, and comparison with analogues in respect of the foregoing are further tasks in the processing of the salvage site. Here some initial results may be presented with a few analogies. The site titled Bodon-tábla dating to the HaC2–D1 period, which lies at the administrative boundary of the settlement of Vát in the close vicinity of the salvage site, may be cited as one such example (Molnár–Farkas 2011, 45–46). The age and nature of its assemblage of artefacts may be compared with those of Ikervár. Of the more remarkable artefacts, the so-called ‘clay altar’, remarkable in a European context must be highlighted: it is one meter in length and is decorated with meander and triangle motifs (Molnár–Farkas 2011, 55, fig. 9/56; 10). Both smaller and larger semi-subterranean archaeological features with an average size of 3 × 4 m and a rectangular ground plan were found within the relatively small size site. The aforementioned cult object was uncovered in one of these structures (Molnár–Farkas 2011, 51). Altar fragments were found not only in this structure, but also in additional and identical archaeological features lying adjacent to each other. In our opinion, when interpreting these archaeological features, a different explanation should be considered; namely these archaeological features and the artefacts found in them are not connected to a general cult activity, but rather to particular funerary rites that represent the most fundamental and concrete stage of ritual. For instance, this is conceivable for the reason that, as underlined by the authors and also verified by additional evidence (e.g.: Brosseder 2004, 119, Abb. 82: Kleinklein; 122, Abb. 84: Martijanec; 125, Abb. 87: Vaskeresztes), the meander motif highly favoured in the Hallstatt period can be connected to cultic activities extending back into the Iron Age. In addition, the bottom of the ‘altar’ narrowing toward a single point as well as its uneven design, as well as other tangible analogues and the context of the archaeological feature might persuade us to believe that the so-called ‘altar of Vát’ could have been such an exterior decorative element, as can be exemplified by either the chronologically preceding or the contemporary house-urns (Pl. 3/1–2) uncovered in Central and Northern Italy (Müller-Karpe 1959, Taf. 30/D/7: Tarquinia, Taf. 23/B/10 and C/10: Forum Romanum) and by the depiction of a woman carrying a house-urn on top of her head portrayed on the bronze situla of Certosa (Teržan 1997, 656, Abb. 1). The authors emphasize that the altar fragments in Vát were regularly placed on the southern side. It may be noted here that a southern orientation was of utmost importance in Etruscan cultic life. To be noted is that the site at Vaskeresztes–Diófás dűlő, where the entry points of the tumuli were also oriented southward, represents an parallel albeit that is chronologically later (Fekete 1981, 129, 133, 141). The façades and access points of sanctuaries and churches have always pointed to the south or southeast, and the decorative elements can be above the entrances. It is no secret that the determining elements of the Etruscan belief systems encompassed rigorous orientation or divided ‘spaces of sanctity’ that might have as well been represented by a particular building or an entire settlement or an enclosed parcel of land suitable for this purpose (Pallottino 1980, 138–141). The building of Vát which was furnished with the ‘altar’ in the Iron Age must have been nothing else but a funerary structure. Its structure is similar to the wooden funerary chambers of the tumulus burials; as at Százhalombatta or Fertőendréd (Holport 1985, fig. 19; Gömöri 2010, 63, Abb. 2). This sector of the site can be considered as a funerary structure rather than a settlement. At this point, we may return to the identical structures unearthed in Ikervár; this type of archaeological feature, as will be noted below, served certain privileged members of the community. Moravičany represents a rare example: rectangular and subterranean archaeological features sharing similar features were excavated, yet their funerary function was unequivocal (Nekvasil 1974, 302–303, Abb. 25–26). The burials of Mannersdorf and Loretto, but most likely of Mattersburg and Hollabrunn can be noted in this respect; the ashes of the dead are significantly mixed with charcoal, and spindle-whorls, bowls, and cups were placed next to the dead. The dimensions of the graves were around 2 × 2 m, and in each case they were rectangular (Nebelsick 1997, 81, 89, Abb. 31; 37; Neugebauer 1997, 163–164). As many examples can be listed in favour of considering the rectangular subterranean archaeological features to be sepulchres as reasons can be assembled to support the view that the sites can have been domestic structures (Lauermann 1997, 157, Abb. 60: Michelstetten; 152, Abb. 58: Sierndorf; 150, Abb. 34 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik 56: Groβmugl). It would be imprudent to draw generalizations, yet the context of those archaeological features which have been subject to analysis and principally the evaluation of the context of the artefacts discovered in them may supply a more reliable answer to this question. As regards the site in Donja Dolina, an extraordinary theory has emerged supplemented with anthropological and ethnographical examples in addition to the archaeological observations, namely the deceased were secondarily buried with food and drink in the aforementioned archaeological structures, either in the houses or underneath them (Gavranović 2007, 411, Abb. 10/1–2). Therefore, the living and the dead could remain in a form of contact after death and live on as integral part of the family, thus one of the urns, which was filled with ashes, was found underneath the wooden platform of the structures discovered in 1904. There was also a boat-shaped fibula in it that can be associated with one found in Ikervár (Gavranović 2007). The fact that only a small amount of burnt bone remains was identified in the archaeological features at Ikervár also reflects the contemporary process of scientific understanding. The root cause of it, in our opinion, derives from many profane aspects; it is absolutely possible that our current concept is faulty and on the one hand we wrongly reconstruct the former reality of the Iron Age while on the other hand we might assume such a funerary rite might not have necessarily produced a few hundred or tens of grams of cremated bone on the other hand. To be noted at this point are several concentrated small areas having a diameter of c. 40 to 50 cm, whose contents were dominated by the presence of charcoal. This might allow us to reconstruct the roots of a very efficient cremation rite. To deviate from this standpoint, in our opinion, is beyond the limits of acceptance. The suggestion that these archaeological features served as funerary monuments, is theoretically based, yet, since it is supported by scientific analyses, it will be adhered to in what follows. The type of structures in Ikervár already referred to is marked by rounded rectangular structures which range up to 5 × 6 m and have lines of posts and certainly wattle-and-daub walls. A few burned clay fragments confirm this. These structures were located between small clusters of burials were separated from each other by vacant areas. Undecorated rustic ware was found in their filling. It should be noted that no sign of an internal fire-place was identified in any of these structures so that the domestic nature of these sites cannot be certain. However, they can be considered as houses, in other words sites of domestic use. Having been discovered on the site, all of the archaeological features that can be considered as burials were unurned cremations; inhumations (Körpergrab) were not identified. Wherever cremated human remains have been identified in all cases these have been defined as burials. The site has not been completely excavated; inhumations may of course remain to be found in the unexcavated areas. Apart from large urns and smaller vessels, nothing else was placed next to the dead in the round, shallow and small size grave pits (Brandurnengrab). Bronze ornaments, fibulae or pins were uncovered in the thick layer of charcoal next to the ashes in two burials. The depth of one of these unurned cremations significantly deviates from the rest; it can be considered as the outstanding archaeological feature on the site on account o of its exceptional depth as well as the presence of a large decorated and burnished black vessel. This was decorated with rosettes, grooves and bosses as well as impressed pendant triangles. In addition to the two types of funerary structures – large cremation monuments; and small cremation pits – circular ditches (Hügelgrab) surrounding three mound burials were also excavated on the salvage site. A few sherds dating also to the Hallstatt period found within the area of the pits provided a firm basis for dating. Not in the central area of the circle of pits, but rather towards the periphery in case of one of the circular ditches at Ikervár the bottom of the presumed grave was found. The body of the grave was not always dug into the ground; there are examples of mounded burials which were placed on the surface of the old land surface with a mound formed over it (Nebelsick 1997, 36). The ditched burial mounds dating to the Iron Age excavated at Franzhausen in the Traisental represent a regional parallel. The artefacts found in the graves unearthed there included figural decorations, and contained urns and one-handled ‘Stupava’ bowls richly decorated with incised, modelled and painted geometric motifs. The female figures depicted on the urns hold some kind of plant, possibly ears of corn, though it is conceivable that what is intended are the fingers of their hands. To be noted is that the hands of the figures mounted on horses do not end in a similar triple branched pattern (Neugebauer 1997, 184, Abb. 75). A bronze belt plaque decorated with raised and incised motif was also found in the cemetery (Neugebauer 1997, 175–185). The range of artefacts found on the site of Ikervár also included a bronze belt plaque; this was not part of a burial, but found in a bronze hoard. The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 35 The significance and complexity of the salvage site in Ikervár–Pinkóci-dűlő can be summarized concisely. A further multidimensional analysis will be indispensable and will offer additional information for research into the Iron Age in the region. The significance of the bronze hoard and its research potential In addition to previously discussed results, in June 2010 a hoard dating to the Iron Age was discovered in the course of the archaeological excavation conducted in the northern sector of Pinkóci-dűlő in Ikervár. The present archaeological report focuses exclusively on this feature. The hoard lay in one of the pits of the settlement dating to the Iron Age; the pit had a depth of 2 m, a diameter of 1.6 m, a circular ground plan, a cylindrical profile and a flat and even bottom; it has been designated as complex 50, Ikervár–Pinkóci-dűlő (Pl. 2). After removal of the topsoil it appeared as a regular circular dark spot on the ground. There were only tiny sherds and pieces of burned clay fragments on its surface. The pit contained nothing but a few small sherds which were found after the removal of the upper layer of 10 cm of the surface. Its filling resembled was hourglass-shaped; the lowest layer contained a considerable amount of charcoal, and the subsequent layers in turn were light brown and some darker colours s. The lower third of the pit contained a graphite streaked cup and an animal jaw (pig) which in fact sealed the layers below; underneath it, there was a significantly charcoal-filled stratum, evidence of conspicuous burning. At the outset of excavation, the archaeological feature and/or the entire series of features adjacent to each other were considered as a well. However, because it was at nearly the highest point of the site, this theory was soon discarded. When the significantly black level in the filling strata was reached, and the decorated vessel was found, considerable interest was aroused as to what the pit contained. Completely unexpectedly, the bronze hoard came to light while removing the earth of the sidewall of the pit. The bronze hoard was unearthed when the earth from the side wall of the pit was removed; it rested in a small recess that resembled a shaft located almost at the bottom of the pit. A negligible part of the hoard tipped over from its original position during the removal of the earth. A conservator and a field technician managed the temporary conservation of the untouched part of the hoard.3 To approach this archaeological feature an area surrounding it was excavated as a block. Thus, the core of the hoard could be uncovered in situ, intact in its original position with minimum disturbance. The cutting was widened in steps in order not to damage the archaeological feature or its contents. It can be concluded that the method and design of the former positioning of the hoard must have been the consequence of conscious human activity. This can be verified for the very first time in Hungary in the Hallstatt period, because the bronze hoard discovered in Ikervár represents the first genuinely excavated hoard of the Transdanubian region that has been dated to the earlier phase of the Iron Age. Having analyzed the former written and photographic sources, it can be extrapolated that it must have been a sacrifice in honour of Demeter and/or Persephone. The details and the possible reasons for this conclusion are described in the following sections. In addition, medical activities cannot be precluded either because a preponderance of the analysed floral remains found in the pit came from medicinal herbs. As regards the content of the hoard, it has been considered as being of particular significance in terms of other European finds, because it contained such unique artefacts that have only a few particular parallels in the archaeological record. We must highlight the bronze vessel with a sieve, the rosette ornamented bronze vessel, the horse brooches, and the Italian imports (Szilágyi 1992), as well as the large decorated boat-shaped brooches, or the decorated bronze belt plaque. The uniqueness of this find is confirmed by the large amount of organic material discovered and by the scientific results derived from analyses (Pl. 5). The comparative study of hoards has been a fundamental pillar of international and from now on, of Hungarian prehistoric research. This is due by virtue of the information supplied by the hoards on the one hand, because the assemblages provide an expedient basis for the in-depth analysis of the particular period studied. In the course of the processing of the hoard, we sought and received answers to the following questions: 3 These were drawn from the personnel of the Savaria Museum, Directorate of the Museums of Vas County. We hereby express our gratitude for their assistance. In addition, we also sincerely appreciate the support of our colleagues: archaeologists Cs. Farkas and I. K. Pap, and field technician H. Hekli, A. Horváth, D. Horváth, Gy. Isztin, F. Kapiller, K. Kelbert, Á. Kőszegi, M. Vágusz, P. Vámos, and restorer E. Cs. Kiss. We thank S. Gulyás and Z. Törőcsik for the English translation of this paper. The kind help and interest shown in the project provided by T. Puskás MD, A. Nagy, T. Fodor and G. Tóth is greatly acknowledged. We thank Dr. L. Horváth for commenting on this paper. We thank G. Ilon for his opinion, support and constant and persevering assistance, as well as his advice and constructive criticism during our work. 36 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik 1. Primary – typological, chronological and contextual – information content: • as a consequence of precise dating, such a hoard found in such an in situ context can ensure a controlling opportunity to identify individual objects and hoard assemblages as stray finds discovered from the 19th century; • based on the context and the connection of the settlement or the cemetery and the hoard, we are in a position to extrapolate the reason for burying and the socio-cultural relation of the community with the hoard; • based on the content of the hoard, we are in a position to extrapolate the function of each feature and artefact (ornaments or weapons, question of gender including gender or class specification and segregation); • parts of the hoard which are contemporary represent an accurate typo-chronological starting point for basic research into the Hallstatt period. 2. Secondary information: Why was the hoard secreted? Why exactly had it been buried in the area where it was discovered? Why was the valuable assemblage secreted so extraordinarily? Who buried the hoard? 3. Tertiary – multidisciplinary – information content: • extra information, which has not been analyzed in case of the Hallstatt period so far, derived from the organic material remains preserved by and detected on objects as carriers and media capable of conservation (pollens, phytoliths, micro- and macro-floral remains, signs of leather, tar, bitumen, bone, stone, and metal use, as well as the existence of textile remains on particular artefacts of the Ikervár hoard); • based on the foregoing, the connection of burial with a particular season, and as a result, with a particular annual period, ceremony, or other human action can be reconstructed, or the connection may be made of the assumed ceremonial event with a natural phenomenon; • the reconstruction of the agricultural activities in the Iron Age and its environment on a microregional level can also be deduced based on the micro- and macro-artefacts conserved in the hoard; • such evidence serves the better understanding of the metallurgy and other manufacturing skills in the Iron Age. To sum up the above, it can be concluded that the bronze hoard comprised of nearly 300 artefacts unearthed on Pinkóci-dűlő adjacent to Ikervár is unique even in terms of more recent, times since other finds come from unconfirmed contexts. The total weight of the Ikervár hoard is nearly 5 kg, and it may be regarded as one of the most important recently uncovered finds as regards Hungarian research carried out in respect of the Hallstatt period in Transdanubia. Its complete processing will be performed within the framework of a complex scientific research program. Methods and results of complex archaeological and natural scientific investigations implemented following laboratory extraction of the bronze hoard complex In order to elucidate as much as possible of the scientific information recorded in the bronze hoard complex, a group of carefully selected experts working in various fields of archaeology and palaeoecology was assembled with the following participants in addition to the collaborators mentioned above: E. Bodor, K. Herbich, G. Ilon, E. Marton, K. Náfrádi, Dá. G. Páll, J. Sándorné Kovács. Laboratory dismantling and sampling was implemented in the following steps: 1. Two parallel numbering systems were used in order to differentiate between the features and artefacts which were recovered during the process of on-site excavation, dismantling and sampling preserving their original stratigraphic position. The former ones were marked by the Roman numeral I. The latter, greater part of the hoard, which remained in situ and was treated as a block in sampling was marked by the Roman numeral II. 2. Part II of the hoard was photographed digitally using X-ray, MR and CT techniques under the supervision of T. Puskás MD at the Diagnostic Laboratory of the Markusovszky Hospital of Szombathely. The resultant photographs and video streams were used to determine the spatial distribution and orientation of major features and sub-features as well as the individual artefacts with a high accuracy which assisted pre-extraction measures in the lab (Pl. 4). 3. All features, sub-features and artefacts were numbered. A trapezoid-shaped bronze anvil of ca. 4007 gm., the most important and highly unique artefact of the no. I hoard complex was registered with the Arabic numeral 1. The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 37 4. The monolith part of the hoard complex registered as no. II with a thickness of 6–10 cm was broken down and sampled for further analysis in the Geoarchaeology Laboratory of the University of Szeged in accordance with the features observed on the photographs s noted in no. 2 above. This approach enabled us to extract the individual artefacts in the order they were placed on top of one another during their burial in the Iron Age. The surface of each identified micro-horizon including the soil in-fill and space between each individual artefact, in addition to the individual artefacts themselves was sampled for further scientific investigation. 5. Every step of the laboratory extraction of the in situ monolith, the orientation of the encountered artefacts and features in each mm-thick micro-horizon was documented photographically. This helped us record meticulously not only the distribution and correct spatial orientation of the major artefacts, but those of the smaller textile and plant remains covering them. 6. This stage of the analysis was of crucial importance in the final reconstruction of the hoard complex since the relationship of the individual metal artefacts and associated plant, textile remains had also been recorded and reconstructed. To aid such work a simple matrix was drawn on every digital photograph using Adobe Photoshop and the correct position of the identified archaeobotanical and other features on the surfaces and the individual artefacts was clearly marked. 7. All artefacts retrieved during the laboratory extraction process were photographed from various angles preceding restoration. 8. The weight of the metal artefacts was also measured using laboratory scales before the removal of associated plant and textile remains, following laboratory cleaning and complete restoration. 9. Sampling for detailed sedimentological, geochemical, phytolith, pollen, organic geochemical and textile analysis was done for every micro-horizons using the removed soil, plant and textile remains. 10. The removed soil was screen-washed on-site in order to retain minute artefacts and other remains which might be informative for further analysis. Preliminary results of natural scientific investigations The outstanding nature of the find made it apparent even at the time of the field survey and discovery that implementation of complex geoarchaeological investigations is indispensable. In the previous chapters a short overview on the archaeological interpretations was given. This part is dedicated to the preliminary findings of natural scientific investigations carried out as part of the project. Sampling and extraction was done from a total of 12 micro-horizons, each with an average thickness of 5–9 mm. The samples were subjected to an array of interconnected analyses ranging from grain-size distribution through geochemistry, palynology, phytolith analysis, archaeobotany to absolute dating yielding a complex database suitable for wide-scale and statistical evaluation regarding almost every aspect of the processes through which the hoard ended up in the ground. This highly innovative, multi-disciplinary approach in both sampling and analyses has here been applied to hoard finds in Hungary for the first time. Even the initial results presented here are highly promising, and call for the introduction of a similar protocol in the future analyses of similar finds. The first horizon corresponds to the surface of the hoard complex. The individual bronze artefacts were carefully removed. The intercalating soil and debris was subjected to grain-size analysis and dual wet-screening yielding the smaller plant remains and concretions. According to the findings of pollen analytical investigations, this horizon contained grains of Ambrosia known to have colonised Hungary from the 20th century onwards which is a clear sign of pollen contamination. Knowing the season of discovery (beginning of September) this result hardly comes as a surprise. Fortunately, the underlying micro-horizons were free of modern pollen grains thus providing us with a reliable picture of the palaeo-vegetation of the Iron Age when the hoard was buried. The second horizon was represented by the complete removal of the upper most bronze artefacts. In one case perfectly intact textile remains thought to be coeval with the time of deposition have been recovered. Numerous fibres were carefully removed for further SEM and organic chemical analysis. Unfortunately following the cleaning and extraction process a major part of the textile surface was oxidized and completely destroyed. The remains which have been preserved in a freezer might be suitable for radio-carbon dating of the find. The third horizon was formed by removal of additional bronze artefacts. This step highlighted an important and previously unobserved character of the find, namely, that one of the bronze artefacts had been completely wrapped in textiles preceding burial. As this artefact represents a fragment of a bronze 38 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik sieve, the possibility of intentionally adding a finely-woven textile layer to ensure better filtering capacity of the device cannot be ruled out. In horizon 4, additional organic remains were identified. It was this horizon, where the reddish-brown iron coating noted on the outer parts of the bronzes was most pronounced. It is suggested that this coating must correspond to the remains of a leather purse into which the hoard had been placed. In order to verify this assumption, this zone was sampled for chemical organic analysis. Horizon 5 provided a better view of this reddish-brown iron-like coating, having a definite margin and a clear skin-like patterning on the surface with a thickness of a couple of millimetres. (Pl. 7/2–3). Horizon 6 provided samples besides the ones mentioned in the previous zone for pollen, phytolith, geochemical and soil chemical analysis. The succeeding micro-horizons (7, 8, 9, and 11) were rich in intercalated debris and soil providing suitable amounts of samples for chemical and geochemical analysis to characterize the major parameters of the soil. Debris and soil matter was prevalent in horizon 10 both regarding its volume and mass compared to that of the bronze artefacts. Nevertheless, textile remains and including the structure of the fibres was clearly observable in this part of the monolith as well displaying strong affinity with the textile remains from the salt mines of Hallstatt of similar age (Bichler Et Al. 2005). The bottom of the monolith was marked by a heavily burnt, charcoal-rich layer upon which the actual hoard had been placed. As no signs of burning were observed on the artefacts forming the hoard itself, there is every reason to believe that this level filling the bottom of the pit must have been intentional preceding the actual deposition of the find. On the whole, the analysis of samples taken from the individual micro-horizons yielded useful information on the nature and depositional processes of the find, which can be summed up as follows: the hoard must have been deposited into a side chamber of an early Iron Age pit dug into loess layers of the final Ice Age. Before the actual deposition this side chamber was fired. A mixture of silver fir, juniper, oak, hornbeam, elm, blackthorn and dogwood twigs was used as fuel. After the chamber had been cleaned and the bronze hoard deposited, the entire find was covered by the material of the subsoil and the surface. Water infiltrating from the surface deposited onto the buried artefacts significant amounts of silt deriving from the loess material of the subsoil. The lower part of the pit was filled by the clay-rich material from the surface. The organic and carbonate content of the deposits used to cover the hoard was determined by LOI following Dean’s method (Dean 1974, 242–248). A gradual increase in the organic content was observed from the top to the centre of the monolith followed by a sharp drop towards the bottom of the pit. This pattern was correlated with the amount of textile remains recovered from the individual horizons. There was a steady downward decrease observed in the carbonate content parallel with an increase in the amount of what is thought to be brown forest soil matter of a neutral or slightly acidic pH. The material of the chamber points to the post-genetic alteration of the loess deposits. The observed variation in the inorganic content of the samples seems to be correlated with the smaller amount of textile fibres in the inner parts of the hoard as well as the precipitation of dissolved carbonates deriving from the upper parts of the subsoil through leaching. In addition it also marks an increase in the surface soil matter used to fill the pit towards the bottom. The observed downward trend in all three parameters (organic, carbonate, inorganic content) point to significant post-genetic changes, which must have triggered a decay of the organic matter of the textiles used to wrap up the artefacts and a migration as well as precipitation of various dissolved elements in other words representing the taphonomy of the find. An extensive chemical and geochemical analysis of all soil samples was carried out following current Hungarian standards (Buzás 1993; Dániel 2004, 53–56, 98–108). According to the findings of these analyses, the soil used for filling up the side chamber can be classified as a brown forest soil. The recorded soil parameters (pH, Arany-type plasticity, humic, nitrogen, phosphate and sulphur content) reflect the highly disturbed nature of this original brown soil. Nevertheless, the observed carbonates content as well as calcium concentration values in the samples indicate a significant leaching of the loess deposits forming the parent material of the pit as a result of fluctuations in the groundwater table. Much of the dissolved carbonates were precipitated on the surface of the artefacts in the bronze hoard. The observed higher values of Cu, Z, Mn and iron in the sediment samples display a gradually decreasing trend towards the centre and the bottom of the monolith. Considering the chemical parameters of brown forest soils present in the modern landscape of the study area (Sümegi Et Al. 2011, 285–354), the observed enrichment of these elements must be attributed to the chemical weathering of the bronze artefacts. This is also recorded in the various coatings and concretions surrounding the hoard itself representing post-genetic precipitates. The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 39 Nevertheless, the pattern observed in the iron content may also indicate the importance of other subsurface processes following reposition. Iron and manganese precipitates observed on the surface of the organic material (cereal covering, textile) used for covering the hoard and the recorded iron anomaly in the centre of the find may derive from the chemical weathering of some smaller iron artefacts deposited nearby. Furthermore, secondary multiple chemical weathering of the actual hoard as a result of the cyclically fluctuating groundwater table must also have had a role in influencing the concentrations of these elements. All in all the observed pattern of element concentrations seems to carry information regarding the original composition of the sediments forming the infill of the pit. On the other hand, there are signs indicating decay of the organic matter of the textile cover used for wrapping the finds as well as the chemical weathering of the bronze artefacts. Numerous plant remains have also been recovered from the surface of the artefacts during dismantling of the monolith as well as a result of the double wet-screening of the intercalating soil and sediments (Jacomet–Kreuz 1999). Out of the 12 micro-horizons no. 11 was sampled for archaeobotanical analysis in order to obtain information on the nature of plants deposited on the individual finds as well as used for the production of textiles into which some of the bronze hoard was wrapped. The samples yielded a rich assemblage of various weeds and cultivated plants. In the inner parts of the monolith, primarily attached to the surface of the bronze artefacts, numerous straw fragments and glumes, mainly of the species einkorn (Triticum monococcum) and to a lesser degree common wheat (Triticum aestivum) was recovered. A part of the straw produced in the course of trashing must have been woven into a roll and used in the act of deposition. Furthermore, some grains of common millet (Panicum mileum) were also recorded, primarily from the lowermost part of the monolith. As no cereal grains were found in the studied material there is every reason to believe that the time of deposition must have followed the summer harvest. The final phase of the harvest is generally dated to the end of June beginning of July. However, if we consider the cooler and wetter climate that must have prevailed during the early Iron Age a shift in the time of the harvest to mid-late July cannot be excluded. On the other hand the ripening of millet usually occurs in August. Thus the presence of millet grains may also indicate a late summer deposition of the hoard. Nevertheless, this dating must be treated with caution as millet can be safely stored for several years. The cultivated plants yield ambiguous information regarding the actual time or season of deposition for the above mentioned reasons. Conversely, weeds, which are generally not intentionally collected and stored by humans, might be more informative in this matter. However, it must be noted that seeds of weeds might have been mixed into the stored grains. So their presence as a calendar marker is likewise ambiguous. Nevertheless, complementing this data with results of pollen analysis in samples scraped from the surface of the bronze artefacts may get us closer to the solution of the problem. Certain taxa of goose-feet (Chenopodium polyspermum, Chenopodium album) blossom during the period between June and September. Thus seed production can be dated for the period following; i.e. between July and September. The flowering of a persicaria (Persicara lapathifolia) is between June and October, with seed being produced mainly between July and September. Similarly, henbane (Hyoscyamus niger) blooms between May and August producing seed during mid- to late summer. Dog’s-grass (Agropyron repens) likewise blooms between early June and October. It must be noted though that only fragments of the stalk of this taxon were recovered from mainly the surface and vicinity of the bronze filter and no seeds were recorded. Dog’s-grass is a long-used herb in traditional medicine as a diuretic, or for treating calculi and various renal illnesses. It is also used as an antiphlogistic in dermatology. This taxon is a common minor element in wheat fields. Thus its presence in our Iron Age material may or may not be accidental. To sum up, the majority of plant remains were cultivated cereals, mainly represented by straw or glume of einkorn and common wheat. The straw of these two major cereal types must have been used to weave wreaths deposited in the pit. As no grains were found there is every reason to believe that the straw used must have ended up in the pit following harvest during July and August. The remains of weeds retrieved represent secondary elements of the former non-arboreal flora found in worked surfaces and arable lands. The significant amounts of dog’s-grass in the assemblage must indicate intentional deposition of this plant together with the hoard. Other recorded weed taxa of henbane, persicara and goose-feet are common secondary elements, whose seeds may indicate a late summer or early autumn reposition of the hoard. Nevertheless, these seeds might have been stored accidentally with the cultivated plants. Thus the identified plant remains do not give unambiguous information on the time of deposition (Pl. 7/1). 40 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik Samples taken from the surface of the bronze artefacts as well as the intervening soil were also subjected to phytolith analysis to get a better picture of the vegetation (Persaits 2010; Persaits–Sümegi 2011, 307–354). The majority of the samples were studied following classical physical and chemical extraction methods. In addition two samples were analyzed using scanning-electron microscopy (SEM). Preservation was exceptional, which enabled a correlation of the findings with those of pollen and plant macro-fossil analyses. SEM studies focus on the analysis of the phytolith content of the plant macro-fossils seen in phytoliths of the epidermis. This may help us understand how phytoliths ended up in the deposit (Pl. 6). Copper-oxides deriving from the bronze artefacts must have contributed to the exceptional preservation of phytoliths in their anatomical position inside the epidermis. 200 counts per sample were made. The identified types are recorded in the following table. The major morphotypes were digitally photographed and taxonomically determined. Results were summed in a diagram. In the sample deriving from the surface of the bronze anvil, phytoliths of the cereal epidermis (einkorn, common wheat) were clearly discernible in their original orientation. Similarly anatomically well-preserved phytoliths were identified in samples deriving from the surface of the bronze sieve. The observed morphological characteristics of these phytoliths are completely different from those found in the anvil samples. A long stick-shaped body is crowned by numerous oval, irregularly scattered warts, which is characteristic of a weed known as dog’sgrass (Agropyron repens) (Golyeva 2001, 217–230). Out of the 10 samples studied six yielded the minimum count of 200 phytolith (Pl. 6). Differences in phytolith concentrations must be attributed to the fact that samples taken from those areas, which corresponded to the straw cover of the bronze hoard, were richer in phytoliths than those away from these regions. The phytolith types of the samples deriving from the anvil and the in-situ monolith were fundamentally different. In case of the anvil, remains of the plant material used for covering the anvil itself were identified. Conversely, in the monolith samples several marker types have been identified as well. Regular phytolith analysis highlighted the presence of einkorn and common wheat used in the wrapping material of the hoard. SEM analysis of the same samples added another element of dog’s-grass into the array of identified plant taxa. Knowing the relatively low concentrations of this element and by taking into account the fact that these were mainly restricted to samples deriving from the inner surface of the bronze sieve there are two possible explanations available for its presence in the studied material. Dog’s-grass is a wellknown secondary weed in arable areas and fallow fields (Golyeva 2001, 217–230), enabling its natural mixing with cultivated cereals. However, this taxon might have been deliberately placed on the surface of the bronze sieve with the aim of preparing herbal medicine. The high-resolution sampling provided useful conclusions for future phytolith analytical studies. No such studies of multiple sampling and analysis implemented on a surface of 6–12 cm are known from either the Hungarian or elsewhere in the international literature. These findings may help us understand the process of phytolith deposition and preservation on a micro-scale and offer indications for the refinement of future sampling methods. One of the most dynamically evolving applications of phytolith analysis is that of certain archaeological features. The success of the investigation is dependent on good sampling, where in certain cases (for example in hut structures) a variation of a couple of centimetres is critical (Persaits 2010; Persaits–Sümegi 2011, 307–354). Results of pollen and charcoal analysis can be summed up as follows: APs appear in the pollen spectrum of the studied samples in highly eroded form marking their secondary origin from the soil used to cover the hoard. In addition, fragmented charcoal of several arboreal elements has been identified from the lowermost part of the studied monolith. This may refer to a use of different arboreal taxa as fuel for purifying the chamber through burning preceding deposition (Pl. 7/1). The observed composition of NAPs, compared with the modern summer pollen spectra for Vas County indicates a time of deposition immediately in early July after the summer harvest (Ilon 2011, 280–285). This assumption was corroborated by the macro-botanical findings as well by the evidence of the archaeological investigations. The preliminary assessment of the archaeological sequels of the bronze hoard and the possible functional interpretation of its deposition A relatively small number of hoards connected to the Hallstatt phase of the Iron Age have been found in Transdanubia, the western region of the Carpathian Basin. A literature search notes some five sites which have produced evidence of this type of archaeological phenomenon; the hoard unearthed at Ikervár makes the sixth example. Fekete (1999, 35–36), has summarised the discoveries on the following salvage sites: Vaskeresztes/Magyarkeresztes (Mozsolics 1942, 155–161), Ravazd–Kisravazd (Fekete The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 41 1973, 341–358), Kurd (Patay 1990, Taf. 51–63; 74; 76–78), Regöly–Szárazdi bozót (Fekete 1995, 37–48), Kiskőszeg/Battina (Kovács 1999, 23–31). Her article puts forward two propositions. Firstly, she hypothesizes that the hoards dating to the Hallstatt period found in Transdanubian served as mortuary goods required for funerary customs or for some sort of sacrifice (Fekete 2008, 108); alternatively that they constituted the entirety of a particular family’s set of jewellery or prestige goods that were not used in the course of the funerary ceremony. Secondly, she considers particular pieces of the hoards known in Hungary and dating to the Hallstatt period as female costume accessories (Fekete 1999, 38). This latter theory has been verified by the hoard unearthed at Ikervár, because the horse figure fibulas can unequivocally be identified as indications of the female gender (Metzner-Nebelsick 2007, 707–735); MetznerNebelsick has defined this type of artefact as ‘Penelope-Prinzip’. In concern to the hoards dating to the Early Iron Age found in Transdanubia, it can be stated that their contents are composed primarily of ornaments and bronze vessels (as exemplified by the hoards of Vaskeresztes/Magyarkeresztes, Kisravazd and Regöly). The contents of the hoards and their number wholly deviate from the relative ‘hoard abundance’ of the Late Bronze Age (Zylmann 2005, 1–33; Koepke 1998, 69; Kubach 1994, 242; Metzner-Nebelsick 1997, 93). Nonetheless, it must be highlighted that it is just in this period that the Fürstengraben, giant mound burials of the élite rich in metal finds indicative of their power, appeared in both the eastern and western Hallstatt zones. The language of symbols of the arts of the Early Iron Age, of which particular elements can be defined as quite abstract, yet geometrically based, one of the most spectacular examples being the pottery from the Nové Košariská 1. tumulus (Pichlerová 1968; Torbrügge 1992, 464, Abb. 58), is beyind understanding today Efforts have been made on the basis of features on other objects such as the art of the Situlae or on other cessels such as the urn from Sopron-Burgstall, barrow 28. The anvil in the bronze hoard of Ikervár must certainly be the legacy of a bronze-smith (Pl. 5/1–2). The maker’s stamp in the form of a circular pattern can be recognized on its side. Many tiny incisions and scratches on its surface confirm its regular use. Yet, semi-finished pieces, the fragments of horse fibulae, or additional fragments of sheet, metal on which burrs, cutting marks, or dents can be identified, also refer to the performance of a metal-worker. It is worth quoting the relevant episodes of Homer, for instance, the description pf Telemachus’ colleagues, the goldsmith who “[…] came, bearing in his hands his tools of bronze, the implements of his craft, anvil and hammer and well-made tongs, [435] wherewith he wrought the gold; […]”, i.e. brought his anvil and hammer, his tools of his craft (Hegyi 2003, 35: Homer: Odyssey, III, 430–450. Nestor’s sacrifice at Pylos; translated by A. T. Murray), and who concurrently was the active participant in the sacrificial ceremony. In this way, the goldsmith with his ‘first fruits’ – which could have been almost anything, the most valuable of one’s assets, such as the most valuable portion of one’s produce – as the participant, organiser, ceremonial chief of the sacrificial ceremony, took part in the ceremonial event (Fekete 1999, 40). In addition to the sacrificial ceremony, healing could have been associated with the site, because a preponderance of the floral remains found in the immediate vicinity of the hoard have medicinal properties, such as mugwort (A. vulgaris), devil’s flax (Linaria vulgaris), betony (Stachys sp.), horsetail (Equisetum), achillea (Achillea sp.), althaea (Althaea), and ribgrass (Plantago lanceolata) having been local along the Rába river and the Gyöngyös creek. Going by the floral evidence, this stock of herbs was capable of healing inflammation of the internal organs and bronchitis, and of eliminating kidney stones. In the course of the reconstruction of the hoard, this fact sheds light on such an aspect that interweaves the scopes of the goldsmith’s sacred and profane activities (Nebelsick 1997, 29, Tab. 2). According to a written source dating to the 6th century BC, we know of a bronze-smith’s votive offering, more specifically a cart wheel, which was dedicated to Apollo. Having been offered at the Acropolis of Kameiros on Rhodes, this wheel served as ‘first-fruits’ offered by a bronze-smith whose name was Onesos. The inscription was produced between 550 and 525 BC (Hegyi 2003, 29). A gold- and bronze-smith’s hoard has been found at Worms, although it is dated somewhat earlier than that from Ikervár. It has Late Bronze Age features and and may be placed in the HaB or C phase (Zylmann 2005, 1–33); it can be compared with other artefacts dating to the pre-Scythian epoch in Hungary (for example Biharugra, Fügöd, Prügy, Szanda, Besenyszög). Combining the results obtained so far by both the archaeological and scientific evidence, the ceremony identified at Ikervár may be interpreted as the offering of the so-called ‘first-fruits’, associated with a funerary ceremony, more specifically, with a ceremony or series of ceremonies organized annually in honour of the goddesses Demeter and/or Persephone. The forms of the sacrifices changed according to whether they were offered for heavenly or terrestrial gods, hence the definitions of uranios (heavenly) and chtonios (terrestrial) sacrifices. As regards Ikervár, the latter prevails (Pl. 8/4). 42 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik The ‘first-fruits’ of Eleusina delivered to the mysteries have been known according to an inscription (which dates to around 422 BC); thence the threads of the cults of Demeter and Persephone as well as the corn and/or bread offerings and animal sacrifice intertwine (Hegyi 2003, 30). Demeter is the goddess of the Earth; its Roman equivalent was Ceres, Terra, the goddess of farming. Her myth is associated with bread, hence the farming of cereals and fertility; her hair is golden akin to a ripe ear of corn. Persephone is Demeter’s daughter, whom Zeus let go banished his consent, she lives with Hades in the Underworld. Subsequently, as chronicled by Homer’s Hymn to Demeter4 (translated by H. G. Evelyn-White). Demeter “pined with longing for her deep-bosomed daughter” and became enraged with Zeus. Driven by her anger, she returned to Olympus nevermore associating with the gods and goddesses. When Persephone – also called Kore and its Roman equivalent Proserpona – the goddess of eternity and annual corn harvest, departed and was placed underground, as a consequence of her loss, Demeter fell into the abyss of bereavement next to a well. The archaeological feature, in which the hoard was discovered, also resembled a well. At the outset of the excavation, it was thought that the pits, which were formed cylindrically and were located adjacent to each other, would make up a row of wells. Owing to Demeter’s grief, the annual corn yield was in jeopardy, so in order to avoid catastrophe, Zeus pardoned Persephone and decided from time to time to let her return to life and to her mother. Eleusina or Eleusis was the scene of Grecian mysteries held in honour of Demeter and Persephone. The mysteries can be characterized by ceremonies that were secret and were understood and practiced only by the initiated. The theme of the mysteries chronicled the secrets of demise, and the core of the plot revolved around the abduction, by the god of the underworld of Persephone, the daughter of the fertile Earth and around her cyclical return. For the initiated, Demeter and Persephone represented death, the state of being placed underground, and metaphorically spreading seeds and being reborn in the spring afterwards, offering promise of a new life and the phenomenon of germination. To know the secret, to meet the goddesses converted the thought of death into an acceptable ideology for the initiated. The date of the ceremony was fixed towards the end of the summer season and lasted several days and it may be noted that the natural scientific analysis of the hoard site produced evidence of a comparable crop output. Different actions were prescribed for each day. The rites were commenced with the thorough washing of hands. Homer (Odyssey, III, 430–450) describes this in conection to Nestor’s sacrifice, when recounting that “[…] Aretus came from the chamber, bringing them water for the hands in a basin embossed with flowers, and in the other hand he held barley grains in a basket; […] Then the old man, Nestor, driver of chariots, [445] began the opening rite of hand-washing and sprinkling with barley grains, […]” (Hegyi 2003, 35). The Ikervár hoard contained a vessel made of sheet bronze with an everted and swelling rim, a cylindrical neck, and rosette decoration on the shoulders. The rosette appears in Situla arts; for instance, in the frieze of the situla from Certosa grave 68 (Situlen 2009, 18–19), or on the situla found in grave 126 of the Benevenuti cemetery at Este (Torbrügge 1992, 509, Abb. 73/E). It is conceivable that these rosettedecorated ceremonial vessels may have a connection with the bronze vessel unearthed by us. Markus Egg believes that the Atestine bronze vessels were associated with significant ceremonies and celebrations embed with cultic and mythical meaning (Egg 1996a, 75–78). The participants sacrificed a pig on a particular day of the event. The only stipulation was to sacrifice a suckling pig. Analogous to the sacrifice of a piglet to Demeter can again be paralleled in Situla art (as on the Certosa and Vače situlae) and in Greek vase painting (woman sacrificing a hog, around 450 BC5). At this point to be noted is that a pig’s jaw, which laid precisely on top of the burnt layer sealing the level containing the hoard, was found in the pit that contained the Ikervár hoard. This sort of blood sacrifice as is described in the Thesmophoria is closely related to the cult of Demeter (Hegyi 2003, 73–74 citing Lucian of Samosata: De meretrice II. 1, 10 scholion). On this day women congregate and throw pigs, loaves, and pine branches into Demeter’s sacred gorge which can be read as a pit or well. The ceremony included fasting, purification, and the encountering of the underworld and the return from it. The fourth day of the ceremony was devoted to rest. Fasting that had been adhered to during the ceremony was interrupted, and the participants were allowed to consume only a special beverage, the socalled kykeon (Pl. 8/2–3). The consumption of this type of beverage originates in a myth, namely when Demeter, in her grief, visited Metanira, the queen of Eleusis, she was invited by the queen to have some 4 5 Although this work has been attributed to Homer, some authorities maintain that it was compiled somewhat later in the 7th century BC (Hegyi 2003, 100–101). Locrian pinax, c. 500–450 BC; Reggio Calabria, Mus. Naz. Arch.; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Locri_Pinax_Of_ Persephone_And_Hades.jpg. The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 43 wine as comfort. However, she was not allowed to drink wine, so she begged the queen to “mix meal and water with soft mint” into a type of beverage sacrifice instead (Hegyi 2003, 101; Homeric Hymns: II. To Demeter 188–211, translated by H. G. Evelyn-White). From that point of time, this beverage became part of the ceremonial mysteries of Eleusina (Hegyi 2003, 102; Clemens of Alexandria: Proptrepticus II. 12.: “[…] have fasted, I have drunk the cup; […]). It is an interesting additional detail to note that that Persephone metamorphosed Minthe, a naiad who had debauched Hades, into a sprig of mint. According to other sources, it was Hades that metamorphosed Minthe in order to protect her from his wife’s violent retaliation. This myth can be illustrated by a relief which depicts Persephone in the Underworld, which is in Hades’ residence, holding cornstalks with ripe ears of corn in her hand, whilst Hades clearly grasps stems of mint. To be emphasised is that Hades, as Persephone’s partner, is portrayed with leafed stems of mint that is, according to Geek mythology, nothing else but the metamorphosed naiad, Minthe herself. As regards its content, at this point, the natural scientific analyses of the Ikervár hoard combines with the best of archaeological evidence and other historic sources because the kykeon was a brew comprising flower (dog’s-grass, Elymus repens), water and fresh mint (horse mint, i.e. Mentha longifolia). As has been revealed by the pollen and phytolith analyses, these raw materials have been identified in the samples collected from the surface of the artefacts. The fact that all of these were also found on the interior surface of the bronze sieve gives further evidence (Pl. 8). Of the known sources describing the ritual consumption of liquids and/or sacrificial scenes including liquids, the following are worth citing: the situla of Magdalenska Gora (Lucke–Frey 1962, Nr. 21, Taf. 68; Eibner 2007, 440. Abb. 5) and as the closest parallel, the mixing of liquida and offering scene on the Vače situla (Lucke–Frey 1962, Nr. 33. Taf. 73; Kossack 1992, 237, Abb. 4/2; Eibner 2007, 441. Abb. 6) as well as the drinking scene on the Benevenuti situla (Frey 1969, Beilage 1; Lücke 2007, 600, 607. Abb. 7). As regards the latter example, two details are of utmost importance: in this particular case, some sort of dry substance (maybe wheat grains or semolina) is used for blending and for sprinkling; women offer the drink from a cup It would appear that all of the artefacts contained in the Ikervár hoard are also correlated with women. Ritual drinking activities (Pl. 9–10), evidence for and traditions of symposia can be identified in the custom of providing burials with mortuary gifts (Nebelsick 1997, 38–44). The burying of the Ikervár hoard and the attendant ceremony are certainly to be connected with the conclusion of the harvest. This has been confirmed by the floral remains as well as the archaeological artefacts (Pl. 7/1). The survival of weeds and cultivated plants has been taken into account in the reconstruction of the process of the burial of the hoard. The combined analyses contribute to the most likely determination of the date: late summer. The association of the presumed ceremonial event with the aforementioned period is verified by the fact that the remains found in samples taken from mound burials no. 114 and 116 in Százhalombatta, and their analysis confirm the same period as the time of the erection of the mound burials (Holport 1985, 25–62). According to Fekete’s hypothesis, the construction of the tumuli can be dated to a period following harvest which is the most vital agricultural activity in the calendar year, but this event was not necessarily linked to the precise date of of death of the individual buried (Fekete 1999, 41). Of Demeter’s and Persephone’s attributes, the wheat, the ear of corn that she always holds in one of her hands is central. Showing the ear of corn itself was a key part of the ceremony as well as showing corn to be as a secret and sacred object. The (female) figures illustrated on urns frequently hold some kind of plant, maybe corn, in their hands. Such an illustration has been identified on the urns uncovered in Franzhausen, Reichersdorf and Maiersch (Neugebauer 1997, 184. Abb. 75; Nebelsick 1992, 407, Taf. 2; Tarpini 2010, 323, Abb. 1/3). To be noted that these figures sometimes hold in their hands long sticks, even taller than themselves; these have been construed as sceptres or rattles by analogy with archaeological finds. Such a sceptre covered sheet with bronze forms part of the Ikervár hoard. Various pendants, chains and/or decorated or undecorated trapezoid plates have been found hanging downward from the top of the staffs. The trapezoid pendants identified in the Ikervár hoard can be associated with these staffs. In certain cases, Persephone holds a scourge in her hand as well as the ears of corn. This can be explained by the fact that she dispersed the ideology of eternity and eternal around the world by the aid of horsedrawn chariots with spoked wheels. These portrayals can also be recognized in the friezes and drawings of situlas found in Central Europe. The sceptre must have been the symbol or insignia of the élites within a community (Borchhardt–Bleibtreu 2006). One of the most beautifully embellished pendants was unearthed in the tumulus of Magdalenska Gora (Tecco-Hvala Et Al. 2004, 183; Tecco-Hvala 2007, 44 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik 484, fig. 6/B). The ornamented sceptre covered with bronze plate and decorated with chains and pendant comes from the tumulus of Libna (Guštin 1976, 113, Tab. 65) and is an excellent analogy for the pendant discovered at the settlement of Velem–Szent Vid (Miske 1908, Taf. 53/1). Therefore, only the chosen, to say specifically selected and appointed individuals could take part in the ceremony. As a consequence they met the goddesses Demeter and Persephone and could participate in the sacrificial offerings. Also, they were entitled to have a different funerary ceremony and rite as opposed to the uninitiated. Mortals who enter the world of Hades after experiencing these holy events are thrice blest because only they have been given the chance to dwell there. Everyone else will suffer (TrencsényiWaldapfel 1983). Since these select lived on after death, they would need houses in the afterlife. These are the archaeological features frequently identified as houses in the course of archaeological excavations as found at Vát and Ikervár and discussed above. This is the explanation as to why such rectangular and semi-subterranean features defined traditionally as ‘houses’ have been frequently uncovered between burials. This fact supports our notion that the members of a particular social class or rather of a privileged community were responsible for the erection of funerary structures. The simplified urn burials in small pits defined as ‘traditional’ in archaeological terms mark the resting place of the initiated. The contents of Early Iron Age hoards are closely connected to the abundant mound burials. It is no coincidence that scholarly research has defined this HaC–D1 period as “the golden age of mound burials dating to the Hallstatt period” (Kossack 1959, 31, 112; Šaldová 1974, 457). This pool of information was considered as a firm foundation during the archaeological investigation of the system of contacts represented by the assemblage. The assemblage is composed of artefacts that provide a more or less accurate dating opportunity prior to the processing of the entire site. The presence of the so-called Navicella fibulas originating in Italy (Fekete 1986, 249) is paramount not only in view of chronology but of the provenance of particular elements of the hoard (Pl. 11/2–3). The salvage site of Vaskeresztes/Magyarkeresztes (Mozsolics 1942, 155– 158; Kemenczei 1996, 472, Abb. 15/2) dated to HaC–D can be defined as the closest and best analogy with the large decorated boat fibulae found at Ikervár. The same salvage site has examples of the ridged and knob decorated bracelets6 (Kemenczei 1996, 472, Abb. 15/23–24). Large ornamented specimens that are identical with those found in Ikervár come from the tumulus of Libna (Guštin 1976, 116, Tab. 68), and the site of Most na Soči (S. Lucia) which comprise numerous graves (Teržan 1984, 268–269), or, again, the sites of Pommerkogel bei Kleinklein (Torbrügge 1992, 499, Abb. 71) and Podzemelj (Torbrügge 1992, 570, Abb. 98/A). The curious feature of these analogies is that the identical type combinations (boat fibula, zoomorphic fibula, serpentine fibula) also have been unearthed on these sites. Grave no. 116 of Bischofshofen, Austria contained a boat fibula with a decorated bow, extended foot, and profiled and knobed terminationof half the normal size which could be associated with one uncovered at Ikervár. According to accurate sexing, this brooch was part of an old woman’s costume accessories (Lippert 1996, 248, Abb. 7). A stone stele displaying a female’s features has shows the particular way of wearing the large boat fibulae. A pair of boat fibulae (Pl. 11/1) can be recognized on the centre of her chest (Negroni Catacchio 2007, 536, fig. 3). In addition to south-western influences, as well as imported objects from Etruria and the Atestine region, western-style objects can also be recognized in particular artefacts in the Ikervár hoard. These are the simplified serpentine fibulae or horse fibulae (Pl. 11/4); the latter types are currently regarded as representative of the female gender and have been uncovered primarily in women’s and occasionally in girls’ tombs, as well as in some settlements. The horse fibulae found in sanctuaries represent a distinct class. These appeared in Lower and Upper Italy in the 8th century BC; as import commodities, they have been the attractive artefacts of sites dating to succeeding historic periods in the territories stretching between the Rhine and the Eastern Alps. They frequently occur in artefact assemblages, especially in female contexts, with weaving implements, abundant jewellery, and the mortuary gifts in élite burials. Horse symbolism can usually be associated with a particular segment of cultic practice. For instance, C. Metzner-Nebelsick (2007, 707–735) identifies it with a female figure personified by Penelope. We know of only one site in the Carpathian Basin where horse fibulae have been discovered in a hoard. This is the site of Kisravazd which has been dated to the HaD1 period, identical in age with the artefacts of Ikervár. Unfortunately, the artefact is currently missing. The related type of zoomorphic fibula has been found in 6 Siepen 2005, Taf. 127. The author dates the bracelets akin to those from Ikervár to the HaD1 period. However, the armlets found in grave no. 4 of mound burial no. 5 in Stična can be cited here as an example (Teržan 1995, 156, Abb. 34). The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 45 three other assemblages in Central Europe, more specifically, on the salvage sites of Mechel, Trento, and Meran-Hochbühel (Metzner-Nebelsick 2007, 721, Abb. 7/7–9). Analogies with the serpentine fibulas (Schlangenfibel) have been known on the basis of many sites dating to the succeeding Hallstatt period. This type of brooch have been found in settlements as on the settlement of the Heuneburg near Hundersingen (Gersbach 1974, 193, Abb. 4, in the period IV level), or in élite burials as at Stična (Gabrovec 1974, 164, 181, Abb. 1; 7). In view of the frequency of the so-called Schlangenfibeln, this type is a marker for the HaD1 period. While the HaD1 period can be characterized by Schlangenfibeln, the HaD2 period is marked by occurrence of Paukenfibeln. Changes typical of the La Téne period can be observed in the HaD3 period, which is characterized by a combination of types (Zürn 1942, 166). Probably the fibulae by themselves do not represent particular meanings, but they do so when associated with aspects of costume (Pl. 11/6) (Bichler Et Al. 2005). The present study will not discuss this aspect in detail; however a brief comment is required. We know of a stool dating to the Iron Age, of which upper and side parts have been ornamented heavily. The depiction of a stool on the Verucchio throne has served as the basis of the reconstruction of (Kossack 1992, 240, Abb. 6). Nearly all weaving techniques can be identified on these examples. Identical armlets decorated with motifs resembling textiles have found on the site of Hemishofen together with a bronze boat fibula and pins dated to the early HaD1 period which is equivalent to that of Ikervár (Drack 1992, 128, Abb. 6). The sieve (Siebtrichter) is one of the most impressive artefacts of the hoard (Pl. 8). A close parallel with a sieve made of sheet bronze has to date remained practically unknown in the Eastern Hallstatt zone. The only close analogy known to us comes from a skeleton burial, the well-know grave no. 994 at the typesite of Hallstatt dating to the early La Téne period (Egg Et Al. 2006, 175–216; Egg–Schönfelder 2009). A similar example was found in barrow no. 2 of the Novo mesto–Kandija site. A fragment of a sieve plate may be that illustrated here, but the drawing is not clear (Torbrügge 1992, 560, Abb. 94). The pierced bronze plate, which is similar to the one discovered at Ikervár, uncovered on the site of Thessalia has been defined as a ‘cheese grater’ (Käsereibe) by Kilian (1975). In addition to many bronze vessels found close to the pierced sieve plate, was a fragment of pierced polishing stone, which can be compared with that of Ikervár (Kilian 1975, Taf. 94/33, the Phera site). With regards to the function of the vessel discovered at Ikervár, it can also be classified as a sieve funnel (Siebtrichter), a simple funnel with the addition of an internal sieve plate. This circular plate was nailed to the internal and narrowing side of the funnel. Simple funnels of this design have been discovered in many élite burials or in hoards. A Late Bronze Age example is that from Dresden-Dobritz (Jacob 1995, Taf. 93–94). A closely similar dating to the 6th or 5th centuries BC comes from the cemetery of Hallstatt (Situla 2009, 11). Its rim was made of twisted plate and it has an expanding and ring-shaped suspension handle similar to that discovered at Ikervár. The massive flat bronze ring found among the artefacts of the bronze hoard may have been part of such a suspension handle affixed to a vessel or having served as a wagon fitting or horse trapping. An analogy occurs in the somewhat later the wagon grave of Somlóvásárhely (Egg 1996b, 331, Abb. 4/2–3). A small, presumably one-handled cup unearthed in the pit of the Ikervár hoard is the only decorated vessel (Pl. 12/1). If our theory approaches the truth, this vessel with its everted rim, embossed decoration on its shoulder, and graphite streaked interior might have as well been a sacrificial drinking-cup. Since only half of the cup was found in the pit, it is conceivable that it had a single upstanding strap handle, but versions without handle are also known. Its fine specimen can be identified on the Kuffern situla which clearly portrays just such a sacrificial drinking ceremony (Hoernes 1891; Frey 1962; Situla 2009, 9). Its closest analogy with internal impressed net motifs was found at Darnózseli–Parászszeg in the region of the Little Hungarian Plain (Németh 1996, 373, Abb. 5/2). Other similar examples were discovered at Tokod (MRT 5, Abb. 57), Szob–Gregersenkert (Ilon 1985, Abb. IV), and Sopron–Krautacker (Jerem 1981, Abb. 6/1; 8/2; 14/11; Jerem 1984, fig. 16/2, where the vessel was found in house 270). Geographically the nearest example comre from Ság hill (Lázár 1955). The analogies to the Ikervár vessel have been found both on settlement and burial sites. Two complete polishing stones form part of the Ikervár hoard. One of them is rectangular, elongated and pierced at one of its ends, while the other is abraded with signs of use. The former tool was presumably suspended from a belt. As regards the latter one, all we know is which end of it was held by its user. Pierced stones of this type have been identified as a frequent mortuary gift in both female and male burials (as at Statzendorf: Mayer 1977; Libna: Guštin 1976, 125. Tab. 77; Franzhausen: in early La Tène burials Neugebauer 1996, 391, Abb. 11. 31), but similar stones have also been found in settlements (Velem–Szent Vid, Miske 1908, Taf 58). 46 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik Last but not least, to be mentioned is that in the course of the archaeological excavation a thin layer of iron precipitation was observed on the edge of the bronze hoard. According to the organic substance analyses, animal protein, probably leather covered the bronze hoard. Subsequently, this layer, rich in organic substances precipitated, acting as a filter for the iron substances from the water table rich in iron. After that, as a consequence of cyclic water table movements, the leather – probably a bag – started to disintegrate (Pl. 7/2–3). The relative chronological position and patterns of contacts demonstrated by the hoard7 Contingent upon the artefact and archaeological features and their parallels described above, the bronze hoard of Ikervár has been dated to the latter part of the Early Iron Age; more specifically to the first half of the HaD period, or HaD1 period. Its burial can be dated to the first half or the middle of the 6th century. The majority of the parallels to individual pieces date to the HaD1 period, yet particular artefact types appear already in the preceding HaC2 phase, while others were used, if rarely, in the HaD2–3 phases. The brooches provide the most reliable foundation chronological basis. Of these, the large decorated boat fibulae have retained an extraordinary role. This Navicella type, showing Italian influence, corresponds in age to the hoard of Magyarkeresztes (Mozsolics 1942, 155–161) and with the boat fibulae of the fourth phase of the Frög site (Tomedi 1996, 545, Abb. 3B) as well as with the boat fibulae unearthed in grave no. 116 of Bischofshofen dated to HaD, or c. 600 BC (Lippert 1996, 239–254). This type occurred in a relatively brief chronological span, and it represents the Este XIb variant (Tomedi 1992, 607). According to Stane Gabrovec, this type appeared in Stična 1 phase, and it became more common in the Stična 2/Stična–Novo mesto 1 horizon (Gabrovec 1974, 163–187). The hoard of Ikervár has analogies with the 2b phase of the Libna salvage site, of which entombments incorporated low ring-footed vessels in addition to boat, multiheaded, and serpentine fibulas as typical funerary goods (Guštin 1976). Egg dates the Strettweg site to the early Hallstatt period based, inter alia, on the multi-headed fibulae. His remarkable observation is that this artefact type was found in graves without weapons, thence it was linked to female practices, which fact might be precisely the case of the hoard of Ikervár by virtue of the horse fibulae (Egg 1996a, 74). The same period equates with the HaD period of Kossack’s chronology equivalent to the Vače IIa horizon and the so-called Bubesheim phase in the northern and western regions of the Alps (Kossack 1959). According to the chronology based on the artefacts unearthed at Este, the artefacts of Ikervár can be considered as parallel with Peroni IIIB2/IIIC (Peroni 1975) and Frey II/III–III (Frey 1980). The salvage site of S. Lucia, where parallels have been identified among the artefacts of the Ic/IIa phase, is of utmost chronological (Teržan 1984). As regards the internally decorated graphite glazed cup, as a date HaD period seems to be confirmed by the vessel discovered at Darnózseli–Parázsszeg in Northern Transdanubia. ✴✴✴ It can be summarised that the hoard of Ikervár can be defined as a time capsule of a series of ritual actions having taken place during the Iron Age. Archaeological and natural scientific analyses corroborate that the hoard dates to the Iron Age and it was buried in a particular season (late summer) in a series of ritual actions. Having evaluated contemporary written and iconographic sources, it has been concluded that the hoard probably represents a sacrifice offered in honour of Demeter and/or Persephone. Additionally, other actions related to medicinal activities cannot be excluded, because a preponderance of the floral remains found in the pit subjected to analysis come from local medicinal herbs. In view of its content, the hoard of Ikervár is considered as important on a pan-European level as well, because it contains such almost unique artefacts that have few if any precise parallels. For instance, there is the bronze vessel with a sieve which was used for a ritual drink called kykeon, the rosette ornamented bronze vessel, the horse fibulae, the Italian imports, the large decorated boat fibulae, and the ridged bronze belt-plaque. In addition, not to be forgotten are the objects related to goldsmithing such as the bronze anvil which weighs more than 4 kg, or the semi-finished bronze artefacts. The uniqueness of the hoard is further strengthened by the large amount of organic material (leather, tar, and textile remains) found in the archaeological feature as well as by the relevant natural scientific samples derived from them. 7 The fragments of straw removed from the surface of the bronze anvil for the purpose of the absolute chronological analysis of the hoard produced C14 results that are totally at odds with the relative dating arrived on typological grounds. The former produced data that exceeded chronologically those of the latter by two centuries. A probable explanation is that calibration of dates between 800 and 500 BC is inaccurate due to the quantitative fluctuation of the C14 isotope (see Gál–Molnár 2004, 185; Friedrich 1999, 271). The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 47 Research based on the context of hoards has been a fundamental pillar of the international and increasingly of Hungarian prehistoric research. Particular typo-chronological, contextual and multidisciplinary factors have been recognized in the processing of the Ikervár hoard which hopefully will contribute critically to the better understanding of the cult life in the Hallstatt phase of the Iron Age. As a consequence of the cooperative natural scientific and archaeological information gained, the hoard of Ikervár may be regarded as one of the key tools in reconstructing the cultic practices of the Iron Age. It is a positive example of how micro-elements considered as ‘invisible’ and the extra information derived from them can expand our knowledge of a short moment in past time. References Bichler Et Al. 2005 Borchhardt– Bleibtreu 2006 Brosseder 2004 Buzás 1993 Dániel 2004 Dean 1974 Drack 1992 Egg 1996a Egg 1996b Egg–Schönfelder 2009 Egg Et Al. 2006 Eibner 2007 Fekete 1973 Fekete 1981 Fekete 1986 Fekete 1995 Fekete 1999 Fekete 2008 Frey 1962 Frey 1969 Frey 1980 Bichler, P.–Grömer, K.–Hofmann-de Keijzer, R.–Kern, A.–Reschreiter, H. (eds.), Hallstatt Textiles. Technical Analysis, Scientific Investigation and Experiment on Iron Age Textiles, BAR 1351. Borchhardt, J.–Bleibtreu, B., Zur Genesis des Zepters, IN: Amann, P.–Pedrazzi, M.–Taeuber, H. (Hrsg.), Italo-Tusco-Romana. Festschrift für L. Aigner-Foresti, Wien, 47–71. Brosseder, U., Studien zur Ornamentik hallstattzeitlicher Keramik zwischen Rhônetal und Karpatenbecken, UPA, Band 106, Bonn. Buzás, I., Talaj- és agrokémiai vizsgálati módszerkönyv 1, Budapest. Dániel, P., Methods of the five-step extraction-digestion method. Results of the five-step extraction-digestion method, IN: Sümegi, P.–Gulyás, S. (eds.), The geohistory of Bátorliget Marshland, Budapest, 53–56, 98–108. Dean, W. E., Determination of the carbonate and organic matter in calcareous sediments and sedimentary rocks by loss on ignitions: comparison with order methods, JSP, 44, 242–248. Drack, W., Das Hallstatt D1-Grab von Lenzburg und verwandte Gräber aus dem nördlichen Schweizer Mittelland, IN: Lippert, A.–Spindler, K. (Hrsg.), Festschrift zum 50jährigen Bestehen des Institutes für Ur- und Frühgeschichte der Leopold-Franzens-Universität Innsbruck, UPA, 8, Bonn, 121–134. Egg, M., Zu den Fürstengräbern im Osthallstattkreis, IN: Jerem, E.–Lippert, A. (Hrsg.), Die Osthallstattkultur, Archaeolingua, 7, Budapest, 53–86. Egg, M., Einige Bemerkungen zum Hallstattzeitlichen Wagengrab von Somlóvásárhely, Kom. Veszprém in Westungarn, Jahrbuch RGZM, 43, 327–353. Egg, M.–Schönfelder, M., Zur Interpretation der Schwertscheide aus Grab 994 von Hallstatt, IN: Mühldorfer, B.–Bockisch-Bräuer, Ch. (Hrsg.), Beiträge zur Hallstatt-und Laténezeit in Nordostbayern und Thueringen Beiträge zur Vorgeschichte Nordostbayerns, 7, Nürnberg, 27–44. Egg, M.–Hauschild, M.–Schönfelder, M., Zum frühlaténzeitlichen Grab 994 mit figural verzierter Schwertscheide von Hallstatt (Oberösterreich), RGZM, 53, 175–216. Eibner, A., Thron – Schemel – Zepter. Zeichen der Herrschaft und Würde, IN: Bležić, M.– Črešnar, M.–Hänsel, B.–Hellmuth, A.–Kaiser, E. (Hrsg.), Scripta Praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan. Situla, 44, Ljubljana, 435–451. Fekete, M., Der Hortfund von Kisravazd, ActaArchHung, 25, 341–358. Fekete, M., Előzetes jelentés a Vaskeresztes-Diófás dűlői halomsírok leletmentéséről, Savaria, 15, 129–166. Fekete, M., Früheisenzeitliche Fibelherstellung in Transdanubien. Beiträge zur Geschichte de Toreutik und des Handels, VMUFP, 20, 249–266. Fekete, M., Etliches über die hallstattzeitlichen Hortfunde Transdanubien, SpecNova, XI, 37–48. Fekete, M., Koravaskori kincsleletek, mint vallástörténeti források, SpecNova, XV, 35–51. Fekete, M., A kora vaskori Dunántúl sajátosságairól, Pécsi Történeti Katedra, Pécs, 107–133. Frey, O.-H., Die Situla von Kuffern. Ein figürlich verzierter Bronzeblecheimer der Zeit um 400 v. Chr, VNMW, N. F. 4. Frey, O.-H., Die Entstehung der Situlenkunst, RGF, 31, Berlin. Frey, O.-H., Die Westhallstattzeit im 6. Jahrhundert v. Chr, IN: Komission beim OÖ. Landesverlag. Land Oberösterreich (Hrsg.), Die Hallstattkultur. Ausstellungskatalog, Schloss Lamberg, Steyr. 48 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik Friedrich 1999 Friedrich, M., Eichen – Jahrringchronologien und ihre Bedeutung für die absoluten Daten der Hallstattzeit, IN: Jerem, E.–Poroszlai, I. (eds.), Archaeology of the Bronze and Iron Age, Archaeolingua, 9, Budapest, 271–284. Gabrovec 1974 Gabrovec, S., Die Ausgrabungen in Stična und ihre Bedeutung für die Südostalpine Hallstattkultur, IN: Chropovskỳ, B. (Hrsg.), Symposium zu Problemen der jüngeren Hallstattzeit in Mitteleuropa, Bratislava, 163–187. Gál–Molnár 2004 Gál, K.–Molnár, A., Sé-Doberdó. Az 1980-as és 2001-es ásatások vaskori leletanyaga, Savaria, 28, 159–230. Gavranović 2007 Gavranović, M., Eisenzeitliche Bestattungssitten in Donja Dolina – Beispiele der sekundären Bestattung, IN: Bležić, M.–Črešnar, M.–Hänsel, B.–Hellmuth, A.–Kaiser, E. (Hrsg.), Scripta Praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan. Situla, 44, Ljubljana, 405–418. Gersbach 1974 Gersbach, E., Vorläufige Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen 1959–1969 auf der Heuneburg (Die Siedlungsstadien der Periode IV), IN: Chropovskỳ, B. (Hrsg.), Symposium zu Problemen der jüngeren Hallstattzeit in Mitteleuropa, Bratislava, 189–204. Golyeva 2001 Golyeva, A. A., Biomorphic analysis as a part of soil morphological investigations, Catena, 43, 217–230. Gömöri 2010 Gömöri, J., Ein Grab der Osthallstattkultur mit Kultwagen aus Fertőendréd, IN: Jerem, E.– Schönfelder, M.–Wiehland, G. (Hrsg.), Nord-süd, ost-west Kontakte während der Eisenzeit in Europa. Akten der Internationalen Tagungen der AG Eisenzeit in Hamburg und Sopron 2002, Archaeolingua, Budapest, 61–73. Guštin 1976 Guštin, M., Libna, Posavski Muzej Brežice, 3, Brežice, 1–137. Hegyi 2003 Hegyi, D., Görög vallástörténeti chrestomathia, Budapest. Hoernes 1891 Hoernes, M., Beiträge zur Erklärung der Situla von Kuffern, MittAGW, 21, 78–81. Holport 1985 Holport, Á., Ásatások Százhalombattán 1978–1982, Studia Comitatensia, 17, Régészeti tanulmányok Pest megyéből, 25–62. Ilon 1985 Ilon, G., A Szob–Gregersen-kerti szkíta kori temetőrészlet, Studia Comitatensia, 17, Régészeti tanulmányok Pest megyéből, 1–25. Ilon 2011 Ilon, G. (ed.), Late Urnfield period cemetery from Szombathely-Zanat supplemented by and assessment of prehistoric and medieval settlement features interdisciplinary analyses, KÖSZVIA kismonográfia sorozat, Budapest. Jacob 1995 Jacob, Ch., Metallgefäβ der Bronze- und Hallstattzeit in Nordwest-, West- und Süddeutschland, PBF, II/9, Stuttgart. Jacomet–Kreuz 1999 Jacomet, S.–Kreuz, A., Archäobotanik. Aufgaben, Methoden und Ergebnisse vegetations- und agrargeschichtlicher Forschung, Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart. Jerem 1981 Jerem, E., Zur späthallstatt- und Frühlaténezeit in Transdanubien, IN: Komission beim OÖ. Landesverlag. Land Oberösterreich (Hrsg.), Die Hallstattkultur, Bericht über das Symposium in Steyr aus Anlass der Internationlen Ausstellung des Landes Oberösterreichs, 1980, Linz, 105–131. Jerem 1984 Jerem, E., A Sopron–Krautackeren feltárt vaskori telep régészeti és környezetrekonstrukciós vizsgálata, I, ArchÉrt, 111, 2, 141–170. Károlyi 2004 Károlyi, M., Napszülöttek. Savaria földjének ősi kultúrái a rómaiak előtt, Szombathely. Kemenczei 1996 Kemenczei, T., Zur Deutung der endbronze- und früheisenzeitlichen Depotfunde Ungarns, RBPA, Band 2, Bonn, 451–480. Kilian 1975 Kilian, K., Fibeln in Thessalien von der mykenischen bis zur archaischen Zeit, PBF, XIV/2, München. Koepke 1998 Koepke, H., Siedlungs und Grabfunde der älteren Eisenzeit au Rheinhessen und dem Gebiet der unteren Nahe, Beiträge UFM, 19, Weissbach. Kossack 1959 Kossack, G., Südbayern während der Hallstattzeit, Berlin. Kossack 1992 Kossack, G., Lebensbilder, mytische Bilderzählung und Kultfestbilder Bemerkungen zu Bildszenen auf einer Thronelehne von Verucchio, IN: Lippert, A.–Spindler, K. (Hrsg.), Festschrift zum 50jährigen Bestehen des Institutes für Ur- und Frühgeschichte der LeopoldFranzens-Universität Innsbruck, UPA, 8, Bonn, 231–246. Kovács 1999 Kovács, T., A Bronze and Iron Age Hoard from Kiskőszeg (Battina, Yugoslavia), Savaria, 24/3, 23–31. Kubach 1994 Kubach, W., Archäologische Untersuchungen zum Übergang von der Bronze- zur Eisenzeit im südlichen und mittleren Hessen, RBPA, 1, Regensburg. The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 49 Lauermann 1997 Lauermann, E., Archäologische Forschungen Michelstetten, IN: Nebelsick, L.–Eibner, A.– Lauermann, E.–Neugebauer, J-W. (Hrsg.), Hallstattkultur im osten Österreich, WissSchrN, 106–109. Lázár 1955 Lázár, J., Hallstatt-kori tumulusok a Ság-hegy távolabbi környékéről, ArchÉrt, 82, 202–211. Lippert 1996 Lippert, A., Zum Beginn der Hallstattzeit im inneren Ostalpenraum: das Gräberfeld von Bischofshofen, IN: Jerem, E.–Lippert, A. (Hrsg.), Die Osthallstattkultur. Archaeolingua, 7, Budapest, 239–254. Lucke–Frey 1962 Lucke, W.–Frey, O.-H., Die Situla in Providence (Rhode Islands). Ein Beitrag zur Situlenkunst des Osthallstattkreises, RGF, 26, Berlin. Lücke 2007 Lücke, J., Das Lappenbeil im mittleren Alpenraum als Motiv in bildlichen und plastischen Darstellungen, IN: Bležić, M.–Črešnar, M.–Hänsel, B.–Hellmuth, A.–Kaiser, E. (Hrsg.), Scripta Praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan, Situla, 44, Ljubljana, 597–612. Mayer 1977 Mayer, E. F., Die Äxte und Beile in Österreich, PBF, IX/9, München. Metzner-Nebelsick Metzner-Nebelsick, C., Vom Hort zum Heros. Betrachtungen über das Nachlassen der 1997 Hortungstätigkeit am Beginn der Eisenzeit und die besondere Bedeutung des Königgrabes von Seddin, IN: Hänsel, A. (Hrsg.) Gaben an die Götter, Berlin, 93–99. Metzner-Nebelsick Metzner-Nebelsick, C., Pferdchenfibeln. Zur Deutung einer frauenspezifischen Schmuckform 2007 der Hallstatt- und Frühlaténezeit, IN: Bležić, M.–Črešnar, M.–Hänsel, B.–Hellmuth, A.–Kaiser, E. (Hrsg.), Scripta Praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan. Situla, 44, Ljubljana, 707–735. Miske 1908 Miske, K., Die prehistorische Ansiedlung Velem Szent Veit, Wien. Molnár–Farkas 2011 Molnár, A.–Farkas, Cs., Hallstatt-kori település Vát–Bodon tábla lelőhelyen. (Előzetes közlemény), Savaria, 34/1, 43–66. Mozsolics 1942 Mozsolics, A., A magyarkeresztesi bronzlelet, ArchÉrt, 1–2, 155–161. MRT 5. 1979 Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája 5, IN: Horváth, I.–Kelemen, H. M.–Torma, I. (szerk.), Komárom megye régészeti topográfiája. Esztergom és dorogi járás, Budapest. Müller-Karpe 1959 Müller-Karpe, H., Beiträge zur Chronologie der Urnenfelderzeit nördlich und südlich der Alpen, RGF, 22, Berlin, 1–334. Nebelsick 1992 Nebelsick, L. D., Figürliche Kunst der Hallstattzeit am Nordosalpenrand im Spannungsfeld zwischen alteuropäischer Tradition und italischen Lebensstil, IN: Lippert, A.–Spindler, K. (Hrsg.), Festschrift zum 50jährigen Bestehen des Institutes für Ur- und Frühgeschichte der Leopold-Franzens-Universität Innsbruck, UPA, 8, Bonn, 401–432. Nebelsick 1997 Nebelsick, L. D., Die Kalenderberggruppe der Hallstattzeit am Nordostalpenrand. Bestattungssitten, IN: Nebelsick, L.–Eibner, A.–Lauermann, E.–Neugebauer, J-W. (Hrsg.), Hallstattkultur im osten Österreich. Wissenschaftliche Schriftenreihe Niederösterreich, 106/107/108/109, 9–128. Negroni-Catacchio Negroni-Catacchio, N., Le vesti sontuose e gli ornamenti, IN: Bležić, M.–Črešnar, M.–Hänsel, 2007 B.–Hellmuth, A.–Kaiser, E. (Hrsg.), Scripta Praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan, Situla, 44, Ljubljana, 533–556. Németh 1996 Németh, T. G., Angaben zur hallstattzeitlichen Topographie des südlichen Teils der Kleinen Tiefebene, IN: Jerem, E.–Lippert, A. (Hrsg.), Die Osthallstattkultur, Archaeolingua, 7, Budapest, 365–378. Nekvasil 1974 Nekvasil, J., Die jüngere und späte Stufe des Hallstattabschnittes der Lausitzes Kultur in Mähren, IN: Chropovskỳ, B. (Hrsg.), Symposium zu Problemen der jüngeren Hallstattzeit in Mitteleuropa, Bratislava, 253–310. Neugebauer 1996 Neugebauer, J.-W., Urnenfelder-/Hallstattkultur in Franzhausen, IN: Jerem, E.–Lippert, A. (Hrsg.), Die Osthallstattkultur, Archaeolingua, Band 7, Budapest, 377–393. Neugebauer 1997 Neugebauer, J.-W., Die Nekropole von Wagram o. d. Traisen/Franzhausen, IN: Nebelsick, L.–Eibner, A.–Lauermann, E.–Neugebauer, J-W. (Hrsg.), Hallstattkultur im osten Österreich. Wissenschaftliche Schriftenreihe Niederösterreich, 106/107/108/109, 175–185. Pallottino 1980 Pallottino, M., Az etruszkok, Budapest, 1–293. Patay 1990 Patay, P., Bronzgefässe in Ungarn, PBF, II/10, München. Peroni 1975 Peroni, R., Studi sulle cronologica delle civilitá di Este e Golasecca, Firenze. Persaits 2010 Persaits, G., A fitolitok szerepe a geoarchaeológiai minták értékelésében, PhD thesis, SZTE TTIK Földtani és Őslénytani Tanszék, Szeged. Persaits–Sümegi 2011 Persaits, G.–Sümegi, P., A fitolitok szerepe a régészeti geológiai és környezettörténeti minták értékelésében, IN: Unger, J.–Pál-Molnár, E. (szerk.), Geoszférák 2010, GeoLitera Szeged, 307–354. 50 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik Pichlerová 1968 Šaldová 1974 Siepen 2005 Situlen 2009 Sümegi Et Al. 2011 Szilágyi 1992 Tarpini 2010 Tecco-Hvala 2007 Tecco-Hvala Et Al. 2004 Teržan 1984 Teržan 1995 Teržan 1997 Tomedi 1992 Tomedi 1996 Torbrügge 1992 TrencsényiWaldapfel 1983 Zürn 1942 Zylmann 2005 Pichlerová, M., Zur Typologie der hallstattzeitlichen Keramik aus Nové Košariská. SlovArch, 16/2, 435. Šaldová, V., Östliche Elemente in der Westböhmischen Hallstattzeitlichen Hügelgräberkultur, IN: Chropovskỳ, B. (Hrsg.), Symposium zu Problemen der jüngeren Hallstattzeit in Mitteleuropa. Bratislava, 447–468. Siepen, M., Der hallstattzeitliche Arm- und Beinschmuck, PBF, X/6, Stuttgart. Situlen. Bilderwelten zwischen Etrusken und Kelten auf antikem Weingeschirr. Begleitheft zur Ausstellung, IN: Kern, A.–Guichard, V.–Cordie, R.–David, W. (Hrsg.), Kelten Römer Museum Manching, 1–50. Sümegi, P.–Náfrádi, K.–Törőcsik, T., Environmental historical development on the study area, IN: Ilon, G. (ed.) Late Urnfield period cemetery from Szombathely-Zanat supplemented by and assessment of prehistoric and medieval settlement features interdisciplinary analyses, KÖSZ-VIA kismonográfia sorozat, Budapest, 285–354. Szilágyi, J. Gy., Transdanubien und Italien im 6–5. Jh, IN: Aigner-Foresti, L. (Hrsg.), Etrusker nördlich von Etruruien. Akten des Symposions von Wien-Schloss Neuwaldegg 2–5. Oktober 1989, Verlag der ÖAW, Wien, 219–234. Tarpini, R., Frühe Formen figuraler Kunst nördlich und südlich der Alpen, IN: Jerem, E.– Schönfelder, M.–Wiehland, G. (Hrsg.), Nord-süd, ost-west Kontakte während der Eisenzeit in Europa. Akten der Internationalen Tagungen der AG Eisenzeit in Hamburg und Sopron 2002, Archaeolingua, Budapest, 321–331. Tecco-Hvala, S., Women from Magdalenska gora, IN: Bležić, M.–Črešnar, M.–Hänsel, B.– Hellmuth, A.–Kaiser, E. (Hrsg.), Scripta Praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan, Situla, 44, Ljubljana, 477–490. Tecco-Hvala, S.–Dular, J.–Kocuvan, E., Eisenzeitliche Grabhügel auf der Magdalenska gora, Katalogie in monografije, 36, Ljubljana. Teržan, B., Most na Soči (S. Lucia), Katalogi in monografije, 23/2, Ljubljana. Teržan, B., Handel und soziale Oberschichten im früheisenzeitlichen Südosteuropa, IN: Hänsel, B. (Hrsg.), Handel, Tausch und Verkehr im bronze- und früheisenzeitlichen Südosteuropa. Soe. Schr., 17, PAS, 11, München–Berlin, 81–160. Teržan, B., Heros der Hallstattzeit. Beobachtungen zum Status an Gräbern um das Caput Adriae, IN: Becker, C.–Dunkelmann, M.-L.–Metzner-Nebelsick, C.–Peter-Röcher, H.– Roeder, M.–Teržan, B. (Hrsg.), Chronos. Beiträge zur prähistorischen Archäologie zwischen Nord- und Südosteuropa. Festschrift für Bernhard Hänsel. Internationale Archäologie Studia Honoraria, 1, Espelkamp, 653–669. Tomedi, G., Zur Chronologie der älteren Hallstattzeit im inneren Ostalpenraum, IN: Lippert, A.–Spindler, K. (Hrsg.), Festschrift zum 50jährigen Besteahen des Institutes für Ur- und Frühgeschichte der Leopold-Franzens-Universität Innsbruck, UPA, 8, 605–614. Tomedi, G., Frög im chronologischen Netzwerk des Südostalpenraumes, IN: Jerem, E.– Lippert, A. (Hrsg.), Die Osthallstattkultur, Archaeolingua, 7, Budapest, 537–548. Torbrügge, W., Die frühe Hallstattzeit (HaC) in chronologischen Ansichten und notwendige Randbemerkungen, Jahrbuch RGZM, 39, 425–615. Trencsényi-Waldapfel, I., Mitológia, Budapest. Zürn, H., Chronologie der späten Hallstattzeit, Germania, 26, Berlin. Zylmann, D., Ein Depotfund der älteren Hallstattzeit aus Worms-Neuhausen, MAZ, 5–6, (1998–99), 1–33. List of plates Pl. 1. 1. The archaeological excavation site on military survey no. 2 (1806–1869); 2. The archaeological excavation site (by Gy. Isztin). Pl. 2. The discovery of the hoard and the series of the ritual features. Pl. 3. 1. Italian house urns; 2. The so-called altar of Vát (after Molnár–Farkas 2011); 3. The discovered (funerary) structures. Pl. 4. X-ray record of the hoard. Pl. 5. Selected artifacts of the hoard. The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 51 Pl. 6. 1. Phytolith diagram of the studied samples; 2. A typical phytolith morphotype; 3. The similarity of the samples based on cluster analysis; 4. Different phytolith types found in the samples (1. Elongate long cell skeleta, 2. Elongate psilate long cell, 3. Elongate papillate long cell, 4. Elongate echinate long cell, 5. Elongate granulate long cell, 6. Unciform hair cell, 7. Cuneiform bulliform short cell, 8. Bilobate short cell, 9. Rondel short cell, 10. Rectangle psilate short cell, 11. Lanceolate psilate long cell, 12. Sponge spicule). Pl. 7. 1. The probable date of burying the hoard based on pollen analysis; 2. Iron precipitation, magnified 2000 times; 3. The result of the SEM-EDAX analysis of the iron precipitation. Pl. 8. Filter funnel (Siebtrichter). 1. Hallstatt (after Egg Et Al. 2006; Egg–Schönfelder 2009); 2. Ikervár; 3. Mint and dog-grass; 4. Persephone and Hades. Pl. 9. Ritual drinking scenes portrayed on situlae. 1. Este-Benevenuti; 2. Vače; 3. Welcelach; 4. Magdalenska Gora (after Lücke 2007; Eibner 2007). Pl. 10. Ritual drinking and other scenes as portrayed on situlae (after Lücke 2007; drawing: M. Nagy). Pl. 11. 1. The depiction of how Navicella-type fibulae were worn (after Negroni Catacchio 2007); 2. Ikervár; 3. Vaskeresztes/Magyarkeresztes; 4. Ikervár; 5. Horse fibulae (after Metzner-Nebelsick 2007); 6. Textile remains (drawing: F. Kapiller). Pl. 12. Pottery finds found in the pit of the hoard, complex no. 50 (drawing: F. Kapiller). Pl. 13. Pottery finds found in the pit of the hoard, complex no. 50, and a fitting sherd from the adjacent pit, complex no. 51 (drawing: F. Kapiller). 52 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik Plate 1. 1. The archaeological excavation site on military survey no. 2 (1806–1869); 2. The archaeological excavation site (by Gy. Isztin). Plate . . e ar aeolo i al e a ation site on military sur ey no. – . e ar aeolo i al e a ation site y y. s tin . The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 53 dar ar onised layer la oloured ar onised layer ray ompa t layer ado e one in situ site of oard Plate 2. The discovery of the hoard and the series of the ritual features. Plate . e dis o ery of t e oard and t e series of t e ritual features. 54 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik Plate 3. 1. Italian house urns; 2. The so-called altar of Vát (after Molnár–Farkas 2011); 3. The discovered (funerary) structures. after Plate . . talian ouse urns . e so alled altar of t – K . e dis o ered funerary stru tures. The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 55 Plate 4. X-ray record of the hoard. Plate . ray re ord of t e oard. 56 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik 5 Plate 5. Selected artifacts of the hoard. Plate 5. ele ted artifa ts of t e oard. The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 57 Plate 6. 1. Phytolith diagram of the studied samples; 2. A typical phytolith morphotype; 3. The similarity of the samples based on cluster analysis; 4. Different phytolith types found in the samples (see: List of plates). Plate . . P ytolit dia ram of t e studied samples . typi al p ytolit morp otype . e similarity of t e samples ased on luster analysis . ifferent p ytolit types found in t e samples see ist of plates . 58 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik Plate 7. 1. The probable date of burying the hoard based on pollen analysis; 2. Iron precipitation, magnified 2000 times; 3. The result of the SEM-EDAX analysis of the iron precipitation. Plate . . e pro a le date of uryin t e oard ased on pollen analysis . ron pre ipitation ma nified times . e result of t e analysis of t e iron pre ipitation. The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 59 Plate 8. Filter funnel (Siebtrichter). 1. Hallstatt (after Egg Et Al. 2006; Egg–Schönfelder 2009); 2. Ikervár; 3. Mint and dog-grass; 4. Persephone and Hades. Plate . ilter funnel . ie ric er . . allstatt after er r . int and do rass – . Persep one and ades. 60 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik Plate 9. Ritual drinking scenes portrayed on situlae. 1. Este-Benevenuti; 2. Vače; 3. Welcelach; 4. Magdalenska Gora (after Lücke 2007; Eibner 2007). . ste ene enuti Plate . itual drin in s enes portrayed on situlae. . a e . el ela . a dalens a ora after K . The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 61 Plate 10. Ritual drinking and other scenes as portrayed on situlae (after Lücke 2007; drawing: M. Nagy). Plate . itual drin in and ot er s enes as portrayed on situlae after K dra in . a y. 62 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik 5 Plate 11. 1. The depiction of how Navicella-type fibulae were worn (after Negroni Catacchio 2007); 2. Ikervár; 3. Vaskeresztes/Magyarkeresztes; 4. Ikervár; 5. Horse fibulae (after Metzner-Nebelsick 2007); 6. Textile remains (drawing: F. Kapiller). Plate . . e depi tion of o a i ella type fi ulae ere orn after . er r . as eres tes a yar eres tes . er r 5. orse fi ulae after K . e tile remains dra in . Kapiller . The Iron Age Hoard Found at Ikervár | 63 5 Plate 12. Pottery finds found in the pit of the hoard, complex no. 50 (drawing: F. Kapiller). Plate . Pottery finds found in t e pit of t e oard omple no. 5 dra in . Kapiller . 64 | M. Nagy–P. Sümegi–G. Persaits–S. Gulyás–T. Törőcsik complex no. 50 complex no. 51 5 Plate 13. Pottery finds found in the pit of the hoard, complex no. 50, and a fitting sherd from the adjacent pit, complex no. 51 (drawing: F. Kapiller). Plate . Pottery finds found in t e pit of t e oard omple no. 5 and a fittin s erd from t e ad a ent pit omple no. 5 dra in . Kapiller . The Application of Remote Sensing Technology and Geophysical Methods in the Topographic Survey of Early Iron Age Burial Tumuli in Transdanubia Zoltán CZAJLIK*–Géza KIRÁLY**–Attila CZÖVEK***– Sándor PUSZTA****–Balázs HOLL*****–Gábor BROLLY** *Eötvös Loránd University, Institute of Archaeological Sciences Budapest, Hungary czajlik.zoltan@btk.elte.hu **University of West Hungary, Department of Surveying and Remote Sensing Sopron, Hungary kiraly.geza@emk.nyme.hu gbrolly@emk.nyme.hu ***Wosinsky Mór Museum Szekszárd, Hungary czoveka@freemail.hu ****Fractal Bt fractal@fractal.hu *****Hungarian National Museum, Centre for National Cultural Heritage Budapest, Hungary balazs.holl@hnm.hu Keywords: archaeological topography, aerial archaeology, geophysical mapping, Airborne Laser Scanning, Early Iron Age, burial tumuli Methods of topographic survey have already been used in the research of Early Iron Age burial tumuli cemeteries before. FlÓris Rómer was the first to initiate and supervise such a survey (e.g.: Nagyberki–Szalacska, A. Hencz’s map, Rómer 1878, 116, fig. 32), and some of the results (Zalaszántó– Várrét, A. Hencz’s map, Rómer 1878, 106) were in use up until recently. Bálint Kuzsinszky described in detail the excavations of the Early Iron Age mounds in Tihany (he himself excavated one of them in 1905). He published maps of them, and even field photographs of the ones that appeared to be intact at the time (Kuzsinszky 1920, fig. 164–168; 204; 207). Sándor Neogrády was the first to apply aerial photography in Hungary. His photographs of the burial tumuli in Nagyberki–Szalacska taken in July 1929 are of pioneering importance (Neogrády 1950, 287, fig. 7). Since the 1960s, the survey of several burial tumuli cemeteries has been conducted, as part of the research by MRT (Hungarian Archaeological Topography; among them the Iron Age ones are: Vaszar– Pörösrét, a survey by Dénes Virágh, MRT 4 1972, 256, fig. 53; Süttő–Sáncföldek, a survey by Virágh, MRT 5 1979, 317, fig. 55). The maps of a few important burial tumulus cemeteries, though situated far Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 65–76 66 | Z. Czajlik–G. Király–A. Czövek–S. Puszta–B. Holl–G. Brolly way from where the topographic survey was carried out, have become well-known (Sopron–Várhely, Szádecky-Kardoss 1982; Ferenc Derdák’s map about Vaskeresztes–Diófás-dűlő, Fekete 1985, Abb. 1; Pécs–Jakabhegy, unknown cartographer, Maráz 1978, Abb. 2). To conduct the survey both in the 19th century and more recently, traditional field measuring instruments were used (tape measure, compass, theodolite). The first archive aerial photograph was used in the survey of the burial tumulus cemetery in Érd-Százhalombatta (Torma and Virágh’s map, MRT 7, 228–231, fig. 26, pl. 57). Winkler (2006) collected topographic data of the Early Iron Age mounds on Kisalföld (Little Hungarian Plain) mainly with the help of archive and tilted aerial photographs, while Czajlik (2008) published his experience in the aerial photography of burial tumuli. The high precision GPS positioning of the Zalaszántó–Tátika burial tumulus cemetery conducted by Havasi and Busznyák was an important step forward (Havasi–Busznyák 2008). Modern Research in Europe The map of the Early Iron Age burial tumulus cemetery, which was identified near Geiselhöring (Bavaria) in September 1979 (Christlein 1982), was drawn using oblique aerial photographs taken for archaeological purposes. This site has been a perfect example for the importance of photography repeated in different circumstances. Before 1986, more than 300 pictures were taken, among them infrared ones, and the map of the cemetery – 100 burial tumuli, which, as a result of agricultural activity, is about to disappear – was drawn by fitting together 14 of the aerial photographs and using an ortophotograph (Becker–Böhm 1996). The infrared technology expands also the possibilities, even using oblique photography (Braasch 2009, Abb. 6–8). The detailed map of the Early Iron Age (?) burial tumulus cemetery near Künzing (Bavaria), which was discovered under a thin layer of snow in December 1985 using aerial photography, is a more recent achievement mainly of magnetometric survey. Beside the negative anomalies of the stone circles of the graves, the discolorations of the burial chambers can be recognized in certain cases (Fassbinder–Becker 1996). The gradiometer geophysical survey of the area surrounding the early La Tène Kleinaspergle site, which has been researched since 1878, shows the mounds in detail (Bofinger 2007, 37). The Iron Age burials discovered in Champagne, in the Marne Region and in Burgundy represent an important stage in the successes of aerial photography for archaeological purposes in France (summary: Lambot 1999, 319–320). Photography was followed by important excavations in several cases (e.g.: Semide, Lambot–Verger 1995). An international program was launched in 2000 in the Vix region, which aimed to research not only the fortified settlement and the burial tumuli of the site, but also the surrounding area, with the help of different prospecting techniques (Osten-Woldenburg Et Al. 2009, recent summary: Chaume–Mordant 2011). There are more and more survey data to suggest that Airborne Laser Scanning (ALS), also known as Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) technology has revolutionized the remote sensing survey of woodlands (Doneus–Briese 2011). However, since the technology has only been used for archaeological purposes for a little more than ten years, and the full-waveform instruments, which are capable of measuring underground landforms more accurately, have only been available for 5–6 years, we have had little opportunity to apply source criticism to new results, while in traditional field survey it can be applied during the actual survey mostly. We have also had little opportunity to check new results and prepare their detailed evaluations, since these would be extremely laborious and requires a lot of effort in case of extensive survey (e.g.: Leithagebirge), because in these cases we need to select the archaeologically relevant data from a comparatively large number of suspicious ones. The surveys in Austria resulted in the discovery of new burial tumuli near Purbach (Doneus Et Al. 2008a) and near Mannersdorf–Schlossberg (Doneus Et Al. 2008b). On some woodland in Baden-Württemberg near Hochmichele, the map of an Iron Age burial field consisting of one larger and several smaller burial tumuli has been drawn, using ALS technology (Bofinger 2007, 14). Later, analyses based on ALS have also been used successfully near Schönbuch. On the woodland, several formations resembling mound graves were discovered. However, they may be of natural origin or the remains of spoil heaps, and they usually require a visit to the site. The mound, which was discovered using Local Relief Model (LRM), after the authentication excavations proved to date back to the Iron Age (Bofinger–Hesse 2011, 167–168). On the basis of the Hungarian and foreign examples listed above, we can assert that aerial photography for archaeological purposes has been suitable for topographic research of mound burials for over 80 years, geophysical technology has been suitable for the same for at least 20 years, and ALS has become The Application of Remote Sensing Technology and Geophysical Methods | 67 adequate for it in the last 5–6 years. Aerial photography for archaeological purposes was not available in Hungary before the political transition for political reasons, and in the lack of the necessary institutions, geophysical surveys for archaeological purposes were also mainly a means to help preliminary excavations. Experience of the last twenty years has resulted in significant achievements in the application of all three methods. We are going to elaborate on them now. Nagyberki–Szalacska (Pl. 1/1) As we briefly mentioned before, the first survey of the Early Iron Age mound burial field was conducted in the 19th century. It is one of a few exceptional archaeological sites because there are archive aerial photographs, taken by Neogrády in 1929. Six tumuli were excavated by Sándor Gallus in 1943. The data of the early excavations were published by Kabay (1960); however, several topographic data concerning the area around the site were published in the site survey record for Somogy County (Kocztur 1964, 97–101). In the early 1970s the site was excavated by Kemenczei (1976), who dated the burials that he had unearthed back to the HaC period. Regular aerial photography of the site started in the 2000s; the largest body of information was gathered from the aerial survey in 2005 and 2006, enabling the identification of some 78 mounds shown on Hencz’s map (Czajlik 2008, 97–98). When processing the information in the oblique photographs, we used different archive aerial taken after World War II. In these pictures some of the woodlands today are depicted as cultivated fields. As a result, we have gathered information about parts of the burial tumulus cemetery where it is impossible to apply aerial photography for archaeological survey and thus the number of mounds identified in the aerial photographs has grown to 160. The most important goal of our future research is to check and confirm our old and recent data on field reconnaissance and to conduct a detailed survey of the whole site using geodetic GPS (Pl. 2). Báta–Öreghegy (Pl. 3) On the satellite images, the outlines of the destroyed mound burials on the Báta–Öreghegy plateau were identified by Attila Czövek (Pl. 3/1–2). We conducted a metal detector survey to examine one of the nine outlines in 2009, then we applied magnetometric analysis to decide whether there used to be a mound grave on the site. The metal detector survey did not produce useful archaeological results; however, by removing all modern metals that disturbed our magnetometric survey, it proved to be very helpful in producing good-quality geophysical data. We used two type GSM-19FG Overhauser magnetometers manufactured by GEM-Systems Advanced Magnetometers. We applied horizontal variometer measuring arrangement. The base magnetometer was set up on magnetically clear area and it monitored changes in the magnetic field every half a second. The probe of the moving magnetometer was held at 0.3 meter above the surface. To minimize the disturbance of the magnetic field, we moved the probe, the electronic part of the magnetometer and the TRIMBLE type GPS unit in a fixed pattern, along the measuring lines. The lines were mostly straight; however, curved lines were not excluded, either. We also used a base GPS unit. The base data were used in post processing. The distance between the measuring lines was planned to be 1 meter, the distance between the measured points along the lines was 0.45 meter. The extension of the investigated field was 70 by 70 meters (Pl. 3/3). The data processing steps were: noise reduction, base correction, dynamic compression, interpolation to the grid, computing two dimensional Fourier spectra, filtering in spectral domain, reduction to pole, downward continuation (Kis–Puszta 2006). As a result of data processing, the indistinct outlines in the aerial photograph became easy to observe and brought us to the conclusion that there might have been a circular ditch on the site, 26 meters in diameter (Pl. 3/4). Without discussing the details of the problems concerning the different interpretations (Czajlik 2008, 103–105), this formation clearly resembles a ditch surrounding a destroyed mound. However, the facts that it is impossible to identify the presumed grave chamber in the magnetic map and that the area produced no archaeological finds do pose certain problems. On Báta–Öreghegy, on the area surrounding the site, we can suspect a hilltop settlement of the Urnfield culture and a presumably Roman watchtower, while on Öreghegy and its continuation, extending over a considerable part of the plateau and thus covering the site of the presumed mound burials as well, we can suspect a late La Tène oppidum (Czajlik 2010, 91). At the same time, in J. Sümegi’s collection in Bátaszék, there is an Early Iron Age piece of pottery, which he found on Báta–Öreghegy, on the site of the presumed burial tumuli. In conclusion, we can assume that there might have been an Early Iron Age settlement and a mound burial field consisting of only a few mounds on the site. 68 | Z. Czajlik–G. Király–A. Czövek–S. Puszta–B. Holl–G. Brolly Sopron–Várhely (Pl. 1/2; 4; 5) The research of the burial tumulus cemetery in Sopron–Várhely was started by Lajos Bella at the end of the 19th century (Bella 1891). The first map of the mounds was drawn for Bella by a secondary school teacher called Béla Skoff (Szádecky-Kardoss 1982, 117). There are 148 numbered mounds depicted on it, while Gy. Szádeczky-Kardoss was able to mark 159 mounds (Szádecky-Kardoss 1982, 174–176). His survey results were borrowed by foreign researchers as well (e.g.: Teržan 1990, 170), and Zsolt Vasáros also used them when preparing his surface model in the 2000s (Jerem 2010, 75). Several topographic surveys have been conducted on the site and it was the first site in Hungary where ALS technology was used for archaeological purposes on 28th November 2007. The survey was carried out by the company Geoservice (affiliated firm of the Austrian company Bewag) for promotional purposes and they gathered data about the town centre of Sopron, the area around GYSEV railway station, a transmission line, the main street in Ágfalva as well as the area surrounding the Várhely Lookout Tower in the Sopron mountains. The latter area is 380–490 meters above sea level, covered almost entirely by forests, mainly middle-aged and old sessile oak forests, however, fir trees and spruces can also be found here in large numbers (Pl. 1/2). The Várhely area is approximately 75 ha large, which has been surveyed by five, more or less SouthNorth 1250 m long strips. The spacing was ~80 m between the strips. It took 7.5 minutes to survey the area by the EC-135 helicopter travelling at 70 km/h at 270 m above the ground. The sensor was a Riegl LMS-Q560 scanner, operated at 45° view angle, 220 m swath width, with 63% overlap. The average was 38 impulses/m2 resulted approx. 85 points/m2, from which 27 points were reflected from the ground. Aerial imageries were collected meanwhile with a RolleiMetric AIC modular camera, with approx. 4.5–5 cm GSD (ground sampling distance) Together with the very low-flight and extremely high-density ALS data, aerial photographs were also taken with a field pixel size of approximately 5 cm (Pl. 1/2). A Digital Elevation Model (DEM) was created by the surveying company itself. They applied the progressive densification of the Triangulated Irregular Network (TIN) method, implemented in TerraScan software. We produced the DEM by the active surface method implemented in TreesVis software (Weinacker Et Al. 2004); its part is shown on Pl. 5/1. The adequately visualised DEM, especially the right colour-ramps and shadings, is outstanding for the visual interpretation. The exact position and sizes of the mound can easily be identified based on it. The automatic detection of the mounds has been tested. The hydrologic modelling of the negated DEM was applied here, but the results in their current phases are very much limited, further investigation is needed (see also Király Et Al. 2012). Comparing the new survey results with Szádeczky-Kardoss’s map, we can say that we were able to identify almost each of the 160 mound burials which he had discovered, however, in one or two cases the identification was quite vague. From a geometric point of view, we were forced to alter the position of a quarter of the mound burials, but the difference was never more than 15 meters. We can suppose the existence of new mounds (one or two?) only in the N-W part of the site. Field reconnaissance also proved our assumption. Although in his survey of the burial tumulus cemetery Szádeczky-Kardoss used ordinary instruments and methods (compass and steps), his map shows a surprising correspondence with results of the modern survey (Pl. 5/2–3). We had the possibility to draw a similarly detailed comparison in case of the earlier mentioned Early Iron Age site near Purbach, since there we also had a good-quality survey conducted earlier (Doneus– Briese 2011, 71, fig. 5/14). From a geometric point of view, the two surveys in Purbach draw similar conclusions; however, the lower mounds were not identified by the earlier survey there. From a topographic point of view, the most significant achievements of the Sopron–Várhely ALS survey are represented by the irregular lines, which, in our interpretation, were roads leading across the mound burial field towards the fortified settlement (Pl. 5/4). We can mention the hollow ways from the Mannersdorf area as their parallel both in space and time. Their appearance can be compared to the linear structures identified in Sopron–Várhely (Doneus–Briese 2011, fig. 5/8). ✴✴✴ The application of remote sensing technology, the possible combination of the different methods is always determined by the topographic conditions and the vegetation of the given area. The most successful of all the methods are usually aerial archaeological photography and archive aerial photographs as well as maps, especially when identifying and recording traces of mounds that can only hardly be observed on the site or cannot be observed at all. Both Báta–Öreghegy and Nagyberki–Szalacska are good examples to show that the quality of the traces of burial tumuli can range from unidentified through hardly observed The Application of Remote Sensing Technology and Geophysical Methods | 69 to well determined ones. On one hand, it means that it is usually difficult to determine the exact number of the mound graves of a burial field which has been devoted to destruction. On the other hand, it represents a warning that there are mounds whose existence cannot be determined with absolute certainty. The application of geophysical technology should always be preceded by the thorough study of all satellite images and by aerial photography because they might prove to be useful in identifying structures that are not distinct in the photographs. They might also be helpful in identifying important details, which means that ‘the probability’ of a mound burial is determined more easily. On woodlands, the application of all three methods (satellite images, aerial photography and geophysics) is limited to a certain extent, however, the fact that in such areas the differences in the features of the terrain are better preserved on archaeological sites makes it essential that we improve surface models. The 1 point/m2 resolution DTM which is necessary for archaeological purposes can be produced on field reconnaissance as well (e.g.: Franz Schubert and his students’ detailed survey of the Mont Beuvray oppidum, which took several years to prepare), though it requires disproportionately too much effort. It is rather easy to understand why ALS technology has become accepted in archaeological topographic survey in a little over than a decade, despite the fact that full-waveform (FWF) technology, which is capable of producing the best results, has only been available for 5–6 years. We need to mention, though, that we have had little opportunity to apply source criticism to new results or to check and confirm them (which is given in field survey) or to prepare their archaeological evaluation. In case of extensive survey (e.g.: Leithagebirge, Doneus–Briese 2011, fig. 5/11), just like in case of all other methods, it takes a very long period of time to apply source criticism and to prepare the evaluation since in these cases we need to select the archaeologically relevant data from a comparatively large number of suspicious ones. Despite these difficulties, we cannot avoid applying modern technology in the topographic survey of burial tumulus cemeteries. Not only because they are effective and can identify traces of mound burials that are impossible to find in other ways, but also because in spite of the problems we mentioned above, they give us a chance to determine real topographic conditions that probably existed in the past and this must serve as the basis of all further archaeological survey. References Becker–Böhm 1996 Bella 1891 Bofinger 2007 Bofinger–Hesse 2011 Braasch 2009 Chaume–Mordant 2011 Christlein 1982 Czajlik 2008 Czajlik 2010 Becker, H.–Böhm, K., Grabhügelfeld der Hallstattzeit im Laabertal bei Geiselhöring, IN: Becker, H. (zgst.), Archäologische Prospektion. Luftbildarchäologie und Geophysik. Arbeitshefte des Bayerischen Landesamtes für Denkmalpflege, Band 29, 165–168. Bella, L., A Sopron melletti Purgstall földvára és urnatemetője, ArchÉrt, 24, 313–320. Bofinger, J., Flugzeug, Laser, Sonde, Spaten. Fernerkundung und archäologische Feldforschung am Beispiel der frühkeltischen Fürstensitze, Esslingen. Bofinger, J.–Hesse, R., As far as the laser can reach… Laminar analysis of LIDAR detected structures as a powerful instrument for archaeological heritage management in Baden-Württemberg, Germany, IN: Cowley, D. (ed.), Remote sensing for Archaeological Heritage Management. Proceedings of the 11th EAC Heritage Management Symposium, Reykjavík, Iceland, 25–27th March 2010, Brussel, 161–171. Braasch, O., Asterix und Infrarot – farbige Flugspuren, IN: Bofinger, J.–Krausse, D. (Hrsg.), Aktuelle Forschungen zu den Kelten in Europa. Festkolloquium für Landeskonservator Jörg Biel am 1. August 2008 in Altheim, Kr. Biberach, Archäologische Informationen aus Baden-Württemberg, 59, 17–44. Chaume, B.–Mordant, C. (dir.), Le complexe aristocratique de Vix. Nouvelles recherches sur l’habitat, le système de fortification et l’environnement du Mont Lassois, Dijon. Christlein, R., Grabhügelfeld der Hallstattzeit bei Geiselhöring. IN: Christlein, R.–Braasch, O., Das unterirdische Bayern. 7000 Jahre Geschichte und Archäologie im Luftbild, Stuttgart, 234–235. Czajlik, Z., Aerial archaeology in the research of burial tumuli in Hungary, ComArchHung, 95–107. Czajlik, Z., Les possibilités de la prospection aérienne conventionnelle en Hongrie, IN: Borhy, L. (éd.), Studia Celtica Classica et Romana Nicolae Szabó septuagesimo dedicata, Budapest, 80–96. 70 | Z. Czajlik–G. Király–A. Czövek–S. Puszta–B. Holl–G. Brolly Doneus–Briese 2011 Doneus, M.–Briese, Ch., Airborne Laser Scanning in forested areas – potential and limitations of an archaeological prospection technique, IN: Cowley, D. (ed.), Remote sensing for Archaeological Heritage Management. Proceedings of the 11th EAC Heritage Management Symposium, Reykjavík, Iceland, 25–27th March 2010, Brussel, 59–76. Doneus Et Al. 2008a Doneus, M.–Briese, C.–Fera, M.–Janner, M., Archaeological prospection of forested areas using full-waveform airborne laser scanning, JAS, 35, 882–893. Doneus Et Al. 2008b Doneus, M.–Briese, C.–Kühlreiber, T., Flugzeuggetragenes Laserscanning als Werkzeug der archäologischen Kulturlandschaftsforschung. Das Fallbeispiel ’Wüste’ bei Mannersdorf am Leithagebirge, Niederösterreich, ArchKorr, 38, 1, 137–156. Fassbinder–Becker 1996 Fassbinder, J.–Becker, H., Das urnenfelder/hallstattzeitliche Gräberfeld von Künzing, IN: Becker, H. (zgst.), Archäologische Prospektion. Luftbildarchäologie und Geophysik. Arbeitshefte des Bayerischen Landesamtes für Denkmalpflege, Band 29, 139–141. Fekete 1985 Fekete, M., Rettungsgrabung früheisenzeitlicher Hügelgräber in Vaskeresztes, Vorbericht, ActaArchHung, 37, 33–78. Havasi–Busznyák 2008 Havasi, B.–Busznyák, J., A zalaszántói őskori tumulusok felmérésének legújabb eredményei, Zalai Múzeum, 17, 93–103. Jerem 2010 Jerem, E., Sopron–Várhely (Burgstall), IN: Jerem, E.–Mester, Zs. (eds.), Prehistoric monuments and collections in Hungary, Budapest, 73–76. Kabay 1960 M. Kabay, É., A szalacskai koravaskori tumulusok anyaga a Magyar Nemzeti Múzeumban, FolArch, 12, 45–59. Kemenczei 1976 Kemenczei, T., Früheisenzeitliche Keramikfunde von Nagyberki, FolArch, 27, 203–208. Király Et Al. 2012 Király, G.–Brolly, G.–Házas, G.–Trimmel, W., Légi lézeres letapogatással felmért halomsírmező a Várhely környékén, Soproni Szemle, 66, 76–81. Kis–Puszta 2006 I. Kis, K.–Puszta, S., Application of magnetic field derivatives for locating Sarmatian graves, Journal of Applied Geophysics, 60, 13–26. Kocztur 1964 Kocztur, É., Somogymegye régészeti leletkatasztere, RégFüz, Ser. II. 13. Kuzsinszky 1920 Kuzsinszky, B., A Balaton környékének archaeológiája. Lelőhelyek és leletek, Budapest. Lambot 1999 Lambot, B., Survols de structures funéraires et religieuses de l’Âge du Bronze aux sanctuaires gallo-romains en Champagne (France). IN: Bréart, B. (dir.), Archéologie aérienne. Actes du colloque international tenu a à Amiens (France) du 15 au 18 octobre 1992. Revue archéologique de Picardie N° spécial 17. Lambot–Verger 1995 Lambot, B.–Verger, S. (avec la collaboration de Méniel, P.), Une tombe à char de La Tène ancienne à Semide (Ardennes), Société Archéologique Champenoise, Reims, Mémoire n° 10, supplément au bulletin 1995 n° 1. Maráz 1978 Maráz, B., Zur Frühhallstattzeit in Süd-Pannonien, JPMÉ, 23, 145–164. MRT 4 1972 Dax, M.–Éri, I.–Mithay, S.–Palágyi, Sz.–Torma, I., Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája 4, Veszprém megye régészeti topográfiája. A Pápai és Zirci járás, Budapest. MRT 5 1979 Horváth, I.–H. Kelemen, M.–Torma, I., Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája 5. Komárom megye régészeti topográfiája. Esztergom és a Dorogi járás, Budapest. MRT 7 1986 Dinnyés, I.–Kővári, K.–Lovag, Zs.–Tettamanti, S.–Topál, J.–Torma, I., Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája 7. Pest megye régészeti topográfiája. A Budai és Szentendrei járás, Budapest. Neogrády 1950 Neogrády, S., A légifénykép és az archeológiai kutatások, Térképészeti Közlöny, 7, 1948–1950, 283–332. Osten-Woldenburg Et Osten-Woldenburg, H.–Chaume, B.–Reinhard, W., Verräterisches Magnetfeld. Die Al. 2009 Geophysik als archäologische Untersuchungsmethode am Beispiel des Mont Lassois, IN: Krausse, D. L. (Hrsg.), Die Kelten. Auf den Spuren der Keltenfürsten, Stuttgart, 73–74. Szádecky-Kardoss 1982 Szádecky-Kardoss, Gy., Vermessung und Kartierung, IN: Patek, E., Neue Untersuchungen auf dem Burgstall bei Sopron, 117–119, 174–176, BRGK, 63, 105–177. Rómer 1878 Rómer, F., Résultats généraux du Mouvement Archéologique en Hongrie, Budapest. Teržan 1990 Teržan, B., Starejša železna doba na Slovenskem Štajerskem – The Early Iron Age in Slovenian Styria, Ljubljana. Weinacker Et Al. 2004 Weinacker, H.–Koch, B.–Heyder, U.–Weinacker, R., Development of filtering, segmentation and modelling modules for LIDAR and multispectral data as a Fundament of an automatic forest inventory system, IASPRS, 36, 8, 50–56. Winkler 2006 Winkler, M., A Kisalföld kora vaskori halomsíros temetkezéseinek vizsgálata légifényképek és topográfiai adatok alapján, Szakdolgozat, ELTE Régészettudományi Intézet, Budapest. The Application of Remote Sensing Technology and Geophysical Methods | 71 List of plates Pl. 1. 1. Nagyberki–Szalacska. Oblique aerial photo of some eroded tumulus burials (Z. Czajlik, June 19, 2005); 2. Sopron–Várhely. Detail. Orthogonal aerial photo of the site, November 28, 2007 (Geoservice). Pl. 2. Nagyberki–Szalacska. Map of the Early Iron Age burial tumulus cemetery using archive and oblique aerial photographs. (Red circles: burial tumuli, black circles: outlines of burial tumuli(?); B. Holl, A. Jáky, 2008–2012). Pl. 3. Báta–Öreghegy. 1–2. Outlines of burial tumuli (?) on Google Earth images; 3–4. Magnetometric survey (B. Holl, S. Puszta, 2009). Pl. 4. The Digital Elevation Model of the burial tumulus cemetery at Sopron–Várhely, using Airborne Laser Scanning (G. Király, 2011). Pl. 5. Sopron–Várhely, details using the ALS-measurement. 1. Shaded Digital Elevation Model; 2. The mounds according to the DEM and Szádecky-Kardoss’s map; 3. Dimensions of the mound no. 191; 4. 3D view of the site (detail). 72 | Z. Czajlik–G. Király–A. Czövek–S. Puszta–B. Holl–G. Brolly Plate 1. 1. Nagyberki–Szalacska. Oblique aerial photo of some eroded tumulus burials. (Z. Czajlik, June 19, 2005); 2. Sopron–Várhely. Detail. Orthogonal aerial photo of the site, November 28, 2007 (Geoservice). Plate . . a y er i– a ac a. li ue aerial p oto of some eroded tumulus urials. . opron– r e . etail. rt o onal aerial p oto of t e site o em er . a li une eoser i e . 5 The Application of Remote Sensing Technology and Geophysical Methods | 73 Plate 2. Nagyberki–Szalacska. Map of the Early Iron Age burial tumulus cemetery using archive and oblique aerial photographs. (Red circles: burial tumuli, black circle: outlines of burial tumuli(?); B. Holl, A. Jáky, 2008–2012). Plate . a y er i– a ac a. ap of t e arly ron e urial tumulus emetery usin ar i e and o li ue aerial p oto rap s. ed ir les urial tumuli la ir les outlines of urial tumuli . oll . y – . 74 | Z. Czajlik–G. Király–A. Czövek–S. Puszta–B. Holl–G. Brolly Plate 3. Báta–Öreghegy. 1–2. Outlines of burial tumuli (?) on Google Earth images; 3–4. Magnetometric survey (B. Holl, S. Puszta, 2009). Plate . ta– re e plateau – . utlines of urial tumuli on oo le art ima es. – . a netometri sur ey . oll . Pus ta . The Application of Remote Sensing Technology and Geophysical Methods | 75 Plate 4. The Digital Elevation Model of the burial tumulus cemetery at Sopron–Várhely, using Airborne Laser Scanning (G. Király, 2011). Plate . e i ital errain odel of t e urial tumulus emetery at opron– r e usin ir orne aser annin . Kir ly . rolly . 76 | Z. Czajlik–G. Király–A. Czövek–S. Puszta–B. Holl–G. Brolly Plate 5. Sopron–Várhely, details using the ALS-measurement. 1. Shaded Digital Elevation Model; 2. The mounds according to the DEM and Szádecky-Kardoss’s map; 3. Dimensions of the mound no. 191; 4. 3D view of the site (detail). Plate 5. opron– r e details usin t e measurement. . aded i ital le ation odel . e mounds a ordin to to and de y Kardoss s map . imensions of t e mound no. . ie of t e site detail . Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök* Robert SCHOLTZ Jósa András Museum Nyíregyháza, Hungary scholtzrobert@gmail.com Keywords: Scythian Age, Alföld Group, biritual cemetery, jewellery, weapons, ceramics Investment-led archaeological excavations were conducted on the territory of the Eastern Detention Facility (so called: Prison) at the southern outskirts of Tiszalök (Northeast Hungary, Szabolcs-SzatmárBereg County) between February 27 and May 18, 2006 (Fig. 1). The site is situated in the fields bordered by the Nyíregyháza–Tiszalök and the Debrecen–Tiszalök railways, east of the Tiszalök–Szorgalmatos– Tiszavasvári road. Three parallel, more-or-less north–south directed sand ridges (96–98.3 m) can be observed on the oblong shaped ‘lot’ of regular northwest–southeast axes. The Scythian period communities ‘settled’ and established their cemeteries on these sand ridges, which rise over the lower waterlogged territory. Watching brief was carried out on a territory of 10.3 hectares along the future 1285 m long prison wall during mechanic earth movement. Altogether 417 features were brought to light on a territory of 23,235 m2 (Pl. 1). The finds were deposited in the Jósa András Museum in Nyíregyháza, where they are being taken into inventory and elaborated (Scholtz 2007b). The aim of the present paper is the introduction and analysis of this material. Fig. 1. Tiszalök, Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County, Hungary. The burials of the Scythian period settlement were unearthed on the northern part of the excavation territory (Pl. 1; 2). Their borders were found in the south, east, and west. In the north, it extended beyond the excavation territory, although we could not collect shards in the ploughed field. The burials were found on the southern slope of a small east–west oriented sand hill. They formed a T-shape, directed to the west. The distance between the burials varies between 5–7 m. In the cemetery no superposition was observed. * The author and Péter Bocz directed the excavations. Gábor Pintye, Ioan Bejinariu (Zalău, Ro) and Liviu Marta (Satu Mare, Ro) archaeologists, László Kiss, Zalán Bujnóczki drawers and Zoltán Toldi university student helped at the excavations. Gabriella Beleznai, Tamás Gábor and the author prepared the drawings, and photos. The site map was prepared by László Veszprémi geodetic engineer. Dr. László Szathmáry examined the anthropological material. The text was proofread by Emese Virágos. I am grateful for their help. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 77–100 78 | R. Scholtz Grave 173 North-west–south-east directed extended skeleton (female) lying on its back in a north-west–south-east directed square-shaped grave shaft with rounded corners (Pl. 2/3; 3/1; 4/1). The walls of the shaft were slightly arched and the arched bottom was flat. Roots and small animals disturbed the greyish brown filling of the shaft containing yellowlight brown spots and small shards. Diam.: 154/130 × 240 cm, depth from the scraped surface: 14 cm. Grave inventory: 1. At about the place of the right ear a small flat disc-shaped amber bead. M.: 0.6 × 0.4 cm (Pl. 4/3). 2. A small flat disc-shaped amber bead lay beside the right side of the jaw. M.: 0.7 × 0.4 cm (Pl. 4/4). 3. A disc-shaped green glass bead among the bones of the left side of the chest. It is glued together from two fragments. M.: 1.8 × 1.2 cm (Pl. 4/7). 4. Cylindrical bone bead in vertical position between the right lower arm and the hip. M.: 1.9 × 1.1 cm (Pl. 4/6). 5. Pierced – probably – red deer tooth lay under the right wrist. M.: 2.3 × 1.2 cm (Pl. 4/8). 6. Wall fragment of a handmade vessel. It is red and tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 4.5 × 2.2 cm. 7. Dark grey, handmade bowl with inverted rim lay beside the right upper arm (Pl. 4/2). There were animal bones inside the bowl. Rd.: 28 cm, Bd.: 9–10 cm, M.: 0.8 × 1 – 9.9 × 9.9 cm. Altogether 57 fragments of which seven from two, three from three, one from four, one from five and one from six fragments are glued together. Not in drawable state (Pl. 4/2). 8. Black, slightly smoothed, handmade, globular vessel (jar) beside the right femur. The rim is outcurved in an arch; the belly of the vessel is decorated with vertical grooves and four knobs. H.: 11 cm, Rd.: 12 cm, Bd.: 5.5 cm (Pl. 4/9). 9. Fragment of a dark grey grindstone of semicircular cross-section at the south-eastern corner of the grave. M.: 17.9 × 13.5 × 5.9 cm (Pl. 4/10). 10. Six small flat disc-shaped amber beads. Three of them were found beside the skull (Pl. 4/5a), while the other three were unearthed alongside the upper body (Pl. 4/5b). M.: 0.4 × 0.4 – 0.6 × 0.4 cm. Ceramic and daub fragments from the filling of the grave shaft: 11. Wall fragments of an urn (?). It is black and smoothed outside and red inside with grey spots. It is handmade and tempered with crushed pottery. The outer surfaces of two of them are decorated with vertical grooves. M.: 4.7 × 3.4 – 2.1 × 1.6 cm and 4.2 × 2.7 cm (Pl. 4/11). 12. Wall and bottom fragment of a handmade bowl (?). It is black outside and red inside with grey spots. It is tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 3 × 3.7 cm (Pl. 4/12). 13. Wall fragment of a handmade vessel. It is brown, handmade and tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 1.7 × 1.7 cm. 14. Wall fragments of a handmade vessel. It is dark grey with dark brown spots, handmade and tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 2.7 × 2.4 and 3.7 × 2.4 cm. 15. Wall fragment of a handmade vessel (cup/bowl?). It is dark brown with grey spots, handmade and tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 2.7 × 1.4 cm. 16. Wall fragments of a handmade vessel (pot?). It is light brown with grey spots and red inside. It is handmade and tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 2.1 × 1.7 – 2.5 × 3.7 cm. 17. Daub fragment. It is brown with grey spots. M.: 1.8 × 1.9 cm. Grave 174 Grave of a female with scattered ashes. The ashes lay at the northern half of the east–west directed square-shaped grave shaft with rounded corners (Pl. 2/3; 3/2; 5/1). The walls of the shaft were slightly arched and the arched bottom was flat. Roots and small animals disturbed the greyish brown filling of the shaft containing yellow-light brown spots daub fragments and small shards. Diam.: 222 × 170 cm, depth from the scraped surface: 24–32 cm. Grave inventory: 1. Greyish brown, handmade bowl with inverted rim at the south-western corner of the grave. The bowl is tempered with crushed pottery and glued together from four fragments. H.: 11 cm, Rd.: 26 cm, Bd.: 8.9 cm (Pl. 5/11). 2. Burnt cylindrical iron needle or pin fragments made of wire of oval cross-section northeast from the bowl. It is glued together from two fragments. M.: 3.8 × 0.6 and 2.9 × 0.6 cm (Pl. 5/4). 3. A scallop (?) from the filling of the grave shaft. M.: 5.6 × 3 cm (Pl. 5/6). 4. Burnt cylindrical iron needle or pin fragments made of wire of oval cross-section. Two fragments were glued together. M.: 1 × 0.4, 1.9 × 0.4 and 3.7 × 0.4 cm (Pl. 5/5). 5. Three fragments of a cylindrical bone object decorated with incised dots and lines on its outer surface. A hole can be seen at the base of the biggest item. Two of them are glued together from 2 pieces. M.: 1 × 1.2; 1.9 × 0.9 and 1.4 × 2.7 cm (Pl. 5/3). 6. Cylindrical bone object. Its outer surface is decorated with parallel horizontal scratches and narrow cross-lines between them. A small hole can be seen approximately at the middle of the object. It is glued together from 3 pieces. M.: 1.6 × 3.2 cm, Diam.: 1.7 cm (Fig. 4; Pl. 5/2). 7. Wall and neck fragments of an urn (?). It is black and smoothed outside and red inside with grey spots. It is handmade and tempered with crushed pottery. The outer surface of three of them is decorated with vertical grooves. M.: 3.8 × 4.1 – 4.7 × 3.7 cm (Pl. 5/7, 9–10). Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök | 79 8. Wall fragments of an urn (?). It is brown and smoothed outside and red inside with grey spots. It is handmade and tempered with crushed pottery. The outer surface of one of them is decorated with vertical grooves. M.: 3.2 × 2.4 and 4.2 × 2.7 cm (Pl. 5/8). 9. The bottom fragment of a dark grey, handmade, crushed pottery tempered vessel. M.: 3.5 × 1.8 cm. 10. The wall fragment of a brown, handmade vessel. It is tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 3.3 × 3 cm. Ceramic fragments from the filling of the grave shaft: 11. Two pieces of dark brown grey spotted, handmade wall fragments of a vessel. It is tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 1.7 × 2.5 and 2.9 × 2.4 cm. 12. Six pieces of wall fragments of an urn (?). It is black and smoothed outside and red inside with grey spots. It is handmade and tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 3.4 × 1.7 – 5.5 × 5.9 cm. 13. Wall fragment of a vessel. It is dark brown outside and dark grey inside with grey and charcoal spots. It is handmade and tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 4.8 × 5.4 cm. 14. Three pieces of wall fragments of a vessel. It is brick-red outside with grey spots. It is handmade and tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 1.8 × 2.3 – 3.4 × 2.8 cm. 15. Wall fragment of a handmade, crushed pottery tempered vessel. It is brown and smoothed. M.: 2.8 × 3.5 cm. 16. Five pieces of wall fragments of different vessels. It is dark brown outside with grey spots. It is handmade and tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 1.8 × 2.2 – 2.6 × 2.4 cm. 17. Six pieces of grey spotted brick-red daub fragments. M.: 1.7 × 2.5 – 4.7 × 3.4 cm. Grave 176 East–west directed skeleton lying on its left side in contracted position on the bottom of a bee-hive shaped pit (Fig. 2; Pl. 2/3; 3/3). The ribs and the small bones of the lower arm were crumbled. The pit is east– west directed and oval-shaped. The walls were arched and the arched bottom was flat. Roots and small animals disturbed the greyish brown filling of the pit containing yellow-light brown spots and daub fragments. Diam.: 136 × 118 cm, Bdiam.: 140 × 154 cm depth from the scraped surface: 50 cm. Ceramic and daub fragments from the filling of the ‘grave shaft’: 1. The wall fragment of a greyish brown handmade smoothed vessel. It is tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 5 × 4.7 cm. 2. Dark grey wall fragments of a handmade vessel. It is light brown inside and tempered with crushed pottery. Two of them are glued together from two fragments. M.: 3.4 × 2.2, 4 × 2.2 and 4.2 × 2.9 cm. 3. Greyish brown wall fragments of a handmade bowl. It is light brown inside and tempered with crushed pottery. One of them is glued together from two fragments. M.: 10.3 × 8.2, 11.9 × 8.6 and 7.4 × 9.3 cm. Fig. 2. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 176. Grave 312 Grave of a female (?) with scattered ashes (Pl. 2/3; 3/4; 8/1). East–west directed square-shaped grave shaft with rounded corners. The walls of the shaft were slightly arched and the arched bottom was flat. Roots and small animals disturbed the greyish brown filling of the shaft containing yellow-light brown spots. Diam.: 179 × 183 cm, depth from the scraped surface: 15–26 cm. Grave inventory: 1. Dark grey with brown spotted, handmade, biconical shaped miniature vessel. It is tempered with crushed pottery. H.: 5.8 cm, Rd.: 3.4 cm, Bd.: 2.1 cm (Pl. 8/2). 2. Greyish brown smoothed, wheel-thrown, high handled cup. It is well levigated. It is glued together from 8 fragments. H.: 12 cm, Rd.: 10 cm, Bd.: 4.9 cm (Pl. 8/3). 3. A brown, dark grey-spotted handmade bowl with inverted rim which is smoothed and black inside. H.: 7 cm, Rd.: 23.3 cm, Bd.: 8.3 cm (Pl. 8/9). 4. Burnt cylindrical iron needle or pin fragments made of wire of oval cross-section covered with calcinated human bones. M.: 1.9 × 0.3, 2.3 × 0.3 and 4.7 × 0.4 cm (Pl. 8/5). 5. Brown, grey and white spotted, hand moulded, biconical burnt clay spindle whorl lay in the layer of ashes. Diam.: 2.5 cm, H.: 1.8 cm (Pl. 8/7). 6. Burnt cylindrical iron needle or pin fragments made of wire of oval cross-section. M.: 1.5 × 0.6 and 3.6 × 0.6 cm (Pl. 8/4). 7. Burnt cylindrical iron needle or pin fragments made of wire of oval cross-section. M.: 2.2 × 0.5, 2.9 × 0.4 and 3.3 × 0.4 cm (Pl. 8/6). 80 | R. Scholtz Ceramic fragments from the filling of the grave shaft: 8. Handle and rim fragment of a handmade vessel. It is greyish brown and tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 3.1 × 2.1 cm (Pl. 8/9). 9. Rim fragment of a handmade, crushed pottery tempered vessel. It is black and dark brown inside. The rim is outcurved in an arch. M.: 3 × 3.3 cm (Pl. 8/10). 10. Wall fragment of a dark brown, smoothed outside and black smoothed inside, handmade vessel. It is tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 1.8 × 1.8 cm. 11. Wall fragment of a grey spotted red outside and black inside, handmade vessel. It is tempered with crushed pottery. M.: 3 × 2.2 cm. 12. Wall and bottom fragments of a brick-red, wheel-thrown vessel. Its outer surface is decorated with incised lines. M.: 3.4 × 4 and 1.7 × 2.5 cm (Pl. 8/11) (Late Migration period). 13. Two brick-red daub fragments. M.: 2.4 × 2.3 and 2.7 × 2.7 cm. Grave 320 Grave of a male with scattered ashes (Pl. 2/3; 3/5; 6–7). The ashes of the dead person(s) lay in two heaps in the northwestern quarter of the large square-shaped grave shaft with rounded corners. The walls of the shaft were slightly arched and the arched bottom was slightly depressed in the centre. Roots disturbed the greyish brown filling of the shaft containing yellow-light brown spots. The majority of the finds lay in the western half of the grave. Diam.: 232 × 175 cm, depth from the scraped surface: 64 cm. Grave inventory: 1. Three stone balls (sling stones?) lay in the south-western quarter of the grave. None was burnt. M.: 4.4 × 3.4; 5.3 × 3.1 and 5.1 × 3.8 cm (Pl. 7/8). 2. Fragment of an iron knife pointed to the east between the stone balls and the ashes. M.: 9 × 1.8 cm. 3. A greyish brown wheel-thrown handled jug stood in the middle of the western wall of the grave shaft, north of the ashes. M.: 28.3 cm, Rd.: 11.3 cm, Bd.: 9 cm (Pl. 7/9). 4. A poorly preserved iron axe-adze (hatchet) was ‘stuck’ with the edge to westward into the bottom of the northwestern wall of the grave shaft. The head is quadrangle in cross-section. L.: 21.5 cm (Pl. 7/7). 5. Two bone knife handles (?) lay north of the ashes in the centre of the grave, on the west and east sides of the quiver mount. They were decorated with geometric linear patterns. M.: 5.1 and 5.2 cm (Pl. 7/2a–b). 6. A three-edged bronze arrowhead pointed to the northwest on the western side of the ashes. L.: 2.6 cm (Pl. 7/1c). 7. An iron knife of an arched back lay between the ashes. L.: 9 cm (Pl. 7/5). 8. An ornamented hind shaped, bone (antler) quiver mount was found on the northern part of the ashes. No trace of burning could be detected on it. M.: 8.4 × 5.5 cm (Fig. 3; Pl. 6/5). 9. A three-edged bronze arrowhead pointed to the northeast. L.: 2.6 cm (Pl. 7/1e). 10. A three-edged bronze arrowhead pointed to the east. L.: 2.7 cm (Pl. 7/1a). 11. Three three-edged bronze arrowheads pointed to the southeast. L.: 2.8; 2.8 and 2.4 cm (Pl. 7/1d). 12. Greyish brown, lobed, hand-thrown bowl stood in the middle of the eastern side of the grave. The surfaces were smoothed. It is decorated with inverted V-shaped parallel incised lines/grooves on the interior of the rim. M.: 11 cm, Rd.: 35.3 cm, Bd.: 9.8 cm (Pl. 7/10). 13. A three-edged bronze arrowhead pointed to the northwest in the ashes. L.: 2.6 cm (Pl. 7/1b). 14. An iron knife of an arched back lay under the ashes. L.: 7.3 cm (Pl. 7/4). 15. Three fragments of a burnt cylindrical bone object lay in the layer of ashes. The outer surface of the smallest one is decorated with a V-shaped line and 2 dots. M.: 1 × 1.3; 1.4 × 1.4 and 1.1 × 1.4 cm (Pl. 7/3). 16. Three burnt cylindrical iron fragment made of wire of oval cross-section lay between the ashes. M.: 2.3 × 0.15; 1.8 × 0.7 and 1.6 × 0.8 cm (Pl. 7/6). Grave 321 A female grave with scattered ashes (Pl. 2/3; 3/6; 8/12). The ashes of the dead person lay in the western half of the grave shaft. The upper part of the shaft got destroyed during mechanic scraping. Its filling is greyish brown disturbed by roots. Uncovered Diam.: 90 × 100 cm, depth from the scraped surface: 0 cm. Grave inventory: 1. Dark brown, grey spotted, handmade, barrel shaped pot. It is tempered with crushed pottery and glued together from 27 fragments. Its shoulder is decorated with two knobs. H.: 10.4 cm, Rd.: 9 cm, Bd.: 7 cm (Pl. 8/14). 2. Forty pieces of wall and bottom fragments of a black, handmade bowl. It is tempered with crushed pottery. Three of them are glued together from two, four from three and one from four fragments. M.: 1.2 × 1.6 – 12.2 × 9.1 cm. Bd.: 12 cm (Pl. 8/15). 3. Burnt cylindrical iron needle or pin fragment made of wire of oval cross-section lay between the ashes. M.: 3.7 × 0.5 cm (Pl. 8/13). Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök | 81 Burial rite The burials of the cemetery represented nearly every burial rite of the Scythian period (Pl. 3). Within the excavated graves the number of the inhumation burials is two (173 and 176), cremation burials are four (174, 312, 320 and 321). The picture will be rendered more completely if we investigate further on the funeral rites within the two main groups. Thus, it turns out that in the case of the inhumation burials one skeleton (grave 176) is contracted, while the body of the other one (grave 173) is extended on its back. The cremation burials cannot be divided into groups. The cremated bones and the coals were deposited on the ancient soil beside the rest of the inventory (Pl. 3/2, 4–6). The incineration was performed on a funeral pyre somewhere else. Unfortunately we could not find its place in the excavated territory. The deceased was burned with carrying his/her wearing ornaments proved by traces of burning on the metal and some on the bone objects. In all cases only a small quantity of cremated bones or charcoals were put into the grave, only as much as was picked up from the funeral pyre as could represent rather a symbolic quantity. Similar phenomenon was observed during the excavation of the cemetery of Ferigile, Romania (Vulpe 1967, 192). A characteristic aspect of funeral rites is the orientation of the bodies. At Tiszalök the skeleton from grave 173 was directed to the northwest (Pl. 3/1; 4/1), while the contracted body from grave 176 was directed to the east (Pl. 3/3; 4/1). Inhumation burials with extended skeletons are most widespread in the territory of the southern Alföld – between the rivers Maros–Tisza–Körös –, but can scarcely be found in the Upper Tisza region (Szabó 1969, 79–81). Presumably burials with this kind of funeral rite represent newcomers from the Scythian Steppe region (Kemenczei 2001, 16). However, in our case the connection with the population of Transylvania cannot be excluded because the northwest orientation of the dead with further characteristic funeral elements – e.g. inhumation burials with extended skeletons, funeral offerings (meat), vessels, weapons, stones in the graves – can be found mostly on the territory of the Ciumbrud group (Ferenczi 1966, 51). During the Middle Iron Age, graves containing contracted skeletons can be found in a relatively great number on the area of the Early Iron Age Mezőcsát culture: between the Danube and Tisza rivers and in the valley of the Maros. Graves with scattered ashes appeared as a new burial rite at the beginning of the Scythian epoch. Burials unearthed in Northern Hungary – Alsótelekes, Heves, Vámosmikola – can be well compared with the graves of the Middle Dniester region dated to the 7th century BC (Kemenczei 2001, 16). The culture elements of the so called Scythian type showing eastern origin – such as decorations, jewels and weapons – appear mostly in the grave-type mentioned secondly. Szabó (1969, 83) believes that this burial custom was the richness and the sign of the gentility. Regarding the shape and size of the grave-pits the most prominent graves of the Tiszalök cemetery seem to be those – similarly to grave 191 from Csanytelek–Újhalastó (Galántha 1986, 71–72, pl. 4) and graves 145 and 165 from Sándorfalva–Eperjes (Galántha 1985, 116–119, fig. 8; Galántha 1987) – which are almost square, with sides and are more than 2 m long. This type of grave-pit represents the scattered-ash burial rite (graves 320 and 321). In connection with the funeral rites we also have to mention that in grave 173 a grindstone was found (Pl. 3/1; 4/10). This custom could be observed in the Great Hungarian Plain for example at Békéscsaba–Fényes, Hódmezővásárhely–Kishomok, Szentes–Vekerzug (Bottyán 1955, 67; Párducz 1954, 54, 56). This burial custom appeared first in the Carpathian Basin in the Late Bronze Age with different cremation burial types (Salgótarján–Bevásárlóközpont/Shopping centre, Vaday 2009, 5–42). Between the beginning of the pre-Scythian period and the end of the Scythian Age one can found stone dishes with different size both in inhumation and cremation burials (Párducz 1966, 83; Scholtz 2007a, 194–195, fig. 6). Patay (1955, 63, 65, fig. 9) describes this funeral rite from graves 11 and 21 from Nógrádkövesd. The placing in the grave of stone dishes is not unknown in Transylvania either (Párducz 1954, 62; Párducz 1966, 83). Thus the use of grinding stone as grave good in Tiszalök is not surprising and can be regarded as such a characteristic funeral rite, which connects this cemetery to the Scythian Age culture in Hungary. Fortunately, at Tiszalök no robbed grave was found. The excavated grave inventory implies that ‘commoners’ were buried in the cemetery. Similarly to the neighbouring settlement – the biritual cemetery lay approximately 150 m northward from the Scythian Age settlement –, ceramics were the most frequent finds. 82 | R. Scholtz Elements of costume and jewellery The jewellery assemblages of the Scythian-influenced Alföld group1 consist mainly of earrings, bracelets and necklaces (Kemenczei 2001, 30). The most numerous objects are the various beads (Bottyán 1955, 58). From the 5th century BC onwards they replace the earlier neckpieces and for about 150 years they can be found everywhere (Jerem 1968, 186). They are generally made of clay, paste, glass-paste, amber or bone/antler. Chochorowski (1985, 51–56, Abb. 10) distinguished forty variant based on the material, shape, decoration and colour. Beads are common in Scythian burials, found in the graves of rich individuals and servants alike. Not only were they strung as necklaces, but they were also used to decorate headdresses and garments (Reeder 1999, 172). Beads were found only in grave 173. There were 8 amber, one green glass-paste, and one cylindrical bone bead (Pl. 4/3–7). The flat, disc-shaped amber beads were laid around the head and the upper half of the body (Pl. 4/3– 5). We cannot decide, whether they were part of a necklace or – because of their small number – of another type of jewel. Otherwise, we cannot exclude the possibility that they may have been weaved into the women’s hair, or were sewed on some kind of textile/leather stripe. The amber beads are precious jewels of the period. Usually they can be found in the cemeteries of the Hallstatt sphere, but they are especially frequent at the southern areas (Jerem 1968, 186; Chochorowski 1985, 54–55, Abb. 10/28; Kemenczei 2009, 91). Glass production is closely connected with metallurgy and the correlated study of metal objects, metal working remains and the composition and the manufacture of glass would be extremely important for the reconstruction of trade patterns (Giumlia-Mair 2009, 160). The same can be said about the green glass bead (Pl. 4/7). This variant (Chochorowski type 5) first appeared in the Early Scythian Age; it is frequent in the territory of the east Hallstatt culture, but can scarcely be found in Transcarpathian Ukraine and in Transylvania (Kemenczei 2009, 88). At Tiszalök we consider it as an element of import (Chochorowski 1985, 52, Abb. 10/5). Its close parallels – dated to HaD – are known from Chotín/Hetény and Ždaňa/Hernádzsadány in Slovakia (Miroššayova–Olexa 2009, 101–102, Obr. 36/14). Both the amber and the glass beads are representing the commercial connections between the population of the Scythian-influenced Alföld group and the Transdanubian Hallstatt culture. It is also important to note that at the onset of the Iron Age, the very ancient amber route, which in the course of the Bronze Age crossed the Alps at the Brenner pass, coming down to the Lake of Garda and following the valley of the Adige river to the sea, was moved to the East and crossed the Alps in Slovenia, following then the Soča/Isonzo valley down to the Adriatic. Thus all passes and roads to the Hallstatt territory in the northern Alps, to the territory of the Dolenjsko facies in the Sava basin and down to the Friulian Plain were under the power of the S. Lucia/Most na Soči group (Giumlia-Mair 2009, 153). The analysed amber beads dated to the Bronze Age come from Balticum based on the results of the researches (Kemenczei 2009, 91). The question of the Tiszalök’s beads origin – similarly to the beads of the Alföld group – in relation with the location of producing workshops remains open for now. The cylindrical bone bead (Pl. 4/6) belongs to the variant 38 in the typology elaborated on 6200 beads of Chochorowski (1985, 56, Abb. 10/38; only 0.1% of the collected beads were made of bone). It occurs very rarely in the grave material of the Alföld group (0.1%), none is known from the settlements. Recently Gyucha (2002, 62, 10/4–5; Scholtz 2011, 51, 3/2) published one similar piece from Gyulavári. Other cylindrical bone beads are known from the burials of Békéscsaba–Fényes, Szentes–Vekerzug and Chotín/Hetény in Slovakia (Gyucha 2002, 62). The iron objects are very poorly preserved at Tiszalök, especially after they have been previously burned on the funeral pyre. Judging from their cross-section, and shape one should conclude that these poorly preserved, burnt iron fragments from the male grave 320 (Pl. 7/6) and female graves 174, 312 and 321 could have originally been elements of a costume: pins or needles (Pl. 5/4–5; 8/4–6; 8/13). Weapons The Scythians were fearsome warriors of their age. Based on the archaeological finds and the remained different depictions and written sources we can reconstruct the former armament of the epoch. For long-range fighting the Scythians used bows and slings; at intermediate range they employed spears and javelins; and for hand-to-hand combat swords, axes, maces and daggers (Cernenko 1983, 11). It is 1 The Alföld Group which developed close contacts with Scythian culture have been given different names in the archaeological literature. In my article I use the determination of Kemenczei (2001, 14–15) instead of the commonly used Vekerzug culture, etc. Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök | 83 generally known that the Scythians were brilliant bowmen, and arrows occupied a very important position in their armaments. Therefore, it is not surprising that we unearthed a well-armed Scythian foot archer in grave 320 at Tiszalök (Pl. 3/5; 6/1). In the grave there were seven arrowheads along with an iron hatchet, a quiver-mount, 3 stone balls (sling stones?) and three iron knives (Pl. 7/1a–d). The arrowheads represent the type of A2c of Vasiliev (1980, 74–77), and the type 9, 17 and 25 of Chochorowski (1985, 86–94, Abb. 25/9, 17, 25). They are three-edged, hollow-based cast in bronze, with no socket and with a length varied between 2.4–2.8 cm. They represent the most numerous variants of the Scythian Age arrowheads in the Carpathian Basin. The variants appeared in Hungary (Sándorfalva–Eperjes, grave 208) at the end of the 7th and at the beginning of the 6th century BC (Kemenczei 1994, 93, 98). Their usage spread from the 6th century BC (Kemenczei 1986, 131; Kemenczei 2009, 45). The bronze three-edged arrowheads can be ranged to the characteristic Scythian objects. They were widely spread across Eurasia. As Členova (1994, 502) stressed they were streamlined and stabile when flying. Arrowheads were found almost in every Scythian grave, their number varied from few pieces to several hundred. At that time, arrowheads were mainly cast in bronze, but iron, bone and wooden ones of various shapes and sizes also existed. Those made of bone and wood were used for hunting while metal ones for fighting. Wood staffs 45–84 cm long were sometimes colour-striped (Fialko 2006, 63). In connection with the Scythian-influenced material culture of the Alföld Group, there appear particularly distinctive kinds of cruciform fittings, made of bronze and occasionally of bone. The majority of authors have identified these objects based on the finds of Kurgan 13 Lichačevka (Hellmuth 2010, 520– 521, Taf. 115) as decorative or hanging elements for the archer’s quiver – a special sheath of wood and leather, called gorytos (Kemenczei 1986; Chochorowski 1985, 95–99, Abb. 30; Vulpe 1990, 56) –, commonly used by Scythian aristocracy to keep and carry bow and arrows, often decorated with gold plates (Cernenko 1983; Fialko 2006, 64). The quiver-mount from Tiszalök was found in grave 320 (Pl. 6/4–5). It is made of bone/antler and has a shape of a hind, sitting with his legs collected, bending his head onto his back. Its height is 8.4 cm and decorated with 36 incised dot-and-circle patterns (Fig. 3). On his reverse side a cylindrical ear was carved, for the gorytos hanging up strap. Up to-date only three other bone quiver-mounts are known from the Carpathian Basin: Szendrő–Ördög-gát cave (Kemenczei 2009, 399, Taf. 28/14), Törökszentmiklós–Surján (CsalogKisfaludi 1985, Abb. 2/13), and Košice/Kassa in Slovakia (Párducz 1965, fig. 9/2). Researchers date these objects from the middle and the second half of the 6th century BC (Kemenczei 1986, 135; Kemenczei 2009, 49–50). In view of archaeological finds and a relief scene in the Apadāna of Persepolis, A. Hellmuth supported this interpretation; however she presumed an even earlier dating of this group of objects. Based on the grave-goods find in the vicinity of the fittings she dated them to the middle-to the second half of the 7th century BC (Hellmuth 2007b, 66–67, Abb. 1–2). Their origin is questionable. According to a part of the researchers the questionable object was prepared in Olbian workshops, and appeared under the influence of the Fig. 3. Bone quiver mount from Grave 320. ancient art. On the other hand, Polidovych supposed that these objects appeared and initially existed in the north-east Black Sea region, and first of all in the left-bank Dnieper Forest-Steppe. Their appearance in Olbia, and further west in the Carpathian Basin could be connected to the migration of populations (Polidovych 2000, 48). In the opinion of Hellmuth (2007b, 66) the cruciform fittings appear to have been created in the Carpathian Basin by the Scythian-influenced groups settled there. His problem solution demands additional research. A few words have still to be said about the bent-legged ‘Scythian stag’. Along with the feline and the eagle, the stag was the most meaningful and frequently used motifs in Scythian Art. They appeared 84 | R. Scholtz in the Eurasian steppes at the beginning of the Scythian period, to a large degree similar in details. The stag is depicted only in profile, the head is turned backward and the legs are bent under the belly with the foreleg resting on the hind leg (Členova 1994, 507–508, fig. 11). Jacobson links the deer or stag with, ultimately, a Siberian mother goddess, as well as with the reindeer, which the ancestors of the Scythians probably hunted (Reeder 1999, 151). The main difference between the Tiszalök stag and the stags from the so called ‘Scytho-Siberian World of Eurasia’ is the absence of antler of the former one. Presumably the contemporary producer (artist) formed a roe-deer (or a horse?). Bukowski (1977, 38) considers that the “images of stag and roe-deer also differ by manner of conception. Roe-deer are presented either with very small horns or with no horns at all”. In our case we may identify this animal as a roe-deer or less probably as a horse. Its analogies are known from Kurgan 35 Bobrica (Hellmuth 2010, 430–431, Taf. 41/1), Kurgan 346 Teklino (Hellmuth 2010, 645, Taf. 220/6) and Kurgan 524 Žabotin (Hellmuth 2010, 668–669, Taf. 240/15 and 17). The latter ones are the characteristic finds of the Early Scythian culture from the middle of the 7th century BC (Hellmuth 2010, 430, 645, 668). The iron hatchet (hammer-axe) from cremation grave 320 can also be reckoned to the characteristic Scythian group of objects (Pl. 7/7). It is two armed with a reconstructed length of 21.5 cm. One of the arms ends in a vertical edge, while the other one in a hammer-wised shaped part with quadrangular crosssection. It was ‘stuck’ with the edge to west into the bottom of the north-western wall of the grave shaft (Pl. 3/5; 6/1–2). During the last fifty years Párducz (1965, 180–190, list 2), Egg (1978), Vasiliev (1980, Taf. 15) and Chochorowski (1985, 100, Abb. 31/2) dealt with the question of the types of the Scythian Age hatchets and with the origin of types. The latest results can be found in the publications of Patay (Patay–Kiss 2002, 104–110), and Kemenczei (2009, 39–43). The research uniformly considers the hammer-axe a weapon. The persons using them were apparently also armed warriors with determined their social state and rank. On the basis of their significant number we can state that the hatchets were one of the main weapons of the warriors of the Scythian period. The fact that the hatchets could be met with different burial customs shows that this weapon was familiar presumably also in the autochthonous societies of the Scythian period (Párducz 1965, 185). We must take into consideration that the data of the ancient authors and survived representations also prove that the hammer-axe is one of the most important items of the Scythian armour. Similarly seated – stuck into the bottom of the grave – hatchet was found at Békéscsaba–Fényes (Banner 1932, 137–138, t. XLVII/11). It is highly probable that the ‘living persons’ stuck the hatchet into the grave bottom because of their fear of the deceased. Similar phenomenon can be mentioned almost 1500 year later, from graves of the Hungarian Conquest period (Révész 1996, 178). We found three stone balls (sling-stones?2) in the south-western quarter of the grave 320 (Pl. 6/1). It is interesting that none of them was burnt. Their size varies between 4.4 × 3.4; 5.3 × 3.1 and 5.1 × 3.8 cm (Pl. 7/8). Based on the analogous finds from Tápiószele, grave 460 (Párducz 1966, 79, 89, pl. LXXII/1–2) we hypothetically determined our finds as sling-stones. The sling, the men’s first ballistic weapon, was a staple in the arsenal of armies worldwide for at least six millennia. The weapon comprises two lengths of leather, sinew or braided fabric extending from a rounded pouch. A slinger slips the looped end of one cord over a finger on his throwing hand and pinches the knotted end of the other cord between thumb and forefinger, swinging and then releasing his projectile toward the target. The principal is simple, but mastering the technique takes practice (Guttman 2010, 23). Cernenko (1983, 11, 14) demonstrated the sling as a common Scythian weapon, many Scythian graves containing several dozen sling-stones, in one case as many as 75, but until now the author does not know any other grave in the Carpathian Basin, where an object like this would have turned up. Beside the bow, the knife also belonged to the equipment of the warrior. Three – fragmented – iron knives were found in grave 320 (Pl. 7/4–5). We did not find knives in the surrounding graves. One edged knifes are characteristic finds of the whole Scythian period. They are equally found in male and female graves, only their size is different (Jerem 1968, 184; Juhász 1976, 250). In this case their length varies between 7.3 and 9 cm. They are the general types of the Central European Iron Age to be found everywhere, so they do not represent any age determination value (Kemenczei 1984, 48). 2 Vega and Craig presented data from sling experiments carried out in Peru among Quechua-speaking herders who are experienced slingers. Their results demonstrate that a prior model of the maximum theoretical distance of sling cast stones underestimates their range. These new data also show significant differences in the use of slings by men and women, and by different age groups and permit a better approximation of ancient warfare (Vega-Craig 2009, 1264, 1268). Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök | 85 Cylindrical bone objects Scythian pintaderas and cylindrical bone objects were thoroughly examined by Kisfaludi (1997, 79–81). At Tiszalök we found cylindrical bone objects in two graves: 174 (Fig. 4) and 320. These objects were decorated with different incised lines (Pl. 5/2–3; 7/2–3). Fig. 4. Incised bone cylinder from Grave 174. The cylindrical bone objects’ diameter varies between 3 and 5 cm, their height is 3–6 cm. They are generally made of antler. Most of them are decorated with different incised geometrical motives like dotand-circle samples and circulating lines. The fields are filled out by incised crosses, triangles, dot-andcircle samples and connected triangles. Most of them originate from female graves often together with clay pintaderas and/or miniature handmade vessels, but we find them on the settlements as well. Based on the collected materials, Kisfaludi (1997, 80) supposed that a part of them belonged to the female toiletry and served as paint holder (paint-box). While in the middle of the ’50s Bottyán (1955, 53–54) interpreted these objects as salt shakers, others as knife handles (Dušek 1966, 31; Chochorowski 1985, 80–81, Abb. 20/2), while nowadays a new idea was revealed. Kozubova reconstructed six bone plates from Cegléd, Chotin/Hetény, Csanytelek–Újhalastó and Tiszalök as whip elements (Peski type). She associated the use of this ‘weapon’ with nomadic elite of the 7th–4th centuries BC, the burials of which spread on a huge territory from the Caucasian range as far as Chotin/Hetény in West-Slovakia (Kozubova 2008, 91–93). Similar bone cylinder fragment was found in a male (?) grave (no. 110) of Alsótelekes (Patay–Kiss 2002, 126, Abb. 8/6). Whips were important tools in a culture so dependent on the horse. They are often found in burials, including those of wealthy Scythian women, and are also depicted on stone steles (Reeder 1999, 117). Pottery Because of the imperishable character of the ceramic, pottery is one of the most documented crafts of the antiquity (Berecki 2008, 39). It is generally characteristic of Scythian burials to have one or more vessel as a grave-good. This tradition was observed in almost all of the burials of the Alföld group. The classification of pottery from Tiszalök can be divided in three categories: coarse, handmade ware; fine, handmade ware and wheel-thrown ware. Vessels as grave goods appear in both female and male graves. 1.1. Barrel-shaped pot The coarse pottery is characterised by the so called barrel-shaped pots (Pl. 8/14). This pot represents one of the ‘guiding fossil’ within the pottery of the period, and it is considered the most numerous vessel form right behind the handled cups in the territory of Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County (Kiss 1983, 18), while earlier Párducz (1969, 82) titled them the most frequent vessel type in the territory of northeast Hungary. The main characteristic of the type is the vertical or slightly inverted rim and curved body with narrow bottom. Its material is generally coarse tempered with crushed pottery. The predominant colours differ between brick-red and greyish brown. The wall is thick with coarse surface, scarcely covered with clay-slip. The decoration is simple, in most cases consisting of simple, conical or flattened and thumb impressed knobs arranged on the shoulder of the vessel. Vessels with similar shapes are present in several 86 | R. Scholtz neighbouring cultures/cultural groups from the middle course of the River Dnieper to West-Podolia, and Slovenia or Bulgaria in the South (Chochorowski 1985, 38, Abb. 3/1). It was scarcely found on the territory of the Transylvanian Ciumbrud group (Kiss 1983, 24). Researchers consider them to be of Late Bronze Age origin (Németi 1982, 124; Kiss 1983, 27–28; Kemenczei 2009, 97). The fine, handmade pottery is distinguished by smoothed surface and colours from brick-red to black. Frequent forms are the bowls with inverted and outcurved rims, biconical globular shaped urns decorated with knobs and grooves and a miniature vessel. The ornamented vessel from grave 173 was considered of Hallstatt inspiration (Pl. 4/9), while the bowl from grave 320 (Pl. 7/10) has good analogies at Ferigile, dated to the 7th–6th centuries BC (Vulpe 1967, 193). And finally there are some wall and bottom fragments of unknown types of vessels, some of them decorated on their surface, the latter ones representing the local Late Bronze Age pottery traditions (Pl. 5/7–10; 8/9–10). 2.1. Bowl with inverted rim These are the most frequent vessel type during the Scythian period, found in all cemeteries of the Carpathian Basin. The simplicity of its shape made it widely spread on the territory of the neighbouring cultures as well. The undecorated form already appeared during the Late Bronze Age, and continued its existence in the subsequent stages. It can be found in the grave material of all the main burial rites (Chochorowski 1985, 32, Abb. 1/1; Matúz 2000, 141). At Tiszalök such bowls were found in three graves: 173, 174 and 321 (Pl. 4/2; 5/11; 8/8). 2.2. Decorated bowl The greyish brown, lobed, handmade bowl was found in the middle of the eastern side of grave 320 (Pl. 7/10). The surfaces were smoothed. It was decorated with inverted V-shaped parallel incised lines/ grooves on the interior of the rim and with ‘turban’ decoration on the shoulder. Up to-date precise analogies for the bowl on the territory of the Alföld group were not found. Distant analogies both in place and time of the vessel are known at Ferigile. Vulpe called these vessels “bowls with grooved rims” and “widerimmed bowls”. The first type of vessels was met in the tombs 2a, in the south and central – the older – zones of the necropolis. It resembles a type of bowl frequent in the Basarabi culture at the beginning of the Hallstatt period (Vulpe 1967, 193, pl. II/14–15, 17; III/1). The second type, the “wide-rimmed bowl” (Vulpe I/D-type) is specific for the area north of the Danube. It has been found in Transylvania, Moldavia, Podolia and the Tisza Plain. This type belonged originally to the Basarabi culture (Vulpe 1967, 193). The bowl from Tiszalök might be a ‘mixture’ of the above mentioned types I/B and I/D. Further, we may mention the bowl from Szirmabesenyő as a parallel, although it was dated to the Early Iron Age (Kemenczei 1988, 93, k. 5/6). Dishes with similar shape and decoration can be found in the Alföld Late Bronze Age assemblages, and among the pre-Scythian elements of the forest steppe region (Kemenczei 1988, 95). The bowl with four knobs on its rim is the most widespread on the territory of the northern Alföld and northwest Romania (Németi 2010, pl. 2/7), but it may have formal connections with the bowls of the so called Középrépáspuszta-type (Csanytelek–Újhalastó, grave 191, Galántha 1986, 73, pl. 2/3). 2.3. Globular vessel (jar) The black vessel was the grave good of grave 173 (Pl. 3/1; 4/9). Similar, but not the same type of vessels can be mentioned from Nyáregyháza (Kemenczei 2009, Taf. 45/18), Salgótarján (Kemenczei 2009, 398, Taf. 176/9), Chotin/Hetény grave A/61 (Dušek 1966, 145, Taf. 39/21–30; Kemenczei 2002, 53, Abb. 19/3), and from the cemetery of Tiszavasvári–Dózsa-telep (Kemenczei 2009, 325, Taf. 103/7). The form is also well known among the grave-goods of the pre-Scythian population: Füzesabony–Kettős-halom grave 43 (Patek 1990, pl. 13/2); Tarnaörs–Csárdamajor grave A (Patek 1990, pl. 26/5). It is considered a typical Hallstatt period – Kyjatice-culture – material. 2.4. Miniature vessel The dark grey, brown spotted, handmade, crushed pottery tempered, biconical shaped miniature vessel was brought to light in grave 312 (Pl. 8/2). Its height is 5.8 cm. Different types of the miniature vessels can be found on the whole territory of the Alföld group. They are well represented in the grave material of the Scythian and Scythian-influenced cultures from Inner Asia to Middle Europe. The function of these objects cannot be well determined. They may have been toys or, according to some scholar, paint Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök | 87 keeper/holder pots (Kisfaludi 1997, 80), while others ascribe ritual role to them. Analogies are known from Törökszentmiklós–Surján, grave 69 (Csalog–Kisfaludi 1985, 314, Abb. 4/21). 3. Wheel-thrown pottery Wheel-thrown pottery was found only in two graves, 320 and 321. Based on manufacturing marks from vessels, it can be affirmed that both fast and slow wheels were represented in the workshops (Romsauer 1991, 359). This quantity of pottery having grey, brown, light-brown or orange fabrics suggests rather a local production than imports from the southern Thracian or Greek world (Németi 2010, 182), however Scythian Age wheel-thrown pottery is unknown in Transylvania, and appears only sporadically in Trans-Carpathian Ukraine, in the Kuštanovice culture (Németi 2010, 182–183). 3.1. Handled jug One of the most important find in the cemetery is a well tempered, handled jug from grave 320 (Pl. 7/9). Chochorowski (1985, 46, Abb. 7/1) classified 8 pieces into this vessel category. Actually we can complete his list with four new pieces: Csanytelek–Újhalastó, grave 191 (Galántha 1986, 72, pl. 3/7), Kardoskút (Kemenczei 2009, 250, Taf. 28/14), Nyíregyháza–Mandabokor II, feat. no. 33 (Scholtz 2007a 192–193, fig. 4, pl. 2/2), and Tiszalök–Prison, grave 320. The best analogy is known from Törökszentmiklós– Surján, dated to the second half of the 6th and first half of the 5th century BC (Csalog-Kisfaludi 1985, 342). This vessel was adopted by the Celts after the contact with the population of the Alföld group (Németi 1988, 110; Berecki 2008, 56). 3.2. High handled cup On the territory of the cemetery we found only one wheel-thrown, high handled cup, in grave 312 (Pl. 8/3). It is greyish brown, smoothed, made of well levigated clay. No traces of secondary burning were found on its surface. At Alsótelekes it appeared in the second half of the 7th century (Patay–Kiss 2002, 130–131) and spread on the whole territory of the Alföld group. This type was also adopted by the Celts after the contact with the population of the Alföld group (Németi 1988, 110). Analogies can be found in almost every cemeteries of the period. Spindle-whorl In the Iron Age several types of textile tools and different techniques were used. Some of these tools remained in use well into the historic times, and there is sufficient knowledge about how they were employed (Andersson 2008, 74). The spindles are the most frequently found spinning tools from the period (Pl. 8/7). A spindle consists of a rod and a whorl. Until now no spindle rod was found in the Carpathian Basin, but we can assume that the rods used by the Iron Age population had been made of wood. The spindle whorls vary in regard of shape, decoration and size. Experiments demonstrated that the weight and the diameter of the whorl together with the fibre material affect the quality of the spun: the smaller the whorl, the thinner the thread one can get. Furthermore, the weight of the whorl determinates the length of the rod. Whorls with a very light weight need rods of less than 15 cm in length (Andersson 2008, 75–76; Gleba 2008). Generally spindle-whorls were made of burnt clay, tempered with fine sand (Bottyán 1955, 53). These objects can be found either in the fill of settlement features, either in male or female burials (Kemenczei 2009, 93). Chochorowski (1985, 79, Abb. 21/2) distinguished from the analyzed 396 spindle whorls 11 types of which our whorl can be classified to the type 2. It represents the most widespread type (26.3%, 104 pieces) of whorl in the Carpathian Basin. Grindstone In the south-eastern corner of the grave 173 a dark grey grindstone of semicircular cross-section was brought to light (Pl. 3/1; 4/10). The grindstones characterise mainly female burials and are only rarely met in child graves. Matúz collected the pre-Scythian inhumation – both supine and contracted – graves in the Carpathian Basin where stone plates were found. Altogether 22 graves were collected, in which females (14) and children (4) were lying. The stones were put most commonly beside the dead left foot (12), but they can be found under the hip, beside the right arm and some pieces placed around, or under the head. Based on the observation that the similar stone objects can also be found in the Scythian Age contracted burials, the ‘surviving’ of the local Early Iron Age population was presumed (Hellebrandt 1988, 114; Patek 1990, 71; Matúz 2000; 2001, 44–45). Thanks to the latest discoveries we can revaluate Párducz’s 88 | R. Scholtz statement about placing the stones into the grave already from the pre-Scythian period (Párducz 1966, 83), since in the recent excavations from Salgótarján–Bevásárlóközpont stones placed in Late Bronze Age burials appeared (Vaday 2009, 8–9). Chochorowski (1985, 85) knew 24 graves in which stone dishes were found. The latest list of these graves was published by Kemenczei (2009, 95). However, we do not really know the purpose of stone plates. It has been claimed that they were used for grinding cereals, sharpening weapons, mixing paint, or in some sense of toiletries or as altars. These stone objects are known extensively among the inhabitants of the wooded steppe, in Olbia, and also among the Sarmatians and Sacae (Kryzhitskiy 2007, 21). They were used at the burial ritual of the elite or of rich females. As Rusyayeva supposed, they had a ritual purpose, perhaps linked with the cult of fertility, child-bearing and ritual cleansing. Both in Olbia and in the wooded steppe some of these dishes bear traces of ochre and sulphur, which have been taken to be tables for domestic purposes, perhaps used for female adornment (Rusyayeva 2007, 101). Nagler’s statement regarding the grindstones in Eurasian steppe burials (Nagler 2000, 107–113) can be easily adopted for an element of burial rites presence in the Carpathian Basin: “It is clear that one element of burial rites both in the European and Asian Steppe zones is linked. It arises in the Bronze Age (the Catacomb and Okunevo cultures) and lasts in some areas up until medieval times. Under no circumstances, however, should we consider the presence of grinding implements in burial monuments as clear evidence of a welldeveloped arable farming tradition among steppe peoples since this custom is absent among traditional agricultural peoples” (Nagler 2000, 110). The matter can be only considered with the full range of the available evidence. Tooth-pendant The red-deer tooth was found under the right wrist of the female skeleton in grave 173 (Pl. 3/1; 4/8). It was pierced in its upper half, so it could have served as a pendant. Up to-date precise analogies for the tooth-pendant on the territory of the Alföld group are not known. Teeth of horses (Tápiószele grave 460, Párducz 1966, 79), dogs (Algyő, grave 46, Bende 2003, fig. 2/2–5), bears (Chotin I/A, grave 96 and 285, Dušek 1966, 82, Taf. XLV/23–24; XXXI/3) and wild boar (Chotin I/A, grave 220, Dušek 1966, 63, Taf. XXIV/29–32) have already been observed (Chochorowski 1985, 70, Abb. 15/3), but red-deer teeth could be found only in one grave dated to the pre-Scythian period at Füzesabony–Kettős-halom, grave 37 (Patek 1990, 63, t. 10/5–12). The pierced deer pendants were found around the lower legs, and one under the hip of a west–eastern oriented, right side contracted male (?) skeleton. His skull was laid with face downward (Patek 1990, 63, 105, pl. 30/6). Presumably we are right if we ascribe magical role to them (Kemenczei 2009, 93). The chronology of the cemetery The footholds for the chronology are the grave goods from grave 173, 320 and 321 (Pl. 4; 6–8). First of all the characteristic Scythian type objects must be mentioned: the wheel-thrown pottery (Pl. 7/9; 8/3), the bronze three-edged arrowheads (Pl. 7/1a–d), and the bone quiver-mount (Pl. 6/5). As we have seen, both of them can be dated to the Early Scythian period. More exact dating of these objects cannot be provided since the dating of the major monuments of Scythian history – such as Ártánd, or Kelermes, Litoj Kurgan in the East, etc. – is still a subject of discussion (Genito 2008, 262). In the present state of research it is accepted that the production of the wheel-thrown pottery first appeared in the eastern part of the Carpathian Basin due to the new immigrant population of the Alföld group in the middle/second half of the 7th century BC (Alsótelekes, Patay–Kiss, 2002, 130–131; Csanytelek–Újhalastó, Galántha 1986; Németi 2010, 181). It is interesting to note that up to-date no Scythian Age pottery kiln is known from the territory of the Alföld group. In the cemetery the little number of the wheel-thrown vessels – a handled jug and a cup (Pl. 7/9; 8/3) – together with the handmade wares with archaic and/or alien forms (Pl. 7/10) completely indicate, that here a new immigrant group was settled who came from the east. On the basis of the above mentioned good analogies of the grave assemblages we would date the excavated Tiszalök burials to the end of the 7th and second half of the 6th centuries BC, while the finds are not characteristic enough to afford a more exact dating. Until now, we do not known when the cemetery was abandoned. Among the excavated grave goods no objects indicate the Celtic influence; therefore it is possible that the community left the site before the arrival of the Celts. The cemetery is, however, not yet exhausted and it can be presumed that in the graves being still under the earth such finds will came to light, which will provide a more exact dating of the site. Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök | 89 ✴✴✴ The presented burials from Tiszalök are one of the latest Scythian Age burials in Szabolcs-SzatmárBereg County (Scholtz 2010, pl. 1; the latest Scythian Age burials were unearthed at Oros in 2010). They are in accordance to the recently known Middle Iron Age settlement and cemetery system from the Upper Tisza region. Its significance is firstly, that it was excavated professionally. Secondly, some of the burials contain unique artefacts (the quiver mount), or objects that can be found scarcely on the territory of the Scythian-influenced Alföld group (the decorated bowl and the wheel-thrown handled jug). The excavated cemetery is not the only in the microregion of the Tiszavasvári township. Until now 24 (!) Middle Iron Age sites have been known in the vicinity of this cemetery. The neighbouring Scythian Age archaeological sites are summarized in table 1. The relatively big number of the sites indicates that during the Middle Iron Age the territory had been under the political supremacy of a new leading aristocracy of eastern origin. The materials of the neighbouring settlements and cemeteries show a cultural mixing. Beside the characteristic objects of the surviving Late Bronze Age Gáva population, the elements of the Scythian Culture – weapons, horse harness, animal-style art, wheel-thrown pottery –, together with the extreme variety of the burial rites suggest that the composition of the Alföld group was not uniform (Scholtz 2010, 86). The elaboration of the materials will probably largely contribute to the solution of the archaeological and historical problems of the Scythian Age in the Upper Tisza region. Appendix 1 Scythian Age sites in the vicinity of Tiszalök Site Szorgalmatos Tiszadob Tiszadada Tiszaeszlár Tiszalök Tiszavasvári Szőlő-Lapos Belterület Batka-dülő Kunsírpart Bashalom Potyhalom Szellőhalom Ciberéspart Fészekalja-dűlő Hajnalos Halmi Kisfástanya Vásárhalom Víztározó Belterület, Kultúrház alapárka Csárdapart Dézsmapart Dózsa-telep Józsefháza-Homokos Józsefháza-Téglás Keresztesi partok Paptelekhát Kapusz-lapos Utaséri-dűlő Settlement / Burial / Stray find S Sf Sf B B B – B B B B B B Sf Sf B B B Sf Sf Sf Sf S/B Sf Literature Nagy 2007, 303. Kemenczei 2009, 140. Kiss 1983, 86–87. Kemenczei 2009, 140. Kiss 1983, 89–90. Kiss 1983, 90–91. Kemenczei 2009, 140. Kemenczei 2009, 141. Kemenczei 2009, 141. Kiss 1983, 94–95. Kiss 1983, 91–93. Kiss 1983, 95. Kemenczei 2009, 141. Kemenczei 2009, 141. Almássy 2001, 137. Kemenczei 2009, 152–157. Almássy 2001, 137. Kemenczei 2009, 142–152. Almássy 2001, 137. Almássy 2001, 137. Almássy 2001, 137. Kalicz 1958, 14. Nagy 2007, 303. Almássy 2001, 137. 90 | R. Scholtz References Almássy 2001 Andersson 2008 Banner 1932 Bende 2003 Berecki 2008 Bottyán 1955 Bukowski 1977 Cernenko 1983 Chochorowski 1985 Členova 1994 Almássy, K., Együtt- vagy egymás mellett élés? Szkíta és kelta lelőhelyek Tiszavasvári környékén, JAMÉ, 18, 133–154. Andersson, E. B., Tools, Textile Production and Society in Viking Age Birka, IN: Gleba, M.– Munkholt, C.–Nosch, M-L. (eds.), Dressing the past, Oxford, 68–85. Banner, B., A Békéscsaba–fényesi sírmező, DolgSzeged, 8, 122–148. Bende, L., Szkíta kori temető Algyőn, AIH 2001, 63–78. Berecki, S., The La Tène settlement from Morești, Cluj–Napoca. Bottyán, Á., Szkíták a magyar Alföldön, RégFüz, I, 1. Bukowski, Z., The Scythian Influence in the Area of Lusatian Culture, Wrocław. Cernenko, E. V.–McBride, A.–Gorelik, M. V., The Scythians, 700–300, Osprey, Men-at Arms, 137, London. Chochorowski, J., Die Vekerzug-Kultur, Charakteristik der Funde, Warszawa–Kraków. Členova, N. L., On the Degree of Similarity between Material Culture Components within the “Scythian World”, IN: Genito, B. (ed.), The Archaeology of the Steppes. Methods and Strategies, Napoli, 499–540. Csalog–Kisfaludi Csalog, Zs.–Kisfaludi, J., Skythenzeitliches Gräberfeld in Törökszentmiklós–Surján-Újtelep, 1985 ActaArchHun, 37, 307–344. Dušek 1966 Dušek, M., Thrakisches Gräberfeld der Hallstattzeit in Chotin, ASF, 6. Egg 1978 Egg, M., Eine thrakoskythische Streitaxt aus Hallstatt, ArchKorr, 8, 111–117. Ferenczi 1966 Ferenczi, Șt., Cimitrul „scitic” de la Ciumbrud, ActaMN, 3, 49–73. Fialko 2006 Fialko, O., Scythian Material Culture, ActaTS, V, 1, 63–75. Galántha 1985 Galántha, M., Előzetes jelentés a Sándorfalva–eperjesi szkíta kori temető feltárásáról, MFMÉ, 1982–83/1, 115–128. Galántha 1986 Galántha, M., The Scythian Age Cemetery at Csanytelek–Újhalastó, IN: Jerem, E. (Hrsg.) Hallstatt Kolloquium Veszprém 1984, MittAIUAW, Beih 3, 69–77, 327–334. Galántha 1987 Galántha, M., A sándorfalva–eperjesi szkíta kori temető, Bölcsészdoktori értekezés, (Manuscript), Szeged. Genito 2008 Genito, B., The Archaeology of the Steppes: The Excavation at Endrőd 19 (SE Hungary), A Particular Viewpoint, ActaArchHung, 59, 257–276. Giumlia-Mair Giumlia-Mair, A., Ancient Metallurgical Traditions and Connections around the Caput Adriae, 2009 Journal of Mining and Metallurgy, 45/2, 149–163. Gleba 2008 Gleba, M., You are What You Wear: Scythian Costume as Identity, IN: Gleba, M.–Munkholt, C.–Nosch, M-L. (eds.), Dressing the past, Oxford, 13–28. Guttman 2010 Guttman, J., Ancient sling, Military History, 26/5, 23. Gyucha 2002 Gyucha, A., Újabb szkíta kori telepnyomok Békés megyéből, BMMK, 23, 59–88. Hellebrandt 1988 Hellebrandt, M., Szkíta kori temető Kesznyéten-Szérűskerten (1984–85. évi ásatás eredménye), HOMÉ, 25–26, 107–126. Hellmuth 2007a Hellmuth, A., Untersuchungen zum Gewicht skythischer pfeilspitzen aus dem Hallstattzeitlichen Siedlung von Smolenice-Molpír, SlovArch, 55/2, 285–294. Hellmuth 2007b Hellmuth, A., Zur Datierung der kreuzförmiger Goryt- und Bogentaschenbeschläge im Karpatenbecken, PZ, 82, 66–84. Hellmuth 2010 Hellmuth, A., Bogenschützen des Pontischen Raumes in der Älteren Eisenzeit, Teil 1–2, UPA, 177. Jerem 1968 Jerem, E. G., The Late Iron Age Cemetery of Szentlőrinc, ActaArchHung, 20, 159–208. Juhász 1976 T. Juhász, I., Az Orosháza–gyopárosi szkíta kori temető, ArchÉrt, 103, 231–252. Kalicz 1958 Kalicz, N., Tiszavasvári–Paptelekhát, RégFüz, I/9, 14. Kemenczei 1984 Kemenczei, T., Skythenzeitliche Akinakes in der Prähistorischen Sammlung des Ungarischen Nationalmuseums, FolArch, 35, 33–49. Kemenczei 1986 Kemenczei, T., Mitteleisenzeitliche Köcherbeschläge aus dem Alföld, FolArch, 37, 117–136. Kemenczei 1988 Kemenczei, T., Kora vaskori leletek Dél-Borsodban, HOMÉ, 25–26, 91–105. Kemenczei 1994 Kemenczei, T., Pfeilspitzen vom Früh-Skythen typ aus Ostungarn, FolArch, 43, 79–99. Kemenczei 2001 Kemenczei, T., Az Alföld szkíta kora, IN: Havassy, P. (szerk.), Hatalmasok viadalokban. Az alföld szkíta kora, Gyulai Katalógusok, 10, Gyula, 9–36. Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök | 91 Kemenczei, T., Beiträge zur Schmuckmode der Alföld Gruppe skytischer Prägung, FolArch, 49–50, 2001–2002, 29–77. Kemenczei 2009 Kemenczei, T., Studien zu den denkmälern skytisch geprägter Alföld gruppe, Budapest. Kisfaludi 1997 Kisfaludi, J., Tonstenpel und Knochenzylinder aus der Mittleren Eisenzeit im Karpatenbecken, ComArchHung, 75–107. Kiss 1983 Kiss, Zs., Szkítakori kerámia Szabolcs-Szatmár megyében, Szakdolgozat (Manuscript), Budapest. Kozubova 2008 Kozubova, A., Kostené valcovité predmety z pohrebísk Vekerzugskej Kultúry v Severozápadnej Časti Karpatskej Kotliny, Archeologia, 49–94. Kryzhitskiy 2007 Krizhitskiy, S. D., Criteria for the Presence of Barbarians in the Population of Early Olbia, IN: Braud, D.–Kryzhitskiy, S. D. (eds.), Classical Olbia and the Scythian World From the Sixth century BC to the second Century AD, Proceedings of the British Academy, Volume 142, 17–22. Matúz 2000 D. Matúz, E., A Szeged–Algyő 258. kútkörzet területén feltárt preszkíta temető, MFMÉ, 6, 139–164. Matúz 2001 D. Matúz, E., Két preszkíta sír Kompolt–Kígyósérről, Ősrégészeti levelek, 3, 43–47. Miroššayova– Miroššayova, E.–Olexa, L., Sklené koráliky z doby Halštatskej na východnom Slovensku, Olexa 2009 Študijné zvesti, 45, 99–103. Nagler 2000 Nagler, A., Grindstones in Eurasian Steppe Burials, Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia, 2, 107–113 Nagy 2007 L. Nagy, M., Tiszavasvári, Királyteleki út (Rókalyuk), AIH 2006, 303. Németi 1982 Németi, I., Das späthallstattzeitliche Gräberfeld von Sanislău, Dacia N. S., 26, 115–144. Németi 1988 Németi, I., Unele aspecte ale evoluţiei ceramicii din a doua epocă fierului în nord-vestul R. S. România, La Tène B–C, SCIVA, 2, 39, 87–111. Németi 2010 Németi, J., The Problem of Hand-made Pottery from La Tène (Celtic) Contexts in North-West Romania. A Comparison with Neighbouring Regions – Tisza Valley and Transylvania, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, BMM, II, 181–215. Párducz 1954 Párducz, M., Le cimetière hallstattien de Szentes–Vekerzug II, ActaArchHung, 4, 25–92. Párducz 1965 Párducz, M., Graves from the Scythian age at Ártánd (County Hajdú-Bihar), ActaArchHung, 17, 137–231. Párducz 1966 Párducz, M., The Scythian Age Cemetery at Tápiószele, ActaArchHung, 18, 35–91. Párducz 1969 Párducz, M., Szkítakori sír Tarpán, JAMÉ, 11, 81–88. Patay 1955 Patay, P., Szkíta leletek a nógrádi dombvidéken, FolArch, 7, 61–74. Patay–Kiss 2002 Patay, P.–Kiss, Zs., Az Alsótelekes–Dolinkai szkíta kori temető közöletlen sírjai, FolArch, 49–50, 2001–2002, 79–141. Patek 1990 Patek, E., A Szabó János Győző által feltárt „preszkíta” síranyag. A Füzesabony-Mezőcsát típusú temetkezések újabb emlékei Heves megyében, Agria, 25–26, 1989–1990, 61–118. Polidovych 2000 Polidovich, Yu. B., Скіфськь хрестоподіьні бляхи [Scythian cross-shaped pendants], Археологiя, 1, 35–48. Reeder 1999 Reeder, E. (ed.), Scythian Gold, New York. Révész 1996 Révész, L., A karosi honfoglalás kori temetők. Régészeti adatok a Felső-Tisza-vidék X. századi történetéhez, Miskolc. Romsauer 1991 Romsauer, P., The earliest wheel-thrown pottery in the Carpathian Basin, Antiquity, 65, 358–367. Rusyayeva 2007 Rusyayeva, A. S., Religious Interactions between Olbia and Scythia, IN: Braud, D.–Kryzhitskiy, S. D. (eds.), Classical Olbia and the Scythian World From the Sixth century BC to the second Century AD, Proceedings of the British Academy, Volume 142, 93–10. Scholtz 2007a Scholtz, R., Scythian age finds on the M3 motorway in Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County, Hungary, VsP, 8, 189–202. Scholtz 2007b Scholtz, R., Szkíta kori település- és temetőrészlet Tiszalök határában (Tiszalök, Börtön), AIH 2006, 53–66. Scholtz 2010 Scholtz R., New Data on the Scythian Age Settlement History of Szabolcs County, Hungary, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, BMM, II, 79–98. Scholtz 2011 Scholtz, R., Újabb szkíta kori lelet Nyíregyházáról, IN: Cabello, J.–C. Tóth, N. (szerk.), Erősségénél fogva várépítésre való. Tanulmányok a 70 éves Németh Péter tiszteletére, Nyíregyháza, 49–56. Szabó 1969 Szabó, J. Gy., A hevesi szkíta kori temető, EMÉ, 7, 55–120. Kemenczei 2002 92 | R. Scholtz Vaday 2009 Vaday, A., Salgótarján, Bevásárlóközpont – többkorszakú régészeti lelőhely, AIH 2008, 5–42. Vasiliev 1980 Vasiliev, V., Sciţii agatîrși pe teritoriul României, Cluj-Napoca. Vega–Craig 2009 Vega, M. B.–Craig, N., New experimental data on the distance of sling projectiles, JAS, 36, 1264–1268. Vulpe 1967 Vulpe, A., Necropola Hallstattiană Ferigile. Monografie arheologică, București. Vulpe 1990 Vulpe, A., Die Kurzschwerter, Dolche und Streitmesser der Hallstattzeit in Rumänien, PBF, VI, 9, München. List of figures Fig. 1. Tiszalök, Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County, Hungary. Fig. 2. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 176. Fig. 3. Bone quiver mount from Grave 320. Fig. 4. Incised bone cylinder from Grave 174. List of plates Pl. 1. The map of the archaeological site Tiszalök–Prison. Pl. 2. The map of the cemetery. Pl. 3. 1. Grave 173; 2. Grave 174; 3. Grave 176; 4. Grave 312; 5. Grave 320; 6. Grave 321. Pl. 4. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 173. 1. Surface drawing; 2, 9, 11–12. ceramic; 3–5ab. amber; 6. bone; 7. glass; 8. tooth; 10. stone. Pl. 5. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 174. 1. Surface drawing; 2–3. bone; 4–5. iron; 6. scallop; 7–11. ceramic. Pl. 6. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 320. 1–4. Surface and section drawings and photos; 5. bone. Pl. 7. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 320. 1. bronze; 2–3. bone; 4–7. iron; 8. stone; 9–10. ceramic. Pl. 8. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 312 and 321. 1, 12. Surface drawing; 2–3, 7–11, 14–15. ceramic; 4–6, 9. iron. Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök | 93 Plate 1. The map of the archaeological site Tiszalök–Prison. Plate . e map of t e ar aeolo i al site is al – ri n. 94 | R. Scholtz Plate 2. The map of the cemetery. Plate . e map of t e emetery. Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök | 95 5 Plate 3. 1. Grave 173; 2. Grave 174; 3. Grave 176; 4. Grave 312; 5. Grave 320; 6. Grave 321. Plate . . ra e . ra e . ra e . ra e 5. ra e . ra e . 96 | R. Scholtz 5 5a m 5 Plate 4. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 173. 1. Surface drawing; 2, 9, 11–12. ceramic; 3–5ab. amber; 6. bone; 7. glass; 8. tooth; 10. stone. . urfa e dra in – Pl. . is al – ri n ra e . . erami –5a . am er . one . lass . toot . stone. Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök | 97 ron 5 m 5 Plate 5. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 174. 1. Surface drawing; 2–3. bone; 4–5. iron; 6. scallop; 7–11. ceramic. Plate 5. is al – ri n ra e . . urfa e dra in – . one –5. iron . s allop – . erami . 98 | R. Scholtz 5a 5 5 m . ree slin stones . ron nife . eel t ro n u . ron at et 5. ron e fra ments . ron e arro eads . ron fra ment . one ui er mountin . ree ron e arro eads . andmade o l erami 5 m erami 5 Plate 6. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 320. 1–4. Surface and section drawings and photos; 5. bone. Plate . is al – ri n ra e . – . urfa e and se tion dra in s and p otos 5. one. Scythian Age Burials at Tiszalök | 99 a e a d f 5 Plate 7. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 320. 1. bronze; 2–3. bone; 4–7. iron; 8. stone; 9–10. ceramic. Plate . is al – ri n ra e . . ron e – . one – . iron . stone – . erami . 100 | R. Scholtz 5 5 5 5 m ron ron orl 5 5 5 m ron 5 Plate 8. Tiszalök–Prison, Grave 312 and 321. 1, 12. Surface drawing; 2–3, 7–11, 14–15. ceramic; 4–6, 9. iron. Plate . is al – ri n . urfa e dra in – – ra e and – 5 erami . – iron. Scythian Age Human Skeletal Remains from Tiszalök László SZATHMÁRY Jósa András Museum Nyíregyháza, Hungary and Debrecen University Department of Evolutionary Zoology and Human Biology Debrecen, Hungary szathmary.laszlo@science.unideb.hu Keywords: human skeletal finds, cremated human finds, Iron Age, Scythian period, North-East Hungary In 2006 six Iron Age (Scythian period) skeletal remains were unearthed in Tiszalök, SzabolcsSzatmár-Bereg County, Hungary by Robert Scholtz and his co-workers (Scholtz 2007). The anthropological finds consisted of two skeletons (grave 173 and 176) and ashes from four scattered cremations (graves 174, 312, 320 and 321). Grave 173 The remains consist of an incomplete and fragmentary skull and mandible as well as parts of the postcranial skeleton: fragments of the diaphyses of the femora and tibiae. The secondary sex characteristics (Acsádi–Nemeskéri 1970; Szathmáry 1993) indicate a female (Sexualisation: –0.25, feminine): mastoid process: +1 (masculine); occipital squama: 0 (indifferent); external occipital protuberance: –1 (feminine); body of the mandible (at M2): 0 (indifferent); mental trigonum: 0 (indifferent); mandibular angle: 0 (indifferent); greater pelvis: –1 (feminine); true pelvis: –1 (feminine); sciatic notch: +1 (masculine); head of femur: –1 (feminine); linea aspera: +1 (masculine); pre-auricular sulcus: –2 (hyper-feminine). Endocranial obliteration: phase I. Superficial position in the symphysial face: phase III. Age at death (cf. Acsádi–Nemeskéri 1970): 37–46 years. Dental abrasion can only be observed on the molars in the mandible. Based on the calculations of Körber (1957), abrasion of phase 2–3 appears on premolars while on the third molar abrasion of phase 1 can be observed. The maximum length of femora was 428 mm; the lateral condyle length of tibiae had 355 mm; while the medial condyle length of tibiae was 353 mm. The reconstructed stature determined according to Th. Sjøvold (1990) indicates a 163 cm tall, i.e. quite tall and slightly masculine female with a strong bony frame. In the Scythian Age cemetery from Tápiószentmárton the examinations of É. Éry (1998) revealed three similar individuals (Fóthi Et Al. 2000). On the other hand, among the 20 individuals from Füzesabony–Kettőshalom, Hatvan–Strázsadomb, Maklár–Koszpérium, Sirok–Akasztómály and Tarnaörs– Csárdamajor (Éry 1990), sites of the Mezőcsát group from the pre-Scythian period (8th century BC) there are only two females (10%) of same height or even taller than the skeleton from grave 173, both unearthed in Sirok. Therefore we hypothetically presume that the female from Tiszalök anthropologically might be connected to the pre-Scythian period. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 101–104 102 | L. Szathmáry Grave 176 The remains consist of a fragmentary and incomplete skull and postcranial skeleton. The stature cannot be reconstructed from the fragments of the long bones. The secondary sex characters (Acsádi– Nemeskéri 1970; Szathmáry 1993) indicate a female (sexualisation –0.78 feminine): frontal and parietal eminences: 0 (indifferent); glabella and superciliary arch: –1 (feminine), mastoid process: 0 (indifferent); external occipital protuberance: –1 (feminine); squamous part of the occipital bone: –1 (feminine); sciatic notch: –1 (feminine); head of femur: 0 (indifferent); linea aspera: –1 (feminine); pre-auricular sulcus: –2 (hyper-feminine). Endocranial obliteration: phase I. Structural phase of the proximal epiphysis of the femur: phase II. Age at death (Acsádi–Nemeskéri 1970): 25–34 years. Taking into account the absolute and relative cranial dimensions (Alekseev–Debec 1964) from the pre-Scythian cemeteries from Füzesabony–Kettőshalom, Maklár–Koszpérium and Sirok–Akasztómály (Éry 1990) and the Scythian sites from Csanytelek, Szentes–Jaksorpart, Tápiószele (Bottyán 1943; Fóthi Et Al. 2000), Szabadszállás–Józan (Dezső 1966), Abony 65 and Ecser 6 (Kővári 2008), one can observe the same dimensions dimension ranges for pre-Scythians and Scythians. The maximum cranial length (167 mm) is short, its occurrence among pre-Scythians (N = 17) is 5.1%; among Scythians (N = 33) is 12.4%. The maximum cranial breadth (140 mm) is broad, its occurrence among pre-Scythians (N = 15) is 20.0%; among Scythians (N = 31) is 12.5%. The maximum frontal breadth (97 mm) is broad (pre-Scythians: N = 18; 27.7%; Scythians: N = 33; 27.3%). The auriculo–bregmatic height (111 mm) is of medium height (pre-Scythians: N = 12; 50.0%; Scythians: N = 29; 37.9%). In conclusion, according to the four absolute cranial measurements the skeleton shows values characteristic to pre-Scythians (25.7%) rather than Scythians (22.5%). The cranial length and breadth index (83.8) refers to a brachycranic individual (pre-Scythians: N = 15; 20.0%; Scythians: N = 31; 9.7%). The auriculo–bregmatic height and cranial length index (66.5) refers to a hypsicranic individual (pre-Scythians: N = 12; 8.3%; Scythians: N = 31; 14.3%). The transversal frontoparietal index (69.3) refers to a metriometopic individual (pre-Scythians: N = 14; 21.4%; Scythians: N = 31; 19.4%). According to the four indices the skeleton from grave 176 bears a resemblance to the preScythians on level 15.3% and to the Scythians on level 18.3%. Summarizing the results, this skeleton presents both pre-Scythian (20.5%) and Scythian marks (20.4%). The relative cranial dimensions are characteristic for pre-Scythians, while the absolute cranial measurements indicate Scythian characters, although pre-Scythians and Scythians were physically quite different (Kővári 2008). At the same time it should be remembered that the dissimilarities of pre-Scythians and Scythians are primarily owing to the first two principal components including the dimensions of the facial skeleton and representing the major part (45.5%) of the total variance – and these data are missing for grave 176. If we endeavour to bridge over the insufficiency of this skeletal find and substitute missing data according to Dear’s method, which proves to be the most reliable in such cases (Guba Et Al. 1997), as well as carry on a hierarchic cluster analysis on the basis of the scores of the extracted principal components by applying both Euclidean distance and UPGMA, we are led to the conclusion that this skeleton can be classified into a group constituted by the pre-Scythian finds of Füzesabony 6 and 23 as well as the Scythian skeletons of Szabadszállás–Józan 45 and 121. Consequently, the marks which indicate that the skeleton from grave 176 can be associated with two different chronological groups in an equal proportion are expressed on the individual level as well. Stature cannot be properly reconstructed. Estimated on the basis of the fragments, the femur might measure 355 mm, which may indicate (Sjøvold 1990) a maximum 142 cm height of body, much shorter than the female from grave 173, referring her to the category of short people. Regarding the physique this individual differs strongly from grave 173 not only in body-height but, being unambiguously feminine, also in the level of sexualisation. It is remarkable however, how expressed the deltoid tuberosity of the humerus is on both sides, this phenomenon being characteristic of the overstrain of the arms. Regarding the pathology of the skeleton cribra orbitalia could be observed, probably caused by nutritional deficiency (İșcan–Kennedy 1989; Ortner 2003). Cremated human remains The excavations uncovered four cremated human remains; they were analyzed applying the classical anatomical methodology (Wells 1960; Chochol 1961; Nemeskéri–Harsányi 1968). The burnt remains were measured (Fig. 1) and their colour was observed (Fig. 2). Scythian Age Human Skeletal Remains from Tiszalök | 103 Grave 174 Size (mm) grave 321 grave 312 grave 320 grave 174 The remains from this feature were x–0.25 30 150 280 490 mostly well burnt out, with arched fissures 0.5–1 45 255 220 430 and a sharp and clanging sound. The occipi1–5 25 5 209 310 tal region was not completely destroyed by 5–7 – – 10 15 fire. The sex of the deceased was very probably 7–x – – 1 5 female, because the head of femur, the malar Total (pieces) 80 410 720 1250 surface and the zygomatic arch all show hyperWeight (g) 15 273 551 1108 feminine characteristics. Age at death (Acsádi– Fig. 1. Distribution of the four cremated remains Nemeskéri 1970) was 31–36 years, according by the size and weight. to the endocranial obliteration in phase I (it is Colour grave 321 grave 312 grave 320 grave 174 open on the pars lambdica of the sagittal suture Chalk-white 55 310 360 860 and on the pars lambdoidea of the lambdoid Greyish white 10 50 190 230 suture) and the structural stage of the proxiBluish white 5 30 125 70 mal epiphysis of the humerus and the femur Greyish blue 10 20 45 90 in phase II. The remains indicate a relatively 80 410 720 1250 robust female with muscle reliefs differentiated Total (pieces) Weight (g) 15 273 551 1108 on the fragments of the limbs (ulnae, femora, tibiae). From the teeth three premolars and the Fig. 2. Distribution of the four cremated remains by the colour. fragments of a canine were kept. The stage of dental abrasion points to phase 1 (Körber 1957), pointing to 26–33 years of age. The vertical diameters of the head of femur were (d/s) 37/36 mm; the transversal diameters of the head of femur were (d/s) 36/35 mm. Grave 312 This feature consists of mostly arched fissured and fragmentary remains with sharp and metal sound. The probable sex of the deceased was female indicated by the 18 mm wide head of the mandible, the characteristic occipital squama and the whole habit of the remains. Age at death was 50–70 years, evidenced by the opened pars asterica on the endocranial obliteration, denoting an age of life over 65 years (Oliver 1960) or over 70 years (Vallois 1937). Dental abrasion shows phase 4 (Körber 1957), specific for 50–70 years of age, or in any case an age of life over 45 years (Miles 1963). The physical characteristics present a female of gracile constitution: muscular reliefs are not expressed; both the interosseous region of the radius crista and the mid-formation of the femur and tibia refer to gracility. The fragments of four teeth were recovered: upper premolar 1, lower premolar 2, upper molar 1 and upper molar 2. Except for lower premolar 2, all the others allow determining the degree of abrasion, which shows phase 4. Grave 320 The cremated remains refer to slightly uneven burning, visible both on the calvaria and the postcranial remains (radius and ulna). Presumably, this is not owing to differences in cremation rites, but in weather conditions and precipitation of the different seasons or parts of the day. This is confirmed by the fact that almost all patterns of fractures – i. e. fragmentary, conchoid and comminuted – can be identified on the remains. Furthermore, it is the distribution of colours due to the considerable amount of fragments burnt improperly rather than the distribution of the sizes of the fragments that distinguishes this object from the rest (Fig. 2). This definitely masculine individual may have been burnt on a funeral pile of the same intensity as the pyre of the females showed. The massive cranial formation, a vertex of 8 mm in diameter and the fragments of the postcranial skeleton are, without exception, all masculine. Age at death was 30–50 years, shown by the 13 cm long opened pars verticis of the sagittal suture, suggesting age of life between 20 and 60 years (Oliver 1960) or between 43 and 52 years (Vallois 1937). The individual had a robust physique, observed on the muscular reliefs of the femur and the tibia. The deltoid tuberosity of the humerus was also expressed; the trochlea of the humerus may have been very broad and high. Grave 321 Only a small amount of cremated remains were found in this grave, but they cover all the anatomical regions. Despite the small quantity, gathering was proportional (Fig. 1). The sex was probably feminine; the age at death was around 23–40 years, with endocranial obliteration in phase I (Acsádi–Nemeskéri 1970). Based on the thickness of the cranial fragments of the vertex (2–3 mm) the deceased was a gracile female. No muscular reliefs can be found on the remains of the limbs. 104 | L. Szathmáry Summing up the results of the investigations on the four cremated remains, one can conclude, that, regardless of the sizes of the samples, the individuals may have been cremated by using the same technique with the same intentions of burning the corpse evenly (Fig. 1 and 2). The remains belonging to grave 320 can be excepted because there the consistent performance of the rite might have been influenced by special seasonal or daily weather conditions (first of all precipitation). The way the ashes are assembled refers to identical intentions regardless of the quantity of the samples. It seems to be sure that the circumstances of the archaeological excavation have not had a determinant effect on the conclusions drawn in the present paper. References Acsádi–Nemeskéri 1970 Acsádi, Gy.–Nemeskéri, J., History of Human Life Span and Mortality, Budapest. Alekseev–Debec 1964 Alekseev, V. P.–Debec, G. F., Kraniometria, Moskva. Bottyán 1943 Bottyán, O., Szkítakori temetők embertani vizsgálata. Anthropologische Untersuchung der Gräberfelden vom Zeitalter der Scyter, Acta Seminarium et Naturalium, Kolozsvár, 3–64. Chochol 1961 Chochol, J., Analyse menschlicher Brandreste aus den Lausitzer Gräberfelden in Ushi nad Laben-Strečkov II. und in Žirovice, Bezirk Cheb, IN: Plesl, E. (ed.), Lužichea kultúra v severovozăpadnich Cechach, Praha, 273–293. Dezső 1966 Dezső, Gy., A Population of the Scythian Period between the Danube and the Tisza, Anthropologia Hungarica, 7, 1–2, 35–83. Éry 1998 Éry, K., Length of Limb Bones and Stature in Ancient Populations in the Carpathian Basin, Humanbiologia Budapestiensis, 26, 1–96. Éry 1990 Éry, K., Embertani vizsgálatok Heves megye Kr.e. VIII. századi népességén, AGRIA, 1989–1990, 25–26, 119–158. Fóthi Et Al. 2000 Fóthi, E.–Bernert, Zs.–Évinger, S., A tápiószelei szkíta kori temető embertani vizsgálata, IN: Gócsáné Móró, Cs. (szerk.), Az aranyszarvas nyomában. A Blaskovich fivérek és a magyar régészet kapcsolata, Kecskemét, 65–93. Guba Et Al. 1997 Guba, Zs.–Szathmáry, L.–Almási, L., Treatment of missing data in principal component analysis, Acta Biologica Szeged, 42, 55–58. İșcan–Kennedy 1989 İșcan, M. Y.–Kennedy, A. R. K., Reconstruction of Life from the Skeleton, New York. Körber 1957 Körber, E., Abrasion und Articulations–bewegung, Zeitschrift die Deutsche Zahnheilkunde, 12, 117–129. Kővári 2008 Kővári, I., Az Alföld őskori népességeinek megítélése kraniometriai elemzésük révén, PhD dissertation, Debrecen University, Debrecen, Manuscript. Miles 1963 Miles, A. E. W., The dentition in the assessment of individual age in skeletal material, IN: Brothwell, D. R. (ed.), Dental anthropology, Symposia of the Society for the Study Human Biology, London, 191–209. Nemeskéri–Harsányi Nemeskéri, J.–Harsányi, L., A hamvasztott csontvázleletek vizsgálatának kérdései., 1968 AnthKözl, 12, 99–116. Olivier 1960 Olivier, G., Pratique Anthropologique, Paris. Ortner 2003 Ortner, D. J., Identification of pathological conditions in human skeletal remains, San Diego. Scholtz 2007 Scholtz, R., Scythian Period settlement and cemetery fragment at Tiszalök (Tiszalök, Prison), AIH 2006, 53–65. Sjøvold 1990 Sjøvold, Th., Estimation of stature from long bones utilizing the line of organic correlation, Human Evolution, 5, 431–446. Szathmáry 1993 Szathmáry, L., Importance of Pre-auricular Region in Sex Determination, JAMÉ, 1990–1992, Nyíregyháza, 67–78. Vallois 1937 Vallois, H. V., La durée de la vie chez l’homme fossile, L’Anthropologie, 47, 499–532. Wells 1960 Wells, C., A study of cremation, Antiquity, 34, 29–37. List of figures Fig. 1. Distribution of the four cremated remains by the size and weight. Fig. 2. Distribution of the four cremated remains by the colour. Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania* Florin GOGÂLTAN–József-Gábor NAGY Institute of Archaeology and Art History Cluj-Napoca, Romania gogaltan@yahoo.com Babeș–Bolyai University Cluj-Napoca, Romania nagyjozsefgabor@yahoo.com To the memory of Professor Ion Horaţiu Crișan Keywords: Transylvania, Early Iron Age, ‘Ha D’ horizon, discoveries of Vlaha type Rescue excavations from Vlaha–Pad, Săvădisla commune, Cluj County sought to investigate a site identified in the summer of 2004 around the 43rd km of the future A3 ‘Transylvania’ motorway (Borș– Brașov). The investigations have been carried out by a team from the Institute of Archaeology and History of Art from Cluj-Napoca (Ioan Stanciu, Florin Gogâltan) and students from the Babeș-Bolyai University (Stanciu Et Al. 2005; 2006; 2007). The site is located on the first terrace of the Finișel stream valley, a tributary of the Someșul Mic, south-west of Vlaha village, at an altitude of 474–476 m, on the area known locally as Pad (Pl. 1). On geodesic distance the locality is at about 9 km south-west from Cluj-Napoca. The legislation and methodology of archaeological research of that time in Romania did not allow the mechanised digging of the site. Due to these conditions the team has planned the digging of three trenches (S. 001–003) of 70 × 2 m each, perpendicular to the axis of the motorway, to which another two trenches were added later, one of 70 × 2 m (S. 004), parallel to the first three, and a main one (S. 005) covering the entire perimeter, along the axis of the motorway and perpendicularly cutting the trenches placed on the width of the road. This excavation system provided stratigraphic profiles at roughly every 50 m along the width of the entire site and a main stratigraphic profile through the entire site (Pl. 2). A total of 15 trenches, having the length of between 10 and 209 m, and 20 rectangular cuts of smaller dimensions have been manually excavated during the 2004 campaign. The distance between them was of up to 50 m, so at the end of this phase eleven rectangular surfaces had been delimited (Sf. I–XI), each between 380 and 2968 m2. The 2005 campaign started with a mechanised removal of the humus layer between trenches – covering an area of 1 ha at a maximum depth of 0.30 m –, followed by the identification and delimitation of existing archaeological features and their investigation (Pl. 1/2). The investigation of a surface of * This work was possible with the financial support of the Sectorial Operational Programme for Human Resources Development 2007–2013, co-financed by the European Social Fund, under the project number POSDRU/89/1.5/S/61104 with the title “Social sciences and humanities in the context of global development - development and implementation of postdoctoral research” and of the MTA Domus Hungarica Scientiarum et Artium Budapest 2012 (Fl. Gogâltan); doctoral studies supported by a scholarship provided by the AMPOSDRU under the project “Development of the opportunities offered to doctoral students to pursue flexible paths in research careers” POSDRU/6/1.5/S/25 (J.-G. Nagy). A paper on this subject was presented by J.-G. Nagy at the Beyond the Veil. International Student Conference on Spirituality in Prehistory, Alba Iulia, 3–5 April 2009 (Nagy 2011a, 93). The authors wish to thank for observations, information and bibliographic support to the following colleagues: C. I. Popa, A. Rustoiu, I. Bejinariu, N. Palincaș, G. G. Marinescu, I. Lascu, D. Pop and V. Cedică. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 105–132 106 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy 5764 m2 was finalised during the third campaign (2006); at that time 1.10 ha, representing over 73% of the area of the site affected by the construction of the Borș–Brașov motorway, had been covered. The last campaign from Vlaha–Pad lasted from July until August 2007, when a surface of over 5000 m2 was excavated. At the end of four archaeological campaigns an area of 16,828.125 m2 has been excavated and a total of 1340 archaeological features, consisting of 308 graves dated to the 6th century AD and 1032 prehistoric features were completely investigated. The research identified the northern, eastern and western limits of the site (Gogâltan Et Al. 2011, 164–165). The prehistoric habitation The stratigraphy is different across the site because the prehistoric habitation displays a variable intensity, concentrating on the highest area of the terrace, on which the cemetery of the second half of the 1st millennium AD was also located. Close to some features archaeological remains are obviously more consistent. The modern humus (the vegetal layer together with ploughed soil) has a thickness of about 20–25 cm, a light grey colour and quite compact consistency. The habitation layer corresponding to the prehistoric settlements has a medium thickness of about 10–15 cm and a maximum one of 25 cm, a greyish-black colour and a crumbling, sometimes clayish consistency, containing smaller or larger bits of adobe and ceramic fragments. Underneath is the ancient soil, having a blackish-brown colour, relatively compact, with a variable thickness between 15 and 25 cm. Ceramic fragments appeared in the upper part, so its delimitation from the archaeological layer itself is quite difficult. Underneath the ancient soil is yellowish-red clay, having a hard consistence and variable thickness, on average of over 1 m. The lowest layer consists of geological gravel, which in some areas already appeared at a depth of 50–60 cm from the modern layer. The large majority of the investigated features consist of postholes, followed by various storage pits later transformed in garbage pits and foundation trenches of some surface dwellings. The surface dwellings did not survive due to erosion and intensive agriculture. Only the partially sunken constructions have been noted (Pl. 2). Aside from these features another category was also identified, belonging to the ritual domain due to the archaeological inventory and the unusual structure of the deposits (Gogâltan Et Al. 2011). An inhumation grave with the deceased in crouched position and dated in the Early Iron Age can also be added (Gogâltan Et Al. 2008). The vertical stratigraphy of the site does not offer concluding data regarding the delimitation of different chronological horizons because the archaeological layer was disturbed by agricultural works, sometimes down to the ancient soil, from which the prehistoric features began. There are a few situations in which the prehistoric features were cut or superposed by later interventions. For example the dwelling Cx 0121, belonging to the late period of the Bronze Age, was cut by a pit in which a bi-truncated vessel of the Early Iron Age was placed, whereas in a dwelling dated to the same period (Cx 1178) it was later dug out a pit dated to the Early Iron Age (Cx 1215). Still the ceramic finds and the metallic artefacts allowed the identification of two distinct settlements. The Bronze Age habitation can be placed in the second phase and eventually at the beginning of the third phase of the Late Bronze Age in Transylvania, BrD–HaA1 Central European (Gogâltan Et Al. 1992, 12–13; Gogâltan 2001, 196–199; Gogâltan Et Al. 2004, 73–74; Gogâltan 2005, 375–376; Bejinariu 2008a, 94–95; Gogâltan 2009, 121–122; Popa–Totoianu 2010b, 248, tabel 1). After around 300–400 years the location was again chosen by a community of the Early Iron Age (Pl. 2), contemporaneous with those from Teleac (level II), Mediaș and Alba Iulia–Monolit. The pottery, especially the kidney-shaped cups, allows a dating in the Iron II sequence, HaB2–3 Central European (Stanciu Et Al. 2006, 399; Stanciu Et Al. 2007, 393; Gogâltan Et Al. 2008, 115; Gogâltan Et Al. 2011, 167; Nagy 2011b, 321). The careful analysis of the archaeological material lead to the identification of several features (CX 0338, CX 0375, CX 1105, CX 1209) containing ceramic forms of post-Basarabi type which can be dated towards the end of the Early Iron Age (Nagy 2011b, 321). The scope of this article is to present one of these features, which provided a relatively rich archaeological inventory and generated some interesting questions regarding its functionality. Feature CX 0375 The archaeological feature named by the research team CX 0375 was identified on the field as a pit having a roughly rectangular shape with slightly rounded corners, due to the tool used for digging it out (Pl. 3/1–2). The slightly trough-like shape of the edge and the bottom of the pit suggests that a wooden hoe with a straight blade having a curved edge was used for digging. The traces of the spade are missing. The dimensions of the pit are of 2.62 × 1.20 m, being not very deeply dug so the virgin soil was reached Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 107 at around 0.43 m down from the modern layer (Pl. 3/5). The orientation of the pit on its long axis was east–west, with a slight northward deviation. Since the prehistoric settlements from Vlaha were located on a rather large terrace of the Finișel stream, far from the slopes of the nearby hill, the subsequent deposits are minimal (Pl. 1/2). The use of this place as pasture or agricultural land during a long period, thus contributing to its erosion, can be also mentioned. Taking into consideration these conditions, it might be considered that the mentioned pit was dug right before its use, while knowing precisely what and how much would be placed inside. When the feature became visible it was presumed that the pit belonged to a Gepidic grave. Its orientation and the fact that it did not belong to one of the ‘rows’ typical of this horizon attracted the attention of the team involved in the investigation of the prehistoric features on site, so it was taken over by them. In the excavation record it has been mentioned that the emptying of the pit was started on 12.05.2005 (J. G. Nagy). At the depth of 13 cm down from the layer on which the pit became visible some ceramic fragments started to appear, belonging to beakers with raised handles, dishes with protuberances on the body, a dish with oblique grooves on the inside of the rim, a bowl, three fragments of a jar, a miniature container, bones, small fragments of charcoal, ash, all at approximately the same level and on the entire surface of the pit (Pl. 3/2–3). Charcoal, ash and animal bones, covered with ceramic fragments, were found on the bottom of the pit (Pl. 3/4). The bottom was reached at a depth of 32 cm down from the layer on which the pit was identified. Aside from the vessels belonging to the end of the Early Iron Age, some unidentifiable ceramic fragments lacking traces of secondary burning were also discovered. The latter may belong to the end of the Bronze Age, being drawn into the pit during its digging into the Bronze Age layer. Some pebbles brought from the nearby valley complete the inventory of the feature (Pl. 3/3, 5). Description of the ceramic inventory: 1. Miniature container, perhaps displaying traces of a spout, coarse, the surface being superficially smoothed, grey, reduction firing, traces of secondary burning, crushed pottery, sand and gravel used as temper (Pl. 4/1). 2. Fragment of a beaker having a slightly reverted rim (probably with two raised handles), a lower bi-truncated half and a flat base, semi-fine, well smoothed surface, brown-blackish, reduction firing, traces of secondary burning, sand used as temper (Pl. 4/2). 3. Beaker with a rounded, straight rim, continued by a slightly curved body, thin walls, two raised handles attached to the rim and having an elliptic cross-section. The lower half is bi-truncated and has a flat base. It is made of a fine fabric, with well smoothed surface, black, reduction firing, sand used as temper (Pl. 4/3). 4. Beaker with a rounded, straight rim, continued by a straight body, thin walls, two raised handles attached to the rim and having an elliptic cross-section, with a thin central nervure. A slightly convex strip decorated with oblique incisions is placed on the base of the handles. The lower half is bi-truncated and has a flat base. It is made of a fine fabric, with a well smoothed surface, black, reduction firing, traces of secondary burning, sand used as temper (Pl. 4/4). 5. Fragment of a dish with a wide reverted rim, decorated with oblique grooves on the inside of the rim, a slightly curved body; lower part of the vessel is missing. Semi-fine fabric, with a well smoothed surface, black, reduction firing, crushed pottery and coarse sand used as temper (Pl. 5/1). 6. Restored dish with a rounded inverted rim, decorated with oblique grooves on the convex shoulder, from which four semicircular knobs, oblique and downward oriented, axial placed, were modelled; each knob has alveolar impressions which are not perforating them. The lower part is bi-truncated and the base is flat. The fabric is semifine, with well smoothed surface, black, incomplete reduction firing, sand used as temper (Pl. 5/2). 7. Restored dish with a slightly inverted rim, on the slightly curved shoulder are placed knobs (probably four, axial placed) having a conical shape, downward oriented. The lower part is strongly bi-truncated and the base is flat. The fabric is coarse, with roughly smoothed surface, black, good reduction firing, sand and a large quantity of gravel used as temper (Pl. 5/3). 8. Fragment of a thickened rim, fine, having well smoothed surface, black-grey, reduction firing, fine sand used as temper (Pl. 6/1). 9. Fragment of a dish rim?, coarse, having a loosely smoothed surface, brown on the outside and grey on the inside, incomplete reduction firing, gravel used as temper, decorated with two circular impressions on the rim (Pl. 6/2). 10. Fragment of a jar with reverted rim, semi-fine, roughly smoothed surface, black-grey, reduction firing, sand used as temper (Pl. 6/3). 11. Fragments of a bowl having a thickened rim, slightly inverted (5 fragments), semi-fine, roughly smoothed surface, black, reduction firing, crushed pottery and sand containing gravel used as temper (Pl. 6/4). 12. Fragment of a bag-shaped vessel having a thickened, slightly reverted rim, straight walls, with two oval adjoining knobs placed on the upper part of the vessel, coarse, superficially smoothed surface, brown-reddish, oxidation firing, sand and crushed pottery used as temper (Pl. 6/5). 108 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy 13. Fragment of a coarse jar having superficially smoothed surface, brown-grey, oxidation firing, sand and crushed pottery used as temper (Pl. 6/6). Unidentifiable ceramic fragments: 14. Fragments of a large storage vessel (10 fragments), coarse, having loosely smoothed surface, brown on the outside and grey on the inside, incomplete oxidation firing, traces of secondary burning, gravel used as temper. 15. Fragmentary base of a vessel (2 fragments), coarse, loosely smoothed surface, grey, incomplete reduction firing, gravel used as temper. Regarding the ceramic production, some steps have been made in the investigation of archaeological aspects of the Early Iron Age in Transylvania during the last ten years. Our scope is not to present a detailed history of the research regarding the Early Iron Age in Transylvania, but to mention the most relevant contributions which appeared in the last decade and are mostly based on the interpretation of ceramic finds (other information regarding the history of research of this period in Giurgiu Ardeu 1996; Stăncescu 2003; Inel 2006; Bejinariu 2008a, 95–96). The so-called ‘HaA’ phase, ascribed to the beginning of the Iron Age or to a period of transition from the Bronze Age to the next period by previous literature,1 started to take shape not only from the perspective of the outstanding metallurgic production (Soroceanu 1995; Petrescu-Dîmboviţa 1998; Soroceanu 2005; Ciugudean Et Al. 2006; Bejinariu 2007; Kacsó 2007; Bejinariu 2008b; Soroceanu 2008; Ciugudean Et Al. 2008; Bratu 2009; etc.) but also from the one of the habitat. Thus important clarifications have been suggested regarding the horizon of Igriţa cultural manifestations (Vasiliev 2004a), Hajdúbagos/Pișcolt–Cehăluţ (Németi 2009; Bejinariu 2010; Németi 2010a), Lăpuș and Gáva from north-western (Marta 2009; Marta 2010) and northern Transylvania (Kacsó 2001; Kacsó 2004; Teržan 2005; Metzner-Nebelsick Et Al. 2009; Teržan 2010; Metzner-Nebelsick Et Al. 2010; Kacsó Et Al. 2011; Kacsó 2011; etc.), and further across the eastern Carpathians in Moldova (László 2010b). Today they are considered archaeological aspects that must be ascribed to the late phase of the Bronze Age. Even if in the title of one of his most recent works László (2010b, 121) still uses the notion of ‘älteren Hallstattperiode’, referring to the ‘frühe hallstattischen’ cultures with grooved ceramic Gáva–Holihrady and Corlăteni–Chișinău, the required quotation marks are rightfully used (László 2010b, 125–126). A few small discoveries from central Transylvania have been put together by Ciugudean (1994; 2004; 2010, 165–167, fig. 2; Ciugudean–Aldea 2005) under the name ‘Band–Cugir’. This sequence was only deduced but remains far from being clarified, as confirmed by the finds from Florești–Polus Center, recently published by Ursuţiu (2009). The Mureș valley has not been neglected either (Rustoiu 2000). Popa offers a new perspective on the Late Bronze Age along the middle course of the river (Popa– Totoianu 2010a; Popa–Totoianu 2010b, 171–291). Numerous other sites belonging to this chronological sequence were investigated during numerous rescue excavations over the last two years. Their future publication will very probably change many aspects of current interpretations. Concerning the Early Iron Age, in the way defined in the last ten years, like a sequence which roughly covers the 10th–5th centuries BC,2 the interest of an entire generation in this period begins to bring the expected results. Albeit showing a modest intensity, the dwellings of the Early Iron Age from Limba–Bordane and Șesu-Orzii provided an interesting material, characteristic of the middle Mureș valley (Rustoiu–Ciută 2001, 119–134). The placing of a single cup belonging to the kidney-shaped type on the bottom of a small pit demonstrate, given the discoveries from Vlaha–Pad, a ritual practice characteristic of the Iron II period (HaB2–3) in Transylvania (Rustoiu–Ciută 2001, 122, fig. 7/3). Alongside older Basarabi finds from Sebeș–Podul Pripocului (Horedt Et Al. 1967, 23, fig. 9/7; Ciugudean 1997, 145, fig. 26/1–8; 1 2 The entire older discussion regarding the chronology of the Early Iron Age in Transylvania, previously known as ‘Hallstatt’, is presented in a series of works belonging to Vasiliev (1983; 1987; 1992; 1994; 1999b; 2003; Vasiliev Et Al. 1991, 102–129; etc.) who dedicated his entire scientific life to the investigation of this period. See also a synthetic presentation of this problem in Gumă 1993, 110–140, and more recently László 2001a; 2001b, as well as some critical observations in Vasiliev 2007. They were not integrated as such in the new edition of ‘Istoria Românilor’ (László 2010a). Mentions are also present in Gogâltan 2001, 199; Gogâltan 2005, 376; Gogâltan 2009, 122; Nagy–Körösfői 2010, 141; Nagy 2011b, 360–371. Analysing the finds of the Early Iron Age from Banat the late Marian Gumă also sought to similarly separate the period in four phases, from I to IV, each having several sub-phases (Gumă 1993, 274–282). Unfortunately his untimely death left this chronological system undeveloped and un-promoted. However the subject will be discussed on another occasion. We only mention that for the periodization of the Hallstatt civilization in Central Europe the following works have been taken into consideration: Sperber 1987; Parzinger 1989; Patek 1993; Pare 1999; Metzner-Nebelsick 2002, 46–75, Abb. 78; Trachsel 2004; etc. Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 109 27/1–5, 7–8) can be added those coming from surveys and rescue excavations made by Popa and Totoianu in 1998 (Popa–Totoianu 2001, 38–39). In a small excavation made at Alba Iulia–Pâclișa was identified a ‘Hallstatt feature’, an agglomeration of pebbles amongst which ceramic fragments were placed. Even if the human bones are missing, it might be possible that the feature had a funerary function. The vessels were ascribed to the Basarabi culture, the final phase (Ciugudean–Dragotă 2001, 270–272). Also the efforts of various students to present the results of several surveys cannot be overlooked. Amongst them can be first mentioned the students from the “1 Decembrie 1918” University of Alba Iulia, highly motivated and coordinated by their professors. This is the case of the sites from Dumitra–Dâlma (Lascu–Ota 2001, 79, 84–85, pl. V), Oarda–Bulza II (Gheorghiu–Lascu 2001, 87–96; Lascu 2005, 53–56) in which materials that can be ascribed to the Early Iron Age were also discovered. The analysis of older or more recent archaeological excavations from Bernadea, Mureș County, or Gligorești–La Holoame, Cluj County (Gogâltan–Florea 1994, 35, fig. 17, Gogâltan Et Al. 2004, 74, fig. 18) allowed Ursuţiu to provide a synthetic perspective on the problem of Basarabi cultural manifestations in Transylvania (Ursuţiu 2002). Despite the prior efforts made by other researchers to investigate the middle sequence of the Early Iron Age (Ciugudean 1976; Vulpe 1986; Vasiliev–Zrínyi 1987; Gogâltan–Ursuţiu 1994; Vasiliev 1996; Ciugudean 1997; etc.), present situation is far from satisfying. Several aspects, like the relations with the indigenous substratum (Gogâltan–Ursuţiu 1994; Ciugudean 2009a, 71–72; Ciugudean 2010, 171; etc.), the character of habitation, funerary rite and ritual, the precise area of distribution remains largely unclear. The recovery of older finds coming from the investigations carried out by Ion Nestor and Eugenia Zaharia at Mediaș, still unpublished, offered Pankau (2004) the chance to analyse the entire ‘HaB’ horizon from Transylvania. Although the scientific value of the analysed finds is less convincing, the presentation of the cultural context to which they belong makes this contribution a reference work for the Early Iron Age in Transylvania. The investigations of the 1990s from Vinţu de Jos (Sibișeni)–Deasupra satului, Alba County, also brought to light traces of the Early Iron Age (Andriţoiu Et Al. 2004, 157–159). They include isolated finds largely placed in the ‘HaB phase’ and some later Basarabi features. The surveys, as well as the excavations, from Lancrăm–Glod allowed Popa and the late colleague Nicolae- Marcel Simina to identify two horizons of habitation dated to the ‘HaB’ and ‘HaC’ (Popa–Simina 2004, 31–35). Other older finds from Petrești– Groapa Galbenă belonging to the same ‘HaB’ period were also recovered by Popa (2004, 64–65, pl. I). Archaeological excavations from Augustin–Tipia Ormenișului, Brașov County, lasting several campaigns (Costea Et Al. 2006), also brought to light materials characteristic to the Early Iron Age. Their un-stratified position within the site and the absence of any relevant features allowed only some general considerations regarding their inclusion in the horizon of ‘sites of Mediaș–Teleac type’ (Ursuţiu 2006, 155). A similar situation is also mentioned by Nikolaus and Rodica Boroffka regarding the investigations from Sighișoara–Dealul Viilor (Boroffka–Boroffka 2006, 582). After the presentation of the history of research at Șimleu Silvaniei (Pop Et Al. 2006) we are waiting with interest the publication of the doctoral dissertation of Sana (2010) dedicated to the problems of the Early Iron Age in the Șimleu depression. It is the merit of George G. Marinescu (2005; 2010a; Marinescu–Marinescu 2010, 249–250) to recently collect and publish Iron Age finds from north-eastern Transylvania, yet his doctoral dissertation remains unpublished (Marinescu 2010c). The prior state of prehistoric research in the area was presented by Gheorghe Marinescu (2003). The resuming of research in the important fortified settlement from Teleac, Alba County, is salutary since the analysis of the ceramics coming from older excavations left open the discussion regarding the characterization of the three dwelling horizons from the site (Ciugudean 2009a; Ciugudean 2009b; Ciugudean 2010, pl. XII–XV; XVII/3; Ciugudean 2011, pl. VI/3, IX–XIII; XV). Rescue archaeological excavations from Alba Iulia–Dealul Furcilor-Monolit / Recea carried out between 2003 and 2006 (Lascu 2006a; 2006b; 2007; 2009; Ciugudean 2009a, 70, Taf. VIII–IX; Ciugudean 2011, pl. II; VI/2; Gheorghiu–Lascu 2011, 185–194) were finalized by the doctoral dissertation of Lascu (2010, as yet unpublished) concerning the finds of the Early Iron Age from this site. The features belonging to two chronological sequences, one with ‘black grooved pottery’ (‘Gáva’ type) and another containing Basarabi finds, are noted. All of them are very important for the reconstruction of the habitat of the open settlements located in the hinterland of the great fortification from Teleac. The publication of some older discoveries, like those from Poian–Kőhát, Covasna County (Méder 2006), or of some smaller or larger rescue excavations like those from Chinari–Mociar, Mureș County (Rezi– Nagy 2009), Porumbenii Mari–Várfele, Harghita County (Nagy–Körösfői 2010) and Gheorghieni–Valea 110 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy Mare, Cluj County (Tecar–Nagy 2010) is useful for the understanding of material culture of the Early Iron Age in Transylvania. Similarly some of the debates concerning a variety of ceramic artefacts can be acknowledged (Benga 2005, 62–64; Lascu 2006b; 2007; Vasiliev 2008; etc.). More modest is the actual information regarding the cultural-historical evolution of the end of the Early Iron Age (‘6th–5th centuries BC’). The older ‘Scythian–Iranian’ discoveries from Transylvania were analysed by Vasiliev (1980), who responded to the opinions of Emil Moscalu and Alexandu Vulpe regarding the existence of the so-called local Ciumbrud group in Transylvania instead of an intrusive Scythian population (Vasiliev 1982, 262–269). The discussion was resumed later by Vulpe from the perspective of ethnic identification (Vulpe 1989, 62–70) or of the metal use (Vulpe 1990). For the period after the publication of these monographs only a few contributions can be mentioned. The most important belongs to Gheorghe Marinescu (1984) and concerns the evidence of this period in north-eastern Transylvania. The cemeteries from Budești-Fânaţe and Mărișelu, as well as other discoveries, offered a rich archaeological material which completes the image of the funerary rite and ritual of the Scythian communities in Transylvania. While republishing or mentioning for the first time some ‘Hallstatt’ funerary discoveries from Aiud, Vulpe (1984) also brought again into discussion the issue of the ‘Ciumbrud cultural group’. The discussion will be again resumed, without taking into consideration the objections of Vasiliev, in Istoria Românilor published in 2001 (Vulpe 2001, 482–488). Aside from these, one can only mention the publication of a new akinakes from Cincșor (Isac 1994) and Năsal (Marinescu–Zăgreanu 2011) or of some small funerary discoveries. For many of them, like those mentioned by Popa (2009, 47, n. 14) from Alba Iulia (Moga–Ciugudean 1995, 30, no. 9), Măhăceni (Moga–Ciugudean 1995, 124, no. 2), Mihalţ (Moga–Ciugudean 1995, 128, no. 3), only some general information is available, without knowing the archaeological material. Popa amiably informed us that at Alba Iulia–Tolstoi there is a cemetery with a typical Scythian inventory (ceramic vessels, bronze and bone arrow heads). From Mihalţ researchers recovered a grave discovered by P. Stânea (a student in Alba Iulia on that time) during the excavation of a foundation, around the middle of the 1990s. A bi-truncated vessel with knobs and a beaker belonging to this inventory were drawn by Popa for Horia Ciugudean. The investigations of the 1990s from Orăștie–Dealul Pemilor also lead to the discovery of a Scythian inhumation grave containing ceramic and metallic inventory (Boroffka 1998, 93–95, 97–98, Abb. 1–5; 6/1; Luca–Pinter 2001, 91–95, pl. 60–61). Amongst the Slavic graves from the cemetery at Ocna Sibiului, Sibiu County, was also found an inhumation burial belonging to a male deceased of about 45 years old (m. 130) which included three ceramic vessels as funerary offerings (a jar, a dish and a beaker, unpublished), an iron spear head and an arrow head (Protase 2004, 38–39, pl. XXIX–XXXII). Some older Scythian finds, like those from Batoș, Mureș County (Boroffka 2002) or Hărău, Hunedoara County (Popa 2009), have finally been published. Recently, during the investigations in the Celtic cemetery from Fântânele–La Gâţa, Bistriţa-Năsăud County (Vaida 2008), a new Scythian cemetery was identified, of which seven graves have already been excavated (Marinescu 2010b). From the information of Marinescu (2010b, n. 9), aside from the nine graves excavated in the 1970s by a collective coordinated by the late Ion Horaţiu Crișan (Florin Medeleţ, Tudor Soroceanu, Gheorghe Marinescu) at Fântânele–Dâmbul Popii (Crișan 1978, 148–154, Abb. 2–3. Vasiliev 1980, 145–146, no. 39 mentions ten graves), in north-eastern Transylvania are also known the following unpublished funerary discoveries: Archiud–Hânsuri (two inhumation graves of which only one is sure, having funerary inventory – information Gheorghe Marinescu) and Visuia–Gurăţele (appliqué decorated in the zoomorphic style). In spite of the attempts to again systematize what it is known about the Scythian enclave from Transylvania (Gheorghiu 2004), no progress was made in the clarification of certain questions which continue to bother those specialists interested in this topic (Vulpe 2001, 482–488; Preda 2001; Vulpe 2003; 2004; 2010; Vasiliev 2005; etc.). The recent debates concerning the ‘Cimmerian’ (Chochorowski 1993; Sauter 2000; Metzner-Nebelsick 2002; Vulpe 2002; etc.) and ‘Scythian’ problems (Ivantchik 2001; 2005; Černenko 2006; Kemenczei 2009; etc.) will perhaps also push the Transylvanian archaeological research in this direction (Gogâltan 2010). Closely connected to the problem of the Scythian group is the entire ‘HaD’ horizon from Transylvania. The discovery in 1971 by András Zrínyi of a cremation grave at Chendu, Mureș County (Crișan 1965, 134–135; Crișan 1969, 27, 258, no. 67, pl. VII/4; VIII/25; XII/3; Vasiliev–Zrínyi 1987, 92, 98–105, fig. 9–10), determined the same Vasiliev to resume the investigations in the Podei location. The grave was dated “between the end of the 7th century and the last quarter of the 6th century BC, within the period being most likely taken into consideration the first half of the 6th century BC” (Vasiliev–Zrínyi Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 111 1987, 105). During the excavations from 1979–1981 a consistent archaeological layer was identified, going down to 0.70–0.75 m. Amongst the features are four dwellings, a cremation burial in pit (quite similar in to its rite and ritual to the one discovered in 1961) and five pits. The graves and the dwelling traces were dated “between the end of the 7th century and the middle of the 6th century BC” (Vasiliev–Zrínyi 1987, 116). It is also mentioned that due to the type of burial it is “characteristic of the indigenous population” (Vasiliev–Zrínyi 1987, 110). The dating of the fortification from Șona, Alba County, in the ‘HaD’ period (Horedt 1974, 216, 225, no. 23) was reconsidered due to the later excavations made by Vasiliev between 1992 and 1994 (Vasiliev 1995, 125–145; Vulpe 2001, 488). Ciugudean published in 1996 a report on nine vessels from Sântimbru, Alba County, which entered into the collections of the Museum of Alba Iulia about 50 years ago; the vessels being complete, he presumed that they belong to a cemetery (Ciugudean 1996, 9; Ciugudean 1997, 164). Previously from the same area another cremation burial (?) was recovered ascribed either to the local ‘proto-Dacian’ population (Crișan 1969, 274–275, no. 276, pl. VIII/11, 24) or to the Scythian group from Transylvania (Vasiliev 1980, 149, no. 78). According to Ciugudean the vessels about which he published did not belong to this ‘cemetery’ (?) due to the distance of over 1 km between them and the different character of the pottery. Albeit he cited numerous analogies from Scythian contexts for the analysed vessels, his conclusion is that the group of discoveries “is different in comparison with the pottery found in Skythian cemeteries, which may signify a cultural or chronological gap or maybe both” (Ciugudean 1996, 9). During the excavations made in 1984–1985 at Uioara de Jos–La Pârloage, Alba County, a hearth was discovered, from which two fragmentary vessels were recovered: a jar-like vessel and a fragmentary cup, dated to “during the late Hallstatt period” (Ciugudean 1997, 165–166, fig. 36/1–2). Aside from the uncertain character of the discovery from Sântimbru, the attempt to recover the funerary inventory, also mentioned by Crișan (1965, 138, fig. 1/2–4, 7; Crișan 1969, 268, no. 203), of the cemetery excavated in 1909 by István Kovács at Uioara de Sus, Alba County, has to be also mentioned (Vasiliev 1999a, 181–188). Although the knowledge regarding the pottery of the 5th century BC from Transylvania is more than modest, the conclusion was that “the pottery indicates that the dating of the cemetery from Uioara has to be restricted to the second half of the late Hallstatt period, more precisely in the 5th century BC, and its beginning can even be placed two or three decades after the beginning of this century” (Vasiliev 1999a, 183). During several surveys on the area of Lunca Târnavei, Alba County, in the Coasta lui Schmidt location, ceramic fragments ascribed to the ‘late Hallstatt (HaD)’ have been identified (Bărbat 2005, 18, pl. VIII/20–22; IX–X). Still the number of fragments is small and many are unidentifiable, so their placing in the ‘HaD’ period has to be carefully considered. So far in Transylvania itself discoveries similar to those from north-western modern Romania, reunited by Németi (1972; 1977a; 1977b; 1982; 1984; etc.) under the ‘Sanislău-Nir cultural group’, are missing. These settlements and cemeteries are more recently seen as a well delimited group within the Vekerzug culture, as it was defined by Chochorowski (1985a; 1985b; 1998). Characteristic to this ‘group’ are the rite and ritual of cremation in urns, the flat cemeteries, the poor metallic inventory lacking the eastern artefacts, the presence of wheel-made pottery, etc. (Németi 2003, 162). A similar cultural identification can be also found in an older publication of Crișan (1974a, 103). The respective group was also dated by Vulpe between “550 – fin du Ve siècle av.n.è.” (Popescu–Vulpe 1982, 106). The recent discoveries from Porţ–Corău and Porţ–Paliș, Sălaj County, demonstrate that such communities also lived in north-western Transylvania (Bejinariu–Pop 2008; Pop–Bejinariu 2010). The two settlements are two km apart. If the one from Corău is quite modest (two dwellings, five pits and a cremation burial, with the deceased’s bones placed in a pit, were investigated), at Porţ–Paliș were identified a fortification abandoned shortly afterwards and a cemetery. Until the summer of 2007 around 200 features were investigated (15 dwellings, several pits and 62 graves). These features are concentrated in two groups which are not contemporaneous. As concerning the funerary rite and ritual, two groups can be also identified: one in which the cremated bones were placed in urns and another in which the remains were placed in pits. The excavations are still in progress. As a preliminary conclusion, the two sites were not contemporaneous, as the one from Porţ–Corău can be dated to a longer period between “the end of the 6th and first half of the 5th centuries BC”, whereas the one from Porţ–Paliș can be dated “between the second half of the 5th and second half of the 4th centuries BC” (Bejinariu–Pop 2008, 38; Pop–Bejinariu 2010, 101). In general analogies can be identified in the ‘Sanislău-Nir group’ but there are also some differences: the quantity of wheel-made pottery is smaller, only some types of vessels are present, the predominance of 112 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy the placing of cremated bones in pit and not in urns, the absence of funerary inventory. The finalization of excavations and the subsequent analysis of the finds will necessarily require a comparison of the inventories from the two sites with the Scythian discoveries from Hungary. Kemenczei (2009, 7–19, 111–114) does not accept the existence of an entity, as the one proposed by Németi, separated from the ‘Alföld group’ and in the least within the Vekerzug culture. Returning to the situation from central Transylvania the question is which population was first living with, and then assimilating, the Scythian group. Affirmations like “of undoubted Thracian origin” (Crișan 1974a, 105), “Thracian–Dacian indigenous population” (Vasiliev 1980, 133) or “may be considered of Thracian origin and related with the post-Basarabi cultural groups like Ferigile (Vulpe 1967) or the ones recently defined in Banat (Gumă 1993, 235–242)” (Ciugudean 1996, 9) are quite vague. Which are the archaeological finds that define such ethnic identifications? Recently Ciugudean pointed again, rightfully, to the fact that the Basarabi world could not have totally disappeared at the arrival of the Scythians in Transylvania. Previously a possible parallel evolution of the late Basarabi and Scythian communities was also suggested (Boroffka 1998, 98–99; Ursuţiu 2000, 225). Some newer situations also occurred, like the one from Gheorghieni–Valea Mare, Cluj County, in which two arrow heads were related to the violent end of the settlement, probably at the arrival of Scythians in the region (Tecar–Nagy 2010, 29). These communities survived and must have lived for a while together with the Scythians (Ciugudean 2010, 171). It is difficult to say what has happened afterwards, but at a certain time the cremation rite was adopted. Older information and opinions regarding this situation were mentioned by the one whose vivid memory we are still keeping: Crișan (1965; 1969; 1974a; 1974b). On that occasion the cremation graves characteristic to the 6th–5th centuries BC were presented. They were considered as belonging to the ‘autochthonous people’, displaying a different funerary rite and ritual in comparison with the inhumation graves specific to the Scythian group. Vulpe is more reserved regarding this hypothesis (Vulpe 2001, 487). The hope of Professor Crișan that: “We are convinced that by future researches the number of autochthonous incineration graves will be increased” (Crișan 1965, 138) has not been fulfilled so far (Gogâltan Et Al. 2008, 111–114). According to Vasiliev (1980, 132), after the middle of the 5th century BC, as is supposedly showing the cemetery from Băiţa, Mureș County, “the Scythian group is assimilated and disappeared as an ethnic-cultural entity from the inner Carpathian area of Romania”. Similar opinions also expressed 25 years later (Vasiliev 2004b, 470; Vasiliev 2005, 74). Although the “evolution of Scythian group is ending around a century before the arrival of the Celts in Transylvania” (Vasiliev 2005, 74), the problem of identifying the material culture of these communities is still open. Dating of the feature This summary presentation of what is known about the Early Iron Age in Transylvania was necessary to identify the analogies and after that to place from a cultural and chronological point of view the inventory of the pit designated as CX 0375 from Vlaha–Pad. Aside from the rectangular shape of the pit, another relevant aspect is the association of some dishes having inverted rim and downside oriented knobs, decorated with grooves or undecorated, with beakers of ‘kantharos’ type, to use a name coming from the contemporaneous Greek ceramic repertoire. The next step is to identify analogies amongst other possible discoveries from Transylvania (Nagy 2011b, 346). The dishes with inverted rim and a curved or slightly angular shoulder, having knobs or lacking them, with or without grooves, are commonly present in Transylvania for about 1000 years starting with the late Bronze Age II (BrD) and up to the Late Iron Age. Only some general works regarding Transylvania, mentioning the chronological sequences of the entire interval, are cited (Ciugudean 1994, fig. 2/5; Andriţoiu Et Al. 2004, pl. XXII/9; Gogâltan 2009, pl. VI/1; Popa–Boroffka 1996, fig. 7/3, 6; Ursuţiu 2009, pl. I/7; III/7–9; VI/3; Vasiliev Et Al. 1991, 84–87; Pankau 2004, 61–62, Marinescu 2010a, 41–128; Vasiliev 1980, 65–67, pl. 8/1–4; 27; Ursuţiu 2002, 73–75; Crișan 1969, pl. X; XIX; Popa–Totoianu 2000, 64–68; etc.). Two aspects may restrict their chronology: the existence of downward oriented knobs and the presence of some small alveoles on them, without perforation (Pl. 5/2). Dishes with downward oriented knobs, similar to those from Vlaha (Pl. 5/2–3), are not known so far in the late Bronze Age. The knobs appear on dishes belonging to the horizon of settlements from Teleac and Mediaș (Iron I–II; HaA2–HaB3)3 (Vasiliev 3 We accept the local origin of what the majority of researchers from Transylvania are defining as ‘Gáva culture’ (Ciugudean 2010, 167). Still, it remains to be explained by those who are still using this name if the ‘Band–Cugir group’ contributed to the formation of the mentioned archaeological culture also in the area from which has been so far presumed that it arrived Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 113 Et Al. 1991, 86, fig. 35/16, 19–20; 44/13, 16; Andriţoiu Et Al. 2004, pl. XXIII/8; Pankau 2004, Taf. 14/6; 16/4; Marinescu 2010a, pl. XVI/2–3; XVIII/3; etc.), without being oriented downward. The tendency to a downward orientation of the knobs on dishes can be spotted, as far as we know, only after the arrival of the Basarabi culture in Transylvania at the beginning of the Iron III; HaB3 phase (Gogâltan–Ursuţiu 1994, fig. 7/3; Ciugudean 1997, 4/1; 19/1; 22/5; 25/4; etc.; Ursuţiu 2002, 75; Andriţoiu Et Al. 2004, pl. XXV/8, 10; Tecar–Nagy 2010, pl. 9/1; 16/4, 7). This manner of placing the knobs on dishes, probably having a functional role, became a characteristic starting with the Scythian period (Iron IV; HaC2–HaD1) when the respective variant of dish is the most common piece in Transylvanian graves (Crișan 1969, pl. X; Vasiliev 1980, pl. 8/2, 4; Vulpe 1984, fig. 7/16; Marinescu 1984, Abb. 2/D, Ciugudean 1996, fig. 1/3; Vasiliev 1999a, fig. 1/1). Their absence in the northern Pontic area made Vasiliev (1980, 66) to conclude that these dishes were used due to the influence of indigenous population. As concerning the existence of some small alveoles on the knobs, without perforating them, it seems that this detail was not always noted by other specialists. For example it was not observed on dishes from the Ferigile cemetery (Vulpe 1967, pl. I–II), but it is present on other discoveries of this type, as we will show below. At least in Transylvania the detail was not noted. Surely the alveoles appear on the knobs of some dishes belonging to the Ferigile group from the south of the southern Carpathians, as the funerary inventories from Cepari, Argeș County dated to the 6th century BC and eventually to the beginning of the following century (Popescu–Vulpe 1982, 111, fig. 4/11; 7/6); Tumulus 15 at Tigveni, Argeș County, dated to the 5th century BC (Vulpe–Popescu 1972, fig. 13/12; Popescu–Vulpe 1982, 111, fig. 17/13) or Rudeni, Argeș County (Popescu–Vulpe 1992, fig. 1/4) are demonstrating. Tumulus 1, from which this dish is coming, also contained a wheel-made vessel (Popescu– Vulpe 1992, 109). The presence of a wheel-made vessel in Ferigile environment is also proven by other discoveries dated to the 6th and mostly to the 5th century BC from the south of the Carpathians (Vulpe 1977, 87; Alexandrescu 1977, 113–137). In this context should be mentioned a vessel from ‘mound XVIII’ from Gogoșu (Berciu–Comșa 1956, 417, fig. 140). The kantharos is a ceramic form characteristic to the Late Bronze Age II and III (BrD–HaA1). Its appearance in Transylvania is related to the advance of Noua communities across the Eastern Carpathians (Sava 2002, 150, Karte 4). Forms of this type are unknown within the local Wietenberg III/C population (Boroffka 1994, Typentaf 2). The moment can be placed as early as the late Bronze Age I, BrB2–C (Cavruc 1996, 71), as the settlement from Rotbav, Brașov County (Dietrich 2011, 115–122) or the far away one from Măhăceni, Alba County, at the foot of the Apuseni Mountains (Ciugudean 1997, 84, fig. 3/3; Ciugudean 2010, 159), show. On the basis of some discoveries, like those from Albești, Mureș County, Sighișoara–Dealul Viilor or Ţichindeal, Sibiu County, a Noua presence was suggested even from the Wietenberg III/C level (Gogâltan 2009, 119; Ciugudean 2010, 159), which may correspond to the end of the middle Bronze Age III in the relative chronological system used here. Due to the end of Wietenberg III settlements in south-eastern Transylvania following the arrival of Noua population, it can be considered as the moment of debut of the late Bronze Age (BrB2–C in the Central European chronology). This form represents the most widely distributed ceramic category of the funerary inventories from the cemeteries belonging to the Noua culture (Sava 1999, 75; Sava 2002, 26–28, Abb. 4). Evidently they are also present in the settlements of this period, both in the area in which the local population was displaced or assimilated (south-eastern and southern Transylvania) and in the remaining territory. Some in Transylvania. What the ‘Band–Cugir group’ have in common with the Gáva manifestations in north-eastern Hungary or north-western Romania? Due to this reason we have recently only used the notion of ‘horizon of the settlements from Teleac and Mediaș’ or ‘Teleac–Mediaș horizon’, constantly avoiding the consecrated terminology of ‘Gáva culture’. For Christopher Pare the settlement from Teleac belongs to the so-called ‘Mediaș-Gruppe’ (Pare 1999, 420), while the entire horizon was named ‘Mediaș–Reci’, ‘Gáva II’ being characteristic to northern Transylvania (Pare 1999, Tab. 7). The term ‘Gávakultur’ was defined for Transylvania by Pankau (2004, 28) in accordance with what Amália Mozsolics wrote in 1957 about the ‘Typus Gáva’ or ‘Gruppen von Gáva–Pécska’: “Sowohl in Siebenbürgen als auch in Oltenien, weiter in Muntenien und in der Moldau finden wir eine gewöhnlich aussen glänzend schwarze, innen rot gefärbte Keramik. Manchmal sind die Gefässe bräunlich grau. Besonders die Urnen sind sehr charakteristisch und bis jetzt auch am besten bekannt. Die breite Rand ist gewöhnlich facettiert, die Schulter konisch oder leicht gewölbt, der Bauch mit breiten schrägen Kanneluren und oft auch kannelierten Buckeln verzirt. Als Grundtypus kann das schöne Gefäss des Depotfundes von Pécska gelten.” (Mozsolics 1957, 121, n. 11). Afterwards the term was used by all of those who wrote a doctoral dissertation about the Early Iron Age in Transylvania. Still, there are some exceptions. For Adrian Ursuţiu the finds from Augustin–Tipia Ormenișului can be ascribed to the horizon of ‘sites of Mediaș– Teleac type’ (Ursuţiu 2006, 155). For Cristian I. Popa the few ceramic fragments discovered at Alba Iulia, Str. Brândușei, belong to the ‘finds of Teleac–Mediaș type’ (Popa Et Al. 2004, 151). 114 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy examples, like the settlements from Nicoleni (Cavruc 2001, 49, fig. 5/4–5, 8; 6/7), Zoltan (Cavruc 2003, 110, no. 252), Olteni (Buzea 2003, 78, no. 149–150), Sibiu (Luca–Boroffka 1995, fig. 5/4–5) or Ţichindeal (Popa–Boroffka 1996, fig. 1/1–5), can be cited. The kantharos will be also used in the contact settlements between the central Transylvanian world and the northern one from the Someș valley (Gogâltan–Isac 1995, Taf. VIII/1), and further away in Suciu de Sus/Lăpuș funerary contexts (Kacsó 1975, fig. 11/1; Kacsó 2004, pl. LIX/4). There were still used also in the settlements of the late Bronze Age III phase (HaA1) on the middle Mureș valley (Popa–Totoianu 2010a, pl. 6/9, 13, 15; 7–9; Popa–Totoianu 2010b, 180–181). After this period the kantharos, as it is known today, disappeared at the beginning of the Iron Age and is missing from subsequent horizons represented by the settlements from Teleac and Mediaș (Vasiliev Et Al. 1991, 88–90; Pankau 2004, Typentafeln 4). A similar observation made by MetznerNebelsick (2002, 127): “Bemerkenswert ist die Tatsache daß in Siebenbürgen keine Kontinuität zwischen Kantharosgefäßen der Noua-Kultur und denen der Basarabi-Kultur hergestellt werden kann”. The beakers with two handles from the Basarabi culture, like those from Chendu (Vasiliev–Zrínyi 1987, fig. 11/1; 12/11) or Teleac (Ciugudean 1997, fig. 4/1) cannot be used as analogies for the types of kantharoi from Vlaha. The same can be also said about the beakers of the Scythian period (Crișan 1969, pl. VIII; Vasiliev 1980, pl. 27; Marinescu 1984, 47–83, Vulpe 1984, 36–63). Kantharoi are rare at Ferigile and it was initially considered that they appeared only in the last phase of the cemetery (Vulpe 1967, pl. VIII/3, 5–6). They were later included in the “1. Kombinationstyp” being placed in the so-called “Phase Ferigile-Süd”, dated to the 7th century BC (Vulpe 1977, 91). More recently a kantharos from Câmpulung, Argeș County was published probably from a funerary context, which was placed in the same early horizon of the cemetery from Ferigile (Palincaș 2005, 294, fig. 2/1). If the finds from Ferigile are not precise analogies for the vessels from Vlaha due to their shape and style of decoration, the piece from Câmpulung is much closer to the decorated kantharos from Vlaha. Although in Transylvania good correspondences for the ceramic materials from the discussed feature from Vlaha are missing, the closest analogies appear further away in the Romanian Banat. At Remetea Mare–Gomila lui Gabor, Timiș County, a burnt dwelling containing a rich archaeological inventory, including a cult deposit consisting of eight complete vessels, was investigated in 1988 (Medeleţ 1991, 63–83). The association of dishes having an inverted rim and downward oriented knobs and beakers of ‘kantharos’ type, decorated with grooves on the body or undecorated is also present here (Pl. 7). When this discovery was published it was very difficult to finds analogies, but Medeleţ correctly inferred that it is a new cultural manifestation. Its placement in the ‘HaB2–3’ horizon (Medeleţ 1991, 81) was later criticised by M. Gumă (1993, 241–242), who proposed a later chronological interval between the end of the 7th century and the first half of the 6th century BC. Together with other discoveries from Banat, like Pogănici– Dealul Păscoani, Caraș-Severin County (Stratan 1961, 165–169; Gumă 1993, 236, pl. CV B/6–16), and Vrani–Dealul Morișchi, Caraș-Severin County (Gumă 1993, 242), they characterise the beginning of the ‘late Hallstatt’ in the region. These things were later confirmed during the archaeological investigation of the earthen fortification of Herneacova–Cetate, Timiș County (Cedică–Medeleţ 2002, 85–86; Medeleţ Et Al. 2004, 93–95; Mare–Cedică 2005, 633–635). Unfortunately the results of these excavations are not yet published, but the materials discovered define a horizon characteristic of the end of the Early Iron Age in Banat (Iron IV, HaC2–HaD1). Until now a solid argument for an eventual connection between the local elites and the Greek-Illyrian helmets discovered in the region (Berciu 1958, 441–443; Gumă 1991, 85–103; Medeleţ–Cedică 2004, 97–100; Teleagă 2008, 435) cannot be proposed, but the hypothesis cannot be excluded. From the same inventory of the pit CX 0375 from Vlaha–Pad comes a fragment of a dish with a wide reverted rim and a slightly curved body, decorated inside with oblique grooves (Pl. 5/1). Although for the previously discussed vessels the analogies have been only found in a ‘post-Basarabi’ sequence, in this case we have to look for correspondences only in the late phase of the Early Iron Age. Such dishes are missing from the funerary inventories of the Scythian group from Transylvania (Vasiliev 1980, 65–67; Marinescu 1984, 47–83; Vulpe 1984, 36–63). The dish has a wide reverted rim, decorated inside with grooves, and is a characteristic of the funerary inventory of the Ferigile group (Vulpe 1967, 41–44; Popescu–Vulpe 1982, 77–114). Still both their shape and decoration are not identical to the dish from Vlaha. Ioan Bejinariu kindly informed us that a fragment of a similar dish has been discovered at Șimleu Silvaniei–Observator. The remaining ceramic fragments do not allow a precise chronological and cultural identification, so they are not discussed. Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 115 Concerning the dating and cultural identification of the pit CX 0375 from Vlaha–Pad, it has to be noted right from the beginning that the Someșul Mic valley was less attractive for Scythian communities, from what it is known today (Vasiliev 1980, pl. 1). At Dezmir, Cluj County, “on the western limit of the railways (CFR) workshops” several cremation and probably also inhumation graves were destroyed in 1938. A human calotte and a fragment probably of a tibia were recovered (Crișan 1964, 91). During the rescue excavations made by Sándor Ferenczi and István Kovács three cremation graves were recovered. Crișan (1964, 91–100), who later published the finds, dated the graves and the accidentally discovered pieces in the 3rd century BC. The wheel-made pottery was considered to be Celtic whereas the handmade one was ‘indigenous Dacian’ (Crișan 1969, 262, no. 112). Vasiliev (1980, 145, no. 35) considered that at Dezmir “were destroyed Scythian inhumation graves and Celtic burials, and due to this situation sometimes Celtic objects were ascribed to Scythian graves and the other way round. The recovered finds indicate the existence of at least three Scythian graves”. From the illustration published by Crișan were selected the handmade vessels and a “fragment of a bronze hair loop (bracelet)” which were ascribed to the Scythian group. This include fig. 3/2, 5, 7; 4/3, 5–6; 5 from the article of Crișan. But who is right? First, the vessel illustrated by Crișan as coming from grave 2 and ascribed by Vasiliev to the Scythian group is coming from a cremation burial and not from an inhumation one. If only the recent syntheses regarding the Celtic civilization in Transylvania, mostly concentrating on the Mureș valley, are taken into consideration, there are no analogies for the handmade pottery from Dezmir (Popa–Totoianu 2000, 51–134; Ferencz 2007; Berecki 2008; etc.). On the other hand it has very good analogies close to the Celtic cemetery from Apahida, Cluj County (Crișan 1969, 252, no. 8, pl. XVI/2; XXX/2, 4; XXXVIII/7), and further away on the Someșul Mare valley at Fântânele–Dâmbul Popii (Crișan 1978, 148–154, Abb. 2–3) or in the recently investigated cemetery from Fântânele–La Gâţa, Bistriţa-Năsăud County (Vaida 2008, pl. V/1–2, 8). It seems that the dating proposed by Crișan for the graves from Dezmir is the correct one, and this site has to be eliminated from the list of Scythian discoveries from Transylvania. We are against the citing of analogies coming from far away areas, having different cultural traditions. Still, it has to be noted that the handmade pottery is also present in north-western Romania (Németi 1988, 87–111; Németi 2010b, 181–215). Other finds ascribed to the Scythians, like the bronze arrow heads from Baciu and Gilău, Cluj County, a bronze hair loop and a clay bead from Chinteni, Cluj County, and a bronze mirror having the handle decorated in the Animal Style from Răscruci, Cluj County4 (Vasiliev 1980, 142, no. 5, 146, no. 44, 144, no. 24, 148, no. 70) represent too small a number of artefacts to demonstrate a massive Scythian presence in the region. Moreover the two bronze arrow heads from Gheorghieni, Cluj County, were discovered in a late Basarabi context, dated to the end of the 7th century BC (Tecar–Nagy 2010, 28, pl. 28/1–2). As it has been shown, there are no precise analogies in Transylvania for the vessels from the feature CX 0375 from Vlaha. Both the Remetea Mare–Herneacova horizon from the Romanian Banat5 and the Ferigile group are cultural contexts situated too far from the upper course of the Someșul Mic. Still, we are compelled to also use these analogies to date precisely the pottery from Vlaha–Pad in a larger postBasarabi period. Given the actual state of research regarding the Early Iron Age on the upper valley of the Someșul Mic, only the recent late Basarabi discoveries from Gheorghieni–Valea Mare, Cluj County (Tecar–Nagy 2010, 15–58) may represent a terminus ante qvem. As it was previously mentioned, the violent end of this site was dated to the end of the 7th century BC, being related to a presumed Scythian attack. Hellmuth (2006; 2007; etc.), continuing her prior interest in the problem of Scythian bronze arrow heads, recently published another synthesis, this time concentrating on the entire northern Pontic area (Hellmuth 2010). In the newly proposed typology the two bronze arrow heads from Gheorghieni can be ascribed in the following manner: one to the I A 3 group “Zweiflügelige Pfeilspitzen mit mandelförmigem Blatt” having a short shaft (Hellmuth 2010, 17), and the second one to the III 3 group “Bronzepfeilspitzen mit dreikantigem Querschnitt” also having a short shaft (Hellmuth 2010, 125). As concerning the dating of the first group, in Transylvanian area, the first half of the 7th century BC can be taken into consideration (Hellmuth 2010, 329). Mapping the bronze arrow heads with triangular cross-section from the III 3 group, characteristic to the ‘Ciumbrud group’ from Transylvania, she notes their reduced number in 4 5 Regarding the positioning of this finds at Răscruci or Feiurdeni, Cluj County (Ipolyi 1861, 253, no. 187; Roska 1942, 84–85, no. 12; 298, no. 31; Vasiliev 1980, 148, nr. 70) will be discussed on another occasion. Very little is also known from about what was happening in Serbian Banat during this period. The publication of some new discoveries like those from Židovar is a good sign (Ljuština 2010, 59–78). 116 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy comparison to other types. It is considered that after the 7th century BC they ceased to be used, a fact confirmed by their absence from the funerary inventory of the ‘Vekerzug culture’ (Hellmuth 2010, 355–357). There is a certitude that the finds from Vlaha are subsequent to the Basarabi culture on the Someșul Mic valley. However it is not possible to say precisely whether they were contemporary, beginning at some time in the second half of the 7th century BC, with the Scythian group, or they were posterior to that. Thus a relatively large chronological placing has been proposed, in what it is known as Iron IV phase (HaC2– HaD1). The identified analogies from distant cultural contexts Remetea Mare–Herneacova and Ferigile are convincingly pointing to the 6th century BC, albeit better chronological observations cannot be made now. It is difficult to say whether such artefacts are also characteristic to the following phase of the Early Iron Age in Transylvania, represented by the 5th century BC. The Greek-Illyrian helmet from Ocna Mureșului, Alba County, circulating in a cultural environment which cannot be precisely defined even today, should not be overlooked (Berciu 1958, 441–442). Aurel Rustoiu (Crișan Et Al. 1995, 35) suggested “the existence in the second half of the 5th century and the first half of the 4th century BC of a local aspect which was not identified archaeologically yet. It is possible that this local aspect experienced some Greek-Illyrian influences, as the helmet discovered at Ocna Mureș (Alba County), datable in the mentioned period, seems to suggest”. This idea has been also taken over by Cristian I. Popa, also adding other discoveries from Transylvania, unfortunately still not published. He also mentions that “one such aspect might be presumed, not coincidentally, in the salt mines area. See also from this point of view the discoveries from Uioara de Sus” (Popa–Totoianu 2000, 76, n. 238). Still it has been shown that the finds from Uioara de Sus are not identical to those from Vlaha–Pad. The helmet from Ocna Mureșului was recently dated between 450 and 400 BC (Teleagă 2008, 435). One has to hope that the far too mentioned future investigations will discover the identity of those who lived for a short period on the terrace from Vlaha–Pad. Due to the connections with the Scythian environment, it is possible that ceramic forms like those from Vlaha may also appear in other areas from western and central Transylvania. However it is clear that from now we can speak about a new local cultural context of the end of the Early Iron Age on the Someșul Mic valley, for which we suggest the term discoveries of Vlaha type. ✴✴✴ We shall now return to the first part of the title: Profane or ritual? After the investigation of this unusual feature amongst the prehistoric habitations from Vlaha–Pad the normal question was concerning its function. The following scenario of events has been presumed: a rectangular pit was dug out, its shape resembling a grave, so an initial use as storage pit can be excluded. The pit is less deep, making it unsuitable for storing produces; what and how much will be put inside was already known. The vessels were not secondary burns in the pit. Everything else must have happened aside from the pit and afterwards the inventory was placed inside. First a layer of charcoal, ash and bones was laid in, on top of which were quite carefully placed fragments of vessels. They were broken in another place, the pit containing vessels which cannot be totally reconstructed. At the time of excavation it has been considered, according to the pottery, that the feature is isolated. The absence of human bones suggested an eventual cenotaph, the pit containing the remains of the funerary banquet. From the perspective of ethnologic studies it is known that the deceased whose bodies could not have been recovered would want to return from the afterlife to punish the living ones. Various sacrifices had to be done to appease and please the soul of the deceased (Bartelheim–Heyd 2001, 268). This was the initial interpretation proposed for the pit CX 0375 from Vlaha–Pad (Nagy 2011b, 335). The secondary burnt drinking and eating vessels, the presence of bones which due to the lack of training were considered cremated, the traces of pyre etc, also supported the hypothesis. Still the osteological analysis made by Imola Kelemen offered a different interpretation of this feature (see her paper in this volume). First the bones were not cremated, are very fragmented and lack traces of eating or butchering. They represent an assemblage of ‘kitchen waste’ and/or ‘remains of food’. The way in which the bones were placed in the pit, some mixed with ceramic fragments, is removing any doubt regarding their secondary position and thus of their belonging to the late Bronze Age layer. The conclusion of the archaeozoologist is more than clear: “The idea of a banquet, on the other hand, cannot be fully confirmed, since in that case we think there would be a much larger number of bones”. She is right when writing that “A ritual with cattle and pig teeth to sacrifice is somewhat hard to believe”. Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 117 As previously shown, the level of knowledge regarding the chronological sequence to which the feature CX 0375 from Vlaha–Pad has been dated, the end of the Early Iron Age in Transylvania, is far from solving the problems concerning the communities of this period. In this situation we have to still question the nature of this feature: profane or ritual? References Alexandrescu, P., Les modèles grecs de la céramique thrace tournée, Dacia N. S., XXI, 113–137. Andriţoiu Et Al. 2004 Andriţoiu, I.–Popa, C. I.–Simina, N. M., Raport de săpătură. Șantierul arheologic Vinţu de Jos-„Deasupra satului” (jud. Alba) (1994–1998), ActaMP, XXVI, 141–192. Bartelheim–Heyd Bartelheim, M.–Heyd, V., Cult After Burial: Patterns of Post-funeral Treatment in the 2001 Bronze and Iron Ages of Central Europe, IN: Biehl, P. F.–Bertemes, F.–Meller, H. (eds.), The Archaeology of Cult and Religion, Budapest, 261–276. Bărbat 2005 Bărbat, I. Al., Materiale preistorice descoperite pe teritoriul localităţii Lunca Târnavei (jud. Alba) (I), BCSS, 11, 13–30. Bejinariu 2007 Bejinariu, I., Depozitul de bronzuri de la Brâglez, Cluj-Napoca. Bejinariu 2008a Bejinariu, I., Stadiul cercetării epocii bronzului și primei epoci a fierului pe teritoriul Sălajului, StCom Satu Mare, XXII/1, 2005 (2008), 93–98. Bejinariu 2008b Bejinariu, I., Bronzuri preistorice din Sălaj (colecțiile Szikszai, Wesselényi-Teleki, Aszodi și descoperiri izolate aflate în colecţiile Muzeului din Zalău, Cluj-Napoca. Bejinariu 2010 Bejinariu, I., Aspects of the Late Bronze Age Cultural Evolution in Northwestern Romania (the Upper Barcău and Crasna Rivers), StCom Satu Mare, XXVI/I, 235–264. Bejinariu–Pop 2008 Bejinariu, I.–Pop, H., Funerary Discoveries Dated at the End of the First Iron Age from the South-Eastern Region of the Upper Tisa Basin (Sălaj County, România, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L., (eds.), Funerary Practices of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Central and South-Eastern Europe. Proceedings of the 9th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology. Bistrița, Romania May 9th–11th, 2008, Cluj-Napoca, 35–46. Benga 2005 Benga, M., Tipologia inventarului funerar din mormintele culturii Basarabi de pe teritoriul României, BCȘȘ, 11, 55–91. Berciu 1958 Berciu, D., Le casque gréco-illyrien de Gostavăţ (Olténie), Dacia N. S., II, 437–450. Berciu–Comșa 1956 Berciu, D.–Comșa, E., Săpăturile arheologice de la Balta Verde și Gogoșu (1949–1950), MCA, II, 251–489. Berecki 2008 Berecki, S., The La Tène Settlement from Morești, Cluj-Napoca. Boroffka 1994 Boroffka, N. G. O., Die Wietenberg-Kultur. Ein Beitrag zur Erforschung der Bronzezeit in Südosteuropa, Bonn. Boroffka 1998 Boroffka, N. G. O., Ein neues hallstattzeitliches Grab aus Siebenburgen, ArhVest, 49, 93–100. Boroffka 2002 Boroffka, N., Mormântul hallstattian de la Batoș (jud. Mureș), Angustia, VII, 233–240. Boroffka–Boroffka Boroffka, N.–Boroffka, R., Materiale preromane, IN: Harhoiu, R.–Baltag, Gh., Sighișoara 2006 „Dealul Viilor”: monografie arheologică, Bistriţa–Cluj-Napoca, 575–619. Bratu 2009 Bratu, O., Depuneri de bronzuri între Dunărea Mijlocie și Nistru în secolele XIII–VII a. Chr., București. Buzea 2003 Buzea, D., Sat Olteni, com. Bodoc, Jud. Covasna – „Cariera de nisip”, IN: Cavruc, V. (coord.), Noi descoperiri arheologice în sud-estul Transilvaniei, Sfântu Gheorghe, 73–80. Cavruc 1996 Cavruc, V., Câteva consideraţii privind originea culturii Noua, Angustia, 1, 67–78. Cavruc 2001 Cavruc, V., Some references to the cultural situation in southeast Transylvania in the Middle and Late Bronze Age, IN: Kacsó, C. (Hrsg.), Der nordkarpatischen Raum in der Bronzezeit. Symposium Baia Mare, 7.–10 Oktober 1998, Baia Mare, 45–82. Cavruc 2003 Cavruc, V., Satul Zoltan, com. Gidfalău, jud. Covasna, IN: Cavruc, V. (coord.), Noi descoperiri arheologice în sud-estul Transilvaniei, Sfântu Gheorghe, 87–110. Cedică–Medeleţ 2002 Cedică, V.–Medeleţ, Fl., Fortificaţia de pământ de la Herneacova (com. Recaș, jud. Timiș), PB, I, 85–86. Černenko 2006 Černenko, E. V., Die Schutzwaffen der Skythen, PBF, III, 2, Stuttgart. Chochorowski 1985a Chochorowski, J., Die Wekerzug Kultur. Charakteristik der Funde, Warszawa–Kraków. Alexandrescu 1977 118 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy Chochorowski 1985b Chochorowski, J., Die Rolle der Wekerzug Kultur (VK) im Rhamen der skythischen Einflüsse in Mitteleuropa, PZ, 60, 204–271. Chochorowski 1993 Chochorowski, J., Ekspancja kimmeryjska na tereny Europy środkowej, Kraków. Chochorowski 1998 Chochorowski, J., Die Wekerzug-Kultur und ihre östliche Beziehungen, IN: Hänsel, B.–Machnik, J. (Hrsg.), Das Karpatenbecken und die osteuropäische Steppe. Nomadenbewegungen und Kulturaustausch in den vorchristlichen Metallzeiten (4000–500 v.Chr.), München, Rahden/Westf., 143–172. Ciugudean 1976 Ciugudean, H., Cultura Basarabi pe teritoriul judeţului Alba, Apulum, XIV, 9–22. Ciugudean 1994 Ciugudean, H., The Hallstatt A Period in Central Transylvania, IN: Ciugudean, H.–Boroffka, N. (eds.), The Early Hallstatt Period (1200–700 B.C.) in South-Eastern Europe, Alba Iulia, 25–40. Ciugudean 1996 Ciugudean, H., Late Hallstatt Discoveries from Sântimbru, EphemNap, VI, 5–10. Ciugudean 1997 Ciugudean, H., Cercetări privind epoca bronzului și prima vârstă a fierului în Transilvania, Alba Iulia. Ciugudean 2004 Ciugudean, H., Descoperiri aparţinând bronzului târziu pe cursul mijlociu al Mureșului, Apulum, XLI, 179–185. Ciugudean 2009a Ciugudean, H., Bemerkungen zur Chronologie der Befestigten Siedlung von Teleac, Analele Banatului, XVII, 67–87. Ciugudean 2009b Ciugudean, H., Câteva observaţii privind cronologia așezării fortificate de la Teleac, Apulum, XLVI, 313–336. Ciugudean 2010 Ciugudean, H., The Late Bronze Age in Transylvania (with primary focus on the central and southern areas), StCom Satu Mare, XXVI/I, 157–202. Ciugudean 2011 Ciugudean, H., Periodizarea culturii Gáva în Transilvania în lumina noilor cercetări, Apulum, XLVIII, 69–102. Ciugudean–Aldea Ciugudean, H.–Aldea, I. Al., Der Bronzefund von Cugir, Kr. Alba, und seine Beziehungen 2005 zu den spätbronzezeitlichen Kulturphänomenen Siebenbürgens, IN: Soroceanu, T. (Hrsg.), Bronzefunde aus Rumänien II. Descoperiri de bronzuri din România, Bistriţa–Cluj-Napoca, 95–132. Ciugudean–Dragotă Ciugudean, H.–Dragotă, A., Cercetări arheologice la Alba Iulia-Pîclișa: descoperirile 2001 hallstattiene și medievale timpurii (Campania din anul 2000), Apulum, XXXVIII, 269–288. Ciugudean Et Al. Ciugudean, H.–Luca, S. A.–Georgescu, A., Depozitul de bronzuri de la Dipșa, Sibiu. 2006 Ciugudean Et Al. Ciugudean, H.–Luca, S. A.–Georgescu, A., Depozite de bronzuri preistorice din colecţia 2008 Brukenthal (I), Sibiu. Crișan 1964 Crișan, I. H., Morminte inedite din sec. III î.e.n. în Transilvania, ActaMN, I, 87–110. Crișan 1965 Crișan, I. H., Once more about the Scythian problem in Transylvania, Dacia N. S., IX, 133–145. Crișan 1969 Crișan, I. H., Ceramica daco-getică. Cu specială privire la Transilvania, București. Crișan 1974a Crișan, I. H., Transilvania la sfârșitul Hallstattului (sec. VI–V), IN: Daicoviciu, H. (ed.), In memoriam Constantini Daicoviciu, Cluj, 99–110. Crișan 1974b Crișan, I. H., Siebenbürgen in der jüngeren Hallstattzeit (VI–IV. Jh. v. u. Z.), IN: Chropovský, B., (Red.), Symposium zu Problemen der jüngeren Hallstattzeit in Mitteleuropa. 25.–29. September, 1970 Smolenice, CSSR, Bratislava, 101–124. Crișan 1978 Crișan, I. H., Die Anfänge der Latènezeit bei den Geto-Dakern, Dacia N. S., XXII, 143–154. Crișan Et Al. 1995 Crișan, I. H.–Rustoiu, A.–Palkó, A., Descoperirile celtice de la Pruniș (jud. Cluj), EphemNap, V, 27–46. Costea Et Al. 2006 Costea, F.–Bălos, A.–Savu, L.–Ardevan, R.–Ursuţiu, A.–Șoneriu, I.–El Susi, G.–Daisa Ciută, B.–Ștefan, D.–Duţescu, M.-M., Augustin-Tipia Ormenișului, judeţul Brașov. Monografie arheologică (I), Brașov. Dietrich 2011 Dietrich, L., Gânduri asupra dimensiunilor sociale ale vaselor de tip kantharos din cultura Noua, IN: Măgureanu, D.–Măndescu, D.–Matei, S., (eds.), Archaeology: making of and practice. Studies in honor of Mircea Babeș at his 70th anniversary, Pitești, 115–122. Ferencz 2007 Ferencz, I. V., Celţii pe Mureșul mijlociu. La Tène-ul timpuriu și mijlociu în bazinul mijlociu al Mureșului (sec. IV–II î.Chr.), Sibiu. Gheorghiu 2004 Gheorghiu, R., Tipologia inventarului funerar la sciţi, BCȘS, 10, 65–84. Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 119 Gheorghiu–Lascu 2001 Gheorghiu–Lascu 2011 Giurgiu Ardeu 1996 Gheorghiu, R.–Lascu, I. Al., Consideraţii privind materialul hallstattian din punctul inedit Oarda-„Bulza” II, BCȘS, 7, 87–96. Gheorghiu, R.–Lascu, I. Al., Gropi cu depuneri de oase umane descoperite în așezările din prima vârstă a fierului din spaţiul intracarpatic, Apulum, XLVIII, 185–194. Giurgiu Ardeu, A., Contribuţii privind stadiul cercetării Hallstattului timpuriu în spaţiul intercarpatic, Sargetia, XXVI/1, 1995–1996, 189–226. Gogâltan 2001 Gogâltan, Fl., The Settlement of Cășeiu and Some Problems Concerning the Late Bronze Age in the Center and Northern Transylvania, IN: Kacsó, C. (Hrsg.), Der nordkarpatischen Raum in der Bronzezeit. Symposium Baia Mare, 7.–10 Oktober 1998, Baia Mare, 191–214. Gogâltan 2005 Gogâltan, Fl., Zur Bronzeverarbeitung im Karpatenbecken. Die Tüllenhämmer und Tüllenambosse aus Rumänien, IN: Soroceanu, T. (Hrsg.), Bronzefunde aus Rumänien II. Descoperiri de bronzuri din România, Bistriţa–Cluj-Napoca, 343–386. Gogâltan 2009 Gogâltan, Fl., A Late Bronze Age dwelling at Iernut–Cătunul Sfântu Gheorghe „Monument”, Mureș district, IN: Berecki, S.–Németh, E. R.–Rezi, B. (eds.), Bronze Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, BMM, I, Cluj-Napoca, 103–141. Gogâltan 2010 Gogâltan, Fl., Book review, Konstantin V. Čugunov, Hermann Parzinger, Anatoli Nagler (mit Beiträgen von Konstantin Pustovoytov, Jörg Fassbinder, Helmut Becker, Ganna I. Zajceva, Valentin A. Dergačev, Marian Scott, Anatolij A. Semencov, Sergej S. Vasiliev, Bas van Geel, Johansen van der Plicht, Ljudmila M. Lebedeva, Kai-Uwe Heußner, Igor’ Sljusarenko, Barbara Armbruster, Annemarie Stauffer, Dmitrij V. Pozdnjakov, Erhard Godehardt, Hans Michael Shellenberg, Vladmimir Myl’nikov, Reinder Neef, Norbert Benecke, Melanie Pruvost, Christine Weber, Tatjana A. Čikiševa, Michael Schultz, Tyede H. Schmidt-Schultz), Der skythenzeitliche Fürstenkurgan Aržan 2 in Tuva, Mainz, 2010, EphemNap, XX, 257–263. Gogâltan–Florea Gogâltan, Fl.–Florea, G., Săpături arheologice la Gligorești (jud. Cluj) – 1990, Apulum, 1994 XXXI, 9–38. Gogâltan–Isac 1995 Gogâltan, Fl.–Isac, A., Die spätbronzezeitliche Siedlung von Cășeiu (I), EphemNap, V, 5–26. Gogâltan–Ursuţiu Gogâltan, Fl.–Ursuţiu, A., The settlement of Basarabi type from Iernut, hamlet Sfântu 1994 Gheorghe, IN: Ciugudean, H.–Boroffka, N. (eds.), The Early Hallstatt Period (1200–700 B.C.) in South-Eastern Europe, Alba Iulia, 81–96. Gogâltan Et Al. 1992 Gogâltan, Fl.–Cociș, S.–Paki, A., Săpături de salvare la Cluj-Becaș–1989, EphemNap, II, 7–17. Gogâltan Et Al. 2004 Gogâltan, Fl.–Aldea, I. Al.–Ursuţiu, A., Raport preliminar asupra investigaţiilor arheologice de la Gligorești “Holoame”, com. Luna, jud. Cluj (1994–1996), Apulum, XLI, 61–101. Gogâltan Et Al. 2008 Gogâltan, Fl.–Apai, E.–Kelemen, I., Leben mit den Toten. Ein Ältereisenzeitliches Grab von Vlaha, Kr. Cluj, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L., (eds.), Funerary Practices of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Central and South-Eastern Europe. Proceedings of the 9th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology. Bistriţa, Romania May 9th–11th, 2008, Cluj-Napoca, 109–123. Gogâltan Et Al. 2011 Gogâltan, Fl.–Németh, R. E.–Apai E., Eine rituelle Grube bei Vlaha, Gemeinde Săvădisla (Kreis Cluj), IN: Berecki, S.–Németh, E. R.–Rezi, B. (eds.), Bronze Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș 8–10 October 2010, BMM, IV, Târgu Mureș, 163–183. Gumă 1991 Gumă, M., Cîteva precizări asupra unor tipuri de coifuri de la sfîrșitul primei epoci a fierului și începutul celei de a doua descoperite în sud-vestul României, Thraco-Dacica, XII, 85–103. Gumă 1993 Gumă, M., Civilizaţia primei epoci a fierului în sud-vestul României, București. Hellmuth 2006 Hellmuth, A., Untersuchungen zu den sogenannten skytischen Pfeilspitzen aus der befestigten Höhensiedlung von Smolenice-Molpír, Bonn. Hellmuth 2007 Hellmuth, A., Zur Datierung der kreuzförmigen Goryt- und Bogentaschenbeschläge im Karpatenbecken, PZ, 82, 66–84. Hellmuth 2010 Hellmuth, A., Bogenschützen des Pontischen Raumes in der Älteren Eisenzeit. Typologische Gliederung, Verbreitung und Chronologie der skythischen Pfeilspitzen, Bonn. Horedt 1974 Horedt, K., Befestigte Siedlungen der spätbronze- und der Hallstattzeit im innerkarpatischen Rumänien, IN: Chropovský, B. (Red.), Symposium zu Problemen der jüngeren Hallstattzeit in Mitteleuropa. 25.–29. September, 1970 Smolenice, CSSR, Bratislava, 205–228. 120 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy Horedt Et Al. 1967 Inel 2006 Ipolyi 1861 Isac 1994 Ivantchik 2001 Ivantchik 2005 Kacsó 1975 Kacsó 2001 Kacsó 2004 Kacsó 2007 Kacsó 2011 Kacsó Et Al. 2011 Kemenczei 2009 Lascu 2005 Lascu 2006a Lascu 2006b Lascu 2007 Lascu 2009 Lascu 2010 Lascu–Ota 2001 László 2001a László 2001b László 2010a László 2010b Ljuština 2010 Horedt, K.–Berciu, I.–Popa, Al.–Paul, I. –Raica, I., Săpăturile arheologice de la Rahău și Sebeș, Apulum, VI, 11–27. Inel, N., Istoricul cercetărilor cu privire la ceramica din prima vârstă a fierului pe teritoriul României. Cu referire specială la spaţiul intracarpatic, Apulum, 43, 1, 111–133. Ipolyi, A., Magyar régészeti repertorium, ArchKözl, II, 189–282. Isac, A., Un akinakes de la Cincșor (jud. Brașov), ActaMN, 31, 179–183. Ivantchik, A. I., Kimmerier und Skythen. Kulturhistorische und chronologische Probleme der Archäologie der osteuropäischen Steppen und Kaukasiens in vor- und frühskythischer Zeit, Berlin–Moskau. Ivantchik, A. I., Am Vorabend der Kolonisation. Das nördliche Schwarzmeergebiet und die Steppennomaden des 8.–7. Jhs. v. Chr. in der klassischen Literaturtradition: Mündliche Überlieferung, Literatur und Geschichte, Moskau–Berlin. Kacsó, C., Contributions à la connaissance de la culture de Suciu de Sus à la lumière des recherches faites à Lăpuș, Dacia N. S., XIX, 45–68. Kacsó, C., Zur chronologischen und kulturellen Stellung des Hügelgräberfeldes von Lăpuș, IN: Kacsó, C. (Hrsg.), Der nordkarpatischen Raum in der Bronzezeit. Symposium Baia Mare, 7.–10 Oktober 1998, Baia Mare, 231–278. C. Kacsó, Mărturii arheologice, Baia Mare. Kacsó, C., Descoperiri de bronzuri din nordul Transilvaniei (I). Colecţia Ferencz Floth, Baia Mare. Kacsó, C., Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Maramureș, Baia Mare. Kacsó, C.–Metzner-Nebelsick, C.–Nebelsick, L. D., New work at the Late Bronze Age Tumulus Cemetery of Lăpuș in Romania, IN: Borgna, E.–Müller Celka, S. (eds.), Ancestral Landscapes: Burial Mounds in the Copper and Bronze Ages. (Central and Eastern Europe – Balkans – Adriatic – Aegean, 4th–2nd milennium BC). Proceedings of the International Conference, Udine, May 15th–17th 2008, Lyon, 341–354. Kemenczei, T., Studien zu den Denkmälern skythisch geprägter Alföld Gruppe, Budapest. Lascu, I., O reprezentare inedită aparţinând culturii Basarabi de la Oarda, Apulum, XLII, 53–56. Lascu, I., Locuirea din prima vârstă a fierului, IN: Alba Iulia Dealul Furcilor-Monolit. Catalogul expoziţiei, Alba Iulia, 12–20. Lascu, I., Statuete antropomorfe descoperite la Alba Iulia-“Dealul Furcilor-Monolit”, Apulum, XLIII/1, 135–140. Lascu, I., Picioare de vas de tipul “Stiefelgefäse” descoperite la Alba Iulia–Dealul FurcilorMonolit, Apulum, XLIV/1, 67–72. Lascu, I., Un sceptru de corn din așezarea din prima vârstă a fierului de la Alba Iulia-Dealul Furcilor-Monolit, Apulum, XLVI/1, 593–599. Lascu, I. A., Contribuţii la cunoașterea primei epoci a fierului în spaţiul intracarpatic al României. Descoperirile arheologice de la Alba Iulia „Dealul Furcilor – Monolit“, Alba Iulia, teză de doctorat. Lascu, I. A.–Ota, R., Cercetări de suprafaţă pe raza localităţii Dumitra (jud. Alba), BCȘS, 7, 77–86. László, A., Prima epocă a fierului. Istoric și caracterizare, IN: Petrescu-Dîmboviţa, M.– Vulpe, Al. (Coord.), Istoria românilor. Vol. I. Moștenirea timpurilor îndepărtate, București, 294–299. László, A., Prima epocă a fierului. Perioada timpurie (Hallstatt A și B), IN: PetrescuDîmboviţa, M.–Vulpe, Al. (Coord.), Istoria românilor. Vol. I. Moștenirea timpurilor îndepărtate, București, 299–327. László, A., Prima epocă a fierului, IN: Petrescu-Dîmboviţa, M.–Vulpe, Al. (Coord.), Istoria românilor. Vol. I. Moștenirea timpurilor îndepărtate, Ediţia a II-a, revizuită și adăugită, București, 289–351. László, A., Zur Chronologie der späten Bronzezit und der älteren Hallstattperiode im nord-östlichen Karpatenraum. Die Radiokarbon-Datierung der Gáva-Holihrady Siedlung von Siret (Bukovina), StCom Satu Mare, 26/1, 121–132. Ljuština, M., The Late Hallstatt Communities in the Serbian Part of the Danube Basin, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș 9–11 October 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 59–78. Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 121 Luca, S. A.–Boroffka, N. G. O., New prehistoric discoveries from Sibiu, Romania, Apulum, XXXII, 73–82. Luca–Pinter 2001 Luca, S. A.–Pinter, Z.-K., Der Böhmerberg bei Broos/Orăștie. Eine archäologische Monographie, Sibiu. Mare–Cedică 2005 Mare, M.–Cedică, V., Cercetările arheologice de la Herneacova – Cetate (or. Recaș, jud. Timiș). Campaniile 2004–2005 (II), Analele Banatului, XII–XIII, 2004–2005, 633–635. Marinescu 1984 Marinescu, Gh., Die jüngere Hallstattzeit in Nordostsiebenbürgen, Dacia N. S., XXVIII, 47–83. Marinescu 2003 Marinescu, Gh., Cercetări arheologice în judeţul Bistriţa-Năsăud, Bistriţa. Marinescu 2005 Marinescu, G. G., Urnenfelderzeitliche Bronzefunde aus dem Nordosten Siebenbürgens, IN: Soroceanu, T. (Hrsg.), Bronzefunde aus Rumänien II. Descoperiri de bronzuri din România, Bistriţa–Cluj-Napoca, 265–284. Marinescu 2010a Marinescu, G. G., Vestigii hallstattiene timpurii și mijlocii din nord-estul Transilvaniei, RevBis, XXIV, 41–128. Marinescu 2010b Marinescu, G. G., Un mormânt de tip scitic descoperit la Fântânele „La Gâţa” (jud. BistriţaNăsăud), Arhiva Someșană, IX, 13–28. Marinescu 2010c Marinescu, G. G., Prima epocă a fierului (Hallstatt) în Bazinul Someșului Mare, Alba Iulia, teză de doctorat. Marinescu–MariMarinescu, Gh.–Marinescu, G. G., Chiochiș, com. Chiochiș, jud. Bistriţa-Năsăud Punct: nescu 2010 Pe Clejă. Cod sit: 33024.01, IN: CCA 2009, București, 249–250, nr. 113. Marinescu–Zăgreanu Marinescu, G. G.–Zăgreanu, R., Un nou akinakes descoperit la Năsal (com. Ţaga, jud. Cluj), 2011 RevBis, XXV, 139–147. Marta 2009 Marta, L., The Late Bronze Age Settlements of Petea-Csengersima, Satu-Mare. Marta 2010 Marta, L., Lăpuș II–Gáva Discoveries in the Plain of Satu Mare, StCom Satu Mare, 26/1, 317–328. Medeleţ 1991 Medeleţ, Fl., O locuinţă hallstattiană de la Remetea Mare „Gomila lui Gabor” (jud. Timiș), Thraco-Dacica, XII, 63–83. Medeleţ–Cedică 2004 Medeleţ, Fl.–Cedică, V, Coiful greco-ilir de la Găvojdia (jud. Timiș), în Analele Banatului, X–XI, 2002–2003 (2004), 97–100. Medeleţ Et Al. 2004 Medeleţ, Fl.–Cedică, V.–Mare, M.–Chiu, Fl.–Rogozea, P., Cercetările arheologice de la Herneacova–Cetate (com. Recaș, jud. Timiș). Campania 2003 (I), Analele Banatului, X–XI, 2002–2003 (2004), 93–95. Méder 2006 Méder, L. L., Hallstattische Keramic aus Poian–Köhát, Marisia, XXVIII, 43–59. Metzner-Nebelsick Metzner-Nebelsick, C., Der Thrako-Kimmerische Formenkreis aus der Sicht der Urnenfelder2002 und Hallstattzeit im südöstlichen Pannonien, Rahden/Westf. Metzner-Nebelsick Metzner-Nebelsick, C.–Kacsó, C.–Nebelsick, L. D.–Peters, M.–Pospieszny, Ł.–Jaeger, M., Et Al. 2009 Rapoarte preliminare asupra cercetărilor în necropola tumulară de la Lăpuș 2007–2008. Vorberichte über die Forschungen in der Hügelnekropole von Lăpuș 2007–2008, Baia Mare. Metzner-Nebelsick Metzner-Nebelsick, C.–Kacsó, C.–Nebelsick, L.D., A Bronze Age ritual structure on the Et Al. 2010 edge of the Carpathian Basin, StCom Satu Mare, 26/1, 219–233. Moga–Ciugudean Moga, V.–Ciugudean, H. (red.), Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Alba, BMA, II, Alba 1995 Iulia. Mozsolics 1957 Mozsolics, A., Archäologische Beiträge zur Geschichte der grossen Wanderung, ActaArchHung, VIII, 119–156. Nagy 2011a Nagy, J. G., A Ritual Pit from Vlaha-“Pad“ IN: Popa, C. I.–Tentis, D. M.–Crandell, O. N. (eds.) Beyond the Veil, International Archaeology Student Conference on “Spirituality in Preand Protohistory”. 3–5 april 2009, Alba Iulia, Romania, BCȘS, special issue, Alba Iulia, 93. Nagy 2011b Nagy, J. G., Habitatul în prima epocă a fierului în Bazinul Someșului Mic. Locuirea de la Vlaha-Pad, jud. Cluj, Iași, teză de doctorat. Nagy–Körösfői 2010 Nagy, J. G.–Körösfői, Zs., Early Iron Age Storage Pit at Porumbeni Mari-Várfele (Hargihta Country), StCom Satu Mare, XXVI/I, 133–152. Németi 1972 Németi, I., Necropola hallstattiană de la Sanislău, StCom Satu Mare, II, 121–149. Németi 1977a Németi, I., Contribuţii la cunoașterea epocii fierului din nord-vestul R. S. România, ActaMP, I, 47–56. Németi 1977b Németi, I., Descoperiri hallstattiene târzii din nord-vestul României (Aspecte de cronologie), ActaMP, I, 57–62. Németi 1982 Németi, I., Das späthalstattzeitliche Gräberfeld von Sanislău, Dacia N. S., XXVI, 115–144. Luca–Boroffka 1995 122 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy Németi 1984 Németi, I., Contribuţii la istoricul hallstattului târziu din nord-vestul României în lumina noilor descoperiri arheologice, ActaMP, VIII, 129–146. Németi 1988 Németi, I., Unele aspecte ale evoluţiei ceramicii din a doua epocă a fierului în nord-vestul R. S. România (Latène B-C), SCIVA, 39, 2, 87–111. Németi 2003 Németi, J., Tracii și celţii, IN: Chiriac, A.–Cornea, L.–Ghemiș, C.–Moisa, G. (Coord.), In memoriam Nicolae Chidioșan, Oradea, 161–175. Németi 2009 Németi, J., The Hajdúbagos/Pișcolt–Cehăluţ group, IN: Berecki, S.–Németh, E. R.–Rezi, B. (eds.), Bronze Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, BMM, IV, Cluj-Napoca, 203–221. Németi 2010a Németi, J., Acâș-Râtul lui Vereș (Veres-rét). The Late Bronze Age settlement, StCom Satu Mare, XXVI/I, 265–316. Németi 2010b Németi, J., The Problem of Hand-Made Pottery from La Tène (Celtic) Contexts in North-Western Romania. A Comparison with Neighbouring Regions – Tisza Valley and Transylvania, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș 9–11 October 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 181–215. Palincaș 2005 Palincaș, N., Câteva fragmente ceramice hallstattiene de tip Ferigile descoperite la Câmpulung (jud. Argeș), SCIVA, 54–56, 2003–2005, 291–301. Pankau 2004 Pankau, C., Die älterhallstattzeitliche Keramik aus Mediaș/Siebenbürgen, Bonn. Pare 1999 Pare, Ch., Beiträge zum Übergang von der Bronze- zur Eisenzeit in Mitteleuropa. Teil I: Grundzüge der Chronologie im östlichen Mitteleuropa (11.-8. Jahrhundert v.Chr.), Jahrbuch RGZM, 45, 1, 1998 (1999), 293–433. Parzinger 1989 Parzinger, H., Chronologie der Späthallstatt- und Frühlatène-Zeit. Studien zu Fundgruppen zwischen Mosel und Save, Weinheim. Patek 1993 Patek, E., Westungarn in der Hallstattzeit, Weinheim. Petrescu-Dîmboviţa Petrescu-Dîmboviţa, M., Der Arm- und Beinschmuck in Rumänien, Stuttgart. 1998 Pop–Bejinariu 2010 Pop, H.–Bejinariu, I., Late Hallstatt-Early La Tène Settlement from Porţ-Paliș (com. Marca, Sălaj County, Romania), IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș 9–11 October 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 99–105. Pop Et Al. 2006 Pop, H.–Bejinariu, I.–Băcueţ-Crișan, S.–Băcueţ-Crișan, D.–Sana, D.–Csók, Zs., Șimleu Silvaniei. Monografie arheologică. (I) istoricul cecetărilor, Cluj-Napoca. Popa 2004 Popa, C. I., Descoperiri din epoca fierului la Petrești-Groapa Galbenă, PA, IV, 63–75. Popa 2009 Popa, C. I., A possible schytian burial at Hărău (Hunedoara County), PA, IX, 45–49. Popa–Boroffka 1996 Popa, D.–Boroffka, N., Consideraţii privind cultura Noua. Așezarea de la Ţichindeal, jud. Sibiu, SCIVA, 47, 1, 51–61. Popa–Simina 2004 Popa, C. I.–Simina, N. M., Cercetări arheologice la Lancrăm-„Glod”, Alba Iulia. Popa–Totoianu 2000 Popa, C. I.–Totoianu, R., Câteva probleme ale epocii Latène în lumina descoperirilor recente de la Lancrăm (or. Sebeș) «Glod», jud. Alba, IN: Gaiu, C.–Rustoiu, A. (coord.), Les celtes et les thraco-daces de l’est du Bassin des Carpates. Les actes du colloque national qui a eu lieu a Bistriţa le 16–17 octobre 1998, Cluj-Napoca, 51–134. Popa–Totoianu 2001 Popa, C. I.–Totoianu, R., Date noi asupra locuirilor umane de la Sebeș–Podul Pripocului (jud. Alba), PA, I, 33–54. Popa–Totoianu 2010a Popa, C. I.–Totoianu, R., The Late Bronze Age settlement at Sebeș-Podul Pripocului (County of Alba), StCom SatuMare, XXVI/I, 85–119. Popa–Totoianu 2010b Popa, C. I.–Totoianu, R., Aspecte ale epocii bronzului în Transilvania (între vechile și noile cercetări), Sebeș. Popa Et Al. 2004 Popa, C. I.–Bounegru, G.–Mihai, P., Raport asupra săpăturii de salvare de la Alba Iulia-Str. Brândușei, f. n., PA, IV, 150–155. Popescu–Vulpe 1982 Popescu, E.–Vulpe, Al., Nouvelles découverts du type Ferigile, Dacia N. S., XXVI, 77–114. Popescu–Vulpe 1992 Popescu, E.–Vulpe, Al., Necropola de tip Ferigile de la Rudeni, jud. Argeș, MCA, 109–113. Preda 2001 Preda, C., Cu privire la localizarea și originea agatârșilor, EphemNap, XI, 4–14. Protase 2004 Protase, D., Cimitirul slav de la Ocna Sibiului (sec. VIII–IX), București–Sibiu. Rezi–Nagy 2009 Rezi, B.–Nagy, J. G., Rescue Excavations at Chinari “Mociar” (Mureș County), Marisia, XXIX, 87–129. Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 123 Roska 1942 Rustoiu 2000 Rustoiu–Ciută 2001 Sana 2010 Sauter 2000 Sava 1999 Sava 2002 Sperber 1987 Soroceanu 1995 Soroceanu 2005 Soroceanu 2008 Stanciu Et Al. 2005 Stanciu Et Al. 2006 Stanciu Et Al. 2007 Stăncescu 2003 Stratan 1961 Tecar–Nagy 2010 Teleagă 2008 Teržan 2005 Teržan 2010 Trachsel 2004 Ursuţiu 2000 Roska, M., Erdély régészeti repertóriuma, I. Őskor, Kolozsvár. Rustoiu, G. T., O așezare inedită aparţinând bronzului târziu de la Oarda–„Bulza“ (mun. Alba Iulia). Câteva consideraţii culturale și cronologice privind bronzul târziu în bazinul mijlociu al Mureșului, Apulum, XXXVII, 1, 161–175. Rustoiu, G. T.–Ciută, M., Consideraţii cu privire la unele descoperiri aparţinând primei epocii a fierului, din așezările de la Limba-Bordane și Limba-Șesu Orzii, IN: Cosma, C.–Tamba, D.–Rustoiu, A. (Hrsg.), Studia archaeologica et historica Nicolao Gudea dicata. Omagiu profesorului Nicolae Gudea la 60 de ani. Festschrift für Professor Nicolae Gudea gelegentlich des 60. Geburtstages, Zalău, 119–134. Sana, D. V., Prima epocă a fierului în depresiunea Șimleului și în zonele învecinate. Descoperirile de tip Gáva, Alba Iulia, teză de doctorat. Sauter, H., Studien zum Kimmerienproblem, Bonn. Sava, E., Istoricul cercetărilor și contribuţii noi la periodizarea și cronologia absolută a culturii Noua, IN: Studia in honorem Ion Niculiţă. Omagiu cu prilejul împlinirii a 60 de ani, Chișinău, 54–83. Sava, E., Die Bestattungen der Noua-Kultur. Ein Beitrag zur Erforschung spätbronzezeitlicher Bestattungsriten zwischen Dnestr und Westkarpaten, Kiel. Sperber, L., Untersuchungen zur Chronologie der Urnenfelderkultur im nördlichen Alpenvorland von der Schweiz bis Oberösterreich, Bonn. Soroceanu, T. (Bearb. u. Red.), Bronzefunde aus Rumänien, Berlin. Soroceanu, T. (Hrsg.), Bronzefunde aus Rumänien II. Descoperiri de bronzuri din România, Bistriţa–Cluj-Napoca. Soroceanu, T., Die vorskythenzeitlichen Metallgefäße im Gebiet des heutigen Rumänien. Vasele de metal prescitice de pe actualul teritoriu al României, Bistriţa–Cluj Napoca. Stanciu, I.–Gogâltan, Fl.–Ursuţiu, A.–Bârcă, V.–Bogdan-Cătăniciu, I.–Rusu, A. A–Molnár, Zs.–Apai, E.–Ardeleanu, M.–Nagy, J. G.–Rezi, B.–Gáll, S.–Tărâţă, M.–Ferencz, Sz.–Tătar, P.–Tatár, A.–Komáromi, Zs.–Deleanu, Vl., Vlaha, com. Săvădisla, jud. Cluj. Punct: Autostrada Borș-Brașov, tronson 2B, km 42+200–45+000). Cod. Sit: 59407.01–59407.03, CCA 2004, 404–406. Stanciu, I.–Gogâltan, Fl.–Molnár, Zs.–Apai, E.–Ardeleanu, M.–Ferencz, Sz.–Nagy, J. G.–Rezi, B.–Tatár, A.–Radu, Z.–Rusu, V.–Sâvu, A.–Tanasiciuc, D.–Todea, M., Vlaha, com. Săvădisla, jud. Cluj. Punct: Pad (Autostrada Borș-Brașov, tronson 2B, km 42+200–45+000). Cod. Sit: 59407.01–59407.03, CCA 2005, 398–400. Stanciu, I.–Gogâltan, Fl.–Apai, E.–Ardeleanu, M.–Ferencz, Sz.–Sava, V.–Daroczi, T.–Dobos, A.–Komáromi, Zs.–Fodor, G.–Ardelean, F.–Marchiș, E.–Moraru, Al.–Sucală, A.–Antal, A.–Gui, M.–Zalomi, E.–Milășan, F.–Diacu, M., Vlaha, com. Săvădisla, jud. Cluj. Punct: Pad (Autostrada Borș–Brașov, tronson 2B, km 42+200–45+000). Cod. Sit: 59407.01–59407.03, CCA 2006, 393–395. Stăncescu, R., Scurt istoric al cercetărilor privind prima epocă a fierului în sud-vestul Transilvaniei, Sargetia, XXXI, 71–83. Stratan, I., Cercetări și săpături arheologice executate de Muzeul raional Lugoj în 1956 și 1958, MCA, VII, 163–170. Tecar, T. I.–Nagy, J.-G., A Community from the First Iron Age from Gheorghieni–Valea Mare (Cluj County). Preliminary study, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș 9–11 October 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 15–58. Teleagă, E., Grichische Importe in den Nekropolen an der unteren Donau. 6. Jh.–Anfang des 3. Jhs. V. Chr., Rahden/West. Teržan, B., Metamorphose–eine Vegetationsgottheit in der Spätbronzezeit, IN: Horejs, B.–Jung, R.–Kaiser, E.–Teržan, B. (Hrsg.), Interpretationsraum Bronzezeit. Bernhard Hänsel von seinen Schülern gewidment, Bonn, 241–261. Teržan, B., Observations on graves in Lapuș, StCom SatuMare, XXVI/I, 203–218. Trachsel, M., Untersuchungen zur relativen und absoluten Chronologie der Hallstattzeit, Bonn. Ursuţiu, A., Consideraţii privind etapa mijlocie a primei vârste a fierului în Transilvania, ActaMP, XXIII, 221–252. 124 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy Ursuţiu 2002 Ursuţiu 2006 Ursuţiu 2009 Vaida 2008 Vasiliev 1980 Vasiliev 1982 Vasiliev 1983 Vasiliev 1987 Vasiliev 1992 Vasiliev 1994 Vasiliev 1995 Vasiliev 1996 Vasiliev 1999a Vasiliev 1999b Vasiliev 2003 Vasiliev 2004a Vasiliev 2004b Vasiliev 2005 Vasiliev 2007 Vasiliev 2008 Vasiliev–Zrínyi 1987 Vasiliev Et Al. 1991 Vulpe 1967 Vulpe 1977 Vulpe 1984 Vulpe 1986 Ursuţiu, A., Etapa mijlocie a primei vârste a fierului în Transilvania (Cercetările de la Bernadea, com. Bahnea, jud. Mureș), Cluj-Napoca. Ursuţiu, A., Descoperirile aparţinând primei vârste a fierului, IN: Costea, F.–Bălos, A.–Savu, L.–Ardevan, R.–Ursuţiu, A.–Șoneriu, I.–El Susi, G.–Daisa Ciută, B.–Ștefan, D.–Duţescu, M.-M., Augustin-Tipia Ormenișului, judeţul Brașov. Monografie arheologică (I), Brașov, 155–160. Ursuţiu, A., Descoperiri aparţinând bronzului târziu. Late Bronze Age discoveries, IN: Mustaţă, S.–Gogâltan, Fl.–Cociș, S.–Ursuţiu, A. (eds.), Cercetări arheologice preventive la Florești-Polus Center, jud. Cluj (2007). Rescue excavation at Florești-Polus Center, Cluj County (2007), Cluj-Napoca, 203–221. Vaida, D. L., Preliminary considerations regarding the Celtic cemetery from Fântanele (the point – La Gâţa), IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L., (eds.), Funerary Practices of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Central and South-Eastern Europe. Proceedings of the 9th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology. Bistriţa, Romania May 9th–11th, 2008, Cluj-Napoca, 237–246. Vasiliev, V., Sciţii agatârși pe teritoriul României, Cluj-Napoca. Vasiliev, V., În legătură cu unele opinii referitoare la Hallstattul D în Transilvania, ActaMN, XIX, 262–269. Vasiliev, V., Probleme ale cronologiei hallstattului în Transilvania, ActaMN, XX, 33–57. Vasiliev, V., Probleme ale cronologiei hallstattului pe teritoriul României (II), Sargetia, XX, 1986–1987, 64–80. Vasiliev, V., Probleme privind cronologia epocii hallstattiene în aria intracarpatică (III), EphemNap, II, 19–26. Vasiliev, V., Despre câteva opinii referitoare la cronologia primei epoci a fierului în Transilvania, ActaMN, 31, I, 37–47. Vasiliev, V., Fortifications de refuge et établissements fortifiés du premier âge du fer en Transilvanie, Bucarest. Vasiliev, V., Quelques aspécts de la culture Basarabi en regardant sourtout la Transylvanie, IN: Der Basarabi-Komplex in Mittel- und Südosteuropa. Kolloquium in Drobeta-Tr. Severin (7–9 mai 1996), Bukarest, 136–142. Vasiliev, V., Date noi despre necropola de incineraţie de la sfârșitul primei vârste a fierului, descoperită la Uioara de Sus (judeţul Alba), Thraco-Dacica, XX, 181–188. Vasiliev, V., Betrachtungen zur Chronologie der älteren Eisenzeit in Siebenbürgen, IN: Boroffka, N.–Soroceanu, T., (Hrsg.), Transsilvanica. Archäologische Untersuchungen zur älteren Geschichte des südöstlichen Mitteleuropa. Gedenkschrift für Kurt Horedt, Rahden/ Westf., 173–179. Vasiliev, V., Prima epocă a fierului, IN: Pop, I.-A.–Nägler, Th., (coord.), Istoria Transilvaniei, vol I (până la 1541), Cluj-Napoca, 51–66. Vasiliev, V., Despre grupul cultural Igriţa, ActaMP, XXVI, 133–140. Vasiliev, V., À propos de quelques aspects concernant le groupe scythique de l’aire Intracarpatique de la Transylvanie, IN: Chochorowski, J., (red.), Kimmerowie, Scytowie, Sarmaci. Księga poświęcona pamięci profesora Tadeusza Sulimirskiego, Kraków, 465–471. Vasiliev, V., Despre câteva aspecte referitoare la grupul scitic din aria intracarpatică a Transilvaniei, RevBis, XIX, 71–76. Vasiliev, V., Despre epoca bronzului și prima epocă a fierului în Istoria Românilor, vol. I, EphemNap, XIV–XV, 2004–2005 (2007), 5–22. Vasiliev, V., Bemerkungen zu den bitronkonischen Gefässen die für Gáva Kultur kennzeichend sind, EphemNap, XVI–XVII, 2006–2007 (2008), 7–16. Vasiliev, V.–Zrínyi, A., Așezarea și mormintele din prima epocă a fierului de la Chendu (jud. Mureș), Apulum, XXIV, 91–118. Vasiliev, V.–Aldea, I. Al.–Ciugudean, H., Civilizaţia dacică timpurie în aria intracarpatică a României. Contribuţii arheologice: așezarea fortificată de la Teleac, Cluj-Napoca. Vulpe, Al., Necropola hallstattiană de la Ferigile (Monografie arheologică), București. Vulpe, Al., Zur Chronologie der Ferigile-Gruppe, Dacia N. S., XXI, 81–111. Vulpe, Al., Descoperiri hallstattiene din zona Aiudului, Thraco-Dacica, V, 36–63. Vulpe, Al., Zur Entstehung der geto-dakischen Zivilisation. Die Basarabi-Kultur. I. Teil: Forschungsgeschichte; Definition; Fundstoff; Verbreitung, Dacia N. S., XXX, 49–89. Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 125 Vulpe 1989 Vulpe 1990 Vulpe 2001 Vulpe 2002 Vulpe 2003 Vulpe 2004 Vulpe 2010 Vulpe–Popescu 1972 Vulpe, Al., Cu privire la agatârși, SympThrac, 7, 62–70. Vulpe, Al., Die Kurzschwerter, Dolch und Streitmesser der Hallstattzeit in Rumänien, PBF, VI, 9, München. Vulpe, Al., Sfârșitul primei epoci a fierului și formarea civilizaţiei celei de-a doua epoci a fierului, IN: Petrescu-Dîmboviţa, M.–Vulpe, Al. (Coord.), Istoria românilor. Vol. I. Moștenirea timpurilor îndepărtate, București, 464–496. Vulpe, Al., Cimerienii: un etnonim cu multiple înţelesuri, Buletinul Muzeului „Teohari Georgescu”, 7–8, 2001–2002, 123–146. Vulpe, Al., Problema scitică în România, IN: Identitate naţională și spirit european. Academicianul Dan Berindei la 80 de ani, București, 113–134. Vulpe, Al., Die Agathyrsen. Eine zusammenfassende Darstellung, IN: Chochorowski, J. (red.), Kimmerowie, Scytowie, Sarmaci. Księga poświęcona pamięci profesora Tadeusza Sulimirskiego, Kraków, 473–482. Vulpe, Al., Buchbesprechung, Askold I. Ivantchik, Am Vorabend der Kolonisation. Das nördliche Schwarzmeergebiet und die Steppennomaden des 8.-7. Jhs. v. Chr. in der klassischen Literaturtradition: Mündliche Überlieferung, Literatur und Geschichte, Moskau, Berlin, 2005, EA, 16, 360–370. Vulpe, Al.–Popescu, E., Contribution à la connaissance des débuts de la culture gétodacique dans la zone subcarpatique Vîlcea-Argeș (La nécropole tumulaire de Tigveni), Dacia N. S., XVI, 75–111. List of plates Pl. 1. Vlaha–Pad. 1. Site location; 2. General view of the site. Pl. 2. Vlaha–Pad. Excavation plan with the marking of the features belonging to the Early Iron Age and the position of feature 0375. Pl. 3. Vlaha–Pad. 1. Outlining of the pit and appearance of first archaeological materials; 2. Final photo; 3. Details of the archaeological materials; 4. Coal, ash, animal bones on the bottom of the pit; 5. Ground plan and profile. Pl. 4–6. Vlaha–Pad. Archaeological material. Pl. 7. Remetea Mare–Gomila lui Gabor. Archaeological material (after Medeleţ 1991). 126 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy . eneral ie of t e site. Plate 1. Vlaha–Pad. 1. Site location; 2. General view of the site. Plate . la a– a . . ite lo ation Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 127 Plate 2. Vlaha–Pad. Excavation plan with the marking of the features belonging to the Early Iron Age and the position of feature 0375. Plate . la a– a . a ation plan it t e mar in of t e features elon in to t e arly ron e and t e position of feature 5. 128 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy m erami fra ments animal ones ri er stones 5 5 5 m 5 m 5 Plate 3. Vlaha–Pad. 1. Outlining of the pit and appearance of first archaeological materials; 2. Final photo; 3. Details of the archaeological materials; 4. Coal, ash, animal bones on the bottom of the pit; 5. Ground plan and profile. Plate . la a– a . . utlinin of t e pit and appearan e of first ar aeolo i al materials . inal p oto . etails of t e ar aeolo i al materials . oal as animal ones on t e ottom of t e pit 5. round plan and profile. Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 129 Plate 4. Vlaha–Pad. Archaeological material. Plate . la a– a . r aeolo i al material. 130 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy Plate 5. Vlaha–Pad. Archaeological material. Plate 5. la a– a . r aeolo i al material. Profane or Ritual? A Discovery from the End of the Early Iron Age from Vlaha–Pad, Transylvania | 131 5 Plate 6. Vlaha–Pad. Archaeological material. Plate . la a– a . r aeolo i al material. 132 | Fl. Gogâltan–J.-G. Nagy 5 Plate 7. Remetea Mare–Gomila lui Gabor. Archaeological material (after Medeleţ 1991). Plate . emetea are– mi a i a r. r aeolo i al material after . The Archaeozoological Analysis of the Animal Bones Discovered in the Early Iron Age Pit at Vlaha–Pad* Imola KELEMEN Szekler Museum of Ciuc Miercurea Ciuc, Romania kelemenimola@csikimuzeum.ro Keywords: archaeozoology, Early Iron Age, pit, ritual or not?, kitchen waste On the occasion of the construction of the Borș–Brașov Motorway the site Pad, south-west from Vlaha village, Cluj County was the object of an archaeological research and excavation, starting from the year 2004. During these works a 6th century necropolis and two prehistoric settlements were identified. The feature in question, Cx0375 is a pit belonging to the first Iron Age (HaD Central European) and is suspected to be ritual due to its special shape and content. The archaeozoological material discovered in feature Cx0375 contained 51 relatively small fragments of animal bones. 20 of these could be identified down to the species and body parts, most of the remaining 31 being rib fragments of mainly large but also small-medium sized mammals. The identifiable fragments, 39.2% of the animal bone material, come from at least 5 individuals (Fig. 1). The fragmentation of the bones suggests they are kitchen waste and/or remains of food, though almost no actual gnawing or cut marks were visible on them. NISP % % MNI % 33,3 14 70 2o 4 20 2 33,3 1 5 1 16,6 1 5 1 16,6 20 100 39.2 6 100 23 8 51 100 Fig. 1. The fragments in pit Cx0375 (NISP = number of identifiable specimens, MNI = minimum number of individuals, o = Ovis aries). Ovis aries/Capra hircus (sheep/goat) Sus scrofa (pig) Bos taurus (cattle) Cervus elaphus (red deer) Total identified fragments Big size mammal Small-medium size mammal Total fragments The most representative part (70%) of the determined animal bones belonged to sheep/goats. Even though none of the fragments were identified as actually coming from the species Capra hircus (goat), the ones that were not proven sheep, have been put in the common group called Ovicapra (Fig. 2). Both of this group’s identified individuals were sheep, one of them juvenile (10–12 months old), the other subadult (3 years old) and female. Though we were able to take some biometric data off the bones, none of them gave us the opportunity of calculating withers height. On one of the Ovicapra bones, a radius, a small cut mark * Besides for providing this intriguing material, I must thank Florin Gogâltan for his useful advices and forever lasting faith in me. I am also particularly grateful to Mike Buckley for identifying with certainty the red deer bone using protein fingerprinting, but also to every specialist that ever offered a suggestion about its morphology. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 133–137 134 | I. Kelemen was visible, supporting our hypothesis that the assemblage represents mostly food remains (potentially a kitchen midden). This might also be supported by the fact that 64.29% of the sheep/goat bones come from B quality meat-zones, 21.43% from A and only 14.28% from C (Uerpmann 1973, 316). Four pig fragments have been identified as coming from at least two individuals, a juvenile (under 2) and a subadult (over 2 years old), ages when pigs are usually slaughtered for their meat and fats. However, the bones were unfortunately too fragmented to measure and, since the isolated teeth are left out of the meat quality classifications, the three B quality tibia fragments cannot be relevant in determining whether the pieces have been actual food remains or not. The only identifiable cattle fragment is an isolated lower molar, indicating a juvenile (1.5–2 years old) individual. Based on size, most of the large rib fragments probably also belong to cattle, but this could not be confirmed morphologically. Sheep/ goat Dens Humerus Radius Ulna Tibia Astragalus Metapodium (vestigial) Sacrum Ossa longa diaph.fr. Costae TOTAL 1o 2o+2oc 1oc 1o+3oc 2o Pig 1 Cattle 1 Red deer Large s. mammal Small-med. s. mammal 1 3 1 2o 2 20 14 4 1 1 23 Fig. 2. The fragments by body parts (o = Ovis aries, oc = Ovicapra). 5 3 8 The most interesting piece was undoubtedly the most difficult one to identify, a red deer’s vestigial metapodial (Fig. 3), with a rather adventurous story. Identifying this fragment has been a frustrating task ever since it became part of my MA dissertation in 2007. It was obvious that the bone was carrying the characteristics based on which it could be determined, but in lack of enough experience and special tools, we were forced to take it to virtually all meetings and conferences with the smallest chance of asking other archaeozoologists about it. It has been taken to many different congresses in Romania, Hungary and even England, but it turned out it was more difficult to identify than first imagined. Eventually, photos of it travelled around the world, through a zooarchaeology mailing list, but none of the suggestions were with confidence. An offer on the other hand, from Dr Mike Buckley at the University of Manchester to take protein samples and objectively infer the species, was more than convincing. Fig. 3. Red deer (Cervus elaphus) vestigial metapodial from Vlaha–Pad, Cx0375. Buckley heads a research group in Manchester, UK, whose interests are, among others, the species determination of degraded tissues from archaeological and palaeontological burial environments using methods in protein mass spectrometry (they call this Zooarchaeology by Mass Spectrometry, or ZooMS for short). Type 1 collagen, the dominant protein in mineralized tissues persists in archaeological and fossil bone, and by ‘fingerprinting’ collagen peptides, they can distinguish between the major domesticate animals The Archaeozoological Analysis of the Animal Bones Discovered in the Early Iron Age Pit at Vlaha–Pad | 135 used in animal husbandry, including the morphologically similar skeletal remains of sheep and goat. Wild species are also part of their research (Buckley Et Al. 2009; 2010; 2011; Buckley–Whitcher Kansa 2011). From the moment the bone fragment arrived at Dr Buckley’s lab in Manchester, after using a non-destructive method to take the collagen sample, the results were back within only 24 hours. The actual result was that the piece belonged to the Cervinae sub-family, so it might have been either red deer (Cervus elaphus) or fallow deer (Dama dama). Although Dama dama has been found in Neo–Aeneolithic Dobrogea and Banat (Haimovici 2007, 298), it is not known to be present at the Early Iron Age in the Carpathian Basin (Bindea 2008; Bălășescu Et Al. 2003), but introduced again much later, around 1850, by Hungarian nobles, brought onto their own properties (Haimovici 2007, 298). Considering this information, this fragment most probably belonged to a red deer. Red deer are relatively common wild game finds among Early Iron Age settlements and since this fragment is not a shed antler but a piece the animal most probably was killed for, it stands as a clear proof of hunting. The feet bones are part of the group with the lowest meat value, so the red deer’s vestigial metapodial seems to be the refuse of food procession. From the point of view of the archaeozoological analyses, this historical period of the Early Iron Age has been very poorly researched in Transylvania, much less in Romania. In Banat there has been a study about a burnt down dwelling, discovered in a Hallstatt settlement at Remetea Mare–Gomila lui Gabor, Timiș County (El Susi 1997), and in Transylvania at the sites: Bernadea (Bindea 2008, 104; El Susi 2001), Zau de Câmpie–La Grădiniţă, Mureș County (Bindea 2008, 102–104), Mediaș–Cetate (Bindea 2008, 100–102; Bindea–Haimovici 2004), Mediaș–Gura Câmpului, Sibiu County (Bindea 2008, 105; Blăjan Et Al. 1979), Teleac, Alba County (Bindea 2008, 104, Vasiliev Et Al. 1991, 162), Porumbenii Mari–Várfele (Kelemen 2009; 2010). The dwelling at Remetea Mare–Gomila lui Gabor provided a larger lot of kitchen midden (183 fragments), the bones belonging mostly (60%) to wild species like red deer: 35.1%, wild hog: 28.6%, aurochs, brown bear: 1.7% each, European hare and marten: 0.5% each, plus a few bird bones (2.9%). The domestic species that appear here are cattle (15.7%), pig (19.2%), and sheep (3.5%). The Bernadea lot of 280 fragments of mammal bones belongs to the Basarabi culture, coming from three dwellings, a household pit and the cultural layer. 86% of these mammals belonged to domestic animals represented by the five most common species (cattle: 34.64%, pig: 25.36%, sheep/goat: 19.64%, horse: 5%, dog: 1.43%). Among the Ovicapra the sheep/goat ratio is 16–2 fragments (!). The remaining wild species were mostly red deer: 7.86%, wild hog and aurochs: 2.5% each, but also one fragment (0.36%) each from roe deer, beaver and European hare. Most (92.52%) of the 107 identified mammal bones at Zau de Câmpie–La Grădiniţă were also domestic: cattle: 55.14%, sheep/goat: 17.75%, pig: 14.01%, horse: 2.8% and dog: 0.93%, while the rest were red deer (3.73%), aurochs (3.73%), wild hog (0.93%) and roe deer (0.93%). From the 19 Ovicapra bones, 4 were identified as coming from sheep, but apparently none derived from goats. At the site Mediaș–Cetate three dwelling levels of a HaB settlement has been discovered, where 160 bone fragments have been gathered from. Except for a fish vertebra, all belonged to mammals, 96.23% domestic (sheep/goat: 30.19%, cattle: 26.42%, pig: 25.16%, horse: 9.43%, dog: 5.03%). The sheep/goat ratio was 12–6 fragments (!). The wild species were represented by red deer (3 fragments) and wild hog, roe deer, brown bear (1 fragment each). Mediaș–Gura Câmpului provided 215 identified bone fragments, almost 80% of it belonging to domestic mammals: cattle: 42.8%, sheep/goat: 18.14%, pig: 14.42%, horse: 0.93% and dog: 2.8%. At Ovicapra it is mentioned that apparently goats were not identified at all (!). Among the wild game there was red deer: 8.84%, aurochs and wild hog: 6.05% each. At Teleac there was a large lot, counting 728 fragments, 85.3% of which being domesticates: cattle: 49.31%, pig: 15.93%, sheep/goat: 10.44%, horse: 5.77%, dog (Canidae): 3.85%. Interestingly, most of the wild game was represented by wolf: 5.5%, then red deer: 4.4% and wild hog: 3.57%, but also roe deer: 0.96%, European hare and beaver: 0.14% each. The animal bone material at Porumbenii Mari–Várfele, Harghita County was more similar to the Cx0375 pit from Vlaha, because it was also a ‘peculiar’, ritual-like pit. There, the total of 56 fragments of kitchen waste (apart from the skull) was made of 2 small-medium ribs, 5 cattle-, 2 pig bones and 47 pieces of the same foal’s skull. Most of the presented Early Iron Age sites count a lot more animal remains than Cx0375 at Vlaha–Pad, because the materials come from whole settlements or a large part of them. Only Remetea Mare–Gomila 136 | I. Kelemen lui Gabor and Porumbenii Mari–Várfele reported on single features, a dwelling and a pit, respectively. Thus, comparing these findings is of great risk, and the only conclusion that seems accurate enough is that these Early Iron Age people may have preferred sheep over goats. In three lots (including Cx0375), goats did not appear at all, and in 2 others are much underrepresented against sheep. The 20 identified fragments coming from at least 6 individuals (two sheep, two pigs, a cattle and a red deer) is a number much too small to draw any precise conclusions from. It is worth mentioning though that considering the lot was so little, the diversity of it is unaccounted. Taking into consideration the data provided by the analogies, the fact that no goat remains have been identified underlines more the era’s preference for sheep. In this light, none of the other determined species are extreme finds either. None of the fragments were burnt,1 nor were they gnawed, and only one small Ovicapra radius fragment has been mildly cut. The fragmentation of the bones, though, and the fact that most of them come from B quality meat-zones of the body allow us to presume that the material is in fact remains of food and kitchen waste. The idea of a banquette, on the other hand, cannot be fully confirmed, since in that case we think there would be a much larger number of bones. Therefore, unfortunately the animal bones are not decisive enough to neither prove, nor effectively deny the pit was ritual. The idea of a banquette is much questioned and also no skeletons or larger connected body parts have been found in the pit. A ritual with cattle and pig teeth to sacrifice is somewhat hard to believe. The fragments seem more like a random pile of kitchen midden, some of them being actual remains of food. References Bălășescu Et Al. 2003 Bălășescu, A.–Udrescu, M.–Radu, V.–Popovici, D., Archéozoologie en Roumanie. Corpus de Données, Târgoviște. Bindea 2008 Bindea, D., Arheozoologia Transilvaniei în pre- și protoistorie, Cluj-Napoca. Bindea–Haimovici 2004 Bindea, D.–Haimovici, S., Resturile paleofaunistice din așezarea hallstattiană timpurie de la Mediaș–„Cetate”, Corviniana, VIII, 117–126. Blăjan Et Al. 1979 Blăjan, M.–Stoicovici, E.–Georoceanu, P., Contribuţii la cunoașterea vieţii economice a populaţiei hallstattiene din zona Mediaș (jud. Sibiu), Sargetia, XIV, 35–44. Buckley Et Al. 2009 Buckley, M.–Collins, M.–Thomas-Oates, J.–Wilson, J. C., Species Identification by Analysis of Bone Collagen Using Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionisation Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry, Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry, 23, 3843–3854. Buckley Et Al. 2010 Buckley, M.–Whitcher Kansa, S.–Howard, S.–Campbell, S.–Thomas-Oates, J.–Collins, M., Distinguishing Between Archaeological Sheep and Goat Bones Using a Single Collagen Peptides, JAS, 37, 13–20. Buckley–Whitcher Buckley, M.–Whitcher Kansa, S., Collagen Fingerprinting of Archaeological Bone Kansa 2011 and Teeth Remains from Domuztepe, South Eastern Turkey, Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 3, 271–280. Buckley Et Al. 2011 Buckley, M.–Larkin, N.–Collins, M., Mammoth and Mastodon Collagen Sequences, Survival and Utility, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 75, 2007–2016. El Susi 1997 El Susi, G., Resturile de faună dintr-o locuinţă hallstattiană de le Remetea Mare–Gomila lui Gabor (judeţul Timiș), Analele Banatului N. S., V, 47–53. El Susi 2001 El Susi, G., Studiul resturilor de faună din așezarea hallstattiană la Bernadea (com. Bahnea, jud. Mureș), Thraco-Dacica, XXII, 1–2, 223–246. Haimovici 2007 Haimovici, S., Mediterranian Species Discovered Among the Animal Remains from Dobrogea Province, Neolithic–Eneolithic Period, Analele Șiinţifice ale Universităţii „Al. I. Cuza” Iași, Biologie Animală, LIII, 291–302. Kelemen 2009 Kelemen, I., A Nagygalambfalva-Várfele lelőhelyen feltárt koravaskori gödör állatcsontjainak elemzése, Appendix for Nagy, J.-G.–Kőrösfői Zs., Koravaskori tárológödör a Nagygalambfalva-Várfele (Hargita megye) lelőhelyről, IN: Kutatások a Nagy-Küküllő felső folyása mentén, Molnár István Múzeum Kiadványai, 1, Székelykeresztúr, 67–72. 1 Although the archaeological report mentions some burnt bones, they apparently did not make into the archaeozoological material itself or have been misread as burnt fragments on site. The Archaeozoological Analysis of the Animal Bones Discovered in the Early Iron Age Pit at Vlaha–Pad | 137 Kelemen 2010 Uerpmann 1973 Vasiliev Et Al. 1991 Kelemen, I., The animal bones belonging to the First Iron Age pit from Porumbenii Mari–Várfele (Harghita County), StCom Satu Mare, XXVI/I, 153–156. Uerpmann, H.-P., Animal Bone Finds and Economic Archaeology: A Critical Study of ‘Osteo-Archaeological’ Method, WArch, 4/3, Theories and Assumptions, 307–322. Vasiliev, V.–Aldea, I. A.–Ciugudean, H., Civilizaţia dacică timpurie în aria intracarpatică a României. Contribuţii arheologice: așezarea fortificată de la Teleac, Cluj Napoca. List of figures Fig. 1. The fragments in pit Cx0375 (NISP = number of identifiable specimens, MNI = minimum number of individuals, o = Ovis aries). Fig. 2. The fragments by body parts (o = Ovis aries, oc = Ovicapra). Fig. 3. Red deer (Cervus elaphus) vestigial metapodial from Vlaha–Pad, Cx0375. Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.) Mircea BABEȘ–Nicolae MIRIŢOIU Archäologisches Institut „Vasile Pârvan“ Bukarest, Rumänien mirceababes@yahoo.com Zentrum für Anthropologie „Dr. Fr. Reiner“ Bukarest, Rumänien Schlagwörter: Bestattungssitten, Biritualismus, verlängerte, mehrstufige Bestattungen, Donau–Karpaten-Raum, 5.–3. Jh. v. Chr., Geten, Thraker, Skythen Die, von den Autoren, in den einheimischen Friedhöfen von Borosești (Jud. Iași) und Poienești (Jud. Vaslui), beide im Osten Rumäniens, durchgeführten Ausgrabungen brachten vor Jahren höchstinteressante Erkenntnisse hinsichtlich der eigenartigen Bestattungsbräuche der norddonauländischen Geten (Getai) während der Frühphase der jüngeren vorrömischen Eisenzeit (5.–3. Jh. v. Chr.).1 An beiden Fundstellen wurden gleichzeitig zwei große Brandgräberfelder erforscht, die zur germanischen (bastarnischen) Poienești–Lukaševka-Kultur aus dem 2.–1. Jh. v. Chr. angehören und somit kein Bezug auf das hier behandelte Thema haben (Babeș 1993). Tatsächlich interessieren uns hier die getischen Gräberfelder vor allem durch die alternative bzw. sukzessive Verwendung von Körper- und Brandbestattung im Rahmen einer verlängerten, mehrstufigen Behandlung ein und desselben Verstorbenen. Ausgangspunkt unserer Überlegungen bildete in Borosești (Taf. 1) die Entdeckung zweier Grabanlagen (Gr.I und Gr.II), die die Form und das Ausmaß (L. 2–2,10 m; Br. 0,75 m) der normalen Körpergräber zeigten (Taf. 2/Gr.I, Gr.II), dazu auch typische Grabbeigaben (Tonware – meist zerbrochen, Perlen, Messer, Steinplatte – evtl. Mühlstein), unordentlich in der Grubenfüllung verstreut (Taf. 3–4; 6/1–3; 7/1–5), jedoch keine menschlichen Knochen lieferten. In Borosești und insbesondere in Poienești wurden aber auch Brandgräber freigelegt, wo der Leichenbrand und die Grabbeigaben ebenfalls in überdimensionalen Gruben deponiert waren, das heißt in Gruben die für Körperbestattungen ohne weiteres gepasst hätten. Die Grube des Grabes V aus Borosești war 2,15 × 1,05 m groß (Taf. 2/Gr.V; 6/5), eigentlich viel zu groß für ihren Inhalt: ein Päckchen Leichenbrand (Fläche von 12 × 12 cm, 10 cm dick) und drei Gefäße als Beigaben (Taf. 4/6–8; 7/9–11), davon eins zerbrochen und zwei umgekippt. Leichenbrand und Grabbeigaben lagen etwa 10–20 cm oberhalb des Bodens, in der Füllung der Grube. Die anderen zwei Gräber von Borosești (Gr.III und Gr.IV) waren echte Urnengräber (Taf. 2; 5; 6/4, 6; 7/6–8) und könnten hypothetisch den aus den Gräbern I und II fehlenden Toten zugeschrieben werden. 1 Vorliegender Vortrag stellt eine abgekürzte Form unseres Beitrags dar, der gleichzeitig in rumänischer Sprache in der Fachzeitschrift ArhMold, XXXIV, 2011, 103–149, erschienen ist. Für die sprachliche Überprüfung und Verbesserung dieses Textes sei hier den Herren Dr. Tudor Soroceanu (Berlin) und Dr. Tiberius Bader (Hochdorf) herzlich gedankt. Zu allererst wurden die Ergebnisse dieser langjährigen Untersuchung von M. Babeș gelegentlich des 14. UISPP-Kongresses in Liège, in September 2001, vorgetragen (Babeș 2001). Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 139–160 140 | M. Babeș–N. Miriţoiu Die in Borosești gemachten Beobachtungen haben uns veranlasst, folgende Interpretation vorzuschlagen. In den sog. Gräbern I und II sollten ursprünglich (provisorisch) Körperbestattungen praktiziert worden; nach einer bestimmten Zeit wären diese Gräber wiedergeöffnet und die Leichen entnommen zwecks weiterer ritueller Behandlung, vermutlich Einäscherung, und endgültiger Beerdigung. Dabei waren die ursprünglichen Beigaben (hauptsächlich Gefäße) beschädigt und ohne Ordnung in derselben Grube geblieben, während die menschlichen Überreste anderswo deponiert waren. Im selben Sinne lässt sich vermuten, dass auch im Gr.V ursprünglich eine Körperbestattung stattgefunden hat, die nach einer bestimmten Zeit wieder geöffnet wurde; die Leiche wurde entnommen und eingeäschert, zum Unterschied von Gr.I und Gr.II wurde aber der Leichenbrand in derselben Grube, eigentlich in der Grubenfüllung, zusammen mit den inzwischen beschädigten Beigaben, endgültig bestattet (Babeș 1994; Babeș 2000, 134). Diese zweite Hypothese passt am besten im Falle des getischen Friedhofes von Poienești. Dort, ausgenommen der bekannte, von R. Vulpe 1949 entdeckte mormânt-cuptor (Ofengrab; tombe-four – eigentlich eine ausgebrannte Grabkammer mit einem Körpergrab – Vulpe 1953, 312–315), und die gewöhnlichen Urnengräber (insgesamt 10), wurden hauptsächlich Brandgrubengräber (31) entdeckt, wo der Leichenbrand und die Beigaben direkt in den Grabgruben, ohne jeglichen Schutz, deponiert worden waren (Taf. 8). Die Gruben hatten eine länglich-ovale oder rechteckige Form und konnten, dem Ausmaß nach, ganze Menschenkörper und eventuelle Grabbeigaben aufnehmen; für eigentliche Brandbestattungen, die in 14 von insgesamt 31 Gräbern gar keine Beigaben geliefert haben, waren sie aber offensichtlich überdimensional. Tatsächlich hatten in 20 Fällen die Gruben eine Länge von 1,50 bis 2,35 m und in weiteren drei sogar von 2,80 bis 2,90 m, wobei die Breite zwischen 0,75–1,25 m schwankte. In diesen Gräbern nahm der Leichenbrand zwischen einem Viertel und einem Drittel, höchstens die Hälfte der Grubensohle ein (Taf. 9). Es ist deswegen eher anzunehmen, dass die Brandgräber mit großen Gruben von Poienești ursprünglich als provisorische Körpergräber angelegt wurden. Man darf weiter vermuten, dass nach einer bestimmten Zeit die Leichen exhumiert und ausgebrannt wurden und dass, schließlich, die eventuell mit den Beigaben gemischten Leichenbrände in die selben Grabgruben deponiert wurden (etwa wie im Fall des Gr.V von Borosești). Gewisse von uns in Poienești gemachten Beobachtungen weisen in dieser Richtung hin: Unregelmäßigkeiten in der Gestalt der Gruben oder die Beschädigung der Opfergefäße, wie in den Gräbern 1045 und 1389, die auf solche sukzessive Handlungen am Grab zurückzuführen sind (Taf. 9 unten). ✴✴✴ Derartig ungewöhnliche Grabfunde wie in Borosești oder Poienești sind aber während der gleichen Zeitspanne zwischen dem 5. und 3. Jh. v. Chr., in einem viel breiteren Raum nördlich der Unteren Donau, zwischen dem Dnjestr (Nistru, Dnestr) im Osten und der Theiß (Tisa, Tisza) im Westen verbreitet (Taf. 13). Überdimensionale Brandgrubengräber sind tatsächlich in den Friedhöfen von Slobozia-Onești, Stelnica, Zimnicea, Fântânele, Teliţa, Murighiol, Băiţa und Olteni in Rumänien, Dănceni und Pârjolteni in der Republik Moldova, Szentes–Vekerzug und Tápiószele in Ungarn belegt. Dafür hat man im Laufe der Zeit recht unterschiedliche Erklärungen formuliert, die sich meistens auf eine vermutlich allgemeine, damals erfolgte Transition von der Körper- zur Brandbestattungssitte beziehen. Im Rahmen dieses Vortrages können wir nur einige von diesen Funden besprechen und dabei zu sehen versuchen, inwieweit sie unseren Funden von Borosești und Poienești und deren von uns vorgeschlagenen Interpretation entsprechen. Wie zu erwarten war, befinden sich die nächsten vergleichbaren Funde in derselben historischen Provinz Moldau d.h. im Osten Rumäniens und in der Republik Moldova. Im Stadtviertel Slobozia von Onești, Jud. Bacău, sind 1962–1963 durch Rettungsgrabungen elf Brandgräber der getischen Kultur freigelegt worden, die, wie in Poienești, durch gewöhnliche Urnengräber bzw. durch Brandgrubengräber mit überdimensionalen Gruben (Gr.II, Gr.V, Gr.IX) vertreten waren. Die letzteren waren 2,20 bis 2,50 m lang und 0,80 bis 1,00 m breit, sie könnten also ursprünglich vollständige Leichen von Erwachsenen enthalten haben. Bei der Freilegung, lieferten sie aber kein Skelett, sondern Leichenbrand, gewöhnlich in der Mitte der Grube deponiert und mit kleinen Beigaben (bronzene Pfeilspitzen und Armring, eiserne Messerchen) gemischt, sowie Tongefäße an einem oder beiden Enden der Grube zu Tage (Buzdugan 1968). In der östlichen Moldau (Bessarabien), zum Unterschied von der westlichen, lieferten die den historischen Geten zugeschriebenen Gräberfelder sowohl Brand- als auch Skelettgräber; offenbar wurde dort die Körperbestattung im bestimmten Masse praktiziert u. zw. entweder als endgültige oder, wie wir vermuten können, als provisorische Grabbehandlung der Toten. Hier darf man also, im Allgemeinen von Biritualismus sprechen. Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.) | 141 Vorerst, bis zu einer vollständigen Veröffentlichung des Gräberfeldes von Hansca–Lutărie, mit rund 62 Brand- und 8 Körperbestattungen (Niculiţă 1977, 62–88; Arnăut 2003, 221), müssen wir uns mit der Aussage der Funde aus dem, ebenfalls nur teilweise publizierten, birituellen Friedhof von Dănceni, Rajon Ialoveni begnügen (Lăpușnean 1979, 18–26, 44–60, 88–99 und 113–120; Arnăut 2003, 51–56). Unter den dort 42 freigelegten Gräbern, lieferten 27 (64%) Brand-, während 15 (36%) Körperbestattungen waren. Bei den Brandgräbern ist eine klare Vorherrschaft der Grubengräber, mit 22 solchen Befunden (81,5%), gegenüber von nur fünf Urnengräbern (18,5%) festzustellen. Unter den ersteren gibt es sowohl solche mit kleinen, runden Gruben (Dm. 0,30–0,50 m), als auch solche – wenigstens sechs – mit großen rechteckigen Gruben (L. 1,40–2,70 m, Br. 0,80–0,90 m, Tiefe 0,50–1,10 m), wie wir aus Borosești und Poienești kennen. Von großem Interesse für unsere Diskussion sind auch die 15 Körpergräber von Dănceni, die oft Spuren von späteren, aber ebenfalls antiken Interventionen (verkehrte Lage der Gebeine, Mangel von bestimmten Skelettteilen usw.) erkennen lassen. Laut Grabungsleiter V. Lăpușnean wären diese Störungen durch Grabraub verursacht, unserer Meinung nach sind sie aber eher als Folgen der wiederholten rituellen Handlungen und Zeremonien am Grab, einschließlich der Manipulation der Leiche, zu interpretieren. In vier Fällen (Gr.73, Gr.129, Gr.139, Gr.149) hat man für den Toten stattliche Grabzimmer (max. Ausmaß 3 × 1,80 m), mit auf vier Pfosten gestützten, mit Lehm überzogenen Holzdach gebaut. In weiteren zehn Gräbern wurden einfache, aber ebenfalls sehr große Grabgruben, mit einer Länge von 2,15–2,70 m und einer Breite von 1,30–1,70 m, ausgehoben. In allen diesen Fällen scheint die Absicht bestanden zu haben, einen leichten Zugang zu den Bestatteten und ausreichenden Raum zwecks verlängerten, wiederholten Zeremonien zu sichern. Die Entdeckung von ausgebrannten Brettern und Lehmbewurf vom Dach in drei der Grabkammern zeigt, dass diese Handlungen mit dem Anzünden bzw. der Verbrennung der Grabanlage endeten, und damit praktisch und symbolisch den Abschluss der Bestattung und die endgültige Trennung von dem Verstorbenen markierten. Dasselbe gilt auch für ein ganz besonderes Brandgrab aus Bessarabien – das Einzelgrab von Pârjolteni (Lăpușnean 1979, 55–59, Abb. 3–5, 15). Hier handelt es sich ebenfalls um eine sehr große rechteckige Grabkammer (Ausmaß 3,20 × 2,00 m, Bodentiefe 1,90 m) mit ausgebrannten Seitenwänden; massive Reste des Daches (verbranntes Lehmbewurf mit eingetieften Holz- und Schilfspuren, Holzkohle, Asche) wurden am Boden gefunden, wo auch zwei kleine Pfostengruben sichtlich waren. Auf dem Boden der Grabkammer war die Urne, zusammen mit den reichen Beigaben (fünf Tongefäße, ein Kurzschwert – Akinakes, 37 Pfeilspitzen, eine Trense usw.), vor der Verbrennung der ganzen Anlage deponiert. Die Leiche wurde offenbar an einem anderen Ort eingeäschert, dürfte aber ursprünglich provisorisch in dieser Kammer untergebracht worden sein. Ausgenommen Dănceni und Pârjolteni ist die Verbrennung einer ganzen Grabanlage im getischen Raum nur äußerst selten bekannt u.zw. unter nicht sehr klaren Umständen, in den sog. „Ofengräbern“ von Poienești (oben) und Zimnicea (Hügel C7, Grab 6, unpubliziert). In der Ostmoldau kennt man einige ausgebrannte Grabkammer in der früheren Nekropole von Seliște (Gr.11, Gr.31, Gr.68), die der ȘoldăneștiStufe der sog. „Thrakischen Hallstattkultur“ Bessarabiens (8. bis 6. Jh. v. Chr.) angehört. Gleichzeitig mit Dănceni und Pârjolteni ist aber die relativ weite Verbreitung dieser Sitte im Osten, im Raum zwischen Dnjestr und Dnjepr zu vermerken (Lăpușnean 1979, 42–59 und Abb.11–12; Meljukova 1979, 148; Petrenko 1967, 15–19). Der Bau hölzerner Grabkammern und die Sitte sie in Brand zu setzen, sind in mehreren skythischen Hügelgräberfeldern der west-podolischen Gruppe, der Gruppe am unteren Dnestr (wie Balabani, Corjevo, Butory, Dubăsari) sowie in der Waldsteppe rechts vom Dnepr (sog. pravoberežie) bekannt. Zieht man diese sowie andere Kulturerscheinungen derselben Zeit in Betracht (bestimmte Beigabensitten, Tracht, Bewaffnung, Pferdeausstattung), so haben mehrere Forscher, neuerdings M. Tkaciuk (1994, 225–228; Tkaciuk 1999, 281–282) zu Recht von der Existenz eines „geto-skythischen Horizontes“ gesprochen. Im Zeitraum dieses „kulturellen Synkretismus“, der etwa der skythischen Expansion nach Westen im 5.–4. Jh. v. Chr. entspricht, kommen auch diejenigen ungewöhnlichen birituellen Bestattungssitten zur Geltung, mit denen wir uns im Rahmen dieses Vortrages beschäftigen sollen. Ganz wichtig für diese Untersuchung ist die immer noch laufende Ausgrabung und die teilweise Veröffentlichung der ins 5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr. datierten großen Nekropole von Stelnica–Grădiștea Mare (Jud. Ialomiţa), an der unteren Donau (Conovici–Matei 1999). Auch diesmal, wie in Hansca und Dănceni, handelt es sich um eine birituelle Nekropole, die bis inklusive 2008, bei einer Gesamtmenge von 384 Gräbern, ungefähr die gleiche Anzahl von Brand- (199) und Skelettgräbern (185) geliefert hat. Unter den Brandbestattungen geht es in 124 Fällen um Urnengräber, während in weiteren 75 Fällen die Leichenbrände und die Beigaben frei auf dem Boden, gewöhnlich in der Mitte von großen, rechteckigen 142 | M. Babeș–N. Miriţoiu Gruben deponiert waren (Taf. 10).2 Über 60% dieser Grabgruben waren länger als 2 m; die beigegebenen Gefäße lagen an beiden Grubenenden, oft zerschlagen oder umgekippt; in der selben Lage befanden sich die als „Mahlsteine“ bezeichneten Steinplatten, die aber nicht nur in den Brandgrubengräbern (drei Fälle), sondern auch, sogar öfters, in den Körpergräbern (16 Fälle) deponiert wurden (Conovici– Matei 1999, 108–116 und Abb. 11–14). Diese letzte Beobachtung, sowie die Tatsache dass die Gruben der Brandgrubengräber und die der Körpergräber gewöhnlich die gleiche Form, Ausmaß und Orientierung haben, weist auf eine enge Verbindung zwischen den beiden Grabgattungen hin und spricht schließlich, vielleicht, zugunsten unserer Hypothese von der Umwandlung des provisorischen Körpergrabes in ein definitives Brandgrab, der in derselben überdimensionalen Grabgrube untergebracht werden sollte. In Stelnica sind allerdings auch manche sog. Kenotaphe mit langen Gruben und typischen Grabbeigaben, aber ohne Menschenknochen entdeckt worden, die an unsere Gräber I und II aus Borosești erinnern. Angesichts dessen, dass die Ausgrabung des Friedhofes von Stelnica längst noch nicht abgeschloßen ist, lässt sich im Augenblick kaum eine relative Chronologie der Bestattungen bzw. der Grabtypen mit Sicherheit anstellen. Anhand des nach zehn Grabungskampagnen (1987–1996) von Conovici und Matei publizierten Berichtes können wir jedoch feststellen, dass die Brandgrubengräber mit großen Gruben in der nord-östlichen und zentralen Zone der Ausgrabungsfläche fehlen, also in einer Zone wo fast ausschließlich eine Konzentrierung der Körpergräber zu beobachten ist. Die Urnengräber folgen etwa das Verbreitungsbild der Brandgrubengräber, was zum vorläufigen Schluss einer zeitlichen Trennung der beiden: Körper- bzw. Brandbestattungssitte führt (Conovici–Matei 1999, 100, Abb. 3; 106, Abb. 6; 110, Abb. 10; die Pläne sind falsch mit dem Norden nach unten orientiert). Wir können also vermuten, dass man in einem früheren Zeitabschnitt mit endgültigenen Körpergräbern, später aber insbesondere mit provisorischen Körperbestattungen zu tun hat, die sich nach Einäscherung der entnommenen Leichen und der Deponierung des Leichenbrandes in denselben Gruben, zu Brandgrubengräbern wurden. Erst im Laufe dieser jüngeren Stufe setzte wahrscheinlich die Urnenbestattungssite durch, die bald die vorherrschende Grabform – das Urnengrab bestimmen sollte. Vereinfacht, könnte man hypothetisch in Stelnica eine ältere Stufe der Vorherrschaft der Körperbestattung, von einer jüngeren Stufe der Vorherrschaft der Urnenbestattung trennen. Dazwischen sollte man eine Übergangszeit annehmen, als man die provisorische Körperbestattung derjenigen Toten praktiziert hat, die hinterher eingeäschert und definitiv in denselben Gruben oder in gesonderten Urnengräbern bestattet werden sollten. Ebenfalls an der unteren Donau, etwa 230 Km flussaufwärts von Stelnica, befindet sich die schon um 1870 bekanntgewordene getische Nekropole von Zimnicea, Jud. Teleorman, aus den 4. bis 2. Jh. v. Chr.; beim Forschungstand 1980 waren hier 162 Brandgräber (davon über 140 Urnengräber) gegenüber von nur vier bis sechs Körpergräber verzeichnet (Alexandrescu 1980). In 14 Grubengräbern waren Leichenbrand und Beigaben frei in der Grube, ohne Urne, gesenkt. Wegen ihrer großen Ausmaße (4–6 qm), der gelegentlichen Verwendung von Stein und Holz als Baustoff, sowie der ungewöhnlich an Tonware, Metallgefäßen, Tracht- und Schmucksachen sowie an Waffen reichen Grabbeigaben, waren neun von diesen als „Hauptgräber“ bezeichnet. Für manche davon, wie allerdings auch in der benachbarten Nekropole von Fântânele (Mateescu–Babeș 1968), hat man Hügel errichtet. Ob es sich um unterirdische Kammern (in Zimnicea in zwei Fällen steingemauert, in Fântânele eine Holzkammer) oder um einfache rechteckige Gruben handelt (Taf. 11), reichen die so gestalteten Grabräume vollständig für die Unterbringung eines Menschenkörpers aus und übertreffen bei weitem den, für die Deponierung eines Leichenbrandhaufens und der entsprechenden, gegebenenfalls auch sehr reichen Grabbeigaben notwendigen Raum. Aus unserer Sicht hätten diese Grabanlagen zur provisorischen Aufbahrung des Leichnams und erst dann zur Endbestattung dessen Leichenbrandes gedient. Laut unserer Interpretation ist auch das schon erwähnte Gr.6 aus Hügel C7 kein „Ofengrab“ (Tombe-four) also kein Scheiterhaufengrab (Bustum), sondern (wie im Falle des „Ofengrabes“ von Poienești und der Körpergräber von Dănceni), eher eine Körperbestattung mit absichtlich, ja rituell, ausgebrannter Grabkammer. Rechts d.h. südlich der unteren Donau, in der rumänischen Dobrudja und in Nordbulgarien ist der uns interessierende Typ von Bestattungen deutlich weniger verbreitet. Nahe der Donaumündung, in einem Hügel bei Teliţa, Jud. Tulcea, bestand das Hauptgrab (Gr.6) aus einer Steinkammer von 2,60 × 1,70 m Innenausmaß, die ohne weiteres ein oder zwei Menschenkörper aufnehmen konnte, aber nur zwei Urnen (von zwei Personen?) und sieben Beigefäße enthielt (Simion–Cantacuzino 1962, 379). In derselben 2 Die rezenten statistischen Angaben (2008), sowie die auf Taf. 13 abgebildeten Grabpläne aus Stelnica sind uns freundlicherweise von der Grabungsleiterin, Anca Ganciu (Archäologisches Institut Bukarest) zur Verfügung gestellt worden. Dafür möchten wir Frau Ganciu ganz herzlich danken. Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.) | 143 Gegend lieferten die beiden getischen Friedhöfe von Murighiol, Jud. Tulcea, insegesamt 60 Brand- und nur zwei Körpergräber aus den 4.–3. Jh. v. Chr. (Bujor 1956; 1958; 1959). Eine bestimmte Anzahl von leider nicht näher beschriebenen Brandgräbern hatten vermutlich große Gruben mit Leichenbrand, Tongefäßen und Steinen enthalten, die ursprünglich eine provisorische Körperbestattung aufgenommen haben konnten. Dieses trifft auf den Fall des Brandgrabes 16 aus Friedhof II, der in einer 2 m langen Steinkiste, zusammen mit drei Gefäßen untergebracht war (Bujor 1958, 126 u. Abb. 2; Bujor 1959, 325–326 u. Abb. 1–2). Im selben Friedhof, im Falle einer großen rechteckigen, als „Opfergrube“ bezeichneten Anlage (Grube 1) wurden entlang der Längswände mehrere ganze, aber auch beschädigte Gefäße gefunden, wobei in der Mitte noch genügend Platz für einen Menschenkörper bestand (Bujor 1956, 244 u. Abb. 2–3 u. 9; Bujor 1958, 127 u. Abb. 3); da aber jedwelche Menschenreste ausgeblieben sind, könnte man – wie in Borosești Gr.I und Gr.II – an ein provisorisches Körpergrab denken, aus dem der Leichnam zwecks weiterer ritueller Behandlung durch Einäscherung entnommen worden war. Ältere und neuere Funde aus Siebenbürgen und aus der Theiß-Ebene machen eine Erweiterung unserer Diskussion in diese Richtung unausweichlich. Seit über vier Jahrzehnten ist uns der kleine, von V. Vasiliev teilweise ausgegrabene Friedhof der Ciumbrud-Gruppe in Băiţa, Jud. Mureș, bekannt, wo fünf Körpergräber und sieben Brandgrubengräber entdeckt worden sind (Vasiliev 1976). Sehr wichtig ist dabei, wie der Verfasser unterstrich, dass „Form, Größe und Richtung der Gruben der Brandgräber ganz identisch mit denjenigen der Körpergräber sind, obwohl man für die kompakt deponierten Leichenbrandreste und die Grabbeigaben eine viel kleinere Grube benötigt hätte“ (Vasiliev 1976, 58). Tatsächlich sind die rechteckigen Brandgrubengräber von Băiţa 1,65 bis 1,95 m lang und 0,92 bis 1,23 m breit und haben dieselbe Orientierung WNW/NW–OSO/SO wie die Skelettgräber. Der Leichenbrand ist kompakt im NW-Teil der Grube, die Beigefäße (1 bis 3) gewöhnlich an deren Enden und die kleinen Beigaben dort deponiert, wo sie im Falle einer Körperbestattung gestanden hätten. Das ist laut V. Vasiliev absichtlich geschehen und sollte als „Ergebnis des durch die einheimische thrako-dakische Bevölkerung auf die Reste der skytho-iranischen Enklave in Siebenbürgen geübten Einflusses“ (Vasiliev 1976, 81) betrachtet werden. Nach demselben Autor wäre in diesem Falle der Übergang zur Brandbestattungssitte als unmittelbarer Ausdruck der Thrakisierung dieser Enklave zu interpretieren. Unserer Meinung nach geht es hier eher um einen Vorgang, der ähnlich wie in Borosești, Poienești, Dănceni oder Stelnica, durch die Praktizierung von verlängerten, birituellen Grabsitten zur Geltung kommt. Auch die neuerdings, in derselben Gegend entdeckte Nekropole von Olteni, Jud. Covasna, ist mit dem uns hier interessierenden Phänomen verbunden; im Unterschied zu Băiţa geht es aber hier ausschließlich um Brandbestattungen, die beim heutigen Publikationsstand zehn Gräber mit Leichenbränden von 15 Individuen ausmachen (Sîrbu Et Al. 2006; 2008a; 2008b). Mit einer einzigen Ausnahme haben diese Gräber große, ovale oder rechteckige Gruben, 2 bis 3 m lang und 1 bis 1,30 m breit (Taf. 12). Sie hätten also ursprünglich, ja provisorisch, ganze Menschenkörper mit ihren Beigaben/Beigefäßen aufnehmen können; die sekundäre Brandbestattung erfolgte erst später, was dazu führte dass in manchen Fällen (Gr.3B, Gr.4B, Gr.10A–C) der Leichenbrand in der Grubenfüllung und nicht auf dem Grubenboden, deponiert worden war. Interessanterweise, in sieben von diesen zehn Gräbern sind konsistente Reste von Holzplanken oder von gespaltenen Balken, sowie in fünf Fällen jeweils zwei Pfostengruben beobachtet worden, die auf die Gestaltung der Grabgruben in der Form von mit Dach versehener Grabkammer hinzuweisen scheinen, so z. B. in Gr.1, Gr.5 oder Gr.7. Derart waren diese Räume geschützt und eine Zeit lang zugänglich geblieben, zwecks Durchführung weiterer, sukzessiver ritueller Handlungen innerhalb einer bestimmten Zeitspanne. In sechs dieser Gräber waren die erhaltenen Holzstücke verkohlt bzw. verbrannt, im Falle des Gr.10 waren die Wände der Grube sogar „stark ausgebrannt“. Sehr wahrscheinlich, wie in Poienești, Zimnicea, Dănceni oder Pârjolteni endete auch in Olteni die verlängerte, mehrstufige Bestattung mit der Brandsetzung der Grabanlage.3 Unweit von dem siebenbürgischen Raum sind die hier untersuchten Bestattungssitten eindeutig in der Theiß-Ebene, im Raum der Vekerzug-Kultur der sog. „Skythenzeit“ dokumentiert (Chochorowski 1985, 136–149). In der Eponymen Nekropole von Szentes–Vekerzug hat M. Párducz Anfang der 50er Jahre rund 150 Grabeinheiten freigelegt, darunter 74 Körpergräber und 41 Brandgräber (davon 15 waren Urnengräber und 26 Brandgrubengräber mit, der Form, Größe und Orientierung nach, den Körpergräbern ähnlichen Gruben). Außerdem wurden neun solcher Gruben ohne Skelett- oder Leichenbrandreste entdeckt: vier davon mit Keramik, fünf völlig beigabenlos (Párducz 1954; 1955); Párducz betrachtete sie 3 Wegen der mangelhaften, oft widersprüchlichen Beschreibung der Gräber von Olteni durch V. Sîrbu und seine Mitarbeiter, kann unsere Interpretation der Befunde nur einen hypothetischen Charakter haben. 144 | M. Babeș–N. Miriţoiu als „symbolische Gräber“, unserer Meinung nach könnte es sich eher, wie in Borosești Gr.I und Gr.II, um provisorische Körpergräber handeln, aus denen der Leichnam entfernt worden war. Desgleichen sollte hier auch die große Nekropole von Tápiószele erwähnt werden, wo Párducz 230 Körpergräber und 211 Brandgräber entdeckt hat, darunter 182, also die große Mehrheit, „mit verstreuter Asche“ (with strewn ashes) in großen Gruben deponiert. Weitere 13 Gruben ohne menschliche Knochen, sind auch hier von Párducz als „symbolische Gräber“ bezeichnet worden; hinzu kommen sechs stark beschädigte Körpergräber mit fehlenden Skelettteilen, die auf Eingriffe in den Gräbern, bzw. auf Manipulation der Leiche nach dem ersten Begräbnis hindeuten (Párducz 1966). Eine weitere signifikante Verbindung mit den schon oben erwähnten Grabfunden aus Rumänien und der Republik Moldova wird von der Beigabensitte offenbart, die als „Mahlsteine“ (grinding stones) interpretierten Steinplatten sowohl in den Körpergräbern, als auch in den großen Brandgrubegräbern der Vekerzug-Kultur, aber auch schon früher in den Gräbern der Füzesabony–Mezőcsát–Gruppe zu deponieren (Metzner-Nebelsick 1998, 367, 412, Abb. 14). In Rumänien sind solche Steinplatten in den schon oben besprochenen Gräbern aus den 5.–3. Jh. v. Chr. von Borosești (1), Poienești (1), Strahotin (1), Stelnica (in 55 Gräbern) und Olteni (2), aber auch in einem älteren, durch die Nekropole von Stoicani vertretenen Kulturhorizont aus dem 7.–6. Jh. nachgewiesen worden (Petrescu-Dîmboviţa 1953, 186–187, Taf. II; IV–VII). Vom Interesse für unsere Diskussion dürfte ebenfalls die Tatsache sein, dass die sog. Mahlsteine auch in den skythischen Gräbern des 5.–4 Jh. v. Chr. aus dem Raum zwischen der Unteren Donau und Dnjepr eine weite Verbreitung hatten. ✴✴✴ Die zur Debatte herangezogenen Daten zeigen, dass die uns hier interessierenden Brandgrubengräber zwischen Dnjestr und Theiß und vom nördlichen Karpatenbecken bis unmittelbar südlich der Unteren Donau, also im gesamten Donau–Karpaten-Raum weit verbreitet sind (Taf. 13). Die Entwicklung dieses eigenartigen Phänomens findet etwa im Zeitraum vom 6. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr. statt, ganz intensiv ist es aber vor allem im 5.–4. Jh. belegt. Anhand unserer Analyse und angesichts der unterschiedlichen Vergesellschaftung der einzelnen Bestattungstypen aus dieser Zeit, lässt sich die Existenz von mehreren Kategorien oder Gruppen von Nekropolen feststellen: I. Birituelle Nekropolen wo allein Körpergräber und Brandgräber mit großen Gruben (jedoch keine Urnengräber) zusammen vorkommen; Băiţa ist das einzige Beispiel einer Nekropole der CiumbrudGruppe wo auch die Brandbestattung praktiziert wird; II. Birituelle Nekropolen mit einer großen Anzahl (Stelnica, Dănceni) oder sogar eine Mehrzahl von Körpergräbern (Szentes–Vekerzug, Tápiószele), die mit zahlreichen Brandgrubengräbern sowie mit einer variablen Anzahl von Urnengräbern vergesellschaftet sind; in diesen Gräberfeldern kennt man gestörte, angeblich beraubte Körper- und Brandgräber, sowie grabähnliche Befunde ohne Knochen, sog. „Kenotaphe“ oder „symbolische Gräber“; III. Birituelle Nekropolen wo Körpergräber nur noch vereinzelt erscheinen, während die Anzahl der Brandgrubengräber und besonders der Urnengräber sehr groß ist: Zimnicea, Hansca, Murighiol, Grădiștea Coslogeni. In all diesen Nekropolen kommen auch sog. „Kenotaphe“ vor. IV. Monorituelle Brandgräberfelder, wo die Brandgrubengräber mit Urnengräbern (gelegentlich in denselben Gruben) vergesellschaftet sind: Borosești, Poienești, Onești-Slobozia, Strahotin, Olteni. Gr.I und Gr.II von Borosești sind keinesfalls als „Kenotaphe“, sondern als provisorische Körpergräber zu deuten, aus denen die Leichen zwecks Verbrennung entnommen worden waren. Diese Kategorien von Nekropolen haben wir hier in ihrer vermutlichen Reihenfolge aufgestellt, die auf kombinations-statistischen Indizien der Grabtypologie basiert ist. In derselben Richtung hatte auch die horizontale Stratigraphie von Stelnica nach den ersten zehn Grabungskampagnien 1996 hingewiesen. Diese Reihenfolge der Nekropolen scheint auch die tatsächliche Entwicklung der Bestattungssitten im Donau–Karpaten-Raum im gegebenen Zeitabschnitt widerzuspiegeln, die offenbar in die Richtung eines allgemeinen Überganges von Körperbestattung zur Brandbestattung vor sich geht. Vor rund 60 Jahren äußerte Ion Nestor die Meinung, dass ein Brandgrab mit einer für die Körpergräber gewöhnlichen Grube aus dem Hügel C1 in Zimnicea „eine Übergangsform von der Körperbestattungszur Brandbestattungssitte“ bzw. „eine Kontamination zwischen den beiden Grabsitten“ darstellen würde (Nestor 1949, 121–122). Dieselbe Deutung wurde später von D. Protase bzw. V. Vasiliev auf die vergleichbaren Brandgräbern mit großen Gruben von Onești-Slobozia und Băiţa übertragen (Protase 1971, 69; Vasiliev 1980, 59–60). Ganz allgemein kann man tatsächlich gegen Mitte des 1. Jahrtausends v. Chr. von dem Übergang von der damals in bestimmten Gebieten herrschenden Körper- zur neuen Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.) | 145 Brandbestattungssitte sprechen. Das ist immerhin äußerst fraglich wenn wir uns auf die jüngeren Nekropolen der III. oder der IV. Gruppe/Stufe beziehen, die nur wenige (III, z. B. Zimnicea) oder überhaupt keine Körpergräber (IV, z. B. Poienești) geliefert haben und nur schwer die Erinnerung an diese Bestattungssitte in der Form von Brandgräbern mit großen Grabgruben oder –kammern beibehalten haben könnten. Vielmehr dürfte hier die von den Funden aus Borosești ausgehende Hypothese gelten, wonach die großen Brandgrubengräber keine Imitation von Körpergräbern sind (also kein interplay im Sinne Hardings), sondern wegen der „technischen“ Notwendigkeit entstanden sind, den Leichnam eines Verstorbenen eine Zeitlang, bis zur endgültigen Bestattung, aufzubewahren und zu schützen. In diesem, mehrere Wochen bis Monate dauernden Intervall, fanden am/im provisorischen Grab verschiedene Kulthandlungen, einschließlich Manipulationen des Leichnams statt, die mit dessen Einäscherung enden. Die Deponierung des Leichenbrandes in derselben großen Grube oder anderswo in einer Urne, markierte den Abschluss der Bestattung und die endgültige Trennung von dem Verstorbenen. Es handelt sich folglich um eine mehrstufige bzw. verlängerte Bestattung, die eine spezielle Form von Biritualismus voraussetzt; dabei ist die Körperbestattung eine provisorische, vorübergehende Form der Bestattungssitte, die nach einiger Zeit von der endgültigen Brandbestattung gefolgt wird (Meyer-Orlac 1982, 123–143, 155–178). Dazu muss noch gesagt werden, dass die von uns rekonstruierte birituelle Grabsitte nicht für die ganze Bevölkerung galt. In Zimnicea illustrieren die „Hauptgräber“ mit reichen Beigaben einen erhobenen Sozialstatus, dagegen sind in Poienești die Brandgrubengräber eher ärmlich ausgestattet. Ganz kurz sei noch hier erwähnt, dass vergleichbare überdimensionale Brandgräber auch in anderen Perioden der Vorgeschichte und in anderen Regionen Europas bekannt sind. Für die Bronzezeit erwähnt A. Harding (2000, 112–113) solche Befunde aus Dänemark, aus NO-Frankreich (Champagne) und aus der Slowakei: Streda nad Bodrogom, mit 24 Körper-, 34 Brandgräbern und 9 symbolischen Gräbern (graves with grave-goods but no sign of a body). Nach G. Kossack kann man, andererseits, Grabfunde aus Süddeutschland zitieren, wo zur Hallstattzeit (Ha C und D), neben Brand- und Körpergräbern, auch ein hoher Prozentsatz (27–51%) von „unbestimmbaren Bestattungen“ ohne Menschenknochen bekannt ist (Kossack 1959, 119–120 u. Taf. 5). Ob unsere Hypothesen auch zu diesen früheren Sonderbestattungen passen, sei dahingestellt, es würde sich trotzdem lohnen, diesem erweiterten Thema nachzugehen. Schließlich, dürfen wir uns auch auf die ethnologischen Studien von R. Hertz (1907) und A. Van Gennep (1909) beziehen, die schon vor hundert Jahren von den „verlängerten“ Bestattungen der primitiven Völker gesprochen haben, die mit der „provisorischen Grablegung“ (la sépulture provisoire, nach Hertz) anfingen und mit der sog. „sekundären Bestattung” der exhumierten Gebeine endeten (MeyerOrlac 1982, 124–125). Nicht selten sind die von Ursula Schlenther (1960) erwähnten ethnographischen Beispiele von birituellen Grabsitten der Eingeborenen aus Australien, aus den pazifischen Inseln Ryukuyu, aus Südamerika (die tupi) oder Südafrika (die bantu), die unter bestimmten Umständen die Leichen oder Gebeine aus Körpergräbern exhumieren, verbrennen und dann wiederum bestatten (Schlenther 1960, 111–113; Meyer-Orlac 1982, 174–175). Auf einzelne Fälle können wir hier nicht eingehen, es ist aber ganz klar welch bedeutende Impulse und Argumente für unsere Diskussion aus dem Bereiche der Ethnologie, sowie der kulturellen und der physischen Anthropologie kommen können. Aus der Sicht der Archäologie ist aber erst dann ein maßgebender Fortschritt zu erwarten, wenn die schon erwähnten Gräberfelder monographisch (zusammen mit vollständigen anthropologischen Untersuchungen) publiziert werden und, andererseits, wenn die künftigen, mit den modernsten und feinsten Methoden durchgeführten Ausgrabungen uns erlauben werden, die Form und die Stratigraphie der Gräber, die Lage der Menschenreste und der Beigaben, sowie deren Erhaltungszustand einwandfrei zu registrieren und zu interpretieren. Mag unsere Hypothese vorerst zerbrechlich erscheinen, sie soll trotzdem dazu führen, dass alternative Betrachtungsweisen, Methoden und Lösungen zum neuen Themata der Todesarchäologie (Archaeology of Death) werden. Literaturverzeichnis Alexandrescu 1980 Arnăut 2003 Babeș 1993 Alexandrescu, A. D., La nécropole gète de Zimnicea, Dacia N. S., 24, 19–126. Arnăut, T., Vestigii ale sec. VII–III a. Chr. în spaţiul de la răsărit de Carpaţi, Chișinău. Babeș, M., Die Poienești–Lukaševka-Kultur. Ein Beitrag zur Kulturgeschichte im Raum östlich der Karpaten in den letzten Jahrhunderten vor Christi Geburt, Bonn. 146 | M. Babeș–N. Miriţoiu Babeș, M., Borosești, IN: Preda, C. (ed.), Enciclopedia Arheologiei și Istoriei Vechi a României, 1, București, 196–197. Babeș 2000 Babeș, M., mormânt, IN: Preda, C. (ed.), Enciclopedia Arheologiei și Istoriei Vechi a României, 3, București, 131–139. Babeș 2001 Babeș, M., Pratiques funéraires birituelles prolongées chez les Gètes du Bas-Danube (Ve–IIIe s. av. J.-C.), IN: XIVe Congrès International des Sciences Préhistoriques et Protohistoriques. Pré-Actes, Liège, 295–296. Bujor 1956 Bujor, E., Contribuţie la cunoașterea populaţiei geto-dace din nord-estul Dobrogei, SCIV, 7, 3–4, 243–252. Bujor 1958 Bujor, E., O geto-dakijskoj kulture v Murigjole, Dacia N. S., 2, 125–141. Bujor 1959 Bujor, E., Șantierul arheologic Murighiol (r. Tulcea, reg. Constanţa), MCA, 6, 325–330. Buzdugan 1968 Buzdugan, C., Necropola getică de la Slobozia, Carpica, 1, 77–94. Chochorowski 1985 Chochorowski, J., Die Vekerzug-Kultur. Charakteristik der Funde, Warszawa–Kraków. Conovici–Matei Conovici, N.–Matei, Gh., Necropola getică de la Stelnica–Grădiștea Mare (jud. Ialomiţa). 1999 Raport general pentru anii 1987–1996, MCA S. N., 1, 99–144. Harding 2000 Harding, A. F., European Societies in the Bronze Age, Cambridge. Kossack 1959 Kossack, G., Südbayern während der Hallstattzeit, RGF, 24, Frankfurt a. M. Lăpușnean 1979 Lăpușnean, V. L., Rannie frakijcy X – načala IV v. do n.e. v lesostepnoj Moldavii, Chișinău. Mateescu–Babeș Mateescu, C. N.–Babeș, M., Cercetări arheologice și săpături de salvare la Fîntînele, SCIV, 1968 19, 2, 283–291. Meljukova 1979 Meljukova, A. I., Skifija i frakijskij mir, Moskau. Metzner-Nebelsick Metzner-Nebelsick, C., Abschied von den „Thrako-Kimmeriern?“. Neue Aspekte der 1998 Interaktion zwischen karpatenländischen Kulturgruppen der späten Bronze- und frühen Eisenzeit mit der osteuropäischen Steppenkoine, IN: Hänsel, B.–Machnik, J. (Hrsg.), Das Karpatenbecken und die osteuropäische Steppe: Nomadenbewegungen und Kulturaustausch in den vorchristlichen Metallzeiten (4000–500 v.Chr.), PAS, Band 12, 361–422. Meyer-Orlac 1982 Meyer-Orlac, R., Mensch und Tod: Archäologischer Befund – Grenzen der Interpretation, Hohenschäftlarn. Nestor 1949 Nestor, I., Săpăturile arheologice dela Zimnicea, jud. Teleorman, Studii, 2, 1, 121–122. Niculiţă 1977 Niculiţă, I. T., Gety IV–III vv. do n.e. v dnestrovsko-karpatskih zemljah, Chișinău. Párducz 1954 Párducz, M., Le cimetière hallstattien de Szentes–Vekerzug II (Les fouilles de 1952 et 1953), ActaArchHun, IV, 1–4, 25–91. Párducz 1955 Párducz, M., Le cimetière hallstattien de Szentes–Vekerzug III, ActaArchHun, VI,1–4, 1–22. Párducz 1966 Párducz, M., The Scythian Age cemetery at Tápiószele, ActaArchHun, XVIII, 35–91. Petrenko 1967 Petrenko, V. G., Pravoberežie Srednego Pridneprov’ja, Arheologija SSSR-SAI, D1–4, Moskau. PetrescuPetrescu-Dîmboviţa, M., Cimitirul hallstattian dela Stoicani, MCA, 1, 157–204. Dîmboviţa 1953 Protase 1971 Protase, D., Riturile funerare la daci și daco-romani, București. Schlenther 1960 Schlenther, U., Brandbestattung und Seelenglauben. Verbreitung und Ursachen der Leichenvrebrennung bei außereuropäischen Völkern, Berlin. Simion–CanSimion, G.–Cantacuzino, Gh. I., Cercetările arheologice de la Teliţa (com. Poșta, r. Tulcea, tacuzino 1962 reg. Dobrogea), MCA, 8, 373–382. Sîrbu Et Al. 2006 Sîrbu, V.–Cavruc, V.–Buzea, D., A 4th–3rd centuries BC Dacian community in Southeastern Transylvania: The findings from Olteni, Covasna County, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Thracians and Celts. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Bistriţa, Cluj-Napoca, 229–237. Sîrbu Et Al. 2008a Sîrbu, V.–Cavruc, V.–Buzea, D., O comunitate dacică din sec. IV–III a. Chr. la Olteni, jud. Covasna, Angustia, 12, 109–148. Sîrbu Et Al. 2008b Sîrbu, V.–Cavruc, V.–Buzea, D., A Dacian Necropolis from 4th–3rd Centuries B. C., Found in Olteni (South-Eastern Transylvania), IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Funerary Practices of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Central and South-Eastern Europe. Proceedings of the 9th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology, Cluj-Napoca, 191–228. Tkaciuk 1994 Tkaciuk, M., Manifestări culturale din sec. V–I a. Chr., Thraco-Dacica, 15, 215–256. Tkaciuk 1999 Tkaciuk, M., Getika, kotoruju my poterjali, Stratum plus, 3, 274–304. Vasiliev 1976 Vasiliev, V., Necropola de la Băiţa și problema tracizării enclavei scitice din Transilvania, Marisia, VI, 49–84. Babeș 1994 Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.) | 147 Vasiliev 1980 Vulpe 1953 Vasiliev, V., Sciţii agatîrși pe teritoriul României, Cluj-Napoca. Vulpe, R., Săpăturile de la Poienești din 1949, MCA, 1, 213–506. Tafeln Taf. 1. Borosești, Jud. Iași (Ausgrabungen M. Babeș, 1972–1978). Lage der getischen Gräber aus den 4.–3. Jh. v. Chr. 1. Urnengrab; 2. Brandgrubengrab; 3. grabähnliche Befunde ohne Knochen; 4. Brandgräber der Poienești– Lukaševka-Kultur aus den 2.–1. Jh. v. Chr. Taf. 2. Borosești, Jud. Iași. Grabanlagen mit großen Gruben: Gr.I, Gr.II und Gr.V; Urnengräber: Gr.III und Gr.IV. Taf. 3. Borosești, Jud. Iași. Gr.I. Grabbeigaben (Tonware, Perlen). Taf. 4. Borosești, Jud. Iași. 1–5. Gr.II; 6–8. Gr.V. Grabbeigaben (Tonware, Messer). Taf. 5. Borosești, Jud. Iași. 1–3. Gr.III; 4–5. Gr.IV. Grabausstattung (Urnen, Deckgefäße und Beigefäß). Taf. 6. Borosești, Jud. Iași. Aufnahmen von Gräbern in situ. 1–2. Gr.I (Quer- und Längsschnitt); 3. Gr.II (Detail mit Steinplatte und Messer); 4. Gr.III; 5. Gr.V (Tongefäße oberhalb des Grubenbodens); 6. Gr.IV (teilweise zerstört). Taf. 7. Borosești, Jud. Iași. 1–5. Gr.II; 6–8 Gr.III; 9–11. Gr.V. Taf. 8. Poienești, Jud. Vaslui (Grabung R. Vulpe, 1949, durch Strichlinien markiert, und Ausgrabungen von M. Babeș, 1979–2000). Plan der getischen Nekropole aus den 5.–3. Jh. v. Chr. Taf. 9. Poienești, Jud. Vaslui. Getische Brandgrubengräber mit überdimensionalen Gruben. Taf. 10. Stelnica, Jud. Ialomiţa (Ausgrabungen von N. Conovici, Gh. Matei und A. Ganciu). Getische Brandgräber mit überdimensionalen Gruben. Taf. 11. 1–4. Zimnicea, Jud. Teleorman (nach A. D. Alexandrescu): „Hauptgräber“ mit großen Gruben (C.10 M.70 und C.17 M.32) oder mit steingemauerten Grabkammern (C.1 M.D. und C.12 M.1); 5. Fântânele, Jud. Teleorman (nach C. N. Mateescu und M. Babeș): getisches Brandhügelgrab mit Holzkammer. Taf. 12. Olteni, Jud. Covasna (nach V. Sîrbu. V. Cavruc, D. Buzea). Brandgräber mit überdimensionalen, holzverstärkten Grabgruben. Taf. 13. Verbreitung der Brandgräber mit überdimensionalen Gruben im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.). 148 | M. Babeș–N. Miriţoiu 5m Tafel 1. Borosești, Jud. Iași (Ausgrabungen M. Babeș, 1972–1978). Lage der getischen Gräber aus den 4.–3. Jh. v. Chr. 1. Urnengrab; 2. Brandgrubengrab; 3. grabähnliche Befunde ohne Knochen; 4. Brandgräber der Poienești–Lukaševka-Kultur aus den 2.–1. Jh. v. Chr. . rnen ra afel . orose ti ud. a i . rand ru en ra . ra us ra un en . a e – . a e der etis en r er aus den .– . . . r. nli e efunde o ne Kno en . rand r er der Poiene ti– u a e a Kultur aus den .– . . . r. Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.) | 149 5m 5 m m m m m m m r. m m m m m r. 5 m 5 m 5 m 5 m m r. m 5 m m m 5 m m a. m m m 5 m a. r. r. m 5 m Tafel 2. Borosești, Jud. Iași. Grabanlagen mit großen Gruben: Gr.I, Gr.II und Gr.V; Urnengräber: Gr.III und Gr.IV. afel . orose ti ud. a i. ra anla en mit ro en ru en r. r. und r. rnen r er r. und r. . 150 | M. Babeș–N. Miriţoiu 5 Tafel 3. Borosești, Jud. Iași. Gr.I. Grabbeigaben (Tonware, Perlen). afel . orose ti ud. a i. r. . ra ei a en on are Perlen . Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.) | 151 5 Tafel 4. Borosești, Jud. Iași. 1–5. Gr.II; 6–8. Gr.V. Grabbeigaben (Tonware, Messer). afel . orose ti ud. a i. –5. r. – . r. . ra ei a en on are esser . 152 | M. Babeș–N. Miriţoiu 5 Tafel 5. Borosești, Jud. Iași. 1–3. Gr.III; 4–5. Gr.IV. Grabausstattung (Urnen, Deckgefäße und Beigefäß). afel 5. orose ti ud. a i. – . r. –5. r. . ra ausstattun rnen e ef e und ei ef . Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.) | 153 5 Tafel 6. Borosești, Jud. Iași. Aufnahmen von Gräbern in situ. 1–2. Gr.I (Quer- und Längsschnitt); 3. Gr.II (Detail mit Steinplatte und Messer); 4. Gr.III; 5. Gr.V (Tongefäße oberhalb des Grubenbodens); 6. Gr.IV (teilweise zerstört). afel . orose ti ud. a i. ufna men on r ern in i . – . r. uer und n ss nitt . r. etail mit teinplatte und esser . r. 5. r. on ef e o er al des ru en odens . r. teil eise erst rt . 154 | M. Babeș–N. Miriţoiu 5 Tafel 7. Borosești, Jud. Iași. 1–5. Gr.II; 6–8 Gr.III; 9–11. Gr.V. afel . orose ti ud. a i. –5. r. – r. – . r. . Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.) | 155 5 5 5 5 5 5 rnen r er rand ru en r er erst rtes ra fen ra 5m Tafel 8. Poienești, Jud. Vaslui (Grabung R. Vulpe, 1949, durch Strichlinien markiert, und Ausgrabungen von M. Babeș, 1979–2000). Plan der getischen Nekropole aus den 5.–3. Jh. v. Chr. afel . Poiene ti ud. aslui ra un . ulpe dur tri linien mar iert und us ra un en on . a e – . Plan der etis en e ropole aus den 5.– . . . r. 156 | M. Babeș–N. Miriţoiu .5 esserfra ment . . . . . . 5 r. ei en rand del no en r. .5 5 . . r. . . . . 5 . . ier n e esserfra ment r. 5 5 . . r. . . . .5 . . 5 . . 5 . . Pfeilspit e Pfeilspit e . . 5 . 5 . . . . 5 Pfeilspit e .5 . . . . 5 Perle Perle Pfeilspit en . . 5 .5 . 5 . r. . Pfeilspit e . . r. 5 5 m Tafel 9. Poienești, Jud. Vaslui. Getische Brandgrubengräber mit überdimensionalen Gruben. afel . Poiene ti ud. aslui. etis e rand ru en r er mit erdimensionalen ru en. Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.) | 157 . 5 . . . ier no en .5 . Perle . . r. r. . r. 5 5 5 Pfeilspit e Ko le r. r. 5 m Tafel 10. Stelnica, Jud. Ialomiţa (Ausgrabungen von N. Conovici, Gh. Matei und A. Ganciu). Getische Brandgräber mit überdimensionalen Gruben. afel . telni a ud. alomi a us ra un en on . ono i i . atei und n a an iu . etis e rand r er mit erdimensionalen ru en. 158 | M. Babeș–N. Miriţoiu . . . . ell lauer e m . . . . Perlen alerei ons er en moderne ru e 5 5 m Taf. 11. 1–4. Zimnicea, Jud. Teleorman (nach A. D. Alexandrescu): „Hauptgräber“ mit großen Gruben (C.10 M.70 und C.17 M.32) oder mit steingemauerten Grabkammern (C.1 M.D. und C.12 M.1); 5. Fântânele, Jud. Teleorman (nach C. N. Mateescu und M. Babeș): getisches Brandhügelgrab mit Holzkammer. 5. afel . – . imni ea ud. eleorman na . . le andres u aupt r er mit ro en ru en . . und . . oder mit stein emauerten ra ammern . . . und . . nt nele ud. eleorman na . . atees u und . a e etis es rand el ra mit ol ammer. Verlängerte, mehrstufige birituelle Bestattungen im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.) | 159 . y . 5 .5 . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . y . . y . 5 . . . r. y . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 r. . 5 . 5 . 5 . 5 d a 5 r. . r. . r. . a . r. . a d a r. .5 . r. . r. y . . . . 5 . y r.5 r. 5 m Taf. 12. Olteni, Jud. Covasna (nach V. Sîrbu. V. Cavruc, D. Buzea). Brandgräber mit überdimensionalen, holzverstärkten Grabgruben. afel . lteni ud. o asna na . r u. . a ru . u ea . rand r er mit erdimensionalen ol erst r ten ra ru en. 160 | M. Babeș–N. Miriţoiu 5 Tafel 13. Verbreitung der Brandgräber mit überdimensionalen Gruben im Donau–Karpaten-Raum (5. bis 3. Jh. v. Chr.). afel . er reitun der rand r er mit erdimensionalen ru en im onau–Karpaten aum 5. is . . . r. . m ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age. The Grave with Chalcidian Helmet from Ocna Sibiului Aurel RUSTOIU–Sándor BERECKI Institute of Archaeology and History of Art Cluj-Napoca, Romania aurelrustoiu@yahoo.com Mureș County Museum Târgu Mureș, Romania sberecki@yahoo.com Keywords: Chalcidian helmet, grave inventory, Late Iron Age, aristocracy, warlike elite, 4th century BC Ocna Sibiului (Sibiu County, Hungarian Vízakna, German Salzburg) is a locality in southern Transylvania, situated in an area having rich salt resources. The grave discussed in this paper was accidentally discovered in 1884. The context and details of the discovery are unknown, so the information regarding the funerary rite and ritual are missing, but some of the inventory was brought to the Brukenthal Museum in Sibiu, and the artefacts are still in its collections (inv. no. A5731/13044; A5732/13045; A5738; A5739; A5753/13066). The recovered inventory includes several pieces of sheet bronze, namely the cheekpiece of a helmet, four simple loops, two loops having three groups of knobs each, four discs and an object of unknown use. These artefacts remained unknown to the scientific community for a considerable period. Nearly a century after their discovery they were published for the first time by Mircea Rusu (1969, 293–294, pl. 147; Rusu–Bandula 1970, 37–39, 59, pl. 18a–b). When the famous grave with a helmet from Ciumești was published, Rusu also mentioned the group of artefacts recovered from Ocna Sibiului. He considered that the finds come from a Celtic grave, the cheek-piece belonged to an Etruscan helmet and the bronze discs and the loops were harness mounts, while not excluding the use of the loops with knobs as bracelets. Chronologically the entire assemblage was dated to the LT B. The ascribing of the grave from Ocna Sibiului to the Celtic period in Transylvania, the identification of the helmet as an Italic or Italo-Celtic type, as well as the dating of the burial to the LT B or towards the end of the 4th century BC were accepted afterwards by other specialists, sometimes with certain variations, for example by Crișan (1971, 152–153, fig. 1; Crișan 1973, 59, no. 41), Zirra (1971, 176, n. 34, 182–183, fig. 3/11; Zirra 1975, 52, pl. 2A/1–2, who considered that the ‘bracelets’ with knobs from Ocna Sibiului, having analogies in the Lower Danube area, attest the connections between the Celts and the indigenous populations), Gumă (1991, 102), Ferencz (2007, 129), etc. Recently, Teleagă (2008, 39, nr. 143, 240, 441, nr. 949, pl. 176/5–7) reopened the discussion regarding the funerary inventory from Ocna Sibiului and especially about the cheek-piece. He considered, similarly to Rusu, that the cheek-piece and the pointed bronze object belong to an Italo-Celtic helmet which should be dated to around 300 BC or slightly later. The artefact would have arrived in Transylvania in Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 161–181 162 | A. Rustoiu–S. Berecki the same way as other iron or bronze helmets (from Ciumești, Silivaș and Apahida), during the eastward expansion of the La Tène culture. Then some years ago, while writing the Ocna Sibiului entry for Lexikon zur keltischen Archäologie, Aurel Rustoiu noted the following: “The cheek-piece belongs to a Greek helmet of Chalcidian type, having mobile cheek-pieces (type V of Pflug). The remaining pieces are harnessing elements. Taking into consideration the chronology of the helmet piece, the grave of Ocna Sibiului can be dated to the first half of the 4th century BC, preceding the Celtic horizon from Transylvania. The discovery illustrates the connections established between the Carpathian Basin and the northern Balkans before the arrival of the Celts in Transylvania” (Rustoiu 2012a). Recently Stoyanov (2005, 649) also noted that the cheek-piece from Ocna Sibiului belonged to a Chalcidian helmet. The recent accumulation of valuable information regarding the Chalcidian helmets from the northern Balkans, as well as the observations of Sándor Berecki concerning the inventory from Brukenthal Museum in Sibiu, allow a re-evaluation of the discovery from Ocna Sibiului and a wider discussion regarding the importance of this burial site. Starting from these primary data, the first aim of this article is to re-analyse the entire assemblage to determine the precise chronology of the grave. The second aim is to identify the cultural milieu to which this funerary assemblage is belonging, in the wider contexts of southern Transylvania and northern Balkans. The funerary inventory All artefacts from the grave of Ocna Sibiului were made of a bronze alloy and after discovery were mechanically cleaned. Due to this fact their surface is heavily scratched, the actual colour being light brown, whereas the un-cleaned areas are brownish-grey to greenish. Aside from that the artefacts are remarkably preserved, the alloy being of excellent quality. 1. The cheek-piece (Pl. 1/11; 2/11) The right cheek-piece of a helmet, made of bronze sheet, is partially damaged on the upper side. It has a semicircular curved edge towards the back and serrated edge towards the front. A small perforation (of about 0.2 cm) on the lower side allowed the helmet to be tied under the chin. Other two perforations having nearly similar dimensions (of the initial three, one being on the damaged area) are on the upper side. Their role was to hold the hinges which allowed the fitting of the cheek-piece on the helmet. The edges were slightly curved inward, and on the inside is an incision surrounding the edge, at 0.5 cm from the rim. The height of the piece is of 13.5 cm while the width is of 8.5 cm. 2. The simple loops (Pl. 1/7–10; 2/7–10) The inventory also contains four simple loops having morphologically different shapes, but similar dimensions and functionality: a. Bronze loop, mould-made, having a semicircular cross-section. Diameter: 6.5 cm (Pl. 1/7, 2/7). b. Bronze loop similar to the first one, but having a diameter of 7.5 cm (Pl. 1/6, 2/8). c. Bronze loop having a U-shaped cross-section. Diameter: 7 cm (Pl. 1/9, 2/9). d. Bronze loop similar to the previous one, but having the diameter of 7.5 cm (Pl. 1/10, 2/10). 3. The loops with knobs (Pl. 1/1–2; 2/1–2) The two bronze loops with knobs were also differently made, as the simple ones: a. Bronze loop, mould-made, having a semicircular cross-section. Three groups of three knobs each are symmetrically placed on the external side. Diameter: 6.5 cm (Pl. 1/1; 2/1). b. Bronze loop having a U-shaped cross-section and three groups of four knobs each are symmetrically placed on the external side. Diameter: 7.5 cm (Pl. 1/2; 2/2). 4. The bronze discs (Pl. 1/3–6; 2/3–6) Four bronze discs forming two pairs were also found: a. Disc made of a cast bronze plaque, having a convex shape and the edge decorated with oblique, parallel incisions, in relief. This decorated edge is separated from the convex body of the disc by a circular groove. The fitting system consists of a semicircular loop. Diameter of the disc: 5.2 cm (Pl. 1/3; 2/3). b. Disc nearly similar to the first one but having the diameter of 5.1 cm (Pl. 1/4; 2/4). c. Disc nearly similar to the first one but having the diameter of 6.5 cm (Pl. 1/5; 2/5). d. Disc nearly similar to the first one but having the diameter of 6.5 cm (Pl. 1/6; 2/6). 5. Piece having uncertain functionality (Pl. 1/12; 2/12) Bronze piece consisting of three morphologically distinct parts: an upper elongated, pointed part, having a hexagonal cross-section; a central part having a globular shape with a central perforation, perpendicular to the axis of the piece (diameter of 0.8 cm); a tubular lower part having a groove towards the lower end. Dimensions: length: 8.5 cm; width of the base: 2.3 cm; length of the fitting perforation: 3.1 cm; diameter of the fitting perforation: 0.6 cm. The functionality of this piece is difficult to identify so far, but a series of analogies may suggest some interpretations which will be detailed below. ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age | 163 The most important item for determining the chronology of the entire funerary inventory is the cheek-piece. The object has no analogies amongst the types of north Italic helmets, nor in temperate Europe, but it is similar to some cheek-pieces belonging to Chalcidian helmets. The name of this type was established at the beginning of the 19th century by Furtwängler, who studied a series of finds from Olympia and noted that they are different from the Corinthian and Attic helmets, being represented on Chalcidian black-figure pottery dated to the 6th century BC. This is the origin of the name chose by the German scholar for this type of helmets. He cited as an example an amphora from the Pergamon Museum in Berlin on which one such helmet is depicted (Furtwängler 1890, 170; Dintsis 1986, pl. 63/6; Pflug 1988, 137, fig. 1). The Chalcidian helmets were widely distributed from the 6th to the 3rd century BC. They are present in Greece, southern Italy and the north-eastern part of the Balkan Peninsula, and in regions around the Black Sea. However, despite this wide area of distribution, they have never been comprehensively analysed. Emil Kunze created a general typology based on the finds from Olympia, dividing them into seven typological groups (Gr. I–VII), from which two (Gr. V–VI) comprise forms which could not be ascribed to the first four groups or were hybrids (Kunze 1967, 137). Later, this typology was refined by Pflug (1988, 138, fig. 2), who retained the first four groups and the seventh one defined by Kunze, the result being a series of five types, from which the last one consists of helmets having hinged cheek-pieces. Contemporaneously, Dintsis (1986, 136–141) proposed a typology based mainly on the shape of the cheek-pieces. However, as previously noted, in comparison with the typology proposed by Dintsis, the one created by Pflug also allows the identification and further addition of other new variants of the basic series (Ognenova-Marinova–Stoyanov 2005, 521). During the last two decades a series of studies have been published concerning the typology, chronology and distribution of Chalcidian helmets in the eastern and northern parts of the Balkan Peninsula and in the Black Sea region, offering a clearer perspective on the role and frequency of use of these artefacts in the afore-mentioned areas (Gumă 1991, 93–100; Teržan 1995, 85–89, fig. 10; Ognenova-Marinova– Stoyanov 2005; Stoyanov 2005; Černenko 2006, 86; Teleagă 2008, 235–239; Lazăr 2009). Returning to the cheek-piece from Ocna Sibiului, the artefact belongs to a helmet which can be ascribed to the Pflug type V. This type includes the helmets having hinged cheek-pieces. In general the shape of the cheek-pieces differs from one item to another, but a tendency to adapt some forms already used for other types of Chalcidian helmets can be observed. The piece from Ocna Sibiului (Pl. 3/1) has close analogies amongst the cheek-pieces discovered in the sanctuaries from Olympia (Pl. 3/2) and Dodona (Pl. 3/3) (Kunze 1994, 73–74, fig. 71; pl. 26/2a), as well as the relief-decorated piece from Tithorea (Pl. 3/4), in central Greece (Andriomenou 1976). At the same time the shape of this cheek-piece is similar to some helmets belonging to the Pflug type II, for example the finds from Shipka–Golyama Kosmatka tumulus (Pl. 3/5) or from Dolna Koznitsa, both in Bulgaria (Ognenova-Marinova–Stoyanov 2005, 527, no. 12–13, pl. 3/2–4; Teleagă 2008, 237–238, no. 29, 46/b) or the miniature golden helmet represented on the handle of a sword from the so-called Grave of Philip II from Vergina (Andronicos 1984, 142–145, fig. 99–101). The Chalcidian helmets were very popular in the northern and north-eastern Balkans. The examples belonging to type V are mostly concentrated in the region between the Balkan and Rodopi Mountains, as well as in north-eastern Bulgaria, a series of finds being documented northward of the Danube (Fig. 1). The Chalcidian helmets of type II are also numerous. As Pflug, amongst others mentioned, aside from the ‘standard’ type (Pl. 4/1) another local variant of the basic type was created in the eastern Balkans dated later than the Greek finds (Pflug 1988, 141–142). The inner edge of the cheek-pieces belonging to this variant is straight and serrated (Pl. 4/2). These pieces are the predecessors of the richly decorated silver and golden helmets from the Lower Danube basin (Pl. 4/4–5), for example those from Agighiol, Cucuteni-Băiceni, Peretu, Coţofenești and the Iron Gates region (Gumă 1991, 99; Ognenova-Marinova– Stoyanov 2005, 519–521). The helmets of type II are concentrated between the Balkans and the Rodopi Mountains, but are to be found mostly in north-eastern Bulgaria (Fig. 2). As concerns the provenance of the helmets from the Balkans, probably some of them were made by workshops from Greece or from the colonies on the Black Sea coast. Others were produced in the local milieu by craftsmen trained in Greek workshops. The ‘ethnic’ origin of these craftsmen is irrelevant. They possessed outstanding knowledge regarding the technology of precious metals and bronze alloys, and had close connections or were subordinated to the élites and leaders of the northern Balkans communities. The latter were the main consumers of luxury products, and thus they imposed various trends, symbolic 164 | A. Rustoiu–S. Berecki Fig. 1. Distribution map of Chalcidian helmets Pflug type V in the northern Balkans (see the list of discoveries in Stoyanov 2005 and Teleagă 2008). significances or functional characteristics of various adornments or utilitarian objects, or of the structure of the military equipment and panoply of weapons and so forth. On the other hand the craftsmen were characterised by a high degree of mobility in time and space. They transmitted specific knowledge and technologies from one generation to another within the same families or groups of craftsmen, which explains the perpetuation of some types of artefacts or of techniques of producing them. At the same time the spatial mobility of the craftsmen was determined by the necessity to find clients able to provide raw materials and to place orders, and, in some cases, also to provide protection (concerning the status and mobility of the craftsmen see Rustoiu 1996a; 2002, 63–70). As a consequence it might be possible that a series of helmets were made, alongside other metalwork and jewellery, by Greek craftsmen – or by others trained in the Greek milieu – working for local rulers. This not uncommon connection is illustrated, for example, by an inscription on a silver vessel from the Rogozen hoard. This inscription names the craftsman Disloias who made the vessel for a local ruler named Kotios of Beos – Kotios eg Beo(s)/Disloias epoiese (Rogozen 1989, 80, cat. no. 29; Alexandrescu 1987, 242). At least one such workshop making helmets probably functioned in north-eastern Bulgaria, as is suggested by the large number of finds concentrated in the region.. Some of the pieces from this region, ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age | 165 Fig. 2. Distribution map of Chalcidian helmets Pflug type II, the ‘Thracian’ variant (black squares) and the silver and gold parade helmets (white squares) (see the list of discoveries in Teržan 1995; Ognenova-Marinova–Stoyanov 2005; Teleagă 2008). and also from other areas, as well as the silver and gold helmets derived from the bronze Chalcidian ones, illustrate the existence of excellent technological knowledge regarding metal processing in the region. A helmet recently discovered in the Golyamata Mogila tumulus, near Malomirovo and Zlatinitsa villages in Jambol region, eastern Bulgaria, was decorated on the top with a snake having three heads (Agre 2011, 84–90, fig. III/21–24), a symbolic motif which is also present, for example, on a decorated plaque from the Letnica hoard (Kull 1997, fig. 4/10), which is probably showing mythological scenes. This example again demonstrates the practice of adapting certain Greek material representations to the practical and ideological needs of the local elites. On the other hand, a series of helmets from the northern Balkans bears signs of ancient repairs. This is the case of some helmets from Judelnik or Budești (Pl. 4/3), in which the hinged cheek-pieces were replaced by fixed ones (see Teleagă 2008, 235–236, 436–438, with detailed illustrations of the repairs). These repairs are of lower quality in comparison with the higher technology involved in the manufacturing of the helmets, which suggest that some of the local leaders lacked access to the services of top class artisans, like those who made similar products for the prestigious aristocratic courts from Thrace. 166 | A. Rustoiu–S. Berecki Chronologically the earliest examples from the north-eastern Balkans, belonging to the ‘standard’ type II, come from Bulgaria (Ruec, Obretenik, Sadovec, Braničevo, Razgrad), being dated to the 5th century BC (Teleagă 2008, 235, 435–436). The majority of these pieces, and mostly the ‘Thracian’ variant of the Chalcidian helmets, were used during the 4th century BC, whereas from the middle of this century the so-called ‘parade’ helmets, made of silver or gold, also appeared (Teleagă 2008, 235–237, 436–438). As for the chronology of the helmets with mobile cheek-pieces, they appeared in Greece as early as the beginning of the 5th century BC, to judge from their presence on contemporary painted pottery (Pflug 1988, 143, fig. 10). The helmet from Tithorea, with cheek-pieces having a similar shape to that of the example from Ocna Sibiului, was dated to the beginning of the 4th century BC (Andriomenou 1976, 199), whereas the finds of the same type from Olympia belong to the first half of this century (Kunze 1994, 73–74). E. Teleagă has given the same dating to other helmets of type V discovered in funerary contexts from Bulgaria and Romania, for example those from Zavet, Mortogonovo, Kălnovo, Făcău and Zimnicea. (Teleagă 2008, 236, 438–440), but some might have also been used slightly later according to the chronology recently proposed by Măndescu (2010, 158–159). Therefore the dating of the helmet from the grave at Ocna Sibiului can be narrowed down to the first half of the 4th century BC and as late as the beginning of the second half of this century. This chronological delimitation corresponds to the ethnic and historical evolution from Transylvania and northern Balkans, an aspect which will be discussed below. The remaining pieces of the Ocna Sibiului funerary inventory are harness mounts. According to their dimensions, the simple loops and the discs can be paired, while the loops with knobs have different sizes. The mentioned discs have analogies made of silver or bronze in a series of funerary inventories or hoards, being associated with other elements of harness fittings. For example similar objects are present in the hoard containing harness mounts discovered at Craiova (Pl. 5/2) (Berciu 1969, 133, fig. 102; Berciu 1974, 150–151, fig. 69; Kull 1997, 214, fig. 7/18), or in the graves from Peretu (Pl. 5/1) (Kull 1997, 215, fig. 8/11–13) and Agighiol (Pl. 5/3) (Berciu 1969, 67–68, fig. 41/1–6; 47/1–3, 5; Berciu 1974, 76–78, fig. 32/7, 9–11; Kull 1997, 246, fig. 24/40–43). Three silver discs are associated with a simple loop and with other decorative harness elements in the recently discovered tumulus from Malomirovo-Zlatinitsa (Agre 2011, 116–118, fig. III.IV-15/a–b – 16). Loops with knobs are frequently associated with other harness mounts, for example in the grave from Găvani (Pl. 6/1) (Kull 1997, 283, fig. 39/18; Sîrbu–Harţuche 2000, 140, fig. 3–7) or in the one from Panagjurište (Pl. 6/2), dated to the 4th century BC (Kull 1997, 296–297, fig. 49/20). The presence of such loops in the inventories of some graves lacking weaponry or harness equipment (for example in the grave from Enisala–Movila 6-B, m. 5, Simion 1971, 118, fig. 31/g; Simion 2003, 279, 314, fig. 14/5), sometimes linked in groups of two or three – as in the case of a grave from Ciucurova (Pl. 6/3), or another from Zimnicea (Simion 1976, 159–163, fig. 10/3; Simion 2003, 155, fig. 1/4; Alexandrescu 1980, 22, fig. 50/8) – indicates that the functionality of these objects was diverse. They could have also been used as garment accessories. The manner in which they were used as connecting elements for belts and straps is also indicated by a series of loops discovered at Magdalenska gora (Pl. 6/4) (Hvala Et Al. 2004, pl. 35/3– 6; 45/8–12; 71/2–5; 159/1–13; etc.). Loops with knobs were in use during an extended period in the area north of the Danube, up to the late La Tène and even later, and having various functionalities (see Rustoiu 1996b, 106–107). The bronze piece having a tubular lower half and a pointed upper half, previously discussed by the present authors (Rustoiu–Berecki 2011), was considered the fitting element of a crest or plume of a helmet (Rusu 1969, 293; Rusu–Bandula 1970, 37–38; Teleagă 2008, 441, no. 949). The images on Greek painted pottery indicate that these Chalcidian helmets had ornamental crests on their top (Dintsis 1986, pl. 63/2, 4, 6; 64/1, 5; Pflug 1988, 143–144, fig. 10). In certain cases traces of soldering have been observed at the point which these decorative elements, probably made of organic materials, were fitted (Stoyanov 2005, 648). In other situations the helmets were decorated on the top with other types of ornaments, also soldered (probably with tin). This is the case of the snake with three heads fitted on the helmet from the Golyamata Mogila tumulus at Malomirovo-Zlatinitsa, previously mentioned, or of the spiral ornaments on other helmets (Dintsis 1986, pl. 67/1–2). Still, the object from the grave at Ocna Sibiului is not an ornament of this kind. The piece is lacking any trace of soldering, whereas the tubular base does not permit its fitting on the top of the helmet. A series of artefacts having a close similarity are later documented in the early Roman imperial period. They consist of bronze fittings belonging to the type of musical instruments used in military contexts, ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age | 167 called cornu (Feugère 2002, 57–59, fig. 57–63). A fragment of this kind discovered at Murrhardt, in Baden-Württenberg (Nuber 1988, 110, fig. 80), is a good example.1 These musical instruments appeared in the Etruscan world and, much earlier, in Greece. Still, the dimensions of the piece from Ocna Sibiului are much smaller than those of these potential analogies, so this functional identification is less convincing. In conclusion the bronze object is not a fitting element of a crest, as previously suggested. Today its functionality is difficult to establish, but the present hypotheses are pointing more likely to military equipment or harnessing. Summarising all these observations, in the light of the chronology of the cheek-piece and of the remaining pieces of the funerary inventory, the grave from Ocna Sibiului can be dated to the first half of the 4th century BC and the beginning of the second half of the century. Other arguments for this dating can be offered by the general interpretation of the ethno-historical evolution of the Transylvanian region in this period as will be presented below. The grave from Ocna Sibiului in the ethno-historical context of the inner Carpathian and northern Balkan region at the beginning of the Late Iron Age A number of details regarding the chronological identification of the grave from Ocna Sibiului are provided by the analysis of the ethno-historical context in the study area. This period corresponds to the horizon preceding the Celtic colonization in Transylvania. The first Celtic groups arrived in the eastern part of the Carpathian Basin and in Transylvania at the end of the LT B1 and the beginning of the LT B2, according to a series of funerary discoveries. Afterwards, in LT B2, new groups occupied territories in the region (Fig. 3). The amalgamation of colonists and indigenous communities determined the appearance of some new communal identities expressed by a mixed or ‘hybrid’ material culture, different from that identified in other Central European areas. Chronologically this period corresponds to the last three or four decades of the 4th century BC (see further on this subject in Rustoiu 2008, 65–90; Rustoiu 2012b). Ocna Sibiului 5 m Fig. 3. Celtic cemeteries dating to LT B1/B2 (circles) and LT B2 (black dots); fortified settlements in Maramureș (triangles); indigenous cremation graves from Olteni and Ocna Sibiului (black squares). 1 We are grateful to our colleague Silvia Mustaţă (Cluj-Napoca) for suggesting these analogies and interpretative possibility. 168 | A. Rustoiu–S. Berecki The Celts did not occupy the entire territory of Transylvania. The fortified settlements from Maramureș, as well as the burials and the settlements from eastern Transylvania (amongst which those from Olteni are significant), illustrate the existence of some local communities which continued to evolve without being significantly influenced by elements of La Tène culture (Fig. 3). At the same time the nature of the settlements, the funerary rites and rituals and their assemblages seem to suggest that these communities were more likely oriented toward the cultural environment outside the Carpathians (Rustoiu 2008, 65–90; Rustoiu 2012b, both with further bibliography). In contrast, in southern Transylvania a series of early funerary discoveries have been documented – for example the sites of Vurpăr and Toarcla (Horedt 1944) – illustrating the Celtic colonization of the region (Fig. 3). Similar to other colonized areas, an amalgamation of elements of La Tène and indigenous cultures has been documented. However, despite this ethnic and cultural mixture the Celtic warlike élites maintained and expressed a particular identity through the use of certain specific symbolic elements. From this point of view the panoply of weapons, consisting of a long sword, a spear and a shield, played an important role. These weapons were sometimes accompanied by helmets, for example the Italic bronze helmet discovered in the surroundings of Haţeg (for the type and distribution see Schaaff 1974, 188–189, n. 20, fig. 31/2 and fig. 32), or chariots – for example that from Toarcla. Although some of the Celtic warriors managed to reach Greece and the northern Balkans, more likely as mercenaries, the La Tène suite of arms remained the main symbolic element of personal and group identity. A cremation grave with the remains placed in a cist, discovered in a tumulus at Plovdiv, is relevant from this point of view. The funerary inventory contains the usual range of arms, including a ritually bent La Tène sword and several spears, together with a La Tène brooch. The funerary offerings consists of numerous Greek and local vessels, including lamps. The burial probably belonged to a Celtic warrior who died around the middle of the 3rd century BC in Thrace and who can be recognized due to the presence of the range of arms and of some garment accessories. Details of the funerary rite and ritual point more likely to the practices and beliefs of the local community in which the warrior met his end (for the funerary inventory and its interpretation from various perspectives see further in Bouzek 2005, 97–99, fig. 7–9; Emilov 2010, 80–82, fig. 4–7). Anastassov (2011, 235) also considers that this grave can be related to the mercenary activity of some Celtic groups hired by various rulers of the Hellenistic period. A similar situation can be also noted in the case of some graves recently discovered at Ohrid (Guštin Et Al. 2011), in which the funerary ritual and the suite of arms are of La Tène type, whereas other elements of the inventory point to a certain cultural hybridity. Taking into consideration the previously mentioned arguments, the grave from Ocna Sibiului has to be dated before the Celtic colonization in Transylvania (especially in southern Transylvania), more precisely before the last quarter of the 4th century BC. This dating is also supported by the general chronology of the artefacts from the funerary inventory, in particular with regard to the helmet. The funerary inventory demonstrates a different manner of expressing the warrior identity, different from that characterising the Celtic milieu, but related to the environment of the military and aristocratic élites of the northern Balkans. Thus in order to discuss the cultural significance of this grave, the analysis has to be oriented towards the situation from the study area and to the events which characterised the period preceding the Celtic colonization. The grave from Ocna Sibiului is not an isolated example (Fig. 4). The cremation grave (probably from a tumulus, see Medeleţ–Bugilan 1987, 102, 125–126; Gumă 1991, 95) from Cuptoare–Sfogea (Pl. 7/1–2), in the region of Banat, containing a Chalcidian helmet (Oprinescu 1987; for important corrections regarding its context, chronology and cultural identification see Gumă 1991, 93–102), as well as the similar helmet (Pl. 7/3) from Mercina (Vărădia commune, Caraș-Severin County),2 discovered sometimes between 1910 and 1915 in the area of the village at the find-spot named Vršački Breg, and today preserved in the Museum of Vršac (Brukner Et Al. 1974, 547–548, fig. 255–256; Medeleţ mss, 2 A series of confusions still persists in archaeological literature regarding the actual location of this discovery. For example, the place of discovery is recorded as “Nerčina (Mercina), near Vršac, Vojvodina” (Lazăr 2009, 16, no. 13), a confusion introduced by Brukner Et Al. 1974, 547, the caption to fig. 256 also indicates the Vršac Hills (Vršački Breg). The same place of discovery was located at Vršac (Uršac?) by Pflug 1988, 142, n. 30) or even at Zsidovina, an evident confusion with Jidovin (now Berzovia, Caraș-Severin County), from which a Greek-Illyrian helmet has been found (for this confusion of location see Lazăr 2009, 16). Florin Medeleţ’s research led him to identify of the place of discovery on the area of the southern or western slopes of the Vršac Hills, which at the beginning of the 20th century were within the territory of the village of Mercina, now part of Romania, in Vărădia commune, Caraș-Severin County (Medeleţ mss.) ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age | 169 s.v. Mercina). This helmet, probably also from a funerary context, suggests the same connections with the southern Carpathian–Balkan area evidenced by the funerary rite and ritual of the grave from Cuptoare and to be dated around the middle or in the second half of the 4th century BC (see Gumă 1991, 101). i i a anub S u i Ocna Sibiului ani cina i u i l a u aca i nic a S ai 5 m Fig. 4. Distribution map of the graves from the northern Balkans, Transylvania and Banat (black dots) and the Greek colonies on the Black Sea coast (black squares). Mircea Babeș has remarked that the inventories of some graves from the southern Carpathian– Balkan area indicate the existence of a hierarchy among the aristocracy from the Lower Danube region and a local ‘interpretation’ of the southern means of expressing status. For example, the burials of the princes from Agighiol, Sveshtari or Vraca are constructed on the basis of a Macedonian model while the funerary contexts from the north of the Danube, like those from Peretu or Găvani, have a simpler architecture but a lavish inventory, whereas other burials, for example those from Zimnicea, Făcău and Fântânele can be attributed to some lower rank members of the local aristocracy (Babeș 1997, 232–233). The graves of the same type from Ocna Sibiului and Banat can be also ascribed to this social level which characterized the periphery of the northern Balkans cultural environment. This social and also functional hierarchization – meaning a distribution of the social and perhaps religious functions within this structure – is also suggested by the aspect of the helmets and of the parade military equipment, made of precious metals and richly decorated with symbolic and mythological scenes, in contrast with the simpler military equipment recovered from the graves belonging to lower rank warriors (Pl. 8). In this context is has to be also mentioned that these helmets played an important role in the affirmation of the social and symbolic status of the owners. In general the headgear as a symbol of authority, laic or religious, is frequently used, from prehistory to the modern times, in various societies. Amongst them can be mentioned the caps worn by the military and religious Dacian aristocracy, or the crowns worn by different medieval and modern monarchs of Europe. The shape and nature of such items differs from one culture to another according to particular aesthetic and symbolic criteria specific to the society that has created them, albeit the idea of symbolically ‘marking’ the leaders’ head is similar (see for example Babić 2001). Within a study regarding the Greek-Illyrian helmets of the end of the Early Iron Age in western Balkans, Blečić (2007) pointed to the multiple significances of such objects: emblems of rank, symbols of a warlike hierarchy, subjects of votive offerings or sacrifices etc. Taking into consideration these 170 | A. Rustoiu–S. Berecki observations, it might be significant that the cremated remains of the deceased from Cuptoare–Sfogea were placed in the helmet before being laid in grave. A similar practice has been encountered in other situations belonging to different historical and cultural environments. For example in a grave from Săvârșin (probably dated to the 4th–3rd centuries BC) the cremated human remains were placed in an iron helmet covered with a bowl, the reuse of the headgear as urn being very clear in this case (Barbu–Hügel 1999, 109; Ferencz 2007, 44, no. 19). In a tumulus burial from Popești (tumulus no. 4; 2nd–1st century BC) it was noted that some of the cremated human remains had been placed in a bronze helmet (Vulpe 1976, 203). These practices illustrate the symbolic role played by helmets, which was maintained in funerary contexts. F. Medeleţ already suggested that a connection might have existed between these ritual practices and a cult of the head that was attested among populations from the Balkans (Medeleţ mss., s.v. Cuptoare). Returning to northern Balkans society in the 5th–3rd centuries BC, it has to be also noted that other material expressions, visible in the archaeological record were also used to display a particular status. Amongst such evidence can be mentioned the large fortified settlements – sometimes having defensive works inspired by Greek models, for example the brick walls from Coţofenii din Dos and Bâzdâna (Babeș 1997) – the rich hoards containing numerous gold and silver objects, the burials with funerary chamber and lavish inventories, but also the smaller fortified settlements and funerary structures, all of which are pointing to a hierarchy of the communities and of their elites. ✴✴✴ Although it was discovered over a century ago, the funerary inventory from Ocna Sibiului provides a series of important details concerning its composition and chronology, but mostly about the general ethno-historical contexts in northern Balkans at the beginning of the Late Iron Age. The grave is dated to a period covering the first half and the beginning of the second half of the 4th century BC. This dating is supported by the chronology of the fragment of Chalcidian helmet and its association with harness mounts specific to the same period. As a result, the grave from Ocna Sibiului is not ‘Celtic’, while the cheek-piece does not belong to an Etruscan or Italic-Celtic helmet as it was previously suggested. The burial precedes the Celtic horizon in Transylvania. Its composition illustrates the cultural connections between southern Transylvania (and Banat) and northern Balkans in the period which both antedates and continues during the reigns of Philip II and Alexander the Great. Northern Balkans society was characterized by influence from both the Greek and Macedonian models, by an interpretation of these models in a particular manner and also by a pronounced symbolic and functional hierarchy. The ‘Thracian’ aristocracy – the upper social layers of the Odrysians, Getae or Triballi – expressed their social position and privileged status through the use of well-defined material symbols. Amongst them the tumulus burials with funerary chamber and lavish inventories eloquently support this idea. The internal social hierarchy of these élites can be observed in the differentiation of the inventories and personal military equipment within the funerary ceremonies (Pl. 8). From this perspective the grave from Ocna Sibiului, as well as the discoveries from the Banat, at Cuptoare–Sfogea and Mercina, illustrate the practice of simplified copying of the northern and north-eastern Balkan model, defining the periphery of this phenomenon. The funerary inventory of the grave from Ocna Sibiului, especially the helmet and the harness equipment, functionally imitates the equipment of the warlike élites from the south of the Carpathians, even if the latter is far from the ostentatiousness displayed in the northern Balkans region. The Celtic élites had imposed, many years after the interment of the deceased from Ocna Sibiului, another cultural model and new ways of expressing identities, defined by other functional and typological structures of military equipment. As mentioned above, the helmets had multiple functional and symbolic meanings. This fact may also explain the well-delimited distribution areas of certain helmets which otherwise had different typological and manufacturing origins. Teržan (1995, 85–86, fig. 5) noted nearly two decades ago that the so-called Greek-Illyrian helmets are mainly encountered in the ‘Illyrian’ communities from the western and north-western Balkans, whereas the Chalcidian ones were mainly used in the north-eastern Balkans. Gumă (1991, 100–102) also identified a chronological and typological succession of the helmets from the north of the Danube, relevant for the study of inter-cultural connections. For the end of the Early Iron Age, Gumă noted the presence of some Greco-Illyrian helmets in the western part of nowadays Romania. The group includes the helmets from Gostavăţ in Oltenia, Ocna Mureș in Transylvania, Berzovia (former Jidovin) in Banat, and the beautifully decorated helmet recently recovered from the Timiș River, at Găvojdia (Medeleţ–Cedică 2003). These pieces illustrate the relations established by local or immigrant ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age | 171 military élites with regions from the western and north-western Balkans in the 5th century BC, and define the limit of the distribution area of such artefacts. The Chalcidian helmets from Transylvania and Banat (Fig. 4) underline a similar mechanism, albeit that they draw attention to the social models which characterize the ‘Thracian’ environment in the 4th century BC. Finally, it has to be also mentioned that for the chronological interval between the end of the ‘Scythian’ horizon in Transylvania (around 450 BC) and the beginning of the ‘Celtic’ horizon (350–330/320 BC), of roughly a century, archaeological evidence is limited. The funerary contexts or their contemporaneous settlements are missing. Still, the main cause is more likely the actual state of research. The grave from Ocna Sibiului may suggest a possible direction for future investigations, at least for the areas covering the limits of the Transylvanian plateau.3 References Agre 2011 Alexandrescu 1980 Alexandrescu 1987 Anastassov 2011 Andriomenou 1976 Andronicos 1984 Babeș 1997 Babić 2001 Barbu–Hügel 1999 Berciu 1969 Berciu 1974 Blečić 2007 Bouzek 2005 Brukner Et Al. 1974 Černenko 2006 Crișan 1971 Crișan 1973 Dintsis 1986 Emilov 2010 Ferencz 2007 3 Agre, D., The tumulus of Golyamata Mogila near the villages of Malomirovo and Zlatinitsa, Sofia. Alexandrescu, A. D., La nécropole Gète de Zimnicea, Dacia N. S., 24, 19–126. Alexandrescu, P., Însemnări arheologice. Asupra tezaurului de la Rogozen, SCIVA, 38, 3, 233–244. Anastassov, J., The Celtic presence in Thrace during the 3rd century BC in light of new archaeological data, IN: Guštin, M.–Jevtić, M. (eds.), The Eastern Celts. The communities between the Alps and the Black Sea, Koper–Beograd, 227–239. Andriomenou, A., Ein chalkidischer Helm aus Tithorea, Mitteilungen des DAI Athenische Abteilung, 91, 189–202. Andronicos, M., Vergina. The royal tombs and the ancient city, Athens. Babeș, M., Despre fortificaţiile “Cetăţii Jidovilor” de la Coţofenii din Dos, SCIVA, 48, 3, 199–236. Babić, S., Headgear of the Early Iron Age tribal chieftains. Social and symbolic aspects, SNMB, XVII-1, 83–93. Barbu, M.–Hügel, P., Săvârșin, IN: Repertoriul arheologic al Mureșului inferior. Judeţul Arad, Timișoara, 106–109. Berciu, D., Arta traco-getică, București. Berciu, D., Contribution à l’étude de l’art Thraco-Gète, București. Blečić, M., Status, symbols, sacrifices, offerings. The diverse meanings of Illyrian helmets, VAMZ, 40, 73–116. Bouzek, J., Celtic campaigns in southern Thrace and the Tylis kingdom: The Duchov fibula in Bulgaria and the destruction of Pistiros in 279/8 BC, IN: Dobrzańska, H.–Megaw, V.– Poleska, P. (eds.), Celts on the margin. Studies in European Cultural Interaction (7th Century BC–1st Century AD) Dedicated to Zenon Woźniak, Krakow, 93–101. Brukner, B.–Jovanović, B.–Tasić, N., Praistorija Vojvodine, Novi Sad. Černenko, E. V., Die Schutzwaffen der Skythen, PBF, III.2, Stuttgart. Crișan, I. H., Contribuţii la problema celţilor din Transilvania, SCIV, 22, 2, 149–164. Crișan, I. H., Așa-numitul mormânt celtic de la Silivaș și problema celui mai vechi grup celtic din Transilvania, Sargetia, 10, 45–78. Dintsis, P., Hellenistische Helme, Roma. Emilov, J., Ancient texts on the Galatian royal residence of Tylis and the context of La Tène finds in Southern Thrace. A reappraisal, IN: Vagalinski, L. F. (ed.), In Search of Celtic Tylis in Thrace (III C BC). Proceedings of the Interdisciplinary Colloquium Arranged by the National Archaeological Institute and Museum at Sofia and the Welsh Department, Aberystwyth University held at the National Archaeological Institute and Museum, Sofia, 8 May 2010, Sofia, 67–87. Ferencz, I. V., Celţii pe Mureșul mijlociu. La Tène-ul timpuriu și mijlociu în bazinul mijlociu al Mureșului (sec. IV–II î.Chr.), Sibiu. The authors are grateful to S. Mustaţă (Cluj-Napoca) and J. Emilov (Sofia) for drawing attention to some relevant bibliography, as well as to M. Guštin for the permission to read in advance the study regarding the graves from Ohrid, which is in press. 172 | A. Rustoiu–S. Berecki Feugère 2002 Furtwängler 1890 Gold der Thraker 2007 Gumă 1991 Feugère, M., Weapons of the Romans, Stroud-Charleston. Furtwängler, A., Olympia IV: Die Bronzen und die übrigen kleineren Funde von Olympia, Berlin. (http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/furtwaengler1890bd1). Die alten Zivilisationen Bulgariens. Das Gold der Thraker, Basel. Gumă, M., Câteva precizări asupra unor tipuri de coifuri de la sfârșitul primei epoci a fierului și începutul celei de a doua descoperite în sud-vestul României, Thraco-Dacica, 12, 85–103. Guštin Et Al. 2011 Guštin, M.–Kuzman, P.–Malenko, V., Ein keltischer Krieger in Lichnidos/Ohrid, Mazedonien (forthcoming). Horedt 1944 Horedt, K., Zwei keltische Grabfunde aus Siebenbürgen, Dacia, 9–10, 1941–1944, 189–200. Hvala Et Al. 2004 Hvala, S. T.–Dular, J.–Kocuvan, E., Eisenzeitliche Grabhügel auf der Magdalenska gora, Ljubljana. Kull 1997 Kull, B., Tod und Apotheose. Zur Ikonographie in Grab und Kunst der jüngeren Eisenzeit an der unteren Donau und ihrer Bedeutung für die Interpretation von „Prunkgräbern“, BerRGK, 78, 197–466. Kunze 1967 Kunze, E., Helme, Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Olympia, 8, 111–183. Kunze 1994 Kunze, E., Chalkidische Helme IV–VII mit Nachträgen zu I und II, Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Olympia, 9, 27–100. Lazăr 2009 Lazăr, S., Helmets of the Chalcidian shape found in the Lower Danube area, Dacia N. S., 53, 13–26. Măndescu 2010 Măndescu, D., Cronologia perioadei timpurii a celei de-a doua epoci a fierului (sec. V–III a. Chr.) între Carpaţi, Nistru și Balcani, Brăila. Medleţ mss Medeleţ, F., Epoca Latène în Banat, manuscript. Medeleţ–Bugilan 1987 Medeleţ, F.–Bugilan, I., Contribuţii la problema și la repertoriul movilelor de pământ din Banat, Banatica, 9, 87–198. Medeleţ–Cedică 2003 Medeleţ, F.–Cedică, V., Coiful greco-ilir de la Găvojdia (jud. Timiș), Analele Banatului, 10–11, 1, 2002–2003, 97–100. Nuber 1988 Nuber, H. U., Antike Bronzen aus Baden-Württenberg, Suttgart–Aalen. Ognenova-Marinova– Ognenova-Marinova, L.–Stoyanov, T., The chalkidian helmets and the origin of the North Stoyanov 2005 Thracian ceremonial armour, IN: Stephanos Archaeologicos in honorem Professoris Liudmili Getov, Sofia, 693–700. Oprinescu 1987 Oprinescu, A., Mormântul unui luptător get de la Cuptoare–“Sfogea” (com Cornea, jud. Caraș-Severin), Thraco-Dacica, 8, 127–129. Pflug 1988 Pflug, H., Chalkidische Helme, IN: Antike Helme. Sammlung Lipperheide und andere Bestände des Antikenmuseums Berlin, Mainz, 137–150. Rogozen 1989 Der thrakische Silberschatz aus Rogozen Bulgarien, Bonn–Mainz–Freiburg–München– Hamburg, 1988–1989. Rustoiu 1996a Rustoiu, A., Ateliere de orfevrărie și artizani de prestigiu în Dacia preromană, IN: Mitu, S.–Gogâltan, Fl. (eds.), Viaţă privată, mentalităţi colective și imaginar social în Transilvania, Oradea–Cluj, 76–82. Rustoiu 1996b Rustoiu, A., Metalurgia bronzului la daci (sec. II î. Chr.–sec. I d. Chr.). Tehnici, ateliere și produse de bronz, BT, 15, București. Rustoiu 2002 Rustoiu, A., Războinici și artizani de prestigiu în Dacia preromană, Cluj-Napoca. Rustoiu 2008 Rustoiu, A., Războinici și societate în aria celtică transilvăneană. Studii pe marginea mormântului cu coif de la Ciumești, Cluj-Napoca. Rustoiu 2012a Rustoiu, A., Ocna Sibiului, IN: Sievers, S.–Urban, O. H.–Ramsl, P. C. (eds.), Lexikon zur keltischen Archäologie, Wien, forthcoming. Rustoiu 2012b Rustoiu, A., Indigenous and colonist communities in the Eastern Carpathian Basin at the beginning of the Late Iron Age. The genesis of an Eastern Celtic World, IN: Popa, C. N.–Stoddart, S. (eds.), Fingerprinting the Iron Age. Approaches to identity in the European Iron Age. Integrating South-Eastern Europe into the debate, Oxford, forthcoming. Rustoiu–Berecki 2011 Rustoiu, A.–Berecki, S., An unidentified bronze object from Ocna Sibiului, Romania (first half of the 4th century BC), Instrumentum, 34, 10. Rusu 1969 Rusu, M., Das keltische Fürstengrab von Ciumești in Rumänien, BerRGK, 50, 267–300. Rusu–Bandula 1970 Rusu, M.–Bandula, O., Mormântul unei căpetenii celtice de la Ciumești, Baia Mare. ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age | 173 Schaaff, U., Keltische Eisenhelme aus vorrömischer Zeit, Jahrbuch RGZM, 21, 1, 149–204. Simion, G., Despre cultura geto-dacică din nordul Dobrogei în lumina descoperirilor de la Enisala, Peuce, 2, 63–129. Simion 1976 Simion, G., Les Gètes de la Dobroudja septentrionale du VIe au Ier siècle av.n.è., ThracoDacica, 1, 143–163. Simion 2003 Simion, G., Culturi antice în zona gurilor Dunării, Cluj-Napoca. Sîrbu 2006 Sîrbu, V., Man and gods in the Geto-Dacian world, Brașov. Sîrbu–Harţuche 2000 Sîrbu, V.–Harţuche, N., Remarques sur le tumulus aristocratique de Găvani, IN: Lungu, V. (ed.), Pratiques funeraires dans l’Europe des XIIIe-IVe s. av. J.-C. Actes du IIIe Colloque International d’Archéologie Funéraire, Tulcea 1997, Tulcea, 139–153. Stoyanov 2005 Stoyanov, T., A bronze helmet of chalkidian type from Golyamo Shivachevo, Sliven District. Notes on the chalkidian helmet in Thrace, IN: Stephanos Archaeologicos in honorem Professoris Liudmili Getov, Sofia, 646–653. Teleagă 2008 Teleagă, E., Griechische Importe in den Nekropolen an der unteren Donau. 6. Jh. – Anfang des 3. Jh. v. Chr., MSVF, Bd. 23, Rahden/Westf. Teržan 1995 Teržan, B., Handel und soziale Oberschichten im früheisenzeitlichen Südosteuropa, IN: Hänsel, B. (Hrsg.), Handel, Tausch und Verkehr im bronze- und früheisenzeitlichen Südosteuropa, München–Berlin, 81–159. Vulpe 1976 Vulpe, A., La nécropole tumulaire gète de Popești, Thraco-Dacica, 1, 193–215. Zirra 1971 Zirra, V., Beiträge zur Kenntnis des keltischen Latène in Rumänien, Dacia N. S. 15, 171–238. Zirra 1975 Zirra, V., Influences des Gèto-Daces et de leurs voisins sur l’habitat celtique de Transylvanie, IN: Fitz, J. (ed.), The Celts in Central Europe, Székesfehérvár, 47–64. Schaaff 1974 Simion 1971 List of figures Fig. 1. Distribution map of Chalcidian helmets Pflug type V in the northern Balkans (see the list of discoveries in Stoyanov 2005 and Teleagă 2008). Fig. 2. Distribution map of Chalcidian helmets Pflug type II, the ‘Thracian’ variant (black squares) and the silver and gold parade helmets (white squares) (see the list of discoveries in Teržan 1995; Ognenova-Marinova– Stoyanov 2005; Teleagă 2008). Fig. 3. Celtic cemeteries dating to LT B1/B2 (circles) and LT B2 (black dots); fortified settlements in Maramureș (triangles); indigenous cremation graves from Olteni and Ocna Sibiului (black squares). Fig. 4. Distribution map of the graves from the northern Balkans, Transylvania and Banat (black dots) and the Greek colonies on the Black Sea coast (black squares). List of plates Pl. 1–2. Funerary inventory from Ocna Sibiului. Pl. 3. Chalcidian cheek-pieces. 1. Ocna Sibiului; 2. Olympia; 3. Dodona (after Kunze 1994); 4. Tithorea (after Andriomenou 1976); 5. Shipka–Golyama Kosmatka (after Gold der Thraker 2007). 1–3, 5. without scale. Pl. 4. Chalcidian helmets. 1. ‘Standard’ type II from Ruec; 2. ‘Thracian’ type from Balș; 3. Repaired helmet from Budești; 4. Silver helmet from Agighiol; 5. Silver helmet from Peretu (1–3. after Lazăr 2009; 4. after Kull 1997; 5. after Sîrbu 2006; 1–3, 5. without scale). Pl. 5. Assemblages of harness elements containing silver discs. 1. Peretu; 2. Craiova; 3. Agighiol (after Kull 1997, without scale). Pl. 6. Assemblages of harness elements discovered in graves and containing loops with knobs (1–2) and different forms using loops with knobs. 1. Găvani; 2. Panagjurište (after Kull 1997); 3. Ciucurova (after Simion 1976); 4. Magdalenska gora (after Hvala Et Al. 2004). Pl. 7. 1. Inventory of the grave from Cuptoare–Sfogea (after Gumă 1991); 2. Helmet from Mercina–Vršacki breg (after Brukner Et Al. 1974, without scale). Pl. 8. Different levels of hierarchization (according to the structure of the funerary inventories) of the aristocracy and the warlike élites in the northern Balkans and on its periphery (see also Fig. 4). Legend: A. Agighiol; B. Peretu; C. Găvani (after Kull 1997); D. Zimnicea, grave C1D (after Alexandrescu 1980; Sîrbu 2006); E. Ocna Sibiului; F. Cuptoare–Sfogea (after Gumă 1991). 174 | A. Rustoiu–S. Berecki 5 Plate 1. Funerary inventory from Ocna Sibiului. Plate . unerary in entory from na i iului p otos . ere i . ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age | 175 5 Plate 2. Funerary inventory from Ocna Sibiului. Plate . unerary in entory from na i iului dra in s . ere i . 176 | A. Rustoiu–S. Berecki 5 Plate 3. Chalcidian cheek-pieces. 1. Ocna Sibiului; 2. Olympia; 3. Dodona (after Kunze 1994); 4. Tithorea (after Andriomenou 1976); 5. Shipka–Golyama Kosmatka (after Gold der Thraker 2007). 1–3, 5. without scale. 5. Plate . al idian ee pie es . na i iului . lympia . odona after K . it orea after ip a– ama ma a after . – 5. it out s ale. ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age | 177 5 Plate 4. Chalcidian helmets. 1. ‘Standard’ type II from Ruec; 2. ‘Thracian’ type from Balș; 3. Repaired helmet from Budești; 4. Silver helmet from Agighiol; 5. Silver helmet from Peretu (1–3. after Lazăr 2009; 4. after Kull 1997; 5. after Sîrbu 2006; 1–3, 5. without scale). Plate . al idian elmets. . standard type from ue . ra ian type from al . repaired elmet from ude ti . sil er elmet from i iol 5. sil er elmet from Peretu – . after . after K 5. after – 5. it out s ale . 178 | A. Rustoiu–S. Berecki Plate 5. Assemblages of harness elements containing silver discs. 1. Peretu; 2. Craiova; 3. Agighiol (after Kull 1997, without scale). Plate 5. ssem la es of arness elements ontainin sil er dis s. . Peretu . raio a . i iol after K it out s ale . ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age | 179 Plate 6. Assemblages of harness elements discovered in graves and containing loops with knobs (1–2) and different forms using loops with knobs. 1. Găvani; 2. Panagjurište (after Kull 1997); 3. Ciucurova (after Simion 1976); 4. Magdalenska gora (after Hvala Et Al. 2004). Plate . ssem la es of arness elements dis o ered in ra es and ontainin loops it no s – and different forms usin loops it no s. . ani . Pana uri te after K . iu uro a after . a dalens a ora after . 180 | A. Rustoiu–S. Berecki Plate 7. 1. Inventory of the grave from Cuptoare–Sfogea (after Gumă 1991); 2. Helmet from Mercina–Vršacki breg (after Brukner Et Al. 1974, without scale). Plate . . n entory of t e ra e from uptoare– . elmet from er ina– r ac i re after K ea after it out s ale . ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron Age | 181 A B C D E F Plate 8. Different levels of hierarchization (according to the structure of the funerary inventories) of the aristocracy and the warlike élites in the northern Balkans and on its periphery (see also Fig. 4). Legend: A. Agighiol; Peretu; Găvanii (after Zimnicea, Alexandrescu 1980; Plate . ifferent leB. els of C.ierar ationKull a 1997); ordinD. to t e strugrave tureC1D of (after t e funerary in entories Sîrbu 2006); E. Ocna Sibiului; F. Cuptoare–Sfogea (after Gumă 1991). of t e aristo ra y and t e arli e lites in t e nort ern al ans and on its perip ery see also i . . e end . i iol . Peretu . ani after K . imni ea ra e after . na i iului . uptoare– ea after . Late Iron Age Burial Rites in Eastern Austria* Peter C. RAMSL Österr. Akademie der Wissenschaften, Präh. Komm. c/o Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Präh. Abt. Vienna, Austria peter.ramsl@univie.ac.at Keywords: La Tène, cemeteries, Eastern Austria, burial rites This paper proposes to give a general view of the burial rites of the La Tène period in Eastern Austria and to set out some main points with regard to special rites which may be explored in future projects. In the 1950s, Jan Filip (1956, 65) postulated the Flachgräberhorizont, a historical term by which the author defined the ‘Celtic expansion’ to Italy and other parts of Europe (LT B). Based on the results of excavations of early La Tène graves in central Bohemia the Flachgräberhorizont model was extended to Central Europe (Filip 1956, Obr. 17). After half a century, taking into consideration present archaeological evidence the term Flachgäber should be reconsidered. In Eastern Austria cases of burials in tumuli have been identified, dating from LT A to LT C. One such site with three tumuli dated to LT A/B1 was investigated in the winter of 2004 at Rassing by the River Perschling, east of the Traisental (Preinfalk 2005). LT B burials in tumuli are known in Katzelsdorf, distr. Wiener Neustadt (Urban Et Al. 1985). The tumuli from Pottenbrunn with LT B2/C1 graves (Ramsl 2002) can be seen on a 18th century map (Josephinischer Kataster, 1785–1789). Grave architecture The inner and outer structures of funerary features were made of different materials. In the Austrian Alpine area and close to limestone outcrops such as on the Leithagebirge stone structures have been observed. They appear as single stones (e.g. at the corners of the grave) like Mannersdorf grave 153 (Ramsl 2011, Abb. 14), as lines of stones or as complete coverage like Mannersdorf grave 4 (Ramsl 2011, Abb. 33) and complete stone chambers like Au am Leithagebirge, grave 15 (Nebehay 1973, Abb. 9); these may consist of several layers of stones. Wooden structures appear as posts/poles left and right beside the pit like in Pottenbrunn grave 565 (Ramsl 2002, Taf. 67) or in the corners of the grave pits, e.g. Inzersdorf grave 277 and 289 (Neugebauer 1996, Taf. 17, 24), presumed tree-trunk coffins like in Pottenbrunn grave 400 (Ramsl 2002, Abb. 6A). Wooden chambers (coffins?) can be observed in Pottenbrunn grave 574 (Ramsl 2002, Taf. 16) and probably Mannersdorf 79 and 86 (Ramsl 2011, Abb. 10), single boards or planks – presumed to be the remains of wooden chambers – were identified in Inzersdorf grave 284 (Neugebauer 1996, Taf. 11). Finally there is also evidence for entrances or steps into the graves (tromos?) like in Mannersdorf grave 4 (Schutzbier 1977, 379). External structures appear also in different materials – wood or stone. To begin with one may recognise post-holes around the grave pits. They appear either singly, double or four- or fivefold, as in Pottenbrunn graves 99, 68, 89 and 233 (Ramsl 2002, Abb. 147), but also in multiples in line with the outer * The research was funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF): P23517-G19. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 183–188 184 | P. C. Ramsl enclosure – internally, like at Pottenbrunn grave 972 (Ramsl 2002, Abb. 147) or externally at Pottenbrunn grave 54 (Ramsl 2002, Abb. 147), alike galleries (Fig. 1). Beside these pole structures the presence of wooden buildings can be reconstructed. These can be interpreted in several ways; these could be temporary parts of burial rites, or in the case of the six-pole structure identified around grave 854 of Pottenbrunn (Ramsl 2002, Abb. 147), they could also be mortuary houses. Fig. 1. Plan of the cemetery of Pottenbrunn, Lower Austria. Fig. 2. Stone paving at the cemetery of Au am Leithagebirge, Lower Austria (after Nebehay 1973). A unique phenomenon in Austria has been identified at the cemetery of Au am Leithagebirge, Kleine Hutweide where areas with stone paving were found. However, though photographic documentation is available (Fig. 2), the exact location is still debated (Nebehay 1973, 3). Comparable phenomena can be recognized at the cemetery of Casalecchio di Reno near Bologna (Ortalli 1995, fig. 20), where the paving is placed inside an enclosed area with postholes in a square lay-out. Fig. 3. Stone structure around grave 8 in Au am Leithagebirge (after Nebehay 1973, Abb. 8). Fig. 4. Stone stele in Mörbisch, Burgenland. Circular shaped enclosures surrounding grave pits appear in Inzersdorf, grave 289 (Neugebauer 1996, Taf. 6) and an approximately square-shaped one in Pottenbrunn 160 (Ramsl 2002, Befundplan 4). Some of these have an entrance as in Pottenbrunn, grave 961 (Ramsl 2002, Befundplan 8), or were Late Iron Age Burial Rites in Eastern Austria | 185 continuous without an entrance in Pottenbrunn, grave 233 (Ramsl 2002, Befundplan 5); at Mannersdorf 225 there was a single enclosure (Ramsl 2011, Abb. 5), while structure 989–990 at Pottenbrunn had two such structures (Ramsl 2002, Befundplan 9). The function or the initial form of these enclosures is partially revealed by the inner structures of the ditches. On the one hand, they have a triangular cross section as at Pottenbrunn 562 (Ramsl 2002, Befundplan 7) indicating that these enclosures were ditches around a particular area. On the other hand, in several cases post-holes were observed inside or as part of these structures for example like those around Pottenbrunn grave 400 (Ramsl 2002, Befundplan 8); these may indicate fences. Grave 22 at Au am Leithagebirge shows a square surrounding setting of stones (Nebehay 1973, Abb. 8) which may be interpreted as low walls (Fig. 3). Other external signs such as stone stelae are very rare in Eastern Austria. These have been found in the case of graves 109 and 116 from Mannersdorf, Mörbisch (Fig. 4) and Vienna (Ramsl 2012) as well as in Transdanubia at Sopron–Krautacker.1 Structures By comparing the distribution of the enclosures from the cemeteries, one can observe different types of structures. In the Franzhausen cemetery single rather than interconnected enclosures have been observed (Neugebauer 1992, Abb. 13), while in other cases different kinds of connected enclosures have been identified: in Inzersdorf a two or three such enclosures were interconnected (Neugebauer 1996, Taf. 2), in Pottenbrunn their number increases to four (Ramsl 2002, Abb. 147) while at Mannersdorf the number of these enclosures is even higher, indicating larger and more complex structural systems (Ramsl 2011). Analysing the system of features and structures, an interpretation of these features as ritual or ceremonial sites is plausible. In Franzhausen (Neugebauer 1992, Abb. 13) the enclosures were nearly exclusively single circular ditches in the northern part and square enclosures in the southern part, while at the border there were only double enclosures, one circular in the north and another square-shaped in the south lacking any sign of graves, indicating the use of these structures as ceremonial sites by two different groups for cult practices, as demonstrations of social identities and so forth. Another example is the internal system around the graves 400 and 520 in Pottenbrunn (Ramsl 2002, Abb. 147). The grave with a double enclosure was connected to the ditch no. 426 without a grave inside, while in the ditch itself, a ritually bent sword was found (Ramsl 2002, Taf. 57). The analogies to such discoveries have usually been interpreted as sanctuaries. Within the grouping of cemeteries other special zones can be identified. In Pottenbrunn and in Mannersdorf some of the interconnected enclosure systems were gender specific. In Pottenbrunn they are dated to a relatively short chronological sequence, these graves were, with one exception in Mannersdorf, female burials. Comparing the enclosure structures of the cemeteries in different regions one can see that in the La Tène cemeteries in south-west Slovakia (Holiare, Horný Jatov or Palárikovo) there are only a few graves with two to four enclosures in which élite burials were placed. Orientation of burials and special ritual features With regard to orientation, the direction that the head is facing is regarded as diagnostic. At Mannersdorf 52% of the graves had a SSW orientation, 17% were oriented to the SW, and only a few graves to the South and SE. In the case of the Traisental group in Pottenbrunn 38% of the graves had a SE orientation, while 25% were oriented to the SSE and 12% to the South. The main direction of orientation in Oberndorf were the SSE and the South, while in Ossarn it was to the SSW and SSE. Therefore, a norm of SW to SE orientation of graves can be identified for the Early La Tène period in Eastern Austria. In LT C, north of the Danube the orientation of the burials changes from South–North to North–South. The phenomenon can be observed in the cemeteries from Poysdorf (Blesl 2010, Abb. 5), Absdorf (Willvonseder 1932, 274), Klein-Reinprechtsdorf (Stifft-Gottlieb 1935), Jetzelsdorf, Steinebrunn (Lederer 1980) and Bernhardsthal (Pittioni 1936, 79). In the case of the cemetery from Dubník, Slovakia, Jozef Bujna (1998) observed deposition of pottery both on and below skeletons. In Pottenbrunn, in the graves 400 and 574, vessels were found lying upon the skeletons. In the case of grave 574 (Ramsl 2002, Abb. 47), a bowl was placed in an unusual position upside down on the right arm of the buried woman. It can be supposed that the pottery had been placed 1 Information: Erzsébet Jerem. 186 | P. C. Ramsl on the cover of a wooden coffin and had dropped into the grave after the wooden parts had rotted. In grave 400 (Ramsl 2002, Abb. 34, 35) together with the skeleton, on the bottom of the grave pit cremated human and animal remains were found, and over them an iron sword was placed lying at the front side, above which a bowl was found (Ramsl 2002, Taf. 55). Analogies for the unusual rite of cremated remains placed next to an inhumation burial are known in Eastern Austria at Ossarn, grave 6 (Ramsl in print) where near the skull of a skeleton two urns with cremated bones had been placed. Regarding the relative age of this ritual, one can suppose that in a first phase the cremation and the inhumation burials had been placed, then, after some time, the sword held by the belt chain fell onto the cremation bones, lying at its front side. Then, when the wooden coffin rotted, the clay bowl fell on the sword. A second Fig. 5. Pottenbrunn, grave 400. Fig. 6. Pottenbrunn, grave 68. hypothesis would suggest the reopening of the grave, when supposedly the cremation was deposited and the sword together with the bowl has been moved (Fig. 5). This second interpretation is supported by the fact that the sword was found slightly pulled out of the scabbard, a similar situation being noticed in Branov (Sankot 2003, fig. 2). The interpretation of this ritual in the case of grave 68 from Pottenbrunn, where pottery was placed beneath the skeleton (Ramsl 2002, Taf. 41) is equivocal (Fig. 6). It is conceivable that the vessel was disposed first on the bottom as a kind of libation and then the body was placed upon it. However, it is also possible that the deceased from a previous burial had been replaced by a new body which was laid over the graves goods of the former burial. The analogous grave 20 from Dubník has been interpreted as a secondary burial (Bujna 1989, 292, Abb. 25). Phase 1. Preparation of the area Phase 2.1. Phase 2. Burial ceremony Phase 2.2. Phase 3. Erection of mound Fig. 7. Graphic representation of a burial ritual from Pottenbrunn. Late Iron Age Burial Rites in Eastern Austria | 187 By analysing the archaeological evidence regarding burial practices, it is obvious, that rituals took place in successive periods, sometimes with transitional phases and even areas (Taylor 2002, 314–316; Veit 2008, 50–51). An eloquent example is grave 233 from Pottenbrunn (Ramsl 2002, 117–119), which had a square shaped enclosure ditch. Inside the enclosed area, post holes were identified in the corners, while in the central point of the structure a small pit was dug. Finally, asymmetrically to all the other features of the structure, the grave pit was dug. In the interpretation of this feature a hypothetical reconstruction can be formulated. It is presumed that firstly the area was prepared for the burial rite, and the four posts were erected in this, the first construction phase. The pit in the centre can be seen as bothros in which liquids or food-stuffs were offered. In a second phase of the ceremony the dead was placed in the pit which was dug inside the wooden structures. Finally, a squareshaped fence enclosure was built and the whole structure was covered with an earthen mound (Fig. 7). As can be seen from the examples presented here, in our opinion the ditched enclosures, the arrangements of postholes and fences were structures integrally connected to burial rituals. Inspired by the drawings of A. Villes (Bienaimé 1999, 521) we offer a graphic interpretation of the structures observed around Pottenbrunn graves 54, 89, 68 Fig. 8. Pottenbrunn, grave 4, 89, 68 and 99. and 99 from (Fig. 8). Graphic reconstruction of the wooden structure. References Blesl 2010 Bienaimé 1999 Bujna 1989 Bujna 1998 Filip 1956 Lederer 1980 Nebehay 1973 Neugebauer 1992 Neugebauer 1996 Ortalli 1995 Pittioni 1936 Blesl, Chr., Neue archäologische Forschungen im Raum Poysdorf, Niederösterreich, AFN, 4, 108–110. Bienaimé, J., L’enclos quadrangulaire I de la nécropole de « La Perrière » à Saint-Benoîtsur-Seine (Aube), IN: Villes, A.–Bataille-Melkon, A. (éds.), Fastes des celtes être Campagne et Bourgogne aux VIIIe–IIIe siècles avant notre ère. Actes du Colloque de l´A.F.E.A.F., Toyes, 25.27 mai 1975, Mémoire de la Société Archéologique Champenoise, 15, Suppl. au Bulletin 4, 517–528. Bujna, J., Das latènezeitlichen Gräberfeld von Dubník. I., SlovArch, XXXVII, 2, 245–354. Bujna, J., Reich ausgestattete Brandgräber mit Holzeinbau auf dem Gräberfeld in Malé Kosihy. Refelxionen und Hypothesen über die Bestattungssitten der Kelten, SlovArch, XLVI, 2, 289–308. Filip, J., Keltové ve střední Evropě, Praha. Lederer, H., Steinebrunn, FÖ, 19, 460. Nebehay, St., Das latènezeitliche Gräberfeld von der Kleinen Hutweide bei Au am Leithagebirge, p.B. Bruck a.d. Leitha, NÖ, ArchAustr, Beiheft 11. Neugebauer, J.-W., Die Kelten im Osten Österreichs, WissSchrN, 92–94, St. Pölten-Wien. Neugebauer, J.-W., Eine frühlatènezeitliche Gräbergruppe in Inzersdorf ob der Traisen, NÖ, IN: Jerem, E.–Krenn-Leeb, A.–Neugebauer, J.-W.–Urban, O. H. (Hrsg.), Die Kelten in den Alpen und an der Donau, Archaeolingua, Studien zur Eisenzeit im Ostalpenraum I, Budapest, 111–178. Ortalli, J., La necropoli celtica della zona „A“ die Casalecchio di Reno (Bologna). Note preliminari sullo scavo del complesso sepolcrale e dell´area di culto, IN: Charpy, J.-J. (ed.), L´europe celtique du Ve au IIIe siècle avant J.-C., Kronos, 189–238. Pittioni, R., Latènefunde aus Niederösterreich, WPZ, 23, 73–80. 188 | P. C. Ramsl Preinfalk, F., Grabhügel am Ufer der Perschling, Zeitschienen – Vom Tullnerfeld zum Traisental, FÖ, Materialhefte, Reihe A, Sonderheft 2, 90–97. Ramsl 2002 Ramsl, P. C., Das eisenzeitliche Gräberfeld von Pottenbrunn, FÖ, Materialhefte A 11. Ramsl 2011 Ramsl, P. C., Das latènezeitlichen Gräberfeld von Mannersdorf am Leithagebirge, Flur Reinthal Süd, Niederösterreich, MPK, 74. Ramsl 2012 Ramsl, P. C., Two stone stelae from the La Tène cemetery of Mannersdorf/Leithagebirge, Flur Reinthal Süd, IN: Anreiter, P.–Bánffy, E.–Bartosiewicz, L.–Meid, W.–Metzner-Nebelsick, C. (eds.), Archaeological, Cultural and Linguistic Heritage, Festschrift for Erzsébet Jerem in Honour of her 70th Birthday, Budapest, Archaeolingua. Ramsl in print Ramsl, P. C., Die latènezeitlichen Gräbergruppen von Ossarn und Oberndorf in der Ebene, Traisental, NÖ. Sankot 2003 Sankot, P., Les épées du début de La Tène en Bohême, FAP, 28. Schutzbier 1977 Schutzbier, H., Mannersdorf/Lgb., FÖ, 16, 378–380. Stifft-Gottlieb 1935 Stifft-Gottlieb, A., Mittel-latènezeitliche Gräber aus Klein-Reinprechtsdorf bei Eggenburg, pol. Bez. Horn, N.-Oe, MittAGW, 65, 22–181. Taylor 2002 Taylor, T., The buried soul, London. Urban Et Al. 1985 Urban, O. H.–Teschler-Nicola, M.–Schulz, M., Die latènezeitlichen Gräberfelder von Katzelsdorf und Guntramsdorf, Niederösterreich, ArchAustr, 69, 13–104. Veit 2008 Veit, U., Die Anfänge menschlichen Totengedenkens und die Entstehung „monumentaler“ Grabanlagen im westlichen und nördlichen Europa, IN: Kümmel. Chr.–Schweizer, B.–Veit, U., Körperinszinierung – Objektsammlung – Monumentalisierung, TAT, 6, Münster, 33–74. Willvonseder 1932 Willvonseder, K., Neue Latènefunde aus Niederösterreich, Germania, 16, 272–275. Preinfalk 2005 List of figures Fig. 1. Plan of the cemetery of Pottenbrunn, Lower Austria. Fig. 2. Stone paving at the cemetery of Au am Leithagebirge, Lower Austria (after Nebehay 1973). Fig. 3. Stone structure around grave 8 in Au am Leithagebirge (after Nebehay 1973, Abb. 8). Fig. 4. Stone stele in Mörbisch, Burgenland. Fig. 5. Pottenbrunn, grave 400. Fig. 6. Pottenbrunn, grave 68. Fig. 7. Graphic representation of a burial ritual from Pottenbrunn. Fig. 8. Pottenbrunn, grave 4, 89, 68 and 99. Graphic reconstruction of the wooden structure. An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg Maciej KARWOWSKI Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte, Universität Wien Vienna, Austria maciej.karwowski@univie.ac.at and Instytut Archeologii, Uniwersytet Rzeszowski Rzeszów, Poland mkar@univ.rzeszow.pl Keywords: Oberleiserberg, Iron Age, La Tène culture, bronze figurines, ithyphallic representations From a settlement of La Tène culture located on a small plateau on Oberleiserberg in Lower Austria comes a bronze anthropomorphic figurine. Oberleiserberg (Oberleis Hill) near Ernstbrunn is one of the most important archaeological sites in eastern Austria. It occupies a vast elevation (457 m above sea level) which is part of the Leiserberge chain at the very centre of the Weinviertel in Lower Austria (Fig. 1). The summit of the elevation is an oval plateau with a surface area of about 6.5 ha (about 360 × 250 m), which is bordered to the west, north and east by steep slopes. On the south side, slightly below the plateau, is another flat ‘terrace’ (called Vorburg) with a surface area of about 1.5 ha. This is therefore a typical hilltop site with a very favourable position both topographically and in terms of communications. Over many years of archaeological research rich traces of occupation spanning the late Neolithic period and modern times have been found. Important parts of the archaeological material coming from Oberleiserberg are finds dated to the Late Iron Age and connected with La Tène culture settlements (Karwowski 2009). Some of this material comes from regular archaeological research and some was collected from the surface of the site. The figurine was discovered on 5 November 1996 by Leopold Laab, private collector, in Danninger’s field, in SW area of the plateau (grid square no. 26 as designated by L. Laab; Pl. 1/2). The find, already mentioned in literature (Stuppner 2006, 21, fig. 39; Karwowski 2009, 119, fig. 5/4), is at present in the collection of the Museum of Prehistory of Lower Austria in Asparn (inv. no. 22694.358). The figurine is made of bronze with a height of just 35 mm (Fig. 2; Pl. 1/1). It represents a man with a prominent and oversize erect penis. The head is hatless, the face rendered very schematically, the nose large and triangular. The eyes and the mouth are represented by two irregular dents. On both sides of the head are fairly irregular bulges, presumably meant to imitate the ears. On its neck the figure has a torc represented by stout closed ring. Both arms are slightly to the sides, flexed at the elbow, hands resting on the hips. The right arm is cracked at shoulder height and twisted to the back at some time. At shoulder and elbow height the left arm is flattened laterally, with traces of use suggesting that it served as a loop for suspension or for attachment of e.g. a chain. On the figure’s upper and lower abdomen is a disproportionately large, vertically placed erect penis (phallus) with emphasized testicles. The buttocks are not modelled. The right leg is straight, the left lightly placed forward and flexed at the knee with the shin receding. The fairly Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 189–212 190 | M. Karwowski weakly modelled feet are attached to a stand – a stout fragment of bronze bar on which the figurine stands. The stand starts 5 mm behind the figurine and now continues 8 mm in front of the figurine where it ends in an obvious truncation. The stand is not level, rather, it curves upwards on both sides, as if belonging to a fragment of a hoop. The figurine would have stood inside this ‘hoop’. Fig. 1. Oberleiserberg. The view from the west, the arrow indicates the site of discovery of the figurine (photo: IUFG Wien). Fig. 2. Ithyphallic figurine from Oberleiserberg (photo: IUFG Wien). Outside the Mediterranean region of Europe small, bronze anthropomorphic figurines of nude humans are known from a relatively small number of finds, dated mainly to Late Hallstatt and Early La Tène period. They usually represent men, more rarely, women. Still, the rule is to have emphasized sexual characteristics, often exaggerated.1 Basically, the figurines may be separated into two groups: standing, many of them set over a small stand, and figurines-pendants with a prominent loop for suspension. Both categories are small figurines, at most just a few centimetres in height. The standing figurines may be fixed 1 Many of the representations of nude male figures discussed here are described in various publications as ‘ithyphallic’. In the case of images of men with emphasized and oversize penises it is hard to assess whether it was the intention of their maker to highlight the genitalia or to portray an erection. It seems that in the vast majority of these images the representations of the penis are quite schematic and the penis is not erect. When the artist wished to portray an erect penis (i.e. phallus) he did this in an unambiguous manner, as is definitely the case of the figurine from Oberleiserberg. An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg | 191 to a small stand, alternately, their legs end in pins for mounting, or have a characteristic flat area on the underside indicating that originally they were meant to stand. The pendants have a specially crafted loopeye for suspension, typically placed on the upper back or at the back of the head. Presumably they were elements of necklaces made up of many elements. The number of nude human figurines encountered in the Mediterranean region increases beginning from the onset of the Iron Age. In ancient Greek culture statuettes were one of the categories of votive offerings presented in temples. Small figurines used as votive offerings were mainly in bronze and terracotta, and mostly represent animals and humans.2 Anthropomorphic figurines represented both nude and clothed figures. The tradition of making votive offerings of small bronze figurines was adopted by the Etruscans (Richardson 1983) and subsequently by the peoples inhabiting Northern Italy, neighbours of the Etruscans, first of all, the Veneti, but also by Iberians residing on the eastern and southern coast of the Iberian Peninsula. The best known sanctuary of the Veneti which has yielded one of the largest finds of bronze votive figurines in Italy was at Este in Veneto. The sanctuary was dedicated to the goddess Reitia (Chieco Bianchi 2002; Capuis–Chieco Bianchi 2002). Similarly as in Etruscan temples, the figurines from Este are in their vast majority human representations, the men nude, the women clothed. With the help of special shafts at the feet the figurines were mounted onto stone bases, a sort of altars (Chieco Bianchi 2002, 24–26, fig. 5; pl. 5, 16, 28–31; Stopponi 2011, 33, 37, fig. 40, 46–47). In the culture of the Iberians the practice of making votive offerings of bronze figurines took root during the Iron Age and continued until the Roman period. From the south-eastern area of the Iberian Peninsula (Lantier 1935) are known hundreds of small bronze anthropomorphic statuettes (Pl. 1/3–5). Iberian figurines were subject to an observable stylistic evolution: from the influence of Archaic Greece during the Early Iron Age, through Etruscan impact and a period of simplification of form and quite schematic representations, to Roman influence. Some of the figurines represent nude figures often only with the head covered, others are clothed. There are both men and women. Some representations are ithyphallic. The figurines usually stand over small stands or have the underside of the feet flat, to make it easy to stand them on a flat surface. Only rarely they have feet with pins for mounting. Lantier (1935, 32–34) suggested that both the style design of most Iberian figurines and their execution technique confirm their local origin. Similarly as is the case of Italy the largest series of Iberian figurines are associated with sacrificial sites. Two main sanctuaries where votive offerings were made of bronze figurines and have yielded many such finds are in Andalusia: the cave sanctuaries Collado de los Jardines at Santa Elena, and Cueva de la Lobera at Castellar. Moreover, the vicinity of the sanctuary at Santa Elena was found to harbour a settlement with relics documenting the production of bronze objects (Prados-Torreira 1997, 153). The chronology of both these sanctuaries is uncertain. The number of finds secured at Santa Elena may indicate both mass production as a very extended period of use. Very likely, the site functioned already during the Early Iron Age and the sanctuary at Castellar definitely continued in use until 3rd century BC. Many of the Iberian places of worship continued in use until the Roman period (Prados-Torreira 1997, 153, 157). In Italy nude human figurines are known also as constituent elements of larger groups of figurines. Sets of this sort are known mostly from the Early Iron Age funerary contexts (Kossack 1999, 22–27). Worth special focus is the bronze cinerary urn from Bisenzio in Tuscany (Kossack 1999, 39–42, fig. 26; von Hase 2002, 165, fig. 24) and two cult wagons: one from Bisenzio (Kossack 1999, 39–41, fig. 25; von Hase 2002, 165, fig. 25), the other from Lucera in Apulia (Kossack 1999, 39–41, 24–27, fig. 13). On the lid and shoulders of the urn (Pl. 4/1) and on both wagons are groups of small bronze figures, quite schematic representations of animals and humans. The latter are mostly nude men with emphasized and exaggerated penises, some evidently erect. The figurines are set on stands fashioned from strips of metal sheet or on frames of the wagons. The tradition of depositing votive offerings of small bronze figurines was adopted also in the environment of the Alpine cultures of the Iron Age. This is clear proof of religious influence, direct, from the Veneti, as well as from more distant regions of Italy. Some of the votive figurines recovered in the Alpine region are evident imports while others are local imitations. Telling these two groups of finds apart conclusively is often quite a challenge. 2 Using the case of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia Völling (2002, 91–93, fig. 3) demonstrated that among the votive offerings – bronze and ceramic statuettes from the first centuries when the temple was in use – a decided majority are bronze figurines of animals (mostly cattle and horses). Bronze anthropomorphic figurines make up less than 1% of the series (52 out of a total of 6471 votive offerings). Also similar quantitatively is the group of anthropomorphic terracotta figurines (69 specimens). 192 | M. Karwowski A large number of finds of bronze anthropomorphic figurines – of which presumably there are a few score specimens – derives from the eastern Alpine hilltop settlement on Gurina near Dellach in Carinthia (Jablonka 2001). Unfortunately most of these finds come from earlier research or are now in private collections and cannot be accessed or have gone missing (Fleischer 1967, 4). During the Iron Age a temple was in use on Gurina and this suggests that the figurines discovered at this site really have the nature of votive offerings associated with a sacred place. In this series it is possible to distinguish two groups: figurines made in the Greek-Roman tradition, likely to represent Italian imports, and figurines which by their greatly simplified style diverge from Italian models and should be treated as local products. These differences presumably had no impact on the religious function served by these objects. All the figurines which may be recognized as local products are representations of nude males and females (Pl. 5/1–4) with emphasized sexual characteristics (Fleischer 1967, 3–5, pl. 91; 111–112; 115; Jablonka 2001, 172–174, pl. 134–137). Finds of votive figurines indicate an evident connection of the inhabitants of the settlement on Gurina with northern Italian region, also, with temples of the Veneti. Special note should be made also of a series of similar, strongly stylized figurines of nude males (Pl. 5/2) which have been interpreted as representations of the demigod Hercules (Fleischer 1967, 5, pl. 91; Jablonka 2001, 173, pl. 135–136). Gleirscher (2001, 103) believes that finds of these figurines suggest that the functioning of the centre on Gurina was associated with the presence of a local aristocracy. The figurines produced in the Alpine region represent human figures in different postures, but – except for the images of ‘Hercules’ from Gurina – no other images have been found which could be interpreted as gods. Also interesting are figurines of nude women (Pl. 5/3–4) (Fleischer 1967, 8, pl. 115/229; Jablonka 2001, 173, pl. 134/1), among them, a find originating from more recent research (Pl. 5/4) (Gleirscher 2005, 53, fig. 3; Gamper 2006, 131–132, fig. 9). In the northern Italian region women represented in the figurines tend to be clothed, and the female representations are evidently less numerous than male ones. The chronology of the figurines from Gurina is not clear. Both their style and context of discovery indicate a broad time-frame, from approximately the 6th century BC until the Roman period. Figurines that show stylistic correspondence to the Greek-Roman tradition presumably have to be dated to the second, possibly, the 1st century BC (Fleischer 1967, 7; Jablonka 2001, 173). A figurine of a nude woman from more recent research was discovered in the context of a sacrificial site dated to the Hallstatt period (Gleirscher 2005, 53). A group of a few dozen figurines made of lead surfaced in graves investigated in a Hallstatt period cemetery at Frög in Carinthia (Tomedi 1995; 2002). Most of them are representations of mounted horsemen but there are also some figurines of other human figures and animals. All were made in a markedly greatly simplified style (Tomedi 2002, 254–263, fig. 42). Presumably, the figurines deposited in graves were not sacrificial offerings but a conclusive interpretation of this undeniably religious practice is not easy (see Tomedi 2002, 277–279). The anthropomorphic figurines from Frög are invariably exception representations of nude men and women, with emphasized and – in some cases – exaggerated sexual characteristics. Both the use of lead as raw material in making the figurines, substantial similarity of some specimens that give the impression of being made using the same casting mould and peculiarity of their style suggest that the statuettes from Frög are local products. The majority of the grave assemblages which contained the figurines of nude figures date to the second half of the 7th and the onset of the 6th century BC (Tomedi 2002, 268). Small bronze anthropomorphic representations are known in the Alpine region also as parts of groups of figurines. One of the best known sets of nude figurines is – discovered as an element of grave goods in a ‘princely’ grave – the sacrificial wagon from Strettweg in Styria (Egg 1996). It is a group of eight figures, nude women and men, with emphasized sexual characteristics (Pl. 4/2). There are also four figures of armed mounted warriors and two figurines of deer. Central place in the group is taken by a figurine, larger than others, of a nude woman holding a large vessel over her head. Presumably, the figures form a sacrificial procession. All are mounted on stands or have their feet fixed to the frame of the wagon which is made of long strips of metal sheet. Drawing on the analysis of the design of the representations Egg (1996, 51, 61) concluded that the wagon originated in an eastern Alpine workshop under impact of southern stimuli, mainly Etruscan. The grave from which the wagon originates has been dated to 7th/6th century BC (Egg 1996, 245). Rich ‘princely’ graves with grave-goods such as the Strettweg wagon, similarly as the series of the ‘Hercules’ figurines from Gurina, may testify to the functioning in the eastern Alpine region of a hierarchical political structure (Gleirscher 2001, 104). An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg | 193 A group possibly similar to the Strettweg wagon could comprise bronze figurines discovered on the slope of the Gutenberg at Balzers (Pl. 5/5) in the valley of the Alpine Rhine in Liechtenstein (von Merhart 1933, 19–22, no. 1–9; Zanier 2006, 158–160, fig. 38). The context of this find suggests that in its chronology this material covers a period from the Hallstatt until the Roman period. At the same time, the most likely dating for these finds would be Late Hallstatt and Early La Tène period. We cannot rule out either that the layer within which the figurines rested had slipped and originally derives from a site lying at a higher altitude, with a ceremonial site from Late Iron Age. There may have been a temple at the same location also during the Pre-Roman and the Roman period (Hild 1933, 5–7; Zanier 2006, 158–161). The find from Balzers includes a total of ten anthropo- and zoomorphic figurines. The sex of the human representations is apparent: these are men, presumably warriors, portrayed in different postures. A half is nude, with emphasized sexual characteristics, including an erect penis,3 the other half wear helmets and armour. One of the clothed figures is larger than the others. The only two figurines of animals are representations of a boar and a deer. All the statuettes are mounted on a stand or have feet with a pin, i.e., an element used for mounting. It is notable that this group is not as stylistically uniform as the group of figurines from the Strettweg wagon and that some of the figures display rather careless crafting. von Merhart (1933, 36) has suggested that the figurines are local products, although apparently inspired by Etruscan and Celtic influence. The design of the weaponry represented in the figurines points quite conclusively to Etruscan influence and to association with the Late Hallstatt period (von Merhart 1933, 22–27; Guillaumet 2006, 186). In the context of finds from Strettweg and from Balzers also worth mentioning here is a similar find, this time however from outside the Alpine region. At Neuvy-en-Sullias near Orléans in Centre region, a hoard of bronzes was discovered by accident. It comprised nine figurines, mainly of nude women and men, in postures suggesting dance (Bolligner Schreyer 2009a, 248, fig. 330–331). The figurines of ‘dancers’ had been crafted with care, with clearly rendered facial features, hair and sexual characteristics. The hoard also included small figurines of animals: a boar and a deer (Bolligner Schreyer 2009b, 258, fig. 344–345). All these pieces show correspondence to Celtic style design or obvious influences from Roman art. This suggests that the hoard was deposited in the ground shortly after Gaul was occupied by the Romans. Even so, the figurines from this hoard find no direct stylistic analogies in Celtic or provincialRoman art (Bolligner Schreyer 2009a, 248). The number of sacrificial sites, centres of worship or temples in the Alpine region datable to the Iron Age is fairly large (Gleirscher 2002, 174–196). Only some of these, like the sites on Gurina and at Balzers mentioned earlier, have yielded a larger series of bronze votive figurines. We can mention here also a fairly recent discovery of a series of bronze figurines within the temple at Pfaffenhofen in Tirol. Certain to be votive offerings, some of these figurines are representations of nude figures. The site may be dated to the Iron Age (Tischer 2004, 63, fig. 65; see also Walde-Psenner 1976, 208–209, no. 69). The western boundary of occurrence in the Alpine region of sacred centres of this sort is designated by the valley of the Alpine Rhine (Gleirscher 2002, 174–177, fig. 1; Mayr–Schindler 2008, 64–66). From the Alpine region comes, moreover, quite a number of solitary finds of anthropomorphic votive figurines representing nude figures. In most cases neither the context of discovery nor the style design of these objects allows a closer determination of their chronology. Even so, many of them may be dated to the Iron Age. A find which deserves special note is a figurine of a nude man from Bludenz, in Vorarlberg (Swozilek 1987, 11–13, fig. 2–5; Mayr–Schindler 2008, 67, fig. 45). This statuette is certain to have belonged to a larger group. This is indicated by the atypical arrangement of its arms suggesting that originally they had rested on some edge, presumably, the rim of a vessel (Pl. 1/6). The man has a hat, fairly carefully rendered facial features and an emphasized oversize penis, which definitely is not erect. The figurine shows evident careful crafting, one which nevertheless diverges visibly from Etruscan models. Consequently, we probably have to do with a local product dating from Late Hallstatt or the La Tène period (Swozilek 1987, 12–13). 3 One of the ithyphallic figures has in addition marked breasts and has been described in literature as a hermaphrodite or androgyne (e.g. von Merhart 1933, 20, 28–30, no. 5; Kossack 1999, 105; Allinger 2002, 33). It should be noted however that in the substantially simplified style of small bronze figurines the details of anatomy, mainly the sexual organs, but also e.g. breasts, the navel, nose and ears, are often exaggerated. Due to this fact we have to accept that in this case we have to do with a representation of a man created in just this style. Also the male figures from the graves at Frög have well modelled breasts which apparently need not indicate their hermaphrodite status (see also Tomedi 2002, 256; Kossack 1999, 23, fig. 9). 194 | M. Karwowski Also worth mentioning here are finds of nude figurative representations, presumably local in provenance, from Steyr in Upper Austria (Fleischer 1967, 127, pl. 90/164), Finkenstein and Zollfeld in Carinthia (Fleischer 1967, 160, 168, pl. 112/217; 115/228), Perjen, Stanz bei Landeck and Telfs in Tirol (Fleischer 1967, 125–226, pl. 89/163; Walde-Psenner 1976, 192–193, 206–209, no. 36, 62–68), Valsugana, Sanzeno and Telve in Trentino (Walde-Psenner 1976, 190, 192, no. 30, 35; Oberosler 1997, 110, no. 73b), as well as specimens originating from a number of unknown locations, mainly in Tirol (Walde-Psenner 1976; 189–205, no. 26–29, 31–34, 55–61).4 Fig. 3. Location of the principal sites mentioned in the text: A. sites of worship, deposits, graves with multiple finds of figurines or groups of figurines; B. bronze standing figurines; C. bronze figurines-pendants; D. ithyphallic stone representations. 1. Alzey, 2. Bais, 3. Banatska Palanka, 4. Beaunotte, 5. Bernhardsthal, 6. Bisenzio, 7. Bludenz, 8. Bourges, 9. Bussy-le-Château, 10. Castellar, 11. Domèvre-en-Haye, 12. Esslingen-Sirnau,3. Este, 14. Finkenstein, 15. Frög, 16. Gurina, 17. Gutenberg, 18. Herschweiler, 19. Hirschlanden, 20. Jaroměř, 21. Lampertheim, 22. Leobersdorf, 23. Lucera, 24. Mala Byjhan, 25. Mühlacker, 26. Neuvy-en-Sullias, 27. Oberleiserberg, 28. Paderne, 29. Perjen, 30. Pfaffenhofen, 31. Plougastel-Daoulas, 32. Ponická Huta, 33. Prašník, 34. Reinheim, 35. Rezi-Rezicseri, 36. Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe, 37. Santa Elena, 38. Sanzeno, 39. Stanz bei Landeck, 40. Staraya Osota, 41. Steyr, 42. Stradonice, 43. Strettweg, 44. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, 45. Stuttgart-Uhlbach, 46. Telfs, 47. Telve, 48. Trenčianske Bohuslavice, 49. Unterlunkhofen, 50. Usseau, 51. Vače, 52. Valsugana, 53. Valtura-Nesactium, 54. Vendeuil-Caply, 55. Vilapedre, 56. Vix, 57. Zollfeld, 58. unspecified site, Aube dep. in Champagne, 59. unspecified site, Manche dep. in Normandy. More seldom, small bronze anthropomorphic figurines are encountered in the region to the north of the Alps, or, in a broad region of Europe outside the Mediterranean region (Fig. 3) (Déchelette 1914, 1300–1303; Echt 1999, 84–89; Chaume 2001, 145–147, 190–191; Frey 2005).5 4 5 Moreover, from the Alpine region comes a number of figurines which are very likely to be Italian imports (Fleischer 1967, 121–169, no. 157, 161, 163a, 166, 211, 212, 216a; Walde-Psenner 1976, 197–202, no. 44–54; Ruprechtsberger 1982, 29, 31–33; fig. 10–12; Swozilek 1987, 16–17, fig. 6–9; Oberosler 1997, 110, no. 73a; Zemmer-Plank 1997, 130–131, no. 103). The same region produced finds of figurines (probably also of local origin) which represent clothed individuals but these, because of the presence of clothing, will not be discussed here (e.g. Kromer 1974; Walde-Psenner 1976, 196–197, no. 43; Guggisberg–Stöllner 1996, 130–132, fig. 9). This area evidently received imports of figurines of Italian provenance but their finds are relatively few. They are known from the Alpine foreland (Fleischer 1967 156–168, no. 209, 210, 214a, 227; Ruprechtsberger 1982, 28–29, fig. 9a–c; Stöllner 1996, 74, pl. 36/C1–3; Stöllner 2002, 156; Dietrich 1994, 151–153, fig. 1; Rieckhoff 2001, 231; Irlinger 2002,187, fig. 4), from western Europe (mainly France; Normand 1973, 110–111, pl. 18/F; Richardson 1983, 390; Adam 1992, 384–386, fig. 10; Gran-Aymerich 1992, 350, fig. 14) and from areas of east-central Europe, where eastern Alpine influences have been observed (Osmuk 1987; Gabrovec 1992, 212, fig. 11/3; Szilágyi 1992, 223–224, fig. 1–4; Kovács 1998, 47–49, fig. 44–46). An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg | 195 Bronze anthropomorphic figurines of nude figures, recognisable as local products, are known in east-central Europe from a small number of specimens. The only find from a La Tène culture grave is a partly melted figurine from Rezi-Rezicseri in Zala County in Hungary (Horváth 1987, 113, pl. 24/1). It represents a nude individual, presumably, male, with the left hand resting on the hip, the right on the chest (Pl. 1/9). The left arm is slightly to the side and forms in this way a sort of an eye for suspension. This function would be confirmed by traces of an iron ring that survive on the arm of the figurine. The figure has rather schematically modelled facial features and hair with a recognizable braid at the back. Between the head and the neck is an indentation, as if left by a ring coiled around the neck, now missing. Sexual characteristics are not apparent, which presumably is the result of this artefact’s partly melted condition. The grave was dated to the turn of the early and the middle La Tène period. Possibly of Late Hallstatt period date is a figurine from Vače in Lower Styria in Slovenia, a representation of a man wearing a helmet (Pl. 2/3). This warrior gripped in his left hand what was probably a spear, now missing. With his right he gripped his penis, now also lost. The helmet appears to be of eastern Hallstatt type (Megaw–Megaw 2001, 38, fig. 23; Gabrovec 1992, 212, fig. 11/1). Five figurines surfaced from Celtic hilltop settlements or oppida. Unfortunately, all of them are finds lacking closer context. From the Late La Tène oppidum at Stradonice in Bohemia come two figurines, both male, with schematically modelled sexual characteristics and facial features (Píč 1903, 63–64, pl. 20/33; 25/9; Čižmářová 2004, 155, no. 22/15a). Very likely (the condition of one of these figurines makes a more detailed determination difficult), in both cases the left hand rested on the hip, the right was upraised. One of the figures is holding in right hand an object reminiscent of the Celtic carnyx (Pl. 2/1). Three more finds come from western Slovakia: from hilltop settlements at Prašník and Ponická Huta, and from a Late La Tène oppidum at Trenčianske Bohuslavice. All representations are rather schematic, but evidently male, with emphasized sexual characteristics, exaggerated in the figurine from Trenčianske Bohuslavice. Figurine from Prašník represents a man with an erect penis (Pl. 1/10). The face is rendered in a schematic manner; around the neck is a wire torc. The right palm is placed on the chest while the left rests on the hip (Pieta 2008, pl. 130/3). In the piece from Ponická Huta the facial features are modelled in greater detail and both hands rest on the hips (Pl. 2/4). The neck is disproportionately long (Pieta 2008, pl. F41). The figurine from Trenčianske Bohuslavice represents a warrior holding a shield in this left hand and, in his right, presumably, a spear, unfortunately, now missing (Pl. 2/2). The head of this figure is without any facial features whatsoever (Pieta 2005, 53, pl. 9/6; Pieta 2008, 289, pl. F36/3).6 At Mala Byjhan in Zakarpattia Oblast in Ukraine, a small hoard of Late Iron Age artefacts was discovered by accident. It comprised four items: glass bracelet, fragment of bronze bracelet and two bronze figurines of a boar, and a man. The latter represents a nude man with emphasized and exaggerated sexual characteristics, schematically modelled facial features and hair with a long braid (Pl. 2/6). The right arm is upraised; the left is resting on the chest (Sova-Gmitrov 1958, 134, fig. 3/1–2). The remaining four figurines from east-central Europe are stray finds lacking in context. From Banatska Palanka in Voivodina (Hunyady 1942, pl. 37/11; Hunyady 1944, 106; Rustoiu–Egri 2010, 231, pl. 27/6) originates a figurine representing a nude individual, presumably male, with modelled facial features and some sort of head gear (a helmet?), standing with his arms down (Pl. 1/11). The next two figurines, both nude, and this time definitely male, with emphasized sexual characteristics, come from Lower Austria. Both figurines have modelled facial features and hair. The first of these was discovered in Bernhardsthal (Nebehay 1998, 219, fig. 310; Echt 1999, 85, fig. 25/3). The figure is represented with left arm upraised and the right hand (damaged) resting on the hip (Pl. 1/7). Nebehay (1998, 219) has interpreted this specimen as an Italian import of Late Hallstatt date. The second Lower Austrian find originates from Leobersdorf (Fleischer 1967, 160, pl. 112/216) The man represented in the figurine has right arm hanging down and the left hand resting on the hip (Pl. 2/5). The left arm is slightly more to the side and could have served as an eye for suspension. The right leg is lightly forward. The last of the figurines from east-central Europe comes from Jaroměř in Bohemia. It is a double representation of two nude figures, a woman and a man. Each of them embraces their partner with one arm, resting the other on her or his hip (Pl. 1/8). The figurine is mounted on a small rectangular stand (Čižmářová 2004, 155, no. 22/14). 6 A few years ago a hoard surfaced on the collectors market in Slovakia of a series of 200–400 small bronze and silver figurines, some of them anthropomorphic, discovered allegedly at Trenčianske Bohuslavice or in its surrounding area (see Stanček 2007). Authenticity of both the ‘hoard’ itself and of individual objects in it has raised very serious doubts. The series has not entered scientific circulation. 196 | M. Karwowski We can mention here also a bronze anthropomorphic figurine, dated to the early Roman period, from a Sarmatian grave at Staraya Osota in Kirovohrad Oblast in Ukraine. It represents a figure with an animal’s head and an erect penis (Simonenko 2008, 8, fig. 5). In western Europe small nude anthropomorphic representations are a little more frequent but they are mostly figurines worn as pendants.7 Among standing figurines we have to mention first of all two grave finds from Stuttgart–Bad Cannstatt in Baden-Württemberg, and from Domèvre-en-Haye in Lorraine. Both these burials are relatively richly furnished and date to the younger phase of Early La Tène period. The figurine from Bad Cannstatt represents a nude individual depicted without emphasizing its sexual characteristics (Pl. 2/7). Paret (1928, 60) interprets it as a woman. The figure is represented quite schematically, with weakly modelled facial features and a prominent triangular nose. The right palm is placed on the chest, the left on the abdomen. The left arm and elbow are flattened across suggesting use for a suspension loop. The right leg is placed slightly forward (Paret 1928, 60, pl. 10/2; Bittel 1934, 12, 74, pl. 2/B, 8/3; Bittel 1981, 102–103, fig. 38). In case of the materials from Domèvre-en-Haye we have to do, presumably, with two destroyed graves. The bronze figurine found among these finds represents, in a schematic fashion, a nude male figure with emphasized, exaggerated sexual characteristics (Pl. 3/1). The facial features are not marked; around the neck is a wire torc. Both hands are resting on the hips; the right arm is slightly more to the side and could have served as an eye for suspension. The left leg, presumably (it is hard to conclude basing on published documentation), is lightly forward (Barthélemy 1889, 319; Barthélemy 1890, 39–40, pl. 30/9; Déchelette 1914, 1301, fig. 565/9; Millotte 1965, 76, pl. 17/7; Liéger 1996, 4, 6, fig. 6). The proportions of the body of the individual represented in the figurine from Domèvre-en-Haye suggest that this is a figure of a child. Also worth mentioning are two figurines originating from unknown locations in north-eastern France. The first of these was discovered in Aube department in Champagne (Pl. 2/10) (Berton 2009, 11, fig. 27), the second in Lorraine (Pl. 2/8) (Berton 2009, 11, fig. 30). Both figurines represent stylised male figures with emphasized and exaggerated sexual characteristics. At the same time, on the heads of either figure no facial features whatsoever are portrayed. In both figurines the hands rest on the hips. The arms of the figurine from Champagne are in a position which allowed them to play the role of loops for suspension. Fragments of the arms of the figurine from Lorraine are broken off but it is possible that originally they were set back in a similar manner. Déchelette (1914, 1301–1302) makes note of two more figurines which may be classified to the category of standing figurines, or, ones with no special loop for suspension. In both cases, basing on the publications, it is not possible to determine the sex of individuals represented. The first figurine is from Herschweiler in Rhineland-Palatinate (Déchelette 1914, fig. 565/8; Echt 1999, 86, fig. 25/7). It represents a standing figure with quite clearly rendered facial features. Both arms are flexed and pressed to the chest. The second figurine originates from Lampertheim in Hesse (Déchelette 1914, fig. 565/1). It was discovered in an Early La Tène grave together with a torc to which it was attached with wire, forming a pendant of sorts. To the figurine the wire is attached (as far as we are able to ascertain from the published drawing) by means of an opening made in the figurine’s torso. This type of opening, which is not a typical loop for suspension, is seen in a number of other pieces. Their best example is a figurine, from the settlement datable to the early Roman period at Bussy-le-Château in Champagne (Moreau 2009, 223, fig. 23). It represents a nude male figure with schematically modelled sexual characteristics (Pl. 2/11). The face is rendered clearly, but also in a schematic manner. In the upper back the figurine has a bulge with dents on each side, by which the figurine may be hooked and suspended. A similar construction design for suspending a figurine is observed in a specimen originating from an unknown location in Champagne (Berton 2009, 11, fig. 29). The figurine is of a nude male with modelled facial features and sexual characteristics (Pl. 2/9). At the back of the head is a bump with a cross-wise opening. Small bronze figurines representing nude figures are known also from northern Europe. Relatively numerous finds of these statuettes – their number is astonishingly large as compared with e.g. the Subalpine zone – derive from southern Scandinavia and are dated to the Nordic Bronze Age. In contrast to the area under Mediterranean influence Scandinavian figurines of nude figures are mostly of women, some with 7 The figurine of a clothed individual wearing a sort of hat from Ilsfeld in Baden-Württemberg, much cited in literature (Bittel 1934, 73, pl. 8/2; Bittel 1981, 102, fig. 37; Echt 1999, 85, fig. 25/4), is left out of the present discussion because of the presence of clothing. An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg | 197 an emphasized vulva. These figures – male ones as well – are usually represented wearing necklaces reminiscent of the torc (Broholm 1947; Kossack 1999, 174–178, fig. 108; 110). A separate category of bronze anthropomorphic figurines of nude figures are the figurines-pendants mentioned earlier. They are known from 17 specimens originating from 12 sites, all of them in Western Europe. In six cases they occurred in relatively richly furnished graves, all dated to Late Hallstatt or Early La Tène period. In one case the figurine-pendant rested in an archaeological feature in a settlement among Late La Tène finds and the other four are stray finds lacking reliable context. These ornaments (as it seems, unlike the standing figurines, in this case we quite evidently have to do with personal ornaments or amulets) are marked by having a large loop, or ring, for suspension fixed to the upper back or at the back of the head. All the figures represented are nude. There are both women and men, usually, with emphasized sexual characteristics, in a few cases, quite pronounced and exaggerated. In nearly all cases the facial features were modelled with some care. All the figures have their legs slightly set apart, usually lightly bent at the knees, which creates an impression as if they are in the process of leaping. The figurines-pendants may be basically divided into two groups: ‘armless’, or, specimens in which the arms are modelled rather schematically, only as a ridge on the side of the torso, or the arms are spread out and flexed at the elbow (which adds emphasis to the impression that they are leaping). Only in three figurines the position of the arms is different from either of these two positions. In the group of ‘armless’ figurines we can place five specimens. Of these the most striking is a double representation from the grave at Esslingen-Sirnau in Baden-Württemberg (Pl. 3/2). It consists of two figures: a man and a woman joined by their backs and sharing a large ring for suspension fixed to their heads (Paret 1936, 248, fig. 3/9; Koch 1969, 19, pl. 17/2; Warneke 1999, 251, fig. 58/34). The next ‘armless’ specimen comes from a grave at Reinheim in Hesse (Pl. 3/5). It surfaced in an assemblage together with another figurine-pendant, with an atypical position of the arms: both are upraised and holding the head (Pl. 3/6). Both these figurines are representations of males (Echt 1999, 84–85, fig. 25/5–6; Chaume 2001, 145–146, 190, fig. 112/1–2). The other three specimens are stray finds, from Mühlacker in Baden-Württemberg (Pl. 3/7): a figure with an exaggerated penis (Paret 1928, 60, pl. 10/1; Bittel 1981, 101, fig. 36), from Alzey in Rhenish Hesse in Rhineland-Palatinate (Déchelette 1914, fig. 565/4), and from an unspecified site in the Manche department in Normandy (Berton 2009, 11, fig. 26). All represent men. In the group of ‘leaping figures’, or, figurines which portray individuals with outspread arms, we have to mention first of all a series of finds from destroyed graves at Stuttgart-Uhlbach in Baden-Württemberg. Here we have four stylistically very similar specimens representing two male and two female figures (Pl. 3/8). All are with emphasized sexual characteristics. These finds originate presumably from two different graves, each with one pair (Déchelette 1914, fig. 565/5; Paret 1928, 60, pl. 10/3–6; Bittel 1934, 74, pl. 8/5–6; Paret 1961, 280, pl. 31/1; Bittel 1981, 101, fig. 35; Warneke 1999, 262, fig. 58/108; Echt 1999, 86, fig. 25/1). A similar set of figurines surfaced in a grave at Unterlunkhofen in Aargau in Switzerland. Its inventory included two figurines-pendants representing nude figures (Pl. 3/9): a man and a woman. Both have emphasized and exaggerated sexual characteristics (Déchelette 1914, 1301, fig. 565/6–7; Lüscher 1993, 168–169, pl. 23/198–199; Warneke 1999, 300, fig. 58/343; Müller 2009, 76, fig. 71). The group of figurines-pendants with outspread arms includes moreover two representations of male figures, from a grave at Bourges in Centre (Déchelette 1914, 1301, fig. 565/2; Willaume 1985, 47, fig. 9/4; Warneke 1999, 302, fig. 58/359; Echt 1999, 86, fig. 25/2), and at Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe in Champagne (Déchelette 1914, fig. 565/3; Thenot 1975, 45, pl. 2/11–12). The latter specimen displays evidently exaggerated sexual characteristics. One more ‘leaping figure’ is stray find from Vix in Burgundy (Joffroy, 1960, 53, pl. 11/5; Chaume 2001, 145, pl. 38/686). It represents man with an exaggerated penis (Pl. 3/4). The ring for suspension, which was fixed to the head, is missing. As mentioned earlier, in three figurines-pendants the figures portrayed have an atypical arrangement of their arms. Next to the already noted specimen with upraised arms from Reinheim, these are finds from Beaunotte in Burgundy and from Vendeuil-Caply in Picardy. The man represented in the figurine from Beaunotte has straight arms hanging down (Pl. 3/3). In the style design of this figure it is worth paying attention to the lack of any facial features whatsoever, the modelled detail of the breasts and an oversized erect penis (Chaume 2001, 145, 191, fig. 110). The specimen from Vendeuil-Caply represents a figure of undetermined sex, the left arm on the chest, the right resting on the abdomen. The figure has 198 | M. Karwowski some sort of head gear (a helmet?) or, possibly, plastically rendered hair (Piton–Dilly 1985, 35, fig. 18). This specimen derives from a settlement which yielded Late La Tène material. Small bronze figurines-pendants – representations of nude figures – are known also from the Mediterranean region, e.g. from Italy, as well as from areas of Europe found far to the east, e.g. in the northern Caucasus (Déchelette 1914, 1301, fig. 566). In east Europe they have been also encountered in Sarmatian graves from the early Roman period (Marčenko–Limberis 2008, 326, 348, pl. 80/13; 127/1). ✴✴✴ To return to the main subject of the present study – the figurine from Oberleiserberg and its style – it is worth focusing on three key essential elements: posture, presence of the necklace torc, and the exaggerated phallus. The posture of the figure represented on the figurine from Oberleiserberg – a nude man with his hands hanging down, left leg lightly to the front – suggests inspiration from Greek kouroi.8 These forms were adopted also in Etruscan art. These were representations of nude youths, beardless, left leg extended forward, the feet placed flat on the ground, straight legs and arms straight and extended down the body, often with the fists clenched. In the vast majority of cases these figures had no additional attributes. And only rarely they were represented in a different arrangement (Büggemann 2007, 93). Representations of kouroi (but also of the kore – statues of young women, who are portrayed in long robes) were characteristic mainly for the art of the Archaic period and are represented both by large marble sculptures and small bronze figures and figurines (Pl. 6/1). They served mostly as votive offerings given to the gods, more seldom, they were placed on tombs as funerary statues (Meyer–Büggemann 2007, 7). Small bronze figurines of kouroi have been discovered in large number in temple contexts. These are mostly temples of Apollo, possibly confirming the supposition that kouroi are representations of Apollo himself. At the same time, these statues have been discovered also in temples dedicated to other gods, also female deities, which suggests, in turn, that they were votive offerings not only given to Apollo. It is worth noting moreover that the kouroi from temple contexts need not be representations of gods at all, and simply may be representations of the male figure as a realisation of the Greek concept of representation of beauty. The fact that the form of the kouros had been borrowed from Egyptian prototypes suggests that these are not representations of Apollo; on the contrary, the representation of Apollo may have been modelled on the form of the kouros, the idealized representation of a male youth (Büggemann 2007, 122–130). The second significant stylistic element of the figurine from Oberleiserberg is the presence of the torc. Classical written sources associate torcs most often with the Celts, mainly as ornaments worn by the warriors. At the same time, we lack explicit information on the role played by the torc in Celtic worship or rituals. In addition, these ornaments rarely appear in the written sources as attributes of divinity although a torc is mentioned as a votive offering in a Greek context in early 5th century BC (Adler 2003, 31–37). More information on the significance of torcs comes from artwork where these ornaments are seen for the first time already during Late Hallstatt period. In Hellenistic Greek art, starting from 3rd century BC the torc becomes a characteristic element used in portraying the Celts (Adler 2003, 51). This is usually in stone sculpture as well as in representations made of bronze, some of them quite small (Pl. 6/3). Celts wearing torcs are usually represented nude. Possibly the most famous example of such a representation is the bronze sculpture of the Dying Gaul, known today from a Roman marble copy (see e.g. Mattei 1991). The torc also appears on representations created in the environment of Late Hallstatt culture as well as in the La Tène and Gallo-Roman cultures. Adler (2003, 329–366) lists in his publication over a hundred of similar representations. Among the representations discussed above, in only three cases we can speak of a possible presence of a torc on the bronze figurines (the representations from Rezi–Rezicseri, Prašník and Domèvre-en-Haye). Moreover, in archaeological material, mainly in graves, torcs are confirmed already during the Late Hallstatt period and continue to be in evidence in the Celtic environment until the Roman period (Adler 2003, 166–193). The third significant stylistic element of the figurine from Oberleiserberg is its erect penis, or phallus. The idea of representing the phallus is an ancient one, and the phallic cult was widespread in many regions of the classical world. At the same time, it had no apparent impact on the ancient cultures in the area of Europe outside the Mediterranean region (Golan 2003, 444). Thus, the phallic motif is encountered often in Mediterranean art but is not particularly characteristic for Celtic art. 8 This similarity was observed earlier by Stuppner (2006, 21). An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg | 199 In ancient cultures the phallus was a fetish meant to represent divinity: the Greeks carried it in solemn ritual processions, the phallophoria, which were an element of festivities dedicated to Dionysus (Gassner 1993, 34–38). The main mythical context of the festivals had to do with the dismemberment of Dionysus who is torn to pieces and devoured by the Titans. Only a single organ was salvaged, referred to in the myth as ‘the heart’, which according to Kerényi (1996, 259–261) would be a metaphor for the phallus, or, the symbol of life indestructible. In the sacred procession this myth was symbolised by an enormous wooden phallic symbol (Kerényi 1996, 71–73, 285–286, fig. 87). Also the sileni and the satyrs in the train of Dionysus are represented in Greek art occasionally with an exposed and, usually, exaggerated erect male member (Kerényi 1996, 285; Hupperts 2004a, 22). Most often these representations appear in vase painting (Dierichs 2008, fig. 21–31), but some are statues are also known, some of them small and made of bronze (Pl. 6/2). The phalli, or phallic motifs at large, were fashioned also from stone, pottery and various metals. Herms, stone stele dedicated to Hermes (Pl. 7/1), featured a penis, usually in the form of a phallus (see also Matthäus 1985, 40, fig. 21). The herms were set up in public places, at crossroads, and were also used as tombstones (Kerényi 1944, 78–95; Gassner 1993, 53–57). However, we need to stress here, that the gods, even those associated with the phallic cult, were almost never portrayed in ithyphallic images. Phallic representations of smaller size were often used as amulets. Numerous finds of similar amulets are known from graves of ancient Greeks and Etruscans, and later, Roman too (Pl. 3/11) (see also Fleischer 1967, 148, pl. 107/199; Walde-Psenner 1976, 233–236, no. 116–124). These symbols are encountered also in the material attributed to the Iberians (Pl. 3/10). Phallic amulets supposedly had an apotropaic function, protecting against evil. In this context the phallus is more likely to have had a symbolic function rather than a directly religious one. Even so, Gassner (1993, 197–201) has noted that the true function of phallic representation is religious. It was associated directly with fertility worship or with religious rituals associated with harvest (see also Kossack 1999, 27–28). Also worth noting is the erotic aspect of some of the phallic representations. In Greek art, mainly in vase painting, but also in sculpture and relief, erotic scenes are often present (Dierichs 2008, 51–112). Some of them are quite daring, and the erect penis, as a matter of course, is their frequent element. The frank nature of these representations is associated with the acceptance in the ancient Greek society of a broad spectrum of sexual behaviour (Sutton 1992, 5–6, 32–34). Thus, erotic scenes played an important role in public space. And we must not forget moreover that sex had a bearing on a significant part of religious beliefs and cult. Definitely, erotic representations had little to do with ordinary demand or a public consent for pornography (Sutton 1992, 5). The best known representation that combines all three elements, present in the style of the figurine from Oberleiserberg, is the famous Late Hallstatt stone stela from Hirschlanden in Baden-Württemberg (Zürn 1964; Frey 2002, 209–211, fig. 191–192). It represents a nude man with only a hat, a neck-ring (torc) and a belt with a dagger (Pl. 7/2). The man’s arms rest on his chest and belly. His genitals are represented in detail and the penis is erect. The posture and proportions of the figure seemingly correspond to the Greek kouroi (Eibner 1982, 118–119, pl. 26/2). Researchers are generally agreed that the statue originated as a result of influence from or contacts with the Greek and/or the Italian environment (see Kossack 1999, 129–131; Adler 2003, 399–340). Stylistically the closest analogy to the Warrior of Hirschlanden is a stone statue from Valtura– Nesactium in Istria (Mladin 1966, 26–27, pl. 14/2; 15/2; Frey 2002, 214–216, fig. 206). Its arms are in a similar placement and, what is perhaps more relevant, the penis is observably erect (Pl. 7/4). The statue was discovered in a cemetery from the Hallstatt period with a few dozen other stone stele (Mladin 1966, 8–15). Unfortunately, the chronology of them all is unclear. Nevertheless, Mladin (1966, 62–64) has argued that these artefacts are datable to the Late Bronze Age. Ithyphallic representations are quite rare during Late Hallstatt or in Celtic art of the Iron Age (see also footnote 1). We can invoke here just three ithyphallic figures with a necklace torc. All were made of stone: sculptures surviving incomplete from Plougastel-Daoulas in Brittany (Pl. 7/3) (Adler 2003, 347), Vilapedre in Galicia (Lenerz-de Wilde 1991, 140, 302, fig. 104; pl. 149/497) and a relief image from Usseau at Poitou-Charentes (Picard 1997, 230, fig. 3; Adler 2003, 353). A number of other stone statues also feature the representation of the phallus. Worth mentioning are the statues from Bais in Brittany (Meuret 1990) and Paderne in Galicia (Lenerz-de Wilde 1991, 300, pl. 144/467).9 9 The well-known – and often considered to be Celtic – sculpture of Tarrasque de Noves from Provence is also ithyphallic (Laing–Laing 1992, 78–81, fig. 71; Bouloumié 1998, 204–205; Birkhan 1999, 36, 89, fig. 456). The sculpture, however, is certainly not of Iron Age or even Roman date (Megaw–Megaw 2001, 170). 200 | M. Karwowski In its category of artefacts – small bronze figurines – the figurine from Oberleiserberg finds no good analogy. Small ithyphallic forms are encountered quite often as elements of groups of figurines in graves in Italy and also in the eastern Alpine region. However, if we were to looking through the prism of the concept of presentation of the figure itself, despite fairly significant stylistic differences, it seems that the closest analogy would be the find from the grave at Domèvre-en-Haye (Pl. 3/1). The main similarities consist of: the rather sketchy rendering of the head, with no modelling of the facial features, the presence of the torc (which nevertheless, in the figurine from Domèvre-en-Haye – as well as in the figurine from Prašník – is made of wire coiled around the neck, possibly, a later addition), analogical position of the arms which rest on the hips, the left leg placed slightly in front, and an emphasized oversize penis. Even so, the main and highly relevant difference is in the penis itself, as in the image from Domèvre-en-Haye it is represented in an evidently pendant form. ✴✴✴ In conclusion, we have to say that originally the figurine from Oberleiserberg presumably belonged to a group of figurines inspired by Etruscan artwork, possibly analogical to the Strettweg wagon or to the amphora from Bisenzio. This is suggested by the mounting of the figurine over a sheet metal stand, now evidently broken off at one end. Etruscan sources of inspiration are supported also by the posture of the figure and its nudity in which it definitely corresponds to the form of the kouros. The depiction of the phallus seems to be linked also to Mediterranean inspirations, where phallic symbols were connected to the religious sphere. On the other hand, the necklace torc appears to be a Celtic attribute. Thus, presumably the figurine from Oberleiserberg originated in an area where Etruscan traditions were alive and where the makers wished to create an image with an unmistakable Celtic element, or where Celtic symbolism was of relevance. The figurine’s chronology is unclear. Its possible association with a group of figurines suggests Late Hallstatt dating. This is supported by the presence of the torc. Nevertheless, with this chronology we are come up against the problem of the absence on Oberleiserberg of evidence on occupation during Late Hallstatt, and possibly, Early La Tène period. A possible clue could be the utilitarian flattening of the left arm of the figurine suggesting that it was worn as a pendant – a personal ornament or amulet. As grave finds indicate, pendants of this sort were worn mainly during the Early La Tène period. Many of the ‘standing’ figurines discussed earlier have traces of use (or also of construction) indicating clearly that despite the lack of a special eye for suspension they were used as pendants. It seems therefore that we have to do here with an Early La Tène artefact, made in the (eastern?) Alpine region as an element of a larger structure associated with cult. At the same time, the figurine itself is unlikely to represent a divinity (typically they were not ithyphallic) rather, it symbolizes an element of cult, e.g. fertility worship. Even so, the nudity of the figure alone would raise it above the mundane. The figurine’s other, and secondary, function was that of a pendant, which in any case does not detract from its significance of a symbol. In this manner this object may have been used even over several generations. It is also worth recalling at this point that contacts of the Celtic community of the settlement on Oberleiserberg with the eastern Alpine zone are well documented by rich archaeological material secured at this site. Bibliography Adam 1992 Adler 2003 Allinger 2002 Barthélemy 1889 Adam, R., Appunti sul repertorio delle importazioni italiche in Francia, IN: Aigner-Foresti, L. (Hrsg.), Etrusker nördlich von Etrurien. Etruskische Präsenz in Norditalien und nördlich der Alpen sowie ihre Einflüsse auf die einheimischen Kulturen, ÖAW, PhilosophischHistorische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte 589, 371–388. Adler, W., Der Halsring von Männern und Göttern: Schriftquellen, bildliche Darstellungen und Halsringfunde aus West-, Mittel- und Nordeuropa zwischen Hallstatt- und Völkerwanderungszeit, SBA, 78. Allinger, K., Frauen und Religion, IN: Cain, H.-U.–Rieckhoff, S. (Hrsg.), Fromm, fremd, barbarisch. Die Religion der Kelten, Mainz am Rhein, 32–38. Barthélemy, F., Matériaux pour servir à l’étude des temps pré-romains en Lorraine, Mémoires de la Société d’archéologie lorraine et du Musée historique lorrain, troisième série, 17, Nancy, 141–363. An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg | 201 Barthélemy 1890 Bentz–Reusser 2008 Berton 2009 Birkhan 1999 Bittel 1934 Bittel 1981 Bolligner Schreyer 2009a Bolligner Schreyer 2009b Bouloumié 1998 Broholm 1947 Brüggemann 2007 Camporeale 1998 Capuis–Chieco Bianchi 2002 Chaume 2001 Chieco Bianchi 2002 Čižmářová 2004 Déchelette 1914 Dierichs 2008 Dietrich 1994 Echt 1999 Egg 1996 Eibner 1982 Fleischer 1967 Frey 2002 Frey 2005 Barthélemy, F., Matériaux pour servir à l’étude des temps pré-romains en Lorraine (suite et fin), Mémoires de la Société d’archéologie lorraine et du Musée historique lorrain, troisième série, 18, Nancy, 5–75. Bentz, M.–Reusser, Ch., Marzabotto: Planstadt der Etrusker, Zaberns Bildbände zur Archäologie. Sonderbände der antiken Welt, Mainz am Rhein. Berton, L., Par tous les dieux! Recueil de bronzes antiques figures, Detection Passion, 85, Pernes-les-Fontaines, 7–11. Birkhan, H., Kelten: Bilder ihrer Kultur – Celts: images of their culture, Wien. Bittel, K., Die Kelten in Württemberg, RGF, 8, Berlin. Bittel, K., Religion und Kult, IN: Bittel, K. (Hrsg.), Die Kelten in Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart, 85–117. Bolligner Schreyer, S., Tanz zwischen den Kulturen, IN: Müller, F., Kunst der Kelten. 700 v. Chr.–700 n. Chr., Stuttgart, 248–249. Bolligner Schreyer, S., Keltische Bärin trifft römische Göttin, IN: Müller, F., Kunst der Kelten. 700 v. Chr.–700 n. Chr., Stuttgart, 258–259. Bouloumié, B., Trasmissione di un motivo della scultura funeraria verso Occidente: il leone e la testa umana, IN: Pallottino, M. (ed.), Gli Etruschi, Milano, 202–205. Broholm, H. C., Anthropomorphic Bronze Age figurines in Denmark, ActaArch København, 18, 196–202. Brüggemann, N., Kontexte und Funktionen von Kouroi im archaischen Griechenland, IN: Meyer, N.–Brüggemann, N., Kore und Kouros. Weihegaben für die Götter, WFA, 10, 93–226. Camporeale, C., Il mondo religioso e la „disciplina etrusca”, IN: Pallottino, M. (ed.), Gli Etruschi, Milano, 90–95. Capuis, L.–Chieco Bianchi, A. M., Il santuario sud-orientale: Reitia e i suoi devoti, IN: Ruta Serafini, A. (ed.), Este preromana: una città e i suoi santuari, Canova, 233–247. Chaume, B., Vix et son territoire à l’Age du Fer. Fouilles du mont Lassois et environnement du site princier, Protohistoire européenne, 6, Montagnac. Chieco Bianchi, A. M., Le statuette di bronzo dal santuario di Reitia a Este (scavi 1880–1916 e 1987–1991), Studien zu vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Heiligtümern, 3, Il santuario di Reitia a Este 2, Mainz am Rhein. Čižmářová, J., Arte e credenze religiose, IN: Kruta, V.–Milan Lička, M. (eds.), Celti dal cuore dell’Europa all‘Insubria: Celti di Boemia e di Moravia, Varese, 151–156. Déchelette, J., Second âge du fer ou époque de la Tène, Manuel d’archéologie préhistorique celtique et gallo-romaine, 2, Archéologie celtique et protohistorique, 3, Paris. Dierichs, A., Erotik in der Kunst Griechenlands, Zaberns Bildbände zur Archäologie. Sonderbände der antiken Welt, Mainz am Rhein. Dietrich, H., Bemerkungen zu neueren Funden und Befunden der SpäthallstattFrühlatènezeit aus dem Nördlinger Ries, IN: Dobiat, C. (Hrsg.), Festschrift für OttoHerman Frey zum 65. Geburtstag, MSVF, 16, 149–157. Echt, R., Das Fürstinnengrab von Reinheim. Studien zur Kulturgeschichte der Früh-LaTène-Zeit, SBA, 69. Egg, M., Das hallstattzeitliche Fürstengrab von Strettweg bei Judenburg in der Obersteiermark, RGZM, 37. Eibner, C., Die hallstättische Kriegerstele von Hirschlanden – ehemals ein griechischer Kouros?, IN: Alzinger, W. (Hrsg.), Festschrift für Hedwig Kenner. Pro arte antiqua 1, Österreichisches Archäologisches Institut in Wien, Sonderschriften 18, Wien, 117–122. Fleischer, F., Die römischen Bronzen aus Österreich, Mainz am Rhein. Frey, O.-H., Menschen oder Heroen? Die Statuen vom Glauberg und die frühe keltische Großplastik, IN: Baitinger, H.–Pinsker, B. (Hrsg.), Das Rätsel der Kelten vom Glauberg, Stuttgart, 208–218. Frey, O.-H., The human figure in Late Hallstatt and Early La Téne art, IN: Dobrzańska, H.– Megaw, V.–Poleska, P. (eds.), Celts on the Margin. Studies in European Cultural Interaction 7th Century BC–1st Century AD Dedicated to Zenon Woźniak, Kraków, 27–31. 202 | M. Karwowski Gabrovec 1992 Gabrovec, S., Etruskischer Niederschlag in Slowenien, IN: Aigner-Foresti, L. (Hrsg.), Etrusker nördlich von Etrurien. Etruskische Präsenz in Norditalien und nördlich der Alpen sowie ihre Einflüsse auf die einheimischen Kulturen, ÖAW, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte 589, 203–218. Gamper 2006 Gamper, P., Vorbericht zur Grabungskampagne 2004 auf der Gurina im Oberen Gailtal, Kärnten, ArchAustr, 88, 2004, 121–168. Gassner 1993 Gassner, J., Phallos. Fruchtbarkeitssymbol oder Abwehrzauber? Ein ethnologischer Beitrag zu humanethologischen Überlegungen der apotropäischen Bedeutung phallischer und ithyphallischer Darstellungen, Wien–Köln–Weimar. Gleirscher 2001 Gleirscher, P., Norische Könige Historische Quellen und archäologischer Befund, PZ, 76/1, 87–104. Gleirscher 2002 Gleirscher, P., Brandopferplatze in den Ostalpen, IN: Gleirscher, P.–Nothdurfter, H.– Schubert, E., Das Rungger Egg. Untersuchungen an einem eisenzeitlichen Brandopferplatz bei Seis am Schlern in Südtirol, RGF, 61, Mainz am Rhein, 173–262. Gleirscher 2005 Gleirscher, P., Archäologische Ausgrabungen auf der Gurina und in Grabelsdorf, Rudolfinum, Jahrbuch des Landesmuseums für Kärnten 2004, Klagenfurt, 51–63. Golan 2003 Golan, A., Prehistoric Religion. Mythology. Symbolism, Jerusalem. Gran-Aymerich 1992 Gran-Aymerich, J., Les matériaux étrusques hors d’Étrurie: le cas de la France et les travaux en cours à Bourges-Avaricum, IN: Aigner-Foresti, L. (ed.), Etrusker nördlich von Etrurien. Etruskische Präsenz in Norditalien und nördlich der Alpen sowie ihre Einflüsse auf die einheimischen Kulturen, ÖAW, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte 589, 329–359. Guillaumet 2006 Guillaumet, J.-P., Quelques autres dépôts d’Europe, IN: Bataille, G.–Guillaumet, J.-P. (eds.), Les dépôts métalliques au second âge du Fer en Europe tempérée, Collection Bibracte, 11, Glux-en-Glenne, 183–191. Guggisberg–Stöllner Guggisberg, M.–Stöllner, T., Ein „Herr der Tiere“ im südlichen Ostalpenraum? 1996 Bemerkungen zur früh latènezeitlichen Stellung einiger Neufunde aus dem Führholz bei Völkermarkt/Kärnten, IN: Stöllner, Th. (ed.), Europa Celtica. Untersuchungen zur Hallstatt-und Latènekultur, VVSM, Sonderband 12, 117–152. von Hase 2002 von Hase, F.-W., Religiöse Ausdruckformen in Etrurien, IN: Zemmer-Plank, L. (Hrsg.), Kult der Vorzeit in den Alpen: Opfergaben, Opferplätze, Opferbrauchtum, Bozen, 137–197. Hild 1933 Hild, A., Grabungsfeld und Kleinfunde, IN: Hild, A.–von Merhart, G., Vor- und Frühgeschichtliche Funde von Gutenberg-Balzers 1932/33, Jahrbuch Liechtenstein, 33, Vaduz, 3–16. Horváth 1987 Horváth, L., The surroundings of Keszthely, IN: Horváth, L.–Kelemen, M.–Uzsoki, A.– Vadász, É., Transdanubia 1, Corpus of Celtic finds In Hungary, 1, Budapest, 63–178. Hunyady 1942 Hunyady, I., Kelták a Kárpátmedencében. Táblakötet, DissPann, 2/18, Budapest. Hunyady 1944 Hunyady, I., Kelták a Kárpátmedencében. Szövegkötet, DissPann, 2/18, Budapest. Hupperts 2004a Hupperts, Ch., Sexualität bei den Griechen, IN: van Vilsteren, V. T.–Weiss, R.-M. (Hrsg.), 100.000 Jahre Sex: über Liebe, Fruchtbarkeit und Wollust, Archäologische Beiträge, Drents Museum, 3, 2003, Zwolle, 18–27. Hupperts 2004b Hupperts, Ch., Sexualität bei den Römern, IN: van Vilsteren, V. T.–Weiss, R.-M. (eds.), 100.000 Jahre Sex: über Liebe, Fruchtbarkeit und Wollust, Archäologische Beiträge, Drents Museum, 3, 2003, Zwolle, 30–37. Irlinger 2002 Irlinger, W., Alpine und südalpine Funde der Eisenzeit in südbayerischen Fundkomplexen. Ein Überblick, IN: Schnekenburger, G. (Hrsg.) Über die Alpen. Menschen – Wege – Waren, Stuttgart, 183–190. Jablonka 2001 Jablonka, J., Die Gurina bei Dellach im Gailtal. Siedlung, Handelsplatz und Heiligtum, Aus Forschung und Kunst, 33, Klagenfurt. Joffroy 1960 Joffroy, R., L’oppidum de Vix et la civilisation hallstattienne finale dans l’Est de la France, PUD, 20. Karwowski 2009 Karwowski, M., A Celtic Hilltop Settlement on Oberleiserberg in Lower Austria, Światowit, Supplement Series B: Barbaricum, 8, Warszawa, 115–131. Kerényi 1944 Kerényi, K., Hermes der Seelenführer: das Mythologem vom männlichen Lebensursprung, Albae Vigiliae N. F. 1, Zürich. Kerényi 1996 Kerényi, K., Dionysos: archetypal image of indestructible life, Bollingen series, 65/2, Princeton. An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg | 203 Koch, R., Katalog Esslingen. Die vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Funde im Heimatmuseum I: Die vorrömischen und römischen Funde, VSADS, A 14/1. Kossack 1999 Kossack, G., Religiöses Denken in dinglicher und bildlicher Überlieferung Alteuropas aus der Spätbronze- und frühen Eisenzeit (9.-6. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Geb.), BAW, PhilosophischHistorische Klasse, Abhandlungen N.F. 116, München. Kovács 1998 Kovács, T., À la périphérie de la culture hallstattienne (VIIe–Ve siècles avant J.-C.), IN: Kovács, T.–Kemenczei, T.–Szabó, M., A la frontière entre l’Est et l’Ouest: l’ art protohistorique en Hongrie au premier millénaire avant notre ère, Glux-en-Glenne, 39–50. Kromer 1974 Kromer, K., Ein Votivfigürchen aus Südtirol, IN: Jeločnik, A. (ed.), Opuscula Iosepho Kastelic sexagenario dicata, Situla 14/15, Ljubljana, 53–59. Laing–Laing 1992 Laing, L.–Laing, J., Art of the Celts, London. Lantier 1935 Lantier, R., Bronzes votifs ibériques, Paris. Lenerz-de Wilde 1991 Lenerz-de Wilde, M., Iberia Celtica. Archäologische Zeugnisse keltischer Kulturen auf der Pyrenäenhalbinsel, Stuttgart. Liéger 1996 Liéger, A., Parures féminines gauloises trouvées à Toul et aux environs, ET, 77, 3–9. Lüscher 1993 Lüscher, G., Unterlunkhofen und die hallstattzeitliche Grabkeramik in der Schweiz, Antiqua, 24, Basel. Marčenko–Limberis Marčenko, I. I. –Limberis, N. Ju., Romische Importe in sarmatischen und maiotischen 2008 Denkmälern des Kubangebietes, IN: Simonenko, A.–Marčenko, I. I.–Limberis, N. Ju., Romische Importe in sarmatischen und maiotischen Gräbern zwischen Unterer Donau und Kuban, ArchE, 25, 265–622. Matthäus 1985 Matthäus, H., Sinfos im Altertum, IN: Wagner, G. A.–Weisgerber, G. (eds.), Silber, Blei und Gold auf Sifnos. Prähistorische und antike Metallproduktion, VDBMB, 31, 17–58. Mattei 1991 Mattei, M., The Dying Gaul, IN: Moscati, S. (ed.), The Celts, Milano, 70–71. Mayr–Schindler 2008 Mayr, U.–Schindler, M. P., Kult der Kelten, IN: Hasler, N.–Heiligmann, J.–Leuzinger, U.–Natter, T. G. (Hrsg.), Bevor die Römer kamen. Späte Kelten am Bodensee, Sulgen, 60–68. von Merhart 1933 von Merhart, G., Die figürlichen Bronzen, IN: Hild, A.–von Merhart, G., Vor- und Frühgeschichtliche Funde von Gutenberg-Balzers 1932/33, Jahrbuch Liechtenstein, 33, 17–36. Megaw–Megaw 2001 Megaw, R.–Megaw, V., Celtic Art. From its Beginnings to the Book of Kells. Revised and Expanded Edition, London. Meuret 1990 Meuret, J.-C., L’antique statuette tricéphale et ithyphallique de Bais (Ille-et-Vilaine), RAO, 87–91. Meyer–Brüggemann Meyer, N.–Brüggemann, N., Kore und Kouros. Weihegaben für die Götter, WFA, 10. 2007 Millotte 1965 Millotte, J.-P., Carte archéologique de la Lorraine (Ages du Bronze et du Fer), Annales littéraires de l’Université de Besançon, 73, Archéologie, 18, Paris. Mladin 1966 Mladin, J., Umjetnički spomenici prahistorijskog nezakcija, Kulturno-Povijesni spomenici Istre, 5, 1964, Pula. Moreau 2009 Moreau, C., Les occupations protohistoriques et antiques du site de Bussy-le-Château Bout des Forces (Marne), IN: Vanmoerkerke, J. (ed.), Le bassin de la Vesle du Bronze final au Moyen Age à travers les fouilles du TGV Est, Bulletin de la Société Archéologique Champenoise, 102/2, Reims, 193–231. Müller 2009 Müller, F., Kunst der Kelten. 700 v. Chr.–700 n. Chr., Stuttgart. Nebehay 1998 Nebehay, S., Bernhardsthal, FÖ, 26, 1997, 219. Normand 1973 Normand, B., L’ Âge du Fer en Basse-Alsace, Publications de la Société Savante d’Alsace et des Régions de l’Est, Collection « Recherches et documents », 14, Strasbourg. Oberosler 1997 Oberosler, R., Kriegervotive und Votivschilde, IN: Höck, A.–Sölder, W.–Hastaba, E. (Hrsg.), Kult der Vorzeit in den Alpen. Opfergaben – Opferplätze – Opferbrauchtum, Innsbruck, 110–111. Osmuk 1987 Osmuk, N., Die Bronzeplastik aus Kobarid. Kulturgeschichtliche Bedeutung kobarider Gruppe kleiner Bronzeplastik und ein Datierungsversuch, ArchIug, 24, Lubiana, 57–79. Paret 1928 Paret, O., Mühlacker. Eine keltische Bronzestatuette und verwandte Funde aus Württemberg, FS N. F., 4/1, 1926–1928, 60–61. Paret 1936 Paret, O., Das Hallstattgrab von Sirnau bei Eßlin, Württemberg, Germania, 20, 246–252. Paret 1961 Paret, O., Württemberg in vor- und frühgeschichtlicher Zeit, VKGLBW, B 17, Stuttgart. Píč 1903 Píč, J. L., Čechy na úsvitě dějin. Hradiště u Stradonic jako historické Marobudum, Starožitnosti Země Česke, 2/2, Praha. Koch 1969 204 | M. Karwowski Picard, G. Ch., Venus (in Galia), IN: Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae VIII: Thespiades-Zodiacus et Supplementum Abila-Thersites, Zürich–Düsseldorf, 230–233. Pieta 2005 Pieta, K., Spätlatènezeitliche Waffen und Ausrüstung im nördlichen Teil des Karpatenbeckens, SlovArch, 53, 35–84. Pieta 2008 Pieta, K., Keltské osídlenie Slovenska. Mladšia doba laténska, ASM, Studia 11, Nitra. Piton–Dilly 1985 Piton, D.–Dilly, G., Le fanum des „Châtelets” de Vendeuil-Caply (Oise), RAP, 1–2, 25–47. Prados-Torreira 1997 Prados-Torreira, L., Sanctuaries of the Iberian Peninsula: Sixth to First Centuries BC, IN: Balmuth, M. S.–Gilman, A.–Prados-Torreira, L. (eds.), Encounters and transformations. The Archaeology of Iberia in Transition, Monographs in Mediterranean Archaeology, 7, Sheffield, 151–159. Richardson 1983 Richardson, E., Etruscan votive bronzes: geometric, orientalizing, archaic, Mainz am Rhein. Rieckhoff 2001 Rieckhoff, S., Die Kelten in Deutschland. Kultur und Geschichte, IN: Rieckhoff, S.–Biel, J., Die Kelten in Deutschland, Stuttgart, 10–276. Ruprechtsberger 1982 Ruprechtsberger, E. M., Ein etruskisches Buccherofragment aus Lauriacum, JahrOM, 127, 25–35. Rustoiu–Egri 2010 Rustoiu, A.–Egri, M., Danubian Kantharoi. Almost Three Decades Later, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin, Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, BMM, II, 217–287. Simonenko 2008 Simonenko, A. V., Romische Importe in sarmatischen Denkmälern des nördlichen Schwarzmeergebietes, IN: Simonenko, A.–Marčenko, I. I.–Limberis, N. Ju., Romische Importe in sarmatischen und maiotischen Gräbern zwischen Unterer Donau und Kuban, ArchE, 25, Mainz am Rhein, 1–263. Sova-Gmitrov 1958 Sova-Gmitrov, P., Nové laténske nálezy na Zakarpatskej Ukrajine, SlovArch, 6/1, 131–135. Stanček 2007 Stanček, L., Slovenské náleziská drancujú súkromní hľadači, Týždenník Žurnál, 36, Bratislava, 40–43. Stopponi 2011 Stopponi, S., Campo della Fiera at Oriveta: new discoveries, IN: de Grummond, N. T.–Edlund-Berry, I. (eds.), The archaeology of sanctuaries and ritual in Etruria, JRA, Supplementary series, 81, Portsmouth, 17–44. Stöllner 1996 Stöllner, T., Die Hallstattzeit und der Beginn der Latènezeit im Inn-Salzach-Raum. Katalogund Tafelteil, ArchS, 3/2. Stöllner 2002 Stöllner, T., Die Hallstattzeit und der Beginn der Latènezeit im Inn-Salzach-Raum. Auswertung, ArchS, 3/1. Stuppner 2006 Stuppner, A., Rund um den Oberleiserberg. Archäologische Denkmale der Gemeinden Ernstbrunn und Niederleis, Ernstbrunn. Sutton 1992 Sutton, R. S. Jr., Pornography and Persuasion on Attic Pottery, IN: Richlin, A. (ed.), Pornography and representation in Greece and Rome, New York–Oxford, 3–35. Swozilek 1987 Swozilek, H., Eisenzeitliche Votivfiguren aus Vorarlberg, Jahrbuch Vorarlberger Landesmuseumsverein. Freunde der Landeskunde, 131, Bregenz, 9–21. Szilágyi 1992 Szilágyi, J. G., Transdanubien und Italien im 6.–5. Jh., IN: Aigner-Foresti, L. (Hrsg.), Etrusker nördlich von Etrurien. Etruskische Präsenz in Norditalien und nördlich der Alpen sowie ihre Einflüsse auf die einheimischen Kulturen, ÖAW, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte 589, Wien, 219–234. Thenot 1975 Thenot, A., La sépulture multiple de Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe (Marne) d’après les fouilles du Baron de Baye, Antiquités nationales, 7, Saint-Germain-en-Laye, 42–48. Tischer 2004 Tischer, T., Pfaffenhofen, FÖ, 42, 2003, Wien, 62–63. Tomedi 1995 Tomedi, G., Zur figuralen Kunst im hallstattzeitlichen Gräberfeld von Frög in Kärnten, ArchKorr, 25, 301–312. Tomedi 2002 Tomedi, G., Das hallstattzeitliche Gräberfeld von Frög. Die Altgrabungen von 1883 bis 1892, Archaeolingua, 14, Budapest. Völling 2002 Völling, T., Weihungen in griechischen Heiligtümern am Beispiel des Artemisheiligtums von Kombothekra und des Zeusheiligtums von Olympia, IN: Zemmer-Plank, L. (Hrsg.), Kult der Vorzeit in den Alpen: Opfergaben, Opferplätze, Opferbrauchtum, Bozen, 83–111. Walde-Psenner 1976 Walde-Psenner, E., Die figürlichen Bronzen der Vor- und Frühgeschichtlichen Sammlung des Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum, VTLF, 56, 169–288. Warneke 1999 Warneke, T. F., Hallstatt- und frühlatènezeitlicher Anhängerschmuck. Studien zu Metallanhängern des 8.–5. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. zwischen Main und Po, IA, 50. Picard 1997 An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg | 205 Willaume 1985 Zanier 2006 Zemmer-Plank 1997 Zürn 1964 Willaume, M., Le Berry à l’âge du fer HaC – La Tène II précédé du catalogue des collections de l’âge du fer du musée de Bourges, BAR, International Series, 247. Zanier, W., Das Alpenrheintal in den Jahrzehnten um Christi Geburt, MBVF, 59. Zemmer-Plank, L., Anthropomorphische Plastik, IN: Höck, A.–Sölder, W.–Hastaba, E. (Hrsg.), Kult der Vorzeit in den Alpen. Opfergaben – Opferplätze – Opferbrauchtum, Innsbruck, 128–132. Zürn, H., An anthropomorphic Hallstatt stele from Germany, Antiquity, 38/151, York, 217–229. List of figures Fig. 1. Oberleiserberg. The view from the west, the arrow indicates the site of discovery of the figurine (photo: IUFG Wien). Fig. 2. Ithyphallic figurine from Oberleiserberg (photo: IUFG Wien). Fig. 3. Location of the principal sites mentioned in the text: A. sites of worship, deposits, graves with multiple finds of figurines or groups of figurines; B. bronze standing figurines; C. bronze figurines-pendants; D. ithyphallic stone representations. 1. Alzey, 2. Bais, 3. Banatska Palanka, 4. Beaunotte, 5. Bernhardsthal, 6. Bisenzio, 7. Bludenz, 8. Bourges, 9. Bussyle-Château, 10. Castellar, 11. Domèvre-en-Haye, 12. Esslingen-Sirnau,3. Este, 14. Finkenstein, 15. Frög, 16. Gurina, 17. Gutenberg, 18. Herschweiler, 19. Hirschlanden, 20. Jaroměř, 21. Lampertheim, 22. Leobersdorf, 23. Lucera, 24. Mala Byjhan, 25. Mühlacker, 26. Neuvy-en-Sullias, 27. Oberleiserberg, 28. Paderne, 29. Perjen, 30. Pfaffenhofen, 31. Plougastel-Daoulas, 32. Ponická Huta, 33. Prašník, 34. Reinheim, 35. Rezi-Rezicseri, 36. Saint-Jean-sur-Tourbe, 37. Santa Elena, 38. Sanzeno, 39. Stanz bei Landeck, 40. Staraya Osota, 41. Steyr, 42. Stradonice, 43. Strettweg, 44. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, 45. Stuttgart-Uhlbach, 46. Telfs, 47. Telve, 48. Trenčianske Bohuslavice, 49. Unterlunkhofen, 50. Usseau, 51. Vače, 52. Valsugana, 53. Valtura-Nesactium, 54. Vendeuil-Caply, 55. Vilapedre, 56. Vix, 57. Zollfeld, 58. unspecified site, Aube dep. in Champagne, 59. unspecified site, Manche dep. in Normandy. List of plates Pl. 1. 1. Ithyphallic figurine from Oberleiserberg (drawing: IUFG Wien); 2. A fragment of Leopold Laab’s journal with information about the discovery of the figurine; 3–5. Iberian votive bronze figurines (after Lantier 1935); 6. Figurine of a nude man from Bludenz (after Mayr–Schindler 2008); 7–11. Bronze standing figurines from east-central Europe: 7. Bernhardsthal, Lower Austria; 8. Jaroměř, Bohemia; 9. Rezi–Rezicseri, Hungary; 10. Prašník, Slovakia; 11. Banatska Palanka, Voivodina (after Horváth 1987; Nebehay 1998; Čižmářová 2004; Pieta 2008; Rustoiu–Egri 2010). Pl. 2. 1–6. Bronze standing figurines from east-central Europe: 1. Stradonice, Bohemia; 2. Trenčianske Bohuslavice, Slovakia; 3. Vače, Slovenia; 4. Ponická Huta, Slovakia; 5. Leobersdorf, Lower Austria; 6. Mala Byjhan, Ukraine (after Sova-Gmitrov 1958; Fleischer 1967; Megaw 2001; Pieta 2008); 7–11. Bronze standing figurines from western Europe: 1. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, Baden-Württemberg; 2. unknown location, Lorraine; 3–4. unknown location, Aube department in Champagne; 5. Bussy-le-Château, Champagne (after Bittel 1981; Berton 2009; Moreau 2009). Pl. 3. 1. Figurine of a nude man (boy?) from Domèvre-en-Haye, Lorraine (after Liéger 1996); 2–9. Bronze figurinespendants. 2. Esslingen-Sirnau, Baden-Württemberg; 3. Beaunotte, Burgundy; 4. Vix, Burgundy; 5–6. Reinheim, Hesse; 7. Mühlacker, Baden-Württemberg; 8. Stuttgart-Uhlbach, Baden-Württemberg; 9. Unterlunkhofen, Aargau (after Koch 1969; Chaume 2001; Bittel 1981; Müller 2009); Iberian and provincial-Roman ithyphallic bronze figurines from unknown location in Spain (10) and from Nunspeet in the Netherlands (11) (after Hupperts 2004b; man.mcu.es). Pl. 4. Groups of small bronze figurines. 1. Lid and shoulders of urn from Bisenzio, Tuscany; 2. Cult wagon from Strettweg, Styria (after Camporeale 1998; Egg 1996). Pl. 5. Bronze figurines in Alpine region. 1–4. Dellach-Gurina; 5. Balzers-Gutenberg (after Jablonka 2001; Gleirscher 2005; Zanier 2006). Pl. 6. Bronze nude representations. 1. Kouros from Marzabotto, Emilia-Romagna (A); 2. Silenus from Dodona, Epirus; 3. Celtic warrior from Italy (after Birkhan 1999; Hupperts 2004a; Bentz–Reusser 2008). Pl. 7. Ithyphallic representations made of stone. 1. Kastro, Sifnos; 2. Hirschlanden; Baden-Württemberg; 3. PlougastelDaoulas, Brittany; 4. Valtura–Nesactium, Istria (after Frey 2002, fr.topic-topos.com and photo by R. A. Frantz). 206 | M. Karwowski 5 Plate 1. 1. Ithyphallic figurine from Oberleiserberg (drawing: IUFG Wien); 2. A fragment of Leopold Laab’s journal with information about the discovery of the figurine; 3–5. Iberian votive bronze figurines (after Lantier 1935); Figurine of a nude man from Bludenz 2008);. 7–11. figurines Plate . . t yp6. alli fi urine from erleiser er (after draMayr–Schindler in ien fraBronze ment standing of eopold aa s ournal it fromt east-central Europe: Austria; Bohemia; Rezi–Rezicseri, Hungary; 5 . i urine of a information a out e dis o ery of t 7. e fiBernhardsthal, urine –5.Lower erian oti 8.e Jaroměř, ron e fi urines9.after Prašník, Slovakia; 11. Banatska Nebehay 1998; Čižmářová – Palanka, Voivodina (after – Horváth . ron e 1987; standin fi urines from east 2004; entral urope nude man 10. from luden after 2008; Rustoiu–Egri . ern ardst al o er ustria . arom Pieta o emia . e i– e i 2010). seri un ary . Pra n lo a ia . anats a P – . Palan a oi odina after An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg | 207 5 Plate 2. 1–6. Bronze standing figurines from east-central Europe: 1. Stradonice, Bohemia; 2. Trenčianske Bohuslavice, 3. Vače, Slovenia; 4. Ponická Huta, Slovakia; 5. Leobersdorf, Lower Austria; 6. Mala Byjhan, Ukraine Plate . – . Slovakia; ron e standin fi urines from east entral urope . tradoni e o emia . ren ians e o usla i e (after Sova-Gmitrov 1958; Fleischer 1967; Megaw 2001; Pieta 2008); 7–11. Bronze standing figurines from lo a ia . a e western lo enia . Poni uta Cannstatt, lo a ia Baden-Württemberg; 5. eo ersdorf o2. unknown er ustria . Lorraine; ala y an raine after Europe: 1. Stuttgart-Bad location, 5 – P – . ron e standin fi urines from 3–4. unknown location, Aube department in Champagne; 5. Bussy-le-Château, Champagne (after Bittel 1981; estern urope . tutt art ad annstatt aden rttem er . un no n lo ation orraine – . un no n lo ation Berton 2009; Moreau 2009). u e department in ampa ne 5. ussy le teau ampa ne after . 208 | M. Karwowski 5 Plate 3. 1. Figurine of a nude man (boy?) from Domèvre-en-Haye, Lorraine (after Liéger 1996); 2–9. Bronze figurines-pendants. 2. Esslingen-Sirnau, Baden-Württemberg; 3. Beaunotte, Burgundy; 4. Vix, Burgundy; urine ofReinheim, a nude man oyMühlacker, from Baden-Württemberg; om re en aye 8. Stuttgart-Uhlbach, orraine after Baden-Württemberg; – . ron e fi urines 5–6. Hesse; 7. sslin en 9. Unterlunkhofen, irnau aden Aargau rttem er . eaunotte ur undy . i ur undy 5– . ein eim esse (after Koch 1969; Chaume 2001; Bittel 1981; Müller 2009); Iberian and provincial-Roman from unknown (10) and from ar au after er aden rttem er .ithyphallic tutt artbronze l afigurinesaden rttem location er .in Spain nterlun ofen Nunspeet in the Netherlands (11) (aftererian Hupperts 2004b; and pro inman.mcu.es). ial oman it yp alli ron e fi urines Plate . . i pendants. . . la K from un no n lo ation in pain and from unspeet in t e et erlands after PP man.m u.es . An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg | 209 Plate 4. Groups of small bronze figurines. 1. Lid and shoulders of urn from Bisenzio, Tuscany; 2. Cult wagon from Strettweg, Styria (after Camporeale 1998; Egg 1996). Plate . roups of small ron e fi urines. . id and s oulders of urn from isen io us any . ult a on from trett e tyria after P . 210 | M. Karwowski 5 Plate 5. Bronze figurines in Alpine region. 1–4. Dellach-Gurina; 5. Balzers-Gutenberg (after Jablonka 2001; Gleirscher 2005; Zanier 2006). Plate 5. ron e fi urines in lpine re ion. – . ella urina 5. al ers uten er after K 5 . An Ithyphallic Celtic Figurine from Oberleiserberg | 211 Plate 6. Bronze nude representations. 1. Kouros from Marzabotto, Emilia-Romagna (A); 2. Silenus from Dodona, Epirus; 3. Celtic warrior from Italy (after Birkhan 1999; Hupperts 2004a; Bentz–Reusser 2008). Plate . ron e nude representations. . Kouros from odona pirus . elti arrior from taly after K ar a otto milia PP oma na a . ilenus from – . 212 | M. Karwowski Plate 7. Ithyphallic representations made of stone. 1. Kastro, Sifnos; 2. Hirschlanden; Baden-Württemberg; 3. PlougastelDaoulas, Brittany; 4. Valtura–Nesactium, Istria (after Frey 2002, fr.topic-topos.com and photo by R. A. Frantz). Plate . t yp alli representations made of stone. . Kastro ifnos . irs landen aden rttem er . Plou astel aoulas rittany . altura– e ac i m stria after fr.topi topos. om and p oto . . rant . The North-Western Part of the Carpathian Basin in the Period of Early Celtic Princes Jan BOUZEK Prague, Czech Republic jan_bouzek@yahoo.com Keywords: Early Celtic Art, Bohemia, Slovakia The Maskenfibel from Slovenské Pravno and the Stupava plaque (Pieta 1982, fig. 24; 27–28; Zachar 1987, fig. 11; 13–16 Megaw 1982; Megaw–Megaw 2010) have been long considered isolated western imports (Fig. 1/1–2). In the first years of the 21st century reports surfaced of new finds made by metal detectorists, and some years later publications appeared in the Zborník of the National Museum in Bratislava of objects coming from illegal excavations on the hill of Slepý vrch near Horné Orešany; first was a figurine of a sphinx (Čambal 2005), and one year later another Maskenfibel came to light (Bazovský 2006) (Fig. 1/3–4). Karol Pieta conducted a rescue excavation on the hill and found a number of other Early La Tène items (Pieta 2007). The fortified hill compares in its character, including a division into acropolis and lower fort with similar princely forts in the core area of the Early La Tène style (Fig. 2). It represents a good parallel as an important Early La Tène centre at the eastern extension of the Little Carpathians. Rich finds of weapons in the fort speak of dramatic military events and confrontation with 1 2 3 4 Fig. 1. 1. Plaque from Stupava; 2. Fibula from Slovenské Pravno; 3. Mask fibula from Horné Orešany; 4. Sphinx from Horné Orešany. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 213–216 214 | J. Bouzek its neighbours, but it existed for some time as shown also by finds of early Duchcov fibulae, as well as the Maskenfibel (Pieta 2007 fig. 8). Its existence confirms that this area should be included into the vast area where Early Celtic art was known and produced. This character of the fort was confirmed by other finds from Slepý vrch discussed by Pieta. The Maskenfibeln took their inspiration from woodcarving, but apparently were not influenced by Phoenician mask beads. The new finds also confirm that some particularities of the pieces from Slovenské Pravno and Stupava were not isolated phenomena. The fibula from Slovenské Pravno and the Stupava plaque probably came from disturbed graves, as was the case with the Celtic imitation of an Etruscan Schnabelkanne handle in the Piešťany Museum (Kolník 1982). Its publication by Kolník first met some sceptic voices doubting its being genuine and regarding it as a modern fake, but the publication of a similar handle from the Heuneburg (von Hase 2000, cf. Krauskopf 2004) put an end to these doubts, and now it seems that its style has some traits not dissimilar from other objects of Early La Tène style from the area of SW Slovakia; it belongs roughly to a similar stylistic province Fig. 2. Hillfort on Slepý Vrch near Horné Orešany. (Fig. 3). The Bučany cemetery, from which the handle perhaps came, confirms that even more modestly equipped Early La Tène graves existed in the area (Bujna–Romsauer 1983). Fig. 3. Handle of Schnabelkanne in Balneological Museum Piešt’any. It seems that a local workshop, representing a new province of Early La Tène art, existed here; with distinct stylistic peculiarities not fully conforming to early Celtic art more westwards. The beasts here are generally less wild in appearance than their western parallels, the style being rather of a rustic or ‘folk’ tinge and more closely related to woodwork that the ‘Classic’ style in South Germany and Bohemia. One Maskenfibel from Lower Austria may perhaps be added, but otherwise there is a long gap of distribution of Early La Tène artistic objects between Bohemia and SW Slovakia. Nearly no Early Celtic comparanda are known as yet in Moravia, with the exception of the Černov hill near Ježovice (Čižmářová 2004, 197–199) which has yielded a hoard of iron implements and a rectangular millstone, which may have belonged to the earliest examples of its kind, if its date would be proved, but no artistic objects were found here as yet. The part of north-west Slovakia might thus have been a small enclave, even if it was an integral part of the general Early La Tène area. The less wild, more peaceful and slightly feminine character of Early La Tène artistic objects in the NW corner of the Carpathian Basin reminds one of the story of the noble Celtic lady Onomaris, who after very poor harvests in her country, when many from her tribe decided to leave but no man was willing to The North-Western Part of the Carpathian Basin in the Period of Early Celtic Princes | 215 lead them, sold all her property and took the leadership of the campaign in which many people participated. After crossing the Danube and subduing the local population in battle she ruled the territory as queen (Anonymus, De mulieribus claris in bello 14 = FrgGrHist257). The existence of this eastern province of Early La Tène brings offers more support for the old idea of Paul Jacobsthal of an oriental contribution in the formation of Early La Tène style. Jacobsthal mentions horse harness, trousers and neck-rings as elements taken from Persian tradition (Jacobsthal 1944, 156), while others have stressed the mediating role of Thrace between Achaemenid and Celtic arts, especially through the artistic schools of Geti and Triballi (Fischer 1988); while the rejection of any eastern participation in the rise of Early Celtic art (Megaw 2005) is difficult to accept. The similar stylisation of human heads as decorative elements can be added to the elements mentioned by Jacobsthal (cf. Bouzek 2006). From roughly the same area in western Slovakia and Hungary several bronze vessels have been recovered. These have first held to be of Etruscan origin, but have been later recognized as having been a product of Magna Graecia (Tarentine?). Their distribution is nearly exclusively along the eastern shores of Italy. The oenochoe from Abrahám (Novotná 1991, 68–71; Pieta 1982, 17) (Fig. 8) is very similar to the fragmentary jug from Szombathely (Szabó 1988, 389–393); both can be dated to the second quarter of the 5th century BC. The jug from Súlov (?) (Pieta 1982, 19) (Fig. 9) belongs roughly either to the end of the 6th or to the early 5th century (cf. Szabó 1988, 391). The podinapter from Fig. 4. Pitchers from Abrahám and Súlov (?). Nováky finds its best parallel, as the previous vessels, in south-east Italy (Rolley 1991, 204, 190–195, cf. Bouzek 1997, 236–237). Also other features show that links along the Eastern Alps with north-east Italy via the Amber Road were not fully interrupted during the 5th century (Bouzek 2002; Shefton 2001; Frey 2004; 2007). Amber was highly valued in the Mediterranean, it is light can be transported by porters or pack animals, and it is possible that the rulers of Slepý vrch could have profited from trade in amber. Finally it may be recalled that one of the earliest Celtic finds in the Central Balkans, the torc found at Gorni Cibar preceded chronologically the Celtic Balkan campaigns and may be a testimony of a visit of a delegation of the Celts in the area of the Triballoi, similar to that reported by Strabo (VII, 3, 8) describing the meeting of the Celts with Alexander III, in 335 BC. References Bazovský, I., Včasnolaténska zoomorfná spona z Horných Orešian, Zborník SNM, 315–322. Bouzek, J., Greece, Anatolia and Europe, cultural interrelations in the Early Iron Age, Jonsered. Bouzek 2002 Bouzek, J., Die Bronzelekythos vom Typ Talcott aus Hurbanovo und andere vorrömische mediterrane Bronzegefässe aus der Slowakei, Anodos 2, In Honour of Mária Novotná, Trnava, 53–57. Bouzek 2006 Bouzek, J., Celts and Thracians, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, L. D. (eds.), Thracians and Celts. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Bistriţa, 18–20 May 2006, Cluj-Napoca, 77–92. Bujna–Romsauer 1983 Bujna, J.–Romsauer, P., Späthallstatt- und frühlatènezeitliches Gräberfeld in Bučany, SlovArch, 31, 277–322. Bazovský 2006 Bouzek 1997 216 | J. Bouzek Čambal 2005 Čižmářová 2004 Fischer 1988 Frey 2004 Frey 2007 von Hase 2000 Jacobsthal 1944 Krauskopf 2004 Kolník 1982 Megaw 1978 Megaw 2005 Megaw–Megaw 2010 Novotná 1991 Pieta 1982 Pieta 2007 Rolley 1991 Shefton 2001 Szabó 1988 Zachar 1987 Čambal, R., Včasnolaténska sfinga z Horných Orešian, Zborník SNM, 99, Arch. 15, 37–44. Čižmářová, J., Encyklopedie Keltů na Moravě a ve Slezsku, Praha. Fischer, F., Celtes et Achémenides, IN: Mohen, J.-P.–Duval, A.–Eluère, C. (eds.), Les Princes celtes et la Méditerranée, Paris, 33–42. Frey, O.-H., Das westliche Hallstatttkreis und das adriatische Gebiet, IN: Guggisberg, M. A. (ed.), Die Hydria von Grächwill. Zur Funktion und Rezeption mediterraner Importe im 6. u. 5. Jh. v. Chr., Bern, 55–63. Frey, O.-H., Über die Ostalpen zur Keltiké: Beziehungen zwischen der Situlen-Este-Kunst und dem Latène A-Kreis, IN: Blečić, M.–Črešnar, M.–Hänsel, B.–Hellmuth, A.–Kaiser, E.–Metzner-Nemelsick, C. (Hrsg.), Scripta praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan. Situla: Dissertationes Musei nationalis Sloveniae, VII, Ljubljana, National Museum of Slovenia, 777–788. von Hase, F.-W., Zur Gussform der figürlichen Henkelattasche von der Heuneburg, IN: Kimmig, W.–Böhr, E. (Hrsg.), Import und mediterrane Einflüsse auf der Heuneburg, Römisch-Germanische Forschungen, 59, Mainz, 177–205. Jacobsthal, P. F., Early Celtic Art, Oxford (reprinted with corrections 1969). Krauskopf, I., Wein- und Wasser-Kannen. Zur unterschiedlichen Exportsituation verschiedener etruskischen Schnabelkannen, IN: Guggisberg, M. A. (Hrsg.), Die Hydria von Grächwill. Zur Funktion und Rezeption mediterraner Importe im 6. u. 5. Jh. v. Chr., Bern, 127–135. Kolník, T., Pozoruhodný nepovšimnutý nález ucha zobákovitej konvice, ArchRoz, 34, 208–210. Megaw, J. V. S., An early La Tène Maskenfibel from Slovenské Pravno, okr. Martin, Slovakia, ÉC, 19, 7–34. Megaw, J. V. S., Early Celtic art without Scythians? – a review, IN: Dobrzańska, H.–Megaw, V.–Poleska, P. (eds.), Celts on the Margin, Studies of European Cultural Interaction, 7th century BC–1st century AD, dedicated to Zenon Wożniak, Kraków, 33–48. Megaw, J. V. S.–Megaw, M. R., A world turned upsidedown, The bronze plaque from Stupava, okr. Malacky, IN: Bereck, S. (ed.), Iron Age communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mures, BMM, 2, Cluj-Napoca, 115–126. Novotná, M., Die Bronzegefässe in der Slowakei, PBF, II, 11, Stuttgart. Pieta, K., Umenie doby železnej na Slovensku, Bratislava. Pieta, K., Der frühlatènezeiliche Burgwall in Horné Orešany, Westslowakei, SlovArch, 55/2, 295–310. Rolley, C., Bronzes en Messapie, IN: Atti del XXX Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 1990, 185–208. Shefton, B., Adriatic links between Aegean Greece and Early Iron Age Europe during the Archaic and Early Classical periods, Anemos, 2, 7–44. Szabó, M., La vaiselle italique dans la cuvette des Carpathes à l’époque des princes celtes, IN: Mohen, J.-P.–Duval, A.–Eluère, C. (eds), Les Princes celtes et la Méditerranée, Paris, 385–395. Zachar, L., Keltské umenie na Slovensku, Bratislava. List of figures Fig. 1. 1. Plaque from Stupava; 2. Fibula from Slovenské Pravno; 3. Sphinx from Horné Orešany; 4. Mask fibula from Horné Orešany. Fig. 2. Hillfort on Slepý Vrch near Horné Orešany. Fig. 3. Handle of Schnabelkanne in Balneological Museum Piešt’any. Fig. 4. Pitchers from Abrahám and Súlov (?). Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma Some New Data on Iron Age Burial Rite at the Southern Part of the Great Hungarian Plain Zoltán PILLING–Ferenc UJVÁRI University of Szeged, Department of Archaeology Szeged, Hungary penyaaa@gmail.com Tornyai János Múzeum Hódmezővásárhely, Hungary ujvferenc@gmail.com Keywords: Hungary, Szeged–Kiskundorozsma, settlement, La Tène, cemetery, 5th–4th century BC In 2009 the Department of Archaeology of the University of Szeged and the Móra Ferenc Museum carried out a rescue excavation at the site of Szeged–Kiskundorozsma–Sandpit 4 in two phases. The work preceded sand mining.1 The site is situated at the southern part of the Great Hungarian Plain, directly next to Szeged, in the northwest direction from the town, in the vicinity of Kiskundorozsma; very close to the mouth of the river Maros/Mureș (Fig. 1). In the neighbourhood of Kiskundorozsma two landscape types can be distinguished: a higher ridge and a deeper alluvial surface. The ridge of the Danube–Tisza Interfluve Region composes the higher surface, and the superficial overlying bed of this surface is flood plain ‘infusion’ loess. Under this sediment sandy loess and sand are located. The deeper alluvial surface is totally flat, where the floods of the Tisza piled sediment with significant thickness. In this area the flood-free hills covered with flood plain ‘infusion’ loess remained only in smaller patches, which were the remains of the Pleistocene sediment. They stayed dry during the flushes, which sometimes covered the whole county. In this way they ensured good occupation places. In the surroundings of Kiskundorozsma, Fig. 1. The location of the site. on the rim of the ridge these dunes are quite 1 The digs were led by V. Kulcsár (University of Szeged), G. Sánta (University of Szeged) and O. Fogas (Móra Ferenc Museum); whom we would like to thank for allowing us to proceed the material of the site. The finds of the site are housed in Móra Ferenc Museum Szeged under the inventory number Ö 2010.10.1–2010.10.1792 and NK 2010.23.1–2010.23.28. The drawings from the plates were made by A. Miháczi-Pálfi, L. Haraszti and Z. Pilling. We would like to thank P. Pomázi (University of Mainz) for his kind advice regarding the geology of the region. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 217–248 218 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári frequent. This is the reason why the area is abounding in find places (Andó 1995, 13, 20, 26; Fülöp 1984; Molnár Et Al. 1971). In contrast to this, on the higher ridge the lack of the find places can be observed, because the sheet sand and the Pleistocene loess formations are in a permanent change, because of the aeolian erosion, thereby it does not offer favourable circumstances to the occupation (Andó 1995, 15). The site is situated on two low hills, which emerge from a watery-swampy environment (Pl. 1/1). The hills were surrounded by the onetime branch of the Maty streamlet. Both the northern and the southern hills were excavated. A total of 40,000 m2, 268 features and 339 stratigraphic units were excavated which resulted a cemetery and a settlement from the Iron Age.2 Beside the Iron Age, features were excavated from the Bronze, the Middle and the Modern Age, and there were a lot of features, which could not be dated. It is important to emphasise, that nearly the whole site was investigated (Pl. 1/2). The settlement As we have already mentioned, the site – both the cemetery and the settlement – lies on two low hills, which are separated by a depression; probably a former branch of the Maty streamlet ran here. There are more ditches, which ran into or in this depression, which could be water deflecting or boundary ditches. Beside the ditches, the excavation of the settlement resulted houses, pits, ritual features, ovens, a large clay extraction pit and numerous postholes. A total of 15 houses were excavated. The vast majority of them were found on the northern mound (8/8, 11/11, 17/17, 20/20, 29/31, 45/60, 53/73, 91/121, 93/125, 122/171, 167/227, 171/234), with two exceptions (167/227, 171/234) mostly at the northern-north-eastern part of the hill, while only approximately one-fifth of them were situated at the southern hill, mainly the south-western slope of the southern hill (196/261, 246/313, 257/324). The orientation of the buildings of the northern mound is north-east–south-west with one exception (8/8), while on the southern mound it was east–west. Regarding the structure of the buildings, one can observe that the semi-subterranean features mostly have the typical rectangular shape with rounded corners, but some of them are rather big (35–40 m2 or more), and have irregular rectangular form. The houses have two postholes in the middle of the shorter walls in general, but sometimes they have no postholes at all. In some cases there were inner pit systems inside the houses. In other cases (house 11/11; 17/17; 29/31) there were grouping of postholes close to one side or the corner of the house, which refer to the one-time equipment of them – loom or maybe furniture (Pl. 2). The southern part of the site was cut into two parts by an east–west directed ditch (176/239; 181/246), which ran up to the south-eastern part of the northern hill, then suddenly came to an end. It is not sure that the feature belongs to the La Tène period, because it did not contained any material at all. Unfortunately it couldn’t be followed in the depression. Beside all of these, numerous pits, postholes and a big clay extraction pit came to light. The latter is situated in the south-western part of the northern mound. On the excavation map one can see that the houses were situated mostly at the northern mound, while the pits and postholes can be found at both hills in large numbers. It seems that the northern mound was more suitable for settlement for some reason. Some of the houses and other features yielded different types of slag: pieces of glass, iron and pottery slag came to light from houses 8/8, 11/11, 17/17, 20/20, 29/31, 91/121, baking oven 91/124, which was built over the fill of the latter house, house 196/261, burning pit of the oven 197/262 which was dug in the fill of the latter house, ditch section 37/115, pit 154/214 (not sure, that the pit belongs to the La Tène period, because it contained nothing, but animal bone and piece of iron slag), 208/273 and a stray piece of iron slag. Therefore, some of the mentioned features might be connected to workshops. In house 29/31 some small, rectangular adobes with rounded corners were unearthed. Their flat side is light brown, and the other is greenish (Pl. 7/8). If the pieces are really adobes, this will add important data to the knowledge on the architectural methods of the Carpathian Basin in the Late Iron Age. Similar phenomenon has already come to light from another settlement in Hungary: there is information about clay bricks from the Late HaB period of the site of Velem (Fekete 1982, 133). Even if the examination of the animal remains has not been carried out yet, the importance of the features with animal sacrifices should be emphasized. Several features contained animal skeletons, skulls or parts of skeletons. In this way dog skeletons came to light from a pit belonging to house 8 (from pit 8/50 the skeleton 8/63); more skeletons were excavated from the pits belonging to house 29 (29/55 and 2 The excavators of the site used both feature- and stratigraphic numbers for the identification. In the followings the first number marks the number of the feature and the second the stratigraphic unit (e.g. 29/31). Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 219 29/75) and next to one of the skeletons there was a dog skull. The dog from pit 29/55 laid in an abnormal position, probably chopped before put in the pit. The backbone of the dog of pit 98/132 was smashed at 3 points, and in pit 135/191 (found under the Middle Age fireplace 134/190) the bones were scattered and smashed (Pl. 3/1–4). It is not sure, that it can be dated to the Late Iron Age, because beside the dog bones, it contained only uncharacteristic handmade pottery sherds of Prehistoric character. A shin and an antler of a red deer was unearthed in house 8 next to each other, and two red deer antlers in a lower yellow clay layer of the big clay extraction pit 124/173 (Pl. 3/5–7). A skull of a cattle was found in house 29/31, fragments of a skull and a horn from feature 68/94 with other bones, and also a skull from house 122/171. Probably ribs, long bones and a mandible of cattle were in the bottom of the cylindrical shaped pit 125/176, however this latter can be dated to the Late Iron Age optionally, because beside the animal bones, it yielded only some uncharacteristic handmade pottery fragments. A cattle skull came to light from the bottom of ditch 142/202 in upside down position (Pl. 4/1–6). A complete skeleton of horse came to light from the bottom of the pit 99/134 (probably dating from the Late Iron Age, since beside the skeleton of the horse, the pit contained only uncharacteristic pottery sherds of Prehistoric character), and bones of further specimens from pit 160/220, with a skeleton of a cattle. In the latter case, the bones were situated in circle, next to the wall of the feature, or rather the main part of the animal bones were in the middle of the bottom of the pit in one mound. Probably the remains of the animals were put into the pit at the same time. Furthermore, a foreleg and a shoulder blade laid at the northern wall of pit 121/169 in anatomical order (Pl. 4/7–8). Animal skeletons and part of skeletons are not unusual in settlements and cemeteries from the Late Iron Age. We can find analogies across the whole territory once inhabited by the Celts; the custom is also known from the territory Hungary: from the features of the Pákozd sanctuary several human and animal skeletons belonging to different species (cattle, sheep, deer and dog) came to light. The sacrificial function of the place – situated close to a spring, a streamlet and Lake Velence – is doubtless. In the cemetery of Pilismarót–Basaharc pits were also excavated among the graves which yielded human and animal bones – mostly dogs – beside human skeletons and skulls (Petres 1972). On the settlements from the Late Iron Age dog is the most frequently sacrificed animal. As a rule, the complete animal was buried. They are frequently related to death in the Celtic mythology. The horse is the attribute of Epona goddess (Petres 1972, 380). It may be possible, that the horses, excavated at Kiskundorozsma could also be related to her cult. As the most valuable domesticated animal, the horse has particularly important role in the Celtic culture (Jerem 1998, 330). Deer played special role both in the Celtic mythology and in the cults. Deer skeletons or parts of skeletons are known in a great number from the territory of Hungary, both from settlements and cemeteries: Tihany–Óvár (Bartosiewicz 2004), Szakály–Réti földek (Vörös 1986), Sopron–Krautacker (Jerem 2003), Sajópetri–Hosszú dűlő (Bartosiewicz 2007, 294–295); etc. Red deer skeletons or skeleton parts found at sites from the Late Iron Age can be connected in all probability to Cernunnos, the god with deer antlers (Rybová–Soudskẏ 1962; Petres 1972, 380–381). Burying the head with antlers or just the antlers was more common feature, than burying the whole animal, where the head or the antler symbolised the entire animal as a pars pro toto. In this case, the head or the antler symbolised the death, rebirth and immortality (Jerem 2003, 555–556). Gabler (1982, 66) emphasised the fertility aspect of this cult apropos of the red deer skeleton in a storage pit at Szakály. The site of Sopron–Krautacker also gives us data to the cattle sacrifice among others: it is supposed in the case of building 326, that the cattle skull, found in the feature, was fixed at the entry of the hut (Jerem 2003, 556). Perhaps it would not be a too audacious suggestion, that the cattle skull found in an upside down position in the settlement, in ditch 142/202, that ran in the shallow, floodplain part between the two hills, was put here as a result of some kind of sacral event, respectively it may have got some kind of sacral role – in so far as it belongs to the Late Iron Age. If comparing the settlement from Kiskundorozsma with other sites where sacral remains came to light, similarities are conspicuous. In the case of the above mentioned Pákozd sanctuary both in composition and in the matter of position of the animal remains: the remains of dogs in Kiskundorozsma were almost unharmed, just like at Pákozd. Considering remains of deer almost exclusively only the antlers were placed in the features at both sites and the features yielded only parts of cattle skeletons. However, the yellow clay layer observed for example at Pákozd (Petres 1972, 368, 370, fig. 4–5) and at Dunaszentgyörgy (Szöllősi 2009, 141–142) above the remains was not noticed at Kiskundorozsma. Nevertheless, in one case (feature 160/220) a thick yellow sandy layer covered the cattle and horse remains, and in the case of 220 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári the clay extraction pit 124/173 the antler fragment came to light from a yellow, clay layer. The fill of one of the pits (pit 29/55) of house 29 – which contained a dog skeleton – consisted of the shift of ashy yellow clay and brown topsoil layers. However, it is not known, what is their relationship to the skeleton, whether they were under or above the remains. Another dog skeleton and a skull came to light from the floor of the same house (29/75). But the cultic origin of the ash is doubtful, because this ashy, burnt layer was noticed nearly on the whole floor of the house. In this way, its presence can be rather explained with the burning down of the building, than with any cultic event. Therefore, there is no evidence that all of the animal remains could be related to ritual events, in some cases they probably were kitchen midden or buried pet. The excavation resulted pottery material in a great number. Unfortunately, this will not bring us closer to the determination of the age of the settlement, because ceramic material is quite uncharacteristic, very fragmentary, and can be dated only between wide time-limits (LT C1–D, the middle of the 3rd–1st century BC), not to mention, that a significant amount of the sherds could not be determined typologically (Kövér 2011; Lesi 2011). The ratio between the handmade and wheel thrown pottery was approximately 2:1 (Pl. 5–6) not counting the Graphittongefäss (Kövér 2011, 28). From the settlement fragments of two different types of glass bracelets are known, both of them came to light from houses. The first one comes from the fill of the northern wall of house 29/31: a translucent blue with characteristic elongated rhomb and decorated with bosses: one boss is on the peak of the rhomb and two ones are situated between them. The bosses used to be decorated with incised threads of white glass, arranged in spiral shape, as well as the incised zigzag line along the sides of the rhomb. Now, only the traces of this decoration can be seen on the fragment (Pl. 7/3). This bracelet belongs to a relatively rare group found only in the eastern Celtic area. In Haevernick’s system, they compose group 15 (Haevernick 1960, 63), also defined as Nové Zámky/Érsekújvár type (Karwowski 2005, 163–164). The main distribution area of this group is South Poland, Slovakia and Moravia (for the list and location of the sites see Březinová 2004, 148–149, Obr. 9), therefore this must be an artefact produced in a local workshop. Some other specimens are known from Gyöngyöspata–Geregi földek, Hungary (Tankó 2006, 98–99, stray find from field walking), from Osijek–Zeleno polje, Croatia (Dizdar 2006, 97) and from Gomolava, Serbia. The latter got there probably by trade (Jovanović–Jovanović 1988, pl. XLVI/2, 7), and the specimen found at Kiskundorozsma could also mark this route. Marko Dizdar distinguished two subtypes within the group with different dating value: the first one has distinct plastic ornaments, with bosses decorated with incised spiral, where blue and white colours alternate. This can be dated to LT C1. The single settlement finds compose the other subgroup, pieces of which are less profiled and the bosses are monochrome. This latter is the younger group (Dizdar 2006, 98). The type from Kiskundorozsma is well datable to the early phase of the Middle La Tène (Karwowski 2005, 164), although it should be noted, that two more specimens at Bořitov in Moravia refer the retardation of this type (Venclová 1990, 130; Dizdar 2006, 98). In this way the type – with the 6b/1 bracelets and the bobbin beads – belongs to the earliest glass works at the eastern-Celtic territory. Based on this, as well as their concentration in a smaller area and the common stylistic features, the common origin in a local glassmaker’s workshop has been proved (Karwowski 2005, 167. To the common ornamental element of types 6b/1 and 15, and the bobbin beads belong the considerably irregular threads arranged in spiral, usually accompanied with bosses, and threads forming the so called Schleifenverzierung ). According to Venclová (1990, 143) this workshop can be supposed somewhere in the Middle-Danube basin, more precisely in south-west Slovakia. The bracelet of house 45/60 is a much simpler and more general type, which can be found at several places in Central-Europe: translucent blue, D shaped in section with a white glass zigzag motif melted at the middle part (Pl. 7/4). This type belongs to group Haevernick-6b; it appears in LT C, but most of the pieces are from LT D (Haevernick 1960, 49–50). In Gebhard’s work dealing with the glass bracelets from Manching this specimens belong to Reihe 11a, and can be dated to LT C1b (Gebhard 1989, 13, 15, 73, 128). Karwowski (2004, 77) also strengthens this dating in his work dealing with the glass objects from Austria. Venclová divided the Haevernick 6b group into further subgroups according to their decorations: 6b/1 and 6b/2, which have got different dating values. The blue, three ribbed ones with white zigzag motif in the middle belong to subgroup 6b/2 and occur in LT C2 and D phases (Venclová 1990, 120, 122). However, she mentioned, that the manufacturing of this type started probably in LT C1 (Venclová–Salač 1990, 647). According to Dizdar, who collected the glass bracelets from the Drava basin, the Haevernick/Venclová 6b/2 or Gebhard 11 specimens found on the territory of the Scordisci Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 221 and the Taurisci, belong to LT C2, and are the productions of the workshops of the middle Danube Basin, together with the pieces of group 15. The specimens of the two bracelet types, found at the territory of the Mokrong group could have arrived via the Amber road (Dizdar 2006, 83–86). A parallel was found not far from our site at Csanytelek–Újhalastó (A. Pál 1994, 229–230). Two brooches unearthed in the settlement, belong to different types. Unfortunately, one of them is a stray find, but it came to light during the topsoil removal works of house 29/31, so it is quite likely that it belonged to this feature. It is almost a complete piece and belongs to a very rare type. On its leg there is a rectangular plate between two knobs and it ends in an anchor-like part which covered the 4 × 4 upper spring. The plate is divided into 5 parts, and the parts are decorated with enamel: rhomb shape in the middle and four triangles in the corners. The artefact is damaged: the leg slipped down on the bow (Pl. 7/1). From Serbia two specimens are known from Boljevci, three from Stari Banovci (Hunyady 1944, 81) and one from Novi Banovci (Majnarić-Pandžić 1970, 90, pl. XXVII/6). Two more specimens come from Hungary, Törökszentmiklós–Surján (Stanczik–Vaday 1971, 24) and one from Horni Vĕstonice in Moravia (Čižmář 2005, 131; misplacing in the text the finds from Törökszentmiklós, mentioning instead Debrecen, while on the map it appears correctly). The synthesis about the Transylvanian fibulas (Rustoiu 1997) was recently completed by Emilian Teleagă and Karol Pieta, who collected and mapped the sites of the type, not only the specimens with anchor-shaped spring cover and rectangular plate, but all of the Middle La Tène brooches decorated with enamel in the Carpathian Basin (Pieta 2010, 31, Abb. 9; Teleagă 2008, 95–96, Abb. 6). The dating of the type has changed a lot: Ilona Hunyady dated them to LT D, rather the second part of this period based on the anchor-shaped spring cover, analogies of which are known mainly from South Pannonia in the Early Imperial Age, with the distinction, that on the specimens from the Imperial Age the anchor does not cover the whole spring (Hunyady 1944, 81–82). Majnarić-Pandžić (1970, 15, 126) dated the specimen from Boljevci from the end of the Middle LT to LT D. Čižmář (2005, 131) placed the specimens from Törökszentmiklós–Surján (‘Debrecen’) to LT B2/ C1 phase. Similarly to Hunyady, he also put the origin of this type to the confluence area of the Drava and Sava with the Danube. Bujna (2003, 61, 106) dated the artefacts from Holiare – without anchor-shaped spring cover – to the late phase of LT C1 or the border of LT C1 and C2. In this respect one can observe, that the type got older and older during the years. The brooch fragment from a firing pit of an oven 197/262 (subsequently dug into the fill of the house 196/261) represents another type. The piece is in a very bad shape: only the burnt and corroded spring and partly the pin and the bow are kept, so the typological determination of the object can be only vaguely carried out (Pl. 7/2). Most probably it was the part of a long iron fibula, which can be dated to the LT C1 and the following period, however the earliest specimens of the type turn up with free leg in the very end of LT B2 (Almássy 1998, 68). A big iron spoon came to light from one of the pits of house 91/121. It is 43 cm long and has an oval and flat head (Pl. 7/7). The pit (91/136) in which it was found was the ash pit of an oven, probably dug subsequently into the fill of the house, because it was directly next to it, and in the upper part of its fill burnt clay and ashy layers alternate. We did not found any parallels from the territory of Hungary, but Jacobi presents numerous similar pieces from Manching (calling them Herdschaufeln). They are a bit different from this piece, because their heads are angular and their handles are twisted, but there is a good analogy of our spoon among them (Jacobi 1974, Taf. 30. 538). In all likelihood they served as instruments in kitchen, related the oven or hearth, but they also came to light with smith tools as well (Jacobi 1974, 101–102). They are also known from the territory of Slovakia: the oldest one was excavated from grave 2 of the Palárikovo cemetery. It was a female grave from LT B2/C1 period, but other specimens are also known from the Middle and Late La Tène. They are associated with metalwork (Pieta 2010, 157, Abb. 66). In the house in which the ash pit and the oven were dug in an iron slag came to light. So it is possible, that on the site or its vicinity a workshop operated, and the spoon could belong to it. The other option is that it was used in the kitchen, based on the closeness of the oven. Beside the above mentioned, some other metal objects were excavated at the settlement: rivets, different kind of knives and two tiny bronze fragments: the first one reminds a fragment of a buffer terminated arm ring with beaded decoration or a fragment of a pseudo-buffer terminated torque: it has got one bigger and three smaller knobs. The smallest knob closes the fragment, while it used to continue in the direction of the biggest one (Pl. 7/6). Torques with similar element are known from Vác (Hellebrandt 1999, t. XXI/8) or Csabrendek (Hunyady 1942, t. XXIV/5), but the problem is, that if this had been the part of this type of jewel, the small knob must have contained a gap, in which the other end of the 222 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári torque could have joined. Similar armring, with variation of bigger and smaller parts came to light from Balatongyörök–Kövesmező (Horváth 1987, t. IV/8), Hévíz–Vörösmarty utca (Horváth 1987, t. VII/5), etc. The problem in this case is that the buffer terminaled armrings with beaded decoration have got similar parts, but they always end in a bigger knob. So it is still a question what it could be. The second piece is a tiny arched fragment. On its external side bronze wiring can be seen, or the wiring could be just imitated with incisions. It has got two irregular shaped knobs, and there is wavy motif on each of the knobs (Pl. 7/5). Parallels for this fragment are not know, so its identification was not possible, however according to its size and arch it could be a bronze ring or a hoop. Summarising all these information one can state, that a nearly complete, farm settlement came to light from the southern part of the Great Hungarian Plain. The 15 houses were not in use at the same time, because in several cases there were ovens built onto the fill of the houses and the clay extraction pit (in house 91/121 the 91/123 and 124; in the clay extraction pit 124/173 the 124/198; in house 196/261 the 197/262), which contained materials from the Late Iron Age, too. This was possible only if the settlement was still in use when the above mentioned houses were abandoned and filled up. Beside the stock breeding and crop cultivation the inhabitants of the settlement could have dealt with iron-, glass- and pottery manufacturing based on the pieces of slag. Furthermore, it is quite likely that fishing also took part in the economic life of the residents, because of the closeness of the river Tisza and the Maty-streamlet, none the less there were no remains, which referred to it. On the basis of the brooches and glass bracelets, the settlement can be dated to LT C1b and LT C2 periods, but one may count with the continuous life at the settlement in LT D. The cemetery3 The cemetery, dated to the 5th–4th century BC – period for which only few cemeteries are known in the neighbouring regions –, although badly plundered, was completely excavated. The settlement of the population of the cemetery was not identified in the region. The main aim of this part is to publish the material and give a short interpretation. Fig. 2. Map of the cemetery. Grave 16, obnr 16/ snr 16 (Pl. 10/1) Grave pit of uncertain shape, l.: 80 cm, w.: 55 cm, d.: 10 cm.4 NE–SW, 135–315°. Contracted female maturus (40–45 years). Badly disturbed, the northern side due to the erosion and the ploughing, the south-western part due to a digging-in. The skeleton laid on its left side, the upper parts of the skull were destroyed, only the armbones and one of the femur were in situ. 3 4 We would like to thank V. Kulcsár (University of Szeged) that we could work on this material and also for her useful advices during our work; E. Jerem (MTA) for her useful advices about the interpretation and the dating of the material; A. Marcsik (University of Szeged) for the anthropological determination; T. M. Tóth (University of Szeged) for the identification of the stones and Gy. Györffy (University of Szeged) for his expert opinion about the tortoises, determining their race, gender, and for answering my questions. We are very grateful to A. Miháczi-Pálfi for her various assistance about this work. L: length, w: width, d: depth, h: height, rd: rim diameter, bd: base diameter, rn: registry number. In the text we term the graves by their stratigraphic number (snr). Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 223 Grave 18, obnr 18/ snr 18 (Pl. 10/2) Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 207 cm, w.: 98 cm, d.: 32 cm. NW–SE, 315–135°. Inhumated female adult. Fully robbed grave, only a few ribs and finger bones survived. It is parallel with grave 58 that lies next to it. The robbing pit of the grave (obnr 44/ snr 59) cut both graves. The grave had a circular ditch (obnr 19/ snr 19) around it. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: slightly outcurving, polished rim fragment of a grey, wheel-made, sand-tempered vessel. L.: 6.3 cm; rd.: ~19 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1695. (Pl. 8/1) Grave 27, obnr 25/ snr 27 (Pl. 10/3) Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 240 cm, w.: 77 cm, d.: 24 cm. W–E, 285–105°. Male adultus (35–39 years) stretched out on the back. Robbing pit disturbed the dead up to the pelvis, only the lower jaws survived from the skull, from the bust an armbone and the collar-bone were not in situ, one humerus was above the pelvis. Below the pelvis the skeleton was untouched; the bones were in wrong condition. The spear came from the robbing pit; the stone object was between the knees. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: 1. Rhombic, ridged, long socketed iron spear. L.: 22.8 cm; w.: 4.5 cm; socket diam.: 2.2 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1696. (Pl. 8/2) 2. Grey and white, half sphere shaped, polished stone amulet which is perforated at two places. L.: 5.2 cm; h.: 1.9 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1697. (Pl. 8/3) Grave 30, obnr 28/ snr 30 Oval grave pit, l.: 170 cm, w.: 81 cm, d.: 10 cm. NW–SE, 315–135°. Rite: no data. A feature without any finds, but the shape and orientation is similar to the nearby graves; therefore it was described on field as grave. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave 32, obnr 30/ snr 32 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 189 cm, w.: 90 cm, d.: 28 cm. E–W, 90–270°. Inhumated infans I (4–5 years). The grave was robbed, parts of a child’s bust (ribs, arms), jaw appeared in the eastern side. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: 1. Rusty, triangular sectioned, one edged fragment of an iron knife. L.: 5.5 cm; w.: 1.8 cm; blade diam.: 0.3 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1698. (Pl. 8/4) 2. Fragment of an outside red, inside grey, handmade, sand-tempered body of a vessel. L.: 3.7 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1699. Grave 39, obnr 31/ snr 39 (Pl. 10/4) Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 264 cm, w.: 110 cm, d.: 53 cm. SE–NW, 140–320°. Inhumated male adultus (35–39 years) and infans I (4–5 years). The grave pit broadened on the north-eastern part irregularly, the disordered bones were on the south-eastern part. There were mandibules of a man and a child, and part of the child’s skull between the bones, so it can be considered as a double burial. On the northeastern side there were some pottery fragments, in the middle of the grave a cup turned up. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: 1. Fragment of an outside grey, inside grey and black, handmade, sand-tempered, slightly inverted rimmed cup. H.: 3.9 cm; rd.: 9.2 cm; bd.: 4.2 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1700. (Pl. 8/8) 2. Black, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered, outside polished base fragment of a vessel. H.: 3.8 cm; w.: 8.8 cm; bd.: ~12 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1701. 3. Outside black, inside brown, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered, everted rim and body sherds of a vessel, total of 5 pieces. On the shoulder burnished net pattern can be seen. L1.: 13.3 cm; w1.: 11.8 cm; rd.: ~19 cm; l2.: 12 cm; w2.: 13,8 cm; l3.: 10 cm; w3.: 6.3 cm; l4.: 3.3 cm; l5.: 3 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1702. (Pl. 8/7) 4. Grey, wheel-made, graphite (?)-, crushed pottery and sand-tempered body sherds of a vessel. Outside comb decoration is visible. L1.: 6.4 cm; w1.: 6.1 cm; l2.: 6.1 cm; w2.: 4.7 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1706 (Pl. 8/5–6) 5. Brown, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered, linear, obliquely cut rim fragment, decorated with cuttings. L.: 5.3 cm; w.: 4.2 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1707. (Pl. 8/9) 6. Grey, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered, linear, rounded rim and sherds of a bowl. L.: 6 cm; w.: 5.7 cm; rd.: ~11 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1709. (Pl. 8/11) 7. Brown, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered body sherd, outside rib impressed with finger tips. L.: 4.3 cm; w.: 4.5 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1710. (Pl. 8/10) 8. From the grave there are more small and uncharacteristic pottery fragments. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1703–1705; Ő.2010.10.1708; Ő.2010.10.1711–1722. Grave 40, obnr 32/ snr 40 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 174 cm, w.: 75 cm, d.: 21 cm. SE–NW, 160–340°. Inhumated female adultus and infans I. The grave is robbed, only few bones remained, but not in anatomical position. From the bones 224 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári we have os frontale of an infans I, and scapula and humerus pieces of a woman, so this is a double burial too. The robbing pit destroyed the original shape of the grave pit at the northern and western side. There was a pottery fragment on the southern side, a fragment of a Certosa brooch was on the middle of the grave. Grave inventory: 1. Grey, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered, slightly everted rim fragment. L.: 4.2 cm; rd.: ~10 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1723. 2. Corroded fragment of a Certosa brooch with a knob. L.: 4 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1724. (Pl. 9/1) Grave 44, obnr 35/ snr 44 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 240 cm, w.: 108 cm, d.: 34 cm. W–E, 270–90°. Rite: no data. Presumably a grave because of the above mentioned characteristics, the only find was a sherd. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: Body sherd of a grey, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered vessel. L.: 3.7 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1725. Grave 45, obnr 36/ snr 45 (Pl. 10/5) Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 200 cm, w.: 54 cm, d.: 21 cm. NW–SE, 300–120°. Female maturus (50–55 years) stretched on the back. The length of the body was 153 cm. The jaw was fallen, the arms were crossed above the bust, the right hand was abnormally downwards, the left hand was missing, the legs were paralleled. There were two brooches on the right and left clavicle, near the neck 10 silver beads, between the ribs an iron object. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: 1. Corroded, crossbow structured iron Certosa brooch. L.: 5.7 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1726. (Pl. 9/2) 2. Corroded, crossbow structured iron Certosa brooch. L.: 5.5 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1727. (Pl. 9/3) 3. Globular, fragmented silver beads twisted from thin silver-wire. L.: 0.5 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1728. (Pl. 9/4) 4. Corroded iron fragments. L.: 1.2 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1729. Grave 48, obnr 39/ snr 48 (Pl. 10/6) Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 250 cm, w.: 80 cm, d.: 40 cm. E–W, 100–280°. Male maturus (35–39 years) stretched on the back. The skeleton laid in anatomical position, its length is 160 cm. His arms laid on the chest. Grave 70 laid below this grave. The jug turned up on the scraping level above the place of the legs. There was an obsidian chip below the head, next to the head an iron spear, next to the left clavicle a double pin, on the left side of the pelvis an iron wire, on the left femur an iron knife, next to the left femur an other iron knife, next to the right leg fragment of a vessel can be found. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: 1. Grey, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered, everted rimmed, profiled shouldered fragments of a jug. The strap-handle starts from the shoulder. H.: 6.7 cm; w.: 7.3 cm; rd.: ~5 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1730. (Pl. 9/6) 2. Rhombic, ridged, corroded long iron spear. Textile marks can be seen on the socket and the blade. L.: 45.4 cm; w.: 6.8 cm; socket diam.: 3 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1731. (Pl. 9/10) 3. Rusty, triangular sectioned, one edged fragment of an iron knife. L.: 16.8 cm; w.: 2.3 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1732. (Pl. 9/5) 4. Corroded fragments of an iron double pin. L1.: 5.6 cm; l2.: 5 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1733. (Pl. 9/8) 5. Corroded, hooky ended iron wire. L.: 8 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1734. (Pl. 9/7) 6. Rusty, triangular sectioned, one edged fragment of an iron knife. L.: 12.1 cm; w.: 1.7 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1735. (Pl. 9/9) 7. Outside brown, inside grey, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered rim and body sherds of a vessel. L.: 9.7 cm; w.: 10.8 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1736. 8. Obsidian fragment. L.: 2.8 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1737. 9. Iron fragment. L.: 5.3 cm; w.: 2.3 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1738. Grave 56, obnr 41/ snr 56 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 149 cm, w.: 70 cm, d.: 23 cm. NW–SE, 315–135°. Inhumated infans I. Only a part of the child’s skull laid in the grave, but nothing referred to robbing. The only find was an iron knife at the place of the left shoulder. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: 1. Rusty, triangular sectioned, one edged fragment of an iron knife. L.: 4.8 cm; w.: 1.7 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1742. (Pl. 9/11) 2. Brown, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered body sherds. L.: 2.5 cm; w.: 5.2 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1743. Grave 57, obnr 42/ snr 57 Oval grave pit, l.: 154 cm, w.: 64 cm, d.: 20 cm. NW–SE, 310–130°. Rite: no data. Grave without human remains, the finds were in the south-eastern side in one pile, maybe at the leg in the past. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 225 Grave inventory: 1. Brown, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered, slightly inverted rim fragment. Outside a 3 cm long boss can be seen. L.: 4.1 cm; w.: 4 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1744. (Pl. 9/13) 2. Brown, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered, inverted rimmed fragment of a beaker. Decorated with small knobs, can be connected with grave good no. 1. H.: 7.3 cm; w.: 8.1 cm; bd.: 5.5 cm, rd.: 9 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1745. (Pl. 9/14) 3. Grey, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered, rim and profiled base fragments of a conical bowl. L1.: 4.3 cm; w1.: 9.6 cm; l2.: 4.2 cm; w2.: 5.3 cm; l3.: 4 cm; w3.: 3.6 cm; h.: 3.1 cm; w4.: 5.1 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1746. (Pl. 9/12) 4. Stone fragment. L.: 3.5 cm; w.: 3.6 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1747. Grave 58, obnr 43/ snr 58 (Pl. 10/2) Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 274 cm, w.: 90 cm, d.: 25 cm. NW–SE, 315–135°. Inhumated female adult and child. The grave was robbed, from the robbing pit a longbone and a clavicle turned up, but it was unclear whether they belonged to this grave or to grave 18 which lied next to this. On the western side some longbones turned up, the bones of the foot were on the southern side on the scraping level. The skeletal bones belonged to an adult woman, the tibia and the radius could be of a child, so this can be a double burial too. This grave was rounded with the same circular ditch as grave 18. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: 1. Grey, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered, linear rim fragment. Decorated with a horseshoe rib. L.: 9.7 cm; w.: 11.7 cm, rd.: 18 cm. Ltsz.: Ő.2010.10.1748. (Pl. 9/15) 2. Brown, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered body sherd. L.: 6.9 cm; w.: 6 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1749. 3. Black, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered, concave base sherd. H.: 2.1 cm; w.: 4.4 cm; bd.: ~4 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1750. Grave 67, obnr 48/ snr 67 Oval grave pit, l.: 100 cm, w.: 63 cm, d.: 15 cm. NW–SE, 310–130°. Rite: no data. On the basis of the orientation and shape it could be a child’s grave. There were not any human remains; the only finds were small fragments. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: black, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered body sherds. L1.: 3.5 cm; w1.: 4 cm; l2.: 2.5 cm; l3.: 1.4 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1751. Grave 68, obnr 49/ snr 68 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 123 cm, w.: 56 cm, d.: 10 cm. NW–SE, 300–120°. Rite: no data. On the basis of the orientation and shape it could be a grave. There weren neither human remains nor finds. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave 69, obnr 50/ snr 69 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 144 cm, w.: 65 cm, d.: 30 cm. W–E, 270–90°. Rite: no data. On the basis of the orientation and shape it could be a grave. There were neither human remains nor finds. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave 70, obnr 39/ snr 70 (Pl. 10/6) Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 250 cm, w.: 80 cm, d.: 40 cm. W–E, 280–100°. Male maturus stretched on the back. The grave was situated under grave 48 in the same grave pit with opposite orientation. The arms of the man were crossed above the stomach, the length of the body was 150 cm. Lots of bones were missing, we had the bones of the legs, forearms, the left hand, skull. The row of teeth were incomplete, the bones of the foot, pelvis, chest were missing. Next to the skull an iron spear turned up, we suspect that the second knife of grave 48 originally belonged to this grave. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: rhombic, ridged, corroded long iron spear. Textile marks can be seen on the socket and the blade. L.: 47.8 cm; w.: 6.3 cm; socket diam.: 2.7 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1739. (Pl. 9/17) Grave 71, obnr 51/ snr 71 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 230 cm, w.: 120 cm, d.: 50 cm. NW–SE, 315–135°. Inhumated juvenis. Completely robbed, only a few longbones remained. Only a few uncharacteristic pottery fragments turned up (Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1753–1761). Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: black, wheel-made (?), sandtempered, outside polished, channelled body sherd. Outside burnished net decoration is visible. L.: 3.7 cm; w.: 3.9 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1752. (Pl. 9/16) Grave 93, obnr 67/ snr 93 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 168 cm, w.: 88 cm, d.: 41 cm. NW–SE, 300–120°. Rite: no data. On the basis of the orientation and shape it could be a grave. There were not any human remains; the only find was a tortoiseshell. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. 226 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári Grave 107, obnr 81/ snr 107 (Pl. 10/7) Oval grave pit, l.: 200 cm, w.: 95 cm, d.: 14 cm. SW–NE, 240–60°. Female adultus stretched on the back. The head of the skeleton turned right, the shoulders were slightly pull up, the hands and the feet were missing. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave 108, obnr 82/ snr 108 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 113 cm, w.: 68 cm, d.: 30 cm. NE–SW, 60–240°. Rite: no data. There were no finds. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave 127, obnr 127/ snr 127 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 154 cm, w.: 71 cm, d.: 33 cm. NW–SE, 315–135°. Rite: no data. No finds, turned up in the same group with the similar graves 178, 181, 185, 186, 196, 197, 199, 200, 204. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave 161, obnr 115/ snr 161 (Pl. 10/8) Oval grave pit, l.: 138 cm, w.: 80 cm, d.: 20 cm. E–W, 80–260°. Infans I stretched on the back. Only the parts of the skull, the jaw, the right humerus, and the longbones of the legs remained. The length of the skeleton wss 83 cm. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave 162, obnr 116/ snr 162 (Pl. 10/9) Oval grave pit, l.: 170 cm, w.: 94 cm, d.: 16 cm. E–W, 80–260°. Infans I or II stretched on the back. From the bones only the fragmented skull, the longbones, and the pelvis remained. Next to the left shoulder a stone can be found, L.: 8.5 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1788. Grave 178, obnr 132/ snr 178 Oval grave pit, l.: 130 cm, w.: 70 cm, d.: 22 cm. NW–SE, 315–135°. Rite: no data. No finds, the grave turned up in the same group with the similar graves 127, 181, 185, 186, 196, 197, 199, 200, 204. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave 181, obnr 128/ snr 181 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 170 cm, w.: 66 cm, d.: 28 cm. NE–SW, 45–225°. Rite: no data. The only finds were some uncharacteristic pottery, turned up in the same group with the similar graves 127, 178, 185, 186, 196, 197, 199, 200, 204. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave inventory: 1. Grey, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered body sherd. L.: 4.4 cm; w.: 4.5 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1790. 2. Brown, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered body sherd. L.: 2.5 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1791. Grave 185, obnr 130/ snr 185 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 146 cm, w.: 80 cm, d.: 52 cm. NE–SW, 45–225°. Rite: no data. The only find was a tortoiseshell, turned up in the same group with the similar graves 127, 178, 181, 186, 196, 197, 199, 200, 204. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Details of the tortoiseshell: 1 plastron: l.: 146 mm, 1 carapax: l.: 152 mm, gender: female. Grave 186, obnr 131/ snr 186 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 158 cm, w.: 65 cm, d.: 51 cm. NW–SE, 320–140°. Rite: no data. No finds, except for tortoiseshells. The grave turned up in the same group with the similar graves 127, 178, 181, 185, 196, 197, 199, 200, 204. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Details of the tortoiseshell: 1 plastron: l.: 148 mm, 1 carapax fragment, gender: female. 1 plastron fragment, l.: 62 mm, calculated length of the plastron: 145 mm, 1 carapax fragment (3/4 part), calculated length of carapax: 154 mm. The two parts belong to the same tortoise, gender: female. Grave 196, obnr 137/ snr 196 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 150 cm, w.: 85 cm, d.: 40 cm. NW-SE, 315–135°. Rite: no data. No finds, except for tortoiseshells. The grave turned up in the same group with the similar graves 127, 178, 181, 185, 186, 197, 199, 200, 204. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Details of the tortoiseshell: 1 plastron fragment, l.: 67 mm, calculated length of the plastron: 118 mm, 1 carapax: l.: 132.5 mm, gender: female. 1 plastron fragment, l.: 81 mm, calculated length of the plastron: 145 mm, 1 carapax fragment, calculated length of carapax: 155 mm, gender: female. Grave 197, obnr 138/ snr 197 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 135 cm, w.: 80 cm, d.: 36 cm. NE–SW, 60–240°. Rite: no data. No finds, except for tortoiseshells. The grave turned up in the same group with the similar graves 127, 178, 181, 185, 186, 196, Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 227 199, 200, 204. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Details of the tortoiseshell: 1 plastron fragment, l.: 106 mm, calculated length of the plastron: 187 mm, gender: female. 1 plastron, l.: 145 mm, gender: female. Grave 199, obnr 139/ snr 199 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 150 cm, w.: 70 cm, d.: 38 cm. NW–SE, 315–135°. Rite: no data. No finds, the grave turned up in the same group with the similar graves 127, 178, 181, 185, 186, 196, 197, 200, 204. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave 200, obnr 140/ snr 200 Oval grave pit, l.: 145 cm, w.: 80 cm, d.: 42 cm. NW–SE, 330–150°. Rite: no data. No finds, the grave turned up in the same group with the similar graves 127, 178, 181, 185, 186, 196, 197, 199, 204. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Grave 204, obnr 144/ snr 204 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 150 cm, w.: 80 cm, d.: 40 cm. NE–SW, 45–225°. Rite: no data. No finds, except for tortoiseshells. The grave turned up in the same group with the similar graves 127, 178, 181, 185, 186, 196, 197, 199 and 200. Fill: brown humus with yellow inclusions. Details of the tortoiseshell: 1 plastron fragment, l.: 65 mm, calculated length of the plastron: 151 mm, gender: female. 1 plastron, l.: 115.5 mm, 1 carapax, l.: 123.4 mm, w.: 117 mm, gender: female (?). Grave 240, obnr 177/ snr 240 Rectangular grave pit with rounded corners, l.: 150 cm, w.: 55 cm, d.: 16 cm. N–S, 340–160°. Inhumated infans II or juvenis. The grave pit was between two sandhills, they dug it into the thick humus layer, that is why it turned up in the course of cutting down the topsoil with machines, so only the bottom of the grave can be found. From the skeleton only a pelvis fragment remained. Grave inventory: Brown, handmade, crushed pottery and sand-tempered body sherd. L.: 5 cm; w.: 3.4 cm. Rn.: Ő.2010.10.1792. The burial rite For the cause that the cemetery was disturbed very badly, in several cases it is difficult to accurately determine the rite, because lots of the graves did not contain any human remains. The same problem arises at the examination of the orientations. Even if we have human remains in the burial, they are disordered, so only the main orientation of the grave pit can be examined and not the body. At Szeged– Kiskundorozsma–Sandpit 4 there are all in all 34 features that can be called graves, but not all of them can be related to the Iron Age. Grave 16 18 27 30 32 39 40 44 45 48 56 57 58 67 68 69 70 71 93 107 108 127 Position contracted inhumation stretched – inhumation inhumation inhumation – stretched stretched inhumation – inhumation – – – stretched inhumation – stretched – – Orientation 135–315° SE–NW 315–135° NW–SE Md 285–105° W–E 315–135° NW–SE Md 090–270° W–E Md 140–320° SE–NW 160–340° SE–NW Md 090–270° E–W Md 300–120° NW–SE 100–280° E–W 315–135° NW–SE 310–130° NW–SE Md 315–135° NW–SE Md 310–130° NW–SE Md 300–120° NW–SE Md 270–090° W–E Md 280–100° W–E 315–135° NW–SE Md 300–120° NW–SE Md 240–060° SW–NE Md 240–060° SW–NE Md 315–135° NW–SE Md Gender F F M – C M, C F, C – F M C – F, C – – – M C – F – – Age 40– 45 23– 35–39 – 4 –5 35–39, 4–5 23–, 4–5 – 50–55 35–39 4–5 – 23–, 4–5 – – – maturus juvenis – 23– – – Disturbed + + + ? + + + ? ? + ? ? ? + ? ? ? 228 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári Grave 161 162 178 181 185 186 196 197 199 200 204 240 Position stretched stretched – – – – – – – – – inhumation Orientation Gender Age 080–260° E–W C 4–5 080–260° E–W C inf. I, II 315–135° NW–SE Md – – 045–225° NE–SW Md – – 045–225° NE–SW Md – – 320–140° NW–SE Md – – 315–135° NW–SE Md – – 060–240° NE–SW Md – – 315–135° NW–SE Md – – 330–150° NW–SE Md – – 045–225° NE–SW Md – – 340–160° N–S Md C inf., juv. Fig. 3. Catalogue of the graves (Md: Main direction). Grave Brooch Double Stone Silver bead Spear Knife Vessel Potsherds pin 16 18 1 27 1 1 30 32 1 1 39 2 + 40 1 1 44 1 45 2 10 48 1 1 2 1 1 56 1 1 57 1 2 1 58 + 67 1 68 69 70 1 71 + 93 107 108 127 161 162 1 178 181 2 185 186 196 197 199 200 204 240 1 Fig. 4. Main inventories of the graves. Disturbed ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Iron objects Tortoise + + 1 1 2 2 2 2 Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 229 The positions of the graves are differing; there is no system in the cemetery, general characteristic of the period (Jerem 1972, 78). Graves 30, 32, 39, 44, 56, 57, 27, 67 and 78 are somewhat in a line, but the other graves around cannot be connected perfectly to this row. There is another concentration on a small hill, west from the mentioned row, where a part of the ‘cenotaphs’ lie, namely graves 127, 178, 181, 185, 186, 196, 197, 199, 200 and 204. All in all there are approximately three grave groups: 1. the row and graves nearby; 2. the graves on the small hill (graves 127, 178, etc.); 3. and graves 107, 108, 161 and 162 on the north-western part of the site. Since the excavators described all of them as graves, fitting to the structure of the cemetery, and the features have the form and similar orientations with other graves, furthermore few of them had potsherds as inventory, there were no superposition and there is no clue showing that these graves belong to other period, we concluded that from the 19 ‘cenotaphs’ some can be connected to the Iron Age cemetery. The number of such graves is improbably high (19 out of 34), but there is no argument sustaining the chronology of the ones from the small hill (group 2) and the dating of grave 240 situated far from the others. Since it is impossible to verify these for sure, these graves will be dealt with only where it is necessary. In this respect, from the total of 34 graves 23 were assuredly connected to the Iron Age, and from these 23 graves 8 are ‘cenotaph’. The dominant rite – as in the majority of the cemeteries from the 5th–4th century BC – is inhumation observed in 15 cases, among which in 7 cases the position is indefinite, in 7 cases the dead were stretched on the back, and in 1 case contracted. The possibility that the 8 ‘cenotaph’ graves some could be cremated is highly unlikely, because the excavators found neither cremated bones nor ashes. The rite of contraction in the La Tène period in the Great Hungarian Plain is usually interpreted as the influence of the Scythian Age population (Vekerzug culture), hence this custom is strange in the La Tène culture (Maráz 1981, 99), though sporadically appears (Almássy 1998, 75). Although the cemeteries of the Scythian period also show big differences, e.g. in Tápiószele the contraction is almost exclusive; in Szentes–Vekerzug it is not characteristic. The explanation can be the mixed ethnic background of the Scythian period. According to Kemenczei (2001, 16) the contraction is common in the area where the pre Scythian Mezőcsát culture lived before. Kiskundorozsma is situated next to the southern border of the Vekerzug culture, so we can interpret this as a Scythian element. But the main characteristics of our cemetery point unambiguously to the Srem group, and in Vojvodina there are a few examples of contraction (Pečine, Zemun–Asfaltna baza, Vagan) from as early as the Kalakača phase (Medović 2003, Abb. 3). From the Srem group parallels from Stubarlija grave 2 (Medović 2007, 13), Doroslovo grave 19 (Trajković 2008, 44), and maybe Vinkovci–NAMA grave 6 (Majnarić-Pandžić 2003, Abb. 2) can be mentioned. Medović points out the eastern influence in the Bosut group, so it can be that the rite of contraction got into the Bosut group from east. So it is difficult to decide the origin of the contraction in the Kiskundorozsma cemetery, because both the effect of the Vekerzug culture and the Srem group seems to be plausible. The domination of the inhumation is general and widespread from HaD to the end of LT B2 in Central-Europe. In the North Balkans the rite changes from cremation to inhumation after the DaljDoroslovo group (Medović–Hänsel 2006, 495). The inhumation rite is typical in the cemetery in question too, however the rite of the ‘cenotaphs’ cannot be reconstructed. Therefore it can be assumed that in the Kiskundorozsma cemetery exclusively inhumation was practiced. This makes difference from the Vekerzug culture of the Great Hungarian Plain, because the rite of the latter was mixed. At the same time, the cemetery from Kiskundorozsma has good parallels at the inhumation cemeteries of the Srem group (for detailed research history see: Medović–Hänsel 2006, 489–491; Medović 2007, 78). Regarding the position of the dead one can observe that the arms were crossed above the chest or stomach. Because of the disturbance there are only few clear examples (graves 45, 48 and 70), with analogies in the Srem group cemeteries (Medović 2003, Abb. 4; Medović–Hänsel 2006, 491, Taf. IX; Medović 2007, 87; Trajković 2008, 44). In some cases the deceased were put into some kind of shroud, because marks of textile are visible on the socket and blade of the spears of graves 48 and 70. These two graves were dug exactly into the same pit, and the warriors were put below and above each other, with opposite orientation (west–east and east–west). The double burials are not rare in the Iron Age, but this mode is a rare one. The question arises, whether they were put into the grave at the same time or the upper one was buried later? The finds don’t indicate any chronological sequence; however it is reasonable to presume some kind of a close relation between the warriors. In the case of the analogous situation from the LT B1/2 cemetery of Ménfőcsanak the second burial was later in time (Vaday 2006). Grave 18 from Vinkovci–NAMA can be similar too, there above a grave of a male there was a female buried too (Majnarić-Pandžić 2003, 488, without illustration). 230 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári In some ‘cenotaphs’ (93, 185, 186, 196, 197 and 204) there were no human remains in the pits only tortoiseshells. However they were not always complete ones, in 6 cases only the upper or the lower part of the tortoiseshell was found: in graves 93, 196 one upper part, in grave 197 two upper parts, in grave 204 one lower part. The tortoise belongs to the species Emys orbicularis, and the main question of course is whether that the tortoises were grave goods or not? According to Gy. Györffy’s opinion5 it seems logical that the tortoises were not grave goods, so the female tortoises went there to lay eggs and died somehow. But the facts go against this: in some cases there is only one part of the shell, in some cases found at the bottom of the pit, which is deeper than 10 cm. There are two data showing the presence of tortoises at the depictions from the Iron Age. In Hermes/Mercury’s hymns we find a story about making the first lyre: Hermes made it from a tortoiseshell, and from then the tortoise was a sacred animal of Hermes. 2) There is a depiction of a tortoise on a Villanova II belt from Monterozzi 2 (Magee 2010, 121). Though both arguments are plausible, it is more probable that the tortoises were not grave goods. Rite Piece Inhumation total 15 Inhumation, unknown position 7 Stretched 7 Contracted 1 Unknown 8 Total 23 Ratios compared to the whole cemetery 65% 30% 30% 5% 35% Ratios inside inhumation 46% 46% 8% Fig. 5. Ratios of the rite. Because of the strong disturbance of the graves there is precise data only in 44% of the graves (10 graves out of 23). These data do not have projecting values, and show a totally mixed picture. Taking into consideration the doubtful orientations and the ‘cenotaph’ graves too, and examining only the main orientation of the grave pit, the domination of the north-west–south-east main direction can be observed, followed by the west–east and north-east–south-west main directions. No connection between the rite, the gender and age of the deceased and the orientation could be defined; the orientation was not strictly connected to the burial rite. Orientation E–W SE–NW SW–NE W–E NW–SE Total Clear data Ratios compared to the whole cemetery 3 13% 2 9% 1 4% 2 9% 2 9% 10 44% Fig. 6. Definite orientations of the graves. Main direction Piece Ratios compared to every grave N–S/S–N 1 3% NE–SW/SW–NE 6 18% E–W/W–E 8 23% NW–SE/SE–NW 19 56% Total 34 Fig. 7. The main directions of the site. 5 Main direction Piece Ratio N–S/S–N NE–SW/SW–NE 2 9% E–W/W–E 8 35% NW–SE/SE–NW 13 56% Total 23 Fig. 8. The main directions of the cemetery. “All of the specimens are female and mature. Their size belongs to the higher limits of the tortoises, which live today, one specimen has record size. The Emys orbicularis banters to water, moves to the dryland only in reasonable cases, e.g. the drying of the living place, when they move to new waters. That is why there are no males often far from the water. But in their egg laying period the females have to look for egg laying places, that can be many times further from the water, where the mating happened. They like the loose, sandy soils, where they can make their nests easier which are situated 8–10 cm below the surface. In this period they are more vulnerable than the males in the water. The other cause for why they can come out of water, is the wintering. According to the literature, they spend the winter in the mud below the water, but they can come out to the dryland if the level of the oxygen is low in the water or the water is polluted. Hence all of the found specimens are females (the natural sex ratio is 50:50%), they could get into the site in a natural way for laying eggs. We can only guess why and how they died.” Gy. Györffy’s oral information. Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 231 Considering the analogies, in Szentlőrinc and Beremend the domination of the west–east main direction with 71% can be observed, followed by the north-west–south-east (with 9%) and the northeast–south-west (with 8%) main directions (Jerem 1968, 175; Jerem 1972, 69, 74). From the cemeteries of the Srem group Vinkovci–NAMA shows the same mixed picture: 2 W–E, 1 NE–SW, 2 SE–NW, 1 N–S, 1 SW–NE (Majnarić-Pandžić 2003), just as the same on Stubarlija: 1 E–W, 1 W–E, 1 NW–SE, 1 SE–NW, 2 NE–SW (Medović 2007). Though there is a low amount of graves from Doroslovo, the biggest number is the NW–SE there too (Trajković 2008). In the Great Hungarian Plain in the pre-Scythian period (Patek 1990) and in the Vekerzug culture W–E is the dominant main direction in many cemeteries, e.g. Vámosmikola 71% W–E main direction, Tápiószele 50% W–E, 32% NE–SW, Szentes–Vekerzug 91% W–E, Chotín 65% W–E (Párducz 1969, 228). The same is the situation in some of the key cemeteries of the Balkans (e.g. Brezje, Sanski most) and in the famous cemetery from Hallstatt (Jerem 1968, 174). If one deceased is presumed for the ‘cenotaphs’, we can count with 26 individuals, otherwise 18. From the 8 children burials 3 cases are double burials (once with a male, twice with a female), therefore for these cases family grave groups can be presumed. The children-adult double burials are known from many sites, e.g. Szentlőrinc (Jerem 1968, 175), Vinkovci–NAMA (Majnarić-Pandžić 2003), Stubarlija (Medović 2007), or from the Vekerzug culture: Csanytelek–Újhalastó (Galántha 1984, 11) and Tápiószele (Párducz 1966, 39), therefore it can be considered a general phenomenon in the Iron Age. Genders Piece Ratio Male 4 16% Female 6 24% Children 8 30% Unknown 8 30% Total 26 Fig. 9. Ratios of the genders. Three features can be connected to the cemetery: the circular ditch surrounding graves 18 and 58; the rectangular ditch open at one side around grave 27; and the ditches and pits around grave 93 (Fig. 10). It is a general view that archaeologists presume tumuli Fig. 10. The features around grave 93. above the ditches, but there is no solid evidence to support it at Kiskundorozsma. This ritual element is known from the Vekerzug culture, e.g. Algyő (Scholtz 2001, 107), Sándorfalva–Eperjes grave 145, Tarnaméra, Tarnabod, Tiszavasvári, Chotín, and has the parallels in the steppe region too (Galántha 1985, 116–118). In the Late Iron Age the rite of making ditches is present from the very beginnings though differs a bit, because the ditches join each other and outline grave quarters, grave gardens. According to Neugebauer (1996, 130) the rite of making ditches is common both east and west in the Early and Middle La Tène, but partially it can be observed in the Urnfield culture, Hallstatt culture, Late La Tène and Roman Age. Sites from the Late Iron Age with ditches are known from Palárikovo (Benadik 1973), Inzersdorf (Neugebauer 1996), Pottenbrunn, Mannersdorf (Ramsl 2002; 2010), Ménfőcsanak (Uzsoki 1987; Vaday 2006), Szomód–Kenderhegy (Vadász 1987), etc. From the southern territory of the Great Hungarian Plain the only example is Szentes–Berekhát (Darányi 2011). There are no parallels known from the Srem group. It is possible to originate this custom from both the Scythian and La Tène culture, or maybe the parallels from the Balkans are missing. Around grave 93 there was a ditch system bordering a rectangular area broken in many places (maybe entrances?). Inside the area a unique – cultic? – pit (onr 38/ snr 47) was investigated in which mildly-burnt wattle-and-daub plates were found placed in layers to the pit. Just outside the ditches there was a 2 m deep well or pit (onr 89/ snr 118). Beside that grave 93 was dug into the ditch, the only grave good was a part of a tortoiseshell. The uncharacteristic pottery makes the interpretation difficult and questions the simultaneous use of the features. Their connection can be supposed only from their positions. Because analogies are missing, the cultic function of the place and features can be only presumed. Jewels Two of the Certosa brooches have a small knot, on the third one the knot was broken (Pl. 9/1–3). Two Teržan type XIII (Teržan 1976, 338) brooches have crossbow structure; because of their bad condition 232 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári the sub-types cannot be defined. On the Great Hungarian Plain the Certosa type occurs rarely, analogies are known from Tápiószele (Párducz 1966, 89, pl. LXII/3), Sajópetri (Szabó 2007, 314) and Pișcolt (Németi 1988, fig. 5/1). However, Certosa type is one of the characteristic objects of the Srem group (Medović 2003, 106; Medović–Hänsel 2006, 491; Garašanin 1973, 651; Ljuština 2010, 61), with numerous analogies from Adaševci and Vučedol (Medović–Hänsel 2006, Taf. IV–V; VII), Stubarlija (Medović 2007, 89), Doroslovo (Brukner 1959, 8) or Vinkovci–NAMA (Majnarić-Pandžić 2003, Abb. 3; 6). Already in the early research it was suggested that some types of the Certosa could continue to exist after their general 4th century BC usage too (Primas 1967), and also the crossbow structure indicates a later form (Jerem 1968, 185). From the Hungarian parallels the dating of Beremend is 5th century BC, but it can overlap to the 4th century BC, because of the Certosa brooch (Jerem 1972, 85–87). Pieces from Szentlőrinc (Jerem 1968, fig. 19/3.1–2; 20/9.3; 23/29.5) can be dated a bit younger from 420 to 300 BC (from the end of LT A to the early LT B2) because of the parallels and the La Tène influences. Teržan (1976, 435) was on the same opinion indicating the 4th century BC (LT B). According to Gleirscher (1996, 260), pointing out the late Hallstatt context, in Carinthia the dating is also LT A–B1. In Sopron–Krautacker the dating of the Eastern-Alpine animal headed brooch – a variant of the Certosa brooch – is LT A2 (Jerem 1986, Taf. 3), in Pottenbrunn the Certosa brooch belongs to the LT A2/B1 phase (Ramsl 2002). The mass grave at Vratnica which contained Certosa brooch, double pin, and similar spears to ones found in Kiskundorozsma, was dated from the last quarter of the 4th century BC to the early 3th century BC (Popović 1996, 111–113). Teržan (1990, 118–119) dated the appearance of the Eastern-Alpine animal headed brooch to the middle of the 5th century BC, but he stated that the question is not clear enough. The pieces from Stubarlija were dated to 5th–4th century BC (Medović 2007, 89). At Sajópetri the Certosa type XIII was dated to the early LT B2 phase (Szabó 2007, 314). Beside the above mentioned, others agree too that the Certosa type can be connected to the Late Hallstatt and Early La Tène (Merhart 1927, 108; Gabrovec 1966, 39; Uenze 1974). The parallels show that the range of the usage of the Certosa type is very long in time. Considering the fast information flow in this period (Jerem 1972, 87), and the fact that the Certosa lives a long period too, the pieces from Kiskundorozsma can be dated from the end of the 5th century BC to the end of the 4th century BC, approx. 420–300 BC. An iron double pin was found in the warrior grave 48 (Pl. 9/8). In the typology of Vasić (1982) – based on the works of Maier (1956) and Alexander (1964) – it belongs to the type III, maybe subtypes III a-c. From around 500 BC the double pin is one of the most widespread type of jewellery in the Balkans, it originates from the territory of modern Bosnia, Macedonia and Serbia, perhaps from the Glasinac culture. So it is common in those areas, but sporadically can be found north from the Sava River (Popović 1996, 111). According to our knowledge, this is the first piece from modern Hungary, without parallels from the Srem group cemeteries, but there is one piece from the Bosut III phase from Gomolava (Vasić 1988, Abb. 1). Beside the Certosa brooch the double pin is the only chronologically significant find, though the double pin has only an approximate dating value. According to Vasic the type III appears as early as Glasinac 4C, at the end of the 7th century BC, but it flourishes from the second half of the 6th century BC to the end of the 4th century BC, approx 550–300 BC, which is the same dating, as in the case of the Certosa brooch, however sporadically this type can also exist up to the 3th century BC. There was a half sphere shaped stone amulet in grave 27 between the legs (Pl. 8/3). The only parallel of this rare type of the grave good is from Szentlőrinc (Jerem 1968, 186; fig. 19/3.4; 25/40.2). The material of the stone amulet is limestone or half limestone, originates from the Transylvanian Plateau which probably arrived in this region on the Maros River. Ten silver beads from a necklace turned up from the female grave 45 (Pl. 9/4) around the neck. Analogies are known from Beremend (Jerem 1972, t. 5/5) and Szentlőrinc (Jerem 1968, fig. 25/41.1; 26/44.2). Based on the parallels from the Balkans dates around 350 BC Jerem considers them Southern –mainly Greek – import. Another earlier parallel comes from Kruševica, which is dated to the 5th century BC (MOS 1990, 98, 190). Weapons Three spears were discovered in the cemetery (Pl. 8/2; 9/10, 17), all of them have ridge. By their ratio of the socket and the blade we can classify them to 3 types: 1.) longer socket (grave 27), socket-blade ratio 7:4; 2.) socket and blade equal (grave 48), socket-blade ratio 1:1; 3.) longer blade (grave 70), socket-blade ratio 1:2. Two groups can be separated according to the function. Because it is shorter, lighter, and the centre of gravity is at the tip the spear of grave 27 can be considered as a throwing spear. Of course this can be Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 233 used as a thrusting spear too, but the design does not indicate this function at the first place. The spears of grave 48, 70 by their size, weight and centre of gravity can be evaluated as thrusting spears. By their huge size (45, 48 cm) these thrusting spears are the longest ones in the Iron Age, and by their rhomboid shape they can be distinguished very well from the other types of the Vekerzug culture and of Transdanubia, because at other types the socket and the blade do not separate spectacularly, and they usually do not have ridge (Jerem 1968, 183–184). It is the characteristic feature of the Srem group to put spears of this type into the graves (Medović–Hänsel 2006, 492; Ljuština 2010, 61). Parallels can be mentioned from Szentlőrinc, Beremend (Jerem 1968, fig. 23/28.1; 19/3.6, 7; 19/6.1; 24/31.1; Jerem 1972, á. 8/18, 19), from the Srem group: Sremska Mitrovica, Vučedol, Adaševci (Medović–Hänsel 2006, Taf. I/3; IV/9–11; V/1, 2) and Doroslovo (Trajković 2008, 44, 197). However the same types turned up from the Scythian cemetery of Tápiószele (Párducz 1966, pl. XVII/3; LXXII/6), from Inzersdorf (Neugebauer 1996, 134, Taf. 17), and from Brezje (Kromer 1959, T. 2/3, 4; 17/7). Therefore this type cannot be connected to any culture or group, rather looks like a characteristic piece of a certain period. The spears cannot be dated really accurately, but most of the authors agree that these long spears were used from the Late Hallstatt to Early La Tène, approx. 5th–4th century BC (Neugebauer 1996, 134; Jerem 1968, 177; Ljuština 2010, 62). Stone objects In grave 57 a stone was found, which is a vulcanic dacit with amfibol, and a fragment of a grindstone from grave 162, which is a sedimental Carpathian sandstone. Both of them can be found in the Transylvanian Plateau, so they could come here in a natural way by the Maros River. Putting stones into the graves is a characteristic feature in the pre Scythian (Patek 1990, 71; t. 5/22; 7/18; 13/1), and Scythian period, e.g. Tápiószele, Szentes–Vekerzug, Békéscsaba–Fényes, Hódmezővásárhely–Kardoskút or Nógrádkövesd (Párducz 1966, 83). Kemenczei (2001, 18) connects this custom with the growing role of agriculture. This custom can be an eastern influence, however in the Kalakača phase there were found stones in the graves too (Medović 2003, 101–102), therefore it is difficult to decide if this custom came from north/east (pre Scythian, Scythian) or south (Bosut group). Pottery Two fragments of a beaker can be found in the ‘cenotaph’ 57 (Pl. 9/13–14). This form is called urn by Mihály Párducz, flowerpot shaped vessel by Irina Lengyel and Erzsébet Jerem, and pot by Erzsébet Patek and Csilla Gáti. Pieces with similar shape but bigger size should be called flowerpot shaped vessels or pots. Vessels with app. 10 cm rim diameter and height cannot be called pot; rather they were used as a beaker for drinking or measuring. The long boss is not a decoration but rather a handle. This form is very general, with parallels from the Hallstatt culture, e.g. Halimba (Lengyel 1959, XXXII/2, 10), from pre Scythian graves (Patek 1990, t. 23/3), from the Vekerzug culture (Dušek 1966, Taf. XI/10; XVI/12; Párducz 1966, pl. LVIII/23, 24), from Szentlőrinc (Jerem 1968, fig. 21/16.3, 19.1, 5), Szajk (Gáti 2009, á. 4/10), and Stubarlija (Medović 2007, 14). A palmcup was found in grave 39 (Pl. 8/8), just like the beaker it has parallels from huge areas from different periods: Tápiószele (Párducz 1966, pl. XXVI/10; LVII/14), Balf (Vályi 1983, t. III/3), various Hallstatt cemeteries (Lengyel 1959, XXXI/11, 12; XXXIV/6), Füzesabony (Patek 1990, t. 5/23), Vinkovci– NAMA (Majnarić-Pandžić 2003, Abb. 7/2) or Stubarlija (Medović 2007, 14). One fragmented jug (or mug) is known from grave 48 (Pl. 9/6), with good parallels from Vinkovci– NAMA (Majnarić-Pandžić 2003, Abb. 4; 6), Sremska Mitrovica (Medović–Hänsel 2006, Taf. I/1; VIII/1, 4), Stubarlija (Medović 2007, 14, 16) and Doroslovo (Trajković 2008, 221). The fragment with a horseshoe decoration from grave 58 (Pl. 9/15) and maybe the fragment from grave 39 (Pl. 8/10) can be defined as flowerpot shaped or barrel shaped vessels/pots. This is a widespread form (Vályi 1983, 100; Jerem 1968, 189; Kemenczei 2001, 33; Gál–Molnár 2004, 179), with analogies from Balf (Vályi 1983, t. I/4; III/6), Szentlőrinc (Jerem 1968, fig. 21/16.3, 22/20.1; 25/38.1; 27/54.1, 54.4, 57.1), Sé–Doberdó (Gál–Molnár 2004, t. 6/2, 9/5), Halimba (Lengyel 1959, XXXII/16) or Vámosmikola (Párducz 1969, pl. LIX/2; LX/6). From grave 39 turned up some fragments of a large urn or pot decorated with a burnished – maybe with graphite – net pattern. Since only the rim is kept, the shape cannot be precisely defined. This form is not culture specific, parallels are known from many sites: Balf (Vályi 1983, t. II/3), Szentlőrinc (Jerem 1968, 189; fig. 27/53.2–4; 25/40.8), Tápiószele (Párducz 1966, pl. LVII/23; LVIII/16), Sághegy, Halimba (Lázár 1951, t. XXVI/2; Lengyel 1959, XXXII/15), Pilismarót (Wollák 1979, k. 7), Sopron–Krautacker (Jerem Et Al. 1984, k. 10; 12) Rozvágy (Hunyady 1942, t. IV/20). 234 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári From grave 39 two comb decorated fragments turned up (Pl. 8/5–6). Since the grave was badly disturbed, the fragments probably were in a secondary position. There was a globular bowl with inverted rim – general form, without chronologic significance – found in grave 39 (Pl. 8/11). Analogies are known from Halimba (Lengyel 1959, XXXV/3), Sé–Doberdó (Gál–Molnár 2004, t. 6/7; 7/1), Vámosmikola (Párducz 1969, pl. LVII/7) or Stubarlija (Medović 2007, 19). The linear rim like the one from the bowl in grave 57 (Pl. 9/12) is considered characteristic for the Late Hallstatt period (Gál–Molnár 2004, 179). Parallels are known from Balf (Vályi 1983, t. II/12) or Tápiószele (Párducz 1966, pl. XXXII/14, 17). The wheel-thrown fragment from grave 18 (Pl. 8/1) belonged to a bowl, it is a usual La Tène form, and it probably was in secondary position in the feature. Thought the fragment in grave 71 (Pl. 9/16) is really small, the channelled decoration can play a connecting role with the Srem group since the main feature of the Bosut III C phase is the channelled decoration (Medović 1978; 2003; MOS 1990, 76), and recent opinions connect the Bosut III C settlements with the Srem group cemeteries (Medović–Hänsel 2006). Two fragments had burnished graphite decoration: the pot from grave 39 and the fragment from grave 71, in both cases the decoration is a net pattern. This ornament was used from HaC, mainly inside bowls, but it existed through HaD and Early La Tène (Gál–Molnár 2004, 180; Jerem Et Al. 1984, footnote 38), with parallels from Sé–Doberdó from HaD2/3 and Early La Tène (Gál–Molnár 2004, t. 13/4–5), Pilismarót (Wollák 1979, k. 5/1; 6/1, 3), Csönge (Fekete 1988, k. 3/2, 7), Szajk and Pilismarót–Basaharc (Wollák 1979, 53; Gáti 2009, 66). The horseshoe decoration on the vessel from grave 58 is a rare one. The parallels come from a very large area: Trošmarija (Balen-Letunić 2000, t. 3/2), Most na Soci graves 875, 1065, 1698, 2361 (Teržan Et Al. 1985), Nin (Batovic 1965, Abb. 5), Bodroghalom and Kistokaj (Hellebrandt 1999, 185, fig. 116; pl. LXIV/6; LXXIV/1). Because of the simple way of making – practically the curving of a clay body – this decoration is general and widespread. Regarding the pottery from the cemetery one can observe that the general types of the Early Iron Age vessels can be found. The bowl with linear rim, the channelled fragment and the burnished decorations can refer to the Late Ha, Early La Tène, Bosut III C phase. The cemetery has only few vessels – situation similar in the Srem group too – in the 23 graves there are only 13 more or less important fragments, while no complete vessels were found and the biggest part of the pottery consists of uncharacteristic fragments. In the cemetery there are no traces of the La Tène pottery tradition; while the small vessels are typical for the Srem group too (Medović–Hänsel 2006, 492, Medović 2007, 86), and the same forms can be met in the Late Hallstatt, Early La Tène periods from Burgerland (Neufeld/Leitha) to Transdanubia (Szentlőrinc) and even further (Majnarić-Pandžić 2003, 490). Chronology of the cemetery When determining the chronology of the cemetery one can rely on the two main metal objects, the brooch and the double pin. The most probable date of the usage of the cemetery is from the end of the 5th century BC to the end of the 4th century BC, approx. 420–300 BC, from the end of LT A to the beginning of LT B2. In the Srem group the younger phase can be paralleled, where the Certosa brooch is a characteristic find, dated between the 5th–4th century BC (Medović 2003 106; Medović–Hänsel 2006, 492; Medović 2007, 86; Ljuština 2010, 61). This corresponds to Bosut III C phase in the territory of Vojvodina. Even if the Celtic presence did not cause break in the material culture of the autochthonous population of the Balkans (Popović 1996, 124), it is possible that the historical advance of the La Tène culture caused the end of the cemetery. Though we can see connections to the Vekerzug culture (stones, ditches, contracted position), the lack of characteristic funerary elements and inventories (mixed rite, pottery, pintaderas, horse burials, electron hair rings, Scythian weaponry) makes quite sure that the people of the cemetery were not the ones of the Vekerzug culture. On the other hand Celtic elements are also missing. Probably the population who buried their dead in the cemetery of Kiskundorozsma belonged to a southern ethnicity. The main features have strong connections with the Srem group and the cemetery of Szentlőrinc (belonging to the tribe of Pannonians). The artefacts from these cemeteries (e.g. Certosa brooch, double pin, glass beads, burnished graphite decoration) show connections to the West-Balkans, and the Eastern-Alpine region, which indicates that the western influences started to reach this region, after the continuous eastern influences of the earlier phases. It seems that at the end of the Early Iron Age the western connections changed the cultures of this region. Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 235 References Alexander 1964 Andó 1995 Almássy 1998 Balen-Letunić 2000 Bartosiewicz 2004 Bartosiewicz 2007 Batovic 1965 Benadik 1973 Březinová 2004 Brukner 1959 Bujna 2003 Čižmář 2005 Darányi 2011 Dizdar 2006 Dušek 1966 Fekete 1982 Fekete 1988 Fülöp 1984 Gabler 1982 Gabrovec 1966 Galántha 1984 Galántha 1985 Garašanin 1973 Gál–Molnár 2004 Gáti 2009 Gebhard 1989 Gleirscher 1996 Haevernick 1960 Hellebrandt 1999 Alexander, J., The pins of Jugoslav Early Iron Age, PPS, 30, 159–185. Andó, M., Természetföldrajzi viszonyok, IN: Kövér, L.–Tóth, S. L. (eds.), Kiskundorozsma. Tanulmányok. Szeged, 13–36. Almássy, K., Kelta temető Tiszavasvári határában, JAMÉ, 41, 55–106. Balen-Letunić, D., Japodske nekropole, VAMZ, XXXII–XXXIII, 23–61. Bartosiewicz, L., A Tihany-Óváron feltárt szarvascsontváz előzetes vizsgálata. The Preliminary Study of a Red Deer (Cervus elaphus) Skeleton from Tihany-Óvár, Hungary, IN: Nagy, E. Gy.–Dani, J.–Hajdú, Zs. (eds.) MΩMOΣ II. Őskoros kutatók II. Összejövetele, Debrecen, 2000, 201–208. Bartosiewicz, L., Ossesment animaux, IN: Szabó, M. (dir.), L’habitat de l’époque de La Tène á Sajópetri-Hosszú dűlő, Budapest 285–306. Batovic, Š., Die Eisenzeit aus dem Gebiet des illyrischen Stammes der Liburnen, ArchIug, 6 55–76. Benadik, B., Besonders angelegte auf keltischen Gräberfeldern der Slowakei und ihre gesellschafliche Bedeutung, Alba Regia, 14, 97–106. Březinová, G., Keltské sklo v severnej časti Karpatskej kotliny. Územie Slovenska, IN: Okres lateński i rzymski w Karpatach polskich, Krosno, 137–150. Brukner, O., Halštatska nekropola kod Doroslova, Građa za proučavanje spomenika kulture Vojvodine, III, 5–17. Bujna, J., Spony z keltskẏ hrobov bez vẏzbroje z územia Slovenska (typologickochronologické triedenie LTB- a C’ spôn), SlovArch, 51, 39–108. Čižmář, M., Contacts between Moravia and the territory of the Scordisci, IN: Dobrzańska, H.–Megaw, V.–Polenska, P. (eds.), Celts on the Margin. Studies in European Cultural Interaction 7th Century BC–1st Century AD. Dedicated to Zenon Woźniak. Kraków, 131–134. Darányi, R., La Tène kori telep- és temetőrészlet Szentes-Berekháton, Thesis, Szeged. Dizdar, M., Nazali staklenih narukvica latenske kulture u Podravini. Glasarmringfunde der Latènekultur in der Podravina, Prilozi IAZ, 23, 67–128. Dušek, M., Thrakisches Gräberfelder der Hallstattzeit in Chotín, ASF, 6. Fekete, M., Angaben zu Kontakten zwischen Italien und Transdanubien, Savaria, 16, 131–142. Fekete., M. Késő-hallstattkori lakóház leletmentése Csöngén, Savaria, 17–18, 123–138. Fülöp, J. (ed.), Geological Map of Hungary. Hungarian Geological Institute, Budapest. Gabler, D., Aspects of the development of Late Iron Age settlements in Transdanubia into the Roman period (Evidence based on the excavations at Szakály in southern Hungary), IN: Studies in the Iron Age of Hungary, BAR, 144, 129–179. Gabrovec, S., Zagorje v prazgodovini, ArhVest, 17, 19–50. Galántha, M., A csanytelek–újhalastói szkíta kori temető ásatásainak újabb eredményei, MKCSM, 10–17. Galántha, M., Előzetes jelentés a Sándorfalva-eperjesi szkíta kori temető feltárásáról, MFMÉ, 1982/83, 1, 115–128. Garašanin, M., Praistorija na tlu SR Srbije, Beograd. Gál. K.–Molnár, A., Sé–Doberdó. Az 1998-as és 2001-es ásatások vaskori leletanyaga, Savaria, 28, 159–230. Gáti, Cs., A szajki (Baranya megye) koravaskori telep kulturális kapcsolatai, IN: Ilon, G. (ed.), MΩMOΣ VI. Proceedings of the 6th meeting for the researchers of Prehistory. Raw materials and trade, Kőszeg, 65–77. Gebhard, R., Der Glasschmuck aus dem oppidum von Manching, Stuttgart. Gleirscher, P., Die Kelten im Raum Kärnten. Ein Forschungsstand, IN: Jerem, E.–KrennLeeb, A.–Neugebauer, J.-W.–Urban, O. H. (Hrsg.), Die Kelten in den Alpen und an der Donau, Budapest–Wien, 255–266. Haevernick, Th. E., Die Glasarmringe und Ringperlen der Mittel- und Spätlaténezeit auf dem Europäischen Festland, Bonn. Hellebrandt, M., Corpus of Celtic Finds in Hungary III. Celtic Finds from Northern Hungary, Budapest. 236 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári Horváth 1987 Hunyady 1942 Hunyady 1944 Jacobi 1974 Jerem 1968 Jerem 1972 Jerem 1986 Jerem 1998 Jerem 2003 Jerem Et Al. 1984 Jovanović–Jovanović 1988 Karwowski 2004 Karwowski 2005 Horváth, L., The surroundings of Keszthely, IN: Corpus of Celtic Finds in Hungary, Budapest. Hunyady, I., Kelták a Kárpátmedencében. Die Kelten im Karpatenbecken, Táblakötet, DissPann, II/18, Budapest. Hunyady, I., Kelták a Kárpátmedencében. Die Kelten im Karpatenbecken, Szövegkötet, DissPann, II/18, Budapest. Jacobi, G., Werkzeug und Gerät aus dem oppidum von Manching, Wiesbaden. Jerem, E., The late Iron Age cemetery of Szentlőrinc, ActaArchHung, 20, 159–208. Jerem, E., Késő vaskori sírleletek Beremendről (Baranya megye), JPMÉ, 16, 69–90. Jerem, E., Bemerkungen zur Siedlungsgeschichte der Späthallstatt- und Frühlatènezeit im Ostalpenraum. (Veränderungen in der Siedlungsstruktur: archäologische und paläokologische Aspekte), IN: Jerem, E. (Hrsg.), Hallstatt Kolloquium Veszprém 1984, Antaeus, Beiheft III, 107–118. Jerem, E., Iron Age horse burial at Sopron–Krautacker (NW–Hungary). Aspects of trade and religion, IN: Anreiter, P.–Bartosiewicz, L.–Jerem, E.–Meid, W. (eds.), Man and the animal world. Studies in Archaeozoology, Arcaeology, Antropology and Palaeolinguistics in memoriam Sándor Bökönyi, Budapest, 319–334. Jerem, E., Animal sacrifice and ritual deposits of the Iron Age Ritual treatment of animals. A case study from Sopron–Krautacker, NW Hungary, IN: Jerem, E.–Raczky, P. (Hrsg.), Morgenrot der Kulturen. Frühe Etappen der Menschheitsgeschichte in Mittel- und Südosteuropa. Festschrift für Nándor Kalicz zum 75. Geburtstag, Budapest, 541–565. Jerem, E.–Facsar, G.–Kordos, L.–Krolopp, E.–Vörös, I., A Sopron–Krautackeren feltárt vaskori telep régészeti és környezetrekonstrukciós vizsgálata, ArchÉrt, 111, 141–169. Jovanović, B.–Jovanović, M., Gomolava. Naselje mladeg doba 2, Novi Sad-Beograd. Karwowski, M., Latènezeitlicher Glasringschmuck aus Ostösterreich, MPK, 55, Wien. Karwowski, M., The earliest types of eastern-Celtic glass ornaments, IN: Dobrzańska, H.–Megaw, V.–Polenska, P. (eds.), Celts on the Margin. Studies in European Cultural Interaction 7th Century BC–1st Century AD. Dedicated to Zenon Woźniak, Kraków, 163–177. Kemenczei 2001 Kemenczei, T., Az Alföld szkíta kora, IN: Havassy, P. (szerk.), Hatalmasok viadalokban, Gyulai katalógusok, 6, 9–36. Kövér 2011 Kövér, T., Szeged-Kiskundorozsma IV. homokbánya, kelta telepének korongolt kerámiaanyaga, Thesis, Szeged. Kromer 1959 Kromer, K., Brezje; halštatske gomile z Brezij pri Trebelnem: Hallstättische Hügelgräber aus Brezje bei Trebelno. Lázár 1951 Lázár, J., A sághegykörnyéki Hallstatt-kori tumulus-sírokról, ArchÉrt, 78, 36–42. Lengyel 1959 Lengyel, I., A halimbai (Veszprém megye) koravaskori temető, ArchÉrt, 86, 159–169. Lesi 2011 Lesi, A., A Szeged-Kiskundorozsma IV. számú homokbánya lelőhely kelta telepének házi kerámiái, Thesis, Szeged. Ljuština 2010 Ljuština, M., The Late Hallstatt Communities in the Serbian Part of the Danube Basin, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș 9–11 October 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 59–78. Magee 2010 Magee, A., Of Belts and Men: The Roman Military Belt of the 1st Century A.D. Maier 1956 Maier, F., Zu einigen bosnisch-herzegowinischen Bronzen in Griechenland, Germania, 34, 63–75. Majnarić-Pandžić 1970 Majnarić-Pandžić, N., Keltsko-latenska kultura u Slavonija i Srijemu, Vinkovci. Majnarić-Pandžić 2003 Majnarić-Pandžić, N., Ein späthallstattzeitliches Gräberfeld in Vinkovci (Nordostkroatien) und das Problem eines neuen Phänomens der Pferdeausstattung in diesem Gebiet, Germania, 81/2, 481–511. Maráz 1981 Maráz, B., A szkítakori őslakosság La tène-kori továbbélése Kelet-Magyarországon (Régészeti adatok a Kárpát-medencei kelta–szkíta kapcsolatok kérdéséhez), JPMÉ, 26, 97–120. Medović 1978 Medovic, P., Naselja starijeggvoz-denog doba u Jugoslovenskom Podunavlju. Die relative Chronologie die Siedlungen der älteren Eisezeit im Jugoslawischen Donaugebiete, DMB, 22. Medović 2003 Medović, P., Bestattungen in der älteren Einzeit im Gebiet der Bosut-Gruppe, IN: Bojović, N.–Vasić, M. (Ur.), Sahranjivanje u bronzano i gvozdeno doba, Cačak, 101–108. Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 237 Medović 2007 Medović, P., Stubarlija: nekropola naselja Feudvar kod Mošorina (Bačka), Novi Sad. Medović–Hänsel 2006 Medović, P.–Hänsel, B., Die Srem-Gruppe – Nekropolen bei den Siedlungen der BosutGruppe, IN: Tasić, N.–Grozdanov, C. (eds.), Homage to Milutin Garašanin, Belgrade, 489–512. Merhart 1927 Merhart, G., Archäologisches zur Frage der Illyrer in Tirol, WPZ, 14, 65–118. Molnár Et Al. 1971 Molnár, B.–Mucsi, M.–Miháltz, I., Latest quaternary history of southern stretch of the Tisza Valley, MFMÉ, 1, 5–13. MOS 1990 Jevtović, J. (ed.), Masters of Silver, The Iron Age in Serbia. Németi 1988 Németi, I., Necropola Latène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare. I, Thraco-Dacica, IX, 49–73. Neugebauer 1996 Neugebauer, J.-W., Eine frühlatènezeitliche Gräbergruppe in Inzersdorf ob der Traisen, NÖ, IN: Jerem, E.–Krenn-Leeb, A.–Neugebauer, J.-W.–Urban, O. H. (Hrsg.), Die Kelten in den Alpen und an der Donau, Budapest–Wien, 111–178. A. Pál 1994 A. Pál, G., Kelta ház Csanytelek–Újhalastón, IN: A kőkortól középkorig. Tanulmányok Trogmayer Ottó 60. születésnapjára. Von der Steinzeit bis zum Mittelalter. Studien zum 60. Geburtstag von Ottó Trogmayer, Szeged, 229–233. Párducz 1966 Párducz, M., The Scythian Age Cemetery at Tápiószele, ActaArchHung, 18, 35–91. Párducz 1969 Párducz, M., The Chronological and Cultural Position of the Scythian Age Cemetery at Vámosmikola, ActaArchHung, 21, 227–234. Patek 1990 Patek, E., A Szabó János Győző által feltárt „preszkíta” síranyag. A Füzesabony-Mezőcsát típusú temetkezések újabb emlékei Heves megyében, Agria, XXV–XXVI, 61–118. Petres 1972 Petres, É., On Celtic animal and human sacrifices, IN: Recent results of Celtic investigations in Hungary. Conference of the Hungarian Society of Archaeology and History of Art, ActaArchHung, XXIV, 365–381. Pieta 2010 Pieta, K., Die Keltische Besiedlung der Slowakei. Jüngere Latènezeit, Nitra. Popović 1996 Popović, P., Early La Tène between Pannonia and the Balkans, Starinar, XLVII, 105–125. Primas 1967 Primas, M., Zur Verbreitung und Zeitstellung der Certosafibeln, Jahrbuch RGZM, 14, 99–133. Ramsl 2002 Ramsl, P. C., Das eisenzeitliche Gräberfeld von Pottenbrunn. Forschungsansätze zu wirtschaftlichen Grundlagen und sozialen Strukturen der latènezeitlichen Bevölkerung des Traisentales, Niederösterreich. FÖ, Materialhefte, Heft 11. Ramsl 2010 Ramsl, P. C., Verbindende Randzonen des Karpatenbeckens in der Frühlatènezeit, IN: Jerem, E.–Schonfelder, M.–Wieland, G. (Hrsg.), Nord-Süd Ost-West. Kontakte während der Eisenzeit in Europa. Akten der Internationalen Tagungen der AG Eisenzeit in Hamburg und Sopron 2002, Budapest, 241–257. Rustoiu 1997 Rustoiu, A., Fibulele din Dacia preromană (sec. II î.e.n.–I. e.n.), BT, 32, Bukarest. Rybová-Soudskẏ 1962 Rybová, A.–Soudskẏ, B., Libenice. Keltská svatyne ve strednich Cechách. Sanctuaire celtique en Bohême centrale, Praha. Scholtz 2001 Scholtz, R., Fejezetek Csongrád megye szkíta kori lelőhelyeinek kutatástörténetéből, IN: Havassy, P. (szerk), Hatalmasok viadalokban, Gyulai katalógusok, 6, 103–113. Stanczik–Vaday 1971 Stanczik, I.–Vaday, A., Keltische Bronzegürtel „Ungarischen“ Typs im Karpatenbecken, FolArch, 22, 7–27. Szabó 2007 Szabó, M. (Dir.), L’habitat de l’époque de La Tène á Sajópetri–Hosszú-dűlő, Budapest. Szöllősi 2009 Szöllősi, Sz., Kelta település részlete a Kr.e. 3. századból. Celtic settlement from the 3rd century BC, IN: Település- és temetőfeltárás Dunaszentgyörgy határában. Settlement and cementery excavation at the borders of Dunaszentgyörgy. KÖK, 1, 123–156. Tankó 2006 Tankó, K., Kelta üvegkarperecek Szurdokpüspökiből és Gyöngyöspatáról, NMMÉ, XXX, 98–108. Teleagă 2008 Teleagă, E., Die La-Tène-zeitliche nekropole von Curtuiușeni/Érkötvélyes (Bihor, Rumänien), Dacia N. S., 85–165. Teržan 1976 Teržan, B., Die Certosafibeln, ArhVest, 27, 317–536. Teržan 1990 Teržan, B., The Early Iron Age in Slovenian Styria, Catalog et monographiae, 25, Ljubljana. Teržan Et Al. 1985 Teržan, B.–Lo Schiavo, F.–Trampuž-Orel, N., Most na Soči (S. Lucia) Szombathyjeva izkopavanja. Die Ausgrabungen von J. Szombathy, Katalogi in monografije Narodni Muzej, 23. Trajković 2008 Trajković, D., Đepfeld: early Iron Age necropolis at Doroslovo, The Town Museum of Sombor, Sombor. 238 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári Uenze 1974 Uzsoki 1987 Vaday 2006 Vadász 1987 Vályi 1983 Vasić 1982 Vasić 1988 Venclová 1990 Venclová–Salač 1990 Vörös 1986 Wollák 1979 Uenze, H. P., Hügelgräber der Hallstatt- und Früh- latènezeit bei Höresham, IN: Kossack, G.–Günter, U. (Hrsg.), Studien zur vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie, Festschrift für Joachim Werner zum 65. Geburtstag, Teil I, 73–113. Uzsoki, A., Ménfőcsanak, IN: Horváth, L.–Kelemen, M.–Uzsoki, A.–Vadász, É., Corpus of Celtic Finds in Hungary, Transdanubia, I, Budapest, 13–62. Vaday, A., A ménfőcsanaki kelta temető kronológiai modellje, Arrabona, 44/1, 597–610. Vadász, É., Komárom County II, IN: Horváth, L.–Kelemen, M.–Uzsoki, A.–Vadász, É., Corpus of Celtic Finds in Hungary, Transdanubia, I, Budapest, 231–248. Vályi K., Korai kelta leletek Balfról, MFMÉ, 1982–1983, 1, 95–113. Vasić, R., Ein Beitrag zu den Doppelnadeln im Balkanraum, PZ, 57, 220–257. Vasić, R., Ein Beitrag zur Chronologie der Späthallstattzeit im Sremgebiet, IN: Tasić, N.–Petrović, J. (Hrsg.), Gomolava. Chronologie und Stratigraphie der vorgeschichtlichen und antiken Kulturen der Donauniederung und Südosteuropas. Interantionales Symposium Ruma 1986, Novi Sad, 169–176. Venclová, N., Prehistoric glass in Bohemia, Archeologickẏ ústav, ČSAV, Praha 1990. Venclová, N.–Salač, V., Latènezeitliches Glass aus der Siedlung in Lovosice, ArchRoz, XLII/6, 640–657. Vörös, I., A ritual red deer burial from the Celtic-roman settlement at Szakály in Transdanubia, ActaArchHung, 38, 31–40. Wollák, K., Hallstattkori leletek a Pilismarót-Szobi révi terepfeltárásból, Dunai Régészeti Közlemények, 1, 49–56. List of figures Fig. 1. The location of the site. Fig. 2. Map of the cemetery. Fig. 3. Catalogue of the graves (Md: Main direction). Fig. 4. Main inventories of the graves. Fig. 5. Ratios of the rite. Fig. 6. Definite orientations of the graves. Fig. 7. The main directions of the site. Fig. 8. The main directions of the cemetery. Fig. 9. Ratios of the genders. Fig. 10. The features around grave 93. List of plates Pl. 1. 1. Aerial picture from the excavation of the northern hill; 2. The excavation map of the site (by Archeoline LLC). Pl. 2. 1. House 8/8; 2. House 20/20; 3. House 29/31; 4. House 91/121. Pl. 3. 1–4. Dog skeletons from features 8/8, 98/132, 135/191 and 29/31; 5–7. Antlers and a shin of red deer from features 8/8 and 124/173. Pl. 4. 1–6. Skulls and bones of cattle from features 29/31, 68/95, 122/171, 125/176, 142/202 and 160/220; 7–8. Horse skeleton and bones from features 99/134 and 121/169. Pl. 5. Selection from the wheel-thrown pottery of the settlement (without scale). Pl. 6. Selection from the handmade pottery of the settlement (without scale). Pl. 7. 1–7. Metal and glass artefacts; 8. Adobe. Pl. 8. 1. Grave 18; 2–3. Grave 27; 4. Grave 32; 5–11. Grave 39. Pl. 9. 1. Grtave 40; 2–4. Grave 45; 5–10. Grave 48; 11. Grave 56; 12–14. Grave 57; 15. Grave 58; 16. Grave 71; 17. Grave 70. Pl. 10. 1. Grave 16; 2. Grave 18 and 58; 3. Grave 27; 4. Grave 39; 5. Grave 45; 6. Grave 48 and 70; 7. Grave 107; 8. Grave 161; 9. Grave 162. Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 239 m un no n a e pre istory ate ron e Plate 1. 1. Aerial picture from the excavation of the northern hill; 2. The excavation map of the site (by Archeoline LLC). Plate . . erial pi ture from t e e a ation of t e nort ern ill . e e a ation map of t e site y r eoline . 240 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári m Plate 2. 1. House 8/8; 2. House 20/20; 3. House 29/31; 4. House 91/121. Plate . . ouse . ouse . ouse . ouse . Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 241 5 Plate 3. 1–4. Dog skeletons from features 8/8, 98/132, 135/191 and 29/31; 5–7. Antlers and a shin of red deer from features 8/8 and 124/173. Plate . – . o s eletons from features 5– . ntlers and a s in of red deer from features 5 and and . 242 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári 5 Plate 4. 1–6. Skulls and bones of cattle from features 29/31, 68/95, 122/171, 125/176, 142/202 and 160/220; 7–8. Horse skeleton and bones from features 99/134 and 121/169. Plate . – . and ulls and ones of attle from features 5 – . orse s eleton and ones from features and 5 . Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 243 5 Plate 5. Selection from the wheel-thrown pottery of the settlement (without scale). Plate 5. ele tion from t e eel t ro n pottery of t e settlement it out s ale . 244 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári 5 Plate 6. Selection from the handmade pottery of the settlement (without scale). Plate . ele tion from t e andmade pottery of t e settlement it out s ale . Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 245 5 Plate 7. 1–7. Metal and glass artefacts; 8. Adobe. Plate . – . etal and lass artefa ts . do e. 246 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári 5 Plate 8. 1. Grave 18; 2–3. Grave 27; 4. Grave 32; 5–11. Grave 39. Plate . . ra e – . ra e . ra e 5– . ra e . Iron Age Settlement and Cemetery from Szeged–Kiskundorozsma | 247 5 5 Plate 9. 1. Grtave 40; 2–4. Grave 45; 5–10. Grave 48; 11. Grave 56; 12–14. Grave 57; 15. Grave 58; 16. Grave 71; 17. Grave 70. Plate . . rta e . ra e 5 – . ra e 5 – . ra e 5 5– . ra e 5. ra e 5 . ra e . ra e . 248 | Z. Pilling–F. Ujvári 5 m Plate 10. 1. Grave 16; 2. Grave 18 and 58; 3. Grave 27; 4. Grave 39; 5. Grave 45; 6. Grave 48 and 70; 7. Grave 107; 8. Grave 161; 9. Grave 162. Plate . . ra e 5. ra e 5 . ra e . ra e and 5 and . ra e . ra e . ra e . ra e . ra e . Cremation and Deposition in the Late Iron Age Cemetery at Ludas Éva TANKÓ–Károly TANKÓ MTA–ELTE Interdisciplinary Archaeological Research Group Budapest, Hungary vindobona.09@gmail.com csisztar@gmail.com Keywords: Late Iron Age, La Tène, human bones, cremated human remains, pyre, cremation process, deposition of ashes, osteological and archaeological analysis This study presents a summary of results achieved by the anthropological and archaeological comparison of the cremated remains recovered at the Ludas–Varjú-dűlő cemetery. The site represents the burial ground of the Early and Middle La Tène period in Eastern Hungary where the tradition of cremation dominated. To demonstrate the significance of this work it is necessary to give a short overview of previous research at this point. The first anthropological analysis associated with the Celtic population in Hungary was completed by Nemeskéri and Deák who analyzed remains from fourteen known sites available in the 1950s (Nemeskéri–Deák 1954, 148–149). Zoffmann (2001) published a comprehensive anthropological study of 137 individuals from 35 Celtic burial sites, however – similarly to her previous essays – the primary focus was on the osteological examination of inhumations (Zoffmann 1998; 2000; 2002a; 2002b). Besides these studies made in Hungary, anthropological material from several Celtic cemeteries in Slovakia – e.g. Dubník and Maňa – has also been examined in recent decades (Vlček 1957; Dacík 1983; Jakab–Vondárková 1989). Research took a significant step forward with the analysis of the cemetery of Malé Kosihy. Detailed anthropological analysis was carried out not only on the inhumation burials, but also on 45 cremated burials. Besides age and sex identification, the cremated remain’s position within the grave (a single or multiple burial groups) and also the spatial relation between individuals (single or multiple individuals) were examined in detail (Jakab 1995). In the Carpathian Basin, scholars chiefly concentrated on inhumations whereas cremated burials received less attention. Meanwhile, in France a new archaeo-anthropological approach has developed, opening up new ways for the analysis of cremated remains. By this new method not only the anthropological characteristics but certain signs of burial rite can also be analyzed on cremated bones (Duday Et Al. 2000, 7–29). The recent archaeological investigation of Ludas provided good potential for the application of the new archaeo-anthropological method. To emphasize the significance of the current study an overview of funerary research will be given concerning the Late Iron Age of the region. Approximately two hundred Celtic cemeteries are so far known in North-eastern Hungary. Only a quarter of these burial grounds have been archaeologically investigated and/or the remains entered into inventories. Smaller or larger scale excavations were carried out only at two dozen cemeteries, among these the excavation of Mátraszőlős (1957–1958: Patay 1972, 353–358), Vác (1969–1974: Hellebrandt 1999, 55–146), Ludas (2001–2002: Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 249–258 250 | É. Tankó–K. Tankó Szabó–Tankó 2006) and Sajópetri (2004–2006: Szabó 2006, 61–71; Szabó Et Al. 2006, 221–225) can be regarded thorough and complete. Although Mátraszőlős were investigated more than half a century ago, neither the archaeological nor the anthropological data is available yet from these sites. Hellebrandt in her comprehensive study on the La Tène period in North-eastern Hungary included a few smaller cemetery sections – e.g. Kistokaj, Radostyán, Muhi – (Hellebrandt 1999) besides her focus on the large burial ground of Vác. The importance of Hellebrandt’s work is undisputable; however, the anthropological analysis of burials is missing from the study. Unfortunately, the published description of burials and drawings are too sketchy to offer reliable information on burial rites. On these grounds therefore a comparative archaeological study based on the funerary record in the region cannot be carried out at the moment due to the imbalance in current data. As opposed to previous research, the excavation at Ludas (Szabó–Tankó 2006) and Sajópetri (Szabó Et Al. 2006) cemeteries were completed by modern, detailed documentation methods creating potential for the new archaeo-anthropological perspective focusing on the La Tène period in this area. The analysis of the remains from Sajópetri is still ongoing whereas the results from Ludas have been published recently (Szabó 2012). In the case of Ludas, anthropological data were available from which further information was derived concerning burial practice and funerary rites. At the site of Ludas–Varjú-dűlő a biritual cemetery containing both primary inhumations and cremation burials of the La Tène period was unearthed. The cemetery contained 77 cremations and 5 inhumations (Fig. 1) – a proportion of which corresponds to other La Tène cemeteries recovered in north-eastern Hungary. Across this region, the dual ritual burial tradition dominates the Celtic cemeteries throughout the period. It seems to be a tendency that the number of inhumations is significantly lower than the number of cremations. For instance, at Mátraszőlős similarly to Ludas, there were hardly any inhumations documented (Patay 1972, 353). In terms of burial practice, Vác and Sajópetri is slightly different since here more than one third of the burials were cremated (Hellebrandt 1999, 84; Szabó 2006, 62). The skeletal remains recovered from Ludas were very poorly preserved as a result of various chemical reactions in local soils and microbial degradations (Mays 2010, 23–27). The skeletal remains of only one individual (burial 951) were in suitable condition for anthropological examination as opposed to the numerous cremations on which the archaeo-anthropological method was carried out. Of the 77 excavated cremations, 58 burial remains were proper for osteological analysis. Cremated bone fragments of 19 burials either perished or were in a very poor condition. The examination of seven multiple burials, despite their suitable condition, were limited to the identification of the main anthropological characteristics; the osteological separation of individuals by currently used methods was not possible. It is important to note that in the Fig. 1. Ludas–Varjú-dűlő. Map of the Celtic cemetery. 1. case of cremated remains their analysis is inhumation; 2. cremation burial; 3. urn grave; 4. destroyed burial. Cremation and Deposition in the Late Iron Age Cemetery at Ludas | 251 much more limited compared to inhumations. Although cremated bones are more resistant to chemical processes taking place in soils than inhumations, the determination of age, sex and pathological conditions in most cases can only be estimated. From the point of view osteological analysis, it is of fundamental importance that the remains are excavated, documented and lifted with great caution and thoroughness (for general methodological problems in archaeology see Mays 2010, 311–322). The first step in the osteological analysis is the identification of the main skeletal elements (skull, axial skeleton, appendicular skeleton: pelvis, upper and lower limbs) and the conduction of necessary measurements. The condition, colour, fragmentation and deformation of bones are also recorded and by this the compiled dataset could shed light on the final treatment of the body: whether and how the deceased was placed on a funerary pyre, and the method and circumstances of the cremation process. For instance, variation in the colour of cremated bone fragments (of the same skeleton) implies that the pyre was burning with various intensity and the body was exposed to flames of different temperatures. This phenomenon is referred to as heterogenic burning. In contrast, if the bone fragments are uniform in colour – homogenic/ homogeneous burning – the whole body was exposed to equal temperatures (Mays 2010, 324–325). The majority of calcined bone fragments discovered at Ludas were homogeneous whitish-grey or greyish-blue coloured. Cremated remains of variegated, yellowish-brown or black colour – implying heterogeneous burning – were present in significantly lower proportions. Therefore it can be concluded that both heterogeneous and homogeneous burning of dead bodies were practiced at Ludas. This implication is supported further by parabolic signs detected on most of the cremated remains which occur during the initial phase of the cremation process, and by linear cracks appearing as the result of generally higher temperatures. Parabolic cracks develop on relatively low temperatures (200°C) whereas linear cracks evolve by intensive exposure of higher temperatures (700°C) (Mays 2010 322–323). To further establish the maximum temperature of burning, melted bronze objects found among cremated remains can provide guidance. In a number of burials burnt and melted bronze ornaments indicate temperatures reaching 800–1000°C (the melting point of this copper alloy depends on the tin content. If the tin content is lower than 20% the melting point is around 800–1000°C, Turner-walker 2009, fig. 1/2). The majority of cremated bones recorded from Ludas was greyish-white coloured, well-fragmented and thoroughly burnt indicating that human remains were manipulated during the cremation process and that of each stage of the procedure was looked after and controlled. It has to be noted here that the level of fragmentation – besides the manner of burning – could have been affected further by the instant collection of hot remains, spraying with cold water or washing. As a result of thermal stress the bones shatter even more (Sigvallius 1993, 122). The majority of cremated bones from Ludas are micro-fragmented, and the average fragment size is around 10 mm. This level of fragmentation makes it considerably difficult to age and sex the remains. To identify the age and sex of individuals the same method was applied for both cremations and inhumations (for the detailed discussion of this method see Mays 2010, 317–320). During the analysis, signs of trauma and other pathological conditions were also recorded which could hold valuable information on the deceased person’s lifestyle. Following the separation of skeletal elements detailed measurements were taken on fragments associated with each particular bone. Calculations based on these measurements represent the presence of certain anatomic units by percentage. The overall mass of cremated remains generally ranges between 100 g and 200 g and it never exceeds 700 g (Fig. 2, Appendix 1). Analyses carried out in present day crematoriums have shown that the average mass of a cremated mature adult is around 1500–2300 g (Trotter–Hixon 1974, fig. 1). By comparing these data with the measurements taken on the Ludas remains it can be concluded that only a certain proportion of selected bones were actually placed in the grave. At this stage of the investigation, further to the anthropological data collection, archaeological information can be derived as well. During the anatomical identification of bone fragments it becomes clear if the remains belonged to one or more individuals. In the case of multiple burials the number and composition of fragments indicate whether the deposition of multiple individuals was carried out intentionally or the remains of more than one individual were accidently mixed up during the cremation process. Intentional deposition of multiple burials can clearly be identified by the presence of characteristic skeletal elements belonging to numerous individuals (e.g. more than two caput femoris, etc.). Multiple burials can be suspected when along the remains of adults, bone fragments of a child occur, or the age differences of bone fragments are clearly distinctive (e.g. different stages of epiphysis fusions are present). 252 | É. Tankó–K. Tankó 1290 1288 1286 1241 1157 1140 1056 1055 1051 1050 1038 1023 1010 1009 1005 1003 998 996 962 961 958 955 953 904 882 879 801 729 708 703 699 686 685 670 669b 665 662 661 660 659 657 655 identifiable 654 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 undetermined 700 800 Fig. 2. Mass of cremated human remains (g) in each burial, showing the proportion of anthropologically identified bone fragments. There were altogether eight double burials documented at Ludas. In two cases the cremated remains of two adults (burial 711, 1009), in five cases an adult and a child (burial 686, 699, 725, 1051, 1267), and in one case a newborn and a child (burial 1139) were placed in the grave together. Sometimes the mass of cremated bone fragments possibly indicate multiple burials; e.g. burial 686: 401 g, burial 711: 646 g, burial 1050: 672 g (Fig. 3, Appendix 1). Bone fragments belonging to two individuals were mostly mixed and deposited in a little heap in the grave (burials 699, 725, 1051, 1139 and 1267). In burial 699 and 1267 the remains of an adult woman and a child of age Infans I were mixed, moreover, in the case of burial 725, an adult of unidentifiable sex and a child of Infans I were found together. These burials could represent two individuals (mother and child) who were cremated together. In other cases the presence of multiple individuals is supposed by their separate deposition in the grave. From burial 1009, an adult male, and alongside vessel no. 5, an adult female were recovered. In burial 711, near to the cremated remains of an adult female aged around 24, bone fragments of another adult female were documented around bracelet no. 5 (Fig. 3). It has to be pointed out that in this case the bone fragments of the two individuals show signs of exposure to different temperatures which implies that they were cremated on separate pyres. In burial 686, neonatal remains were partly placed in a vessel and were partly mixed with bone fragments of an adult male. It is likely in Cremation and Deposition in the Late Iron Age Cemetery at Ludas | 253 this and similar cases that the cremation of these two individuals was carried out on the same pyre. The interpretation of burial 1139 is slightly more problematic as among the neonatal remains, skull fragments of a child aged Infans I were found. The two children could have been cremated together, however, the missing skeletal elements of the older child raises issues for which we have no satisfactory answers yet. Furthermore, in some child burials the total absence of skull bones can be observed. In burial 1267, among the remains of an adult female, cremated skeletal bones of a child were detected, but the infant’s skull fragments were not present at all. From burial 1051, among calcined skeletal Fig. 3. Position of cremated human remains in bones of a child aged around 1 year old, skull fragments grave 711. of an adult were documented. In this case the mixed remains of the two individuals imply cremation on the same pyre. There is no explanation so far why the skeletal elements of the adult and the skull bones of the child were missing from the grave. The case of burial 665 is noteworthy as here only the post-cranial bones were present, the remains of the skull were absent. A possible explanation could be that the skull was not placed in the grave, thus was not cremated with the rest of the body in the first place. In inhumations from the La Tène period, posthumus manipulation of bodies has been documented in some cases – e.g. Sajópetri (Szabó 2006, 62) –; therefore similar manipulation of bodies during the cremation process cannot be ruled out either. At Ludas, in the case of two cremations, signs of quasi contemporaneous manipulation were detected. The fill of burial 954 was later disturbed and a cooking vessel was placed upside-down in the grave, a similar situation was documented in burial 686. These later interferences did not aim to disturb the remains initially and demonstrate that interaction with the deceased did not stop with the event of burial at all times. There are some cases when the remains of an individual contained bone fragments of a different person (1038, 1050, 1055 and 1157). Here – as opposed to the above described examples – rather than particular skeletal elements being present, only random fragments of other individuals occur, therefore intentionality can be ruled out. The use of the same location for cremation could explain the appearance of such random bone fragments. Carrying out cremation in a commonly used location, in the so-called bustum is well-known from the Celtic world – e.g. Clemency (Metzler Et Al. 1991); Westhampnett (Fitzpatrick 2000, 24–25, fig. 27) –, but at Ludas the existence of a communal funerary location can only be assumed as such structure was not documented. Nevertheless in most cases according to anthropological data it is clear that the cremations were carried out at different locations. The cremated remains of Ludas were recovered from diverse archaeological contexts. Cremations were generally placed into a rectangular-shaped gravepit with straight walls and a flat base. The remains were either scattered on the bottom or were piled up in a little heap. This heap of bone fragments could be round, oval or rectangular. The burnt and deformed metal ornaments were found mostly among the human remains, as well as occasionally separately. By examining the position of the ashes within the grave it can be observed that the remains form either a circle or an oval or a rectangle. It often occurs in Iron Age burials – and at Ludas as well (e.g. burials 655, 660 and 726) – that the cremated bones were placed in a larger bowl or jar Fig. 4. Unburned bronze fibula on cremated human remains in grave 962. functioning as funerary urns. Placement 254 | É. Tankó–K. Tankó of human remains in containers (such as a vessel) is also well-known from Iron Age burials. Most recently Le Goff analysed the various forms of cremated bone depositions in the La Calotterie cemetery in Belgium dating to the middle La Téne period. She argues that the remains deposited in circles were originally put into perishable containers, presumably into pouches made of leather or textile (enveloppe souple by French terminology). She also mentions examples for rectangular and scattered deposition of ashes (Le Goff Et Al. 2009, 116–123). Analogues for perishable containers were documented in the cemetery of Ludas as well. By examining the archaeozoological material Méniel (2006, 345–366) has shown that the positions of certain bones imply the use of rectangular containers in graves. On these grounds the employment of perishable containers can be assumed in the Ludas burials with relative certainty. Ashes deposited in circular heaps were most possibly placed in circular containers, like in wooden buckets, wicker baskets, leather or textile pouches (Fig. 6). In some cases, on top of the heaps of cremated remains, unburnt metal ornaments, chiefly fibulae were recorded (e.g. 962, 1050, 1057, 1157). Since no sign of heat exposure was detected on the fibulae, these objects were unlikely parts of the garment worn during the cremation process. This phenomenon raises the possibility that the remains were placed into textile pouches held together by fibulae (Fig. 4). Rectangular depositions of ashes – similarly to the rectangular deposition of animal bones – were presumably put in wooden containers, e.g. wooden tray, wicker basket, etc. (Fig. 5). Fig. 5. Examples of deposition of cremated human remains and its hypothetical interpretations. Within the group of cremations, burial 1282 represents a unique burial practice at Ludas. Here, besides vessels containing food offerings, the majority of burnt bronze objects were collected from the remains of the pyre and were piled in a small heap. A layer consisting of charcoal, cremated human bones and melted bronze ornaments implies that the vestiges of the pyre were scraped into the southern part of the grave (Fig. 6). Similar, a possibly even more intriguing situation was documented in burial 734 where most of the ashes were placed in the eastern side of the grave, outside of the burial wooden box (Fig. 7). In these cases it can be assumed that the pyre was erected directly adjacent to the grave, which after the cremation of the body finished was scraped into the grave. Finally it is worth noting that burnt animal bones were also found among the cremated human remains. This was the case in the majority of cremation burials excavated at Ludas, however the proportion Cremation and Deposition in the Late Iron Age Cemetery at Ludas | 255 of animal bones was very small compared to the human remains. The only exception was burial 686, where a large amount of burnt archaeozoological material was recovered. Burnt animal bones were without exception mixed with cremated human bones in the grave – as opposed to separate food offerings – thus certain animal parts or entire animal were placed on the pyre together with the body. Fig. 6. Ashes with cremated human bones in the south part of grave 1282. Fig. 7. Cremated human remains outside of burial wooden box in grave 734. In summary can be concluded that analysis of cremated human remains besides basic physical anthropological information (such as the determination of age and sex) yields data on burial practice and circumstances of deposition. From this point of view archaeo-anthropological results derived from the cemetery of Ludas are unique in the Carpathian Basin. Similar information on other burial grounds from the region is relatively scarce. On the other hand La Tène cemeteries in France examined by the same method are too geographically distant to be suitable comparative analogues for population estimates. By examining the burial rite it became clear that the construction of the cremation process and the ritual circumstances of the burials documented in the cemetery of Ludas are very similar to details recorded in the Bourgogne, Picardie and Champagne-Ardennes Celtic burial grounds (Baray 2003). In other words, these burials only contained certain skeletal elements demonstrating that cremated human remains were carefully selected from the vestiges of the pyre. Archaeo-anthropological data shows that communal use of cremating locations (fragmented remains of other individuals were mixed with the ashes of the deceased) The diverse position of cremated bones in graves is also intriguing, furthermore there is evidence of temperature control during the cremation process. To compare the data from Ludas with other cemeteries in the Carpathian Basin, more excavations will be necessary where the archao-anthropological approach can be applied. From this point of view the ongoing physical anthropological analysis of the cemetery of Sajópetri–Homoki-szőlőskertek will be significant. 256 | É. Tankó–K. Tankó female adultus-maturus hom female adultus-maturus hom female ? adultus-maturus hom female ? adultus-maturus hom female adultus-maturus undetermined / no available data het adultus hom female adultus-maturus het adultus-maturus undetermined / no available data hom female adultus-maturus het male adultus-maturus Percentage of identified bones (%) mi me hom Mass of identified bones (g) poor med undetermined / no available data hom female adultus-maturus hom female adultus-maturus Overall bone mass (g) mi mi mi Age med poor poor Identification of sex mi mi-me mi mi-me mi mi-me mi mi mi-me Sex Fragmentation mi = micro me = meso ma = macro med med poor med poor med med poor med Cremation method hom = homogogeneous het = heterogeneous Preservation poor, med = medium, good 651 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 664 665 669b 670 683 685 686 692 693 695 699 699 703 708 709 711 711 725 725 726 729 731 733 734 740 801 879 882 883 904 951 953 954 955 958 960 961 962 965 988 989 990 992 Number of depositon Burial number Appendix 1 Summary of osteological analysis of material from the cemetery of Ludas 250,45 87,88 0,75 72,99 9,44 287,18 10,4 51,23 231,12 60,10 32,51 0 32,84 0 68,92 4,78 25,10 161,78 24 46 49 70 66,7 52,16 68,9 16,00 36,51 28,93 24 70 42 121,35 401,51 23,05 96,36 19 24 111,26 56,74 51 110,59 240,33 38,70 28,83 35 12 30,96 30 120,21 147,24 52,31 18,03 66,25 9,93 15 45 19 193,37 98,61 51 42,89 2,14 5 3,23 175,17 0,61 87,58 19 50 146,72 418,8 5,86 259,65 4 62 24 37 45 undetermined / no available data 1 2 med med med med mi-me mi-me mi-me mi-me 1 2 1 2 med med poor poor poor med poor mi-me mi-me mi mi mi mi mi med poor poor med poor mi-me inhumation mi mi-me hypermi med med poor poor med med mi-me inhumation mi med med mi mi mi mi het female adultus-maturus het child infans I hom male adultus-maturus hom male ? adultus-maturus undetermined / no available data hom female adultus hom female ? adultus-maturus hom adultus-maturus hom child infans I het female adultus-maturus hom male adultus-maturus undetermined / no available data hom male adultus-maturus female ? adultus hom adultus-maturus hom male adultus-maturus hom child infans I undetermined / no available data hom male juvenis female adultus hom female ? adultus-maturus hom adultus-maturus hom female adultus-maturus undetermined / no available data hom adultus-maturus hom adultus-maturus undetermined / no available data 646 362 161 103,23 1,35 389 Age Percentage of identified bones (%) ? Mass of identified bones (g) male adultus-maturus adultus-maturus adultus-maturus adultus-maturus Overall bone mass (g) hom hom hom hom Identification of sex mi mi mi mi mi Sex Fragmentation mi = micro me = meso ma = macro poor med med med med Cremation method hom = homogogeneous het = heterogeneous Preservation poor, med = medium, good 995 996 998 1003 1005 1006 1008 1009 1009 1010 1023 1030 1036b 1038 1050 1051 1054 1055 1056 1057 1139 1139 1140 1155 1156 1157 1241 1267 1267 1274 1282 1286 1288 1289 1290 Number of depositon Burial number Cremation and Deposition in the Late Iron Age Cemetery at Ludas | 257 2,35 13,17 321,83 33,38 48,78 0 1,18 25,74 1,66 6,34 9 8 5 13 343 264,11 77 199,49 23,1 71,81 22,86 36 99 undetermined / no available data 1 2 med med med med mi-me me mi mi hom hom het het male female child adultus-maturus adultus-maturus infans I adultus-maturus undetermined / no available data 1 2 1 2 poor med med mi mi mi hom hom het female male child adultus-maturus adultus-maturus infans I 125,37 671,9 50,41 62,68 456,89 9,57 50 68 19 med med good med med med poor poor med med good good poor poor med poor mi mi mi-me-ma mi mi mi inhumation hypermi mi mi mi-me-ma mi-me-ma inhumation mi mi-me hypermi-mi hom hom hom hom hom hom male male adultus-maturus adultus-maturus adultus infans I infans I adultus-maturus 320,6 224,3 537 138 150,68 150,28 47 67 152,51 42,70 28 infans I adultus-maturus adultus-maturus infans I 119,8 65,88 526 11,98 25,69 10 39 279,63 61,83 117,44 22,87 42 37 med mi-me hom male adultus-maturus hom male adultus-maturus undetermined / no available data hom male ? adultus Overall mass 106,76 43,77 9501,85 41 hom hom hom hom child child child female child References Baray 2003 Dacík 1983 Duday Et Al. 2000 Fitzpatrick 2000 Baray, L., Pratiques funéraires et sociétés de l’Âge du Fer dans le bassin Parisien (fin du VIIe s – troisième quart du IIe s. avant J.-C.), Paris. Dacík, T., Anthropologische Analyse der Skelette an dem keltischen Gräberfeld in Maňa, IN: Benadík, B., Maňa. Keltisches Gräberfeld, Nitra, 149–65. Duday, H.–Depierre, G.–Janin, T., Validation des paramètres de quantification, protocoles et stratégies dans l’étude anthropologique des sépultures secondaires à incinération. L’example des nécropoles protohistoriques du Midi de la France, IN: Dedet, B.–Gruat, P.–Marchand, G.–Py, M.–Schwaller, M., Archéologie de la mort, archéologie de la tombe au Premier Âge du Fer. Actes du XXIe Colloque International de l’Assotiation Française pour L’Étude de l’Âge du Fer. Lattes, 7–29. Fitzpatrick, A. P., Ritual, sequence and structure in Late Iron Age Mortuary practices in North-West Europe, IN: Pearce, J.–Millett, M.–Struck, M., Burial, Society and Context in the Roman World, Oxford, 15–29. 258 | É. Tankó–K. Tankó B. Hellebrandt, M., Celtic Finds from Northern Hungary, Corpus of Celtic Finds in Hungary, III, Budapest. Jakab 1995 Jakab, J., Anthropologische Grundanalyse des birituellen latènezeitlichen Gräberfeldes in Malé Kosihy, IN: Bujna, J., Malé Kosihy. Latènezeitliches Gräberfeld. Katalog, Nitra, 183–210. Jakab–Vondárková Jakab, J.–Vondárková, M., Ergebnisse der anthropologischen Analyse des latènezeitlichen 1989 Gräberfeldes in Dubník, SlovArch, 37, 355–370. Le Goff Et Al. 2009 Le Goff, I.–Laperle, G.–Millerat, P.–Culot, A., Le devenir du cadavre incinéré en Gaule Belgique. Méthodes et analyse de cas, Revue Archéologique de Picarde 2009, 113–128. Mays 2010 Mays, S., The archaeology of human bones, Oxon–New York. Méniel 2006 Méniel, P., Les offrandes animales de la nécropole celtique de Ludas-Varjú-dűlő, ActaArchHung, 57, 345–366. Metzler Et Al. 1991 Metzler, J.–Waringo, R.–Bis, R.–Metzler-Zens, N., Clemency et les tombes de l’aristocratie en Gaule Belgique, Luxembourg. Nemeskéri–Deák 1954 Nemeskéri, J.–Deák, M., A magyarországi kelták embertani vizsgálata, Biológiai Közlemények, 2, 133–158. Patay 1972 Patay, P., Celtic finds in the mountainous region Northern Hungary, ActaArchHung, 24, 353–358. Sigvallius 1993 Sigvallius, B., Death and Burial. Iron Age Cremation from Nine Burial Ground in North Spånga, Stockholm. Szabó 2006 Szabó, M., La Tène period cemetery at Sajópetri (Excavation in 2005), AIH 2005, 61–71. Szabó 2012 Szabó, M. (dir.), Nécropole latènienne à Ludas–Varjú-dűlő, Budapest. Szabó Et Al. 2006 Szabó, M.–Guillaumet, J.-P.–Vitali, D., L’occupation celtique de la Grande Plaine Hongroise, Rapport annuel d’activité scientifique du Centre Archéologique Européen de Bibracte, 221–225. Szabó–Tankó 2006 Szabó, M.–Tankó, K., Nécropole latènienne à Ludas–Varjú-dűlő, ActaArchHung, 57, 325–343. Turner-walker 2009 Turner-Walker, G., A Practical Guide to the Conservation of Metals, Taipei. Trotter–Hixon 1974 Trotter, M.–Hixon, B. B., Sequential Changes in Weight, Density and Percentage Ash Eight of Human Skeletons from Early Foetal Period through to Old Age, Anatomical Record, 179, 1–18. Vlček 1957 Vlček, E., Antropológia keltov na juhozápadnom Slovensku, IN: Benadík, B.–Vlček, E.– Ambros, C., Keltské Pohrebiská na juhozápadnom Slovensku, Bratislava. 203–289. Zoffmann 1998 K. Zoffmann, Zs., Hamvasztásos rítusú kelta temetkezések embertani vizsgálata, IN: Németh, P. G., Kelta temetők Somogy megyében, SMMK, 13, 78. Zoffmann 2000 K. Zoffmann, Zs., Die anthropologischen Funde der am Fundort Somogytúr–Homokbánya freigelegten keltischen Gräber, ActaArchHung, 51, 1999–2000, 266–267. Zoffmann 2001 K. Zoffmann, Zs., Anthropological structure of the prehistoric populations living in the Carpathian Basin in the Neolithic, Copper, Bronze and Iron Age, ActaArchHung, 52, 49–62. Zoffmann 2002a K. Zoffmann, Zs., Az Ordacsehi–Kécsimező lelőhely birituális kelta temetkezéseinek embertani leletei. SMMK, 15, 61–64. Zoffmann 2002b K. Zoffmann, Zs., Adatok a Kárpát-medence keltakori népességének antropológiájához, AnthrKözl, 43, 21–26. Hellebrandt 1999 List of figures Fig. 1. Ludas–Varjú-dűlő. Map of the Celtic cemetery. 1. inhumation; 2. cremation burial; 3. urn grave; 4. destroyed burial. Fig. 2. Mass of cremated human remains (g) in each burial, showing the proportion of anthropologically identified bone fragments. Fig. 3. Examples of deposition of cremated human remains and its hypothetical interpretations. Fig. 4. Position of cremated human remains in grave 711. Fig. 5. Unburned bronze fibula on cremated human remains in grave 962. Fig. 6. Ashes with cremated human bones in the south part of grave 1282. Fig. 7. Cremated human remains outside of burial wooden box in grave 734. The Biritual Cemetery AT Šurany–Nitriansky Hrádok, District of Nové Zámky, Slovakia* Gertrúda BŘEZINOVÁ Institute of Archaeology, SAS, Nitra, Slovakia gertruda.brezinova@savba.sk Keywords: Late Iron Age, biritual cemetery, Slovakia With an oval ground plan and protected from north and west by an arm of the Nitra River named Cítenka, the tell settlement of Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok was occupied throughout prehistory and into to the Middle Ages. The first rescue surveys were undertaken in 1923 by the Archaeological Institute in Prague led by Jan Eisner. The site was researched in 1930 by Štefan Janšák, who, based on field observations, was the first to recognise the site as being an acropolis of the neighbouring contemporary settlements. The Archaeological Institute in Martin carried out further surveys during 1948–1952, firstly led by Anton Točík (1948–1949), who in the following years (1950–1952) worked in cooperation with the Archaeological Institute in Prague and Antonin Knor (1952). In 1957–1960 the regulation of the Nitra River and as a result under the leadership of Točík, the Archaeological Institute of the Slovak Academy of Sciences in Nitra organized systematic excavations (Točík 1962). One of the collaborators was Karol Sedlák, who produced model documentation of field situations and finds. Generations of archaeologists received their practical training on the site (Pl. 1/1). The excavation was a salvage project with, two thirds of the potential excavated area being destroyed by the new regulation works of the Nitra River. Fieldwork was not only unusually extensive, but it applied new excavation methods such as area excavation following a grid system, the provision of control blocks, interdisciplinary cooperation, the mechanical removal of excavated and a high level of uniform documentation. The earliest settlement with four horizons dates from the Neolithic Lengyel culture while a roundel was identified as being dated to from the Copper Age. The most significant settlement period was assigned to the Maďarovce culture dated in turn to the Early Bronze Age and the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age (Točík 1981). Other finds date from the Early Iron Age, and a Late La Tène biritual cemetery together with a fortified Celto-Dacian settlement were also investigated. Finds from the Roman and Migration Periods were rare, and so were Slav finds consisting of Prague-type pottery from the 6th century AD. The youngest settlement features date from the Great Moravian Period (9th century AD) and the Middle Ages (12th to 13th centuries AD). Regarding the Late Iron Age, the fortified Celto-Dacian settlement had been already discussed (Točík 1959; Pieta 2008; Březinová 2010). A reconstruction of the entrance was published first by Točík (1981); the features dating to around the turn of our eras (pit 4) as well as the Roman imports were published earlier (Pieta 1997a; 1997b). On the other hand, the partially destroyed Middle La Tène biritual cemetery (comprising some eight graves) from Zámeček was only briefly mentioned in print (Benadik 1977). The area of Nitriansky Hrádok includes several, mostly unpublished, sites from this period, a * Our research was supported by GP VEGA no. 105/09 a 61/10. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 259–271 260 | G. Březinová settlement at Hoferské, and another one at Vysoký breh. Disturbed graves are known also from Jánosszeg (Pl. 1/2). Regarding their chronology, the latest graves date from the end of LT C. Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček During the years 1956–1960 three inhumation graves and three cremation burials were excavated. One inhumation grave was found in 1949 and one cremation burial in 1952. The general extent of the cemetery is distorted by the fact that almost two-thirds of the area was damaged by agricultural activity and there is no possibility of finding out whether and how many graves might be situated on those parts of the site not yet examined. The graves were concentrated in two areas. In the centre of the southern edge, one inhumation grave was found in the vicinity of three cremation burials while three other inhumation graves with another cremation burial were situated not far distant in the south-western part of the cemetery. The inhumation graves were not oriented in any particular direction. Finds from the excavated graves were disturbed and some of them damaged during the bombing of Nové Zámky city in 1945. To date this necropolis has not been completely documented or published. Some of the finds have been described by Benadik (1977), who dated the Zámeček cemetery to the latest horizon of the flat Celtic inhumation graves in the Middle Danube area. Regarding the chronology and stratigraphy of the graves, inhumation grave 2 with a female skeleton from the Middle La Tène Period (LT C1) found under a Celto-Dacian (Fig. 2) hut is relevant (Březinová 2010). The remains of the biritual cemetery from the 2nd century BC and the fortified settlement from the second half of the 1st century BC from the loess promontory called Zámeček were excavated in 1948–1952 and 1956–1959. La Tène finds found earlier at this location were deposited at the former Župné Museum in Nitra before World War II. Eisner, Janšák and Szőke also mentioned further finds. In the inter-war period the Slovak National Museum in Martin acquired more La Tène finds from the private collections of M. Hanus and H. Šughs. Except for sporadic pottery fragments characteristic for the settlements, all the mentioned finds came from disturbed graves. Intact vessels, bronze Hohlbuckelring, a glass bracelet and a lignite bracelet were also found. The majority of these finds were lost or damaged when Nové Zámky was bombed during the war. The graves were concentrated in two places, in the middle of the southern boundary one inhumation grave was situated in the vicinity of three cremation burials, and in the south-western part three inhumation graves were found together with one cremation burial not far distant. The orientation of the graves differed. Female inhumation grave 1/1958, section E/22 (Fig. 1) This grave was sunk into the thick Maďarovce cultural layer and because of its indistinct filling colour and structure it was only recognised when remains of the skeleton was found. The grave pit was rectangular in shape deformed by the collapse of the walls. The medium sized female skeleton was lying on her back, with approximate E–W orientation. The bones of the lower extremities were completely preserved while the upper ones were only partially conserved; the rib cage were mostly consumed and the skull was missing. A pig’s mandible was found between the femurs. Two bronze brooches largely conserved by corrosion products (2) and 40 glass beads (3) were situated above the pelvis. A bottle-shaped vase (1) was situated to the right of the feet. These artefacts have been lost. 1. Bottle-shape vase with bi-conical body; small centrally placed omphalos; its upper part decorated with wider coarse line with oblique grooves; black-grey; size: height 16.9 cm; mouth diameter 12 cm; max. diameter 18.8 cm; bottom diameter 9 cm. 2. Two bronze brooches of hinged construction with external cord and with foot connected to the bow on which are two tiny knobs; relatively well preserved; length: 4.4 cm. 3. Necklace of 40 discoid beads made of dark blue glass; diameter 0.7–1.6 cm; thickness: 0.25–0.9 cm. Female inhumation grave 2/1958, section E/21 (Fig. 2; Pl. 2) The grave was situated under a later Celto-Dacian hut. The outline of the burial pit was revealed after the foundation of the hut had been excavated. It was of regular rectangular shape with perpendicular walls and a flat bottom, partially sunk into loess and into the filling of a Lengyel-culture ditch. Its length was 200 cm, the width was 70 cm, and it was at 265 cm below the surface. The relatively well-preserved female skeleton was lying on her back; the skull was slightly lifted up and turned to the left, the arms were placed along the body having a SSW–NNE orientation. Fragments from two iron brooches were found The Biritual Cemetery AT Šurany–Nitriansky Hrádok, District of Nové Zámky, Slovakia | 261 2–3 4 5 1 0 N 1. pottery 2–3. bronze brooches 0.5m 4. glass beads 5. swine mandible Fig. 1. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček, E/22–3, 1958. Inhumation grave 1 (sketches by K. Sedlák). Fig. 2. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. Grave 2. 1. inhumation grave; 2. Celto-Dacian hut; 3. armring. near the collar bone; two bronze brooches and another iron brooch were on the left side of the rib cage; a glass bracelet was found on the left scapular; and, finally, an iron belt-chain was placed between the ribs and pelvis. 1. Bronze wire brooch of single piece construction with triple external spring on the bow ending with a spiral coil; length 4 cm (Pl. 2/3). 262 | G. Březinová 2. The second similar brooches when removed from the grave had a strongly corroded bow and broken spring (Pl. 2/2). 3. Fragments from probably two iron brooches, one with the remains of the spring, the other of the pin and bow catch plate. 4. Fragmented iron brooch, with preserved bow with spring and pin fragments, no other diagnostic features; bow length: 7.4 cm. 5. Iron belt-chain, strongly corroded, with links connected by rings and twisted sections, one of which had a spherical ending; diameter of rings: approx. 1.8 cm; width of twisted parts: 1.4 cm (Pl. 2/4–7). 4. Armring made of blue glass with lateral ribs and highly convex central partly segmented with thick wide beading resembling twisted decoration; three smooth beadings alternate with white thread-like wavy lines. Similar discontinuous decoration is to be found on the edges as well; diameter: 9.3 cm; width: 2 cm; thickness: 1.2 cm (Pl. 2/1; Fig. 2/3). Inhumation grave 3/1958, section E/21–10, SW–NE (Pl. 4/1) The grave was sunk into the light grey Maďarovce cultural layer. When the skeleton was first observed the outline of the grave was indistinctive. The grave pit bottom was 170 deep from the surface. The well preserved skeleton was that of a mature individual; it was lying on its back with SW–NE orientation with slightly bent and outstretched right arm and left leg; the upper vertebra were broken. No grave goods were found with the skeleton though an incomplete iron brooch (1) was found just above the skeleton. 1. Part of markedly corroded iron brooch with the foot connected to the bow, which was not preserved; length: 8.5 cm (Pl. 4/1). Inhumation grave 1/49, female The grave was discovered after the skeleton had been revealed 155 cm deep in the cultural layer. The grave pit did not differ in colour and structure from its surroundings. The buried woman was lying on her right side, almost on her stomach, with hands stretched to the right from the trunk and slightly bended, the lower extremities were in the same position. The skull placed on its right side was trepanned. There was an elongated opening showing healed edges on the occipital bone. The skeleton’s length was of 160 cm, its orientation was E–W. An iron belt was found on the upper vertebra. 1. Fragments of iron belt-chain covered with thick layer of ash-like rust and markedly corroded in its core, resulting in only sporadic links being identified. Further finds are missing. 280 cm 2 100 cm 4 1 298 cm 5 3 490 cm 1. Low vessel 2. graphite vessel 3–4. iron fragment 5. bronze fragment 6. fragmentary iron fibula 0 1m Fig. 3. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. Cremation grave 1 (sketches by K. Sedlák). Cremation grave 1/1958, section D/14–E/14 (Fig. 3) The grave was found 110 cm deep in the Maďarovce culture layer. The shape of the grave pit was unclear; some features indicated a circular ground plan. A vase-shaped urn (1) was situated in the centre; the clayey filling containing the remains of un-calcined bones. A small graphite vessel (2) was situated at the southern side of the pit. In the vicinity, fragments of an iron boss (4) and a shield mount with two iron nails (5) were discovered. Parts of a bronze brooch (6) and two (?) iron brooches (7) were deposited in the urn. Two fragments of vessels from the same period (3) were found nearby. The Biritual Cemetery AT Šurany–Nitriansky Hrádok, District of Nové Zámky, Slovakia | 263 1. Squat vessel with wide indented neck and out-turned and expanding rim; the body is low, lenticular; with a central basal omphalos; grey-brown surface; height: 11.5 cm, rim diameter: 19.5 cm, max. diameter: 23.5 cm, bottom diameter: 11 cm. 2. Small, thick-walled barrel shaped vessel with rounded expanding rim; with shallow perimeter groove on burnished shoulder and perpendicular combed decoration on the rim and under the neck; grey, with graphite inclusions; height: 7.6 cm; diameter of the mouth: 9.5 cm; max. diameter: 11 cm; bottom diameter: 5.8 cm. 3. Profiled bowl rim fragment, grey-brown. 4. Fragment of the base of a barrel shaped vessel, black-grey, with graphite inclusions. 5. Two fragments of iron brooch, one with part of the spring and pin, the other unidentifiable; width: 2.5 cm. 6. Two fire-deformed and heavily corroded segments of spring and pin or bow of iron brooch; length: 3.8 cm and 6.5 cm. 7. Fragment of a bronze brooch bow; length: 2 cm. 8. Two short bent nails with convex circular heads, missing their points, probably used as rivets to fasten bosses to the shield; length: 2.5 cm; thickness: 0.5 cm. 9. Fragments of iron plate from a boss and fragments of an iron shield rim mount. 100 cmj 5 3 1 2 4 1 0 0.5 425 cm 1m 260 cmj Cremation grave 2/1958, section D/14–E/14 (Fig. 4, Pl. 4/1–10) This grave was situated at 2 m distance from grave 1, and it was found at a depth of 115 cm. A lot of burnt material which had blackened the area in the vicinity was revealed in a shallow pitlike depression. This pit included some small unburnt bones, several fragments of La Tène pottery, a small lump of bronze, iron shears, fragments of two iron brooches, iron belt and sword with sheath s. 355 all situated in the lower part together with nearby a fragment of a bottle-shaped vessel. The assemblage of finds from the graves 1 and 2 and their relative closeness (less than 2 m from each other) indicate a cremation burial. 1. fragments of a shears 2. fragments of an iron sword 3. fragments of an iron brooch 4. segments of a flat iron belt 5. fragments of an iron brooch 1. Fragments of one piece shears, rust-joined two blades with broken tips and segments of tangs but missing the Fig. 4. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. Cremation spring; length: 13 cm (Pl. 4/9). grave 2 (sketches by K. Sedlák). 2. Fragments of iron brooch, one with parts of the bow and pin. 3. Segments of flat iron belt-chain with embossed decoration; twisted from rod and widened at the end. One terminal ending with a ring, the other with a spherical hook, its surface heavily corroded. Length: 13.5–16.5 cm; width: 1.9–2.6 cm; thickness: 0.8–1.2 cm (Pl. 4/1–4). 4. Rust-damaged fragments of iron sword and pieces of iron sheath, bent or twisted several times, the sheath sides slightly curved, two fragments with strip eyelets; another fragment with smoothly narrowing lower terminal part; grooves showing reinforcement along the sheath edges; width of the lower part: 3 cm; width of the central part: 4.4 cm; width of the upper part near the eyelet: 5 cm; eyelet width: 2 cm (Pl. 4/5, 6, 8, 10). Cremation grave 3/1958, section C 19 (Pl. 4/2–3) A small bottle-shaped vessel filled with clay and containing a bronze ringlet was unearthed at a depth of 70 cm was recovered in the wall of the Maďarovce cultural layer but as was an unsupervised find made without professional supervision, the existence of a grave can only be assumed. 1. Small bottle-shaped vase with slightly funnel-shaped mouth, with expanding round rim; lower part of the neck with low relief rib, and lines limited to the perimeter; basal omphalos; height: 7.6 cm; rim diameter: 7.1 cm; max. diameter: 8.9 cm; bottom diameter: 4.8 cm (Pl. 4/3). 2. Bronze open ring made of round wire with touching flat terminals; patinated; diameter: 3.4 cm; diameter of the wire: 0.5 cm (Pl. 4/2). Cremation grave 4 (1/52) (Pl. 4/4–10) Cluster of unburnt small bones together with iron brooch, iron spear, knife and bracelet were found 60–70 cm deep at the bottom of thick black soil layer. Outlines and shape of the grave pit were not defined (see A. Knorr’s finding report in the Archaeological Institute SAS in Nitra). 264 | G. Březinová The cemetery of Jánosszeg (Pl. 5; 6) In this cemetery a total number of three graves were located, probably cremation burials (?), yet it is very likely that the cemetery was larger. The skeletal remains were not removed, only the grave inventories were rescued. Točík’s brief report (535/56, inv. no. 58/56) informs that Š. Rajnoha, the employee of the Archaeological Institute, handed over two bronze bracelets and a bronze belt-chain from the damaged cemetery on 21st August 1956. He acquired the finds from one Mr. Szekeres from Šurany. The given inventory number covered also another artefacts. ✴✴✴ The bronze bracelet from cremation grave 4 (1/52) is of BR-B5 type (Buna 2005, 26, obr. 13) dating from the end of LT B2, or in B2/C1 (?). The bronze wire brooch of joined construction with triple spring on the bow from inhumation grave 2/1958, which is continuation of the catch plate foot and it ends with spiral coil of the wire terminal part on the bow (Plate 1/3) is of BF-H3-C type (Bujna 2003, 60, obr. 28). The armlet made of blue glass with side ribs and highly convex central part (Plate 1/1; Fig. 4) is of 8b type (Bujna 2005, 135). The rich grave 2/1958 belonging to a woman should be one of the youngest graves discovered, dating from the final LT C1. The bronze brooch from grave 2/1952 is of BF-H3-C type (Bujna 2003, 60, fig. 28), dating from LT C1. One of the few urn graves, cremation grave 1, contained a vase shaped urn, with pieces of partly burnt (presumably human) bones. The shield components indicate a warrior’s grave. The segments of the flat iron belt-chain from cremation grave 2 (Bujna 1982, 324, Abb. 5/54) and the rust-damaged fragments of iron sword together with the pieces of iron sheath, bent or twisted several times (Bujna 2004, 321–338; Haruštiak 2009, 117–168) date this grave to LT C1b–c. In spite of having presently only a part of the finds from both localities where graves were found, we can presume that this burial place (or places) existed in the period LT B2 (?) and continued into the end of LT C1. Based on an 18th century map (Pl. 1/2), one can see that Zameček and Jánosszeg are very close to each other. It is highly possible that the Cítenka river-bed followed a different course in the La Tène times, and therefore one cannot exclude the possibility that the graves from the two locations actually were in fact one burial place beginning with LT B2 period and lasting till the end of LT C1. Even if in the region there are only finds from much destroyed and disturbed cemeteries and settlements, one can observe that the micro-region was intensively inhabited. The later Iron Age settlements and cemeteries can be dated mainly to the LT C1 period. No continuity up to the LT D period can be proved as only parts of the settlements have been excavated and no detailed evaluation has so far been published. On the contrary, the situation at Zámeček indicates discontinuity in burying after settlement in the LT C1 period. The next period of occupation occurred almost half-a-century later in the so-called Celto-Dacian period, when a fortified settlement was built on the site.1 References Benadik 1977 Březinová 2010 Bujna 1982 Bujna 2003 Bujna 2004 Bujna 2005 Haruštiak 2009 1 Benadik, B., Zur Datierung des jüngsten Horizontes der keltischen Flachgräberfelder im mittleren Donaugebiet, IN: Chropovský, B. (Hrsg.), Symposium Ausklang der LatèneZivilisation und Anfänge der germanischen Besiedlung im mittleren Donaugebiet, Bratislava, 15–31. Březinová, G., Sídlisko z neskorolaténskej polohy Zámeček v Šuranoch, Nitrianskom Hrádku, IN: Beljak, J.–Březinová, G.–Varsik, V. (eds.), Archeológia barbarov 2009: Hospodárstvo Germánov: sídliskové a ekonomické štruktúry od neskorej doby laténskej po včasný stredovek, Nitra, Archeologický ústav SAV, 113–130. Bujna, J., Spiegelung der Sozialstruktur auf latènezeitlichen Gräberfeldern im Karpatenbecken, PamArch, 73, 312–431. Bujna, J., Spony z keltských hrobov bez výzbroje z územia Slovenska. Typovo-chronologické triedenie LT B- a C1 spôn, SlovArch, 51, 39–108. Bujna, J., K problematike birituality u Keltov, Študijné zvesti, 36, 321–338. Bujna, J., Kruhový šperk z laténskych ženských hrobov na Slovensku, Nitra. Haruštiak, J., Vývoj pohrebného rítu na keltských pohrebiskách z územia Slovenska, SlovArch, 57, 117–168. Traslated by PhDr. Ľudmila Vaňková. The Biritual Cemetery AT Šurany–Nitriansky Hrádok, District of Nové Zámky, Slovakia | 265 Knor 1952 Pieta 1997a Pieta 1997b Pieta 2008 Točík 1959 Točík 1962 Točík 1981 Knor, A., Zámeček v Nitranském Hrádku u Šuran na Slovensku, ArchRoz, IV, 241–250. Pieta, K., Römischer Import der Spätlatenezeit in der Slowakei, ArhVest, 47, 183–195. Pieta, K., Die frühen norisch-pannonischen Handelsbeziehungen mit dem nördlichen Mitteldonaugebiet, IN: Čižmářová, J.–Měchurová, Z. (ed.), Peregrinatio gothica. Jantarová stezka, Acta Musei Moraviae, Scientiae sociales, 82, Supplementum, Brno, 45–61. Pieta, K., Keltské osídlenie Slovenska (Mladšia doba laténska), Arch. ústav SAV, ASM, XI, Nitra. Točík, A., K otázke osídlenia juhozápadného Slovenska na zlome letopočtu, ArchRoz, 11, 841–873. Točík, A., Nitriansky Hrádok, Zámeček, Výskumná správa č. 700/62, Dokumentácia AÚ SAV Nitra. Točík, A., Nitriansky Hrádok-Zámeček. Bronzezeitliche befestigte Ansiedlung der MaďarovceKultur, Band I, Heft 1, Nitra. List of figures Fig. 1. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček, E/22–3, 1958. Inhumation grave 1 (sketches by K. Sedlák). Fig. 2. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. Grave 2. Fig. 3. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. Cremation grave 1 (sketches by K. Sedlák). Fig. 4. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. Cremation grave 2 (sketches by K. Sedlák). List of plates Pl. 1. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok. 1. Zámeček; 2. Nitriansky Hrádok on the 18th c. map. LT B2–C sites: 1. Vysoký breh; 2. Hofierske; 3. Zámeček; 4. Jánosszeg. Pl. 2. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. Inhumation grave 2/1958. Pl. 3. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. Cremation grave 2/1958. Pl. 4. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. 1. Inhumation grave 3/1958. 2–3. Cremation grave 3/1958. 4–10. Inhumation grave 4 and other finds from the cemetery. Pl. 5. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Jánosszeg. Finds from cremation graves. Pl. 6. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Jánosszeg. Pottery from cremation graves. 266 | G. Březinová Plate 1. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok. 1. Zámeček; 2. Nitriansky Hrádok on the 18th c. map. LT B2–C sites: 1. Vysoký breh; 2. Hofierske; 3. Zámeček; 4. Jánosszeg. t Plate . urany itrians y r do . . . map. – sites . re me e . itrians y r do on t e . ier e . me e . n e . The Biritual Cemetery AT Šurany–Nitriansky Hrádok, District of Nové Zámky, Slovakia | 267 5 Plate 2. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. Inhumation grave 2/1958. Plate . urany itrians y r do – me e . n umation ra e 5 . 268 | G. Březinová 5 Plate 3. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. Cremation grave 2/1958. Plate . urany itrians y r do – me e . remation ra e 5 . The Biritual Cemetery AT Šurany–Nitriansky Hrádok, District of Nové Zámky, Slovakia | 269 5 –5 – – Plate 4. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Zámeček. 1. Inhumation grave 3/1958. 2–3. Cremation grave 3/1958. 4–10. Inhumation grave 4 and other finds from the cemetery. Plate . urany – . remation ra e itrians y r do – me e . . n umation ra e 5 . 5 . – . n umation ra e and ot er finds from t e emetery. 270 | G. Březinová 5 – 5– Plate 5. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Jánosszeg. Finds from cremation graves. Plate 5. urany itrians y r do – n e . inds from remation ra es. The Biritual Cemetery AT Šurany–Nitriansky Hrádok, District of Nové Zámky, Slovakia | 271 – Plate 6. Šurany, Nitriansky Hrádok–Jánosszeg. Pottery from cremation graves. Plate . urany itrians y r do – n e . Pottery from remation ra es. The Interpretative Value of Annular Ornaments for the Study of Early Celtic Populations in the Middle Danube Area* Martin FURMAN Regional Monuments Board Žilina, Slovakia martin.furman.za@gmail.com Keywords: annular rings, flat Celtic cemeteries, Middle Danube Area, Celtic migrations, mobility The annular ring with its frequency and rich variability presents a distinctive and characteristic element at flat Celtic cemeteries. Together with other clothing components like brooches, belt-plaques, etc., it shapes the picture of its wearer, their social status and relationship to a certain ethnic or cultural group of inhabitants. Since the Bronze Age, and the origins of wearing decorative rings the presence of this type of ring has been a characteristic part of female costume. With regard to the description of Celtic graves Píč (1902, 25) remarked that they abound in an unusual amount of decorative rings which developed peculiarly into a very rich, often even bizarre, variety. A wide range of various types made of several kinds of material offers a sufficient base for the study of their spatial distribution, distribution activities and mutual relationships among the regions which were affected by Celtic culture. Studying grave units with the focus on the combinations of the decorative rings – which types co-occur and in which position regarding the buried body they are placed – i.e. with regard to the so-called annular garniture we can arrive at interesting information about the society, ties between the more or less distant regions or cultural influences. The annular ring as a part of female costume, in terms of archeological culture the so-called Ringgarnituren or Ringtracht, was analysed from the set of 212 grave units without armament, i.e. mainly female graves in the territory of south-western Slovakia, Moravia, and the contiguous parts of Hungary and north-eastern Austria. The defined territory, called the Middle Danube Area in the paper, formed the base from which the graves and their annular garnitures were confronted with the situation at the cemeteries in the western Celtic area. To compare the mutual relatioships between the two geographical areas we used 101 graves in the territory of Bohemia, western Austria, southern Germany and northern and western Switzerland. The material basis of the analysis was the so-called big annular ring – anklets, bracelets, upper arm bracelets and neckrings. Finger rings were also monitored in the paper although not in regard to the annular ring but as an auxiliary element for dating the graves and searching analogies. A wide range of types and different positions of this type of a ring did not show any peculiarities which could suggest regional differences in their wearing. According to the presence or absence of the so-called big annular rings, their position to the buried body and the material from which the rings were made, there were defined nine basic types. Every type has several variants based on the number of the annular rings and their position on the buried body. According to the material it was possible to form three basic groups of grave units: * The present paper is a part of a PhD. dissertation on the annular ring as a source for the archeologically study of costume, distribution activities and mobility of the Celtic communities in the Middle Danube Area. The thesis was defended in the Archeological Institute of the Slovak Academy of Sciences in Nitra in 2009. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 273–287 274 | M. Furman 1. graves with bronze decorative rings only (types 1 to 5); 2. graves with both bronze and iron decorative rings (types 6 and 7); 3. graves with a sapropelite ring in combination with bronze and/or iron rings (types 8 and 9). Based on the position with regard to the buried body there were defined five groups in the paper: 1. graves with bracelets only (type 1); 2. graves with anklets only (type 2); 3. graves with bracelets and anklets (type 3, 6, 8); 4. graves with bracelets, anklets and an upper arm bracelet (models 4, 7, 9); 5. graves with a torque in combination with bracelets and anklets (model 5). The aim of the paper is to analyze the annular ring from its earliest occurrence in the Celtic flat cemeteries in the context of archeologically definable fashions. We were inspired to include the Early La Tène stage in the analysis by a certain parallel between the annular ring at the Bučany burial ground (grave 24) in south-western Slovakia and some burials in the territory of western Switzerland. The period of the first groups of Celts in the Middle Danube Area and of the following consolidation of conditions during the LT B1 phase is characterized by the annular rings consisting of predominantly bronze specimens defined in the paper as types 1 to 5 and their variants (Fig. 1). Fig. 1. Types and their variants of the bronze annular ring forms from the beginnings of the burial at flat Celtic cemeteries in the Middle Danube Area. With regard to the subject of annular rings in the La Tène period as represented by the earliest occurrence of the hoops included in the analysis of the researched set of the Middle Danube area, this is represented by grave 24 from the Early La Tène burial ground of Bučany (Bujna–Romsauer 1983, 287–288, Abb. 17, Taf. 8). The annular rings consist of two bracelets of sheet bronze probably with inserted ends and irregular decoration on the body which were slipped on both wrists symmetrically (Pl. 1/1). It is so-called simple annular rings in which anklets are absent. Plain sheet bracelets occurring symmetrically in pairs, or The Interpretative Value of Annular Ornaments for the Study of Early Celtic Populations in the Middle Danube Area | 275 asymetrically as a single decorative ring on the right or the left wrist without the presence of anklets are of markedly concentrated in the area of Swiss Plateau as exemplidied by: Münsingen grave 8b (Hodson 1968, 42, pl. 5); Murten-Morat grave 2 (Kaenel 1990, 60–61, fig. 21), Payerne Neyremont graves 1, 3 (Kaenel 1990, 90–91, pl. 22); St Sulpice graves 44, 67, 73 (Kaenel 1990, 109, 115, 117, pl. 49; 50; 52–53). All graves of the west-Celtic area with proved plain sheet bracelets which are represented in the present data set are dated to the Early La Tène (LT A). At the beginning of LT B1 the plain sheet armring in the area of Swiss Plateau is already present in combination with anklets; the so-called simple annular rings do not occur any longer. Evidence for sheet annular rings without relief decoration on the body is also found in the regions of Baden-Württemberg and the Pfalz at Nebringen (Krämer 1964) and Sinsheim (Liebschwager 1969) from the end of the LT A phase and mainly at the beginning of LT B1. These bronze decorative rings occur as bracelets, anklets, and occasionally even as torcs. The burial ground of St Sulpice, which was in use from the second half of the fifth century BC to the third century BC, testifies to the development of plain sheet rings from the simpliest forms with undecorated or irregularly marked body to the tubular rings with engraved zig-zag decoration and with a robust sleeve at the joint. A similar type of the annular ring is found in grave 67 at the burial ground of St Sulpice (Pl. 1/2). Irregular punched decoration on the plain bodies of sheet anklets is also present in grave 40 at St Sulpice (Kaenel 1990, 107–108, pl. 39). This evidence leads us to the assumption that during the LT A phase already there is substantiated influence of the west Celtic area on the Middle Danube, perhaps from Swiss Plateau, the core of the Celtic civilisation. In his famous work Ab urbe condita (V, 33–35), the Roman historian Livy writes about two simultaneous migrations – one southwards to Italy and the other eastwards to the Hercynian Forest. Vitali (2008, 77) defines this area as the territory of today’s Black Forest (Schwarzwald) and the vast areas north of the Danube up to the Moravian Gate and Slovakia. Based on Livy’s description both migrations are dated to the period from the turn of the seventh and sixth centuries BC to the end of the fifth century BC when the Senones arrived in Italy and the city of Rome was conquered. The migrations from the mid-fifth century BC on are also testified by the material culture of the Early La Tène burial grounds. Hence, from the mid-fifth century BC on we can observe the arrival of Celtic groups from the west Celtic area in the Middle Danube Area. According to Szabó (1992, 21) this migration also included a part of the Celtic population from north-eastern Bavaria, the neighbouring areas of Austria and the south of Bohemia. In his opinion these particular sections of population were first to arrive in the area of the Carpathian Basin and after a rapid acculturative process they mixed with the indigenous Hallstatt population which gave rise to the new Early La Tène culture with a minimum of Hallstatt elements. A significant influence from the west Celtic environment appears in the Middle Danube area at the beginning of the LT B1 phase as well. It is reflected not only in the evident import of the annular rings but also in the style of decoration of the annular rings. One of the best examples to demonstrate this situation is the burial ground of Hurbanovo–Bacherov majer (Benadik 1957, 55–74). The so-called simple annular ring is represented here by grave 1 in which the annular ring consists of only a plain solid bracelet with buffers or massive beads expanding from the body and with engraved decoration near the buffers; this was found on the right wrist (Pl. 1/3). The grave also contained a vessel, a bronze brooch from the pre-Duchcov horizon, and an iron belt-plaque. According to Brezňanová (2009, 249) this type of brooch belongs to the earliest horizon of the flat Celtic cemeteries of south-eastern Slovakia and northern Hungary and she seeks their origin in the territory of actual Switzerland, southern Germany and perhaps Pfalz. The thoroughly made bracelet from the Hurbanovo-Bacherov majer 1 does not have a parallel in the Middle Danube area. On the other hand, we can find direct analogies in the area of the Middle and Upper Rhein where this type was a fairly frequent ring form found mainly symmetrically in pairs on both wrists-; less frequently it was found asymmetrically on a right or left wrist. In the early phases of the LT B1 period there appear graves with decorative rings of the same typological family with the functional position of bracelets, anklets and torques. At the burial ground of Rezi– Rezicseri situated in the north-west of Hungary near Lake Balaton the cremated burial’s inventory contained plain sheet annular rings which we can identify as anklets, a bracelet and a torc judging by their diameters (Pl. 2). Plain sheet rings of the same typological group worn symmetrically in pairs are frequent in the cemeteries in Baden-Württemberg. This ring form (variant 5–3) characterized in the same typological groups of tubular rings with the function of anklets, bracelets and a torc, is present in several graves at the burial ground of Sinsheim and the locality of Laudenbach (Liebschwager 1969). Presumably the grave 3 at Rezi–Rezicseri with its ring also belongs to the group of graves of the western European area 276 | M. Furman but the presence of only one bracelet suggests the forming of a central-european asymmetrical form of the ring (variant 5–2). A symmetrical annular ring with the same typological groups of solid bronze decorative rings forming the role of bracelets and anklets, but not torcs (variant 3–1) occurs within the analysed data set in several graves in the territory of Moravia and south-eastern Slovakia. However, it is not found in the territory of north-western Hungary in the studied set. According to Bujna (2005, 156) they were the first groups of migrating Celts proceeding presumably from the territory of north-eastern Switzerland, but also from the area of Pfalz and Hessen. We can also observe the cultural influence of the west-Celtic area, perhaps from the Champagne region, in grave 10 at the burial ground of Hurbanovo–Bacherov majer (Pl. 3/1). Alongside the early types of the big annular ring as a part of this grave equipment there was also a rare type of a wire bronze finger ring elaborately twisted. A gold specimen knotted in a very similar way was found in grave 13 at the burial ground of St. Memmie in the region of Marne (Pl. 3/2). Early La Tène brooches with spring 2+2 and plain solid bracelets with buffers found on both wrists allow dating the grave in St. Memmie back to the beginning of the LT B1 period (Charpy–Chossenot 1989, 25–28, pl. 8; 9; 23/2). In the territory of south-western Slovakia there is the evidence of the development in the use of material for the production of some types of the annular ring – from the specimen made of precious metal (gold, silver) to bronze rings. Forexample armrings of groups AR-H1 and BR-H3, finger rings of gorups AR-J1 and BR-J1, or groups AR-K2 and BR-K2 in Bujna’s clasification (Bujna 2005). The example of two typologically similar finger rings made of different materials indicates certain mutual contacts. It is possible that it was caused by the cultural influence which in south-western Slovakia was expressed in the local production of the ring folowing the western model, or it is the evidence of direct import. The hypothesis of local production following the western model is supported by the fact that in grave 10 at Hurbanovo–Bacherov majer the buried individual was presumably following the new native model of the annular ring (variant 5–2) in which the asymmetrical way of wearing bracelets is preferred, mainly on the left wrist. Within the analysed group variant 5–2 is almost absent in the west-Celtic area. On the other hand the symmetrical paired wearing of the annular ring is popular there. The neckring – a distinctive element of the annular rings reflecting a higher social status of the wearer – is one of the dominant forms of annular rings of the LT B1 period. The obvious west-Celtic influence is reflected in the typological range of the neckrings on one hand (solid buffer torcs, often with engraved decoration at the ends, twisted or plain sheet torcs) and on the other hand in the period of its abundant occurrence in the first phases of flat cemeteries when we observe evident contacts with the west. A solid bronze neckring with the same typological characters which are visible on the bracelet from grave 1 at Hurbanovo–Bacherov majer is documented in grave 39 at Maňa (Pl. 4). It forms a symmetrical unpaired annular ring together with plain solid anklets with buffers, a bronze beaded bracelet and a silver wire bracelet (variant 5–4). So carefully made a torc with typical features which appear in the west Celtic area (the buffers indented by beading and V-shaped engraved decoration) is the evidence of direct influence or perhaps import. A symmetrical paired annular rings consisting of anklets with strong ribbing, simple plain solid bracelets and a solid torque whose buffers are indented from the body by beading, is substantiated by grave 12 at the burial ground of Hurbanovo–Bacherov majer (Benadik 1957, 71–72, Tab. 26). The grave goods are completed with two, according to Brezňanová (2009, 252) probably imported, bronze brooches which we can identify as coming from the west. Presumably the same model of the annular rings is testified by the graves of Rousínov 2 (Ludikovský 1964, 340, Obr. 3) and Sobotovice 1/1908 (Ludikovský 1964, 341–342, Obr. 10) the equipment of which also belongs to the LT B1 period. However, the unknown find context does not allow one to definitely assign them to this source. The forming of the local annular rings under the influence of older symmetrical models is represented by grave 234 in Trnovec nad Váhom (Benadik 1957, 24–25, Tab. 4). Bracelets with slight ribbing following the influence of older symmetrical models are supplemented by a torc with pseudo-buffers and an early type of anklets with moulded decoration of triple protuberances which reflect the native annular rings. The strong influence of the west Celtic environment at the beginning of the LT B1 period can be observed in north-eastern Austria at the burial ground of Mannersdorf. Numerous plain sheet rings, rarely with occasional punched decoration on the body or the sleeve, are a frequent part of the annular rings the occurence of which is concentrated in the territory of the western Celts. As an example we can mention grave 8 (Ramsl 2011, 37–38, Abb. 20, Taf. 37–40). A rich annular ring presumably of a woman of high social status consisting of two pairs of anklets and bracelets and two torcs occurs in the western The Interpretative Value of Annular Ornaments for the Study of Early Celtic Populations in the Middle Danube Area | 277 La Tène environment from the LT A period on while in the Middle Danube area it is rare in the material studied here and it is testified only by this Mannersdorf grave. The preference for wearing a bracelet on the left arm which is combined with anklets and a torc (variant 5–2) is a specific phenomenon of the territories of Moravia and south-western Slovakia. In the LT B1 period alongside solid types of rings functioning as anklets and bracelets there start to occur sheet anklets with moulded decoration consisting of triple protuberances which represent a distinctive native element of the annular rings in south-western Slovakia. At the end of the LT B1 period the discovery of a torc in graves is rather an exception and in the whole Middle Danube area a combination of a pair of anklets with a bracelet comes in fashion. These annular rings, defined in this paper as variant 3–4, lasts until the turning point between the LT B2 and C1 periods. To the west of the Middle Danube area variant 3–4 as well as the asymmetrical annular rings with a torc (variant 5–2) occur rather rarely. Probably already in the LT B1a period a new annular ring form appears in the Middle Danube area alongside the above mentioned models which is enriched with another kind of big annular ring, a bronze upper arm bracelet. This variant 4–2 characterized with typologically related solid bronze rings employed as anklets, bracelets and an upper arm bracelet is testified by grave 1003 at Pottenbrunn (Ramsl 2002, 55–56, Taf. 79) in the north-eastern Austria (Pl. 5) and Brno-Chrlice 7 (Čižmářová 1990, 257–259, Obr. 2) in the territory of Moravia (Pl. 6). The western La Tène influence, perhaps from the region of Middle and Upper Rhein, is reflected in the design of some of the representative types of ornamented rings: the buffers indented by beading and the V-shaped engraved decoration near the buffers. Apart from the Early La Tène brooches the common feature of the two graves is also the presence of a ribbon ring, a narrow grave pit and the absence of pottery. There are parallels found in some of the attributes in the territory of Bavaria, at Burgweinting (Zuber 2005) and in Bohemia, at Makotřasy, grave 5 (Čižmář 1978). Therefore there are several cues which allow assigning the above mentioned graves to a related group of Celts. They are the very Celts who presumably started the new fashion of wearing upper arm bracelets, the favourite ring not only in the Middle Danube area but also to the west of it, mainly in the LT B2 period. After the evident influences from the western La Tène area at the end of the LT A period and especially at the beginning of the following LT B1 period a certain consolidation of the conditions occurs in the Middle Danube area which is reflected in the production of a local form of annular ring and in the appearance of new models of the annular rings. Alongside the continuing solid types of rings during the LT B1b period there starts to occur a new type of anklets in the annular rings: an early sheet ribbed hoop with simple moulded decoration of triple protuberances, mainly in the area of south-western Slovakia. According to Bujna (2005, 156) this annular ring is the first type signalling a domestic model of the annular ring in the area to the north and to the south of the Danube Bend. A paired way of wearing of two identical bracelets combined with the early type of the anklets with moulded decoration of triple protuberances can be interpreted as prevailing of the tradition of the symmetrical annular rings model characteristic for solid rings from the beginning of the LT B1 period while the sheet anklets with moulded decoration of triple protuberances represent a new, domestic, element: Hurbanovo–Bacherov majer 6 (Benadik 1957, Tab. 23); Palárikovo 36 (research report AÚ SAV no. 7379; Bujna 2005, obr. 6: PA 36); Dubník 7 (Bujna 1989, Taf. 5); Trnovec nad Váhom 234 (Benadik 1957, Tab. 4). In the later phase of the LT B1 period the recession of the symmetrical style occurs in the Middle Danube area and the asymmetrical annular ring model starts to develop. According to Bujna (1994, 10) this situation presumably happens in part under the influence of the renaissance of the autochtonous ethnic and cultural substratum and under the intensification of local Carpathian crafts. However, alongside the new models within the asymmetrical annular rings with the anklets with moulded decoration of triple protuberances there still occur links to the previous period. Grave 78 at Palárikovo (Bujna 2005, obr. 9, PA 78) dated to the LT B1b period can serve as an example. With its combination of the annular ring it belongs to variant 4–2, i.e. to the group of asymmetrical rings. Both wrists are decorated with identical types of bracelets with marked ribbing while the left arm is decorated with a simple upper arm bracelet made of plain solid bronze. From the point of view of geography the occurrence of the first types of the asymmetrical rings is concentrated within the Middle Danube area in the territory of Moravia, south-western Slovakia and the adjacent part of Austria. The region of northern Hungary documents the asymmetrical rings in a greater extent later in the LT B2 period when there appear tubular anklets with transversely ribbed hoop, the so-called caterpillar-shaped hoops. 278 | M. Furman An interesting and a very specific ring form seem to be the type consisting of anklets only – type 2. Amongst the material of our study in the Middle Danube area it is markedly concentrated in the territory of south-western Slovakia and the adjacent part of Hungary and it is less frequent in north-eastern Austria. In the region of Moravia this annular ring form is not represented. The first evidence of the presence of the type 2 form in the Danubian Lowland dates back to the LT B1 period and it is represented by the graves with solid anklets with marked ribbing – as in Dubník 6 (Pl. 7) – and early types of anklets with moulded decoration of triple protuberances – Dubník 2B, 9B (Bujna 1989, Taf. 2; 9). In the LT B2 period the type 2 form also appears in the northern part of Hungary and at the burial ground of Mannersdorf. The evidence of the presence of this original annular ring model ends probably in the last phase of the burial at flat Celtic cemeteries as testified by cremated burials with knobbed anklets consisting of four plain hollow hemispheres. It is the very territory of south-western Slovakia which documents the continuous development of the type 2 from the LT B1 to the late phase of the LT C1 period (Fig. 2). It may mean that the centre of the fashion for wearing the annular rings consisting of anklets only was the Danubian Lowland area. In the LT B2 period we can observe the distribution of type 2 not only in the adjacent areas of northeastern Austria and Hungary but its occurrence is also documented in northern Switzerland at the cemeteries of Andelfingen (Tanner 1979), Lausen-Edleten (Tanner 1980) and probably in the Danube Basin in the territory of southern Germany: Erlau, grave 1; Langengeisling; München-Strasstrudering, grave 3 (Krämer 1985). In the LT B2 period, when in the Middle Danube area we observe the spreading of the sheet, so-called caterpillar hoops, at Swiss burial grounds which are characterized by double wearing of paired anklets there occur graves with symmetrical paired forms of sheet anklets with transversely ribbed hoops without any other accompanying annular rings. Fig. 2. Distribution of type 2. In his work on the Danube immigration to the territory of Champagne in the third century BC, Kruta (1985, 28) analyzes the influences from Central Europe. According to him the occurrence of anklets in this area is connected with the Celtic groups from the Middle Danube area, especially with the territory of Bohemia and the surrounding areas (Kruta 1985, 48). In the region of Champagne there occur new burial grounds where female graves contained the annular rings formed by solid anklets with ribbing or knobbed anklets walnut-shaped, combined with bracelets and upper arm bracelets always worn The Interpretative Value of Annular Ornaments for the Study of Early Celtic Populations in the Middle Danube Area | 279 asymmetrically, mainly on the left arm. As mentioned above, this model of the annular rings is highly concentrated in the Middle Danube area. Interesting is the female grave 10 which was uncovered at the site of Pleur in the region of Marne, Champagne (Kruta 1985, 39, fig. 5) and which contained a pair of solid beaded anklets with buffers without any other components. The dating of the grave to the second quarter of the third century BC corresponds with graves of type 2 in western Switzerland. According to Kruta (1985, 48) recently discovered burial grounds in the Champagne region with documented female burials with annular rings including anklets are the evidence of the arrival and settling of the Celtic groups originally from Central Europe. The occurrence of type 2 in our study at the sites of southern Germany and western Switzerland during the LT B2 period could be related with the very Celtic enclave to which the above-mentioned author draws attention. This hypothesis is also supported by the grave of Pleur with the annular rings consisting of anklets only. ✴✴✴ The annular rings in the Middle Danube area from the beginning of the rite of burial in flat Celtic cemeteries to the latest preserved graves of the Middle La Tène period underwent a very complex development. The first contacts with the west Celtic environment in the area of the Middle Danube are observed in the Early La Tène period already when the distinctive La Tène culture starts to be formed on the basis of the indigenous Hallstatt substratum. At the beginning of the LT B1, the period of a well-known and historically proved expansion, there are several colonization waves from the west penetrating into the Middle Danube area. During the LT B1 period there occurs a certain consolidation of conditions which is reflected in the local production of decorative rings and in the change in the fashion of wearing annular rings from a symmetrical to an asymmetrical manner with the preference being for the left arm. The occurrence of coral and amphora-shaped glass beads documented in the graves of south-western Slovakia in the LT B1 period are considered to represent the influence of the Adriatic-Balkan area. Flat Celtic cemeteries are the basic source of information for studying the Early and Middle La Tène period. The analysis of grave units and their preserved equipment of mostly metal objects allows one to point to several phenomena regarding the ethnic or social identity of their users. The annular rings together with brooches offer the opportunity to trace not only the mutual relationships between the more or less distant areas of their occurrence, but also allows one to study their functional position on the dead they allow to search the origin and the social status of their user.1 References Benadik 1957 Benadik, B., Archeologický materiál a jeho hodnotenie, IN: Benadik, B.–Vlček, E.– Ambros, C., Keltské pohrebiská na juhozápadnom Slovensku, Bratislava. Benadik 1983 Benadik, B., Maňa. Keltisches Gräberfeld. Fundkatalog, Nitra. Brezňanová 2009 Brezňanová, G., Priestorové analýzy vybraných typov laténskych spôn na území Karpatskej kotliny, PhD thesis, unpublished, Nitra. Bujna 1989 Bujna, J., Das latènezeitliche Gräberfeld bei Dubník. I., SlovArch, 37, 245–354. Bujna 1994 Bujna, J., Mladšia doba železná – laténska na Slovensku, SHN, 2, Nitra, 7–39. Bujna 2005 Bujna, J., Kruhový šperk z laténskych ženských hrobov na Slovensku, Nitra. Bujna –Romsauer 1983 Bujna, J.–Romsauer, P., Späthallstatt- und frühlatènezeitliches Gräberfeld in Bučany, SlovArch, 31–2, 277–324. Horváth 1987 Horváth, L., The surroundings of Keszthely, IN: Horváth, L.–Kelemen, M.–Uszoki, A.– Vadász, É., Corpus of Celtic Find in Hungary, Transdanubia 1, Budapest. Hodson 1968 Hodson, F. R., The La Tène Cemetery at Münsingen-Rain, ActaB, 5. Charpy–Chossenot Charpy, J.-J.–Chossenot, M., Les cimetières gaulois de Saint-Memmie (Marne), Mémoires 1989 de la société d´agriculture, commerce, sciences et arts du département de la Marne, Châlons-sur-Marne. Čižmář 1978 Čižmář, M., Keltské pohřebiště v Makotřasích, okres Kladno, PamArch, 69, 117–140. Čižmářová 1990 Čižmářová, J., Laténske pohřebiště v Brně-Chrlicích, ArchRoz, 42, 257–268. 1 My thanks are due to Émilie Millet (PhD graduate at Université de Bourgogne, UFR Sciences Humaines, Section Archéologie, Dijon a Johannes Gutenberg Universität, Institut für Vor- und Frügeschichte, Mainz) for the information about female ring garnitures from the Middle and Upper Rhein and prof. Jozef Bujna for his consultation and valuable advice. 280 | M. Furman Kaenel 1990 Krämer 1964 Krämer 1985 Kruta 1985 Liebschwager 1969 Ludikovský 1964 Píč 1902 Ramsl 2002 Ramsl 2011 Szabó 1992 Tanner 1979 Tanner 1980 Vitali 2008 Zuber 2005 Kaenel, G., Recherches sur la periode de La Tène en Suisse occidentale. Analyse des sépultures, Cahiers d´Archéologie Romande No. 50, Lausanne. Krämer, W., Das keltische Gräberfeld von Nebringen (Kreis Böblingen), Stuttgart. Krämer, W., Die Grabfunde von Manching und die latènezeitlichen Flachgräber in Südbayern, Die Ausgrabungen in Manching, 9, Stuttgart. Kruta, V., Le port des anneaux de cheville en Champagne et le problème d´une immigration danubienne au IIIème siècle avant J.-C, ÉC, 22, 27–51. Liebschwager, Ch., Die Gräber der Frühlatènekultur in Baden-Württenberg, InauguralDisertation zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde der Philosophischen Fakultät der AlbertLudwigs-Universität zu Freiburg i. Br., Freiburg i. Br. Ludikovský, K., Akeramický horizont bohatých hrobů na Moravě, PamArch, 55, 321–349. Píč, J. L., Kostrové hroby s kulturou marnskou čili latènskou a Bojové v Čechách, IN: Starožitnosti země české II/1, Praha. Ramsl, P., Das eisenzeitliche Gräberfeld von Pottenbrunn, FÖ, Materialhefte A 11, Wien. Ramsl, P., Das Latènezeitliche Gräberfeld von Mannersdorf am Leithagebirge, Flur Reinthal Süd, Niederösterreich. Wien. Szabó, M., Les Celtes de l’est. Le Second Age du Fer dans la cuvette des Karpates, Paris. Tanner, A., Die Latènegräber der nordalpinen Schweiz, SSUUB, Bern. Tanner, A., Die Latènegräber der nordalpinen Schweiz. Kanton Zürich. Heft 4/6–16, SSUUB, Bern. Vitali, D., Keltové.Poklady starobylých civilizácií, Praha. Zuber, J., Keltische Gruber aus Burgweinting, Stadt Regensburg, Oberpfalz, AJB, 56–58. List of figures Fig. 1. Types and their variants of the bronze annular ring forms from the beginnings of the burial at flat Celtic cemeteries in the Middle Danube Area. Fig. 2. Distribution of type 2. List of plates Pl. 1. 1. Bučany 24 (Bujna–Romsauer 1983, Taf. 8/1–10); 2. St. Sulpice 67 (after Kaenel 1990, pl. 52, T. 67/1, 2); 3. Hurbanovo–Bacherov majer 1 (after Benadik 1957, Obr, 17/11; Tab. 20/1, 2, 10). Pl. 2. Rezi–Rezicseri 3 (after Horváth 1987, pl. 16). Pl. 3. 1. Hurbanovo–Bacherov majer 10 (after Benadik 1957, Obr, 17, 2; Tab. 22/ 4–7, 10, 13, 16); 2. St. Memmie (after Charpy–Chossenot 1989, 26, Pl. 8: 13). Pl. 4. Maňa 39 (after Benadik 1983, Taf. 17). Pl. 5. Pottenbrunn 1003 (after Ramsl 2002, Taf. 79). Pl. 6. Brno-Chrlice 7 (after Čižmářová 1990, Obr. 2). Pl. 7. Dubník 6 (after Bujna 1989, Taf. 4). The Interpretative Value of Annular Ornaments for the Study of Early Celtic Populations in the Middle Danube Area | 281 5 ariant ariant ariant Plate 1. 1. Bučany 24 (after Bujna–Romsauer 1983, Taf. 8/1–10); 2. St. Sulpice 67 (after Kaenel 1990, pl. 52, T. 67/1, 2); 3. Hurbanovo–Bacherov majer 1 (after Benadik 1957, Obr, 17/11; Tab. 20/1, 2, 10). Plate . . u any – pl. 5 . . ur ano o– ac er ma er af. – K . t. ulpi e 5 r K a . . 282 | M. Furman ype no. 5 5 ariant 5 ypot eti al ostume 5 Plate 2. Rezi–Rezicseri 3 (after Horváth 1987, pl. 16). Plate . e i– e i seri pl. . The Interpretative Value of Annular Ornaments for the Study of Early Celtic Populations in the Middle Danube Area | 283 ype no. 5 5 5 ariant 5 Plate 3. 1. Hurbanovo–Bacherov majer 10 (after Benadik 1957, Obr, 17, 2; Tab. 22/ 4–7, 10, 13, 16); 2. St. Memmie (after Charpy–Chossenot 1989, 26, Plate 8: 13). a . Plate . . ur ano o– ac er ma er – . t. emmie K P – 5 r pl. . 284 | M. Furman ype no. 5 ariant 5 5 Plate 4. Maňa 39 (after Benadik 1983, Taf. 17). Plate . a a K af. . The Interpretative Value of Annular Ornaments for the Study of Early Celtic Populations in the Middle Danube Area | 285 ype no. 5 ariant 5 Plate 5. Pottenbrunn 1003 (after Ramsl 2002, Taf. 79). Plate 5. Potten runn af. . 286 | M. Furman ype no. 5 ariant 5 Plate 6. Brno-Chrlice 7 (after Čižmářová 1990, Obr. 2). Plate . rno rli e r. . The Interpretative Value of Annular Ornaments for the Study of Early Celtic Populations in the Middle Danube Area | 287 ype no. 5 5 Plate 7. Dubník 6 (after Bujna 1989, Taf. 4). Plate . u n af. . Reflections of the Contacts between Celtic Communities in North-West Romania and South-West Slovakia in the Grave Inventories Gabriela BREZŇANOVÁ The Regional Monuments Board Banská Bystrica, Slovakia gabriela.breznanova@pamiatky.gov.sk Keywords: LT B period, annular costume, Central Danube, Pișcolt, contacts The paper underlines aspects of the contacts between the Celtic communities comparing the cemetery at Pișcolt–Nisipărie (Németi 1988; 1989; 1992; 1993) in nowadays Romania and the communities from the Central Danube region. The comparison is based on several annular costume models that were found in graves at Pișcolt, but their genesis could be found in the Central Danube region. Bujna (2005) and Furman (2009) in their works regarding the analysis of the annular costume in the Celtic graves in the region of Central Danube identified several models originating in the Central Danube conditions after the consolidation, following the settling of the western Celtic groups in LT B1 and B2. ‘Annular costume’ defines combinations of types of rings on the body extremities as revealed in inhumation graves. It is very important to determine which ring types were in common occurrence and on which extremities of the buried person they were present (Furman 2009, 5). It seems that characteristic combinations of annular jewellery types are one of the indicators that could be helpful for a closer definition of the region to which the bearer of the costume had a close relation. According to Bujna (2005, 156) one of the first models of the annular costume that has relations to the region of south-west Slovakia and nearby parts of Hungary consists of tubular sheet anklets with a transversely ribbed hoop, moulded decoration of triple protuberances, so-called Warzenfussring,1 and a massive bronze bracelet on the left wrist of a woman (Pl. 1/A).2 According to the author, exactly these anklets of the afore mentioned type are products of the Central Danube workshops, what is proved by high concentration of their presence in the region of south-west Slovakia – where approximately 145 pieces were registered – and neighbouring parts of Hungary (Pl. 1/B). The mentioned model of the annular costume was present at Pișcolt–Nisipărie in the grave 181 (Németi 1989, fig. 18). A woman buried in this grave had on her left wrist a massive bracelet with pronounced beading, a so-called Knotenarmring. On one of her right-hand fingers she had a rod saddled ring made of silver wire, and on each of her arms one iron fibula of which only fragments were preserved. In the same cemetery a very similar model of the annular costume can be observed in the grave 35 of a woman (Németi 1989, fig. 5). On her ankles were located tubular sheet anklets with a transversely ribbed hoop and moulded decoration of triple protuberances (Warzenfussringen), and on her left wrist a bronze bracelet with pronounced beading (Knotenarmring). These rings were accompanied by an iron armlet on the right arm of the buried woman and a small ring of amber on her chest. Iron armlets are characteristic for the models of the annular costume in the Central Danube region, but its usual position is not on the 1 2 For the definition and terminology of ring types see Bujna Et Al. 1996. I thank M. Furman for notifying me of several sites with presence of this model of the annular costume. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 289–294 290 | G. Brezňanová right but on the left arm. The costume of the woman buried in the grave 35 at Pișcolt–Nisipărie was found together with a small, early La Tène bronze fibula and small iron rings from the belt set. According to the grave inventory, both graves could be dated to the earlier phase of the LT B2 period. Another annular costume from Pișcolt, consisting of anklets and a massive bracelet on the left hand was identified in the grave 177 (Németi 1989, fig. 18). It is surprising that the anklets on the ankles of the woman buried in this grave do not belong to the same type of rings: on the right ankle there is a bronze plate-made caterpillar anklet and on the left ankle a bronze tubular sheet anklet with a transversely ribbed hoop and moulded decoration of triple protuberances (Warzenfussring). A massive bracelet structured by alternating smooth and relief decorated ribs was found on the left wrist of this woman. The rest of the inventory consisted of three early La Tène bronze fibulae, one of which had elaborately moulded knob. On the girdle of the woman in this grave a bronze buckle with a sheet was found. The inventory of this grave also contained a vessel. The knobbed bronze fibula and the bracelet date this grave to the earlier phase of LT B2. In grave 172 (Németi 1989, fig. 15) a skeleton of a woman was found. The inventory contained a couple of similar anklets on the ankles, along with a bronze bracelet on the left wrist and an iron armlet on her left arm. Furman demonstrated that annular costumes consisting of anklets on the ankles and one bracelet and armlet on the left hand were represented in the region of Central Danube by five graves – at Dubník, Maňa, Palárikovo and Jászberény –, dated in the LT B2 and LT C1 (Furman 2009, 93–94, pl. 34). In the western La Tène environment this model of annular costume is unknown. In the grave 172, in the function of anklets the bronze rings structured by subtle beading and terminal buffers were used, while in the function of the bracelet a ring consisting of two parts with a hinged closer structured by alternating smooth and relief decorated ribs was used. The grave inventory was completed with an iron armlet, a lance-shaped buckle, a small iron and an amber ring, an iron lace and two vessels. Albeit the small amber ring was found in the area of the pelvis it is probable that it originally hanged on the iron lace that was found in the area of the left arm. Comparing to the rest of the inventory the anklets from the grave 172 are archaic. The bracelet and lance-shaped buckle typologically represent later grave goods; the grave 172 could be dated to the earlier LT B2. In the cemetery from Pișcolt–Nisipărie four women’s graves with annular costume having its origins in the Central Danube region could be identified. The buried persons in the graves 35, 177 and 181 had on their ankles bronze tubular sheet anklets with a transversely ribbed hoop and moulded decoration of triple protuberances (Warzenfussringen), which were of Central Danube origin and in the eastern part of the Carpathian Basin (north-western Romania and Transylvania) they most probably represent imports. The annular costume’s typological composition from grave 181 at Pișcolt was identical with some inventories found in south-west Slovakia (Pl. 3), in the grave 118 at Maňa (Benadik 1983, 53, pl. XLII/8–13; Bujna 2005, fig. 25), or in the grave 1 from Hronovce–Domaša (Eisner 1927, 343, 345; from the grave inventory another anklet, an iron buckle and one of two vessels are not preserved) and in the grave 21 from Palárikovo (Bujna 2005, fig. 26).3 The annular costumes consisting of anklets on the ankles, a bronze bracelet and an iron armlet on the left hand were frequent in the region of Central Danube. A similar annular costume to the one from grave 172 from Pișcolt was found in grave 35 from the same cemetery, but in this case the iron armlet was not on the left but on the right arm. The inventory of the grave 35 – and probably also of grave 172 – contained a small amber ring strung on a bronze or iron lace, which is characteristic for the Celtic woman’s costume in the Central Danube area. The presented parallels indicate that based on the grave inventories and artefact combination, the women from the graves 35, 177, 181 from Pișcolt can be connected to Central Danube region. The influence of the autochthonous population is reflected by graves orientation. In this period for south-west Slovakia the S–N graves orientation is characteristic, while the graves mentioned are oriented toward the north, similarly to the graves from Pișcolt (Németi 1993, 118, fig. 1). Therefore, in north-western Romania cultural influences from the area of Central Danube can be observed during the LT B2 period, which is due to possible mobility of individuals or smaller groups. This direction of cultural influence from the west to the east in the LT C1 period can be only slightly observed. On the other hand, based on the archaeological information a migration of goods and ideas in the opposite direction, from Transylvania to the Central Danube in the Middle La Tène period, is also plausible. 3 For information on the grave from Palárikovo I thank prof. J. Bujna. Reflections of the Contacts between Celtic Communities in North-West Romania and South-West Slovakia | 291 References Benadik 1983 Bujna 2005 Bujna Et Al. 1996 Eisner 1927 Furman 2009 Németi 1988 Németi 1989 Németi 1992 Németi 1993 Benadik, B., Maňa. Keltisches Gräberfeld. Fundkatalog, Nitra. Bujna, J., Kruhový šperk z laténskych ženských hrobov na Slovensku, Nitra. Bujna, J.–Bátora, J.–Čilinská, Z.–Kuzmová, K.–Rejholcová, M.–Žebrák, P., Terminológia archeologickej hmotnej kultúry na Slovensku. III. Šperk a súčasti odevu, Nitra. Eisner, J., Latènské hroby v Hronském Damašdě (okr. Želiezovce) na Slovensku, ČUsŠ, I, 3, 341–350. Furman, M., Kruhový šperk ako prameň archeologicky postihnuteľného kroja, distribučných aktivít a mobility keltských komunít v stredodunajskom priestore, PhD. thesis, Nitra. Németi, I., Necropola Latène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, I, Thraco-Dacica, IX, 49–73. Németi, I., Necropola Latène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, II, Thraco-Dacica, X, 75–114. Németi, I., Necropola Latène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, III, Thraco-Dacica, XIII, 117–129. Németi, I., Necropola Latène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, IV, Thraco-Dacica, XIV, 59–112. List of plates Pl. 1. A. Cemeteries with woman graves with the annular costume consisting of tubular sheet anklets with a transversely ribbed hoop, moulded decoration of triple protuberances and bracelet on the left wrist (different types of bracelet) in the Carpathian Basin; B. Occurrence of the mentioned anklet in the Carpathian Basin. Older and younger types of this kind of anklet are not distinguished on the map. Pl. 2. Pișcolt–Nisipărie. 1. Grave 35; 2. Grave 177; 3. Grave 172 (after Németi 1989, fig. 15, 18). Pl. 3. Cemeteries with woman graves with identical composition of annular costume: tubular sheet anklets with a transversely ribbed hoop, moulded decoration of triple protuberances, and bracelet with pronounced beading. (after Benadik 1983, 53, pl. XLII/8–13; Eisner 1927, 343; Németi 1989, fig. 18). 292 | G. Brezňanová Locality Locality Number nr. of graves 1 Galanta-Nebojsa 1 2 Hronovce –Domaša 1 3 Maňa 2 4 Nížkovice 1 5 Palárikovo 3 6 Pişcolt–Nisipărie 1 7 Svätý Peter 1 A 3 3 1 2 7 5 6 0 17 B 16 15 19 4 14 18 2 10 12 11 1 5 24 1 9 3 7 13 28 6 25 26 8 27 23 29 30 21 300 km L. nr. Locality 1 2 3 4 5 Bajč–Vlkanovo Branč Dubník Galanta–Nebojsa Hurbanovo– Bacherov majer Chotín Kamenín Malé Kosihy Maňa Michal nad Žitavou Nové Zámky Palárikovo Svätý Peter Trnovec nad Váhom – Horný Jatov Blučina Brno–Maloměřice Prostějov Mannersdorf am Leithagebirge Schrattenberg Gyoma–Egei halom Jászberény–Cserőhalom Ordacsehi Rezi–Rezicseri Szomód–Kenderhegy Tatabánya–Erőmű Homokbánya Tiszavasvári– Városföldje Tokod–Árpádakna Vác–Kavicsbánya Ciumeşti Pişcolt–Nisipărie 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 22 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0 300 km 27 28 29 30 Number of anklets 10 2 16 4 4 12 2 8 40 6 2 32 2 5 2 6 1 12 2 1 2 1 2 1 4 1 3 1 5 Plate 1. A. Cemeteries with woman graves with the annular costume consisting of tubular sheet anklets with a transversely ribbed hoop, moulded decoration of triple protuberances and bracelet on the left wrist (different types of bracelet) in the Carpathian Basin; B. Occurrence of the mentioned anklet in the Carpathian Basin. Older and younger types of this kind of anklet are not distinguished on the map. Reflections of the Contacts between Celtic Communities in North-West Romania and South-West Slovakia | 293 Plate 2. Pișcolt–Nisipărie. 1. Grave 35; 2. Grave 177; 3. Grave 172 (after Németi 1989, fig. 15, 18). . ra e 5 . ra e Plate . Pi olt– i i rie. . ra e after fi . 5 . 294 | G. Brezňanová . rono e– ma a . a a . Pal ri o o . Pi olt– i i rie a a ra e 5 rono e– ma a ra e 5 c Pi olt– i i c rie ra e Plate 3. Cemeteries with woman graves with identical composition of annular costume: tubular sheet anklets with a transversely ribbed hoop, moulded decoration of triple protuberances, and bracelet with pronounced beading. (after Benadik 1983, 53, pl. XLII/8–13; Eisner 1927, 343; Németi 1989, fig. 18). Plate . emeteries it oman ra es it identi al omposition of annular ostume tu ular s eet an e it a trans ersely ri ed oop moulded de oration of triple protu eran es and race e it pronoun ed eadin . after K 5 pl. – fi . . Funerary Rites and Rituals of the Celtic Cemeteries in North-Western Romania and a Comparison with the Funerary Discoveries in the Tisza Plain and Transylvania János NÉMETI Carei Museum, Romania Keywords: Scythian culture, Celts, cremation, inhumation, grave inventory The Scythian culture of Alföld-type (the former Vekerzug–Chotin culture) is documented in northwest Romania, in the earlier phase of the La Tène culture. The material and religious Scythian culture is relatively well evidenced by the settlements and cemeteries dating from the 6th–4th centuries BC (HaD2). This period is characterized by the poor presence of specific Scythian artefacts (weapons, jewellery, clothing accessories), by the presence of traditional Hallstatt pottery and by the occurrence of fast wheel-made grey and orange pottery in both settlements and funerary inventories. The specific pottery of the age as well as the metal artefacts (temple spiral rings, glass beads with peacock eyes, white paste kaolin beads) are closely related to those known in the Tisza Plain and altogether different from the Scythian artefacts discovered in Transylvania, which are older chronologically as they are placed in the 7th–6th centuries BC (Vasiliev 2005, 75–76). There are several cemeteries as well as isolated graves currently known from north-western Romania: Curtuiușeni–Dâmbul Ars, Ghenci–Movila Spânzurătorii, Sanislău–Nisipărie, Carei–Atelier vechi FIUT, Livada de Bihor, Oradea–Salca, Valea lui Mihai–Viile comunale, Porţi-Zalău. These are cremation graves and there is only one situation in Sanislău–Nisipărie when an inhumation grave has been found. These findings have been classified in the Nyírség–Sanislău group of the Alföldtype Scythian culture. We consider that the carriers of the Nyírség–Sanislău group with traditional Gáva elements form the basis of the local population in that period. The earlier discoveries in HaD2 are represented by the colonization of the first Celtic groups from north-western Romania (Németi 1982, 115–144; Németi 1999, 109, fig. 48). Barrows with cremation graves are common in the Sub-Carpathian region of the Ukraine (Zakarpattia) in the Late Hallstatt period of the Kustanovice/Kustánfalva culture (Popovich 1997, 77–79). Handmade pottery prevails in the second half of the 5th century and the first half of the 4th century. Celtic elements like the Dux-type bronze fibulae (Popovich 1997, pl. 1/14–16, kurgan XI, Kustanovice) appeared both in cemeteries and in settlements together with Alföld-type grey pottery at the end of the 4th century BC and the first half of the 3rd century. The Alföld cemeteries of the Scythian era in the Tisza Plain have heterogeneous funeral rites: extended or crouched burial or cremation whether in a pit or urn. Cremation urns are present mainly in north-eastern and northern Hungary at Hortobágy–Arkus, Muhi–Kocsmadomb or Nyíregyháza–Közvágóhíd. More numerous graves with crouched skeletons have been found at Alsótelekes, Csanytelek–Újhalastó, Szabadszállás, Tiszavasvár–Dózsatelep and Tiszavasvári–Csárdapart. Cemeteries with extended inhumations occur mostly ar Szentes–Vekerzug, Békéscsaba–Fényes or Hódmezővásárhely. These cemeteries also contain burials in which the deceased is accompanied by horses: Orosháza–Gyopáros, Chotin (Hetény), Tápiószele. The Eastern Scythian character of the burial rite prevails in these cemeteries (Kemenczei 2009, 29–34). Based on archaeological finds, the penetration of the Scythian group into Transylvania during the archaic period of the Scythian culture occurred at the end of the 7th century or the beginning of the 6th century. Research shows, however, that no Scythian material from Transylvania can be dated after the Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 295–302 296 | J. Németi mid-5th century BC. Among the most recent Scythian finds is the cemetery of Băiţa with 19 graves of which seven are cremations (Vasilev 2005, 74). Consequently one can highlight once more that the evolution of the Scythian group in Transylvania ends approximately a century before the colonization of the Celts in this part of the country. Thus, we can conclude that at the time of the Celtic colonization of the Carpathian Basin, the rites and rituals were very complex representing a relative heterogeneous ethnic population which, no doubt, would have influenced the newcomers. They integrated well into the local population as is proven by the presence of Celtic settlements alongside the indigenous establishments; the latter survived the peaceful colonization by the Celts. Far from their reputation as destroyers, killers and predators so much highlighted by Classical writers the evidence of archaeology indicates there was a peaceful coexistence or cohabitation between the two populations. Inhumation Cremation Urns Unknown Regarding the burial rites and rituals in north-western Romania one can observe that the number of inhumations in the necropolis of Pișcolt–Nisipărie rate 44.4% Unknown 8% out of the total number of burial discoveries (Fig. 1). The Urns total number of inhumations except for the cemetery 7% from Tărian–Dâmbul Ciurdaș is lower than cremations. Inhumation 41% Burial pits are usually rectangular with rounded corners or widen slightly towards the head or feet, depending on the arrangements of the funeral furniture. The skeletons are mostly damaged due to excessive moisture of the sandy soil that contains iron oxides, which help to the decomposition of organic materials. In the past, well-defined Cremation skeletons, when archaeologists had unearthed them, were 44% subsequently broken after they dried in the sun. The orientation of the skeletons is diverse, but commonest is the north-west–south-east orientation, or the west–east orientation, with the head at the western end of the grave. Fig. 1. Rite of the Pișcolt cemetery. Usually, burials were extended and rarely in a crouched position. The grave goods consisted of personal items: clothing, jewellery, tools and weapons, offering vessels and food-stuffs. The position of offering vessels in graves was as follows: the offering vessels were laid grouped by the skull or by the upper body. Offering vessels could be also laid at the feet of the deceased or at the lower part of the body and occasionally were laid along the body or on both sides of the deceased. Cremation pits are similar to those used for inhumations. They start from the trampled surface in the La Tène era and stop in the sterile sand layer. They are round or oval, sub-rectangular and without evidence of burning. These graves are characterized by the following: remains from the cremated body: items of clothing and jewellery, weapons – which sometimes were burnt together with the deceased or laid separately – and food offerings. The remains of the cremated body were deposited either in a larger pile, in several smaller pile, or scattered all over the burial pit. Offering vessels were laid randomly: vessels aligned in a row or grouped in the middle of the burial pit. The number of offering vessels doesn’t take account of the burial rite, but in the recent phases of the necropolis (third and fourth horizons) there occurred the deposition of a larger vessel, the tureen type, a bowl and a small vessel, which may be a small cup, a cup or jar. The food offering was usually raw meat of pork or wild boar, beef, mutton and chicken and was laid separately in a corner of the burial pit either without a knife or with a knife – rarely with a folding blade – or the offering was simply put in a bowl. Cremation urns are rarer; cremated human bones are to be found together with a part of the grave goods deposited in an urn. The remaining burial goods were placed near the urn. The following classes of objects can be observed: lidded urns, lidless urns, burial urns and a portion of the cremated human bones grouped around the urn (a mixed burial rite). Based on food offerings, we can distinguish the following: graves with offering pots, graves with no pottery and graves with food offerings with no knives and graves with offerings and a large knife or Hiebmesser. From the analysis of the burial rites and associated rituals, we can conclude that all surveyed cemeteries were bi-ritual. It is not yet established where inside the cemeteries the deceased was cremated (ustrinum). There is some evidence that cremation was taking place at some distance from the actual cemetery, because burnt human bones have occurred at the level of the trampled surface of the La Tène age; Funerary Rites and Rituals of the Celtic Cemeteries in North-Western Romania | 297 fragments of bones and other small items, such as fibulae Inhumation Cremation Urns Unknown and knives appear to have been lost during the funeral ceremony (Fig. 2). From north-eastern and northern Hungary many cemeteries and disturbed graves have unfortunately been 19% published only partially or indeed have remained unana31% lysed. 20 graves were uncovered at Tiszavasvári– Városföldje-Jegyzőtag out of which 12 were inhumations 7% with only one skeleton in a crouched position, seven cremation pits and one cremation urn (Almássy 1998, 55–106). 20 burial features — unpublished so far — have been investigated in Szabolcs commune in 1970. The situation is similar in the cemetery at Nyíregyháza– 43% Császárszállás (Butka) where between 35 and 40 graves were investigated (Németh 2007, 487–493). 90 graves were investigated at Sajópetri–Homoki szőlők out of which 23 were inhumations, 41 cremation and three cremation Fig. 2. Rite of the Celts in north-west Romania. urns (18 graves were destroyed). Several of the inhumations were in a crouched position (Szabó 2006, 61–71; Szabó 2007, no. 306, 268–271). The cemetery at Ludas–Varjúdülő was published as a preliminary report; 82 funerary features were investigated of which 11 graves were destroyed, 41were cremation pits and 23 inhumations in which the deceased lay extended with arms and legs straight and the rest of the graves had the skeleton in a crouched position. Of the cremations some in-urn features are recorded (Szabó–Tankó 2006, 325–343). Based on the available data on the burial rite and ritual in our geographical area we can conclude that cemeteries were bi-ritual. The most important Celtic cemetery from Transylvania is Fântânele–Dâmbul Popii, which, unfortunately, has so far only been briefly published. From the data provided by Ion Horaţiu Crișan in 1974, one can conclude that a total of 82 burial features were uncovered, Inhumation Cremation Urns Unknown 20 of which were disturbed (Crișan 1974a; 1975). Seven of the total graves were inhumations and the rest were creInhumation mation, without cremation urns. At Orosfaia, Lucian Vaida 9% investigated eleven graves of which two were disturbed, two were inhumations and seven were cremations (Vaida 2000, Unknown 135–159). At Fântânele–La gâţa (also known as Dealul 34% Iușului) 31 burial features were uncovered of which 24 were cremations, one contained a cremation urn and there were also six inhumations.1 István Kovács investigated the cemetery from Apahida in the early 20th century and uncovCremation ered 21 cremations (Kovács 1911, 1–69) which together 53% Urns with the burial features of the Endre Orosz collection were 4% estimated at about 45 to 50 graves. We know of 137 graves in Transylvania inside the Carpathian Ring, which have been recently investigated by Sándor Berecki, who concludes that the burial rite in this area is bi-ritual (Fig. 3), Fig. 3. Rite of the Celts in Transylvania with the majority being cremation (Berecki 2006, 51–76). (after Berecki 2006). ✴✴✴ The Celtic colonization of Eastern Europe is well-documented archaeologically. Interrelations between newcomers and the indigenous people were peaceful. The Celts took over from the indigenous people many forms of pottery, especially handled vessels and wheel-made grey pottery, while in turn they shared with the locals a higher level of technology of firing (exemplified by the pottery kilns from Andrid and Biharia) and the superior technology of metal-working. From the spiritual or religious area, they took over the rite of cremation and moreover the placing of calcined bones in an urn. Cohabiting with the indigenous population, the Celts learnt to practice certain rituals specific to the locals such as the placing 1 For the information provided in November 2011 we thank Sándor Berecki. 298 | J. Németi of food in graves, namely larger or smaller portions of pork or wild boar meat. One can observe this ritual in Celtic cemeteries throughout the entire Carpathian Basin. Boar bones were found in several graves in Apahida (Kovács 1911, fig. 28; 44; 47; 58) and partial pigs in Pișcolt–Nisipărie (Németi 1988, M31, M139, M140, M207; Németi 1989, M135, M8, M60, M126). Another example is grave no. 13 in Sanislău (Zirra 1972, pl. XLIV), and bones of wild boar were found in the M6, M10, M19–19b, M22 graves in Tiszavasvári– Városföldje-Jegyzőtag (Almássy 1998, 59–61). In the cemetery at Ludas–Varjúdülő, pig bones were found in seven graves: 686, 951, 1038, 1039, 1051, 1056 and 1057 (Szabó–Tankó 2006, 341). The pig or boar had an important role in Celtic mythology as the pig was considered the animal of death. Graves of wild boar were discovered at Sopron–Bécsi-domb (Szabó 1971, fig. 28) where it was observed that they were buried according to the Celtic ritual. A burial feature was found at Pácin–Alsóharaszt-dülő (Szörényi 2007), which comprised a crouched human skeleton holding a wild boar in its arms (Fig. 4). There are depictions in Celtic art of bronze figures of wild boar from Báta (Szabó 2005, 79) or Luncani (Roska 1944, fig. 21). At Ludas–Varjúdülő, a pseudo-kantharos was discovered with wild boarshaped handles (Szabó 2005, 163). An incomplete clay figure of wild boar was discovered in the settlement at Berea–Nyúlvár, L: 6.1 cm, H: 4.3 cm, inv. nr. 17.298 (Fig. 5). On the ritual cauldron from Gundestrup, a rider among the knights wore a helmet with a crest in the form of a wild boar. These representations can be considered as amulets, worn at the neck, but also as military insignia. Fig. 4. Pácin–Alsóharaszt dülő.2 Fig. 5. Berea–Nyúlvár. Incomplete clay zoomorphic figurine representing a wild boar. Another element of the Celtic funeral ritual is burial with a wagon. Excavations of cemeteries in northwestern Romania have yielded elements of this ritual: the cemetery from Pișcolt, M108, in an accidental discovery from Pișcolt–Parc No. 2 or Romgaz (Németi 1999, no. 33, 45) and in Curtuiușeni–Égetőhegy (Roska 1942a, 81–84; Roska 1944, fig. 14). In Transylvania, the discoveries from Cristuru Secuiesc (Roska 1944, no. 128, fig. 47) or Toarcla (Roska 1942b, no. 82, 232) should be mentioned. In Hungary, there are discoveries made in Balsa, Arnót and Hatvanboldog (Végh 1973, 208–218). Celtic mythology sees life as a long journey and death as a stop within this long journey in which, according to the ritual the cart or wagon is the mean of transport. Burial monuments depicting the funerary cart and dating from the end of the 1st century BC (approximating to the period of Romanized Celts) were found in the area inhabited by the Eravisci. The deceased is laid in a four-wheeled cart with the favourite horse and hunting dog beside him/ her. This representation is actually a journey of everyday life. Such representations are well-known from Budakeszi and Budaörs (Mráv 2005, 56–60) and Gorsium, Tác (Szabó 2005, 180). 2 http://www.spatak.hu/spatak/index.php?option=com_datsogallery&Itemid=33&func=detail&id=83. Funerary Rites and Rituals of the Celtic Cemeteries in North-Western Romania | 299 A rare phenomenon was encountered in the cemetery from Pișcolt–Nisipărie, where the fill of pit M157 yielded pottery fragments coming from several intentionally broken vessels broken, a phenomenon that occurs in M164 and M205 as was observed at Ciumești–Moara in grave M3/1962 where fragments of several vessels were scattered on the bottom of the pit. In the case of this ritual, we may think of a practice related to a funeral banquet. In both Pișcolt–Nisipărie and Ciumești were found either whole or broken vessels at the level of the trampled surface of the La Tène era. We may also mention M9 from Ciumești and several graves from Pișcolt–Nisipărie. We believe that these are especially children graves, and possibly other types of funerary features at Pișcolt, Ciumești, Sanislău, Curtuieșeni, Tărian which yielded stratified Celtic cemeteries, where the types of vessels were totally random. Appendix 1. Catalogue of Celtic funeral finds from north-western Romania 1. Arad–Gai (Hu. Arad, Arad C.), accidental funeral discovery. Crișan 1966, fig. 22/1–9; 23/1–2; 24/1–3; Crișan 1974b, 39–40, fig. 5/1–3; Dörner 1972, pl. I/10–16; II/1; RepArad 1999, 35. 2. Arad–Ceala (Hu. Arad, Arad C.), accidental funeral discovery. Dörner 1972, 151, pl. I/1–2; Crișan 1974b, fig. 1/1–5; 3/1–4; RepArad 1999, 38. 3. Arad-Nou (Hu. Arad, Arad C.), cemetery. Dörner 1972, pl. II/2–10, 12; Zirra 1971, 180, Abb. 1. 4. Carei–Drumul Căminului (Hu. Nagykároly, Satu Mare C.), accidental funeral discovery. Németi–Sălceanu 1995, 55–58; Németi 1999, nr. 43, XXIb, 69. 5. Căpleni–Óhaj-domb (Hu. Kaplony, Satu Mare C.), accidental funeral discovery. Németi 1999, nr. 52, H2, 79. 6. Ciumești–Moara (Hu. Csomaköz, Satu Mare C.), cemetery. Rusu–Bandula 1970; Rusu 1969, 295; Crișan 1971, 55–92; Zirra 1968; Zirra 1971, Abb. 8; 10; 12; Németi 1975b, 243–248, fig. 1/1–3; 2/1, 7; 3/1,1a; Németi 1997, 111–114; Horedt 1973, 299–303; Bader 1984, 55–90. 7. Curtuiușeni–Dâmbul Ars (Hu. Érkörtvélyes, Bihor C.), cemetery. Roska 1942a, 81–84; 224–234; Roska 1944, 37–38; Nánási 1973, 29–38; Nánási 1975, 47–49; Zirra 1971, Abb. 14–15; Németi 1993b, 23–28; Németi 1999, nr. 30, 41; Teleagă 2007, 23–57; Teleagă 2008, 85–165. 8. Derșida (Hu. Kisderzsida, Sălaj C.), accidental funeral discovery. Németi–Lakó 1993, 77–83. 9. Dindești–Grădina lui Negreanu (Hu. Érdengeleg, Satu Mare C.), cemetery. Zirra 1971, Abb. 8/18, 38; Zirra 1972, 171–172. 10. Dindești–Pășună (Hu. Érdengeleg, Satu Mare C.), accidental funeral discovery. Unpublished. 11. Diosig–Cărămidărie Fábry (Hu. Bihardiószeg, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Roska 1944, fig. 4/1–3; Zirra 1971, Abb. 15/10. 12. Diosig–Holm (Hu. Bihardioszeg, Bihor C.), cemetery. Inf. I. Ordentlich, unpublished. 13. Foieni/Ciumești (Hu. Mezőfény/Csomaköz, Satu Mare C.), accidental funeral discovery. Németi 1999, nr. 36 VIIIa, 53; NÉmeti 2003. 14. Horea–Vatra satului, grădina lui Mateș Gheorghe nr. 28 (Satu Mare C.), accidental funeral discovery. Németi 1999, nr. 39a, 60. 15. Mofinu Mic–Pescărie A (Hu. Kismajtény, County Satu Mare), cemetery. Németi 1987; Németi 1999, nr. 54b3, 80. 16. Oradea–Salca (Hu. Nagyvárad, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Zirra 1971, Abb. 15/1. 17. Oradea–Cărămidărie Guttmann (Hu. Nagyvárad, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Roska 1944, nr. 91, 46. 18. Oradea–Köblös (Hu. Nagyvárad, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Roska 1944, nr. 88–199. 19. Oradea–Cimitirul Rulikowski (Hu. Nagyvárad, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Emődi 2000, 99, fig. 3/1. 20. Otomani–Sub cetate (Hu. Ottomány, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Roska 1938, 12; Roska 1942b, nr. 99, 4; Roska 1944, nr. 72, 215. 21. Pecica (Hu. Pécska, Arad C.), cemetery. Dörner 1972, pl. III; Crișan 1974b, fig. 15–16; Márton 1933, 163; Zirra 1971, 180, Abb. 1. 22. Pișcolt–Nisipărie (Hu. Piskolt, Satu Mare C.), cemetery. NÉmeti 1975a; 1988; 1989; 1992; 1993a; 1999, nr, 33e8, 44; Zirra 1997; 1998. 23. Pișcolt–Parc 2 Romgaz (Hu. Piskolt, Satu Mare C.), accidental funeral discovery. Németi 1999, nr. 33, 45. 24. Sanislău–Lutărie (Hu. Szaniszló, Satu Mare C.), cemetery. Zirra 1971, Abb. 6/4–6; 8/20–22, 26–27, 33; Zirra 1972; Németi 1975b, 245–248, fig. 2/8–11; 3/1–9. 25. Săcuieni (Hu. Székelyhíd, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Roska 1944, nr. 127, 50; Zirra 1971, Abb. 15/17. 26. Sălacea (Hu. Szalacs, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Roska 1944, nr. 115, 48, fig. 44; Zirra 1971, Abb. 15/8a. 27. Sântion (Hu. Pusztaszentjános, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Roska 1944, nr. 124, 50. 28. Sâniob (Hu. Szentjobb, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Roska 1944, nr. 125, 50. 300 | J. Németi 29. Sânandrei–Drumul Morii (Hu. Szentandrás, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Hunyadi 1944, pl. LXXIII/7; RepBihor 1974, 69. 30. Șilindru (Hu. Érselend, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Roska 1944, nr. 32, 38. 31. Tărian–Dâmbul lui Ciordaș (Hu. Köröstarján, Bihor C.), cemetery. Chidioșan–Ignat 1972, 553–557; Zirra 1971, Abb. 15/2–5, 7–9, 15–16, 18–21, 23, 28–31. 32. Tarcea (Hu. Értarcsa, County Bihor), accidental funeral discovery. Unpublished. 33. Valea lui Mihai–Cătun Gorove (Érmihályfalva, Bihor C.), accidental funeral discovery. Roska 1944, nr. 31, 38, fig. 18–19; Zirra 1971, Abb. 15/6, 12–14. 34. Vârșand (Hu. Gyulavarsánd, Arad C.), accidental funeral discovery. Domonkos 1910; Dörner 1972, 151, pl. III/6; Zirra 1971, Abb. 1/11. 35. Zăuani–Dâlma cimitirului (Hu. Szilágyzovány, Sălaj C.), cemetery. Matei 1978; Németi–Lakó 1993, 117–129. Appendix 2 Number of graves from the cemeteries in north-western Romania3 No. Total 3 Site Inhumations Arad–Gai Aradu Nou Arad–Ceala Carei–Drumul Căminului Căpleni Ciumești–Moara Curtuiușeni–Dâmbul Ars Derșida Dindești–Grădina lui Negreanu Dindești–Pășune Diosig–Fabrica de cărămidă Fabry Diosig–Halom Foieni/Ciumești Sf. Paul Horea–Vatra Satului Moftinu Mic–Pescărie Oradea–Salca Oradea–Gr. Guttmann Oradea–Gr. Köblös Oradea–Cim. Rulikowski Otomani Pecica Pișcolt–Nisipărie Pișcolt–Parc nr. 2 (Romgaz) Sanislău Săcuieni Sălăcea Sânion Santandrei Șilindru Tarcea Tărian Vârșrad Valea lui Mihai Zăuani – 1 – – – 7 5 – 1 1 – 1 1 – – – – – – – – 76 – 1 – 1 – – – – 7 – – – 102 Cremation pits – 2 1 – – 21 10 1 1 – – – – – 2 – – – – – 2 83 – 12 – – – – – – 5 – – 3 143 Cremation urns – – – – – 4 2 – – – – – – – – – – – 1 – – 13 – 1 – – – – – – – – 1 2 24 Uncertain Total no. of items* graves 8 8 – 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 – 32 12 29 – 1 – 2 – 1 1 1 – 1 – 1 1 1 – 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 – 1 1 1 – 2 14 186 1 1 9 23 1 1 – 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13 1 1 – 5 – 5 61 330 Accidental finds, (metal artefacts), which probably come from burial finds, are marked with one grave in the uncertain items column. Funerary Rites and Rituals of the Celtic Cemeteries in North-Western Romania | 301 References Almássy, K., Kelta temető Tiszavasvári határában, JAMÉ, XXXIX–XL, 55–106. Bader, T., O zăbală din a doua perioadă a epocii fierului descoperita la Ciumești, SCIVA, 35, 1, 85–90. Berecki 2006 Berecki, S., Rite and Ritual of the Celts from Transylvania, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Thracians and Celts, Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Bistriţa, 18–20 mai, 2006, Cluj-Napoca, 51–76. Chidioșan–Ignat Chidioșan, N.–Ignat, D., Cimitirul celtic de la Tărian, SCIV, 23, 4, 553–579. 1972 Crișan 1966 Crișan, I. H., Materiale dacice din necropola și așezarea de la Ciumești și problema raporturilor dintre daci și celţi în Transilvania, Baia-Mare. Crișan 1971 Crișan, I. H., În legătura cu datarea necropolei celtice de la Ciumești, Marmatia, II, 55–92. Crișan 1974a Crișan, I. H., La nécropole de Fântânele et son importance pour le problèmes de Celtes de l’Europe Centrale, IN: The Celts in Central Europe, Alba Regia, XIV, 185–186. Crișan 1974b Crișan, I. H., Descoperiri celtice păstrate în Muzeul Judeţean Arad, Ziridava, III–IV, 37–80. Crișan 1975 Crișan, I. H., Mormântul celtic de la Fântănele–Livada, SCIVA, 26, 1, 45–50. Domonkos 1910 Domonkos, J., A gyulavarsándi nyakperec, Múzeumi és Könyvtári Értesítő, 50. Dörner 1972 Dörner, E., Urme celtice pe teritoriul orădean, RevMuz, 2, 149–154. Emődi 2000 Emődi, J., Kelta leletek a Rulikowsky temetőből és a Szalka dombról, IN: Emődi, J., Történeti adatok Nagyvárad múltjából, 101. Horedt 1973 Horedt, K., Interpretări arheologice, II cu privire la datarea cimitirului de la Ciumești, jud. Satu Mare, SCIV, 24, 2, 299–303. Hunyadi 1944 Hunyadi, I., Kelták a Kárpát medencében, DissPann, II. Kemenczei 2009 Kemenczei, T., Studien zu den Denkmälern skythisch geprägter Alföld Gruppe, IPH, 12. Kovács 1911 Kovács, I., Az apahidai őskori telep és La Tène temető, DolgKolozsvár, II, 1–69. Matei 1978 Matei, Al. V., Trei morminte din sec. III. î.e.n. descoperite la Zăuani (jud. Sălaj), ActaMP, II, 29–37. Márton 1933 Márton, L., Die Frühlatènezeit in Ungarn, ArchHung, XI, 163–170. Mráv 2005 Mráv, Zs., Kocsival a túlvilágra, Kocsit tartalmazó temetkezések, a budaörsi római település temetőjében, IN: Ottományi, K.–Mester, E.–Mráv, Zs., Antik gyökereink: Budaörs múltja a régészeti leletek fényében, Budaörs, 56–60. Nánási 1973 Nánási, Z., Descoperiri în necropola celtică de la Curtuiușeni, Crisia, III, 29–38. Nánási 1975 Nánási, Z., Un mormânt celtic cu inventar deosebit, descoperit la Curtuiușeni, StCom Satu Mare, III, 47–50. Németh 2007 Németh, E., Egy összeégett kelta leletegyüttes restaurálása, JAMÉ, XLIX, 487–493. Németi 1975a Németi, I., Contributions concernant la facies Latènien du nord–ouest Roumanie a la lumière de dècouvertes celtiques de Pișcolt (dépt. Satu Mare), Alba Regia, 14, 187–197. Németi 1975b Németi, I., Weitere Angaben über die keltischen Gräberfelder von Ciumești und Sanislău (Kreis Satu Mare), Dacia N. S., XIX, 243–248. Németi 1982 Németi, I., Das späthallstattzeitlichen Gräberfeld von Sanislău, Dacia N. S., XVI, 1–2, 115–144. Németi 1987 Németi, I., Descoperiri arheologice din teritoriul localităţii Moftinu Mic (jud. Satu-Mare), StCom Satu Mare, VII–VIII, 1986–1987, 101–137. Németi 1988 Németi, I., Necropola La Tène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, I, Thraco-Dacica, IX, 49–73. Németi 1989 Németi, I., Necropola La Tène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, II, Thraco-Dacica, X, 75–114. Németi 1992 Németi, I., Necropola La Tène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, III, Thraco-Dacica, XIII, 59–112. Németi 1993a Németi, I., Necropola La Tène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, IV, Thraco-Dacica, XIV, 117–129. Németi 1993b Németi, I., Un mormânt celtic descoperit la Curtuiușeni–Dâmbul Ars, StCom Satu Mare, IX–X, 23–28. Németi 1997 Németi, I., Spada descoperită incidental la Ciumești (com. Sanislău), StCom Satu Mare, XIV, 111–114. Németi 1999 Németi, J., Repertoriul arheologic al zonei Careiului, BT, XXVIII. Németi 2003 Németi, J., Mormântul celtic de la Ciumești Pârâul Sf. Paul, Marmatia, 7/1, 187–199. Németi–Lakó Németi, I.–Lakó, É., Noi descoperiri celtice din Judeţul Sălaj, ActaMP, 17, 1993, 77–90. 1993 Almássy 1998 Bader 1984 302 | J. Németi Németi– Sălceanu 1995 Popovich 1997 RepArad 1999 RepBihor 1974 Roska 1937 Roska 1942a Roska 1942b Roska 1944 Rusu 1969 Rusu–Bandula 1970 Szabó 1971 Szabó 2005 Szabó 2006 Szabó 2007 Szabó–Tankó 2006 Szörényi 2007 Teleagă 2007 Teleagă 2008 Vaida 2000 Vasiliev 2005 Végh 1973 Zirra 1968 Zirra 1971 Zirra 1972 Zirra 1997 Zirra 1998 Németi, I.–Sălceanu, I., Sondaje arheologice în zona Careiului (1992), IN: Cercetări arheologice în aria nord-tracă, I, București, 55–58. Popovich, I., Periodization on chronology o Kuštanovica type sites in the Transcarpathian region, JAMÉ, XXXV–XXXVI, 1995–1996, 77–95. Repertoriul Arheologic al Judeţului Arad, Muzeul Banatului, Timișoara. Repertoriul monumentelor naturii, arheologice, istorice, etnografice, de arhitectură și artă din judeţul Bihor, Oradea. Roska, M., Bihar vármegye monográfiája a legrégebbi időktől a honfoglalásig, Magyar Városok és Vármegyék Monográfiája, XXV, Bihar Vármegye. Roska, M., Sépulture celtique a char de Érkörtvélyes, Közlemények Kolozsvár, II, 81–84. Roska, M., Erdély régészeti repertóriuma I. Őskor, Thesaurus antiquitatum transsilvanicarum, Tom I. Praehistorica, Cluj-Napoca. Roska, M., A kelták Erdélyben – Les gaullois an Transylvanie, Közlemények Kolozsvár, IV, 37–41. Rusu, M., Das keltische Fürstengrab von Ciumești in Rumänien, BerRGK, 50, 267–300. Rusu, M.–Bandula, O., Mormântul unei căpetenii celtice, de la Ciumești, Baia Mare. Szabó, M., A kelták nyomában Magyarországon, Budapest. Szabó, M., A keleti kelták. A késővaskor a Kárpát medencében, Budapest. Szabó, M., La Tène kori temető Sajópetri határában, (A 2005-ös évi feltárás), AIH, 61–65. Szabó, M., Sajópetri, Homoki szőlőskertek, AIH, nr. 306, 268–271. Szabó, D.–Tankó, K., Présentation du système de gestion de céramique de Sajópetri (Hongrie), Ősrégészeti levelek, 8–9, 167–176. Szörényi, G. A., Régészeti kutatások a cigándi árvíztároló területén. I, Pácin–Alharaszt. http:// www.spatak.hu/spatak /index.php?option=com_content &task=view&id=19&Itemid=2 (16 01 2012) Teleagă, E., Die Ausgrabungen von Nicolae Chidioșan in der La-Tenezeitlichen Nekropole von Curtuiușeni-Érkörtvélyes (Bihor Rumänien) – Săpăturile lui Nicolae Chidioșan în necropola din epoca La-Tène de la Curtuiușeni/Érkörtvélyes (Bihor, Rumänien), Crisia, XXXVII, 23–59. Teleagă, E., Die La-Tène-zeitliche Nekropole von Curtuiușeni/Érkörtvélyes (Bihor, Rumänien). Der Forschungsstand, Dacia N. S., LII, 85–165. Vaida, L., The Celtic Cemetery from Orosfaia (Bistriţa-Năsăud county, IN: Gaiu, C.–Rustoiu, A. (red), Les Celtes et les Thraco–daces de l’est du Basin des Carpates, Cluj-Napoca, 135–160. Vasiliev, V., Despre câteva aspecte referitoare la grupul scitic din aria intercarpatică a Transilvaniei, RevBis, XIX, 71–76. Végh, K., Adatok a kelta kocsi-temetkezések kérdéséhez, ArhÉrt, 100, 2, 208–218. Zirra, V., Un cimitir celtic din nord-vestul României, Baia-Mare. Zirra, V., Beiträge Zur Kenntnis des keltischen Latène in Rumänien, Dacia N. S., XV, 173–238. Zirra, V., Noi necropole celtice din nord-vestul României (cimitirul biritual de la Sanislău și Dindești), StCom Satu Mare, II, 151–205. Zirra, V. V., Contribuţii la cronologia relativă a cimitirului de la Pișcolt. Analiza combinatorie și statigrafie orizontală, SCIVA, 48, 2. 87–135. Zirra, V. V., Die relative Chronologie des Gräberfeldes von Pișcolt, (Kr. Satu Mare), SBHM, 2, 148–160. List of figures Fig. 1. Rite of the Pișcolt cemetery. Fig. 2. Rite of the Celts in north-west Romania. Fig. 3. Rite of the Celts in Transylvania (after Berecki 2006). Fig. 4. Pácin–Alsóharaszt dülő. Fig. 5. Berea–Nyúlvár. Incomplete clay zoomorphic figurine representing a wild boar. Meine Begegnungen mit den Keltenfürsten: am Beispiel der Fürstengräber von Ciumești und Hochdorf 50 Jahre seit der Entdeckung des Fürstengrabes von Ciumești Tiberius BADER Keltenmuseum Hochdorf/Enz Deutschland tib.bader@web.de In memoriam Vlad Zirra, dem Ausgräber des keltischen Gräberfeldes von Ciumești Schlüsselwörter: Fürstengrab, Ciumești, Kelten, Vogelhelm Vor 50 Jahren, am 10. August 1961 wurde das keltische Fürstengrab von Ciumești/Csomaköz, Bez. Satu Mare entdeckt. Örtliche Bauern haben für den Bau eines Stalls in der Gemarkung des Ortes, die vorhandene Sanddüne eingeebnet und sind dabei auf eine kreisförmige Grube gestoßen. In der Grube lagen die Überreste einer Bestattung. Diese runde, fünfzigste Jahreswende ist ein Anlass wieder über diese sensationelle Endeckung zu sprechen, die alten Erinnerungen aufzufrischen, wieder zu beleben, die unveröffentlichten Informationen ans Tageslicht zu bringen und diesen außerordentlich wichtigen Fund neu zu bewerten.1 1. Begegnung Kurz nach der o.g. Entdeckung, war ich mit einer Gruppe von Geschichtslehrern bzw. -professoren aus Satu Mare/Sathmar im Rahmen eines Sommerprogramms an Ort und Stelle (Taf. 1/1–3). Das geplante Ziel des Besuches im Ort Berea/Bere war die Besichtigung der archäologischen Grabungen von Al. Păunescu, den ich noch in meiner Studentenzeit bei den archäologischen Grabungen in Ceahlău, Moldova 1955/56 kennen gelernt hatte. Ebenso wollten wir die archäologische Sammlung des reformierten Pfarrers Gy. Kovács in Berea ansehen. Zunächst besuchten wir die Grabung in der Flur Kisrengátja (Stavila Mică), Berea I, eine Siedlung aus der frühen Jungsteinzeit (vgl. Păunescu 1963; 1964; Németi 1999, 54, BIa), wo Al. Păunescu eine ausführliche Fachführung machte (Taf. 1/2–4). Dann besichtigten wir die Slg. Kovács, wobei der Sammler seine „Schätze“ sehr akribisch und detailgetreu vorführte. Einige Funde aus der Sammlung habe ich fotografiert (Abb. 1, veröffentlicht von Kacsó 1969, Taf. 49/7.2). Während des Aufenthalts bei Gy. Kovács erhielt ich von einem Bewohner eine wichtige Nachricht, nämlich dass in der Gemarkung der Gemeinde, im Ort Ciumești etwas Besonderes entdeckt worden sei und die Funde sich zuhause bei einem Bauer befänden. Unverzüglich ging ich zusammen mit einigen Lehrern dorthin, wir trafen den Bauern an und er zeigte sich sehr entgegenkommend. Er hat mir gleich die Funde in der Nebenstube (Ung. oldalkamra) des Wohnzimmers oder „Schönstube“ gezeigt. Mit dem Bauer zusammen habe ich die Gegenstände des Fundes herausgenommen und im Hof des Hauses habe ich sie fotografiert (Taf. 2). Dabei berichtete er mir über die Fundumstände und Fundverhältnisse. 1 Wir denken hier u. a. an den 100. Jahrestag vom Beginn der archäologischen Großgrabung von Goldberg im Nördlinger Ries, Süddeutschland unter der Leitung von Gerhard Bersu (vgl. Bofinger 2011) und vor 20 Jahren wurde der heute weltberühmte „Ötzi“ in den Alpen entdeckt. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 303–316 304 | T. Bader Anschließend, am Spätnachmittag fuhren wir zurück nach Sathmar. Nach einigen Monaten hörte ich von der Frau I. Kovács, Museumsdirektorin von Baia Mare/Nagybánya, dass sie die Fundobjekte für das Regionalmuseum Baia Mare für 50 Lei (!!) von dem Bauer gekauft hat2 (Taf. 3/1–5). Der Bauer hieß J. Ludenherr (ursprünglich ein Schwabe). Das war meine erste Begegnung mit dem Fürstengrab von Ciumești. 2. Begegnung Im Jahr 1973 führte ich archäologische Grabungen in der Gemeinde Ciumești, Ort Berea in mehreren Fundstellen mit bronzezeitlichen Spuren, wie Togul evreului/Zsidótag, Cetatea iepurelui/Nyúlvár, Viile Berei/Berei szőlő usw. durch. Schon früher hatte ich für meine Dissertation die zwei Sammlungen von Gy. Kovács, bzw. in Baia Mare und in Berea durchgearbeitet, die bronzezeitlichen Funden aufgeAbb. 1. Ein Topf mit Fuß aus einem Gräberfeld von nommen und gezeichnet (Bader 1978, 120–121, Ciumești, Bodrogkeresztúr-Kultur. Nr. 11). Die Grabungsarbeiter waren Schüler aus dem Ungarischen Gymnasium Sathmar und wir hatten im Schulhaus in einem Klassenzimmer auf Strohlagern Unterkunft gefunden. So kam ich in Kontakt mit dem Dorfschullehrer und wie es bei Ungarn üblich ist, lud er mich sonntags zum Mittagessen ein. Während wir bei einem guten ungarischen Sonntagsessen bei Tisch saßen, kam sein Vater/Schwiegervater zu uns, ich erinnere mich nicht mehr genau, Gy. Varga bácsi. Wir unterhielten uns in ungarischer Sprache, auch über die laufenden Grabungen. Dabei berichtete er, dass er bei der Endeckung des Vogelhelms dabei gewesen sei und einige Gegenstände mitgenommen habe, denn er wollte nicht, dass sie in die Hände des Dorfpfarrers Gy. Kovács fielen, der alles sammelte. In der Grube seien Knochenreste, Asche und Kohle gewesen, sagte er mir. Auf meine Frage wo die Funde sind, die er mitgenommen habe, antwortete er mir schlicht: „auf dem Dachboden“. Von dort holte er sie gleich und ich bekam die Funde ohne weiteres und ohne Bezahlung für das Sathmarer Museum. Auch heute noch bin ich ihm sehr dankbar dafür. Auf diese Weise wurde der zweiten Teil der Beigaben des Prunkgrabes von Ciumești erworben (Taf. 3/6–11), den ich Herrn J. Németi, dem Leiter des Stadtmuseums Carei/Großkarol gegen bronzezeitlichen Funde „tauschte“ und zu veröffentlichen überlassen habe (Németi 1975, Abb. 1; 2/1–7; Rustoiu 2008, 17). Das war meine zweite Begegnung mit dem Fürstengrab von Ciumești. 3. Begegnung Die erste Sammlung des Pfarrers Gy. Kovács, die wir 1961 in Berea gesehen hatten, kaufte Frau I. Kovács für das Regionalmuseum Baia Mare. Der Pfarrer führte seine Sammeltätigkeit aber weiter, obwohl die Fachleute ihn verwarnt hatten, nicht weiter die Scherben auf den Feldern zu sammeln, weil man dann die Fundstellen nicht mehr richtig lokalisieren kann. Nachdem ich diese zweite Sammlung in Bezug auf bronzezeitliche Funde untersucht hatte, kaufte ich sie 1977 für das Bezirksmuseum Satu Mare.3 Außer den 2 3 Das Sathmarer Museum war nicht zuständig die Funde zu kaufen, weil damals die „Regionen“ (Rum. regiune) als Verwaltungseinheiten in Rumänien funktionierten und das Museum damals den Status eines Stadtmuseums hatte. Dazu berechtigt war eigentlich das Muzeul Regional Baia Mare/Regionalmuseum Baia Mare. Mein Absicht war damals, die „Kovács-Sammlung“ in einem Katalog zu veröffentlichen, so wurde die Idee auch im Arbeitsplan des Bezirksmuseums Sathmar aufgenommen. Als ersten Schritt hat man beschlossen die Funde zu zeichnen und mit Frau Zs. Balaskó, Fachzeichnerin für Archäologie des Nationalmuseums für Geschichte Cluj-Napoca kam eine feste Vereinbarung dazu zustande. Sie hat schon mehrere Tausende kleiner Feuersteinstücke, insbesondere Pfeilspitzen auf Kosten des Museums gezeichnet. Die Zeichnungen waren bei meiner Ausreise im Oktober 1987 in meinem Büro in einem Stahlschrank abgelagert. Heute sind sie – nach der Auskunft der Mitarbeiter des Museums – nicht mehr auffindbar. Inzwischen hat J. Németi über die „Kovács-Sammlung“ geschrieben. Er vergaß zu erwähnen unter welchen Umständen der Kauf zustande gekommen Meine Begegnungen mit den Keltenfürsten: am Beispiel der Fürstengräber von Ciumești und Hochdorf | 305 bronzezeitlichen Funden in der Sammlung hatte mich eine Trense vom „griechischen Typ“, ein Zufallfund nach den Grabungen auf dem Gräberfeld von Ciumești, fasziniert, die ich fand es wichtig, sie zu veröffentlichen (Bader 1983, Abb. 1–3). Groß war meine Überraschung als ich diese Trense als Beigabe im Helmgrab von Ciumești in der Habilitationsschrift von der Frau B. Kull (1998, 280, Anm. 329, Abb. 38/8) wiedergesehen habe. Umso mehr als ihr Vater für das Keltenmuseum, dessen Leiter ich damals war, ehrenamtlich tätig war. Ich war gut mit ihr bekannt und sie wusste, dass ich im Museum Sathmar gearbeitet hatte, aber sie hat kein Wort gesagt, dass sie im Museum Sathmar von mir im Jahr 1973 gerettete Funde gezeichnet hatte. Ihre Kontaktperson im Museum war für diese Funde nicht zuständig. In der Vitrine mit den Beigaben des Helmgrabes ist auch die Trense ausgestellt und sie hat sie automatisch ohne weiteres dem Vogelhelmgrab zugeschrieben4. Das Importstück würde hervorragend zum Fürstengrab passen, aber leider gehört es nicht dazu. Das war meine dritte Begegnung mit dem Grab von Ciumești. 4. Begegnung Die Beigaben des Vogelhelmgrabes von Ciumești befinden sich heute in drei Museen: Der Helm im Nationalmuseum für Geschichte Rumäniens, București; die 1961 von Frau Kovács erworbenen Beigaben im Bezirksmuseum Baia Mare und die von mir 1973 geretteten Stücke im Bezirksmuseum Satu Mare. Die Ausstellung mit den keltischen Funden aus Siebenbürgen im Keltenmuseum Hochdorf in 2000/2001war ein Anlass, eine Möglichkeit, das Grab von Ciumești zum ersten mal vollständig, mit allen Beigaben zusammen auszustellen. Und so geschah es. Alle Beigaben wurden in der Ausstellung „Tharker und Kelten beidseits der Karpaten“ ausgestellt (Siehe Thraker 2001, 88–89, Nr. 135–146) (Abb. 2). Das war die vierte Begegnung mit dem Vogelhelmgrab von Ciumești. Abb. 2. 1. Das Vogelhelmgrab von Ciumești im Keltenmuseum Hochdorf; 2. Das Titelblatt des Katalogs der Ausstellung in Hochdorf mit dem Vogelhelm. 4 war und wer die Sammlung für das Sathmarer Museum gekauft hatte. Darüber hinaus ist folgende Feststellung nicht richtig, dass: „…că însemnările în legătură cu acest material arheologic atât de bogat și foarte important din punct de vedere știinţific sunt foarte lacunare, ele se rezumă deseori la mici constatări privind lotul achiziţionat. Din păcate autorul colecţiei n-a publicat nimic din această colecţie, nici măcar la nivelul ziarelor locale.“ (Németi 1997b, 63). Die Wahrheit ist, dass der Verfasser dieses Beitrages hat die ganze Sammlung noch in Berea für seine Dissertation durchgecheckt und verwendet hat, als sie bei einem Bauern gelagert war, weil der Sammler Kovács, als Ruheständler schon in Oradea/Großwardein wohnte. Gemeinsam mit dem Sammler zusammen habe ich die Fundstellen aufgesucht und auch einiges aus der Sammlung auch veröffentlicht (z. B. die griechische Trense, vgl. die Literatur). Der Sammler seinerseits hatte seine Sammlung inventarisiert und ausführlich beschrieben, die Funde zu veröffentlichen, dafür war er nicht zuständig, obwohl er gut informiert war. Die neolithischen Funde hat C. Virag (2008, 91) aus der Sammlung veröffentlicht, standen aber auch ihm das Inventar und die Beschreibung der Sammlung von Gy. Kovács nicht zur Verfügung. Bei der Tagung für die keltische Zivilisation im Karpatenbecken, in Târgu Mureș, am 9–11 Oktober 2009 hat mich A. Rustoiu informiert, dass er diesen Fehler schon in der Fachliteratur korrigiert hat, vgl. Rustoiu 2008, 17. 306 | T. Bader Geschichte der Entdeckung Fundumstände, Fundverhältnisse Wie schon erwähnt haben die Bauern aus dem Ort Ciumești das Gelände in der Gemarkung des Ortes, Flur Malomháta/Moara, gew. Grajduri C.A.P., für den Bau eines Stalls vorbereitet, eine Sanddüne geebnet und am 10. August 1961 entdeckten sie eine kreisförmige Grube .Was die Größe der Grube betrifft, gibt es verschiedene Angaben: Einmal schreibt M. Rusu dass sie einen Durchmesser vom 1,20 m (Rusu– Bandula 1970, 3), ein anderes Mal vom 1,50 m hatte (Rusu 1971, 267), die Tiefe habe 1,8 m betragen. Ob die Grube einen Durchmesser von 1,20 oder 1,50 hatte spielt eigentlich keine große Rolle (Rustoiu 2008, 13, ca. 1,2–1,5 m). Die Tiefe von 1,8 m erscheint unter normalen Umständen zu viel, aber wie wir wissen der Wind transportiert im Sandgebiet den Sand, von einer Stelle weg und an einer anderen legt er Sand nieder. Womöglich war das Grab also noch nachträglich von Sand überlagert worden. So würden sich auch die verschiedenen Tiefen der Gruben der Brandgräber in dem Gräberfeld erklären, die zwischen 0,60–2,20 m (Zirra 1967, 13) liegen. Über die Entdeckung, Fundumstände und Fundverhältnisse des Vogelhelmgrabes schreibt M. Rusu im deutschen Text im Bericht RGK sehr lakonisch, kurz, ausführlicher aber in der rumänischen Veröffentlichung: „Nisipul ce formează duna, fiind fin și ușor de săpat, ţăranii respectivi au golit conţinutul gropii, adunînd cu grije toate fragmentele de bronz și fier găsite. De remarcat, că după relatările orale făcute de ei, în groapa care se adîncea pînă la aproximativ 1,8 m, în afară de obiectele amintite, în nisipul ce umplea groapa și care avea culoare ușor mai închisă, fiind amestecat cu humus, nu s-au găsit oase calcinate, cenușă, ori oase umane întregi, care să indice prezenţa unui mormînt obișnuit. Obiectele au fost strînse de la ţărani de către brigadierul I. Ludenher și preotul I. Kovács iar apoi achiziţionate de Muzeul Regional Maramureș, din Baia Mare unde se păstrează.“ (Rusu–Bandula 1970, 3 Anm. 1; Rustoiu 2008, 13). Nach den Auskünften von Gy. Varga wissen wir heute dass nicht alle Beigaben aus dem Grab sorgfältig von den Bauern aufgesammelt und dem Brigadier Ludenherr abgegeben worden sind. Die Aussage dass in der Grube seien keine Asche und kalzinierte Knochen gewesen, ist genauso falsch, wie die Information dass auch der Sammler Kovács von den Bauern Beigaben aus dem Grab bekommen hat. Abb. 3. Plan des keltischen Gräberfeldes von Ciumești (nach V. Zirra; M. Rusu). Angesichts dieser lückenhaften Informationen, meinen die Autoren M. Rusu und O. Bandula, bei der Veröffentlichungen der ersten Gruppe des Inventars des Grabes: „Eine letzte, mit dem Funde von Meine Begegnungen mit den Keltenfürsten: am Beispiel der Fürstengräber von Ciumești und Hochdorf | 307 Ciumești verknüpte Frage betrifft die Feststellung, ob die oben beschriebenen Gegenstände das Inventar eines Brandgrabes, oder eines symbolischen Grabes (Kenotaph) waren. …. Wie schon erwähnt zeigt keiner der besprochenen Gegenstände Feuerspuren, wie die Beigaben der Brandgräber aus derselben Nekropole. Nach mündlichen Berichten der Entdecker fanden sich in der betreffenden Grube, außer den hier besprochenen Gegenständen, keine verbrannten Knochen, Asche oder ein menschliches Skelett die auf ein gewöhnliches Grab hindeuten könnten. Die einzige wahrscheinliche Erklärung für das Vorhandensein dieser Waffen in der Grube, die sich ungefähr in der Mitte des Gräberfeldes befindet, scheint uns, dass sie das Inventar vom Kenotaph eines keltischen Fürsten darstellen, der anderswo starb, so dass die Familie ihm die übliche Leichenfeier nicht machen konnte. Nicht ausgeschlossen ist auch die Hypothese, dass dieser in Europa einzig dastehende Fund, einen besonderen Ritus für einen symbolischen Urahnen der keltischen Gemeinschaft von Ciumești darstellt.“ (Rusu–Bandula 1970, 43, 60; vgl. Rustoiu 2008, 13). Diese Feststellungen von M. Rusu und O. Bandula fallen kategorisch nach der Rettung der zweiten Gruppe des Inventars des Grabes weg. Nach dem Stand der heutigen Forschung kann man folgendes erkennen: das Grab ist keine Einzeldeponierung, sondern es lag auf dem Gelände eines Gräberfeldes aus der La Tène-Zeit (Abb. 3); der Bestattungsritus des Helmgrabes entspricht dem der anderen Brandgräbern aus der Nekropole. Auch die Form der Grube des Fürstengrabes, zylinderförmig, kreisförmig im Querschnitt mit gewölbtem Boden ähnelt den Gruben der anderen Brandgräber. Im Rahmen der Bearbeitung der zweiten Gruppe des Inventar des Grabes, bzw. von „Varga bácsi“ hat J. Németi (1975, 244) festgestellt dass, die Gürtelkette und Fibel Brandspuren tragen also sekundär verbrannt sind, sicher eine Folge des Scheiterhaufenbrandes. So kann man nachvollziehen, dass die Leiche zusammen mit den Trachtenstücken verbrannt wurde, dann nach der Verbrennung, die Asche und die verbrannten Knochenreste in die Grube und in die Urne (Aussage von Gy. Varga) gefüllt wurden. Die wertvollen Beigaben wie der Helm, Kettenpanzer, Beinschienen, die Urne, die zwei Tassen wurden unversehrt in die Grube niedergelegt (vgl. Rustoiu 2008, 17–18). Rekonstruktion des Inventars, der Beigaben des Grabes (Auswertung der Fotoaufnahmen, Literatur, Informationen von J. Ludenherr und Gy. Varga) Gruppe I: J. Ludenherr. 1. Eiserner Helm mit Bronzevogel, 2. Kettenpanzerhemd mit einer verzierten Bronzerosette, 3.4. zwei bronzene Beinschienen, 5. Eiserne Lanzenspitze, 6. eine Tontasse, fragmentarisch erhalten (Taf. 3/1–5; 4). Die Tontasse sieht man klar auf unserer Aufnahme (Taf. 2/1–3). Aus unbekannten Gründen kam sie jedoch nicht in die Sammlung des Museums Baia Mare. Die Feststellung in: Preda 1994, 307, dass in der Grube auch ein Schwert war ist falsch. Ebenso unrichtig ist eine Information von einem Kollegen auf der Tagung in Târgu Mureș, am 9–11 Oktober 2009, dass im Grab auch ein Schwert gewesen sei (publiziert von J. Németi). Das von J. Németi veröffentlichte Schwert ist ein Einzelfund und auch nicht sicher ob es auf dem Gelände der keltischen Nekropole gefunden wurde (Németi 1997a). Genauso wenig gehören zum Vogelhelmgrab eine Trense und eine Schere (Kull 1998, 280, Abb. 38/8.10). Literaturhinweise: Zirra 1967, 115, 135–136, Taf. 12 (Erstveröffentlichung des Vogelhelmes); Rusu– Bandula 1970; Rusu 1971, 267–300; Horedt 1973, 301; Preda 1994, 307; Filip 1998, 71; Németi 1999, 50, Nr. 36 Ia; Kull 1998, 280, Abb. 38/1, 4, 5, 9; Thraker 2001, 88–89, Nr. 135–140; Babeș 2001, 517, Abb. 93; Rustoiu 2008, Abb. 1/1–4; 2/1–5. Der Vogelhelm ist in fast allen monographischen Geschichtsbüchern über die Kelten reproduziert. Gruppe II: Gy. Varga. 7. Wangenklappe, 8. Fibelfragment, 9. Panzerhelmreste (vier Bruchstücke), 10. Gürtel mit Haken (Bruchstücke), 11. Mehrere Bruchstücke unbestimmbarer eiserner Gegenstände, 12. Tongefäß-Urne, 13. Tonschale (Taf. 3/6–11). Die Wagenklappe (eine fehlt beim Helm) und die Bruchstücke des Kettenpanzers sind die besten, sozusagen die entscheidenden Argumente und Beweise dass die Gegenstände der Gruppe II zum Grab mit Helm, bzw. dem Fürstengrab gehören. Literaturhinweise: Németi 1975, 247–248, Abb. 1; 2/1–7; Németi 1999, 50, Nr. 36 Ia; Kull 1998, 280–281, Abb. 38/2, 3, 6, 6a, 7, 11; Thraker 2001, 89, Nr. 141–146; Rustoiu 2008, Abb. 2/1–5. Typologie, Vergleichstücke, Zeitstellung und Verbreitung der Beigaben des Vogelhelmsgrabes von Ciumești wurden ausführlich und hervorragend in der Monographie von A. Rustoiu (2008, 18–36) bearbeitet. Seine Ergebnisse hier zu wiederholen ist nicht nötig. Konservatorischer Zustand der Beigaben Als ich zum ersten Mal 1961 die Beigaben aus der ersten Gruppe sah, waren einige Stücke so gut erhalten, die Bronzen mit glänzender schöner, grüner, Originalpatina dass ich als junger Archäologe 308 | T. Bader den Fund chronologisch völlig falsch einschätzte. M. Rusu5 veröffentlichte eine Aufnahme über den Vogelhelm (Abb. 4), besser gesagt: „Die Brückstücke des Helmes von Ciumești, vor der Restaurierung“ (Rusu–Bandula 1970, Taf. I). Diese Aufnahme vermittelt einen falschen Eindruck vom konservatorischen Zustand des Helms. Die Aufnahmen (Taf. 2/1–3) zeigen den Vogel auf dem Helm stehend, nur die beiden Flügel fehlen. Er wurde also nicht in Brückstücken entdeckt und geborgen wie das von M. Rusu veröffentlichte Bild zeigt. Der „Hals“ wurde getrennt vom Körper gefunden. Die zwei Blechflügel fehlen auf den Fotos, ob sie in der Nebenstube beim Bauer Ludenherr nicht dabei waren oder in der Stube geblieben sind (in der Stube war dunkel), kann ich heute nach fünfzig Jahren nicht mehr nachvollziehen. Ob die Zerstückelung des Vogelhelmes während des Transports von Ciumești nach Baia Mare geschah oder im Museum, oder beim Transport nach Klausenburg, oder im Labor passierte das wissen wir nicht. Von einer Beischiene fehlt ein Stück, das man noch auf dem Bild sehen kann und das inzwischen verloren gegangen ist. In der zweiten Gruppe sind die Metallstücke schlecht erhalten (Siehe Németi 1975, Abb. 2/1–7). Die Beigaben aus der ersten Gruppe wurden im Labor von Cluj/Klausenburg unter der Leitung von J. Korodi restauriert, außer dem Kettenpanzer, der im Labor des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz restauriert wurde. Abb. 4. Bruchstücke des zerlegten Vogelhelms (nach Rusu–Bandula 1970). Zeitliche und ethnische Zuordnung der Funde Als ich die Funde 1961 zum ersten Mal gesehen habe, war ich noch ein junger Museumsmann und glaubte ich nach der schönen Patina der Beinschienen, dass sie zur frühmittelalterlichen Zeit gehören. Später hörte ich von der Frau I. Kovács, dass Prof. R. Vulpe, București zum ersten Mal gesagt hat, dass es um keltische Funde sich handelt. Anlässlich der Eröffnung der Ausstellung aus Rumänien im Keltenmuseum Hochdorf am 13. September 2000, habe ich diese Geschichte bei der Führung für die Ehrengäste erzählt. Anwesend war Prof. Al. Vulpe, der Sohn von R. Vulpe und er konterte: „Nein ich habe zum ersten Mal gesagt, dass der Fund keltisch ist und nicht mein Vater“. Darauf antwortete lakonisch Prof. J. Maran aus Heidelberg: „Es ist egal, ein Vulpe hat es gesagt!“ 5 Ich zitiere den Namen M. Rusu, für das Büchlein gemeinsam mit O. Bandula, Direktor des Regionalmuseums Baia Mare veröffentlicht, weil praktisch er den Text geschrieben hat und O. B. nur seinen Namen darunter setzte, was damals in „Zusammenarbeit“ zwischen den Museen und Fachinstituten üblich war. Einer hat den „Stoff “ geliefert und der andere war der Schneider! Meine Begegnungen mit den Keltenfürsten: am Beispiel der Fürstengräber von Ciumești und Hochdorf | 309 Zur Datierung des Grabes wurden von der Forschung verschiedene Meinungen geäußert. Vl. Zirra datierte das Gräberfeld von Ciumești in die Stufe LT C, vom Ende des 3. Jh., etwa zwischen 230–130 v. Chr., mit dem Hinweis dass einige Gegenstände LT B2 Charakter haben. Die Datierung des Vogelhelmsgrabes Ende des 4. und Anfang des 3. Jh. V. Chr. von M. Rusu hielt er für zu hoch, die Beigaben waren über mehrere Generationen im Gebrauch (Zirra 1967, 114, 135–136). Das schreibt Vl. Zirra vor der eigentlichen Veröffentlichung des Grabes von M. Rusu. Nach M. Rusu wie schon Vl. Zirra noch im Jahr 1967 vorankündigt, „das Helmgrab von Ciumești mit seinem LT B-Inventar zu den ältesten keltischen Funden in Rumänien gehört“ und über das Gräberfeld meint M. Rusu weiter dass, „Zweifellos gehören viele der betreffenden Grabinventare der LT C-Stufe an wie Vl. Zirra für Ciumești sehr richtig nachwies; seine absolute Datierung (230–130 v. Chr. geb.) scheint uns jedoch zu niedrig.“ Weiterhin geht M. Rusu nicht davon aus, dass einige Beigaben wie der Helm aus dem Fürstengrab von mehreren Generationen benutzt worden seien und sie mit dem letzten Besitzer begraben wurden (Rusu 1971, 295–296). K. Horedt meinte: „Die frühen Fibel- und Armringtypen treten vorwiegend in der Mitte des Gräberfeldes auf. Das Grab mit dem Vogelhelm wird von diesen durch eine Zone von mittellatènezeitlichen Gräbern getrennt, so dass der gegenwärtig allerdings unvollständige Gräberplan keinen zwingenden Hinweis gibt, dass das Kriegergrab bereits vor der Mittelaltènezeit angelegt wurde“ (Horedt 1973, 309). Noch deutlicher ist im rumänischen Text formuliert: „După planul actual al cimitirului constatarea cea mai importantă o reprezintă faptul că poziţia mormântului cu coif al războinicului celt nu se încadrează în aria mormintelor celor mai timpurii, fiind despărţit de ele printr-o fîșie ce cuprinde morminte de clară factură Latène C. Din stratigrafia orizontală a cimitirului, în măsura în care o cunoaștem, nu se poate deduce deci o dovadă peremtorie că războinicul cu coif a fost înmormântat înaintea perioadei Latène C. Această posibilitate desigur nu se poate exclude și observaţia nu se referă la timpul când au fost lucrate piesele inventarului care din cauza caracterului lor unic trebuie datate după alte criterii.“ (Horedt 1973, 301). Nach den neu zum Vorschein gekommenen Beigaben erörterte J. Németi die chronologische Lage des Grabes neu. Nach den Vergleichstücken für die Fibel, den Gürtel und die Keramik „gliedert sich das Kriegergrab von Ciumești in organischer Weise in das Gräberfeld von Ciumești ein und die Bestattung kann frühesten am Ende der B2-Stufe, aber hauptsächlich während des Mittellatène stattgefunden haben“ (Németi 1975, 244–245). Also akzeptiert J. Németi die Datierung von Vl. Zirra und K. Horedt. Fünfundzwanzig Jahre später schreibt J. Németi in einem populärwissenschaftlichen Büchlein: „A később előkerült fibula-töredék, az övlánc-maradványok és az agyagedények arra utalnak, hogy bár a harci felszerelés a Kr. e. IV. század elején készülhetett, de földbekerülésük (eltemetésük) már a Kr. e. III. század elején történhetett (talán átöröklődött, vagy később került a feltételezett személy tulajdonába)“ (Németi 2009, 76). Was sagen die Vertreter der neuen Generation der Keltenforschung in Siebenbürgen? Eine Frage an die anwesenden Keltenforscher: A. Rustoiu, Vl. V. Zirra, V. Ferencz, S. Berecki, H. Pop! A. Rustoiu meint in seiner monographischen Bearbeitung des Vogelhelmgrabes: „În ceea ce privește cronologia, este evident că nu se mai poate susţine o datare timpurie în sec. IV a. Chr.... Analiza întregului material recuperat al mormântului a ilustrat faptul că datarea complexului respectiv trebuie plasată în subfazele La Tène B2b-C1 sau, mai degrabă, numai în La Tène C1” (Rustoiu 2008, 18, 36). Der Status des Toten Wer war die Person, deren Leiche auf Scheiterhaufen verbrannt worden war, deren Überreste mit Kriegerausrüstung in einer Grube bestattet wurden? Auch ohne anthropologische Untersuchungen, kann man sicher sein, dass es sich nach den Beigaben um einen Mann handelte. Wie alt war er? Das wissen wir nicht (Vix, 35 Jahre; Hochdorf, 40–45 Jahre). Was für eine Rolle hat er in der keltischen Gesellschaft gespielt? Vl. Zirra spricht über „mormânt de câpetenie“, „Helmgrab“, Kriegergab, M. Rusu konsequent „Fürstengrab“, K. Horedt „Kriegergrab“, J. Németi „Kriegergrab“, „mormântul princiar“, „katonai-törzsi vezető“, M. Babeș „șef politic de rang princiar.“, A. Rustoiu „războinicul celt de la Ciumești“, „șef militar“, „lider militar“. M. Schönfelder (2007a, 2007b) spricht allgemein über die „élite“ der keltischen Gesellschaft. Was sind eigentlich die Kriterien für die Bestimmung des Charakters des Grabes? Im süddeutschen Raum bezeichnet man vom 19. Jh. an einige Gräber herausragender Einzelpersönlichkeiten, einer Oberschicht, oder der „Fürsten“ mit dem Atribut bzw. Namen „Fürstengrab“. Was sind die Kriterien dafür? Eine imposante Grabanlage, Grabhügel mit enormen Ausmaßen (50–60 m Dm, 5–15 m hoch); Grabkammer aus Holz oder Stein; reiche Ausstattung; mediterrane Importgute als Beigabe; Lage im Bereich der befestigten Höhensiedlungen, der so genannten Fürstensitze. 310 | T. Bader Welche dieser Kriterien erfüllt das Helmgrab von Ciumești? Nur eines: relativ reiche Ausstattung, ohne Goldfunde, was eigentlich nicht bei den Ostkelten üblich war. Allein der Vogelhelm, ein Unikat in Europa, inklusive Kleinasien, im Verbreitungsgebiet der Kelten ist ein sehr wichtiges Indiz dafür, dass wir hier einen besonderen Fall haben. Ganz sicher war der Bestattete, der Verstorbene eine überragende politische Person, vielleicht ein Stammesschef, ein Häuptling im Sinn der indianischen Gesellschaftsstruktur, ein militärischer Chef. Ihn als Princeps im mittelalterlichen Sinn zu bezeichnen wäre meiner Meinung nach zu viel. Wir kennen überhaupt nicht die Größe des Gebietes, das unter seiner, wenn man so will „Verwaltung“ stand. Doch wir können, meine ich den Begriff „Fürstengrab“ für die damaligen Verhältnisse weiter benützen, aber nicht im mittelalterlichen Sinn. Einige Bemerkungen zur Forschung und Veröffentlichung der Funde von Ciumești (Forschungsgeschichte) Die Forschungsgeschichte muss ich Ihnen erzählen, bzw. weitergeben und nicht mit ins Grab in Deutschland, in Hemmingen (mein Wohnsitz) nehmen! Das Grab wurde am 10. August 1961 entdeckt. Irgendwann am Spätherbst kaufte Frau I. Kovács, Direktorin des Regionalmuseum Baia Mare die erste Gruppe der Beigaben. In Gemarkungen der Orte Ciumești und Berea haben archäologische Grabungen im Jahr 1961, wie schon erwähnt A. Păunescu (1963; 1964) und I. Comșa (1963; 1971) vom Archäologischen Institut București für die Jungsteinzeit – dank der Beziehungen zwischen C. S. Nicolaescu-Plopșor und I. Kovács, Direktorin des Regionalmuseums, die bei der großen Rettungsgrabungen von Lacul Bicaz, 1955– 1956 (der Verfasser dieser Zeilen war als Student auch dabei) entstand – durchgeführt. Der Bukarester Archäologe, C. S. Nicolaescu-Plopșor hat die Region Maramureș besucht und dort paläolithische Forschungen in Oaș/Avas (Nicolaescu-Plopșor–Kovács 1959) organisiert. So besuchte er auch mich im damals Rayonal Museum Sathmar, und sine qua non auch die Sammlung Kovács in Berea. So entstand die Idee der Grabungen des Bukarester Instituts. Dass auch das Institut von Klausenburg/Cluj (eine Rivalität) nicht auf der Strecke bleiben sollte, wurde vom Institut M. Rusu zu Forschung eingeladen und so grub er 1962 das bronzezeitliche Gräberfeld der Otomani-Kultur aus (Ordentlich–Kacsó 1970). Was das Helmgrab von Ciumești betrifft schreibt M. Rusu: „În urma aprobării Acad. Prof. C. Daicoviciu și a acordării fondurilor necesare, împreună cu V. Zirra, de la Institutul de Arheologie București și E. Kovács, de la Muzeul regional Maramureș, am efectuat o săpătură de salvare, iar în anul următor, tot în colaborare cu Muzeul regional săpăturile au continuat pînă la desvelirea aproape integrală a cimitirului…“ (Rusu–Bandula 1970 3 f., Anm. 1). In der deutschen Übersetzung des Textes und im Bericht RGK: „Nach Verständigung der zuständigen Stellen wurde eine Suchgrabung vorgenommen… „ (dies. 44); oder „Auf die Fundmeldung hin erfolgte eine Suchgrabung“ (Rusu 1971, 267). Die große Frage ist wann diese „Suchgrabung“ durchgeführt wurde, noch im Jahr 1961? Dafür gibt es keine andere Bestätigung. Wahrscheinlicher ist das Jahr 1962 (Zirra 1967, 3, Anm. 2; Németi 1999, 50, Nr. 36, Ia). Und was hat diese Kontrollgrabung oder „Suchgrabung“ gebracht, neue Kenntnisse? Darüber schweigt M. Rusu. Wenn er wirklich eine Kontrollgrabung am Fundplatz des Helmgrabes durchgeführt hat, immerhin war das ganze Gelände schon eingeebnet und die Grabgrube verschwunden hat er höchstwahrscheinlich nichts mehr gefunden. Im Jahr 1962 hat M. Rusu das bronzezeitliche Gräberfeld ausgegraben. Dank dieser Forschungen bekam er Kontakte insbesondere zum späteren Museumsdirektor in Baia Mare, O. Bandula – der selbst mit der Archäologie überhaupt nichts zu tun hatte, aber in Klausenburg studiert hatte. Um die Waagschalen im Gleichgewicht zu halten, erhielt M. Rusu den Auftrag zur Bearbeitung und Veröffentlichung des Helmgrabes, obwohl er kein Keltenforscher war, wie damals üblich war, jedoch zusammen mit dem „Arbeitgeber“, also mit O. Bandula. Dieser Auftrag, dass M. Rusu das Helmgrab zur Veröffentlichung bekommen hatte, hat Vl. Zirra weh getan. (Ich hatte damals mit ihm eine Besprechung darüber). Bei der Übergabe eines Sonderdruckes aus dem Bericht RGK, 1971 dem Verfasser dieses Beitrages im Jahr 1972 versuchte M. Rusu mir zu erklären warum er und nicht V. Zirra das Vogelgrab veröffentlicht hat. Das war nur der Anfang! Die Kelten waren in den Augen der Lokalpolitiker in Baia Mare, aber auch allgemein im Land des großen Führers, „Genius der Karpaten“ personae non gratae. Das Manuskript der Veröffentlichung des keltischen Gräberfeldes von Vl. Zirra sollte so lange in der Redaktion in Baia Mare bleiben bis die Arbeit über die dakische Funde im Gräberfeld und in der Siedlung von Ciumești von I. H. Crișan (1966) von Cluj gedruckt war. Erst danach durften die Kelten kommen, bzw. das Buch über das keltische Gräberfeld gedruckt werden und dies nicht einmal mit Erscheinungsjahr (1967). Dies ist eine traurige, unwürdige Geschichte. V. Zirra war ein ehrlicher Mann ein korrekter, sehr guter Keltenforscher und er würde es verdienen, dass der Band dieses Kolloquiums über die keltischen Bestattungen ihm gewidmet wird: In memoriam Vlad Zirra. Meine Begegnungen mit den Keltenfürsten: am Beispiel der Fürstengräber von Ciumești und Hochdorf | 311 Das Schicksal der Beigaben des Grabes Wie bereits erwähnt wurden, wurden die Beigaben der ersten Gruppe noch gegen Ende des Jahres 1961 von Frau I. Kovács gekauft und so gelangten sie ins Regionalmuseum Baia Mare. Als das Nationalmuseum für Geschichte Rumäniens entstand, wurden von den regional bzw. örtlichen Museen die wichtigsten Funde per Dekret weggenommen – die Aktion war nicht unumstritten – und nach Bukarest gebracht. Und so wanderte der Vogelhelm von Ciumești weiter in die Hauptstadt. Der Rest der Funde verblieb in Baia Mare, ebenso wie die zweite Gruppe der Beigaben im Museum Sathmar. Zum ersten Mal wurden die Beigaben des Grabes im Keltenmuseum Hochdorf Enz 1999/2000 im Rahmen der Ausstellung „Thraker und Kelten beidseits der Karpaten“ zusammen ausgestellt (Abb. 2). Zum zweiten Mal, anlässlich des 50-jährigen Jubiläums von der Entdeckung wurden die Beigaben im Bezirkmuseum Satu Mare, im Dezember 2011 ausgestellt und zum dritten Mal sollte man die Funde im Rahmen entweder in der großen Keltenausstellung in Stuttgart oder in Manching 2012/2013 zusammenstellen.6 Literatur Babeș 2001 Bader 1978 Bader 1983 Bofinger 2011 Comșa 1963 Comșa 1971 Crișan 1966 Filip 1998 Horedt 1973 Kacsó 1969 Kull 1998 Németi 1975 Németi 1997a Németi 1997b Németi 1999 Németi 2009 Ordentlich–Kacsó 1970 Păunescu 1963 6 Babeș, M., IN: Petrescu-Dîmboviţa, M.–Vulpe, Al. (ed.), Istoria Românilor, I, București. Bader, T., Epoca bronzului în nord-vestul Transilvaniei – Die Bronzezeit in Nordwestsiebenbürgen, București. Bader, T., O zăbală din a doua perioadă a epocii fierului descoperită la Ciumești, SCIVA, 35, 1, 85–90. Bofinger, J., Vor 100 Jahren Beginn einer archäologischen Großgrabung auf dem Goldberg im Nördlinger Ries, Denkmalpflege in Baden Württemberg Nachrichtenblatt der Landesdenkmalpflege, 40, 3, 155–157. Комша, Е., К вопросу о периодизации неолитических культур на северо-западе Румынской народной республики, Dacia N. S., 7, 477–484. Comșa, E., Über das Neolithikum in Westrumänien, ActaAA, 14, 31–43. Crișan, I. H., Materiale dacice din necropola și așezarea de la Ciumești și problema raporturilor dintre daci și celţi în Transilvania, Baia Mare. Filip, J., Enzyklopädisches Handbuch zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Europas, Band III, Addenda, Praha. Horedt, K., Interpretări arheologice. II 1. Cu privire la datarea cimitirului de la Ciumești, jud. Satu Mare, SCIV, 23, 2, 299–303, 309. Kacsó, C., Morminte din perioada de tranziţie spre epoca bronzului de la Ciumești, StCom Satu Mare, 1, 49–56. Kull, B., Tod und Apotheose. Zur Ikonographie in Grab und Kunst der jüngeren Eisenzeit an den unteren Donau und ihrer Bedeutung für die Interpretation von „Prunkgräbern“, BerRGK, 78, 197–466. Németi, I., Weitere Angaben über die keltischen Gräberfelder von Ciumești und Sanislău, Dacia N. S., 19, 243–248. Németi, I., Spada descoperită incidental la Ciumești (com. Sanislău), StCom Satu Mare, 14, 111–114. Németi, I., Câteva consideraţii asupra colecţiilor „Kovács”, StCom Satu Mare, 14, 63–74. Németi, J., Repertoriul arheologic al zonei Careiului, BT, XXVIII. Németi, J., Barangolások Szatmárban, Szatmárnémeti. Ordentlich, I.–Kacsó, C., Cimitirul din epoca bronzului de la Ciumești, SCIV, 21, 49–63. Пзунеску, Ал., Пережитки тарденуазкой культуры в древнем неолите в Чумешти, Dacia N. S., 7, 467–475. Auf den zweiten Teil des Vortrags, Begegnung mit dem Fürsten von Hochdorf verzichten wir hier, weil wir darüber schon in mehreren Beiträgen geschrieben haben. Wir bedanken uns für die wertvollen Ratschläge bei Dr. A. Rustoiu, Institut für Geschichte und Archäologie Cluj-Napoca. Der Text dieses Beitrages wurde von Frau Dr. S. Stork, Keltenmuseum Hochdorf lektoriert. Herzlichen Dank dafür. Taf. 1–2 und Abb. 1 Aufnahmen T. Bader, 1961, digitalisiert von Frau S. Kumfert, Landesamt für Denkmalpflege beim Regierungspräsidium Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg, Esslingen. 312 | T. Bader Păunescu 1964 Păunescu, Al., Cu privire la perioada de sfârșit a epipaleoliticului în nord-vestul și nordestul României și unele persistenţe în neoliticul vechi, SCIV, 15, 3, 321–336. Nicolaescu-Plopșor– Nicolaescu-Plopșor, C. S.–Kovács, E., Cercetările paleolitice din regiunea Baia Mare, MCA, Kovács 1959 6, 33–42. Preda 1994 Preda, C. (coord.), Enciclopedia Arheologiei și Istoriei Vechi a României, I A–C, București. Rustoiu 2008 Rustoiu, A., Războinici și societatea în aria celtică transilvăneană Studii pe marginea mormântului cu coif de la Ciumești, Cluj-Napoca. Rusu 1971 Rusu, M., Das keltische Fürstengrab von Ciumești, 50. BerRGK, 1969 (1971), 267–300. Rusu–Bandula 1970 Rusu, M.–Bandula, O., Mormântul unei căpetenii celtice de la Ciumești, Baia Mare. Schönfelder 2007a Schönfelder, M., Considérations sur les élites celtiques des IVe–IIIe s. av. J.-C., IN: Mennessier-Jouannet, C.–Adam, A.-M.–Milcent, P.-Y. (Hrsg.), La Gaule dans son context européen aux IVe et IIIe siècle avant notre ère. Actes du XXVIIe colloque international de l’AFEAF (Clermont-Ferrand, 29 mai–1er juin 2003), Lattes, 385–398. Schönfelder 2007b Schönfelder, M., Élite ou aristocrates? Les Celtes vus par les sources archéologiques, IN: Fernoux, H.-L.–Stein, C. (eds.), Aristocratie antique. Modèles et exemplarité sociale, Dijon, 11–23. Thraker 2001 Thraker und Kelten beidseits der Karpaten. Keltenmuseum Hochdorf/Enz Sonderausstellung vom 14. September – 29. April 2001, Eberdingen 2000/2001. Virag 2008 Virag, C., A Kovács gyűjtemény újkőkori és rézkori kerámiaanyaga, JAMÉ, 50, 91–159. Zirra (1967) Zirra, Vl., Un cimitir celtic în nord-vestul României, (ohne Jahr, 1967). Liste der Abbildungen Abb. 1. Ein Topf mit Fuß aus einem Gräberfeld von Ciumești, Bodrogkereszúr-Kultur. Abb. 2. 1. Das Vogelhelmgrab von Ciumești im Keltenmuseum Hochdorf; 2. Das Titelblatt des Katalogs der Ausstellung in Hochdorf mit dem Vogelhelm. Abb. 3. Plan des keltischen Gräberfeldes von Ciumești (nach V. Zirra; M. Rusu). Abb. 4. Bruchstücke des zerlegten Vogelhelms (nach Rusu–Bandula 1970). Liste der Tafeln Taf. 1. 1. Die Sathmarer Lehrergruppe in Berea, 1961 (im Vordergrund in der Mitte Pfarrer Gyula Kovács); 2. Die Gruppe mit Al. Păunescu (mit Schirmmütze); 3. Die Gruppe auf der Grabung – neolitische Siedlung; 4. Stratigraphie der Siedlung (Wandprofil). Taf. 2. 1. Das Vogelhelmgrab von Ciumești. Auf dem „Hockerli“/Hocker der Helm, die Lanzenspitze und eine Tonschale, fragmentarisch erhalten; bei den Füßen des Hockers zwei Beischienen; 2. Wie 1., noch zusätzlich: Das Panzerhemd mit der Rosette und der Hals vom Vogel; 3. Nahaufnahme mit dem Helm, der Lanzenspitze und der Tasse; 4. Der Vogelhelm. Taf. 3. 1. Helm; 2. Kettenpanzerhemd; 3. Lanzenspitze; 4. Rosette; 5. zwei Beinschienen; 6. Wangenklappe; 7. Fibelfragment; 8. Fragmente vom Kettenpanzerhemd; 9. Gürtelfragmente; 10. die Urne; 11. die Schale. Taf. 4. 1. Der Vogelhelm nach der Restaurierung; 2. Der Vogelhelm; 3. Beinschiene; 4. Lanzenspitze; 5. Rosette (2–5. nach Rusu 1971). Meine Begegnungen mit den Keltenfürsten: am Beispiel der Fürstengräber von Ciumești und Hochdorf | 313 Tafel 1. 1. Die Sathmarer Lehrergruppe in Berea, 1961 (im Vordergrund in der Mitte Pfarrer Gyula Kovács); 2. Die Gruppe mit Al. Păunescu (mit Schirmmütze); 3. Die Gruppe auf der Grabung – neolitische Siedlung; 4. Stratigraphie der Siedlung (Wandprofil). afel . . ie at marer e rer ruppe in erea im order rund in der itte Pfarrer yula Ko s . ie ruppe mit l. P unes u mit irmm t e . ie ruppe auf der ra un – neolitis e iedlun . trati rap ie der iedlun andprofil . 314 | T. Bader Tafel 2. 1. Das Vogelhelmgrab von Ciumești. Auf dem „Hockerli“/Hocker der Helm, die Lanzenspitze und eine Tonschale, fragmentarisch erhalten; bei den Füßen des Hockers zwei Beischienen; 2. Wie 1., noch zusätzlich: Das Panzerhemd mit der Rosette und der Hals vom Vogel; 3. Nahaufnahme mit dem Helm, der Lanzenspitze afel . . as o el elm ra und onder iume ti. uf dem o erli o er der elm die Tasse; 4. Der Vogelhelm. an enspit e und eine ons ale fra mentaris er alten ei den en des o ers ei eis ienen . ie . no us t li as Pan er emd mit der osette und der als om o el . a aufna me mit dem elm der an enspit e und der asse . er o el elm. Meine Begegnungen mit den Keltenfürsten: am Beispiel der Fürstengräber von Ciumești und Hochdorf | 315 5 Tafel 3. 1. Helm; 2. Kettenpanzerhemd; 3. Lanzenspitze; 4. Rosette; 5. zwei Beinschienen; 6. Wangenklappe; 7. Fibelfragment; 8. Fragmente vom Kettenpanzerhemd; 9. Gürtelfragmente; 10. die Urne; 11. die Schale. afel . . elm . Kettenpan er emd . an enspit e . osette 5. ei eins ienen . an en lappe . i elfra ment . ra mente om Kettenpan er emd . rtelfra mente . die rne . die ale. 316 | T. Bader 5 Tafel 4. 1. Der Vogelhelm nach der Restaurierung; 2. Der Vogelhelm; 3. Beinschiene; 4. Lanzenspitze; 5. Rosette (2–5. nach Rusu 1971). afel . . er o el elm na der estaurierun . er o el elm . eins iene . an enspit e 5. osette –5. na . The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves Luca-Paul PUPEZĂ National Museum of Transylvanian History Cluj-Napoca, Romania paulpupeza@yahoo.com Keywords: Celts, graves, pottery, autochthons, acculturation, assimilation The Celtic presence in the Eastern Carpathian Basin (by which we understand especially Transylvania, Banat, Crișana and Maramureș) is visible today much through the graves and less through the settlements (Sîrbu 2006, 195; Dietrich–Dietrich 2006, 20–22); though the Celtic settlements known today exceeds 100, but only 25 were identified through archaeological excavations, having just over 50 habitat complexes. The Celtic society image in this territory is outlined especially in terms of burial discoveries. The Celtic graves discovered so far exceeds 500, from over 70 sites, including both necropolis and isolated findings (Dietrich–Dietrich 2006, 22). The amount of Celtic graves seems to be large, but the data recovered are far from being complete. Most of the Eastern Carpathian Basin graves (Fig. 1) known today came from the necropolis of Pișcolt: 185 graves (Németi 1987; 1989; 1992; Zirra 1997); other identified cemeteries being much smaller: Apahida: 50 (Crișan 1971; Zirra 1976), Cepari: 13 (Roska 1944, 55–56; Crișan 1966), Ciumești: 35 (Crișan 1966; Zirra 1967), Curtuișeni: 22 (Nánási 1973; Teleagă 2008), Fântânele–La Gâţa: 29 (Vaida 2008), Orosfaia: 12 (Vaida 2000), Sanislău: 21 (Zirra 1972), Tărian: 12 (Chidioșan–Ignat 1972), or Zăuan: 5 (Matei 1978; Németi–Lakó 1993). Some necropolis that seem to have a relatively large number of graves have been just partially investigated and others, largely investigated, were just partially published, such as Fântânele–Dealul Popii, which has about 100 graves, but only 11 published (Dănilă 1978), Galaţii Bistriţei (Dănilă 1989, 115–116) or Remetea Mare with one grave published (Medeleţ 1975; Rustoiu 2008). A large number of graves came from accidental discoveries (Berecki 2006, 66–71; made only for Transylvania, the statistic shows that of the 53 Celtic funerary sites over 70% are isolated or incidental) and so their data are much about funerary inventories but less about funerary complexes. As a result, of approximately 500 Celtic graves probably half provide detailed information, grouped in 8 or 9 sites. In almost all Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic sites, necropolis or settlement, along with Celtic material local products of Early Iron Age tradition were found. The cultural group’s map of the late South-East Europe Early Iron Age has many unknowns, especially regarding the Carpathian Basin (Fig. 2). As in the case of Celtic Iron Age, late Early Iron Age image is also visible today much through the graves and less through the settlements. The most obvious 6th–5th centuries BC presence is of the so called ‘Scythian group’ (Párducz 1973), expression that covers a complex phenomenon, involving different cultural groups on a wide Central European area. In Transylvania, the Scythian group of Agathyrsi has inhumation graves (Cipău, Ciumbrud, Cristești) in the 6th century BC, but the burial rites gradually change into pit cremation (Băiţa) in the 5th century BC (Vasiliev 1980, 60, 136). The discoveries from Ocna Sibiului (Rusu–Bandula 1970, 37–39; Sîrbu 2006, 194; Rustoiu–Berecki 2012), Olteni (Cavruc–Buzea 2005; Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 317–341 318 | L.-P. Pupeză Sîrbu Et Al. 2008) or Săvârșin (Barbu–Hügel 1997, 91–92) are dated immediately before the Celtic presence, in the 5th–4th centuries BC. The connections between these early Late Iron Age findings and the late Early Iron Age Scythian group from Transylvania are hard to make. An unknown historical phenomenon or an archaeological incipient research stage could explain such a misconnection. Also, it could be a result of the lack accordance between different chronologies regarding the late Early Iron Age and the early Late Iron Age. Fig. 1. Celtic graves in the Eastern Carpathian Basin (4th–2nd c. BC). Fig. 2. Cultural groups at the end of the Early Iron Age (6th–5th c. BC). West of the Carpathian Mountains, the findings prior to the Celts are numerous, but there are also funeral discoveries for the most part. Graves and necropolis from here, dated in the 6th–5th centuries BC, belong to the Vekerzug culture, probably Thracian in origin. The north-western Transylvania cemeteries The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 319 from Curtuișeni (Nánási 1969), Ghenci (Németi 1999, 64–70), Porţ (Bejinariu–Pop 2008) or Sanislău (Németi 1972; 1982) were characterized by urn cremation graves and were assigned to a particular group of the Vekerzug culture, called ‘Sanislău–Nir’ (Németi 1978, 36–37). Sometimes the sequence between the Vekerzug culture and the Celts is obviously: near the necropolis of the Early Iron Age, a Late Iron Age necropolis was found (Curtuișeni, Sanislău). The local tradition pottery The most important Early Iron Age local tradition pottery found in the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic graves are the bitruncated cup, the cup, the truncated bowl, the bowl with everted rim, the bowl with inverted rim, the bitruncated vessel and the vessels with straight or slightly rounded profile (Pl. 3/A–F). The bitruncated cup The bitruncated cups are usually medium size, made by hand and on wheel, with one or two overrise handles, a more or less bi-conical shape and a straight or an everted rim (Pl. 1/A). The cups were well burnt, in darkish (gray, brown, black) or reddish colours, with the surface frequently covered by a black sometimes polished thin clay layer. The type’s origin is in the local Early Iron Age, when similar cups were used (Teodor 1967, 34; Vulpe 1967, 51; Crișan 1969, 48–50, 121; Moscalu 1983, 84; Németi 1988, 97, 99–100). For the late Early Iron Age such discoveries were made especially in settlements (Crișan 1969, 48). The bitruncated cups were an uncommonly presence in the 6th–5th centuries BC graves from Scythian Transylvania (Cipău, Pl. 1/I.6), the Vekerzug culture area (Chotin, Pl. 1/I.1, 5; Sanislău, Pl. 1/I.3) or the east and south of the Carpathians (Ferigile, Pl. 1/I.2, 4). Beyond bitruncated cups generally features, small differences in handle shape, ornamentation, working technique and even profile variations can be noticed. The use of strongly curved cups seems to be frequent, at some exemplars the bitruncated shape being hardly visible. The decoration consists of round buttons or conic protuberances and incised or stamped circles following different patterns. Some handles were vertically or obliquely deeply incised to create the impression of a twisted or a doubled handle. The bitruncated cups have the most consistent presence of all local tradition pottery found in Celtic graves (Pl. 2): Aiud (Pl. 1/III.14), Apahida (Pl. 1/III.15–20), Blandiana (Pl. 1/III.21, 22), Blaj (Pl. 1/III.23), Ciumești (Pl. 1/III.24–27), Cluj–Mănăștur (Pl. 1/III.28), Curtuișeni (Pl. 2/1–4), Derșida (Pl. 2/5), Dindești (Zirra 1972, 171–174, fig. 10/6), Fântânele–La Gâţa (Pl. 2/6), Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Pl. 2/7, 8), Galaţii Bistriţei (Pl. 2/9), Ghenci (Crișan 1966, 67–71, fig. 28/3), Mediaș (Pl. 2/10), Papiu Ilarian (Pl. 2/11), Pișcolt (Pl. 2/12–16), Pruniș (Pl. 2/17), Sanislău (Pl. 2/18–20), Șeica Mică (Pl. 2/21), Tărian (Pl. 2/22), Zăuan (Pl. 2/23). The cups were found both in cremation and inhumation graves. Of Ciumești necropolis 35 identified graves 10 had local tradition pottery, 9 with bitruncated cups. At Curtuișeni the cups appeared in 6 of all 22 graves, those with local pottery being 8. In 35 graves from Pișcolt the bitruncated cups were discovered, sometimes two in the same complex. In the Apahida necropolis bitruncated cups were found in 9 of the 24 Orosz collection graves, but none in the 21 graves investigated by I. Kovács, where in fact no other type of local tradition pottery was found. The bitruncated cups were also absent from Cepari, Fântânele or Tărian Celtic cemeteries and from the local necropolis of Olteni. Significant Late Iron Age discoveries were made also in settlements such as Morești (Berecki 2008, pl. 26/8; 27/1; 47/6) or Seușa (Ferencz 2007, pl. LXXXV), the bitruncated cups being used primarily for drinking (Pupeză 2010, 130–132). The large exemplars with curved walls and long necks were used probably for pouring and storing liquids (Florea 1997, 93). In graves the bitruncated cups were most likely used for liquid offerings; some cups were found grouped together with other offering pots, even other Celtic vessels for liquids. The bitruncated cups have not served as funerary urns or as urns cover in Celtic graves, as was the case for some contemporary Thracian graves outside the Carpathian Arch (Canlia, Pl. 1/ II.7–8; Zimnicea, Pl. 1/II.9–13). In terms of chronology, the bitruncated cups appear in the earliest Late Iron Age graves and continue to be used until the end of the Celtic presence in the Carpathian Basin. The cups morphological features do not provide important chronological issues. For example, some cups from Ciumești necropolis are close in shape and ornamentation to the Early Iron Age cups, but their dating is relatively late (3rd–2nd centuries BC). Regarding the handmade / wheel-thrown chronological rate, it is probably correct to assume that the oldest cups were made by hand, according to Early Iron Age tradition. The situation at Pișcolt 320 | L.-P. Pupeză seems to prove this sequence: in the necropolis first phase the handmade cups were mostly in use, along with some wheel-thrown cups, their number increasing after the second phase. The handmade to wheelthrown evolution is easily noticed outside the Carpathian Arch: in the 3rd–2nd centuries BC handmade cups were mostly in use, then, in the beginning of the 1st century BC, the wheel-thrown cups were increasing in number and replacing some handmade cup types that are disappearing (Crișan 1969, 118–124). In these processes two differences can be notice, beyond the chronological disproportion: the wheel-thrown bitruncated cups in the Carpathian Basin are numerous in the 3rd–2nd centuries BC but sporadic outside the Carpathian Arch, and in the Celtic area was a preference for blackish colour wheel-thrown cups while in the Thracian territories the wheel-thrown cups were mostly gray. Analogies outside the Carpathian Arch dated between the 4th century and the beginning of the 1st century BC are known fom Bordușani (Trohani 2006, pl. 50/8; 79/1); Brad (Ursachi 1995, pl. 55/9; 97/14; 98/18); Canlia (Boroffka–Trohani 2003, fig. 15/10; 16/1; 8); Ciolăneștii din Deal (Petrescu-Dîmboviţa 1974, fig. 1/4–6); Ciurea (Babeș 1993, Taf. 30/21); Enisala (Simion 1971, fig. 18e; 31c); Glăvănești (Babeș 1993, Taf. 27/11); Grădiștea (Sîrbu 1996, pl. 35/3; 59/2–4; 78/2); Gropșani (Popilian–Nica 1998, pl. 44/1); Pleașov (Preda 1986, pl. 11/2; 22/4); Poiana (Vulpe–Teodor 2003, fig. 162/5; 163/4); Vlădiceasca (Trohani 1976, pl. 11/1; 13/3, 5–6); Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, C10M61, fig. 26/3; C10M108, fig. 39/3; C10M112, fig. 25/8; C14M1, fig. 25/6). The cup Used mostly for drinking, the simple cups were smaller than bitruncated cups, sometimes similar in shape (Pl. 1/B). In generally, the cups have round walls, a large opening and one or two overraised handles. The handmade exemplars, conical, with slightly rounded or straight walls, can be directly related to Early Iron Age over-raised handle cups (Crișan 1969, 43–48, 84; Moscalu 1983, 80; Németi 1988, 99). During the Early Iron Age, the simple cups were spread over a wide area in various types (Vulpe 1967, 44–49). Cups were found frequently in 6th–5th centuries BC Scythian graves inside the Carpathian Arch (Cipău, Pl. 3/B.2), sometimes in two or three exemplars (Vasiliev 1979, 54–57; Vasiliev 1980, 68–69). In the Vekerzug culture necropolis, at Chotin (Pl. 3/B.4–5), Ghenci (Pl. 3/B.6) or Sanislău (Pl. 3/B.3) and in the Thracian area outside the Carpathian Arch, e.g. Ferigile (Pl. 3/B.1) the cups had also a consistent presence. Despite the fact that the cups covered the whole Eastern Carpathian Basin (Pl. 3/A), it was not a commonly used type during the Late Iron Age. Analogies outside the Carpathian Arch between the 4th and the beginning of the 1st century BC can be mentioned from Bordușani (Trohani 2006, pl. 126/1); Canlia (Boroffka–Trohani 2003, fig. 7/7); Vlădiceasca (Trohani 1976, pl. 17/3); Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, C10M55, fig. 28/6; C10M108, fig. 28/11). In Celtic environment they appear sporadically both in settlements, as Ciumești (Zirra 1980, pl. XI/12), and in Celtic necropolis as Cepari (Pl. 3/D.11), Ciumești (Pl. 3/D.12–14), Curtuișeni (Pl. 3/D.15), Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Pl. 3/D.17–18), Fântânele–La Gâţa (Pl. 3/D.16), Orosfaia (Pl. 3/D.19), Pișcolt (Pl. 3/D.20–23), Sanislău (Pl. 3/D.24). At Pișcolt the simple cup appears in 9 graves, once in two exemplars, but no such cups were discovered at Ciumești or Apahida. The Dacian cup, truncated in shape and with one handle, is totally missing from the Celtic graves but is present in the Thracian areas outside the Carpathian Arch since the 2nd century BC, e.g. Zimnicea (Pl. 3/C.10). One of the earliest Dacian cup exemplars was found in the settlement from Schela Cladovei (Mehedinţi county), dated at the beginning of 2nd century BC; the local materials was mix with Celtic and Greek materials (Boroneanţ–Davidescu 1968, 253–259). In Celtic graves the simple cups were most likely used for liquid offerings, the same usage as in the Thracian contemporary necropolis outside the Carpathian Arch, at Canlia (Pl. 3/C.9) or Zimnicea (Pl. 3/C.7–8). In one case from Pișcolt the cup was used as a funeral urn in a cremation grave of a child (Németi 1988, 61, fig. 9/M198). Bowls with inverted rim The bowls with inverted rim are the most numerous Early Iron Age tradition bowls from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic necropolis and settlements. The inverted rim toward interior create a small ‘shoulder’ in the wall’s profile, easily curved or even straight (Pl. 1/D) (Crișan 1969, 52–53, 114–116; Moscalu 1983, 70–77, 111–119; Németi 1988, 95, 100). The bowls were made mostly by hand, but not exclusively, and had the rim rounded or straight. The rare ornaments consist of buttons and vertical or oblique ribs. The bowl with inverted rim was a common Early Iron Age type with a long period of use; The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 321 it was almost similar in shape with the Late Iron Age bowls (Vulpe 1967, 38–39; Crișan 1969, 52–53). This type of bowl was present in Scythian Transylvania at Ciumbrud (Pl. 4/B.3–4), in Vekerzug culture at Chotin (Pl. 4/B.1) and Sanislău (Pl. 4/B.2) and also in the Thracian area east and south of the Carpathians at Ferigile (Pl. 4/B.5–6). In the settlements such as Berea (Zirra 1980, pl. XLIII/2), Florești (Pupeză 2008, pl. VI/5; VII/4; XVIII/1, 4–5; XII/1–3), Morești (Berecki 2008, pl. 14/5; 25/11) or Zalău (Pop–Pupeză 2006, pl. III, fig. 2/3) the bowls were primarily use in food serving or in food preserving. In the Celtic graves (Pl. 4/A), the bowls with inverted rim were used mostly for sacrificial goods: Apahida (Pl. 4/C.7), Cepari (Pl. 4/C.8– 9), Cristuru Secuiesc (Pl. 4/C.10), Curtuișeni (Pl. 4/C.11), Galaţii Bistriţei (Dănilă 1955, fig. 7/1, 3; Crișan 1966, 66–67, fig. 27/1, 3), Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Pl. 4/C.12–14), Pișcolt (Pl. 4/C.15–17), Pruniș (Pl. 4/C.18–20), Tărian (Pl. 4/C.21) and Zăuan (Pl. 4/C.22–23). The bowls with inverted rim were not as numerous as the Celtic bowls with similar utilities. At Ciumești, Orosfaia or Sanislău this type of bowl do not appear at all, while at Apahida or Tărian only one exemplar was found. At Pișcolt 15 graves had bowls with inverted rim and in 13 of them the bowls were certainly used for sacrificial goods. Occasionally, the bowls were used to cover the urns in Celtic necropolis as in the local necropolis from Olteni (Pl. 4/D.27–29) or in the Thracian world outside the Carpathian Arch, at Canlia (Pl. 4/D.25–26) or Zimnicea (Pl. 4/D.24, 30). At Olteni (Sîrbu Et Al. 2008, fig. 9/1, 7) and Canlia (Boroffka–Trohani 2003, fig. 17/10) some bowls were used as funerary urns. A few Celtic bowls were used as funerary urns, but inverted rim bowls with such a utility were not yet discovered in Celtic cemeteries. Found both in inhumation and in incineration graves, the bowls with inverted rim covered the entire Carpathian Basin. This type of bowl has a more consistent presence in the Celtic graves early phases and then is decreasing. The same evolution is visible in the Thracian world outside the Carpathian Arch (Pupeză 2010, 136–137). Analogies outside the Carpathian Arch for the period between the 4th century and the beginning of the 1st century BC can be mentioned from Bordușani (Trohani 2006, pl. 99/27); Bunești (Bazarciuc 1979, 35); Coţofenii din Dos (Zirra Et Al. 1993, 146–147); Cucorăni (Teodor 1975, pl. 21/5); Davideni (Babeș 1993, Taf. 23/20); Glăvănești (Babeș 1993, Taf. 27/15); Iaz (Bona–Rogozea 1986, 439–441); Murighiol (Bujor 1957, 250) or Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, C17M31, fig. 34/6; C17M41, fig. 23/17, 22). Bowls with everted rim The bowls with everted rim were made mostly by hand and were similar in shape with the 2nd century BC–1st century AD Dacian fruit bowls (Pl. 1/C); the two types can be easily confused especially when the lower parts of the pots are missing (Teodor 1967, 37; Crișan 1969, 114–116; Moscalu 1983, 77–78, 122–123). The wall was first inverted toward the interior, as in the previous type ‘shoulder’ making, and then the rim is everted toward the exterior. When the ‘shoulder’ is easily curved or not well defined, the bowl becomes suppler, like a truncated or a curved wall bowl, closer in shape to some Celtic bowls. The type’s origin was in the local Early Iron Age, rooted in the local late Bronze Age or on a possible foreign Early Iron Age model (Vulpe 1967, 41–44; Crișan 1969, 53–54, 116). In the late Early Iron Age the bowls with everted rim were numerous in the Thracian world outside the Carpathian Arch (Ferigile: Pl. 5/B.4; Isaccea: Pl. 5/B.2–3), but rare in Scythian Transylvania (Vasiliev 1980, 67) or in the Vekerzug culture (Chotin: Pl. 5/B.1). In the Late Iron Age the bowls with everted rim have also a rare apparition (Pl. 5/A), in both settlements, as Morești (Berecki 2008, pl. 21/1, 5–6; 41/1–2; 47/8), and necropolis as Arad–Gai (Pl. 5/C.5), Ciumești (Pl. 5/C.6–8), Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Pl. 5/C.9), Pișcolt (Pl. 5/C.10–11) and Valea lui Mihai (Pl. 5/C.12). In the Celtic graves the bowls were use for sacrificial goods or as a cover for the funeral urn, the last situation being the most common in the local Thracian graves, inside (Olteni: Pl. 5/D.16) or outside of the Carpathian Arch (Canlia: Pl. 5/D.13–15; Zimnicea: Pl. 5/D.17–18). Because of the few exemplars, there are no certain chronological and space spreading information about the bowls with everted rim. Outside the Carpathian Arch, the bowls with everted rim were mostly used in the 3rd and 2nd century BC, and then their number was decreasing (Pupeză 2010, 138–139). Analogies outside the Carpathian Arch for the 4th century and the beginning of the 1st century BC can be mentioned from Brad (Ursachi 1995, pl. 58/2–3); Bordușani (Trohani 2006, 97/15; 99/28); Ciurea (Teodor 1987, fig. 8/4; Babeș 1993, Taf. 30/29); Cucorăni (Teodor 1975, pl. 33/9; Babeș 1993, Taf. 21/46, 55–56); Gropșani (Popilian–Nica 1998, pl. 38/1; 39/3; 44/2); Vlădiceasca (Trohani 1976, pl. 18/5, 7); Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, C10M115, fig. 23/21; C18M31, fig. 34/2). 322 | L.-P. Pupeză Truncated bowls Usually made by hand, the bowls of this type have a simple truncated shape, hence the name, and a rounded rim. Some exemplars have an elongated S-shape profile, with easily defined curves. The type’s origin is the local Early Iron Age; this period truncated bowls were almost similar in shape (Vulpe 1967, 39–40; Moscalu 1983, 73–74). The truncated bowls were well spread in the Early Iron Age, especially in the early phases, but such bowls rarely appear in late graves, in the Vekerzug culture at Chotin (Pl. 6/B.1) or Sanislău (Pl. 6/B.2) or in the Thracian world outside Carpathian Arch at Ferigile (Pl. 6/B.3). The truncated bowls were mostly found in Late Iron Age settlements, at Ciumești (Zirra 1980, pl. XXXV/3, 10; XLII/4), Florești (Pupeză 2008, pl. XXIII/4) or Zalău (Pop–Pupeză 2006, pl. III, fig. 2/1; 4/6) for examples, but in just a few Celtic cemeteries: Apahida (Pl. 6/D.7–8), Arad–Gai (Pl. 6/D.9), Pișcolt (Németi 1988, fig. 8/M187), Pruniș (Pl. 6/D.10), Tărian (Pl. 6/D.11–12). The bowls were probably use for sacrificial goods, both in inhumation and in cremation graves (Pl. 6/A). In local contemporary necropolis outside the Carpathian Arch (Canlia: Pl. 6/C.4–5; Zimnicea: Pl. 6/C.6), the truncated bowls were used for sacrificial goods too but also as funerary urn covers. In one case from Olteni, a truncated bowl was used as a funerary urn (Sîrbu Et Al. 2008, 194). Analogies outside the Carpathian Arch between the 4th century and the beginning of the 1st century BC are known from Botoșana (Teodor 1980, pl. 21/2); Brad (Ursachi 1995, pl. 57/1); Enisala (Simion 1977, pl. 9/c); Pleașov (Preda 1986, pl. 13/2) and Vlădiceasca (Trohani 1976, pl. 11/2). No certain chronological and space spreading conclusion can be made about the truncated bowls, because of the few exemplars found. In the Thracian world outside the Carpathian Arch, the decorated truncated bowls seems to be numerous in the 4th–3rd centuries BC and then the type will disappear in the 1st century BC (Pupeză 2010, 136). Bitruncated vessels Vessels of this type have a bitruncated shape, an everted or an upright rim and a straight bottom (Pl. 3/E). Some exemplars have an elongated cylindrical neck or the walls easily curved, almost not bitruncated at all. Most of the bitruncated vessels were made by hand and were decorated with round buttons or conic protuberances, usually in the maximum curvature area. The bitruncated vessels originate in the Early Iron Age, when this type had a remarkable frequency in all south-west Europe, regardless of ethnic territories characteristics (Vulpe 1967, 51–52; Crișan 1969; Vasiliev 1980, 62–67; Moscalu 1983, 15). Relevant Early Iron Age discoveries were made in the Scythian Transylvania at Cipău (Pl. 7/B.5–6), in the Vekerzug culture at Chotin (Pl. 7/B.1–2) and Sanislău (Pl. 7/B.3–4) but also in the Thracian area outside the Carpathians, at Ferigile (Pl. 7/B.7–8). In the Late Iron Age settlements such as Ciumești (Crișan 1966, fig. 13/10; Zirra 1980, pl. XXXV/11), Morești (Berecki 2008, pl. 32/5; 40/5) or Zalău (Pop–Pupeză 2006, pl. II, fig. 2/1, 6–7), the bitruncated vessels were used for storing and probably the small ones for cooking. In Celtic graves (Pl. 7/A), bitruncated vessels were used more for sacrificial goods and less as funerary urn: Apahida (Pl. 6/E.13), Cepari (Crișan 1966, fig. 25/4), Ciumești (Pl. 6/E.2; 7/D.12), Dezmir (Pl. 6/E.15), Fântânele– Dealul Popii (Pl. 6/E.16–17; 7/D.15), Fântânele–La Gâţa (Pl. 7/D.13–14), Orosfaia (Pl. 7/D.16–17), Pișcolt (Pl. 7/D.18–19), Pruniș (Pl. 7/D.20), Sanislău (Pl. 7/D.21–22), Tărian (Pl. 7/D.23), Zăuan (Pl. 7/D.24). In the Thracian world outside the Carpathian Arch the situation seems to be reversed: the bitruncated vessels were used more as funerary urn and less for sacrificial goods at Canlia (Pl. 7/C.9) or Zimnicea (Pl. 7/C.10–11). Analogies outside the Carpathian Arch between the 4th century and the beginning of the 1st century BC are known from Brad (Ursachi 1995, pl. 51/6); Canlia (Boroffka–Trohani 2003, fig. 22/10), Ciolăneștii din Deal (Petrescu-Dîmboviţa 1974, fig. 1/1–2); Ciurea (Teodor 1987, fig. 8/1); Glăvănești (Babeș 1993, Taf. 28/8); Gropșani (Popilian–Nica 1998, pl. 46/3); Vlădiceasca (Trohani 1976, pl. 10/6); Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, C10M115, fig. 21/9; C10M55, fig. 20/5; C17M41, fig. 22/2). The bitruncated vessels keep almost unchanged their shape during the Late Iron Age, so no certain chronological issues can be made. As a general tendency, the curving of the walls and the reducing in size could be noticed (Pupeză 2010, 140–141). Vessels with straight or slightly rounded profile Usually made by hand, the vessel with straight or slightly rounded profile is considered to be the prototype of 1st century BC–1st century AD Dacian jar-vessel (Crișan 1969, 107; Moscalu 1983, 44–45). The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 323 As shown by its name, the vessels have a straight or a slightly rounded profile, a wide opening and a rounded rim (Pl. 1/F). The large size vessels were named bell-vessels or sack-vessels because of the shape similarities with a bell or a sack (Berciu 1957, 90; Teodor 1967, 27; Crișan 1969, 70–72; Moscalu 1983, 57–69). The ornamentation consists of alveolar belts, round buttons or conic protuberances, placed in the upper side of the vessel, sometimes close to the rim. The vessel’s origin was in the Early Iron Age (Vulpe 1967, 52–53; Crișan 1969, 58–59, 107; Moscalu 1983, 44–45, 62–65), its spread being similar of the bitruncated vessel: in the Scythian Transylvania at Ciumbrud (Pl. 8/B.1), in the Vekerzug culture at Chotin (Pl. 8/B.2), Ghenci (Pl. 8/B.3), Sanislău (Pl. 8/B.5–6) and in the Thracian area outside the Carpathian Arch at Ferigile (Pl. 8/B.7–8) and Isaccea (Pl. 8/B.4). In the Late Iron Age settlements from Berea (Zirra 1980, pl. XLV/5), Ciumești (Zirra 1980, pl. XXX/4; XXXIV/12), Florești (Pupeză 2008, pl. V/4, 12; X/8; XXI/7, 8, 11), Morești (Berecki 2008, pl. 14/4; 42/3), Seușa (Ferencz–Ciută 2000, pl. XI/2) or Zalău (Pop–Pupeză 2006, pl. II; fig. 1/5; 2/2; pl. III; fig. 2/4; 3/1; 5/4) the vessels with straight or slightly rounded profile were used especially for storing. In the Celtic graves (Pl. 8/A) such vessels were used for sacrificial goods and rare as funerary urn: Apahida (Pl. 8/D.15), Cepari (Crișan 1966, fig. 25/8), Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Pl. 8/D.16–17), Galaţii Bistriţei (Dănilă 1955, fig. 7/2, 5; Crișan 1966, 66–67, fig. 27/2, 5) and Pișcolt (Pl. 8/D.18–24). As was the case of the bitruncated vessels, in the Thracian world outside the Carpathian Arch the situation seems to be reversed: the vessels with straight or slightly rounded profile were used more as funerary urn and less for sacrificial goods at Canlia (Pl. 8/C.9–10) or Zimnicea (Pl. 8/C.13–14). In the local necropolis from Olteni the same situation can be noticed (Pl. 8/C.11–12). Analogies outside the Carpathian Arch, between the 4th century and beginning of the 1st century BC can be mentioned from Borniș (Teodor 1984, pl. 8/1), Botoșana (Teodor 1980, pl. 17/6; 18/5; 21/1, 6), Canlia (Boroffka– Trohani 2003, fig. 7/1, 5; 8/9; 9/2; 10/2; 12/1, 3, 8; 17/6, 8, 12; 23/2, 5, 7), Ciurea (Teodor 1987, fig. 11/2); Cucorăni (Teodor 1975, pl. 23/7); Enisala (Simion 1971, fig. 17a; 23a; 24c; 28c), Gropșani (Popilian–Nica 1998, pl. 38/2; 39/4), Pleașov (Preda 1986, pl. 7/1–4); Poiana (Vulpe–Teodor 2003, fig. 152/1); Satu Nou (Irimia 1983, fig. 5/4; 6/1; 15/1), Vlădiceasca (Trohani 1976, pl. 11/8), Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, 19/6, 10). The vessels with straight or slightly rounded profile keep almost unchanged their shape in the 3rd–2nd centuries BC. In the Thracian area outside the Carpathian Arch, after the end of the 2nd century BC these types of vessels were slowly replaced by jar-vessels (Crișan 1969, 109). Statistical observations Local Iron Age tradition pottery was found in all major Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic cemeteries (Appendix 1), but their proportion is difficult to establish. The local pottery types appeared at Ciumești in 10 of all 35 graves, that means 30% of the identified graves, but the actual proportion among all pottery found in necropolis do not exceeding 20%. At Pișcolt the local pottery was found in 69 of the 185 graves investigated (37%), consisting of about 90 vessels, namely 30% of all 300 found vessels. The similar proportion was at Curtuișeni, the local pottery reaching about 22% of all 40 vessels discovered, and at Tărian, reaching around 30%. The local pottery from Sanislău exceeds just 10%, but many graves were destroyed by modern interventions in this site. Most local Iron Age tradition types were manufactured by hand, the bitruncated vessels and the vessels with straight or slightly rounded profile almost exclusively. The bitruncated cup was of all local types the most frequently made on wheel, followed by the simple cups and bowls. Due to many factors a handmade / wheel-thrown pottery real proportion is hard to make. Obviously, the handmade pottery surpasses the wheel-thrown pottery, being probably around 80% or 90% of all. The bitruncated cup was by far the most present local Iron Age tradition type in the Celtic graves. At Pișcolt the bitruncated cup was found in 36 graves, meaning almost 10% of all pottery; other local types were present in a less quantity, not exceeding 3–4%. An identical situation was at Ciumești, despite the smaller number of graves: the bitruncated cups were 10% of all pottery and other types were less represented or not at all. At Curtuișeni the bitruncated cups represented 13% of all pottery found. The absences in several cemeteries of one local pottery type or another can be explained to some point by an early stage of archaeological research, but sometimes the data are enough to assume other reasons. Aside perhaps from bitruncated cup, there are many types with similar utilities to the local pottery in the Celtic repertoire, and these types seem to be preferred along the others. The use of one type or another could be linked to some funerary customs or ritual rules. If so, the situation of the bitruncated cup – very 324 | L.-P. Pupeză present in cemeteries but almost totally missing from the settlements – can be better understand. The most obvious case is from Ciumești, where 12 bitruncated cups were found in the necropolis but none in the 8 complexes investigated in the settlement. Probably this type compensated a lack in the Celtic pottery repertoire; it was appropriate for some funerary rituals and played an important role in funeral banquet. The local pottery was found both in cremation and incineration graves. The situation from Tărian, where local pottery appeared only in cremation graves, was probably an exception. Neither in terms of pottery types can’t a specific preference for a funeral rite be noticed. The lack of funeral grave goods systematization makes even more difficult such an award. At Pișcolt, from one phase to another, an attempt of such systematization was seen, by three types repeating (big pot, bowl, drinking vessel), but it was rather a utilitarian repetition then a morphological one (Németi 1992, 109). The local pottery spread in the Late Iron Age in the region was relatively uniform. The differences between Transylvania and the west Carpathians areas reflect less an historical fact and more a stage of archaeological research: the graves discovered so far are more numerous in the west. In terms of chronology, the local pottery was found in all Celtic cemeteries phases. However, their number and typological evolution along different chronological phases is difficult to establish. Most of the Celtic cemeteries are dated relatively large, without phases or sub-phases clearly identified; the inside data about the evolution of a pottery type or another are almost impossible to obtain in such circumstances. One of the few examples that provide such inside detailed information is the Pișcolt necropolis. In the first phase, the local pottery was found in 44% of all graves, the effective proportion of the local pottery among all found pottery being about 43%. In the second phase the graves proportion with local pottery remained almost unchanged, 41%, but the amount of local pottery drops at 34%. In the last phases the graves with local pottery were slightly reduced at 36%, while the pottery proportion was just 22%. Obviously, these proportions were influenced by the relative data of the study (just mentioned and not recovered vessels, uncertain types, incomplete complexes, etc.). Nevertheless, a few observations can be made. The local pottery graves number seems to be constant, around 35–40% of all graves. In contrast, the local pottery proportion was certainly smaller from one phase to another. The only one pottery type with an ascendant evolution was the bitruncated cup. To conclude the local pottery chapter, an observation should be made: apart of the ceramic products the other local materials are almost entirely missing from the Celtic graves. The Thracian fibulae had a rare apparition in both settlements and cemeteries (Zirra 1998, 34–44), just a few silver coins were discovered in funerary contexts (Dietrich–Dietrich 2006, 32–35) and the Thracian jewellery were sporadically found in cemeteries (Rustoiu 2008, 25–44). Autochthons and allogens The main question raised by local Iron Age tradition pottery from the Celtic graves is who’s behind the production and the use of such vessels. The easiest scenario is to assume that behind these vessels are the Dacians or the Daco-Getians, local population found by the Celts at their arrival in the Eastern Carpathian Basin, population that later will cohabit with the newcomers. Therefore, the Celtic graves local pottery could be the direct result of this cohabitation (Crișan 1966). Viewed in detail, this scenario has many inconveniences. The local pottery undoubtedly proves that in the region a Thracian population was present when in the 4th century BC the Celts arrived. But, before consider this population as Dacian or Daco-Getian, some historical and terminological nuances should be made. The use for a large territory of the term ‘Dacian’ in ancient literary Roman or Greek sources was a late 1st century BC phenomenon (the first mention of the Dacians was made in the 1st century BC by Caesar in De bello Gallico, V.25.2 and the earliest event involving the Dacians was mentioned by Frontinus in Stratagemata, II.4.3 for the end of the 2nd century BC or the beginning of the 1st century BC). Somehow, it is an echo in the ancient literary sources of the unifying process that took place north of the Danube in beginning of the 1st centuries BC and ended with a powerful Dacian kingdom in the 1st century AD. In this late generalization process is very difficult to establish the real meaning of the ethnic term Dacian, what it designate in the 3rd or 2nd century BC and where it could be geographically circumscribed. In many ways, the same phenomenon happened for the term ‘Celt’ or ‘Gaul’ that initially designate a small tribe and then was generalized by Romans or Greeks for a larger territory, covering different tribes (Kruta 2000, 21). The term ‘Daco-Getian’ is a modern historiography creation; it should be used rather when general references regarding large Thracian territories are made (Vulpe 1998, 2–12, with further bibliography), The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 325 than ethnic attributions. In such circumstances, the use of terms Dacian or Daco-Getian for the 3rd–2nd centuries BC Carpathian Basin should be made with caution: first term is related to a later historical phenomenon and the second is a much later historiographic creation. It is preferable not to use a personal name for the locals but a neutral term as ‘autochthons’, opposed to ‘allogens’ for the newcomers. By autochthonous the sum of all local Iron Age tradition elements would be understand, regardless of the particular regional characteristics. The bitruncated vessels, the cups or the bowls with inverted rim were found in the late fist Iron Age Scythian Transylvania, in the Vekerzug culture and in the Thracian world outside the Carpathian Arch. When arrived in the Carpathian Basin the Celts made first contact with the population behind the Vekerzug culture so it was initially assumed that most of the local influences came from here (Zirra 1975; Németi 2010, 185–186). However, in this research stage, given the uniformity spread of local pottery types in the early Late Iron Age and the common Thracian origin of those, it is difficult to assume witch cultural group had the strongest influences over the Celts. The same moderate assumptions should be made for other local influences over the Celts, such as the funerary rite customs. Almost 60% of all Celtic graves discovered so far in the Eastern Carpathian Basins are of pit cremation (Dietrich–Dietrich 2006; Berecki 2006, 54–56). The Celtic cremation was attributed to local influences, especially of the Vekerzug culture Sanislău–Nir group. Viewed in detail, this scenario has also many inconveniences. The local Thracian population funerary rite at the end of the Early Iron Age was indeed cremation, but almost exclusively it was urn cremation; so was the case of Sanislău– Nir group, the late Scythian Transylvania or of the outside Carpathian Arch cultural groups. Furthermore, the Thracians will continue to use this rite during the Late Iron Age, outside (Canlia, Enisala, Isaccea, Zimnicea) or inside (Olteni, Săvârșin) the Carpathian Arch. In fact, over 90% of all 5th–2nd centuries’ Thracian graves north of the Danube were of urn cremation (Sîrbu 1993, 41–42). In the Celtic cemeteries of the region urn cremation represented around 5–10% of all graves discovered so far (Berecki 2006, 54–56): 7% at Pișcolt, 20% at Ciumești, 3% at Fântânele–La Gâţa and 6% at Sanislău. At Pișcolt the urn cremation graves were constant from one phase to another, so is difficult to identify a moment when a local influence took place; also in just 6 of all 12 urn cremation graves pottery of local tradition was found. However, the difference between the urn cremation proportion in the Thracian and in the Celtic world was huge. The incineration rite in the central and western Celtic Europe is documented since the 5th–4th centuries BC, when the most numerous graves were of inhumation. But, in some areas like Bohemia or Moravia the incineration prevailed in this period, presumably under the autochthonous influence. Thus, the Celts knew the incineration before they arrived in the Carpathian Basin. Moreover, from the 3rd century BC the incineration becomes the predominant rite in the whole Celtic world (Kruta 2000, 679). Although some influences may not be excluded, the Celtic cremation and the local Thracian cremation were essentially different. Beyond the statistical information, another important element must be taken into account. The ancient cemeteries were images of the living society, images often distorted from reality. The deceased did not buried themselves, they are put in the grave by community’s members. The funeral was an event organized by the living for the living and was less about the deceased and more about its death impact on the living. So, the deceased image as it appears in the grave does not reflect his real life but the way he was seen by the community (Parker Pearson 1999, 3–20; Hakenbeck 2004, 1–6; McCarthy 2004, 25–39). The cemeteries are a sum of all this dead individual imagines, framed together in a community’s images of itself. The end result was a self built image and not a real one. To draw the real image of the Celtic society a comparison between the cemeteries and afferent settlements need to be done. Unfortunately, there are just a few examples in the Carpathian Basin where both the necropolis and the afferent settlement were discovered. One such case is from Ciumești. Regarding the local pottery, a comparison between the Ciumești necropolis and settlement, revealed some important differences. As mentioned before, the local pottery proportion among all pottery does not exceed 20%. In the settlement the local pottery exceed 40% overall and in some complexes even 50% (Zirra 1980). The local Iron Age tradition pottery had a significant presence in the Celtic settlements, often around 40–50% of all ceramic material. In the cemeteries this proportion was at half, just around 20–25%. If from this equation the bitruncated cups found in cemeteries are removed, because of its special situation, the disproportion between the cemeteries local pottery and the habitat complexes local pottery was even greater. In other words, the community members that use local pottery are less visible in death than in everyday life. 326 | L.-P. Pupeză A specific funerary pottery that could provide an obvious explanation to such differences was missing from the Celtic graves; other causes must be searched. One possible cause could have a profoundly utilitarian character. If initially the autochthons were behind the local pottery production and use, after the Celts arrival this monopoly was not necessarily to continue. The Celts probably assumed the mostly handmade autochthonous pottery to complete their repertoire of mostly wheel-thrown pottery. For cooking the handmade vessels were better than the wheel-thrown ones, and many of the local pottery had this primer utility. It is possible that the Celts continue to manufacture those handmade types because their obvious efficiency. In fact, except the situla, the Carpathian Basin Celtic pottery was rarely made by hand, a sign perhaps that the local pottery responded well to the current needs. Only when a local type had no correspondent in Celtic pottery repertoire, such as the bitruncated cup, it was made large-scale on wheel. This utilitarian perspective was visible especially in the settlements; when the Celts who made and used local pottery were buried a more traditional way that includes specific Celtic pottery was chosen. Maybe the Celts from the Carpathian Basin were pragmatic in life but conservators in death. An acculturation phenomenon could offer a reverse explanation of the different local pottery proportion in settlements and cemeteries. The influences between the autochthons and the allogens were mutual (Zirra 1975), but no doubt that the Celts were the dominant power in the 3rd–2nd centuries BC. In these conditions, some autochthons could try to build for themselves a Celtic image; the taking of the dominant image by the dominated is one of the key features of an acculturation phenomenon. The graves with mixed material, Celtic and local, could be a direct result of this image building by the autochthons. The Celtic cemeteries graves that have only local pottery were just a few and in most of the graves Celtic material was found too. Part of this phenomenon could be also the fact that in the early Celtic graves local pottery was rarely associated with weapons; then their number is increasing (Appendix 1). It could be an example of an interdiction transformed in acceptance. If the acculturation phenomenon was real, the Carpathian Basin territories originally inhabited by the autochthons follow probably two distinct directions. In the territories ruled effectively by the Celts (Crișana, north-western and central Transylvania, northern Banat, Mureș valley, Bistriţa Depression) the autochthons seems to be ‘celtised’ and lose gradually their specific ethnic features. The situation from Pișcolt where the local pottery constantly decreases from one phase to another might prove some autochthons assimilation in the Celtic society. In the territories where the Celtic influence was small, autochthonous features might have been preserved. But these particular Eastern Carpathian Basin areas are difficult to identify, if they really existed. These areas (Maramureș, southern Transylvania, southern Banat, and some eastern Carpathians Depressions) were presumed especially because the Celtic material was missing and not because the autochthonous material abound. An indirect argument of these areas autochthonous character was given by the fact that one of the most important Dacian sites from the 1st century BC–1st century AD developed here. However, an acculturation process that occurred in the 3rd–2nd centuries BC Carpathian Basin is hard to outline yet because of the insufficient data. The relations between the Celts and the autochthons were particularly complex, as shown in the graves inventories. To observe an acculturation or an assimilation phenomenon, the funerary data have to be corroborated with the settlements data. An almost exclusive funeral image can be misleading. It is probably the case of the direct connection made between the 2nd century BC cemeteries disappearances and the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celts disappearances. For such a phenomenon to be real, the main argument should be the settlements disappearance and not the graves. The necropolis disappearances could be connected also with some radical Celtic funerary rite transformations and not especially with the disappearance of an entire community. In the Late Iron Age south-east Europe, at the end of the 2nd century BC, such a radical transformation seems to have placed: the graves disappear from the Thracian world north to the Danube (Sîrbu 1993, 40–44; Spânu 2002, 103) almost in the same period when the Celtic graves disappear from the Carpathian Basin. So, with just a few Celtic settlements that provide detailed information, general assumption regarding acculturation, assimilation or other large scale phenomenon are difficult to make. Therefore, the local Iron Age tradition pottery found in the Celtic graves proves a Thracian population presence when the Celts arrived in the 4th century BC. The obvious differences between the local pottery proportions in Celtic settlements and cemeteries or the relative lack of autochthonous communities during the 3rd–2nd centuries BC, raises numerous questions about the consistency of this presence. Due to the reduced data provided so far by the archaeological research, phenomenon such as assimilation or acculturation can be rather assumed than proved. The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 327 Appendix 1 Table of Carpathian Basin Celtic funerary discoveries with local traditions pottery FUNERARY RITE W H W H X W H W H W H BIG POT H LIQUID POT W SITULA H W BOWL H CURV WALL POT W CELTIC POTTERY BIT.POT H TRU. BOWL W EVR. RIM BOWL H INV. RIM BOWL Pit SIMP.CUP Urn BIT. CUP CX INHU MA SITE CREMAT. N O POTTERY OF LOCAL TRADITION W 1 X X Apahida, CJ 2 Ciumești, SM Cepari, BN 5 Orosfaia, BN X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X M34 X X X M35 X X X M3 X M4 X M5 X X M6 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X? X X? X X? X X X? X X X LT C1 X LT B2 X X X X Gr5 X X X X X Gr7 X X X X X Gr8 X X X X X X Gr11 X X X X M3 X M4 X M5 X X X X X X X X X X X X M10 X X X Gr1 X X M7 X M8 X X X X X X X X X X X X M13 X X M20 X X M19 X M22 X X LT C1 X X X LT B1 X X X LT B2 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X LT B1/C1 X X X M25 X X X X LT C1 LT B2/C1 X M10 M23 X X M2 LT B2/C1 X M9 X LT C1 X X X X X LT B2 X X X LT B2/C1 X X M8 Gr3 X LT B2/C1 Gr4 Gr10 LT C1/C2 X X X M28 M9 Pișcolt, SM X X X X X X X LT C1/C2 X X M13 X X M6 Gr6 6 X X Gr17 Fântânele– D. Popii, BN X X X Gr12 4 X X M7 Curtuișeni, BH X M11 M22b 3 X X M14 X X X X X X X X X X X X X M5 X C H R. X X X X M4 X J E W X X X F I B H W X X WE A X X X X X LT C1 X LT B2 X LT C1 X LT B2 LT B2 X X LT B1 X LT B2 X X LT B2 LT B2 328 | L.-P. Pupeză FUNERARY RITE H W H W H W H BIG POT W LIQUID POT H SITULA W BOWL H CURV WALL POT W BIT.POT H W TRU. BOWL X M44 X M45 X W WE A X X X X X M46 X X X X X X X X X X X X X M58 X X X X M64 X X X X M67 X X X X M68 X M80 X C H R. X X LT B2 X LT B2 X LT B2 X LT B2 X LT C1 LT B2 LT C1/C2 M53 X J E W X M55 M79 X X X F I B H W X M50 X X X X LT C2 LT C2 X LT C2 LT C1/C2 X X X LT C2 X X LT C2 X X X M94 X M101 X LT C2 LT C1 X X X X X X LT C2 X X X X X LT C2 LT C1 X X X X X X X LT C2 X X LT B2 LT C2 M107 X X X X X X M108 X X X X X X LT C1 M109 X X X X X LT C2 M111 X X LT C1 M115 X X LT C1 M124 X X X X M125 X X M128 X M134 X X M139 X X M140 X X M141 X M146 X X M152 X M160 X M161 X M163 X M166 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X M191 X X X X X M194 X M196 X X X X X X X M202 X X X M2 LT B1 X LT C1 X X LT B2 X LT B2 X X LT B2 X X LT B2 X X X X X X X X X X X LT B1 LT B1 X LT B2 X LT B2 X LT C1 X X X X LT C2 X X LT B1 X X LT B1 X X LT C1 X X LT B2 X X M16 LT B1 X X M19 LT C1 LT B1 X X X X X X X LT B1 LT C1 X X X X X X X X X M207 LT C1 LT B2 X X X M205 LT B2 X X X M199 LT B1 X X X M14 X X M190 M13 X X X X M192 LT B2 X X M189 X LT B1 X X X LT B1 LT B1 X X X M188 LT B2 X X X X X M203 X LT C1 LT C1/C2 X X M198 X LT B1 X X M173 M187 X X X X M184 LT C1 X X X M172 M174 X X X X X X X X M151 X X X M126 M148 Sanislău, SM H X M41 M93 7 W X M86 Pișcolt, SM H CELTIC POTTERY X M82 6 W EVR. RIM BOWL M40 H INV. RIM BOWL Pit M35 SIMP.CUP Urn BIT. CUP CX INHU MA SITE CREMAT. N O POTTERY OF LOCAL TRADITION X X X X X X X X X X X X LT B2/C1 The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 329 FUNERARY RITE X M3 X X W H X X X W H X X X X X X W H W H W X X H W H BIG POT X H W LIQUID POT M26 H SITULA X W BOWL X M2 H CURV WALL POT Zăuan, SJ W CELTIC POTTERY BIT.POT M18 M1 9 H TRU. BOWL Pit X EVR. RIM BOWL Tărian, BH M12 INV. RIM BOWL 8 SIMP.CUP Urn BIT. CUP CX INHU MA SITE CREMAT. N O POTTERY OF LOCAL TRADITION W X X X F I B J E W C H R. H W X X X X X X X X X LT C1 X X X WE A X X X LT C1 X X CX = archaeological complex; cremat. = cremation grave; urn = urn cremation grave; pit = pit cremation grave; inhuma. = inhumation grave; bit. cup = bitruncated cup; H = handmade; W = made on wheel; simp. cup = simple cup; inv. rim bowl = bowls with the rim orientated towards the interior (inverted); evr. rim bowl = bowls with a small ‘shoulder’ and the rim orientated towards the exterior (everted); tru. bowl = truncated bowl; bit. pot = bitruncated vessel; curv. wall pot = vessel with straight or slightly rounded profile; liquid pot = different types of pots used for liquids; big pot = different types of pots big in size, usually bitruncated; weap. = different types of weapons; fib. = fibulae; jew. = different types of jewelries; chr. = chronology; M2, Gr7 = grave name References Aldea–Ciugudean Aldea, I. A.–Ciugudean, H., Noi descoperiri arheologice pe teritoriul judeţului Alba (I), 1978 Apulum, XVI, 39–53. Alexandrescu 1980 Alexandrescu, Al. D., La Nècopole gete de Zimnicea, Dacia N. S., XXIV, 20–56. Babeș 1993 Babeș, M., Die Poienești–Lukasevka-Kultur, Bonn. Barbu–Hügel 1997 Barbu, M.–Hügel, P., Șantierul arheologic Săvârșin, CCA 1996, 91–92. Bazarciuc 1979 Bazarciuc, V. V., Date noi privind cultura geto-dacică în lumina recentelor cercetări arheologice în zona Hușilor, Hierasus, II, 33–36. Bejinariu–Pop 2008 Bejinariu, I.–Pop, H., Funerary Discoveries Dated at the End of the Early Iron Age from the South-Eastern Region of the Upper Tisa Basin (Sălaj County, România), IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Funerary practice of the Bronze and Iron Age in Central and South-Eastern Europe, Cluj-Napoca, 35–46. Berciu 1957 Berciu, D., Șantierul arheologic Cernavoda (reg. Constanþa, r. Medgidia), MCA, III, 83–92. Berecki 2006 Berecki, S., Rite and Ritual of the Celts from Transylvania, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Funerary practice of the Bronze and Iron Age in Central and South-Eastern Europe, ClujNapoca, 51–76. Berecki 2008 Berecki, S., The La Tène settlement from Morești, Cluj-Napoca. Bona–Rogozea 1986 Bona, P.–Rogozea, R., Necropola dacică de la Iaz, ActaMN, XXII–XXIII, 1985–1986, 349–451. Boroffka–Trohani Boroffka, R.–Trohani, G., Necropola getică de la Canlia, com. Lipniţa, jud. Constanţa, CA, 2003 XII, 139–198. Boroneanţ–Davi- Boronenţ, V.–Davidescu, M., Două bordeie dacice de la Schela Cladovei, Turnu Severin, descu 1968 Apulum, VII/1, 253–259. Bujor 1957 Bujor, E., Săpăturile de salvare de la Murighiol, MCA, III, 247–255. Cavruc–Buzea 2005 Cavruc, V.–Buzea, D., Vestigiile dacice timpurii de la Olteni. Raport preliminar, Angustia, 9, 121–154. Chidioșan–Ignat Chidioșan, N.–Ignat, D., Cimitirul celtic de la Tărian, SCIVA, 23, 4, 553–579. 1972 Crișan 1966 Crișan, I. H., Materiale dacice din necropola și așezarea de la Ciumești și problema raporturilor dintre daci și celţi în Transilvania, Baia Mare. Crișan 1969 Crișan, I. H., Ceramica daco-getică. Cu specială privire la Transilvania, București. Crișan 1971 Crișan, I. H., Necropola celtică de la Apahida, ActaMN, VIII, 37–70. Crișan 1973a Crișan, I. H., Descoperiri celtice de la Cluj, Peţelca și Șeica Mică, ActaMN, X, 39–64. Crișan 1973b Crișan, I. H., Așa numitul mormânt de la Silivaș și problema celui mai vechi grup celtic din Transilvania, Sargeţia, 10, 45–78. 330 | L.-P. Pupeză Crișan, I. H., Precizări în legătură cu descoperirile celtice de la Aiud, StCom Sibiu, 18, 71–92. Crișan, I. H., Începutul Laténe-ului la daco-geți, Marisia, VII, 65–85. Crișan, I. H.–Milea, Z., Descoperiri celtice la Papiu Ilarian (jud. Mureș), ActaMN, VII, 65–78. Crișan, I. H.–Rustoiu, A.–Palkó, A., Descoperiri celtice de la Pruniș (jud. Cluj), EphemNap, V, 27–46. Dănilă 1955 Dănilă, Șt., Inventarul unor morminte de incineraţie din sec. III–II î. e. n., Din activitatea muzeelor noastre, Cluj, 89–99. Dănilă 1978 Dănilă, Șt., Primele săpături în necropola de epocă La Tène de la Fântânele, SCIVA, 29, 2, 257–276. Dănilă 1989 Dănilă, Șt., Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Bistriţa-Năsăud, Cluj-Napoca. Dietrich–Dietrich Dietrich, L.–Dietrich, O., Locuirea celtică din Transilvania, Banat și Crișana, SCIVA, 57, 1–4, 2006 9–56. Dušek 1966 Dušek, M., Thrakisches Gräberfeld der Hallstattzeit in Chotin, Bratislava. Ferencz 1997 Ferencz, I. V., Nouvelles considérations sur la tombe celtique á char de Cristurul Secuiesc, EpemNap, VII, 5–10. Ferencz 2007 Ferencz, I. V., Celţii pe Mureșul mijlociu. La Tène-ul timpuriu și mijlociu în bazinul mijlociu al Mureșului (sec. IV–II î.Chr.), Sibiu. Ferencz–Ciută 2000 Ferencz, I. V.–Ciută, M. M., Finds from Seușa (Alba county) belongins to Middle Latène, IN: Gaiu, C.–Rustoiu, A. (coord.), Les celtes et les thraco-daces de l’est du bassin des Carpates, Cluj-Napoca, 22–50. Florea 1997 Florea, G., Ceramica pictată, IN: Andriţoiu, I.–Rustoiu, A., Sighișoara–Wietenberg. Descoperirile preistorice și așezarea dacică, BT, 91–97. Hakenbeck 2004 Hakenbeck, S. E., Reconsidering Ethnicity: an introduction, IN: Hakenbeck, S. E.–Matthews, S. G. (ed.), Reconsidering Ethnicity: Material Culture and Identity in the Past, Cambridge, 1–6. Irimia 1983 Irimia, M., Date noi privind necropolele din Dobrogea în a doua epocă a fierului, Pontica, 16, 69–128. Kruta 2000 Kruta, V., Les Celtes. Histoire et dictionnaire, Paris. Matei 1978 Matei, Al. V., Trei morminte din sec. III î.e.n. descoperite la Zăuan (jud. Sălaj), ActaMP, II, 29–37. McCarthy 2004 McCarthy, J., Extraordinary use of ordinary objects, IN: Hakenbeck, S. E.–Matthews, S. G. (eds.), Reconsidering Ethnicity: Material Culture and Identity in the Past, Cambridge, 25–39. Medeleţ 1975 Medeleţ, F., Situla de la Remetea Mare (jud. Timiș), Banatica, 3, 49–57. Moscalu 1983 Moscalu, E., Ceramica thraco-getică, București. Nánási 1969 Nánási, Z., Morminte hallstattiene târzii de la Curtuișeni, StCom Satu Mare, I, 85–90. Nánási 1973 Nánási, Z., Descoperiri în necropola celtică de la Curtuișeni, Crisia, III, 29–46. Németi 1978 Németi, I., Nord-vestul României de la Hallstatt-ul târziu până la Letène-ul mijlociu, PhD, Cluj-Napoca. Németi 1972 Németi, I., Necropola hallstattiană de la Sanislãu, StCom Satu Mare, II, 121–149. Németi 1982 Németi, I., Das späthallstattzeitliche Gräberfeld von Sanislău, Dacia N. S., 26, 115–144. Németi 1987 Németi, I., Necropola celtică de la Pișcolt. I, Thraco-Dacica, VIII, 49–74. Németi 1988 Németi, I., Unele aspecte ale evoluţiei ceramicii din a doua epocă a fierului în nord-vestul României (Latène B–C), SCIVA, 39, 2, 87–112. Németi 1989 Németi, I., Necropola celtică de la Pișcolt. II, Thraco-Dacica, X, 75–114. Németi 1992 Németi, I., Necropola celtică de la Pișcolt. III, Thraco-Dacica, XIII, 59–112. Németi 1999 Németi, J., Repertoriul arheologic al zonei Careiului, București. Németi 2010 Németi, J., The problem of Hand-Made Pottery from La Tène (Celtic) Contexts in NorthWestern Romania, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, BMM, II, 181–215. Németi–Lakó 1993 Németi, I.–Lakó, É., Noi descoperiri celtice în judeţul Sălaj, ActaMP, XXVII, 77–90. Nestor 1941 Nestor, I., Keltische Gräber bei Mediaș. Ein Beitrag zur Frage der frühen keltischen Funde in Siebenbürgen, Dacia, VII–VIII, 1937–1940 (1941), 159–182. Párducz 1973 Párducz, M., Probleme der Skytenzeit im Karpatenbecken, ActaArchHung, 25, 27–63. Parker Pearson 1999 Parker Pearson, M., The archaeology of Death and Burial, Texas. Petrescu-Dîmboviţa Petrescu-Dîmboviţa, M., Descoperirea de vase dacice de la Ciolăneștii din Deal (jud. Teleor1974 man), IN: Daicoviciu, H. (ed), In Memoriam Constantin Daicoviciu, Cluj-Napoca, 285–300. Crișan 1974 Crișan 1977 Crișan–Milea 1970 Crișan Et Al. 1995 The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 331 Pop–Pupeză 2006 Pop, H.–Pupeză, P., Dacians and Celts in the Northwestern Romania, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Thracians and Celts. Proceedings of the International Colloquim from Bistriţa 18–20 May 2006, Cluj-Napoca, 183–212. Popilian–Nica 1998 Popilian, G.–Nica, M., Gropșani. Monografie arheologică, București. Preda 1986 Preda, C., Contribuţii la cunoașterea civilizaţiei geto-dacice. Așezarea de la Pleașov (jud. Teleorman), Thraco-Dacica, VII, 1–2, 74–98. Pupeză 2008 Pupeză, P., Descoperiri din a doua epocă a fierului (sec. III–II a. Chr.) de la Polus Center (com. Florești, jud. Cluj), RevBis, XXII, 27–72. Pupeză 2010 Pupeză, P., Ceramica daco-getică din interiorul arcului Carpatic (sfârșitul sec. III a. Chr.–începutul sec. I a. Chr.), RevBis, XXIV, 129–162. Roska 1944 Roska, M., A Kelták Erdélyben, Közlemények Kolozsvár, IV, 1–2, 53–80. Rustoiu 2008 Rustoiu, A., Celţii din Transilvania și comunităţile indigene nord-balcanice. Schimburi culturale și mobilitate individuală, EphemNap, XVIII, 25–44. Rustoiu–Berecki Rustoiu, A.–Berecki, S., ‘Thracian’ Warriors in Transylvania at the Beginning of the Late Iron 2012 Age. The Grave with Chalcidian Helmet from Ocna Sibiului, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș 7–9 October 2012, BMM, V, Târgu Mureș , 161–181. Rusu–Bandula 1970 Rusu, M.–Bandula, O., Mormântul unei căpetenii celtice de la Ciumești, Baia Mare. Simion 1971 Simion, G., Cultura traco-getică în lumina izvoarelor arheologice descoperite în necropola de la Enisala, Peuce, 2, 63–121. Simion 1977 Simion, G., Descoperiri noi pe teritoriul Noviodunens, Peuce, 6, 123–148. Simion 2003 Simion, G., O necropolă din sec. VI–V a. Chr. la Isaccea, Peuce S. N., I (XIV), 113–128. Sîrbu 1993 Sîrbu, V., Credinţe și practici funerare, religioase și magice în lumea geto-dacilor, Galaţi–Brăila. Sîrbu 1996 Sîrbu, V., Dava getică de la Grădiștea (jud. Brăila), Brăila. Sîrbu 2006 Sîrbu, V., Dacii și celţii din Transilvania și vestul României, IN: Gaiu, C.–Găzdac, C. (eds.), Fontes Historiae. Studia in Honorem Demetrii Protase, Cluj-Napoca, 191–219. Sîrbu Et Al. 2008 Sîrbu, V.–Cavruc, V.–Buzea, D., A Dacian necropolis from 4th–3rd Centuries BC, found in Olteni (South-Eastern Transylvania), IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Funerary Practices of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Central and South-Eastern Europe, Cluj-Napoca, 191–228. Spânu 2002 Spânu, D., Un mormânt de epocă târzie Latène de la Dubova, SCIVA, 52–53, 2001–2002, 83–132. Stoia 1975 Stoia, A., Bemerkungen über das birituelle Gräberfeld in Chotin (CSSR), Dacia N. S., XIX, 87–104. Teleagă 2008 Teleagă, E., Die La-Tène-zeitlichen Nekropole von Curtuiușeni / Érkörtvélyes (Bihor, Rumänien). Der Forschungsstand, Dacia N. S., LII, 85–165. Teodor 1967 Teodor, S., Contribuţii la cunoașterea ceramicii de sec. III–II î.e.n. din Moldova, SCIVA, 18, 1, 25–45. Teodor 1975 Teodor, S., Săpăturile de la Cucorăni (jud. Botoșani), ArhMold, VIII, 124–139. Teodor 1980 Teodor, S., Așezarea de epocă Latène de la Botoșana, SCIVA, 31, 2, 181–227. Teodor 1984 Teodor, S., Descoperiri din epoca Latène în zona Neamţului, Thraco-Dacica, V, 122–137. Teodor 1987 Teodor, S., Cercetările arheologice de la Ciurea, jud. Iași, ArhMold, XI, 65–102. Trohani 1976 Trohani, G., Săpăturile din așezarea geto-dacică de la Vlădiceasca, CA, 2, 87–134. Trohani 2006 Trohani, G., Locuirea getică din partea de nord a Popinei Bordușani (com. Bordușani, jud. Ialomiţa), Târgoviște. Ursachi 1995a Ursachi, V., Zargidava. Cetatea dacică de la Brad, București. Vaida 2000 Vaida, L., The Celtic Cemetery from Orosfaia (Bistriţa-Năsăud County), IN: Gaiu, C.–Rustoiu, A. (eds.), Les celtes et les thraco-daces de l’est du bassin des Carpates, Cluj-Napoca, 135–159. Vaida 2008 Vaida, D. L., Preliminary Considerations Regarding the Celtic Cemetery from Fântânele (the Point – La Gâţa), IN; Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Funerary Practices of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Central and South-Eastern Europe, Cluj-Napoca, 237–246. Vasiliev 1979 Vasiliev, V., Problema ceramicii mormintelor scitice din Transilvania, Marisia, IX, 43–60. Vasiliev 1980 Vasiliev, V., Sciţii agatârși pe teritoriul României, Cluj-Napoca. Vulpe 1967 Vulpe, Al., Necropola hallstattiană de la Ferigile, București. Vulpe 1998 Vulpe, Al., Geto-dacii?, Centrul de Istorie Comparată a Societăţilor Antice, 1–2, 2–12. Vulpe–Teodor 2003 Vulpe, R.–Teodor, S., Piroboridava. Așezarea dacică de la Poiana, București. Zirra 1967 Zirra, Vl., Un cimitir celtic în nord-vestul României, Baia Mare. 332 | L.-P. Pupeză Zirra 1972 Zirra 1975 Zirra 1976 Zirra 1980 Zirra 1997 Zirra 1998 Zirra Et Al. 1993 Zirra, Vl., Noi necropole celtice din nord-vestul României (cimitirele birituale de la Sanislău și Dindești), StCom Satu Mare, II, 151–196. Zirra, Vl., Influence des geto-daces set leurs voisins sur l’habitat celtique de Transylvanie, Alba Regia, XIV, 47–63. Zirra, Vl., La nécropole La Tène d’Apahida. Nouvelles considérations, Dacia N. S., XX, 129–166. Zirra, Vl., Locuiri din a doua epocă a fierului în nord-vestul României. Așezarea contemporană cimitirului Latène de la Ciumești și habitatul indigen de la Berea (jud. Satu Mare), StCom Satu Mare, IV, 39–84. Zirra, Vl. V., Contribuţii la cronologia relativă a cimitirului de la Pișcolt. Analiză combinatorie și stratigrafie orizontală, SCIVA, 48, 2, 87–137. Zirra, Vl. V., Bemerkungen zu den Thrako–Getischen Fibeln, Dacia N. S, 40–42, 1996–1998, 29–54. Zirra, Vl.–Conovici, N.–Trohani, G.–Gherghe, P.–Alexandrescu, P.–Gâta, Gh.–Zirra, Vl. V., La station fortifiée de “Cetatea Jidovilor” (Coţofenii din Dos, dép. de Dolj), Dacia N. S., XXXVII, 79–157. List of figures Fig. 1. Celtic graves in the Carpathian Basin (4th–2nd c. BC). Fig. 2. Cultural groups at the end of the Early Iron Age (6th–5th c. BC). List of plates Pl. 1. A–F. Types of autochthonous pottery. A. Bitruncated cup; B. Cup; C. Bowl with everted rim; D. Bowl with inverted rim; E. Bitruncated vessel; F. Vessels with straight or slightly rounded profile; I. Early Iron Age graves: 1, 5. Chotin (Dušek 1966, pl. XIII/5; XXXVII/10); 2, 4. Ferigile (Vulpe 1967, 51, type III, 1/6; 15/17); 3. Sanislău (Németi 1982, 121, Abb. 3/D2; 18/18); 6. Cipău (Vasiliev 1979, 58, pl. XXV/1; Vasiliev 1980, 70–71). II. Thracian graves: 7–8. Canlia (Boroffka–Trohani 2003, fig. 15/10; 16/8); 9–13. Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, 20–56, pl. 25/8; 26/3; 27/7; 38/2; 39/8). III. Celtic graves: 14. Aiud (Crișan 1974, 78; Ferencz 2007, 75–76, pl. XIII/4); 15–20. Apahida (Crișan 1971, 41, pl. I/1; II/1; Zirra 1976, fig. 9/2; 10/3; 12/9; 14/4; 15/8; 17/3; 19/4); 21–22. Blandiana (Aldea–Ciugudean 1978; Ferencz 2007, 77–78, XXIII/1; XXIV/3); 23. Blaj (Crișan 1973b, 54; Ferencz 2007, 78, pl. XX/1); 24–27. Ciumești (Crișan 1966, 18–22, fig. 1/3; 2/1; 5/2–3; 6/2–3; 7/1–2; Zirra 1967, 13–52, fig. 9/IV; 10/XI; 16/VII; 17/VII; 21/V; 22/VIII; 26/III; 27/II; 45); 28. Cluj– Mănăștur (Crișan 1973a, pl. 2/1). Pl. 2. Bitruncated cups from Celtic graves. 1–4. Curtuișeni (Nánási 1973, pl. III/3; Teleagă 2008, Abb. 4/2; 5/3; 7/1; 8/2; 10/1; 11/4; EF.4); 5. Derșida (Németi–Lakó 1993, fig. 3/3; 4/3); 6. Fântânele–La Gâţa (Vaida 2008, pl. V/9); 7–8. Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Crișan 1977, pl. XXXV/3–4); 9. Galaţii Bistriţei (Dănilă 1955, fig. 7/4; Crișan 1966, 66–67, fig. 27/4); 10. Mediaș (Nestor 1941, Abb. 6/2, 4); 11. Papiu Ilarian (Crișan–Milea 1970, pl. I/1; II/6); 12–16. Pișcolt (Németi 1988, fig. 2/M2 (13); 5/M125(2); 10/M191(9); M199(4–5); M202(9); Németi 1989, fig. 4/M22(2); M23(3); 7/M94(3–4); 10/M146(6); M151(6); 11/M152(9); 19/M188(4); Németi 1992, fig. 1/M10(10); 2/M13(5); 3/M20(11); 4/M45(5); 5/M50; 7/M55(3); M58(5); 8/M64(4); 9/M67(9); 10/ M68(5); 12/M79(4); 14/M93(6); 15/M101(12); 17/M108(13); 19/M109(6); 25/M148(1); 17. Pruniș (Crișan Et Al. 1995, fig. 2/3); 18–20. Sanislău (Crișan 1966, 72–73, fig. 29/2; Zirra 1972, fig. 8/5–7); 21. Șeica Mică (Crișan 1973a, pl. IV/4); 22. Tărian (Chidioșan–Ignat 1972, fig. 5/4); 23. Zăuan (Matei 1978, 29–37, pl. III/1). Pl. 3. A. Celtic graves with cups. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1. Ferigile (Vulpe 1967, 45–47, type II B, 2/8); 2. Cipău (Vasiliev 1979, 54–57, pl. XXIII/8; Vasiliev 1980, 68–69); 3. Sanislău (Németi 1982, 121, Abb. 3D/1, 3); 4–5. Chotin (Stoia 1975, 95–96, Abb. 8); 6. Ghenci (Crișan 1966, 67, fig. 28/8). C. Thracian graves. 7–8, 10. Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, fig. 23/31; 28/6, 11); 9. Canlia (Boroffka–Trohani 2003, fig. 7/7). D. Celtic graves. 11. Cepari (Crișan 1966, fig. 25/15); 12–14. Ciumești (Crișan 1966, fig. 1/3; 5/2, 3); 15. Curtuișeni (Nánási 1973, pl. III/2, 4; Teleagă 2008, Abb. 7/3; 17/4); 16. Fântânele–La Gâţa (Vaida 2008, pl. V/8); 17–18. Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Dănilă 1978, fig. 4/1, 2); 19. Orosfaia (Vaida 2000, fig. 5/5); 20–23. Pișcolt (Németi 1988, fig. 5/M134(6); 6/M139(7); 9/M198(1); Németi 1989, fig. 6/M44(4); 24. Sanislău (Crișan 1966, 72–74, fig. 29/1; Zirra 1972, fig. 9/1). The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 333 Pl. 4. A. Celtic graves with inverted rim bowls. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1. Chotin (Stoia 1975, Abb. 11, type 4B); 2. Sanislău (Németi 1982, Abb. 3B/2); 3–4. Ciumbrud (Vasiliev 1979, 51–54, pl. XXIII/3; Vasiliev 1980, 65–67); 5–6. Ferigile (Vulpe 1967, 38–39, type IA, 1/20; type IB, 26/27). C. Celtic graves. 7. Apahida (Crișan 1966, fig. 20/1; Crișan 1971, pl. III/3, IV/1; Zirra 1976, fig. 13/4); 8–9. Cepari (Crișan 1966, fig. 25/10–11); 10. Cristuru Secuiesc (Ferencz 1997, pl. II/1); 11. Curtuișeni (Nánási 1973, pl. III/5; Teleagă 2008, Abb. 12/2); 12–14. Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Dănilă 1978, fig. 5/3); 15–17. Pișcolt (Németi 1988, fig. 2/M9(11); 9/ M198(2); Németi 1989, fig. 6/M44(5); 8/M124(4); 10/M146(5, 7); 14/M163(2); 15/M173(8, 9); 16/M173(10); 16/M174(12); Németi 1992, fig. 1/M8(8); 12/M80); 18–20. Pruniș (Crișan Et Al. 1995, fig. 1/2, 5–6; 9/2); 21. Tărian (Chidioșan–Ignat 1972, fig. 5/1, 3); 22–23. Zăuan (Matei 1978, pl. IX/1–2; XI/2). D. Thracian graves. 24, 30. Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, fig. 23/17, 22; 34/6); 25–26. Canlia (Boroffka–Trohani 2003, 145–146, fig. 13/9; 15/3, 9); 27–29. Olteni (Sîrbu Et al. 2008, fig. 5/1; 10/1, 7). Pl. 5. A. Celtic graves with everted rim bowls. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1. Chotin (Dušek 1966, pl. XL/11); 2–3. Isaccea (Simion 2003, fig. 7/1); 4. Ferigile (Vulpe 1967, 41–44, type ID, 14/24). C. Celtic graves. 5. Arad–Gai (Crișan 1966, 51–56, fig. 23/2); 6–8. Ciumești (Crișan 1966, 5–22, fig. 1/1; 3/1; 5/1; 6/1; Zirra 1967, fig. 26/ M5(III); M35(IV); 9. Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Dănilă 1978, fig. 5/2); 10–11. Pișcolt (Németi 1988, fig. 10/ M199(3); 11/M203(4); Németi 1989, fig. 12/M161(4); 12. Valea lui Mihai (Crișan 1966, 74–75, fig. 30/2). D. Thracian graves. 13–15. Canlia (Boroffka–Trohani 2003, fig. 13/8; 17/9; 23/4); 16. Olteni (Sîrbu Et Al. 2008, fig. 18/4); 17–18. Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, fig. 23/21; 34/2). Pl. 6. A. Celtic graves with truncated bowls. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1. Chotin (Stoia 1975, Abb. 11, type 1, 4A); 2. Sanislău (Németi 1982, Abb. 3B/7); 3. Ferigile (Vulpe 1967, 40, type IB, 25/17). C. Thracian graves. 4–5. Canlia (Boroffka–Trohani 2003, fig. 7/8; 13/1); 6. Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, fig. 23/30; 23/25). D. Celtic graves. 7–8. Apahida (Crișan 1971, pl. XI/4–5; Zirra 1976, fig. 19/5–6); 9. Arad–Gai (Crișan 1966, fig. 22/6; 23/1); 10. Pruniș (Crișan Et Al. 1995, fig. 1/3; 9/1); 11–12. Tărian (Chidioșan–Ignat 1972, fig. 5/7– 8). E. Bitruncated vessels from Celtic graves: 13. Apahida (Crișan 1966, fig. 20/3; 21/1; Crișan 1971, pl. IX/1; X/1; Zirra 1976, fig. 12/10); 14. Ciumești (Crișan 1966, fig. 1/2; 2/2; 3/2; 4/2; Zirra 1967, fig. 26/M5(II); M38(I); 15. Dezmir (Crișan 1966, 64–66, fig. 26/1–2); 16–17. Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Dănilă 1978, fig. 4/1; 7/1). Pl. 7. A. Celtic graves with bitruncated vessels. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1–2. Chotin (Stoia 1975, Abb. 15, type 1, 3); 3–4. Sanislău (Németi 1982, Abb. 3C/1, 3); 5–6. Cipău (Vasiliev 1979, 46–51, pl. XXI/1, 4); 7–8. Ferigile (Vulpe 1967, 51–52, type V, 1/31; 7/36). C. Thracian graves. 9. Canlia (Boroffka–Trohani 2003, fig. 22/10); 10–11. Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, fig. 18/1; 22/2). D. Celtic graves. 12. Ciumești (Crișan 1966, fig. 1/2; 2/2; 3/2; 4/2; Zirra 1967, fig. 26/M5(II); M38(I); 13–14. Fântânele–La Gâţa (Vaida 2008, pl. V/1, 2); 15. Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Dănilă 1978, fig. 4/1; 7/1); 16–17. Orosfaia (Vaida 2000, fig. 7/12; 8/6); 18–19. Pișcolt (Németi 1988, fig. 7/M140(23); 8/M166(7); M187(5–6); Németi 1989, fig. 3/M19(3); 4/M23(2); 5/M35(9); 6/ M46(1); 8/M124(7); 10/M146(4); 12/M160(8–9); Németi 1992, fig. 1/M8(7); 20/M111(2); 22/M126(5); 20. Pruniș (Crișan Et Al. 1995, fig. 2/1); 21–22. Sanislău (Crișan 1966, 72–74, fig. 29/3; Zirra 1972, fig. 9/2); 23. Tărian (Chidioșan–Ignat 1972, fig. 3/1, 6); 24. Zăuan (Matei 1978, pl. II). Pl. 8. A. Celtic graves with straight or slightly rounded profile vessels. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1. Ciumbrud (Vasiliev 1979, 57, pl. XXIV/8); 2. Chotin (Stoia 1975, Abb. 13, type 3); 3. Ghenci (Crișan 1966, 67, fig. 28/6); 4. Isaccea (Simion 2003, fig. 9); 5–6. Sanislău (Németi 1982, Abb. 3A/2, 3); 7–8. Ferigile (Vulpe 1967, 52– 52, type VI, 17/51; 21/42). C. Thracian graves. 9–10. Canlia (Boroffka–Trohani 2003, fig. 15/1, 4); 11–12. Olteni (Cavruc–Buzea 2005, pl. VII/4; IX/2, 3; Sîrbu Et Al. 2008, fig. 5/2–3; 6/4; 9/2, 5, 8; 10/2, 5, 8); 13–14. Zimnicea (Alexandrescu 1980, 19/1, 6, 10; 14/7). D. Celtic graves. 15. Apahida (Crișan 1966, fig. 20/4; 21/3; Crișan 1971, pl. I/3; II/2; V/2; VI/8; Zirra 1976, fig. 10/8; 18/2); 16–17. Fântânele–Dealul Popii (Dănilă 1978, fig. 2/1–2); 18–24. Pișcolt (Németi 1988, fig. 6/M139(6, 8); 7/M141(2); 8/M166(9–10); 10/M202(7–8); 11/M203(3); Németi 1989, fig. 4/M25; 10/M151(2–3); Németi 1992, fig. 3/M20(10); 12/M79(1). 334 | L.-P. Pupeză 5 5 5 . arly ron e ra es . ra ian ra es . elti ra es Plate 1. A–F. Types of autochthonous pottery; I. Early Iron Age graves: 1, 5. Chotin; 2, 4. Ferigile; 3. Sanislău; 6. Cipău. II. Thracian graves: 7–8. Canlia; 9–13. Zimnicea. III. Celtic graves: 14. Aiud; 15–20. Apahida; 21–22. Blandiana; 23. Blaj; 24–27. Ciumești; 28. Cluj–Mănăștur. Plate . – . ypes of auto t onous pottery . arly ron e ra es 5. otin . eri ile . anisl u . ip u. . ra ian ra es – . anlia – . imni ea. . elti ra es . iud 5– . pa ida – . landiana . la – . iume ti . lu – n r. 5 Plate 2. Bitruncated cups from Celtic graves. 1–4. Curtuișeni; 5. Derșida; 6. Fântânele–La Gâţa; 7–8. Fântânele–Dealul Popii; 9. Galaţii Bistriţei; 10. Mediaș; 11. Papiu Ilarian; 12–16. Pișcolt; 17. Pruniș; 18–20. Sanislău; 21. Șeica Mică; 22. Tărian; 23. Zăuan. Plate . itrun ated ups from elti ra es. – . urtui eni 5. er ida . ala ii istri ei . edia . Papiu larian – . Pi olt . Pruni . – nt nele– a . anisl u a – . nt nele– ea . ei a i . rian . ii uan. The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 335 5 336 | L.-P. Pupeză 5 5 Plate 3. A. Celtic graves with cups. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1. Ferigile; 2. Cipău; 3. Sanislău; 4–5. Chotin; 6. Ghenci. C. Thracian graves. 7–8, 10. Zimnicea; 9. Canlia. D. Celtic graves. 11. Cepari; 12–14. Ciumești; 15. Curtuișeni; 16. Fântânele–La Gâţa; 17–18. Fântânele–Dealul Popii; 19. Orosfaia; 20–23. Pișcolt; 24. Sanislău. Plate . . elti ra es it ups. . arly ron e ra es. . eri ile . ip u . anisl u –5. otin . en i. . ra ian ra es. – . imni ea . anlia. . elti ra es. . epari – . iume ti 5. urtui eni . nt nele– a a – . nt nele– ea ii . rosfaia – . Pi olt . anisl u. 5 5 Plate 4. A. Celtic graves with inverted rim bowls. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1. Chotin; 2. Sanislău; 3–4. Ciumbrud; 5–6. Ferigile. C. Celtic graves. 7. Apahida; 8–9. Cepari; 10. Cristuru Secuiesc; 11. Curtuișeni; 12–14. Fântânele–Dealul Popii; 15–17. Pișcolt; 18–20. Pruniș; 21. Tărian; 22–23. Zăuan. D. Thracian graves. 24, 30. Zimnicea; 25–26. Canlia; 27–29. Olteni. Plate . . elti ra es it in erted rim o ls. . arly ron e ra es. . otin . anisl u – . ium rud 5– . eri ile. . elti ra es. . pa ida – . epari . risturu e uies . urtui eni – . nt nele– ea ii 5– . Pi olt – . Pruni . rian – . uan. . ra ian ra es. . imni ea 5– . anlia – . lteni. The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 337 5 5 Plate 5. A. Celtic graves with everted rim bowls. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1. Chotin; 2–3. Isaccea; 4. Ferigile. C. Celtic graves. 5. Arad–Gai; 6–8. Ciumești; 9. Fântânele–Dealul Popii; 10–11. Pișcolt; 12. Valea lui Mihai. D. Thracian graves. 13–15. Canlia; 16. Olteni; 17–18. Zimnicea. Plate 5. . elti – . iume ti . ra es it e erted rim o ls. . arly ron e ra es. . otin – . sa ea . eri ile. . elti ra es. 5. rad– ai nt nele– ea ii – . Pi olt . alea lui i ai. . ra ian ra es. – 5. anlia . lteni – . imni ea. 338 | L.-P. Pupeză 5 5 Plate 6. A. Celtic graves with truncated bowls. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1. Chotin; 2. Sanislău; 3. Ferigile. C. Thracian graves. 4–5. Canlia; 6. Zimnicea. D. Celtic graves. 7–8. Apahida; 9. Arad–Gai; 10. Pruniș; 11–12. Tărian. E. Bitruncated vessels from Celtic graves: 13. Apahida; 14. Ciumești; 15. Dezmir; 16–17. Fântânele–Dealul Popii. Plate . . elti ra es it trun ated o ls. . arly ron e ra es. . otin . anisl u . eri ile. . ra ian ra es. –5. anlia . imni ea. . elti ra es. – . pa ida . rad– ai . Pruni – . rian. . itrun ated essels from elti ra es . pa ida . iume ti 5. e mir – . nt nele– ea ii. The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 339 5 340 | L.-P. Pupeză 5 5 Plate 7. A. Celtic graves with bitruncated vessels. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1–2. Chotin; 3–4. Sanislău; 5–6. Cipău; 7–8. Ferigile. C. Thracian graves. 9. Canlia; 10–11. Zimnicea. D. Celtic graves. 12. Ciumești; 13–14. Fântânele–La Gâţa; 15. Fântânele–Dealul Popii; 16–17. Orosfaia; 18–19. Pișcolt; 20. Pruniș; 21–22. Sanislău; 23. Tărian; 24. Zăuan. Plate . . elti ra es it itrun ated essels. . arly ron e ra es. – . otin – . anisl u 5– . ip u – . eri ile. . ra ian ra es. . anlia – . imni ea. . elti ra es. . iume ti – . nt nele– a a 5. nt nele– ea ii – . rosfaia – . Pi olt . Pruni – . anisl u . rian . uan. 5 Plate 8. A. Celtic graves with straight or slightly rounded profile vessels. B. Early Iron Age graves. 1. Ciumbrud; 2. Chotin; 3. Ghenci; 4. Isaccea; 5–6. Sanislău; 7–8. Ferigile. C. Thracian graves. 9–10. Canlia; 11–12. Olteni; 13–14. Zimnicea. D. Celtic graves. 15. Apahida; 16–17. Fântânele–Dealul Popii; 18–24. Pișcolt. – Plate . . elti ra es it strai t or sli tly rounded profile essels. . arly ron e ra es. . ium rud . otin . en i . sa ea 5– . anisl u – . eri ile. . ra ian ra es. . anlia – . lteni – . imni ea. . elti ra es. 5. pa ida – . nt nele– ea ii – . Pi olt. The Local Tradition Pottery from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Celtic Graves | 341 5 Killing the Weapons An Insight on Graves with Destroyed Weapons in Late Iron Age Transylvania* Dragoș MĂNDESCU Argeș County Museum Pitești, Romania dragos_mandescu@yahoo.com Keywords: destroyed (bent, folded) weapons, funerary ritual, fourth–first centuries BC, Transylvania, Celts, Thracians The phenomenon of destruction or intentional deformation of Celtic weapons (especially swords) placed in graves as grave goods or in sanctuaries as votive depositions has often captured the attention of scholars (Pleiner–Scott 1993, 161; Buchwald 2005, 121, fig. 121), the analyses being affected in detail by super-specialized attempts (Rapin 1993, 291–298). In Transylvania, the eastern region of the Celtic expansion in the Carpathian Basin, this phenomenon has been little discussed, although this funerary custom associated with Celtic ritual manifestations was recognized and pointed out in the literature a long time ago (Pârvan 1926, 626; Popescu 1944, 655; Berciu 1970, 84; Zirra 1971, 235). It is true that, in Transylvania during the Late Iron Age, one does not meet exceptional and spectacular situations like those from the Central European area, such as the cemetery of Monte Tamburino, which includes lots of graves with weapons which in the majority are intentionally bent (Vitali 2003, 15, 76, 117, 161, 205, 221, 239, pl. 7/2, 4; 68/12–15; 109/14–16; 153/3, 15; 197/2–3; 213/3–4; 231/10–11, 14), or the West European area – for example, the ritual deposition of cut heads and weapons, including bent swords, from Cailar-Gard (Roure Et Al. 2007, 655), or even the discovery of the deformed weapons in nonfunerary dwelling structures as in the fortress of Bourguignon-les-Morey (Dubreucq–Piningre 2005, 674–675, fig. 5/3) or, in the Scandinavian area, such as the deposit from Hjortspring which includes over one hundred weapons, many of them intentionally deformed (Buchwald 2005, 188, fig. 276). Despite all this evidence, the archaeological reality of the bent weapons from Transylvania deserve a detailed study, so long as there are opinions which affirm that the weapon deformation in funerary context should be seen as a special feature for the eastern part of the Celtic world together with the Paduan area (Anastassov 2006, 22). However, the situation of the bent weapons from Transylvania should not be interpreted as an isolated situation, but seen in the totality of the eastern borders of the Celtic world, an area where a lot of such discoveries have been made, such as in southern Poland as from example the early La Tène sword from Iwanowice (Pleiner–Scott 1993, 132), Eastern Hungary – the bent sword from grave 5 from Muhi, which indicates an early dating at the end of LT B2 (Hellebrandt 1999, 91) –, or Serbia, where some spectacular examples could be found at Odžaci (Czarnecka 2007, 48–49, fig. 1) or the numerous graves from the Scordiscian cemetery of Karaburma (Todorovic 1972, 30–31, 35, pl. 24/9; 34/4). * This work was supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research, CNCS-UEFISCDI, project number PN-II-RU-TE-2011–3-0078 (The Archaeological Relevance of Periphery). Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 343–356 344 | D. Măndescu Regarding the basic statistics, one can observe that throughout the 150 years of their presence in Transylvania (including Crișana and Banat), to the present some 70 Celtic cemeteries and isolated graves have been discovered (Dietrich–Dietrich 2006, 22, fig. 4), a total of about 500 graves (Babeș 2000, 135). From the most recent published results 11% of the total number of the graves contained weapons, or 15% of the total number of graves with grave goods (Babeș 2001, 516). Almost half of the graves with weapons from Transylvania of the Celtic era (about 27 graves) contained ritually bent weapons (broken or destroyed). Their distribution in the Transylvanian Celtic area is even and all zones are included (Pl. 1/1). In the inner Carpathian region of Transylvania ten bent Celtic swords were found discovered in ten graves at Aiud, Toarcla, Dipșa, Cristuru Secuiesc, Orosfaia, Silivaș and Band. Excepting grave 2 from Orosfaia which contained a bent late LT C1 Celtic sword (probably the latest bent sword found in a Celtic grave Transylvania) a piece that has been properly studied, documented and published (Vaida 2006, 303, fig. 14/7), all the other graves were discovered in circumstances where the details regarding the rite and ritual are sparse. In two of the Celtic cemeteries from Aiud area (Parc and the Straub Vineyard) at least three graves containing bent swords (Fig. 2/1, 18) were discovered by chance at the beginning of the twentieth century (Roska 1944, 65, 78, cat. no. 88 b–c, fig. 34/1a–b; 35/2; Crișan 1973, 50, cat. no. 1 b–c). The LT B2 sword (Ferencz 2007, 74, fig. 2) discovered in 1912 at Aiud–Parc (Fig. 1/1) is certainly one of the oldest examples of bent swords in Celtic graves from Transylvania. Fig. 1. Bent iron weapons in the Celtic Transylvanian area. 1–9, 13–18. swords; 10–11. spearheads; 12. knife. 1 and 18. Aiud, 2 and 13. Pișcolt, 3 and 10. Tărian, 4 and 5. Dipșa, 6. Săcueni, 7. Silivaș, 8. Cristuru Secuiesc, 9. Curtuiușeni, 11 and 16. Aradul Nou, 12. Aluniș, 14 and 15. Sanislău, 17. Pecica. Various scales (after Ferencz 2007; Németi 1989; Chidioșan–Ignat 1972; Horedt 1944; Constantiniu 1968; Roska 1944; Crișan 1974; Pădurean 1985; Zirra 1972). The bent sword was also included in the funerary inventory of the so called chariot burials from Cristuru Secuiesc–Csűrösoldal (Roska 1933, 359–360, fig. 1/1–1a) and Toarcla–Kuhbüchel (Horedt 1944, 189, 191, fig. 1/2–3). We do not have much information about the grave from Toarcla, discovered by chance in the second half of the nineteenth century. At Cristuru Secuiesc a grave was also discovered also by chance at the beginning of the twentieth century; the bent sword (Fig. 1/8) seemed to have been placed on the large pottery vessel (urn) in which the cremated bones and the grave goods were found. In this case one can classify this as an in-urned cremation containing a bent weapon as grave goods, – a rather rare association for the region and period we are dealing with here. Another grave with a cremation in an urn containing a bent Celtic sword (Fig. 1/5) amongst the funerary inventory was discovered by chance in 1910 at Dipșa–Totenberg (Horedt 1944, 196, 198, fig. 5/8). It is possible that this grave was a part of a larger cemetery as long as not far from it in a second destroyed grave another ritually bent and broken sword (Fig. 2/4) was recovered (Horedt 1944, 198, fig. 5/3). Killing the Weapons An Insight on Graves with Destroyed Weapons in Late Iron Age Transylvania | 345 Bent swords associated with other weapons formed part of the inventory of the presumed grave from Silivaș (Fig. 1/7), associated with spears and sica type fighting knife (Roska 1944, 66, 78, cat. no. 96, fig. 38) while the grave from Band–Omláshegy / Dulasvár, excavated by István Kovács in 1906 was associated with a spearhead (Roska 1944, 64, 78, cat. no. 80; Lazăr 1995, 57, cat. no. VIII.1.b). In both cases, at Silivaș and at Band, only the spears were bent, the rest of the weapons being intact with no sign of any intervention or destruction. There is a marked north-western nucleus in the valley of the Criș Rivers and Someș Rivers. It should be mentioned that the discoveries made in this area must be connected to those made in the Hungarian Plain. Here, the archaeologically recorded graves containing ritually bent weapons – five graves at Pișcolt, two at Sanislău and one at Tărian – are numerous by comparison to those discovered by chance but which have been recorded (Curtuiușeni and Săcueni). At Pișcolt, ritually bent weapons – swords only (Fig. 1/2, 13) – were discovered in five graves, exclusively cremations in pits, belonging both to the early stages of the cemetery – the grave 36 from horizon I, the graves 124, 137 and 207 from horizon II –, and to the final stage – the grave 155 from horizon IV – (Németi 1988, 54, fig. 4/10; Németi 1989, 86, 87, 103, fig. 8/1a–c; 10; 23/3–3a; Németi 1992, 97, fig. 27/3). Other two ritually bent swords were found in the graves 1 and 3 from Sanislău–Lutărie, both incinerations in pit (Fig. 1/14–15). These weapons present traces of contact with fire (Zirra 1972, 158–159, fig. 4/1, 5; pl. XLIX/1; L/4–5). A distinct feature presents the LT C1 grave 34 of incinerations in pit, from the bi-ritual cemetery from Tărian–Dâmbul lui Ciordaș. The bent sword from this grave (Fig. 1/3) was pulled out of the scabbard, a very rare case in Transylvania. The iron scabbard, also bent, was placed in the grave above the sword. This grave is remarkable because beside the bent sword a spearhead was also part of the funerary inventory (Chidioșan–Ignat 1972, 565, pl. 7/3–8) (Fig. 1/10). Conversely, in other Celtic regions and communities this feature is quite common, as demonstrated by the graves with sword and scabbard separately folded of already mentioned cemetery at Monte Tamburino (Vitali 2003, graves 55, 72, 89, 118, 126, 135). Two chance finds are to be mentioned beside this important series of graves systematically researched, because they mark the chronological frame of the bent weapons from the graves of this north-western group. The broken sword from the grave discovered between the two World Wars at Săcueni–Cărămidărie (Roska 1944, 70, cat. no. 127) was very probably previously bent (Constantiniu 1968, 220, fig. 1–2). The preserved scabbard chape (Fig. 1/6) indicates a considerable age of this sword, perhaps even the end of LT B1. The other chronological limit (the final LT C1, if we consider the fibula from the funerary inventory) is represented by the bent and fragmented sword (Fig. 1/9) from the cremation chariot burial discovered by chance at Curtuiușeni–Égetőhegy (Roska 1944, 58, 77, cat. no. 30, fig. 14/16). Between these two groups – the inner-Carpathians Transylvania and the north-western nucleus – it is placed the discovery from Derșida–Dealul Temeteului: a grave containing a ritually bent sword, as well as a shield umbo; these pieces belong most probably to the LT C1 period (Németi 1992, 110; Németi– Lakó 1993, 77–78, pl. 2/6–7; 3/4–5). A western nucleus is situated on the lower Mureș valley and in Banat. At Aradul Nou, a spearhead and a blade of sword, both of them ritually bent and broken (Fig. 1/11, 16), were discovered by chance among other grave goods of some destroyed graves (Crișan 1974, 41–42, fig. 7/6–7; 8/3, 9). Another Celtic sword, three times bent and broken (Fig. 1/17) was discovered at Pecica (Crișan 1974, 46, fig. 16/1; 17/1–2). Also a chance find is the bent knife (Fig. 1/12) from Aluniș (Pădurean 1985, 30, cat. no. V. b, pl. 8/2a; Luca 2006, 23). The only graves containing bent weapons in Banat which have been properly researched are those of the cemetery from Remetea Mare. At least two graves from this cemetery contained bent swords as grave good: grave 1, in which two bent swords were discovered and grave 10 (Rustoiu 2008, 111, fig. 55–56). What kinds of weapons were bent? Among the 29 bent or ritually broken weapons, the swords are very important with some 26 examples (90%); the sword is included in almost all the graves in the category of those with bent weapons as grave goods. A recent count of the swords from Transylvania yielded a total amount of de 35 examples (Berecki 2008, 54–55, 68, 62) known from the entire period of the presence of the Celts in this area, from LT B2a (11 swords), LT B2b (10 swords), and LT C1 (14 swords). Even a superficial analysis of these numbers reveals that almost three quarters (almost 75%) of the La Tène swords from Transylvania were bent, representing a significant percentage. In second place after the swords – but much less numerous – are the spearheads: two examples discovered at Aradul Nou (Crișan 1974, 41–42, fig. 7/6; 8/3) and at Tărian (Chidioșan–Ignat 1972, 565, pl. 7/6). The list of the categories 346 | D. Măndescu of bent weapons ends with a knife, a chance find at Aluniș (Pădurean 1985, 30, pl. 7/2a), that could come have from a destroyed grave, although there is no certainty regarding this (Luca 2006, 23). Thus, we can note the existence of three categories of bent weapons in Celtic burials from Transylvania: the sword, the spearhead and the knife. It must be underlined that the three bent elements were never found associated in the same sealed context. Only the sword and the spear (both of them bent) are associated in a single context: the grave 34 (cremation in a pit) in the cemetery from Tărian (Chidioșan–Ignat 1972, 565, pl. 7/3, 6–8). In other situations, when the sword is placed in the grave together with the spear (sometimes even two spears) and a knife, only the sword is bent, spear (spears) and the knife being intact. This funerary rite can be observed in the cemetery from Pișcolt, in the case of the graves 36 (Németi 1988, 54, fig. 4/8–10), 124 (Németi 1989, 86, fig. 8/1–3) and 155 (Németi 1992, 97, fig. 27/3–4), all of them being cremation burials, but also in other sealed contexts: examples are the graves 1 and 10 from Remetea Mare (bent swords and intact spearheads, knife and umbo: Rustoiu 2008, 111, fig. 55–56), grave 2 from Orosfaia (folded sword and intact spearhead, umbo and even an arrowhead: Vaida 2006, 303, fig. 14/7; Ferencz–Vaida 2010, 310–311, pl. 4) all of them highlighting the unique character of the grave 34 from Tărian. Not only bent weapons were deposed as grave goods in cremation graves. There are a few other cremation graves from Celtic cemeteries from Transylvania that contain edged household tools that were bent before being put next to the cremated bones. In grave 5 (a cremation in a pit) from the cemetery of Apahida – on the basis of the ornaments found in it, a grave belonging to a woman –, three little iron bent knives were found (Zirra 1976, 135, fig. 5/5–7a). It is also interesting that grave 158 belongs to the last horizon of the cemetery from Pișcolt (also a cremation in a pit), in which the spearhead was intact, but the iron shears found with it were bent (Németi 1992, 97, fig. 28/5). In other contexts and cultures such household iron tools put bent in graves occur up to the Roman period: the grave 25, belonging to a woman, from the cemetery of Aica di Fie (Völser Aicha) dated to the second half of the 2nd century and the first half of the 3rd century AD, contained a ritually bent and broken needle (Rosada–Dal Ri 1985, 241, pl. 14/25/432). 1 2 3 4 5 Fig. 2. Pattern of bent/folded Celtic iron sword in Transylvania: 1. once; 2. twice; 3. three times; 4–5. four times. 1. Aiud, 2. Pișcolt, 3. Tărian, 4. Orosfaia, 5. Remetea Mare. Various scales (after Ferencz 2007; Németi 1989; Chidioșan–Ignat 1972; Vaida 2006; Rustoiu 2008). How were they bent? The answer to this question might be considered to be of lesser importance, but there are some details that sometimes may reflect well defined behavioural characteristics, specifically ritual features for a certain group of people. Thus, in our area of interest, the sword is ordinarily bent once to three times (Fig. 2/1–3). Only two exceptions were documented: in the case of the grave 2 from Orosfaia (Fig. 2/4), in which the sword was bent – in fact rolled – four times (Vaida 2006, 303, fig. 14/7), and also the sword from grave 10 of Remetea Mare cemetery (Rustoiu 2008, 111, fig. 56/M10) (Fig. 2/5). In the cases when the scabbard was present, the sword and the scabbard were bent together, the sword being kept inside the scabbard. Such swords bent in their scabbard were discovered at Aiud, Band, Curtuiușeni, Orosfaia, Sanislău and Pișcolt. There is an important exception at Tărian, where the sword Killing the Weapons An Insight on Graves with Destroyed Weapons in Late Iron Age Transylvania | 347 and the scabbard were separately bent. In the cremation grave 34 from this cemetery, right next to the cremated bones of the dead was firstly laid the sword bent three times. Then its scabbard bent four times was put on the sword (Chidioșan–Ignat 1974, 565, pl. 7/3, 7–8). Other graves where it seems that the sword and the scabbard were perhaps separately bent are those from Toarcla and Derșida. Regarding the spearheads from Aradul Nou and Tărian it must be said that they have been bent in two halves in the middle. In fact the sword from Aradul Nou was discovered broken in two halves due to having been bent (Crișan 1974, 41–42, fig. 7/6; 8/3). Why were these weapons bent? Obviously this is the most difficult question to answer in a coherent and definitive manner. Throughout time and varying from one author to another there are many and varied explanations, each of them having its own weakness. Some comprise a profane view by explaining the folding, bending, breaking and destruction as being due to practical reasons: long weapons like swords were too big to fit the pit of the cremation graves. Additionally, in this way (making the weapon impossible to be used by destroying it in front of all those participating in the funerary ceremony) would prevent a possible robbery of the grave where the aim would be to take away the valuable weaponry (Pinter 2001, 56–58). Other more elaborate explanations lead to an area more difficult to be explored because it involves behaviour related with the individual character of the weapons and elements of ritual belonging to the sphere of superstition (Berecki 2006, 64), as well as of mystical and religious motivations, the investing of the weapon with supernatural and magical powers. In this case the sword being considered an extension of the warrior’s arm during the battle and thus being part of his body which, together with the body, was consequently ‘killed’ (Rustoiu 2008, 91). Regarding chronology, it has been noted that the graves date from LT B2 (or possibly the end of LT B1 as in the case of Săcueni) until the end of LT C1 (Curtuiușeni, Orosfaia). Where documented and recorded, the funerary rite of the graves having bent weapons as grave goods was always cremation, usually cremation in a pit, a feature already outlined for the case of the cemetery at Pișcolt (Németi 1993, 119); though this is uncertain in the case of discoveries made by chance, such as those from Dipșa and Cristuru Secuiesc. However, in Transylvania bent weapons are never present in inhumation graves. This may just be a regional peculiarity, since in other areas of Celtic Europe, like the Boiian territory south of Po River, around Bononia, inhumation graves with bent weapons as grave goods are not at all a rarity: for instance Benacci graves 121 and 953 from the cemetery at Certosa (Vitali 1992, 141, 292, 285, 288, 294), or the grave 89 at Monte Tamburino (Vitali 2003, 161, pl. 153/3, 15). In the archaeological literature, ritual bending of the weapons deposed in graves as grave goods or in other contexts as offerings is a custom that belongs exclusively to the Celts; this is a common ‘topos’. Though there most remain doubt regarding this idea as long as the Thracian Getae, the south-eastern neighbours of the Celts from Transylvania, also used this funerary ritual (Pl. 1/2). Bent weapons were discovered in Thracian Getae graves starting from the end of the Early Iron Age. Weapons ritually bent were also discovered in graves from the barrow cemetery with cremations from Ferigile dated to the second quarter of the first millennium BC (Fig. 3/1–4): one akinakes in barrow 44 grave 1, three knives for fight in barrow 53 and barrow 4 grave 1, and spearheads in barrow 136 and ‘zone 1’ (Vulpe 1967, 110, 137, 180, pl. 15/4; 17/10–11, 16; 20/9, 12). The most spectacular piece is the akinakes type sword from the barrow 44 grave 1 (Fig. 3/1), which, after being bent many times was stung in the ancient soil beside the cremated bones of the dead, before the barrow was built (Vulpe 1967, 133, pl. 15/4). A spearhead ritually bent was found in another cemetery belonging to Ferigile group researched in the Danube area, at Eșalniţa-Mala (Fig. 3/6) dating back to the 7th and 6th centuries BC (Comori arheologice 1978, 79, 96, R. 282). The custom of deposing bent weapons in graves can be observed in the Getic world from the Lower Danube during the 4th and the 3rd centuries BC. Ritually bent spearheads are predominant. They are present both in the ordinary Getic graves like those from Daia (Rădulescu 1966, 265–266, fig. 1–3) (Fig. 3/8) and Pleven (Tabakova-Canova 1964, 46–48, fig. 1–3) (Fig. 3/11), and in the ‘princely’ ones: the grave from Peretu (Fig. 3/7) is a good example of such an ostentatious burial (Moscalu 1989, 138, fig. 4/9). The bent spearheads from Poroschia (Mirea–Pătrașcu 2006, 21, 43, fig. 46) (Fig. 3/10) and Zimnicea (Spânu 2003, 9, n. 41, fig. 8) (Fig. 3/9) were probably part of the funerary inventory of graves which have been subsequently robbed and destroyed. Comparing the archaeological evidence specific for the two worlds of the Celts and the Getae, it clearly follows that the only important difference between them is that among the Thraco-Getic communities the most significant bent weapons are spears and not swords. It is obvious that this selection does not belong to a specific funerary custom, so much as is due to a different style of fighting and to a different 348 | D. Măndescu suite of arms of Thracian warriors for whom the spear was the first choice. Despite this, the bent sword is present in Thraco-Getic burials: the akinakes from Ferigile has already been mentioned. In addition, in grave 3b2 (a slab constructed cist grave containing a cremation burial) from the cemetery at Enisala was also discovered an iron sword bent to fit the inner walls of the cist (Simion 1971, 110, fig. 27/b; pl. 11). From a chronological viewpoint, the ritually bent swords discovered at Dragoevo (Fig. 3/5) are placed between the discoveries from Ferigile and those from Enisala; at Dragoevo was discovered at least one bent Greek-type sword dated to the 6th century BC, a type which survived in the Getic world until the 4th century BC (Măndescu 2010, 175); however, the reason for its bending remains still unclear (ritual deposit?, cult place?, grave?) (Bujokliev Et Al. 1995, 35, cat. no. 1). 3 4 1 5 7 6 2 8 9 10 11 Fig. 3. Bent iron weapons in the Thracian area. 2, 4, 6–11. spearheads; 1, 5. swords; 3. knife. 1–4. Ferigile, 5. Dragoevo, 6. Eșalniţa, 7. Peretu, 8. Daia, 9. Zimnicea, 10. Poroschia, 11. Pleven. Various scales (after Bujokliev Et Al. 1995; Comori arheologice 1978; Moscalu 1989; Rădulescu 1966; Spânu 2003; Mirea–Pătrașcu 2006; Tabakova-Canova 1964). It may, however, be too easy tp assume that the Celts who arrived in Transylvania in the last third of the 4th century BC borrowed this funerary custom from the neighbouring Thracian population. Some older opinions on this subject (Berciu 1970, 84) have suggested this theory. The proof that this cannot be supported is the existence of Celtic graves containing ritually bent weapons along the whole extent of their movement to east. The iron sword having a characteristic 4th century BC hilt (Rapin 1999, 51, fig. 8/1) and the blade bent twice, discovered at Szendrő which has been known for a long time (Pârvan 1926, 436, fig. 322) is proof that in the Early La Tène period the eastern Celts used ritually to bend their swords. Killing the Weapons An Insight on Graves with Destroyed Weapons in Late Iron Age Transylvania | 349 Another group of graves in which bent weapons have been found in Transylvania belong to the postCeltic horizon and extend into the middle Mureș valley (Pl. 1/3). In all the cases where the funerary rite has been recorded, this is cremation. The first graves to be discussed in this context certainly belong to the supra-regional and supra-ethnic horizon conventionally called the Padea–Panagjurski Kolonii (2nd– 1st centuries BC), in which the Dacians played an important role. Of note is the graves (probably two in number) from Teleac, from which a spearhead and a sica (Fig. 4/1–2), both ritually bent, were recovered (Moga 1982, 87–91, fig. 1–2). Also must be mentioned the grave from Blandiana, where the spearhead was intact, unaffected by ritual intervention, while the sica-type dagger seemed to be intentionally bent (Fig. 4/3). Even if the evidence of this dagger’s intentional bending might be doubted, there is further evidence that an iron bit was certainly ritually bent in the grave from Blandiana (Ciugudean 1980, 428, fig. 3) (Fig. 4/4). The marked bending of the central element of this bit cannot have been accidental. The grave discovered at Ighiu in 1885 probably belongs to the same category as the two previously mentioned graves, because in the pottery vessel used as funerary urn was placed a bent iron spearhead (Moga– Ciugudean 1995, 110, cat. no. 93.3). Fig. 4. Bent iron weapons in the post-Celtic Transylvania. 2–3 sica; 1. spearhead; 5. sword; 4. bit. 1–2. Teleac, 3–4. Blandiana, 5. Craiva. Various scales (after Rustoiu 2008; Popa 2008). The bending of the weapons put in the graves of the Padea–Panagjurski Kolonii horizon was a frequent custom in the whole Danube area on both sides of the river thus the discoveries from Transylvania, though peripheral, are no different from the graves of the Northern Balkan nucleus. In an earlier chronologic horizon (the middle/the second half of the 3rd century and the beginning of the 2nd century), corresponding to LT C1 and the transition to LT C2, and more obvious especially to the south of the Danube, have been exclusively found bent swords that remind us of the characteristics of the Celtic world. The bent sword from a warrior grave at Plovdiv, from the Hellenistic cemetery of Philippopolis (Megaw 2004, 100) is a good example. Though they were found in late complexes, the bent swords from the graves from Ruse (Anastassov 2007, 169, 171, pl. 2), Kazanlâk (Getov 1962, 41–42), Novo Selo (Anastassov 2006, 29, pl. 2), Kamburovo (Nicolăescu-Plopșor 1948, 31) and barrow 6 from Kâlnovo (Bujokliev Et Al. 1995, 36, cat. no. 6) complete the general picture. There are also bent swords to the north of the Danube, in Oltenia, for example at Perișor (Zirra 1971, 234, n. 303), Turnu Severin (Nicolăescu-Plopșor 1948, 29, pl. IV/13), Dobrosloveni (Nicolăescu-Plopșor 1948, 24, pl. V/12), Sărata (Bondoc 2011, 291, fig. 1/1), grave 1 from Corlate (Nicolăescu-Plopșor 1948, 22, pl. II/1). A similar bent sword was strangely found on the Pontic littoral, in the cemetery of Callatis, in a grave considered to be that of a mercenary warrior (Rustoiu 2000, 277–279, fig. 1/1). Many cremation graves are recorded in Oltenia (LT C2/beginning of LT D1) where the ritually bent spearhead usually bearing traces of contact with fire is the only weapon among the grave goods: Gruia (Zirra 1971, fig. 21/10; Sîrbu 1993, 77), Slatina–Crișan (Sîrbu 1993, 78), Călărași (Nicolăescu-Plopșor 1948, 18, pl. I/4) and grave 2 from graveyard at Corlate (Nicolăescu-Plopșor 1948, 22–23, pl. II/5), etc. 350 | D. Măndescu The association of sword and spear, both of them bent, was attested in the graves from Balta Verde (Sîrbu 1993, 78) and Gogoșiţa (Nicolăescu-Plopșor 1948, 25, pl. IV/2, 4–5). In other case, the bent spear is associated with a sica, also bent. Graves of this type include those from Rastu (Tudor 1968, 517–520, fig. 1–3; Sîrbu 1993, 79, fig. 18; Borangic 2009, 48–49, cat. no. 21–23) and Dubova (Spânu 2002, 84, fig. 1/2–3). Though rarely, there are cases in which the whole assemblage was burned and ritually bent before being put into the grave. Such a cremation burial is one from Cornești, where there were discovered a sword, a sica, a spearhead and a shield umbo, all distorted and showing traces of burning (Popescu 1963, 408, 410, fig. 1–4; Sîrbu 1993, 78). As can be seen, the majority of the burials containing weapons ritually bent from Oltenia are isolated graves, but there is a notable cemetery at Turburea-Spahii, where nine graves from the total of 29 contained weapons (swords, knives, spears) most of them burned and bent or broken (Babeș 2000, 137). It is certain that Oltenia presents a lot of viable analogies for the graves containing bent weapons from Teleac, Blandiana and Ighiu. Unfortunately, like the graves from Transylvania, the majority of the weaponry discovered in the graves from Oltenia dated to the 2nd–1st centuries BC – about 30 spots, according to a recent study (Babeș 2000, 137) – are chance finds, without complete information about their grave. There are clues supporting the view that beginning in the 2nd century BC, this occurrence of the custom of bending the weapons and putting them into graves is recorded over a much larger area of Europe. Thus, the situation in the Lower Danube and in Transylvania is similar to the one from the Po–Este Basin (the Celtic area of the Veneti), where starting from the 2nd century and along the 1st century BC cremation is general and swords placed in the grave are ritually bent. The assemblage is completed by the spearhead and the shield umbo. Previously, in the older graves found in this region, all of them inhumations, the sword was placed intact on the right side of the dead warrior (Capuis 1993, 227, 231–232). Returning again to the situation in Transylvania, we will focus on the last two graves containing bent weapons belonging to the pre-Roman period. These are Dacian burials dated to the 1st century BC. Both of them are situated in the proximity of two important Dacian centres of power, Cugir and Craiva. One of the four barrow graves from the south western slope of the fortress from Cugir (barrow IV, a cremation grave) contained, beside an intact sica, a spearhead ritually bent (Crișan 1980, 82; Sîrbu 1993, 72; Popa 2004, 116). Many weapons and items of warrior’s equipment were also discovered in barrow II and III from a group at Cugir (Popa 2004, 115, pl. 11–12/9–10). However, we do not have enough evidence to establish if other weapons found here, except the spear from the barrow IV, were ritually bent. Regarding the sword bent and broken in three fragments from Craiva (Fig. 4/5), it must be said that it belongs to an ensemble of pieces (probably the inventory of a grave) discovered by chance at the bottom of Piatra Craivii, on which peak the Dacian fortress is found. For a long time this sword was considered to be an part of grave goods from a Celtic burial (Roska 1944, 60, cat, no. 51, fig. 23/1–3; Crișan 1973, 55, cat. no. 16), but a recent study have convincingly proved that, although it belonged to a Celtic type, this sword was a part of a funerary inventory of a Dacian burial from the 2nd–1st centuries BC and thus closely related to the fortress situated in the vicinity (Popa 2008, 357–365, pl. 2/1). The situation of the graves containing bent weapons placed next to the big centres of power at Cugir and Craiva is not exceptional in the Getic and Dacian world. Such graves are also attested outside Transylvania. Thus, next to the big dava from Popești situated to the south of the Carpathians a sword folded in two was put in a cremation grave under barrow 4 (Vulpe 1976, 201, fig. 13; Sîrbu 1993, 73, fig. 10/4). On the northern side of the Dacian territory, in the two cemeteries, Serednij Gunok and Chellenica, situated next to the important fortified centre of Mala Kopanja were discovered many cremation graves of warriors from the middle and the second half of the 1st century BC; their grave goods included a variety of weapons – ritually bent: sica, swords, spearhead (Kotygoroshko 2009, 281–283, fig. 2/1; 3/2; 4/2–3). Such burials of warriors containing weapons ritually bent are relatively numerous in the culture having an important Dacian component situated in the upper Dniester valley (the area of the so-called Lipitsa culture) and the upper basin of Tisza River. The most relevant factor regarding the Lipitsa culture is represented by the cemetery of Zvenigorod-Goeva Gora, where cremation flat graves are prevalent. The predominant Dacian elements are mixed with the Przeworsk elements as is demonstrated by the pottery forms. There are three cremation graves in that cemetery (dated to the 1st century AD) that contain ritually bent weapons: graves 8 (a bent sword next to an intact spearhead), 15 (under the urn, a spearhead stung Killing the Weapons An Insight on Graves with Destroyed Weapons in Late Iron Age Transylvania | 351 into the soil and a bent sword, while in the urn a bent fighting knife was found) and 16 (a bent spearhead) (Shchukin 1989, 283–284, pl. 11/8, 13; Sîrbu 1993, 80, fig. 19/2, 14; 20/23). In the same area is situated the Dacian grave from Lucha (1st century AD) that contains a bent spearhead (Shchukin 1989, 282). On the other side, in the area of the upper basin of Tisza River is attested, starting to the second half of the 2nd century BC, an archaeological culture created by a mixture of ethnics and populations (Dacians, Celts, Przeworsk elements). Here, in the cemetery from Zemplin (the end of the 2nd century BC to the first half of the 2nd century AD), a ritually bent sword was placed in the grave 128 (Sîrbu 1993, 81, fig. 22/4). Returning to the case of Transylvania in the post-Celtic period, in the five sites which include discoveries of graves containing weapons ritually bent, five (or six) such weapons were found (three spearheads, one or two sica and one sword) and also a bit. The ratio of swords to spears by comparison to the Celtic era is now reversed. The ratio of 3:1 during the post-Celtic era suggests of course a radical change of the weapons favoured and of the importance of each weapon element. And even more than this, the predominance of bent spearheads recalls the customs of the Thracian world, so that it is easy to deduce what were the conditions and the influences surrounding this new fashion in weaponry. A succinct view of the funerary customs in the barbarian Europe in the 2nd century BC and 2nd century AD, reveals not only that the Celts and the Dacians used to ritually bend their swords as part of the burial ritual, but also especially the German populations from North. The examples could be followed in Scandinavia, where there are attested even graves containing double sets of weapons (swords) ritually bent, like those situated next to Langå, in Fyn island (four bent swords) or grave 2 from Övre Ålebäck, in Öland (Czarnecka 2007, 53, fig. 5). Southern of it, in the Oksywie culture, from the middle of the 2nd century, the ritually bent swords represent a usual presence in the funerary inventory, as represented by the graves from Warszkowo, Buczek, Oleszno, Dębczina (Shchukin 1989, pl. 13/III.27, 37, 43; 14/15, 31); sometimes as well as the bent swords were found spearheads, also deformed, destroyed as in the cremation graves from Gdańsk Nowolipki and Bolszewo or in the grave 1/1883 from the cemetery of Rządz (Czarnecka 2007, 53, fig. 4). We have already mentioned the preference of the ethnic elements of the Przeworsk culture for the ritual ‘killing’ of the weapons, especially swords (Liana 1968, 381–383). Thus we have noted the destroyed weapons in graves consisting of cremation in a pit; this kind of grave goods is documented from the first phases of this culture, during LT C2 (Shchukin 1989, 41, 46, pl. 8/11). This feature was maintained during the entire period of the Przeworsk culture, even at the beginning of the 3rd century AD placing the bent swords in the graves was still ‘in fashion’ (Shchukin 1989, 28). A spectacular example is the inventory of the grave from Kortynca, dating to the advanced phase of the Przeworsk culture (LT D2): two swords in scabbards ritually bent, also two bent spearheads and other intact weapons (Czarnecka 2007, 51, fig. 3). In the Vistula Basin, in the graves of the Chełmno Group situated at the interface of the Przeworsk and Oksywie cultures, bent swords are also present (Shchukin 1989, pl. 13/II.14) so it was also in the Grossromstedt-Kronwinkl horizon, LT D2, the middle of the 1st century BC (Shchukin 1989, 265, pl. 4/15). Further to the south, closer to the region which has been our main concern in this article, a bent sword placed in the grave was found in the area of the Poienești–Lukaševka Bastarnian culture, in grave 29 from the cemetery at Borosești (Babeș 1993, 114, 186, Taf. 5/c–d). The provincial Roman world was also familiar with these funerary practices. In a cremation grave from Neeritter in the Netherlands, probably belonging to a veteran of an auxiliary unit, buried in the manner of the local ritual and dated to the 1st century AD, the sword was intentionally bent (Roymans 1996, 35, 105, cat. no. 23, fig. 9). In the middle and lower Rhine valley, in the territories where the Batavi, Cugerni and Treveri lived in the 1st–2nd centuries AD, a lot of bent and destroyed Roman weapons (gladii, helmets) were deposed in cult places such as that from Empel (Roymans 1996, 35). The ritual bending of weapons put in graves proves to be a habit of the funerary rituals extending in various regions over a considerable period of time as represented in various cultures. Much later than the chronological framework considered here, when both the Celts and the Thracian had quitted the stage of Balkan history, bent swords are still sporadically attested in the funerary inventory of the graves of the various peoples who populated large areas of this zone. A ritually bent sword is part of the assemblage of the inhumation grave 169 from Mihălășeni (Sântana de Mureș–Cerneahov culture). The presence of the bent sword on the right side of the dead from Mihălășeni, a Nordic-featured man, was considered to be remeniscent of the Vandal culture (Șovan 2009, 196). Also the Sarmatians were not complete strangers to this ritual. This is proved by the grave from Vaskút (dating to the 4th–5th centuries AD), which contains a ritually bent double bladed iron sword 352 | D. Măndescu (Muscalu 2009, 197, fig. 7/4). The ritual was also performed by the Gepidae. Ritually bent swords were discovered in the Gepidian graves from Ártánd–Nagyfarkasdomb (the second half of the 5th century), as well as being discovered in some graves from the cemetery from Csongrád (Bierbrauer 2006, 180, fig. 8/3). Like events in a never-ending story, there are similar examples in the Middle Ages: the bending of the sword was a ritual practice performed by the Francs and Allamani, and also sporadically by the Hungarians (Pinter 2001, 53). References Anastassov 2006 Anastassov 2007 Babeș 1993 Babeș 2000 Babeș 2001 Berciu 1970 Berecki 2006 Berecki 2008 Bierbrauer 2006 Bondoc 2011 Borangic 2009 Buchwald 2005 Bujokliev Et Al. 1995 Capuis 1993 Chidioșan–Ignat 1972 Ciugudean 1980 Comori arheologice 1978 Constantiniu 1968 Anastassov, J., Objets Latèniens du Musée de Schoumen (Bulgarie), IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Thracians and Celts. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Bistrița, ClujNapoca, 11–50. Anastassov, J., Le mobilier Latènien du Musée de Ruse (Bulgarie), Izvestija Ruse, 11, 165–187. Babeș, M., Die Poienești–Lukaševka-Kultur. Ein Beitrag zur Kulturgeschichte im Raum östlich der Karpaten in den letzen Jahrhunderten vor Christi Geburt, Bonn. Babeș, M., s. v. mormânt, IN: Preda, C. (Coord.), Enciclopedia arheologiei și istoriei vechi a României, III (M–Q), București, 131–139. Babeș, M., Spațiul carpato-dunărean în secolele III–II a.Chr., IN: Petrescu-Dîmbovița, M.– Vulpe, A., Istoria Românilor, I, Moștenirea timpurilor îndepărtate, București, 501–531. Berciu, D., Lumea celților, București. Berecki, S., Rite and Ritual of the Celts from Transylvania, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Thracians and Celts. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Bistriţa, Cluj-Napoca, 51–76. Berecki, S., The Chronology of the Celtic Discoveries from Transylvania, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Funerary Practices of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Central and South-Eastern Europe. Proceedings of the 9th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology, Bistriţa, 9–11 May 2008, Cluj-Napoca, 47–65. Bierbrauer, V., Gepiden im 5. Jahrhundert – eine Spurensuche, IN: Mihailescu-Bîrliba, V.– Hriban, C.–Munteanu, L. (eds.), Miscellanea romano-barbarica. In honorem septuagenarii magistri Ion Ioniţă oblata, București, 167–216. Bondoc, D., Discoveries from the second period of the Iron Age from Sărata, Călărași commune, Dolj County, IN: Măgureanu, D.–Măndescu, D.–Matei, S. (eds.), Archaeology: making of and practice. Studies in honor of Mircea Babeș at his 70th anniversary, Pitești, 291–295. Borangic, C., Sica. Tipologie și funcţionalitate, Nemus, 4, 7–8, 22–74. Buchwald, V. F., Iron and steel in ancient times, Copenhagen. Bujokliev, H.–Domaradski, M.–Atanassov, G., Văorăjeni ot Drevna Trakia, Šumen. Capuis, L., I Veneti. Societa’ e cultura di un popolo dell’ Italia preromana, Milano. Chidioșan, N.–Ignat, D., Cimitirul celtic de la Tărian, SCIV, 23, 4, 553–579. Ciugudean, H., Mormântul celtic de la Blandiana (jud. Alba), ActaMN, 17, 425–432. Comori arheologice în regiunea Porţile de Fier – Trésors archeologiques dans la region de Porţile de Fier, Catalog de expoziţie, București–Drobeta-Turnu Severin. Constantiniu, M., O spadă celtică din Transilvania, București. Materiale de istorie și muzeografie, 6, 219–222. Crișan 1973 Crișan, I. H., Așa numitul mormânt de la Silivaș și problema celui mai vechi grup celtic din Transilvania, Sargetia, 10, 45–78. Crișan 1974 Crișan, I. H., Descoperiri celtice păstrate în Muzeul Judeţean Arad, Ziridava, 3–4, 37–86. Crișan 1980 Crișan, I. H., Necropola dacică de la Cugir (jud. Alba), Apulum, 20, 81–87. Czarnecka 2007 Czarnecka, K., Brothers-in-arms? Graves from the pre-Roman period furnished with a double set of weaponry, ArchBaltica, 8, 47–57. Dietrich–Dietrich Dietrich, L.–Dietrich, O., Locuirea celtică din Transilvania, Banat și Crișana (Stadiul actual al 2006 cercetării), SCIVA, 57, 1–4, 9–56. Killing the Weapons An Insight on Graves with Destroyed Weapons in Late Iron Age Transylvania | 353 Dubreucq– Piningre 2005 Dubreucq, É.–Piningre, J.-F., Un dépot d’armes du IIIe siècle av. J.C. à Bourguignon-les-Morey (Haute-Saône), IN: Barral, Ph.–Dubigney, A.–Dunning, C.–Kaenel, G.–Roulière-Lambert, M.-J. (eds.), L’âge du fer dans l’arc jurassien et ses marges: dépôts, lieux sacrés et territorialité à l’âge du fer : actes du XXIXe colloque international de l’AFEAF, Bienne, canton de Berne, Suisse, 5–8 mai 2005, II, Besançon, 671–680. Ferencz 2007 Ferencz, I. V., Despre o spadă celtică descoperită la Aiud, Apulum, 44, 73–81. Ferencz–Vaida 2010 Ferencz, I. V.–Vaida, D. L., Middle La Tène arrowheads from Transylvania, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, 9–11 october 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 309–320. Getov 1962 Getov, L., Novi danni za văorăženieto u nas prez latensato epoha, Arheologija, 4, 3, 41–43. Hellebrandt 1999 Hellebrandt, M., Corpus of Celtic Finds in Hungary, III, Celtic Finds from Northern Hungary, Budapest. Horedt 1944 Horedt, K., Zwei keltische Grabfunde aus Siebenbürgen, Dacia, 9–10, 1941–1944, 189–200. Kotygoroshko 2009 Kotygoroshko, V., Sicas of mala Kopanja, IN: Cândea, I. (ed.), The Thracians and Theirs Neighbours in Antiquity. Studia in Honorem Valerii Sîrbu, Brăila, 281–288. Lazăr 1995 Lazăr, V., Repertoriul arheologic al județului Mureș, Târgu Mureș. Liana 1968 Liana, T., Niektóre zwyczaje pogrzebowe ludności kultury Przeworskiej, Wiadomości Archeologiczne, 33, 3–4, 381–385. Luca 2006 Luca, S. A., Descoperiri arheologice din Banatul Românesc – Repertoriu, Sibiu. Măndescu 2010 Măndescu, D., Cronologia perioadei timpurii a celei de-a doua epoci a fierului (sec. V–III a.Chr.) între Carpați, Nistru și Balcani, Brăila. Megaw 2004 Megaw, J. V. S., In the footsteps of Brennos? Further archaeological evidence for Celts in Balkans, IN: Hänsel, B. (Hrsg.), Zwischen Karpaten un Ägäis. Studies in memory of Vera Nĕmejcova Pavúkova, Rhaden, 93–107. Mirea–Pătrașcu Mirea, P.–Pătrașcu, I., Alexandria. Repere arheologice și numismatice, Ploiești. 2006 Moga 1982 Moga, V., Morminte dacice de incineratie la Teleac, Apulum, 20, 87–91. Moga–Ciugudean Moga, V.–Ciugudean, H., Repertoriul arheologic al județului Alba, Alba Iulia. 1995 Moscalu 1989 Moscalu, E., Die thrako-getische Fürstengrab von Peretu in Rumänien, BerRGK, 70, 129–190. Muscalu 2009 Muscalu, B., Arme descoperite în mediul sarmatic, BHAUT, 9, 191–208. Németi 1988 Németi I., Necropola Latène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, I, Thraco-Dacica, 9, 49–73. Németi 1989 Németi, I., Necropola Latène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, II, Thraco-Dacica, 10, 75–114. Németi 1992 Németi, I., Necropola Latène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, III, Thraco-Dacica, 13, 59–112. Németi 1993 Németi, I., Necropola Latène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare, IV, Thraco-Dacica, 14, 117–129. Németi–Lakó 1993 Németi, I.–Lakó, E., Noi descoperiri celtice în judeţul Sălaj, ActaMP, 17, 77–90. NicolăescuNicolăescu-Plopșor, C. S., Antiquités celtiques en Olténie. Repertoire, Dacia, 10–11, 17–33. Plopșor 1948 Pădurean 1985 Pădurean, E. D., Contribuţii la repertoriul arheologic de pe valea Mureșului Inferior și a Crișului Alb, Crisia, 15, 27–51. Pârvan 1926 Pârvan, V., Getica. O protoistorie a Daciei, București. Pinter 2001 Pinter, Z-K., Spada și sabia medievală în Transilvania și Banat (secolele IX–XIV), Reșiţa. Pleiner–Scott 1993 Pleiner, R.–Scott, B. G., The Celtic Sword, Oxford. Popa 2004 Popa, C. I., Descoperiri dacice pe valea Cugirului, IN: Pescaru, A.–Ferencz, I. V. (eds.), DacoGeții. 80 de ani de cercetări arheologice sistematice la cetățile dacice din Munții Orăștiei, Deva, 83–166. Popa 2008 Popa, C. I., A possible Dacian burial in the vicinity of the Piatra Craivii fortress, Apulum, 45, 357–365. Popescu 1944 Popescu, D., Celții în Transilvania – Starea cercetărilor arheologice, Transilvania, 75, 8–9, 639–666. Popescu 1963 Popescu, D., Două descoperiri celtice din Oltenia, SCIVA, 14, 2, 403–412. Rapin 1993 Rapin, A., Destructions et mutilations des armes dans les nécropoles et les sanctuaires du second âge du Fer. Réflexions sur les rituels et leur descriptifs, IN: Cliquet, D. (ed.), Les Celtes en Normandie: les rites funéraires en Gaule (IIIème–Ier siècle avant J.-C.). Actes du 14ème colloque de l’Association française pour l’étude de l’âge du fer, Evreux, mai 1990, Rennes, 291–298. 354 | D. Măndescu Rapin 1999 L’armement celtique en Europe: Chronologie de son évolution technologique du Ve au Ier s. av. J.-C., Gladius, 19, 33–67. Rădulescu 1966 Rădulescu, Gh., Mormintele de la Daia și Puieni – raionul Giurgiu, RevMuz, 3, 3, 265–266. Rosada–Dal Ri 1985 Rosada, G.–Dal Ri, L., Tires e Aica. Necropoli di epoca romana, Verona. Roska 1933 Roska, M., Tombeau celtique de Cristurul Săcuiesc, dép. d’Odorhei, Dacia, 3–4, 359–361. Roska 1944 Roska, M., A kelták Erdélyben, Közlemények Kolozsvár, 4, 53–80. Roure Et Al. 2007 Roure, R. et collaborateurs, Armes et têtes coupées au Cailar (Gard): Premiers éléments de réflexion sur un dépôt rituel en Gaule méditerranéenne, IN: Barral, Ph.–Dubigney, A.– Dunning, C.–Kaenel, G.–Roulière-Lambert, M.-J. (eds.), L’âge du fer dans l’arc jurassien et ses marges: dépôts, lieux sacrés et territorialité à l’âge du fer : actes du XXIXe colloque international de l’AFEAF, Bienne, canton de Berne, Suisse, 5–8 mai 2005, II, Besançon, 653–658. Roymans 1996 Roymans, N., The sword or the plough. Regional dynamics in the romanisation of Belgic Gaul and the Rhineland area, IN: Roymans, N. (ed.), From the sword to the plough. Three studies on the earliest Romanisation of Northern Gaul, Amsterdam, 9–126. Rustoiu 2000 Rustoiu, A., Mercenari „barbari” la Histria și Callatis în sec. I a.Chr. Interpretări arheologice și istorice, Istros, 10, 277–288. Rustoiu 2008 Rustoiu, A., Războinici și societate în aria celtică transilvăneană. Studii pe marginea mormântului cu coif de la Ciumești, Cluj-Napoca. Shchukin 1989 Shchukin, M. B., Rome ant the Barbarians in Central and Eastern Europe. 1st century BC– 1st century AD, I–II, Oxford. Simion 1971 Simion, G., Despre cultura geto-dacă din nordul Dobrogei în lumina descoperirilor de la Enisala, Peuce, 2, 63–129. Sîrbu 1993 Sîrbu, V., Credinţe și practici funerare, religioase și magice în lumea geto-dacilor, Galați. Spânu 2002 Spânu, D., Un mormânt de epocă târzie Latène de la Dubova, SCIVA, 52–53, 2001–2002, 83–132. Spânu 2003 Spânu, D., Un posibil inventar funerar Latène târziu din zona Porţile de Fier, Ea-online, june, at www.archaeology.ro. Șovan 2009 Șovan, O. L., Necropola de tip Sântana de Mureș–Černjacov de la Mihălășeni (judeţul Botoșani), Târgoviște. Tabakova-Canova Tabakova-Canova, G., Novi nahodki v Plevenskija muzej, Arheologija, 4, 4, 46–52. 1964 Todorovic 1972 Todorovic, J., Praistorijska Karaburma, Beograd. Tudor 1968 Tudor, E., Morminte de luptători din a doua epocă a fierului descoperite la Rastu, SCIV, 19, 3, 517–526. Vaida 2006 Vaida, D. L., Celtic finds in North-East Transylvania (IVth–IInd centuries B.C.), IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Thracians and Celts. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Bistriţa, Cluj-Napoca, 295–323. Vitali 1992 Vitali, D., Tombe e necropoli galliche di Bologna e territorio, Bologna. Vitali 2003 Vitali, D., La necropoli di Monte Tamburino a Monte Bibele, I–II, Bologna. Vulpe 1967 Vulpe, A., Necropola hallstattiană de la Ferigile. Monografie arheologică, București. Vulpe 1976 Vulpe, A., Le nécropole tumulaire gète de Popesti, Thraco-Dacica, 1, 193–215. Zirra 1971 Zirra, V., Beiträge zur Kenntnis des keltischen Latène in Rumänien, Dacia, N. S., 15, 171–238. Zirra 1972 Zirra, V., Noi necropole celtice în nord-vestul României (Cimitirele birituale de la Sanislău și Dindești), StCom Satu Mare, 2, 151–205. Zirra 1976 Zirra, V., La nécropole La Tène d’Apahida. Nouvelles considérations, Dacia, N. S., 20, 129–165. List of figures Fig. 1. Bent iron weapons in the Celtic Transylvanian area. 1–9, 13–18. swords; 10–11. spearheads; 12. knife. 1 and 18. Aiud, 2 and 13. Pișcolt, 3 and 10. Tărian, 4 and 5. Dipșa, 6. Săcueni, 7. Silivaș, 8. Cristuru Secuiesc, 9. Curtuiușeni, 11 and 16. Aradul Nou, 12. Aluniș, 14 and 15. Sanislău, 17. Pecica. Various scales. (after Ferencz 2007; Németi 1989; Chidioșan–Ignat 1972; Horedt 1944; Constantiniu 1968; Roska 1944; Crișan 1974; Pădurean 1985; Zirra 1972). Killing the Weapons An Insight on Graves with Destroyed Weapons in Late Iron Age Transylvania | 355 Fig. 2. Pattern of bent/folded Celtic iron sword in Transylvania: 1. once; 2. twice; 3. three times; 4–5. four times. 1. Aiud, 2. Pișcolt, 3. Tărian, 4. Orosfaia, 5. Remetea Mare. Various scales (after Ferencz 2007; Németi 1989; Chidioșan–Ignat 1972; Vaida 2006; Rustoiu 2008). Fig. 3. Bent iron weapons in the Thracian area. 2, 4, 6–11. spearheads; 1, 5. swords; 3. knife. 1–4. Ferigile, 5. Dragoevo, 6. Eșalniţa, 7. Peretu, 8. Daia, 9. Zimnicea, 10. Poroschia, 11. Pleven. Various scales (after Bujokliev Et Al. 1995; Comori arheologice 1978; Moscalu 1989; Rădulescu 1966; Spânu 2003; Mirea–Pătrașcu 2006; Tabakova-Canova 1964). Fig. 4. Bent iron weapons in the post-Celtic Transylvania. 2–3 sica; 1. spearhead; 5. sword; 4. bit. 1–2. Teleac, 3–4. Blandiana, 5. Craiva. Various scales (after Rustoiu 2008; Popa 2008). List of plates Pl. 1. 1. Distribution map of the graves with destroyed weapons as grave goods in Transylvania, Crișana and Banat (4th–2nd centuries BC). 1. Aiud, 2. Aluniș, 3. Aradul Nou, 4. Band, 5. Cristuru Secuiesc, 6. Curtuiușeni, 7. Derșida, 8. Dipșa, 9. Orosfaia, 10. Pecica, 11. Pișcolt, 12. Remetea Mare, 13. Sanislău, 14. Săcueni, 15. Silivaș, 16. Tărian, 17. Toarcla; 2. Distribution map of the bent weapons in Thracian world (6th–3rd centuries BC). 1. Daia, 2. Dragoevo, 3. Enisala, 4. Eșalniţa, 5. Ferigile, 6. Peretu, 7. Pleven, 8. Poroschia, 9. Zimnicea; 3. Distribution map of the graves with bent weapons as grave goods in post-Celtic Transylvania (2nd–1st centuries BC). 1. Blandiana, 2. Craiva, 3. Cugir, 4. Ighiu, 5. Teleac. 356 | D. Măndescu 1. Distribution thees gravesitwith destroyed weapons graveragoods in Transylvania, Crișana Banat Plate . . Plate istri1.ution map ofmap t e ofra destroyed eaponsasas e oods in ransyl aniaand ri ana and anat t nd (4th–2nd centuries BC). 1. Aiud, 2. Aluniș, 3. Aradul Nou, 4. Band, 5. Cristuru Secuiesc, 6. Curtuiușeni, 7. Derșida, – enturies . . iud . luni . radul ou . and 5. risturu e uies . urtuiu eni . er ida . ip a . rosfaia 8. Dipșa, 9. Orosfaia, 10. Pecica, 11. Pișcolt, 12. Remetea Mare, 13. Sanislău, 14. Săcueni, 15. Silivaș, 16. Tărian, 17. Toarcla; . Pe i a . Pi olt . emetea are . anisl u . ueni 5. ili a . rian . oar la . istri ution map of t e ent 2. Distribution map of the bent weapons in Thracian world (6th–3rd centuries BC). 1. Daia, 2. Dragoevo, 3. Enisala, t rd eapons4.inEșalniţa, ra 5.ian orld – enturies . . aia . ra oe o . nisalamap. of alni a 5. with eri ile Peretu . Ple en Ferigile, 6. Peretu, 7. Pleven, 8. Poroschia, 9. Zimnicea; 3. Distribution the graves bent.weapons . Poros ia as . grave imni goods ea .in post-Celtic istri ution map of t (2nd–1st e ra centuries es it BC). ent1. Blandiana, eapons as ra e 3.oods post 5. elti Transylvania 2. Craiva, Cugir,in 4. Ighiu, Teleac. ransyl ania nd – st enturies . . landiana . rai a . u ir . iu 5. elea . The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin. Intercommunity Communication Strategies* Aurel RUSTOIU Institute of Archaeology and History of Art Cluj-Napoca, Romania aurelrustoiu@yahoo.com Keywords: Celts, indigenous communities, cemeteries, community identity, colonisation, Carpathian Basin In 335 BC, Alexander the Great campaigned against the Triballi. The events were reported by Ptolemaios, son of Lagos, future king of Egypt, who accompanied the Macedonian king on the expedition. The information provided would be one of the sources for the works of Arrian and Strabo. According to the Classical authors, Alexander the Great chased the Triballi up to the Danube to somewhere in the Morava valley (See Medeleţ 1982; contra Vulpe–Zahariade 1987, 98, 115, n. 27; Vulpe 2001, 458, who proposes a location on the Danube downstream of the Iron Gates). The Triballi led by King Syrmos sought refuge on an island of the river. As they resisted his attacks, the Macedonian king crossed the Danube in a one-day military strike and defeated the Getae on the left bank. This show of force was successful, since, when returning to the camp on the right bank of the Danube, Alexander the Great received the envoys of the peoples in the area with whom he exchanged vows of friendship and alliances. Arrian (I.4.6–8) records: “There [in Alexander’s camp] arrived envoys from both the free tribes inhabiting the Istros banks and from Syrmos, king of the Triballi; envoys came from even the Celts, who live around the Ionian Gulf... He (Alexander) befriended them all, taking and giving pledges. He asked the Celts what humanly thing they feared most, thinking they would say himself – as his great fame would have reached them and even further. But the Celts’ reply dashed his expectations. Indeed, as they lived at great distance from Alexander – and the land they occupied was hardly accessible – seeing that he left for other places, replied they feared no one unless it were that the heaven might fall on them sometime. Alexander called them friends, made them his allies and sent them home, adding only this: the Celts are story-tellers.” This account coincides with that preserved in Strabo (VII.3.8 – C 301): Alexander “received gifts from the peoples there and from Syrmos. Ptolemaios, son of Lagos, says that on this expedition, the Celts, who lived about the Adriatic, joined Alexander for the sake of establishing friendship and hospitality. The king received them kindly and asked them – when drinking – what it was they most feared, believing they would say himself. But they replied they feared no man; they only feared the heaven might fall on them.” Beyond the anecdotal aspects, these reports illustrate on one hand that the mentioned area was inhabited by local and ‘migrating’ communities with well-defined identity features and power structures – well enough delimited so to be recognized as such by foreign observers, as for instance the Macedonians –, and on the other hand, an entire set of diplomatic principles, standards and procedures regulating the * Documentation for this article was partly carried out on a research visit to the Library of the Römisch-Germanische Kommission, Frankfurt/Main, between 10 May and 5 June 2011. I wish warmly to thank S. Sievers for her support. Moreover, M. Ljuština, P. Ramsl and J. Gomez de Soto provided some bibliographical information for which I would like to thank them. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 357–390 358 | A. Rustoiu relations and communication between these communities, even though from different positions of force. If the Triballi, Getae and other populations, which are not specifically mentioned in the works, account for the wider picture of the indigenous communities in the area, the ‘Celts around the Ionian Gulf ’ define the group of western communities, which following the events of 335 BC, would colonise the south of the Carpathian Basin. The first aim of this study is to reconsider a series of archaeological data for the contacts at the beginning of the Late Iron Age of local communities from the southern Carpathian Basin with the La Tène communities in the eastern Alpine region and Transdanubia,. Secondly, it aims to analyse the archaeological information for the Celtic colonisation1 of the southern Carpathian Basin and the interaction with local communities. Lastly, it aims at clarifying the means through which the new communities were established following the mixture between settlers and natives, displaying La Tène cultural characteristics, interacted with neighbouring populations in the northern Balkan or eastern Mediterranean regions. The southern region of the Carpathian Basin prior to the Celtic colonisation The analysis of funerary finds in the middle Danube basin indicates that during LT B1 (the first two thirds of the 4th century BC) ‘Celtic’ communities advanced from Lower Austria regions to the east along the river (Fig. 1), occupying territories in northern Transdanubia, south-west Slovakia as well as the area of Lake Balaton (Jerem 1986; Szabó 1992, 13–23). Funerary contexts belonging to these groups illustrate the preservation of certain elements of rite and ritual as well as of La Tène-type inventories – occasionally mixed with local elements – specific to the area of origin. Fig. 1. Distribution map of early La Tène burials in the Carpathian Basin. White triangles – cemeteries LT A; black triangles – cemeteries LT B1; black squares – LT B1 type brooches (the pre-Duchcov horizon) discovered in indigenous graves from southern Carpathian Basin and north-western Balkans (after Jerem 1986 and Popović 1996). See Appendix 1. 1 The term ‘colonisation’ here, differentiates from ‘mobility’ and ‘migration’. ‘Mobility’ is the movement for various purposes of an individual or a group at variable distances from the area of origin, usually returning to the original community. On the other hand, ‘migration’ is defined by the movement of an individual or a group from an area to another aimed at the definitive establishment in the destination area (see broadly Ramsl 2003). ‘Colonisation’ or ‘settlement’ are specific terms designating the migration of part of a community (or of groups formed of individuals coming from various communities centred around certain élites, principles, ideas and so forth) in order permanently to settle a new territory outside the ‘ancestral’ area (usually located at considerably distance from the area of origin). For this reason, the Celtic colonisation is occasionally compared with Greek colonisation during the Archaic period. Regarding the evolution of theories on the Celtic ‘migrations’ see Kaenel 2007. The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 359 During the same period, funerary goods in the southern part of the Carpathian Basin include items of adornment and garment accessories originating in the eastern Alpine La Tène milieu (Pl. 1). They especially comprise brooches specific to the pre-Duchcov horizon – brooches, amongst other variations, with the foot shaped as a water-bird’s head or knobbed – and also various bracelet types (Popović 1996, 105– 112). This is the case, for instance, with certain brooches found at Szentlőrinc, Velika (Pl. 1/1–12), Donja Dolina (Popović 1996, 105–110; Jerem 1968, 184: Szentlőrinc; Majnarić-Pandžić 1996, fig. 1–3: Velika, Donja Dolina; Dizdar–Potrebica 2002, 113, 123, pl. 1–2: Velika) or of a bronze bracelet (Pl. 1/18) from Velika (Popović 1996, 106, fig. 3/7; Majnarić-Pandžić 1996, fig. 2; Dizdar–Potrebica 2002, pl. 2/6). All these items come from graves assigned to local ‘Illyrian’ communities and demonstrate the diversified trade between the two cultural areas. Furthermore, a series of brooches discovered further south in the north-western part of the Balkan Peninsula, were produced in local workshops. They preserve morphological features of La Tène brooches, however, a number of details were changed in order to suit the symbolic requirements of the indigenous communities. For instance, in the case of zoomorphic brooches, the water-bird head shaped ornament was replaced by representations of a snake head (Popović 1996, 111–114, 121). Fig. 2. Distribution map of zoomorphic brooches (with stylised griffin heads). See Appendix 2. By mid 4th century BC, the first brooches belonging to the Duchcov horizon spread to the south. They have also been discovered as associated finds belonging to indigenous communities (Popović 1996, 115–120). The Čurug hoard, composed of silver jewellery specific to the Balkans, also contained a bronze brooch (Pl. 2/1) of early Duchcov type (Tasić 1992, 10–12, fig. 5, 51–55; Ljuština 2010, 61, pl. 3–4). In other words, this brooch was incorporated in an ensemble of dress ornaments specific to local communities (Pl. 2). Similar circumstances are found in the case of zoomorphic brooches (Szabó 1974; Binding 1993, 39–40, 160, type 22, list 25, pl. 38/7–9; 39/3–9; 40/1; Rustoiu 2008a, 118–119, fig. 58: distribution map). The foot of these brooches is ring-shaped and ornamented with a stylised dragon or griffin head with open wide mouth. These brooches were commonly worn in pairs and joined by a bronze or iron chain. Occasionally, the brooch pair is formed of one piece with zoomorphic ornament and another of Duchcov type (as with the Szentendre find). The period of use of these types corresponds to the second 360 | A. Rustoiu half of the 4th century BC and the start of the following century. These brooches are the product of one or several workshops located in northern Transdanubia (Fig. 2). They were distributed southwards to the Sava (Donja Dolina) and the Danube area (Kostolac, Banjska Stena), one item being recorded in northern Bulgaria.2 Other items come from south-western Romania, at Pecica and in an unpublished cremation burial from Timișoara–Cioreni (see a short note in Medeleţ–Bejan 1983). The latter is relevant as it is indicative of the means through which La Tène items were integrated in an indigenous dress ensemble. The grave goods included two bronze zoomorphic brooches (Pl. 3/3–4), a fragmentary bronze bracelet (Pl. 3/2), another bracelet made of twisted silver wire (Pl. 3/1) and part of an astragal belt deformed by the funeral pyre (Pl. 3/5–6). The urn, preserved only as sherds, is a wheel-made vessel, most likely bi-conical, with the shoulder ornamented with incised lines and stamped circles, placed in garlands (Pl. 3/7). A handmade bowl, discovered in the same grave, was most likely used as urn lid (Pl. 3/8). The simple bracelet, the twisted bracelet and the part of the astragal belt have analogies in a series of graves in the southern area of the Carpathian Basin dated to the end of the Early Iron Age or by the beginning of the Late Iron Age.3 Funerary rite and rituals elements, similarly to most goods, are specific to a woman’s grave, of local origin.4 Zoomorphic brooches were incorporated in this ensemble of jewellery and dress accessories which define ‘indigenous’ fashions. Chronologically, the grave at Timișoara–Cioreni is dated after the second half of the 4th century BC and is prior to the arrival of the first groups of Celt settlers in the region. The La Tène items mentioned above were discovered in local funerary contexts belonging to the indigenous communities. They account for contacts between these communities and the Celts in the eastern Alpine area or northern Carpathian Basin. Contacts of this kind are identifiable in reverse as well. Thus, grave 26 of the La Tène cemetery at Mannersdorf, Lower Austria includes a pin with omega-shaped head, originating in the Balkan Peninsula (Ramsl 2010a, 253, fig. 12–13; Ramsl 2010b, 292, fig. 10). Under what form did contacts develop? Distance communication means were diverse, involving strategies and intercommunity interaction and communication mechanisms. Communities located along major communication routes, intensively used over time, had an important role in the establishment of contacts among different population groups. For instance, this is the case of the community at Mannersdorf, located by the junction between the ‘Central European corridor’ – connecting Western and Central-Eastern European regions – with the ‘Amber Road’ – uniting regions along the Adriatic, and the eastern Alpine area with northern Europe. Funerary goods in the Mannersdorf cemetery exemplify the distribution of artefacts specific to these regions (Ramsl 2010b). The site at Donja Dolina mirrors similar circumstances (Marić 1964; Gavranović 2007). Other communities controlled communication on the Sava river between northern Italy and the Danube area, as well as southwards to the eastern shore of the Adriatic on the Vrbas and then on Neretva rivers. Either by trade or transit of people and goods through these regions, individual communities entered in contact with groups from various areas. Such mobility, more or less individual, was regulated by standard and concrete communication mechanisms. The mobility of groups and individuals also took various forms. Pompeius Trogus (Justin XXIV.4.5), evoking the period of the Celtic colonisation to the east, still remembered military conflicts between the newcomers and local communities: after having subdued the Pannonians, the Gauls for many years carried on various wars with their neighbours. Theopompus (FGrH 150 F39–40 = Athenaeus 10.443 b-c), within the context of a moralizing story,5 recalls a Celtic attack in the Balkans against the tribe called the Ardiaei (usually identified with Autariatae: Mócsy 1972 apud Bearzot 2004, 69–71; Szabó 1992, 23; Kruta 2000, 241, etc.; contra Papazoglu 1978, 104), which took place in 359–358 BC or possibly a decade later (Bearzot 2004, 65, 67; Džino 2007, 55). Except for raids of the kind concerning which written 2 The brooch discovered in the region of Veliko Târnovo is a hybrid form: the spring and the bow are made similarly to the ‘Thracian’ brooches, while the foot is similar to that of the zoomorphic brooches. These features suggest that the brooch was more likely made by a local artisan familiarised with the Thracian workshops. See also Mircheva 2007, 71; Măndescu 2010, 358. 3 Silver twisted bracelets are found in grave 2 at Beremend (Jerem 1973, 81, fig. 7/2–5) and the grave at Velika (Popović 1996, fig. 3/10–11; Majnarić-Pandžić 1996, fig. 2), while astragal belts are common in this period to the ‘Illyrian’ area (Jovanović 1998). 4 Burials in the Srem group area (Bačka region, westward of Banat) are inhumation (see Ljuština 2010, 61–64, with bibliography), while in Banat cremation seems to be the custom in the period under discussion, occasionally in a lidded urn (see for instance the grave with Chalcidian helmet at Cuptoare-Sfogea or the lidded urn at Brebu: Gumă 1991, 93–99; Gumă 1993, 236–238). 5 Regarding Theopompus work see Pownall 2004, 143–175, especially p. 152 in connection to the episode referring to the Ardiaei and the Celts. The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 361 sources provide insufficient details, warrior groups most likely ventured in the eastern Mediterranean, crossing the Balkan Peninsula and at certain periods serving as mercenaries. Although Celtic mercenary activity flourished especially in the Hellenistic period and after the Great Invasion of the Balkans (see broadly Rustoiu 2006a, 53–63 with references), certain finds from temperate Europe might indicate that Celtic warriors ‘visited’ the Mediterranean area in an even earlier period. M. Schönfelder has noted that in a series of contexts dated from LT A to LT B2 – some located in the northern and north-western parts of the Carpathian Basin – spear butts (sauroter) have been discovered; these originated in the Mediterranean area (Pl. 4). Such items, parts of the hoplite spear, would not have been distributed or copied in continental Europe by other than individuals familiar with such weapons. And, in order to know their function, respective individuals must have fought on Greek battle-fields (Schönfelder 2007, 311–317). The displacement over large areas of armed groups involved the crossing of territories controlled by other communities and concurrently, access to food sources or outlets for products useful for campaigning. When such resources were not obtained by force, negotiations were carried out in order to regulate relations between the parties involved. During such agreements gifts were exchanged, including especially horses complete with harness, luxury wares, jewellery and dress or garment accessories. Such practices are frequently mentioned by the Classical authors (see for instance Xenophon VII.3.26–27 or Livy XLIII.5). Some of the La Tène artefacts found in indigenous contexts in the southern Carpathian Basin (brooches or other garment sets) might have been distributed south due to such intercommunity contacts. They were incorporated however with dress ornaments according to local fashions. The mobility of warrior groups, similar to other forms of individual mobility, resulted in the dissemination of, amongst other factors, knowledge, ideology. The diffusion of fashion, visible in the morphology of some dress items, may be due to such types of mobility and intercommunity contacts. As previously mentioned, a series of La Tène brooches, foreign to our area, were copied and certain details were transformed in line with local symbolic rules. The penetration of Celtic groups in the southern area of the Carpathian Basin altered to a certain extent contact and communications mechanisms between the communities in the region. The Celtic colonisation of southern Carpathian Basin The Celtic colonisation of the southern Carpathian Basin occurred along various routes and in different stages. The analysis of the chronology and distribution of funerary finds in the entire Carpathian Basin area is relevant in relation to the establishment of such colonisation stages and directions (Fig. 3). A series of cemeteries or isolated finds dated to the start of LT B2, located on the lower Drava and the Danube suggest a southern advance of colonising groups from the Lake Balaton area or northern Transdanubia. In certain circumstances, one may even suppose the involvement of northern Italic groups. At Osijek, some graves included weapons, others contain types of jewellery and female dress accessories (Pl. 5/1), for example in graves 22 and 29 (Božič 1981, 327, pl. 6/1–4; Guštin 1984, 319–320, fig. 10B), and similarly at Batina (Božič 1981, 327; Szabó–Petres 1992, 108, pl. 99), Bogdanovci (Božič 1981, 327) and Dalj (Majnarić-Pandžić 1970, 16–24). Eastwards – ranging along the lower Sava and the Danube – finds indicate an alternative advance route in connection with the colonisation stages of eastern Carpathian Basin. The analysis of cemeteries in this area has proved that the first Celtic groups advanced from Transdanubia to the east, to the northern Great Hungarian Plain and up to the upper Tisza. From there, they advanced southwards along the Western Carpathians, subsequently penetrating in Transylvania (Fig. 3). Such advance is recorded by a series of cemeteries ranging along the mentioned route. Some of them start by the end of LT B1 and the beginning of sub-phase LT B2 (the cemeteries in Vác area, at Muhi–Kocsmadomb, Pișcolt, the cemeteries from Crișana – of which those located around Arad are important from this point of view – or south-western Transylvania). Other cemeteries evolve only from LT B2, which suggests that the advance was slow and gradual over the second half of the 4th century BC until the beginning of the next century (Rustoiu 2008a, 67–80). From Crișana, groups of settlers advanced southwards, through the Banat. At Aradul Nou (Pl. 5/3; Pl. 6), a cemetery dated to the end of LT B1 and beginning of sub-phase LT B2 has been identified (Crișan 1974, 40–44. Other recent rescue excavations made along the line of the Timișoara–Arad motorway are still unpublished; excavations and information Adrian Ursuţiu). Another cemetery to the south of the Mureș, near the confluence of the river with the Tisza, belonging to the beginning of LT B2, was recorded at Szőreg in Hungary (Maráz 1977, 62, no. 42). At Cherestur (Beba Veche village, Timiș County) a cremation grave, part of a larger cemetery, was discovered at the beginning of the 20th century. The grave goods 362 | A. Rustoiu comprised two bronze brooches of early Duchcov type (Pl. 7/1–2), two bronze bracelets, one tubular and the other cast (Pl. 7/3–4), three iron loops, one now lost (Pl. 7/5–6), a bi-conical vessel (Pl. 7/8) and a cup (Pl. 7/7), both wheel-made. The entire inventory dates the grave to the beginning of LT B2 (unpublished; Medeleţ mss.a). Lastly, the cemetery at Remetea Mare, Timiș County (Rustoiu 2006b, 223–225, fig. 6–8; Rustoiu 2008a, fig. 55–57, 61; Rustoiu–Egri 2010, 220, pl. 7; Rustoiu–Egri 2011, 28–29, fig. 10; Medeleţ mss.b) (Pl. 8–9), the graves from western Banat identified at Bašaid (Girić 1997), Vatin (the latter comprising a bronze tubular bracelet and another cast bronze bracelet, with Steckverschluss fastening system) and other funerary contexts at Vršac–Bela Voda all belong chronologically to the same period (Medeleţ mss.a). Fig. 3. Distribution map of early La Tène burials from the Carpathian Basin and directions of Celtic colonisation (after Jerem 1986 and Rustoiu 2008a with additions). White triangles: cemeteries LT A; black triangles: cemeteries LT B1; white dots: cemeteries beginning in the LT B1/B2 period; black dots: cemeteries beginning in the LT B2 period. See Appendix 3. From the Banat, groups of settlers crossed the Danube in the Morava area at the confluence with the river. The earliest burials have been identified at Kostolac–Pećine (Jovanović 1984; 1992; Popović– Jovanović 2004) (Pl. 10–11), Kostolac–Repnjak (Jacanović 1987) and Požarevać (Božič 1981, 327, pl. 6/5–10) (Pl. 5/2). Cemeteries in the region of Belgrade (Karaburma and Rospi Ćuprija: Todorović 1967; 1972) also contain graves datable to LT B2 (Pl. 12–13). The Danube crossing and the settlement on the right bank occurred most likely after the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC. During the expedition to the Danube of 335 BC, as already mentioned, relations between the communities in the area, as well as the regional balance of forces, were regulated by treaties concluded with the Macedonian king. Following Alexander’s death and the division of his great empire amongst his successors, such previous treaties and agreements most likely ceased. In fact, after more than two decades, by the beginning of the 3rd century BC, the Celts who already settled in the southern Carpathian Basin planned to attack Macedonia. Upon the intervention of Cassandros, the invasion of Greece was delayed by two more decades, in other words by another generation. This might suggest that new treaties between Cassandros and the Celts by the Danube were concluded. In addition, one may suppose that a similar treaty was generally complied with over the life of the leaders involved in negotiations, renewal being possibly required when generations changed. The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 363 But what were the mechanisms leading to the establishment of settler groups? As suggested by the relatively low percentage of early graves within cemeteries, the individuals forming a group were few in number. They were most likely recruited from different communities, thus in turn generating new communities. In Transdanubia or south-western Slovakia, the evolution of cemeteries does not cease abruptly. Therefore, there was no mass migration of complete communities. It seems that individuals from further regions were also involved in setting up settler groups. For instance, torcs ornamented with coral inlays or enamelled disks (the so-called Oberrheinischer Scheibenhalsring) found in the Upper Rhine region appear on the middle Danube or in Crișana (Müller 1989, Beilage 6) in funerary contexts dated to this period (Fig. 4). These types were not distributed along trade routes as there are insufficient intermediary finds in central European areas to account for gradual diffusion. Additionally, the relatively high numbers of items coming from the middle Danube area and nearby regions exclude the possibility of accidental diffusion. Their distribution must be related rather to the migration of individuals east of their area of origin. Fig. 4. Distribution map of neck-rings with discs decorated with enamel or coral – Oberrheinische Scheibenhalsringe (after Müller 1989 apud Hauschild 2010). To what extent do the cemeteries with La Tène inventories which emerged in the Carpathian Basin present evidence for a real presence of settlers from remote regions? Would not they rather point to the adoption by the indigenous communities of a fashion specific to the La Tène area? A good example of analysis of this sort is provided by a cemetery recently excavated at Dornach, in Bavaria. Certain funerary goods include items which typologically were distributed in Bohemia and Moravia during LT B2 (weapons, especially swords, and jewellery). Analysis of strontium isotopes sampled from the teeth of six individuals buried in the Dornach cemetery concluded that half of the subjects were indeed of Bohemian origin (Eggl 2003). For the Carpathian Basin area, such interdisciplinary studies are only at the beginning. Recently, M. Hauschild defined the principles of such an approach based on a large research project, inquiring about the ‘Celtisation’ or ‘assimilation’ issue as well as about interpreting patterns in relation to the circulation of groups or individuals and the diffusion of cultural forms. This project aims at interpreting the results of strontium isotopes analysis based on samples taken from the cemeteries in the region under discussion (Hauschild 2010). The warrior elite fulfilled an important function in the establishment of settler groups and subsequent migration development. Warriors were one of the most mobile social segments within the communities. Their mobility generated the distribution over large geographical regions of associated forms of material culture. This is the case of the swords with scabbards ornamented with so-called ‘dragon-pairs’ (Fig. 5) or of the Hatvan–Boldog–Silivaș-type swords dated to LT B2 (Fig. 6) found from Iberia to the Carpathian Basin (Stöllner 1998, 167–170, Liste 4, Beilage 3; Rustoiu 2008a, 102–103, fig. 47). The number of 364 | A. Rustoiu graves with weapons in a series of cemeteries in our area illustrate that, occasionally, the number of warriors within the community was relatively high. Such communities are those which were most likely also to have been involved in the raids into Macedonia and Greece at the beginning of the 3rd century BC. Thus, at Belgrade–Karaburma the percentage of graves with weapons reaches 70% during the first phase of the cemetery, while at Remetea Mare the percentage is 35% (Rustoiu 2006a, 61–62, Table 4–5). Fig. 5. Distribution map of swords decorated with dragon-pairs (after Stöllner 1998). Fig. 6. Distribution map of swords of Hatvan–Boldog–Silivaș type (after Stöllner 1998, with supplementary finds from Transylvania). In connection with the establishment mechanisms of settler groups, we should also discuss the role of social contacts between neighbouring communities or the relations with more distant ones (see Ramsl 2003, 104). This network of social relations most likely allowed the ‘selection’ of individuals planning to depart from the community of origin in order to participate in the establishment of new communities. Moreover, the colonisation process involved the gradual exploration of new territories. For this reason, advance into new territories was slow and sequential, as proven by the different chronological dates when a series of cemeteries start to evolve. Lastly, the colonisation of new territories required the establishment of new contacts or social networks engaging with the local communities in the region. The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 365 The penetration of the Celts east of the middle Danube basin, into the Great Hungarian Plain and Transylvania, then into southern Carpathian Basin resulted in the cultural reconfiguration of the various regions. Concurrently, the new communities, formed following the amalgamation of these culturally different populations, had other identities. The form of interaction between settlers and local populations differed from one community to another, and this is noticeable following the analysis of funerary customs in each cemetery (for an overview see Rustoiu 2008a, 70–80). In certain cases, local populations preserved traditional elements of funerary rites and rituals, at least in the initial period of co-habitation with the newcomers. Hence, they deliberately preserved a specific identity which they publicly displayed, amongst other means, during funerary ceremonies. At the same time, though, the lack of graves with weapons showing indigenous rites and rituals indicate that they did not join the warrior elite of the newcomers. Circumstances noted in the cemetery at Muhi–Kocsmadomb, north-western Hungary, are significant: natives’ and settlers’ graves are grouped around burials that included weapons, the latter always belonging to the newcomers (Hellebrandt 1999, 233–236; Almássy 2010, 12). Hence, the natives were most likely dependent within the community, fulfilling more probably a clientele position. In other cases, local populations were relatively quickly incorporated within new community structures, as suggested by the adoption of settler-specific burial rituals, although for several generations they continued to influence other elements of material culture, of which the persistence of traditional wares being most obvious. The cemetery at Fântânele–Dealul Popii in Transylvania is most eloquent of this factor (Rustoiu 2008a, 76–78). Cemeteries located in the southern part of the Carpathian Basin also provide a series of elements illustrating the specific pattern of interactions between the settlers and the local communities they overlaid. At Belgrade–Karaburma, a series of burials in the early phase of the cemetery retain local traditional jewellery amongst their grave-goods. This is the expression of a maintained native identity defined by the display of body ornaments and dress accessories different than those of the newcomers, especially recognisable in the female dress. The inhumation graves 63 and 67 contained a series of glass beads, earrings or hair-lock loops made of twisted silver wire (Pl. 14) (Todorović 1972, 26–28, pl. 23/Grob 63; 25/Grob 67; Guštin 1984, 321, fig. 11). Such earrings are the morphological extension of certain items recorded in the same region in the period previous to that of Celtic colonisation (Jovanović 1994; 2007; Gavranović 2007, 413, fig. 11/4–5). We must underline that, beside these traditional sets, the costumes of the dead females also included La Tène-type elements. Thus, grave 63 at Karaburma contained an early type of La Tène brooch (Pl. 14/5) (Todorović 1972, pl. 23/2) and in grave 67 the iron buckle of a belt specific to the Celtic area was identified (Pl. 14/9) (Todorović 1972, pl. 25/2). Similarly to funerary contexts or hoards previous to the Celtic horizon, for example, the grave at Timișoara–Cioreni or the hoard at Čurug, indigenous decorative pieces or dress items were combined with La Tène elements, the latter being incorporated in a specific manner to mark individual identity. The cemetery at Kostolac–Pećine, so far only partially published, contains 43 graves of which 17 are equally cremation and inhumation graves. Nine of the inhumation graves have been assigned to the local population. Graves containing weapons also have typical La Tène assemblages and a series of funerary inventories consist of dress accessories and female jewellery specific to central European Celtic area. Concurrently, other graves (without weapons) preserve local traditional elements, i.e. dress items and wares (Jovanović 1984; 1992; 1999; Popović–Jovanović 2004). The complete publication of this cemetery will, based on the nature of funerary rites, rituals and inventories, most likely reveal important data concerning the interaction between settlers and natives and on the nature of the relations they established. In conclusion, despite regional differences between communities, altogether the cultural aspect changed substantially following the penetration of the Celtic groups. Such colonisation gave rise to new communities with specific manifestations consistent with their new identities built on the fusion between the newcomers and natives. Such communities initiated other social contacts with the local populations in the northern Balkan Peninsula. Intercommunity communication mechanisms were diverse and complex, involving negotiation and agreements of various forms. Similarly to other cases, they were controlled by the élites. Marriage alliances constituted one of the forms by which contacts and social and political arrangements were set up with the leaders of other groups, in order to gain partners and allies. Under Caesar, in Gaul, the Helvetian Orgetorix, while preparing to invade the west, initiated a series of negotiations and agreements with the neighbours, among other offering his daughter to marry the leader of the Aedui, 366 | A. Rustoiu Dumnorix (Caesar, B. G. I.3). In his turn, Dumnorix established a series of alliances for strengthening his authority and prestige by giving his mother in marriage to a powerful noble from the Bituriges and his female relatives in marriage in other communities (Caesar, B. G. I.18). Such marriage alliances were concluded sometimes between leaders who exercised their authority over distant areas, however, whose fame exceeded by far the limits of the regions they controlled. Thus, the Suebi’s “Ariovistus had two wives: one a Sueban by nation, whom he brought with him from home, the other a Norican, whom he had married in Gaul, having been sent by king Voccio, her brother” (Caesar, B. G. I.53). The practices just described were much more frequent than the glimpses one finds in the accounts of ancient authors. For regions that were of no interest for Mediterranean observers, who might have reported events of the sort as well, the only sources available are the archaeological data. Arnold (2005) has introduced the topic of the mobility of women within Iron Age societies in the form of marriage alliances. She argued that women’s mobility as a result of marriages may be occasionally visible archaeologically if, among other factors, the general dress elements of the community of origin and those of the new group were differentiated and if the subject preserved costume types in the new ‘country’. Grave 3 discovered in the cemetery at Remetea Mare in Banat is an example (Medeleţ mss.b; Rustoiu 2006b, 215–216, fig. 6–8; Rustoiu 2008b, 28–29, fig. 4). Respective cemetery evolved for a short period over LT B2 and the start of LT C1. By its funerary rite and ritual features, the cemetery at Remetea Mare illustrates the cultural mixture specific to Celtic cemeteries in the east and south of the Carpathian Basin. With one exception, it includes cremation graves, whose inventories are typical La Tène. The exception above is a female inhumation grave, whose goods comprised a handmade bowl (Pl. 15/6), a small bi-conical wheel-made vessel (Pl. 15/7), iron tweezers that when discovered, still preserved attached fabric pieces of the dead clothing (Pl. 15/5), a bronze Thracian brooch (Pl. 15/3) and a segment of an astragal belt reused as pendant (Pl. 15/4). Both the funerary rite (unique amongst other graves in the cemetery) and inventory suggest that the woman came from a community markedly different from that where she died and was buried. Astragal belts had a long-lasting evolution in the north-western Balkans, starting in the Early Iron Age (see Jovanović 1998). The belt fragment from Remetea Mare is related to the Osijek type which is found in the territory of the Scordisci (Božič 1982). The belt element from Remetea Mare was used as pendant. The reuse of belt parts in a similar fashion was also noted in other cases. Thus, in a grave at Mahrevići, in BosniaHerzegovina, a pendant was identified as having been made of a fragment of an enamelled ‘Hungarian’ belt chain (Truhelka 1912, 21, fig. 12; Guštin 1984, 340, n. 106). The ‘Thracian’ brooch belongs to the IIb variant according to V. V. Zirra’s typology and was dated in the first half of the 3rd century BC (Zirra 1998, 41, fig. 4/5 where the brooch drawing at Remetea Mare is wrong). Brooches of this variant were distributed especially in north-western Bulgaria and southern Romania (at Zimnicea and Bâzdâna) and also in the southern Banat (at Banatska Palanka) and the Iron Gates area (Zirra 1998, fig. 10). Recently, Rastko Vasić underlined that ‘Thracian’ brooches also appear in the western Balkans. This Serbian researcher noted that such pieces are concentrated, amongst other areas, in the eastern territory of the Scordisci and in the Iron Gates area where they remained in fashion for an extended period (Vasić 2000). Given these costume elements, one may assume that the grave at Remetea Mare belonged to a woman coming from a community south of the Danube, located in a contact zone between Thracian and Celtic-Illyrian worlds where inhumation was practiced, at least partially if not exclusively. She may have reached the La Tène community at Remetea Mare following a matrimonial alliance established between the Celts from the Banat and a south Danubian group sometime in the first half of the 3rd century BC. These graves in ‘foreign’ cultural environments pose a series of additional problems of interpretation. The dead were buried with the specific dress and according to rite and ritual prescriptions specific to the areas of origin. Preservation of adornment and dress elements indicate they enjoyed a privileged status within the new communities, while their origin was not concealed by local garment elements. Moreover, for the burials to be ritually correct, it was required that women were accompanied by a number of persons (an entourage) who applied the traditional prescriptions of their country of origin. Therefore, a marriage alliance involved, even if only temporary over the life of the woman engaged in such a relationship, the mobility of a larger number of individuals. This allowed the circulation of concrete products from one area to another, the diffusion of specific behavioural and ideology elements from one community to another. In the same context of intercommunity relations established due to the mobility of certain individuals, we should mention craftsmen activities within communities differing from those of the country of origin. The contribution of Thracian and Greek metal craftsmen in the production of specific items and The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 367 transfer of technologies in the Celtic-native environment was significant. Miklós Szabó noted two decades ago that “the Thracian contribution to the formation of the toreutics of the Celtic Oriental koiné cannot be contested” (Szabó 1991, 127). In the analysis of the role of foreign craftsmen – either originating in the Thracian area or from Macedonia or Greece – a few points of interpretation stand out. Firstly, the new communities formed on the fusion of settlers and natives led to mixed cultural forms. They were expressed, for instance, by ornaments which combine local and La Tène elements. Such aspects were discussed above. Secondly, the metal craftsmen – either native or foreign – were connected or subordinated to community élites and leaders. The latter were the main beneficiaries of luxury products and those who also imposed fashion trends, symbolic significances and functional features of certain adornment or utilitarian pieces. Thirdly, metal craftsmen and generally, all sorts of artisans were mobile both over time and space. The craftsmen passed on specific technologies and knowledge from one generation to another within same families or artisan groups, which explain why certain artefact types or manufacturing techniques perpetuated over time. In addition, the space mobility of the craftsmen was the result of the necessity to identify beneficiaries, who would ensure raw materials, consumption and possibly, protection. The golden hoard at Szárazd–Regöly, Hungary (Pl. 16), which may be rather dated to the middle La Tène, contains a series of jewellery of Balkan or Greek origin – segmented spherical beads, tubular ends of chain decorated in filigree (Pl. 16/1–3) – that started to be used in the local environment as early as the end of the Early Iron Age. They are supplemented by a series of other elements copying Greek or local pieces, yet ornamented according to Celtic symbolic standards. This is the case of the beads decorated with human masks (Pl. 16/5). Wheel-shaped pendants, a common symbol in the La Tène decorative repertoire also add (Pl. 16/4). Respective hoard is indicative of the establishment of a mixed decorative style in the Celtic-native area of the Carpathian Basin (Szabó 1975, 152–155, fig. 7, pl. 7–10; Szabó 1991, 127, fig. 1–2; Szabó 2006, 114–115, fig. 20). On one hand, the craftsman of Balkan origin made a complex jewel of local morphology and technology, on the other hand, certain decorative details were conceived upon the order of Celtic élites, expressing symbolic significances attached to their ideology. This phenomenon of adjusting Mediterranean forms to practical necessities of the dominant Celtic élites occurred at early date. One of the concrete examples is the emergence during LT B2 within warriors’ military equipment of the loop-in-loop sword suspension chains, made of bronze and later of iron (Fig. 7). Their morphology clearly proves that silver or gold jewellery chains, specific to the Mediterranean area, were technically reproduced and transformed for practical use as military equipment pieces (Rustoiu 2008a, 105–116). These chains furthermore emphasize the connection between artisans and warrior élites. On the other hand, the mobility of craftsmen played an important role in the establishment of intercommunity social communication networks and the transfer of technologies over broader areas. ✴✴✴ Approached from various view-points, the study of cultural exchanges and inter-community relations is important for research into ancient societies. Cultural distance exchanges generated complex intercommunity communication strategies and mechanisms (Lang 2002; Venclová 2002, 72–74; Stöllner 2010, 283–286, fig. 5). A significant role in ensuring contacts among communities was played by mobility either individual or in groups. Such mobility secured not only the transfer of archaeologically visible material goods from one cultural space to another, but also the circulation of immaterial goods, invisible from the view-point of traditional archaeology. This is the case of the ‘intellectual goods’, technology, behavioural, ideology transfers and so forth (Venclová 2002, 74–75). Distance communications and contacts were also ensured by the migration of communities from one geographical area to another which occasionally led to cultural re-configurations of the place of destination and the creation of new social networks both within and outside the human groups in motion. Given these remarks, the relations established between the Celts and the native populations in the southern region of the Carpathian Basin may be understood from a new perspective. These relations underwent several stages throughout early La Tène. In the first stage, a series of distance cultural contacts were established between native and La Tène communities in the eastern Alpine area and Transdanubia. Such contacts took various forms of individual or group mobility. As previously mentioned, individual circulation along major communication routes was important in the distribution of artefacts specific to certain cultural circles. Additionally, the mobility of warriors 368 | A. Rustoiu who engaged in military raids at considerable distance from their areas of origin or as mercenaries in the eastern Mediterranean basin was also essential in the establishment of contacts among different communities. This type of mobility involved diplomatic agreements that would regulate relations between the natives whose territories were crossed and the armed groups. Negotiations were accompanied by the practice of gift exchange between the partners involved. These gifts, which were the symbolic expression of the high status of the giver, comprised goods specific to the partners’ cultural areas of origin, even though functionally, they were similar (for example, horses complete with harness, dress ornaments and other jewellery and metal vessels). Fig. 7. Loop-in-loop sword chains. 1. Distribution map (black dots: iron chains; black squares: bronze chains); 2–5. Belgrade–Karaburma (after Todorović 1972), weapons from grave 66 (2–3, 5. iron; 4. bronze). These inter-community communication strategies determined the circulation of products over broad areas, while the mobility of individuals contributed to the spread of fashion or knowledge (symbolic or practical). Thus, the native communities overtook a series of La Tène dress accessories (brooches being most eloquent), irrespective as to how their significance was transformed, being incorporated into local dress ornaments according to local symbolic principles and standards. The southward migration of the Celts, under the form of colonisation of new regions, altered the culture of the area under discussion and initiated a new stage in the relations between La Tène communities and indigenous populations. Identification of mechanisms by which such colonisation was carried out and the means through which new community identities were built following interactions between indigenous populations and newcomers are important for understanding cultural contact forms of this new stage. The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 369 The analysis of finds coming from cemeteries indicates that this was no mass migration of communities from the centre or west of the continent towards the east. Groups of settlers included individuals coming from different communities based on prior social relations between them. Within the new groups, warriors were important from the point of view of cohesion and mobility. The settlers’ advance into the new territories was gradual, lasting for several decades. Interaction between the newcomers and natives led to the establishment of new communities having specific identities, different in case to case. Concurrently, new social networks also involving indigenous communities were initiated. Occasionally, indigenous populations are identifiable within cemeteries based on the preservation of individual funerary rites and rituals. In other cases, the natives quickly took over the new ritual norms; however, certain traditional forms survived for some time. Inter-community communication mechanisms promoted by the élites in order to gain partners and allies, were also new as compared to previous periods. An example was the practice of marriage alliances between different communities. Such alliances may occasionally be identified archeologically, like the case of grave 3 in the cemetery at Remetea Mare. An important role in the transfer of technologies and knowledge was played by metal craftsmen coming from the northern Balkans or Greece, who found among the new élites beneficiaries of the products they manufactured. The same products combine La Tène traditional elements with those from local or Greek sources, thus promoting a mixed La Tène style. The Great Expedition to the Balkans and Greece, which occurred subsequently, would further alter a series of cultural features and mechanisms of inter-community connections in the Carpathian Basin. Appendix 1 List of brooches of Early La Tène type (LT B1) discovered in indigenous funerary contexts in southern Carpathian Basin and north-western Balkans (after Popović 1996) Hungary 1. Szentlőrinc Croatia 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Dalj Jezerine Kompolje Osijek Velika Bosnia And Herzegovina 7. Donja Dolina 8. Sanski Most 9. Vratnica 10. Vrućica Appendix 2 List of zoomorphic brooches (after Binding 1993, 160, type 22: Tierkopffibeln mit aufgerissenem Maul, with modifications and completions; see Fig. 2) Hungary 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Győr–Újszállás Liter Pilismarot–Basaharc Püspökhatvan Sopron–Bécsidomb Szentendre Unknown site 370 | A. Rustoiu Romania 8. Pecica 9. Timișoara–Cioreni: unpublished, see supra. 10. Fântânele–Dealul Popii (variant): unpublished. Bosnia And Herzegovina 11. Donja Dolina 12. Donja Dolina, grave XLVII Serbia 13. Banjska Stena (Sladić 2002, 37–38, fig. 1) 14. Kostolac (Popović 1996, 117, fig. 12/3) Bulgaria 15. Veliko Târnovo region, hybrid (Mircheva 2007, 71, fig. 7) Appendix 3 List of La Tène funerary discoveries from southern Carpathian Basin and directions of advance of the groups of settlers (see Fig. 3) Romania 1. Aradul Nou (Crișan 1974, 40–44 and information A. Ursuţiu) 2. Cherestur (Medeleţ mss.a) 3. Remetea Mare (Rustoiu 2006b, 223–225, fig. 6–8; Rustoiu 2008a, fig. 55–57; 61; Rustoiu–Egri 2010, 220, pl. 7; Rustoiu–Egri 2011, 28–29, fig. 10; Medeleţ mss.b) Hungary 4. Szőreg (Maráz 1977, 62, no. 42) Serbia 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Croatia 15. 16. 17. 18. Bašaid (Girić 1997) Belgrade–Karaburma (Todorović 1972) Belgrade–Rospi Ćuprija (Todorović 1967) Kostolac–Pećine (Jovanović 1984; 1992; Popović–Jovanović 2004) Kostolac–Repnjak (Jacanović 1987) Kupinovo (Majnarić-Pandžić 1970, 127–129) Požarevac (Božič 1981, 327, pl. 6/5–10) Sremska Mitrovica (Majnarić-Pandžić 1970, 133) Vatin (Medeleţ mss.a) Vršac (Medeleţ mss.a) Batina (Božič 1981, 327; Szabó–Petres 1992, 108, pl. 99) Bogdanovci (Božič 1981, 327) Dalj (Majnarić-Pandžić 1970, 16–24) Osijek (Božič 1981, 327, pl. 6/1–4; Guštin 1984, 319–320, fig. 10B) References Almássy 2010 Arnold 2005 Almássy, K., Some new data on the Scythian-Celtic relationship, IN: Jerem, E.–Schönfelder, M.–Wieland, G. (Hrsg.), Nord-Süd, Ost-West Kontakte während der Eisenzeit in Europa. Akten der Internationalen Tagungen der AG Eisenzeit in Hamburg und Sopron 2002, Budapest, 9–25. Arnold, B., Mobile men, sedentary women? Material culture as a marker of regional and supra-regional interaction in Iron Age Europe, IN: Dobrzanska, H.–Megaw, J. V. S.–Poleska, P. (eds.), Celts on the margin. Studies in European Cultural Interaction 7th Century BC–1st Century AD Dedicated to Zenon Woźniak, Krakow, 17–26. The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 371 Baitinger 2001 Bearzot 2004 Binding 1993 Božič 1981 Božič 1982 Crișan 1974 Dizdar–Potrebica 2002 Džino 2007 Eggl 2003 Gavranović 2007 Girić 1997 Gumă 1991 Gumă 1993 Guštin 1984 Hauschild 2010 Hellebrandt 1999 Jacanović 1987 Jerem 1968 Jerem 1973 Jerem 1986 Jovanović 1984 Jovanović 1992 Jovanović 1994 Jovanović 1999 Jovanović 2007 Jovanović 1998 Baitinger, H., Die Angriffswaffen aus Olympia, Olympische Forschungen, 29, Berlin–New York. Bearzot, C., I Celti in Illiria. A proposito del. Frg. 40 di Theopompo, IN: Urso, G. (ed.), Dall’Adriatico al Danubio. L’Illirico nell’età greca e romana. Atti del convegno internazionale, Cividale del Friuli, 25–27 settembre 2003, Pisa, 63–78. Binding, U., Studien zu den figürlichen Fibeln der Frühlatènezeit, Bonn. Božič, D., Relativna kronologija mlajše želeyne dobe v jugoslovanskem Podonavju, ArhVest, 31, 315–336. Božič, D., Kasnolatenski astragalni pojasevi tipa Beograd, Starinar, 32, 47–56. Crișan, I. H., Descoperiri celtice păstrate în Muzeul Judeţean Arad, Ziridava, 3–4, 37–86. Dizdar, M.–Potrebica, H., Latenska kultura na prostoru požeške kotline, Opuscula Archaeologica, 26, 111–131. Džino, D., The Celts in Illyricum – whoever they may be: the hybridization and construction of identities in Southeastern Europe in the fourth and third centuries BC, OpArch, 31, 49–68. Eggl, C., Ost–West-Beziehungen im Flachgräberlatène Bayerns, Germania, 81, 513–538. Gavranović, M., Eisenzeitliche Beastattungssitten in Donja Dolina. Beispiele der sekundären Bestattung, IN: Blečić, M.–Črešnar, M.–Hänsel, B.–Hellmuth, A.–Kaiser, E. (eds.), Scripta praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan, Situla 44, Dissertationes Musei Nationalis Sloveniae, Ljubljana, 405–418. Girić, M., Latenski nalazi iz severnog Banata, RadMV, 39, 93–95. Gumă, M., Câteva precizări asupra unor tipuri de coifuri de la sfârţitul primei epoci a fierului și începutul celei de a doua descoperite în sud-vestul României, Thraco-Dacica, 12, 85–103. Gumă, M., Civilizaţia primei epoci a fierului în sud-vestul României. BT, IV, București. Guštin, M., Die Kelten in Jugoslawien. Übersicht über das archäologische Fundgut, Jahrbuch RGZM, 31, 305–363. Hauschild, M., “Celticised” or “Assimilated”? In search of foreign and indigenous people at the time of the Celtic migrations, IN: Berecki, S. (ed), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin, Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, 9–11 October 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 171–180. Hellebrandt, M., Celtic finds from northern Hungary, Corpus of Celtic finds in Hungary, III, Budapest. Jacanović, D., Keltski grob iz Kostolaca, Viminacium, 2, 7–17. Jerem, E., The Late Iron Age Cemetery of Szentlőrincz, ActaArchHung, 20, 159–208. Jerem, E., Zur Geschichte der Späten Eisenzeit in Transsdanubien. Späteisenzeitliche Grabfunde von Beremend (Komitat Baranya), ActaArchHung, 25, 65–86. Jerem, E., Bemerkungen zur Siedlungsgeschichte der Späthallstatt- und Frühlatènezeit im Ostalpenraum (Veränderung in der Siedlungsstruktur: archäologische und paläoökonomische Aspekte), IN: Hallstatt Kolloquium Veszprém 1984, Budapest, 107–118. Jovanović, B., Les sepultures de la nécropole celtique de Pećine près de Kostolac (Serbie du Nord), ÉC, 21, 63–91. Jovanović, B., Celtic settlement of the Balkans, IN: Tasić, N. (ed.), Scordisci and the native population in the middle Danube region, Belgrade, 19–33. Jovanović, B., Der Horizont der ältesten keltischen Gräber auf dem Nordbalkan (in Serbian), IN: Tasić, N. (ed.), Kulture gvodenog doba Jugoslovenskog podunavlija, Beograd, 111–117. Jovanović, B., Die Tradition der skythischen Eisenzeit in der frühen Latènezeit des Nordbalkans, IN: Vasić, M. (ed.), Le Djerdap/Les Portes de Fér à la deuxième moitié du premièr millenaire av. J. Ch. jusqu’aux guerres daciques. Kolloquium in Kladovo–Drobeta-Tr. Severin (Sept.-Oct. 1998), Beograd, 37–40. Jovanović, B., Srebrne nušnice u nakitu ranog latena Srednjeg Podunavlja, IN: Blečić, M.– Črešnar, M.–Hänsel, B.–Hellmuth, A.–Kaiser, E. (eds.), Scripta praehistorica in honorem Biba Teržan, Situla 44, Dissertationes Musei Nationalis Sloveniae, Ljubljana, 821–827. Jovanović, M., Astragalni pojasevi na području centralnog Balkana i Jugoistočne Evrope, RadMV, 40, 39–95. 372 | A. Rustoiu Kaenel 2007 Kruta 2000 Lang 2002 Ljuština 2010 Majnarić-Pandžić 1970 Majnarić-Pandžić 1996 Maráz 1977 Marić 1964 Măndescu 2010 Medeleţ 1982 Medeleţ mss.a Medeleţ mss.b Medeleţ–Bejan 1983 Mircheva 2007 Mócsy 1972 Müller 1989 Papazoglu 1978 Popović 1996 Popović–Jovanović 2004 Pownall 2004 Ramsl 2003 Ramsl 2010a Ramsl 2010b Rapin 2000 Rustoiu 2006a Rustoiu 2006b Rustoiu 2008a Kaenel, G., Les mouvements de populations celtiques: aspects historiographiques et confrontations archéologiques, IN: Mennessier-Jouannet, C.–Adam, A.-M.–Milcent, P.-Y. (eds.), La Gaule dans son contexte européen aux IVe et IIIe siècle avant notre ère. Actes du XXVIIe colloque international de l’AFEAF (Clermont-Ferrand, 29 mai–1er juin 2003), Lattes, 385–398. Kruta, V., Les Celtes. Histoire et dictionnaire. Des origines à la romanisation et aux christianisme, Paris 2000. Lang, A., Fernkontakte – Voraussetzungen, Interpretationen und Auswirkungen für die Eisenzeit, IN: Lang, A.–Salač, V. (eds.), Fernkontakte in der Eisenzeit, Praha, 11–19. Ljuština, M., The late Hallstatt communities in the Serbian part of the Danube Basin, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin, Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, 9–11 October 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 297–307. Majnarić-Pandžić, N., Keltsko-latenska kultura u Slavoniji i Srijemu, Vinkovci. Majnarić-Pandžić, N., Nekoliko napomena o uvođenju ranolatenskog stila u sjevernu Hrvatsku i Bosnu, ArhRR, 12, Zagreb, 31–53. Maráz, B., Délkelet-Magyarország La Tène-korának kronológiai kérdései, ArchaÉrt, 104, 1, 47–64. Marić, Z., Donja Dolina, Glasnik ZM, 19, Sarajevo, 5–128. Măndescu, D., Cronologia perioadei timpurii a celei de a doua epoci a fierului (sec. V-III a. Chr.) între Carpaţi, Nistru și Balcani, Brăila. Medeleţ, F., În legătură cu expediţia întreprinsă de Alexandru Macedon la Dunăre în 335 î.e.n, ActaMN, 19, 13–22. Medeleţ, F., Epoca Latène în Banat, manuscript. Medeleţ, F., Necropola La Tène de la Remetea Mare (jud. Timiș), manuscript. Medeleţ, F.–Bejan, A., Un mormânt de incineraţie de la începutul celei de a doua vârste a fierului descoperit la Timișoara, SymThrac, 1, 37. Mircheva, E., La Tène fibulae kept in Varna Archaeological Museum, IN: Vagalinski, L. F. (ed.), The Lower Danube in Antiquity (VI C. BC–VI C. AD), Sofia, 65–72. Mócsy, A., Zu Theopompus Frg. 39–40, Rivista storica dell’antichità, 2, 13–16. Müller, F., Die frühlatènezeitlichen Scheibenhalsringe. RGF, 46, Mainz. Papazoglu, F., The Central Balkan Tribes in Pre-Roman Times, Amsterdam. Popović, P., Early La Tène between Pannonia and the Balkans, Starinar, 47, 105–125. Popović, P.–Jovanović, B., La sépulture 1–3/378 de la nécropole de Pećine près de Kostolac, Balcanica, 35, 23–34. Pownall, F., Lessons from the Past. The Moral Use of History in Fourth-Century Prose, Ann Arbor. Ramsl, P. C., Migrationsphänomene(?!) in der Frühlatènezeit, Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 133, 101–109. Ramsl, P. C., Verbindende Randzonen des Karpatenbeckens in der Frühlatènezeit, IN: Jerem, E.–Schönfelder, M.–Wieland, G. (eds.), Nord-Süd, Ost-West Kontakte während der Eisenzeit in Europa. Akten der Internationalen Tagungen der AG Eisenzeit in Hamburg und Sopron 2002, Budapest, 241–255. Ramsl, P. C., The La Tène Age Cemetery of Mannersdorf am Leithagebirge, Flur Rheinthal Süd, Lower Austria and the Connections to Other Parts of the Middle European Corridor, IN: Berecki, S. (ed), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin, Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, 9–11 October 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 289–295. Rapin, A., L’armement latènien en Hongrie, IN: Guillaumet, J.-P. (ed.), Dix ans de coopération franco-hongroise en archéologie: 1988–1998, Budapest, 97–134. Rustoiu, A., A Journey to Mediterranean. Peregrinations of a Celtic Warrior from Transylvania, StudiaUBB, 51, 1, Special Issues: Focusing on Iron Age Élites, 42–85. Rustoiu, A., The Celts between Tisa and the Carpathians before and after the Great Invasion in the Balkans, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Thracians and Celts. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Bistriţa, 18–20 May 2006, Cluj-Napoca, 213–228. Rustoiu, A., Războinici și societate în aria celtică transilvăneană. Studii pe marginea mormântului cu coif de la Ciumești, Cluj-Napoca. The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 373 Rustoiu 2008b Rustoiu, A., Celţii din Transilvania și comunităţile indigene nord-balcanice. Schimburi culturale și mobilitate individual, EphemNap, 18, 25–44. Rustoiu–Egri 2010 Rustoiu A.–Egri, M., Danubian Kantharoi – Almost three decades later, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin, Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, 9–11 October 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 217–287. Rustoiu–Egri 2011 Rustoiu A.–Egri, M., The Celts from the Carpathian Basin between continental traditions and the fascination of the Mediterranean. A study of the Danubian kantharoi, Cluj-Napoca. Schönfelder 2007 Schönfelder, M., Zurück aus Griechenland – Spuren keltischer Söldner in Mitteleuropa, Germania, 85, 307–328. Sladić 2002 Sladić, M. B., Tragom ranih keltskih uticaja na prostoru Timočke krajine, Balcanica, 32–33, 37–47. Stöllner 1998 Stöllner, T., Grab 102 vom Dürrnberg bei Hallein. Bemerkungen zu den Dürrnberger Kriegergräbern der Frühlatènezeit, Germania, 76, 1, 67–176. Stöllner 2010 Stöllner, T., Kontakt, Mobilität und Kulturwandel im Frühlatènekreis – das Beispiel Frühlatènegürtelhaken, IN: Jerem, E.–Schönfelder, M.–Wieland, G. (eds.), Nord-Süd, OstWest Kontakte während der Eisenzeit in Europa. Akten der Internationalen Tagungen der AG Eisenzeit in Hamburg und Sopron 2002, Budapest, 277–319. Szabó 1974 Szabó, M., Contribution à l’étude de l’art et de la chronologie de La Tène ancienne en Hongrie, FolArch, 25, 71–86. Szabó 1975 Szabó, M., Sur la question de filigrane dans l’art des celtes orientaux, IN: Jenő, F. (ed.), The Celts in Central Europe, Székesfehérvár, 147–165. Szabó 1991 Szabó, M., Thraco-Celtica, Orpheus, 1, 126–134. Szabó 1992 Szabó, M., Les Celtes de l’Est. Le second Âge du Fer dans la cuvette des Karpates, Paris. Szabó 2006 Szabó, M., Les Celtes de l’Est, IN: Szabó, M. (ed.), Celtes et Gaulois. L’Archéologie face à L’Histoire. Les Civilisés et les Barbares du Ve au IIe siècle avant J.-C. Actes de la table ronde de Budapest 17–18 juin 2005, Collection Bibracte 12/3, Glux-en-Glenne, 97–117. Szabó–Petres 1992 Szabó, M.–Petres, É. F., Decorated weapons of the La Tène Iron Age in the Carpathian Basin, Budapest. Tasić 1992 Tasić, N., The Pre-Celtic Population of the Serbian Danube Valley and the Northen Balkan, IN: Tasić, N. (ed.), Scordisci and the Native Population in the Middle Danube Region, Belgrade, 7–17. Todorović 1967 Todorović, J., Praistorijske nekropole na Rospi Ćupriji kod Beograda, Starinar, 18, 153–162. Todorović 1972 Todorović, J., Praistorijska Karaburma I. Nekropola mladeg gvozdenog doba, Beograd. Truhelka 1912 Truhelka, C., Ein tumulus der La Tène Periode in Mahrevići, WMBH, 12, Sarajevo, 12–28. Vasić 2000 Vasić, R., Thracian fibulae in the west: Invasion or cultural exchange?, ArchBulg, 4, 1, 13–20. Venclová 2002 Venclová, N., External contacts: visible and invisible, IN: Lang, A.–Salač, V. (Hrsg.), Fernkontakte in der Eisenzeit, Praha, 72–82. Vulpe 2001 Vulpe, A., Istoria și civilizaţia spaţiului carpato-dunărean între mijlocul sec. al VII-lea și începutul sec. al III-lea a. Chr, IN: Petrescu-Dîmboviţa, M.–Vulpe, A. (coord.), Istoria Românilor, vol. 1, București, 451–500. Vulpe–Zahariade 1987 Vulpe, A.–Zahariade, M., Geto-Dacii în istoria militară a lumii antice, București. Zirra 1998 Zirra, V. V., Bemerkungen zu den thraco-getischen Fibeln, Dacia N. S., 40–42, 1996–1998, 29–53. List of figures Fig. 1. Distribution map of early La Tène burials in the Carpathian Basin. White triangles – cemeteries LT A; black triangles – cemeteries LT B1; black squares – LT B1 type brooches (the pre-Duchcov horizon) discovered in indigenous graves from southern Carpathian Basin and north-western Balkans (after Jerem 1986 and Popović 1996). See Appendix 1. Fig. 2. Distribution map of zoomorphic brooches (with stylised griffin heads). See Appendix 2. Fig. 3. Distribution map of early La Tène burials from the Carpathian Basin and directions of Celtic colonisation (after Jerem 1986 and Rustoiu 2008a with additions). White triangles: cemeteries LT A; black triangles: cemeteries LT B1; white dots: cemeteries beginning in the LT B1/B2 period; black dots: cemeteries beginning in the LT B2 period. See Appendix 3. 374 | A. Rustoiu Fig. 4. Distribution map of neck-rings with discs decorated with enamel or coral – Oberrheinische Scheibenhalsringe (after Müller 1989 apud Hauschild 2010). Fig. 5. Distribution map of swords decorated with dragon-pairs (after Stöllner 1998). Fig. 6. Distribution map of swords of Hatvan–Boldog–Silivaș type (after Stöllner 1998, with supplementary finds from Transylvania). Fig. 7. Loop-in-loop sword chains. 1. Distribution map (black dots: iron chains; black squares: bronze chains); 2–5. Belgrade–Karaburma (after Todorović 1972), weapons from grave 66 (2–3, 5. iron; 4. bronze). List of plates Pl. 1. The inventory of the grave from Velika (after Popović 1996, without scale). Pl. 2. Čurug hoard. 1, 5. bronze; 2, 6–11. silver (after Ljuština 2010, without scale). Pl. 3. The inventory of the grave from Timișoara–Cioreni. 1. silver; 2–6. bronze (drawings: F. Medeleţ). Pl. 4. Bronze (1) and iron (2–9) spear butts discovered in Greece and in temperate Europe. 1–2. Olympia; 3. Dorna; 4. Römhild–Steinsberg/Kleiner Gleichberg (Germany); 5. Inzersdorf (Austria); 6. Kosd (Hungary); 7. Suippe; 8. Mairy; 9. Bussy-le-Long (France). After Baitinger 2001 (1–2), Schönfelder 2007 (3–4), Rapin 2000 (5–9), without scale. Pl. 5. Funerary inventories. 1. Osijek, grave 29; 2. Požarevac; 3. Aradu Nou, inhumation grave 2 (1–2. after Božič 1981; 3. after Crișan 1974). Pl. 6. Aradu Nou, cremated grave 1 (after Crișan 1974). Pl. 7. Cherestur, cremated grave in urn (?) (after Medeleţ mss.a, different scales). Pl. 8. Remetea Mare, cremated grave 9 and 10 (after Medeleţ mss.b; Rustoiu 2008, different scales). Pl. 9. Remetea Mare, cremated grave 8 (after Medeleţ mss.b; Rustoiu–Egri 2010, different scales). Pl. 10. Kostolać–Pećine, creamated grave G 1–3/378 (after Popović–Jovanović 2004). Pl. 11. Kostolać–Pećine, inhumation grave G 3–982 (after Jovanović 1984). Pl. 12. Belgrade–Karaburma, grave 62 (after Todorović 1972). Pl. 13. Belgrade–Karaburma, cremated grave 60 (after Todorović 1972). Pl. 14. Belgrade–Karaburma. 1–5. inhumation graves 63; 6–10. inhumation grave 67 (after Todorović 1972; Guštin 1984). Pl. 15. Remetea Mare, inhumation grave 3 (after Medeleţ mss.b; Rustoiu 2008). Pl. 16. Szárazd-Regöly gold hoard: the typology of the inventory (after Szabó 2006, without scale). The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 375 5 5 5 Plate 1. The inventory of the grave from Velika (after Popović 1996, without scale). Plate . e in entory of t e ra e from eli a after P P it out s ale. 376 | A. Rustoiu 5 Plate 2. Čurug hoard. 1, 5. bronze; 2, 6–11. silver (after Ljuština 2010, without scale). The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 377 5 Plate 3. The inventory of the grave from Timișoara–Cioreni. 1. silver; 2–6. bronze (drawings: F. Medeleţ, without scale). Plate . . sil er e in entory of t e ra e from imi oara– i reni. – . ron e dra in s . edele it out s ale . 378 | A. Rustoiu 5 Plate 4. Bronze (1) and iron (2–9) spear butts discovered in Greece and in temperate Europe. 1–2. Olympia; 3. Dorna; 4. Römhild–Steinsberg/Kleiner Gleichberg (Germany); 5. Inzersdorf (Austria); 6. Kosd (Hungary); 7.Plate Suippe; .8. Mairy; Afterutts Baitinger (3–4), Rapin 2000 ron e9. Bussy-le-Long and iron (France). – spear dis o 2001 ered(1–2), in Schönfelder ree e and in 2007 temperate urope. (5–9), without scale. – . lympia . orna . m ild– ein er einer eic er ermany 5. n ersdorf ustria . Kosd un ary . uippe . airy . ussy le on ran e . fter – – P 5– it out s ale. The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 379 a a– –d m m d Plate 5. Funerary inventories. 1. Osijek, grave 29; 2. Požarevac; 3. Aradu Nou, inhumation grave 2 (1–2. after Božič 1981; 3. after Crișan 1974). Plate 5. unerary in entories. . si e . radu ou in umation ra e – . after ra e . Po are a . after . 380 | A. Rustoiu 5 5 5a Plate 6. Aradu Nou, cremated grave 1 (after Crișan 1974). Plate . radu ou remated ra e after . The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 381 5 Plate 7. Cherestur, cremated grave in urn (?) (after Medeleţ mss.a, different scales). Plate . erestur remated ra e in urn after mss.a different s ales . 382 | A. Rustoiu ra e ra e Plate 8. Remetea Mare, cremated grave 9 and 10 (after Medeleţ mss.b; Rustoiu 2008, different scales). Plate . emetea are remated ra e and after mss. different s ales . The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 383 5 5 Plate 9. Remetea Mare, cremated grave 8 (after Medeleţ mss.b; Rustoiu–Egri 2010, different scales). Plate . emetea are remated ra e after mss. – different s ales . 384 | A. Rustoiu 5 m 5 Plate 10. Kostolać–Pećine, creamated grave G 1–3/378 (after Popović–Jovanović 2004). Plate . Kostola – e ine reamated ra e – after P P – . The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 385 a 5 – Plate 11. Kostolać–Pećine, inhumation grave G 3–982 (after Jovanović 1984). Plate . Kostola – e ine in umation ra e after . 386 | A. Rustoiu 5 Plate 12. Belgrade–Karaburma, grave 62 (after Todorović 1972). Plate . el rade– ara rma ra e after . The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 387 5 Plate 13. Belgrade–Karaburma, cremated grave 60 (after Todorović 1972). Plate . el rade– ara rma remated ra e after . 388 | A. Rustoiu a 5 Plate 14. Belgrade–Karaburma. 1–5. inhumation graves 63; 6–10. inhumation grave 67 (after Todorović 1972; Guštin 1984). – Plate . el rade– ara rma. –5. in umation ra es . in umation ra e after . The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin | 389 5 m m –5 – Plate 15. Remetea Mare, inhumation grave 3 (after Medeleţ mss.b; Rustoiu 2008). Plate 5. emetea are in umation ra e after mss. . 390 | A. Rustoiu 5 Plate 16. Szárazd-Regöly gold hoard: the typology of the inventory (after Szabó 2006, without scale). Plate . ra d e ly old oard t e typolo y of t e in entory after it out s ale . Celtic Newcomers between Traditional and Fashionable: Graves 63 and 67 from Karaburma Marija LJUŠTINA–Miloš SPASIĆ Faculty of Philosophy Belgrade, Serbia mljustin@f.bg.ac.rs Belgrade City Museum Belgrade, Serbia spasicmilos@gmail.com Keywords: Late Iron Age, necropolis, Karaburma, Scordisci, indigenous population More than sixty years elapsed since the first excavation reports on Celtic necropolis Karaburma in Belgrade, and the site still stands out as one of the focal points for understanding of Celtic culture in the central Balkans and southernmost Pannonia. Archaeological research in the new residential complex in the part of Belgrade called Karaburma started in 1958 and lasted continuously until 1963, conducted by Jovan Todorović. Karaburma was geographically a headland peaking into the Danube. When the neighbouring island of Ada Huja was connected to the mainland thus becoming a peninsula, Karaburma’s area on the right bank of Danube also became known as Ada Huja, so Karaburma is now a few hundred meters away from the river. Building of the new residential area resulted in discovering some new archaeological sites. Big advantage was that at that time earthworks were carried out by hand without any machinery. It was also possible to explore archaeologically both the building area and the area not affected by the building activities, so that the more accurate picture of prehistoric Karaburma could be formed (Todorović 1972, 7). For the same purpose, it is necessary to take into consideration finds from the site Rospi Ćuprija, which is an integral part of the same geographic and cultural whole. Much to our regret, it was not possible to carry out more extensive archaeological research of the area on the Danube bank, where the remains of the Early and Late Iron Age settlements had been identified. The Iron Age necropolis and the Bronze Age necropolis (with more than 200 graves with urns) partially overlap. The necropolis attributed to proto-historic Singidunum comprises 96 graves (Fig. 1). There are only 6 graves with inhumations, while the rest are graves with cremation. The graves were discovered in the area measuring 1200 × 200 m. They were dug in without definite order. It should be emphasized that the grave pits could not be defined and described in the documentation due to soil structure and the fact that the Karaburma slopes have been subject to denudation during the last two millennia (Todorović 1972, 9–10). The graves in the necropolis formed groups with 10–40 graves in each. Some of the groups were positioned very near one to another, while some were couples of meters away from the neighbouring groups. Graves in the groups belong to all the burial phases. The graves dated at the younger phases of La Tène did not disturb the graves from the older phases, which suggest existence of above-ground marks (Todorović 1972, 45). Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 391–399 392 | M. Ljuština–M. Spasić KARABURMA Early Iron Age and Early La Tène cemetery Early LT female cremation Early LT male cremation Early Iron Age cremation Early LT warrior cremation Dux fibula 0 50m Fig. 1. Plan of the necropolis at the site of Karaburma. Among the few skeletal graves, our attention was focused on the graves No. 63 and 67 which were identified as the earliest inside the necropolis and dated at the end of the 4th and beginning of the 3rd c. BC. It turned out that both of the graves were found at the part of the necropolis overlapping the necropolis from the Bronze Age. This fact was more than helpful, because the position of the grave 67, which was not known from the publication, was reconstructed using the original documentation of the Bronze Age urn field cemetery. N 0 50cm Fig. 2. Karaburma, graves 63 and 67 (artefacts appearing on the figure are not in scale). Grave 63 belongs to an inhumed deceased, lying on the back with arms stretched next to the body (Fig. 2). Lower parts of the stretched legs were damaged. The head is slightly turned leftwards. The skeleton is well preserved. Its orientation is W–E, the head being on the west and the legs on the east. The grave was at the depth of 115 cm. The length of the preserved part of the skeleton (without feet bones) is 138 cm (Todorović 1972, 26). The skeleton was attributed to a female deceased, on the basis of the grave inventory. No detailed anthropological analysis has been performed so far. Two silver earrings made of twisted wire were on the left and right side of the head (Pl. 1/3). Both of the earrings are well preserved (3 cm and 2.8 cm in diameter respectively) with crossing and overlapping ends, one of which being pointed and the other – broader and roll-shaped. Jovanović (Јовановић 1994, 112) defined them as belonging to Celtic Newcomers between Traditional and Fashionable: Graves 63 and 67 from Karaburma | 393 the variant a of this type of jewellery. There were 7 multicoloured glass beads on the neck of the deceased (Pl. 1/4). They are small in size (2–7 mm) and their colours vary from dark blue to ochre and pale yellow. A bronze fibula of Dux type, 4.8 cm in length, with decorated arch and two pairs of chain pendants was on the right shoulder (Pl. 1/1). Its foot is bent and spherically ended. Its widened arch has elliptical ornamentation. The spring is bilateral, with three pairs of coils, into which a pivot bar is inserted. The four chain pendants, their lengths varying from 6 to 17 cm, hang from the pivot bar. It was dated at the end of the 4th and the beginning of the 3rd century BC (Todorović 1972, 62). A large wheel thrown clay bowl (10 cm in height, 29 cm in width and 12 cm in bottom diameter) was placed some 40 cm from the left side of the head (Pl. 1/5). Its rim is widened and thickened, bent on the inside, and its bottom is flat and pronounced. According to Todorović (1972, 49) this type of bowl is one of the oldest types in the necropolis. Next to the right side of the head there was a fragment of biconical iron object (Pl. 1/2), some 1.2 cm in diameter (Todorović 1972, 26–27). Grave 67 belongs to an inhumed deceased (Fig. 2). Based on the original documentation from the field excavation, it can be stated that the skeleton was found in the immediate vicinity of the grave 63 and that it was orientated likewise, W–E, which is opposite to the situation published by Todorović (1972, 28, pl. XLII/3). Preserved length of the skeleton is 156 cm. It was lying at the depth of 99 cm. The head was on the east, the legs on the west. Both the arms and the legs were in stretched position.1 On the left and right side of the head two twisted silver earrings were found (Pl. 1/6). Both of them are made of thin twisted wire, with a loop at one end, belonging to the variant b by Jovanović (Јовановић 1994, 112). The earrings are damaged and deformed, and their approximate diameter is 3 cm. A string of 25 blue biconical glass beads was hanging around the neck (Pl. 1/7). A conical foot of a handmade kantharos (preserved height is 3.8 cm and the foot diameter is 9 cm) was discovered by the right elbow, below which there was a damaged iron object. Actually, a number of amorphous iron fragments were interpreted as parts of a small knife (Todorović 1972, 28). An alternative approach to the identification of the iron object, since it was found in the waist area, is that one is dealing with a belt hook (cf. Rustoiu 2012). An analogous find is the iron belt hook from the grave CX041 from the site Aradu Nou, Romania.2 Approximately contemporaneous skeletal grave G3–991 from the site Kostolac–Pećine comprised a belt buckle (Јовановић 1994, 112; Jovanović 2007, 822–823), which makes the explanation of the iron object from the Karaburma grave 67 as a belt hook more plausible. According to Todorović (1972, 42, 87) the skeletal graves 63 and 67 are the oldest in the necropolis and can be dated at the 3rd century BC, in the period of Celtic settling and stabilisation (320–280 BC), and there is a chance that they belonged to the autochthonous population. Inhumation as a funerary practice is typical for both the Celts in their homeland (Todorović 1972, 42) and the indigenous Late Hallstatt communities in the Serbian part of the Danube Basin (cf. graves of the Srem group in Medović 2007; Trajković 2008; Ljuština 2010). In the inventory of the graves 63 and 67 Todorović (1972, 87) recognized objects with autochthonous origin: earrings in both of the graves and the ceramic vessel in the grave 67; and objects which were imported from the Celtic, at that time already bordering territories: the fibula and the bowl from the grave 63, glass beads in both of the graves. The glass necklaces/beads are characteristic for the skeletal graves of the 3rd century BC exclusively (Todorović 1972, 71). The silver earrings made of twisted wire found in the graves 63 and 67 were a unique find at the time they were discovered (Todorović 1972, 60, 70). Analogies can be found in the necropolis Kostolac– Pećine, where in the skeletal grave G3–991, two silver earrings made of twisted wire with a conical end were found along with a belt buckle, a fibula of Certosa type, an early Duchcov type fibula and two simple bronze loop-shaped earrings (Јовановић 1994, 112; Jovanović 2007, 822–823). The earrings from the Pećine grave G3–991 are not the closest analogy for the finds from either of the Karaburma graves, since they belong to the variant c by Jovanović (Јовановић 1994, 112). The closest analogy for the earrings from the Karaburma grave 67 comes from an isolated grave with incineration from Kostolac in which the twisted earrings were accompanied by two iron fibulae of later Duchcov type (Јовановић 1994, 11–113; Jovanović 2007, 823). The pair of twisted silver earrings with roll-shaped ends from the grave CX50 1 2 Thanks to the well preserved skeletal remains, which are kept in Belgrade City Museum, a preliminary anthropological analysis could be performed. The authors are very grateful to colleague S. Krunić, whose analysis revealed that the grave belonged to a female, aged 45–50. The results of the excavations at Aradu Nou, which had been conducted by Adrian Ursuţiu, have not been published up to now; information given here by courtesy of Aurel Rustoiu. 394 | M. Ljuština–M. Spasić from the site Aradu Nou3 is almost the same in shape and size as the earrings from the grave 63 from Karaburma. It is interesting to notice that direct analogies for the earrings from more remote Early La Tène sites are not easy to find. Use of silver loops, typologically close to the variant b by Jovanović, as pendants/ beads or, larger in size, as bracelets, is confirmed in the Early La Tène graves from Slovakia and Austria (Benadik Et Al. 1956, 66, T. XXV/3; Pauli 1978, 34, T. 138; Јовановић 1994, 113–114). Bronze bracelets from a child’s grave 54 from Doroslovo–Đepfeld necropolis of the late phase of the Early Iron Age Srem group (Trajković 2008, 44, 78; Ljuština 2010, 62), shaped in almost the same manner as the earrings of the variant a by B. Jovanović, suggest possible origin of such type of jewellery. The closest parallels can be found in the material from the Late Hallstatt period. This type of jewellery is common in the northwestern Balkans and south and east Pannonia. Not only were twisted earrings usual part of jewellery sets, but also twisted bracelets, made of bronze or silver wire, which was in some cases multiplied and twisted together. Earrings belonging to Jovanović’s variants c and b came from Glasinac (made of silver) and Donja Dolina (made of bronze) respectively, and bronze bracelets from the grave 8 from the necropolis of the Iapodes at Jezerine (Јовановић 1994, 114 with references). Two pairs of twisted silver bracelets from Beremend (Jerem 1973, 68, fig. 7/2–5) show close typological parallels, too. Silver jewellery from the Szentes–Vekerzug cultural circle of south-eastern Pannonia shows much similarity to the earrings from the Early La Tène graves from the north Balkans. In this respect remarkable are ends of twisted silver bracelets and loops-earrings (Chochorowski 1985, 68, fig. 13; Dušek 1961, 161, T. IV/2; Јовановић 1994, 114; Jovanović 1999, 37–38). Fig. 3. Distribution of Duchcov-Münsingen fibulae (LT B2). Adapted after Popović 1996, fig. 14. 1. Osijek; 2. Dalj; 3. Bogdanovci, Vukovar; 4. Čurug; 5. Bašaid; 6. Pećine, Viminacium, Kostolac; 7. Negotin; 8. Karaburma, Rospi Ćuprija; 9. Zemun; 10. Novi Banovci; 11. Kupinovo; 12. Sremska Mitrovica; 13. Šabac; 14. Gradina na Bosutu; 15. Rapanić Polje; 16. Gosinja Planina, Podilijak, Rusanovići; 17. Pod; 18. Majdan; 19. Donja Dolina; 20. Pleternica; 21. Sanski Most; 22. Ribić, Jezerine, Golubić; 23. Vrebac. Celtic newcomers vs. indigenous population By the end of the 4th century BC, on their way towards the south through the Pannonian plain, the Celts reached the central Balkans, including ‘Belgrade’s confluence’, where they made a stop. According to the archaeological record, consequences of these events are considerable cultural changes. Funerary practices, pottery production, weaponry, tools, dress and jewellery significantly changed. With the appearance of La Tène style, the forms of the Early Iron Age gradually integrated with the new ones, until most of the 3 Unpublished material; excavations by Adrian Ursuţiu, information by Aurel Rustoiu. Celtic Newcomers between Traditional and Fashionable: Graves 63 and 67 from Karaburma | 395 area was dominated by La Tène culture. This fact is especially marked along the main directions of the Celtic movements – the area along the middle Danube and the parts of Transdanubia. Southern Pannonia and western Balkans retained the Late Hallstatt character for a long time (Popović 1996, 105). The Danube valley and the western Balkans in the Early La Tène period bear several common characteristics in material culture. A prominent one is represented by the fibulae with ornamented bow bearing an oval plaque with a frame, one of which is the fibula from the grave 63 from Karaburma. The same characteristic, the bow in the shape of a medallion, is apparent on three fibulae with chains from Bogdanovci, as well as on a pair of fibulae from Osijek. The piece form Karaburma has the closest analogy in the fibula from Rusanovići, at Glasinac (Popović 1996, 119). Chronologically, these fibulae are placed into the period from the 4th till, at least the middle of the 3rd c. BC (LT B2), and their distribution can be seen on the map (Fig. 3). The entire series of these finds bear some similar solutions, appearing as early as in the Early La Tène period, but as Popović (1996, 120, 124) noted, it seems that they were not actual import from original Celtic lands, which was the model proposed by Todorović (1972, 87). The fibulae were presumably manufactured somewhere between the Sava and the Danube, after the older examples. These forms were transported to the western Balkans and were later manufactured there after the similar examples. It is more likely that one is faced with an indirect influence of La Tène style, or a technology transfer, coming over Slovakia and Transdanubia into this part of the Balkans (Popović 1996, 120, 124). The model of a direct Celtic influx by means of imported objects should not be eliminated in total, but should be taken with less probability. Remains the question of both the workshops which produced the goods and the final recipients, the persons who wore them during the lifetime and were buried with them. Besides the grave 63, there are two more graves in which fibulae of Duchcov type were found at Karaburma. The grave 60 (Todorović 1972, 25–26) contained a wheel-thrown urn with cremated human bones in it, two bronze earrings, three small iron knives, an iron buckle, an iron ring and four fibulae of Duchcov type (Pl. 1/9–10, 12). Such a big concentration of Duchcov fibulae in a single grave has not been attested on the territory of Serbia yet. The grave 66 probably represents the cremation of a male warrior. Besides a wheel-thrown urn with burnt human bones in it, parts of a shield, two iron knives, an iron spear, an iron chain and a fibula of Duchcov type (Pl. 1/11) were found near the urn (Todorović 1972, 27–28). Thus, the distribution of Duchcov fibulae in the necropolis at Karaburma clearly shows that this type of fibulae was not exclusively worn by female or male. Also, the situation from the grave 60 offers a good starting point for the reconstruction of the modes of wearing of Duchcov fibulae, since four of them were found in that grave. On the other hand, such a big number of fibulae could be also interpreted as a solid signal for the accumulation of wealth, weather the lady that was buried with them actually possessed them, or they were put near the urn as a symbolic offering or so. 1 In the grave 23, at the nearby site 1–3 Belgrade–Rospi Ćuprija (Fig. 4), one more Duchcov fibula was found (Pl. 1/8). As in the case of the grave 63 from Karaburma, this is a skeletal grave, whose gender has not been determined. The deceased was lying with the hands on the pelvis and 2 the feet crossed. Alongside the big iron 3 fibula (Fig. 4/1; Pl. 1/8), two parts of an iron buckle and a wheel-thrown bowl, which was placed by the feet, were found in it (Тодоровић 1956, 46, 50). Unusual position of the deceased resembles the funerary practice of the Early Iron Age Srem Group (cf. the grave 18 from 4 the necropolis Doroslovo–Đepfeld in Ljuština 2010, pl. 5), although the grave inventory reveals undoubtedly Early La Fig. 4. Rospi Ćuprija, Grave 23. 1. Iron fibula of Duchcov type; 2–3. Tène features. Iron parts of a belt buckles (?); 4. Wheel-thrown bowl (no scale). 396 | M. Ljuština–M. Spasić In Marko Dizdar’s opinion, the female skeletal graves 63 and 67 from Karaburma could be attributed to the women of autochthonous Pannonian origin (Dizdar 2004, 76). He based his opinion on the burial customs and grave inventory. His attention is particularly focused on the handmade kantharoi from the settlements and necropolises of the Scordisci, one of which is found in the grave 67 at Karaburma. He presumed that the finds of the handmade kantharoi are result of influences of autochthonous Early Iron Age traditions on the material culture of the Scordisci. It is possible that some of the Pannonian population survived and kept their own identity through certain handmade ceramic forms, as well as ornamental techniques and motifs noticed on some of La Tène sites in the Middle Danube Bassin (Dizdar 2001, 101–103). That is how material heritage of the Scordisci embraced two lines of development of the kantharoi: the autochthonous Pannonian, rooted in the Early Iron Age forms, and the one established by copying Hellenistic models of the kantharoi, which increase in number during the late phase of the Early and Middle La Tène (Dizdar 2004, 76). According to Rustoiu (2012) the graves of the early phase of the Karaburma necropolis preserve local traditional jewellery amongst their goods. This is the expression of a maintained native identity defined by the display of body ornaments and dress accessories different than those of the newcomers, especially recognisable in the female dress. In that respect, Karaburma would provide a number of elements illustrating the specific pattern of interactions between the colonists and the local communities they overlaid. The so-called ‘Celtic migrations’ in the 4th and 3rd century BC are the historical background. During this time La Tène culture expanded from its main area in Central Europe to Southern France, Northern Italy, the Danube region and Romania. The Celts extended their area to Greece and even reached Asia Minor. But the question arises if the expansion of La Tène culture is identical with the historical Celtic migrations (Hauschild 2010, 171). Archaeological sources suggest the first appearance of La Tène culture in the Middle Danube region already at the end of the 5th c. BC (Zirra 1991; Szabó 1998). The Carpathian-Danube area was during the late Hallstatt period already complexly populated with the presence of different cultures, which developed during the Early La Tène period from a substrate of different groups of population. Objects of Early La Tène character, like Duchcov, Münsingen or Certosa type fibulae, bracelets with Steckverschluss or Stempelenden, Hohlringe and Hohlbuckelringe, typical La Tène weapons, horse harness and wheel thrown pottery, date the first appearance of Celtic immigrants in the Carpathian–Danube area. Today we must consider that this is usually an emigration of small parts of tribal communities, small groups or only single persons (Hauschild 2010, 172–173). Marrying-in into a family of another tribe is to be understood as migration (Hauschild 2010, 174) and should be taken into consideration when the female deceased from Karaburma are in question. The inventory of graves is the ‘key’ to each individual, but this way one may detect ‘mobility of objects and manners’ instead of buried persons themselves. It is difficult, almost impossible to exactly determine ethnical identity of individuals based on several objects. For recognizing foreignness, differences in cultural assets and significant change in funeral traditions must be available (Hauschild 2010, 174). Physical anthropology with its bioarchaeometric research can offer a solution how to detect foreign individuals. The isotope analysis performed on bone material provides solid evidence of indigenous as well as immigrated persons within a local community (Hauschild 2010, 175). ✴✴✴ At first glance burial practice of the autochthonous populations belonging to the Srem group look very similar to the practice noticed at the graves 63 and 67 from Karaburma. In both cases we deal with inhumation. The deceased were placed into a grave pit in stretched position, with personal belongings, jewellery in the first place (fibulae, strings of glass beads), and some food for the afterlife, put into ceramic vessels. The most significant differences are concerning position of arms of the deceased, as well as the place where the food offerings were placed inside the grave. Late Hallstatt practice is to put arms on the chest and food by the feet. In the case of Karaburma arms were stretched next to the body, and the vessels were near upper part of the body, next to the head or the elbow. These archaeologically traceable differences in burial practice suggest differences in funerary rituals and afterlife concepts of the two populations. The differences in types of jewellery (Certosa vs. Duchcov fibulae, more opulent glass strings in the Late Hallstatt graves) and pottery (handmade vs. wheel-thrown vessels) may reflect changes in fashion or local availability of certain goods. In this sense, a special attention should be paid to the skeletal grave G3–991 from Kostolac–Pećine, where the set of jewellery of the deceased comprised both a fibula of Certosa type and an early Duchcov type fibula. Celtic Newcomers between Traditional and Fashionable: Graves 63 and 67 from Karaburma | 397 Remains the question to what extent grave inventory reflects the deceased and to what extent the living community who took care about the funeral. Were the two ladies from Karaburma ‘Celticised’ or ‘Assimilated’ during their lifetime? Where they of Celtic origin and married-in into an autochthonous family or vice versa? We should be aware, as Jovanović (2007, 824) noted, that the selection of personal belongings in the female graves reflects individual preferences of each of the women. We argue that occurrence of jewellery typical for two different communities is profound articulation of cultural interactions that might not developed just through the acts of actual contacts of new-coming and autochthonous population. Instead, we see it as one of the physical manifestations of long term process that led to construction of Scordiscian identity. References Benadik Et Al. 1956 Chochorowski 1985 Dušek 1961 Jerem 1973 Јовановић 1994 Jovanović 1999 Jovanović 2007 Dizdar 2001 Dizdar 2004 Hauschild 2010 Ljuština 2010 Medović 2007 Pauli 1978 Popović 1996 Rustoiu 2012 Szabó 1998 Тодоровић 1956 Todorović 1972 Trajković 2008 Zirra 1991 Benadik, B.–Vlček, E.–Ambros, C., Keltische Gräberfelder der Südwestslowakei, Bratislava. Chochorowski, J., Die Vekerzug-Kultur, Charakteristik der Funde, Warszawa–Krakow. Dušek, M., Die Thrako-skytische Periode in der Slowakei, SlovArch, IX, 1–2, 155–174. Jerem, E., Zur Geschichte der späten Eisenzeit in Transdanubien. Späteisenzeitliche Grabfunde von Beremend komitat Baranya), ActaArchHun, 25, 65–86. Јовановић, Б., Хоризонт најстаријих келтских гробова на северном Балкану, IN: Тасић, Н. (ed.), Културе гвозденог доба југословенског Подунавља, Београд, 111–117. Jovanović, B., Die Tradition der skythischen Eisenzeit in der frühen Latènezeit des Nordbalkans, IN: Garašanin, M.–Roman, P.–Stînga, I.–Tasić, N.–Vasić, M. (eds.), Le Djerdap/ Les Portes de Fér à la deuxième moitié du premièr millenaire av. J. Ch. jusqu’aux guerres daciques. Kolloquium in Kladovo–Drobeta-Turnu Severin (September-October 1998), Beograd, 37–40. Jovanović, B., Srebrne naušnice u nakitu ranog latena Srednjeg Podunavlja, IN: Blečić, M.– Črešnar, M.–Hänsel, B.–Hellmuth, A.–Kaiser, E.–Metzner-Nebelsick, C. (eds.), Scripta praehistoria in honorem Biba Teržan, Ljubljana, 821–827. Dizdar, M., Latenska naselja na vinkovačkom području, Zagreb. Dizdar, M., Grob LT 11 iz Zvonimirova - primjer dvojnog pokopa latenske kulture, OpArch, 28, 41–88. Hauschild, M., “Celticised” or “Assimilated“? In Search of Foreign and Indigenous People at the Time of the Celtic Migrations, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu-Mureș 9–11 October 2009, Cluj-Napoca, 171–180. Ljuština, M., The Late Hallstatt Communities in Serbian Part of the Danube Basin, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu-Mureș 9–11 October 2009, Cluj-Napoca, 59–78. Medović, P., Stubarlija – Nekropola naselja Feudvar kod Mošorina (Bačka), Novi Sad. Pauli, L., Der Dürnberg bei Hallein III, München. Popović, P., Early La Tène between Pannonia and the Balkans, Starinar, N. S., XLVII, 105–125. Rustoiu, A., The Celts and Indigenous Populations from the Southern Carpathian Basin. Intercommunity Communication Strategies, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carphatian Basin. Proceedings of the International colloquium from Târgu Mureș 7–9 October 2011, BMM, V, Târgu Mureș, 357–390. Szabó, M., Die Kelten im Karpatenbecken (vom 5. Jh. v. Chr. zu Christi Geburt), IN: Kemenczei, T.–Kovács, T.–Szabó, M. (Hrsg.), Schätze aus der Keltenzeit in Ungarn. Kunst im Karpatenbecken im 1. Jahrtausend vor Christus. Sonderausstellung Keltenmuseum Hochdorf/Enz 1998/1999, Schriftenreihe des Keltenmuseum Hochdorf/Enz 3, Eberdingen, 51–70. Тодоровић, Ј., Праисториска некропола на Роспи Ћуприји код Београда, Годишњак Музеја града Београда, III, 27–62. Todorović, J., Praistorijska Karaburma I – nekropola mlađeg gvozdenog doba, Beograd. Trajković, D., Đepfeld. Early Iron Age Necropolis at Doroslovo, Sombor. Zirra, V., Les plus anciennes fibules en Romanie, Dacia N. S., 35, 177–184. 398 | M. Ljuština–M. Spasić List of figures Fig. 1. Plan of the necropolis at the site of Karaburma. Fig. 2. Karaburma, graves 63 and 67 (artefacts appearing on the figure are not in scale). Fig. 3. Distribution of Duchcov-Münsingen fibulae (LT B2). Adapted after Popović 1996, fig. 14. Fig. 4. Rospi Ćuprija, Grave 23. 1. Iron fibula of Duchcov type; 2–3. Iron parts of a belt buckles (?); 4. Wheel-thrown bowl (no scale). List of plates Pl. 1. 1–5. Karaburma, grave 63: 1. Duchcov fibula; 2. Biconical iron fragment; 3. Silver earrings; 4. Glass beads; 5. Wheel-thrown bowl. 6–7. Karaburma, grave 67: 6. Silver earrings; 7. Glass beads. 8–12. Duchcov fibulae: 8. Rospi Ćuprija, grave 23; 9–10, 12. Karaburma, grave 60; 11. Karaburma, grave 66. Celtic Newcomers between Traditional and Fashionable: Graves 63 and 67 from Karaburma | 399 5 – – – Plate 1. 1–5. Karaburma, grave 63: 1. Duchcov fibula; 2. Biconical iron fragment; 3. Silver earrings; 4. Glass beads; 5. Wheel-thrown bowl. 6–7. Karaburma, grave 67: 6. Silver earrings; 7. Glass beads. 8–12. Duchcov fibulae: 8. Rospi Ćuprija, grave 23; 9–10, 12. Karaburma, grave 60; 11. Karaburma, grave 66. Plate . –5. Kara urma ra e . u o fi ula . i oni al iron fra ment . sil er earrin s . lass eads 5. eel t ro n o l. – . Kara urma ra e . sil er earrin s . lass eads. – . u o fi ulae . ospi upri a ra e – . Kara urma ra e . Kara urma ra e . ‘Till Death Do Us Part’ A Statistical Approach to Identifying Burial Similarity and Grouping. The Case of the Late La Tène Graves from the Eastern Carpathian Basin Cătălin Nicolae POPA University of Cambridge Cambridge, UK pcatalinn@yahoo.com Keywords: statistics, similarity, clustering, identity, burials This paper will describe a statistical method developed for the study of burial data and will give a very brief example of the results that it can produce. The method aims to calculate the similarity between burials and construct possible groupings based on them. It was developed with the question of investigating the manifestation of group identity in the funerary record. The method puts into statistical practice the phrase: Till death do us part. This is done by basically replacing the word death with statistics. However the phrase should not be taken literally, with death as a subject, since I do not wish to discuss the agency of death (Williams 2004; Robb in press). In this study death is understood as an event that triggers the agency of the mourners, since it is the mourners, and on a broader level the community, that bury the deceased (Parker Pearson 1993; 1999; Lucy 2002). During the funerary ritual, the relationship between the deceased and the community members gets materialised. Along with it, the relationships between different groups also gets reinforced or challenged. It is through these relationships that personal identity and the community identity as a whole are formed and maintained. Therefore the mortuary ritual is also a materialisation of these identities. Additionally, because the death of a community member is a traumatic event in which the group’s integrity is thrown off balance, group identity is often prominent as a means of reaffirming its integrity and re-establishing its equilibrium. Identity is a very broad and all-encompassing term which raises significant difficulties when seeking to apply it to the concrete archaeological record. Identity can draw on different elements since it is based on qualities that people see themselves sharing with others, as well as criteria they perceive as distinguishing themselves from others (Canuto–Yaeger 2000, 2). Thus there are multiple types of identities that an individual can hold: family, social, religious, class, state etc. Additionally, following on the point of Jovanović (2005, 77) and O’Shea (1981, 49–52), there is a vertical hierarchy of identities according to their level of generality and which function concomitantly (e.g. local, regional, ethnic, national). In order to account for all of these possibilities one would require an enormous amount of information given through high resolution data. Archaeologically we rarely have that. The statistical method that I employ is developed to work with low-resolution archaeological data. Consequently I have chosen to focus on group identity, meaning any type of identity that a person shares with other group members, and to shrink this concept down to its very essence: the opposition between same-different. It is this opposition that gets transcribed in the statistical analysis. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 401–412 402 | C. N. Popa Statistical Analysis. Preliminary Considerations Before describing the actual statistical algorithms that were employed, it is necessary to put forward series of important theoretical considerations regarding statistical analysis and its use in archaeology. I consider it necessary to put forwards a series of important theoretical considerations regarding statistical analysis and its use in archaeology.1 First of all, statistical analysis is only a tool. Archaeologists apply this tool to data in order to reveal possible patterns. But statistical methods cannot actually tell us what the patterns represent. Explaining what a pattern means is purely a process of interpretation which is done entirely by the researcher. This point is true for both exploratory or descriptive techniques (e.g. histogram, principle component analysis) and for model-based ones (e.g. Bayesian methods). Secondly, statistical analysis should always be done with a question in mind (Shennan 1997, 216). Most of the time, plunging blindly into data with statistical methods will give results which are either absolutely useless or which one cannot use since it is not possible to know what they actually reflect. This point is especially true for model-based methods. In the case of exploratory techniques it often happens that they are used without a clear question; this may actually prove useful especially if there are easily identifiable patterns to be found in the data. Nonetheless, even in this case, having a specific question to ask the data greatly increases the possibility of getting useful results. Finally, statistics are not objective. There are at least two layers of subjectivity that one has to bear in mind. The first one is linked to data recording. Every statistical algorithm uses a database and the way data is recorded is a matter of choice. Choices are present everywhere in the database (e.g. deciding between a mug and a jug). The point is that a computer can only calculate what you tell it to calculate. The second layer is linked to the statistical algorithm itself. Any algorithm is written by a person and the choices that the programmer makes when conceiving this algorithm has of course a direct impact on the results. Indeed these choices are made to the best knowledge of the programmer, and if we are lucky the programmer will be an archaeologist or at least someone who is familiar with our work, but in the end these are decision which shape the outcome of the analysis. A computer can only calculate how you tell it to calculate. However these ideas should not discourage archaeologists from using statistical analysis. They are meant rather to guide the people who use it or are thinking of using it and to make it clear what statistics can and cannot do. It can show patterns, but it cannot not tell us what these patterns mean; it can help to answer questions, but only if we ask them beforehand; it can give a useful result, but this result will not be the objective output of a machine. Statistical Analysis. The Algorithms The statistical analysis deployed is grouped in two stages. Since the analysis is thought as reflecting the phrase Till death do us part, the stages of the analysis correspond to the two logical questions present within the phrase: How does death do us part?; and What parts does death divide us into?. The first question was transcribed into a similarity algorithm that compares all burials to each other; the second questions was translated as a clustering procedure which groups the burials into several ‘parts’ (i.e. clusters) based on the results from the first step. In order to understand what the determined clusters refer to, further exploratory methods are deployed, integrating the results from the previous analysis. Before the algorithm is run it is necessary to choose from a burial database the variables that the algorithm will process. All the variables are categorical2 (Agresti 1990) and can be split in two types: ritual variables3 and inventory or grave-good variables. The ritual variables refer to all the information linked to the burial itself, such as the use of cremation or inhumation, whether the grave is flat or tumular, whether it is a single or multiple burial etc. More diverse variables can also be included if they are considered relevant for the question at hand (e.g. settlement proximity, landscape position), with the condition that they can be expressed as simple categorical variables. The inventory variables contain all the information that characterises the grave-goods present in the burial. Each inventory item is characterised by an equal number of categorical variables, such as material, decoration, colour, secondary burning, integrity etc. Additionally, each item is characterised by an equal number of hierarchically connected categorical 1 2 3 Some of these ideas are discussed in the introduction of Statistics in Archaeology by Baxter (2003, 1–18). Binary variables may also be used, but they are treated as categorical. The name ritual variables is rather improper. Grave variables may have been more appropriate but, for the sake of avoiding confusions, ritual was employed instead. ‘Till Death Do Us Part’ A Statistical Approach to Identifying Burial Similarity and Grouping | 403 variables that serve to identify the object. These variables can be thought as relating to functionality, typology or both. For instance if functionality and typology are combined, and functionality is considered to be more important, a sword can be characterised as: category 1 weapon; category 2 offensive; category 3 sword; category 4 type 1 (Fig. 1). Such a hierarchical structure of these variables allows the algorithm to find degrees of similarities between artefacts and allows for the identification of sets with variable elements. I consider such a structure essential for the question of identity, since expressing a common identity seldom involves precise similitude. Category 1 weapon Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 offensive sword Type 1 battleknife defensive spearhead arrowhead Type 2 Fig. 1. Example of sword description using four hierarchical variables. Certain variables, such as sex, age, geographical position etc., may be left out of the algorithm and only introduced in the final stage when further exploratory methods are employed to characterise the results of the clustering. This artifice allows one to inspect whether factors relating to things like age or sex where relevant in identity manifestation and how the funerary display of identity changed according to region. As a result it can be possible to single out the types of group identities being manifested. If these variables had been introduced in the actual cluster analysis such observations would have no longer been possible. For instance, if sex were considered in the analysis then the similarity algorithm, and of course also the cluster analysis, would determine that burials of the same sex are rather similar to one-another. Hence this means that the analysis would start with the premise that burials of the same sex had a certain degree of similarity. Conversely, leaving the information related to sex out of the cluster analysis gives the possibility to verify whether the sex of the deceased had an influence on the choices made by the mourners during the mortuary ritual without assuming beforehand that it did. For example, if sex was considered as a variable in the analysis and the clustering algorithm would determine that the burials can be split into two groups, each of different sex, then it would be highly problematic to say that gender identity was being expressed in the funerary record since the assumption was already included in the analysis. On the other hand, if the same result was obtained without using sex as a variable in the cluster analysis, then it would be safe to infer that we are dealing with the expression of gender identity embedded in the mortuary ritual (Fig. 2). The difference between using sex as a variable or not can be translated as the user taking the decision that sex is an important identity element or seeing whether the mourners took that decision. Fig. 2. The advantage of using sex as an independent variable. 404 | C. N. Popa After the variables are decided on, they are extracted from the database and imported in the statistical program. The similarity and clustering algorithms were implemented in the statistical software R; the post-clustering exploratory statistical methods are done in SPSS. Additionally, basic spatial analysis is done in ArcGIS. This involves plotting the burials on a map of the area with the help of satellite imagery and observing whether possible groupings can be observed according to geographical region or in relation to certain landscape features, such as water streams or mountain ranges. The First Part. The Similarity Algorithm The similarity algorithm is born out of the need to quantify how similar or different the burials are to each other (Drennan 1996, 271–283). Hence it involves putting into numbers the empirical observations that are made when comparing two graves. Such a transformation is necessary since many statistical procedures, including cluster analysis, which is used in this case, can only operate with numerical values. While there are numerous similarity algorithms in existence, none of them would work with the data that I employ. Most similarity algorithms are developed to work with continuous data or binary data (Drennan 1996, 271–283; Everitt Et Al. 2011, 43–69). Continuous data refers to the recording of numbers, which could be the expression of measurements. The classical way of calculating the similarity, or in this case the dissimilarity index, is by employing a simple Euclidean distance. Binary data on the other hand refers to variables that contain 0 or 1 values, 0 referring to absence and 1 to presence. In this case there are several possible calculations of the similarity, depending on the question that is being asked and on what the data stands for. Nevertheless the most common methods are Simple Matching and Jaccard’s Coefficients (Drennan 1996, 277–279). The data that I aim to analyse is however neither continuous nor binary but categorical (Agresti 1990), meaning that each variable can contain different independent values. It is often suggested to transform categorical variables into binary ones, but doing so a lot of information necessary for the identity question being asked would be lost. When such a transformation is not possible, methods for comparing categorical data have been proposed (Agresti 2007), but usually they require a specific structure of the data, which seldom works with the material traces that we find. This situation has led me to construct a new similarity algorithm which can easily work with archaeological data and mimic the way archaeologists approach the burial record. The similarity algorithm receives as input the raw data and has as output a dissimilarity or distance matrix. The algorithm involves numerous operations and several phases. Each of them will be detailed bellow. The first step is to import all the data into R from the burial database. This is done through a table in which each entry corresponds to an inventory item that also contains all the ritual information associated with the burial from which it comes. Next, from the imported data, the relevant variables are extracted. This means that a copy of the data is made in which only the variables that have been chosen to run the cluster analysis on are kept. This step is followed by the controlled transformation of the data into numerical values. The data held in each of the analysed variables is converted from string type to integer type. For instance, the variable ritual type, which can contain as values inhumation, cremation, cenotaphs or unknown is converted to contain the values 1, 2, 3, or -1, each of these corresponding to the initial ritual types. -1 is used for all variables when data is missing. A controlled transformation of the variables has been opted for, instead of allowing R to do so intrinsically, because it is necessary to know exactly what numerical value corresponds to the initial information. This is needed for the later stages of the similarity algorithm when there is the possibility of assigning different weights to the variables as well as the values that they contain. After all the used variables are converted to numerical data the algorithm calculates separately the similarity of the burials based on the ritual information and the similarity of the burials based on the grave-goods. Calculating the similarity based on ritual is rather straightforward. Each burial is one by one compared to all other burials using just the variables relating to ritual. Depending on the weight attributed to each variable, and if desired also to individual values taken by the variables, a value is obtained to characterise how similar all the burials are to one-another. The condition for two variables to add to the similarity is to contain the same value, which must be different from -1, meaning that there hast to be information regarding that particular aspect of the burial. By applying this condition to each variable the algorithm determines a number between 0 and the sum of all the weights assigned to the variables. For example, if six ritual variables are employed and if a weight of 1 is attributed to each variable, then the similarity ‘Till Death Do Us Part’ A Statistical Approach to Identifying Burial Similarity and Grouping | 405 index between two burials is between 0 and 6. However, this similarity index is standardised by dividing the index to the maximum possible value, so the sum of all the weights, which in this example is 6. This operation transforms all the indexes in a number between 0 and 1, with 0 meaning that the two burials are completely different and 1 that they are identical. For the algorithm to give consistent results, the same weight has to be assigned to the variables during all the burial comparisons. Therefore it is not possible to run half of the burials with a set of assigned weights and run the other half with a different set of weights. The only way to achieve such an operation would be to split the data initially into two data sets and run separately the analysis on them, each time with the different set of weights. The designation of weights to the variables is done by the user on a purely empirical basis. This choice has to do largely with the question at hand but it can also have to do with observations done beforehand. For instance, if the placing of the burial next to a river was observed a priori to be very important, then more weight could be put on the variable recording that particular information. Calculating the similarity between burials based on the funerary inventory is more complex, involving several operations. The basic functioning principle is similar to what was described above: each burial is compared to each other burial in order to calculate a value characterizing their similarity. However, the comparison of two burials involves two steps. Firstly, each grave-good from the first burial is compared to all the other grave-goods from the second burial based on the inventory related variables The hierarchical categorical variables that describe each artefact must necessarily be included. The result of all these comparisons is a matrix of m by n components, with m representing the total number of grave-goods from the first burial and n the total number of grave-goods from the second burial. Similar to the result from the ritual information comparison, the values contained in the matrix are between 0 and the sum of all the weights assigned to the variables. Based on the matrix, the maximum similarity between the two burials is computed. . This is done by choosing a number of values from the matrix and adding them together. Only one value per row and per column can be added to the sum. The algorithm that gives the optimum solution and thus the maximum sum is the so-called Hungarian method (Kuhn 1955). After the sum is calculated, the next step is to standardise the result in the same manner as it was done with the ritual similarity index. I have chosen to standardise the result by dividing the computed sum with the total sum of the weights assigned to the variables employed in the inventory comparison, multiplied with the maximum number of grave-goods. Hence, the mathematical calculation can be expressed as: Si,j = Sumi,j w × oi,j where Si,j is the final calculated standardised similarity between burial number i and burial number j Sumi,j is the maximum sum calculated using the Hungarian method between burial number i and burial number j w is the total sum of the weights assigned to the variables used for the grave-good comparison oi,j is the maximum between m and n, where m is the number of grave-goods contained by burial i and n the number of grave-goods contained by burial j The result obtained will be thus between 0 and 1, with 0 meaning that the two burials are completely different and 1 that they are identical. After all these calculations are done the result will be two similarity matrices, one based on the ritual variables, the other one based on the grave-goods. At this point it can be opted to either run the clustering statistics individually on one of the two matrices, or to run it on the combined results. If one chooses to run the clustering on them separately, then only operation left to do is to turn the similarity matrices into dissimilarity or distance matrices. This can be done by simply subtracting the similarity index from 1, although other possibilities also exist (Shennan 1997, 222–227). If one chooses to run the cluster analysis on the two indexes put together instead of running it independently on ritual and grave-good similarities, then it is necessary to find a way to combine the two matrices into one. The most direct way of doing this would be by using a simple arithmetical mean. The mean would put an equal amount of importance on both ritual and grave-goods. While this could be acceptable in some situations, in others it may be advisable to use a different formula, which puts emphasis on the ritual or grave-good similarity depending on certain factors. After the two are combined, the last step is to transform the result into a dissimilarity index and thus obtain the dissimilarity or distance matrix. The procedure is identical to the one described for the individual ritual and grave-good matrices. 406 | C. N. Popa The Second Part. The Clustering Procedure Clustering algorithms are used in order to determine the possible groupings of data cases,4 meaning, in a more general manner, that they are employed for classification (Everitt Et Al. 2011). It is a procedure that mimics one of the human mind’s fundamental ways of dealing with complicated variability: categorizing, or putting things into groups (Drennan 1996, 309). Cluster analysis is largely an empirical method; there is little theoretical backing for the results obtained. Therefore it is extremely important to validate the results that are obtained through different procedures. There are various algorithms for clustering, all of them operating on a similarity or dissimilarity matrix and sometimes also on the original data if it is in a specific form. Each clustering algorithm tends to give a certain group structure due to its internal mechanism. This implies that certain clustering patterns can be more readily identified with some algorithms, while with other ones it can prove to be significantly more difficult. For example, simple linear patterns will be easiest to identify with a Single Linkage Hierarchical Algorithm. On the other hand, because of the rigidity of clustering procedures, every method will arrange the data into a particular kind of grouping construction, thus forcing the data structure. For instance Hierarchical Clustering in general will force the data into a hierarchical structure. Consequently, to overcome the issues of the different clustering algorithms, but at the same time take advantage of their potentially different outcomes, I have decided to employ several methods, allowing me to explore the various possible groups that can occur. The results thus obtained are validated individually as well as by comparing them to each-other.5 The first clustering algorithm deployed is by far the most commonly used one: Hierarchical Cluster Analysis. The wide use of this method has led some authors to practically identify cluster analysis with it (Drennan 1996, 309–320). The algorithm works in an agglomerative manner, working in multiple steps to combine into a cluster the cases that are most similar. At each stage the most similar cases are grouped together or added to an already existing group if their most similar case is already in a group. The end result is a hierarchical tree in which the bottom levels are the most similar and the top levels contain the cases that are furthest apart. The easiest way to display such results is through a dendrogram Fig. 3. Example of dendrogram with 30 cases. (Fig. 3). There are several types of possible hierarchical procedures based on the similarity principle which is employed during the numerous steps of the algorithm. The most widely used types are: Single Linkage or nearest neighbour; Complete Linkage or furthest neighbour; and Average Linkage. Additionally, Ward, Centroid, Median and McQuitty methods can also be used (Everitt Et Al. 2011, 73–78). Each of these different Hierarchical Clustering methods can, and often do, give potentially different results. Deciding on which one to use cannot be done in advance except for very few cases. The soundest way seems to be running the algorithm using all the methods, or at least the three main ones, and then testing which produced the clusters that are best defined and at the same time the easiest to interpret (Drennan 1996, 315–316). Often Average Linkage appears to give the most solid results. Hierarchical Clustering does not produce as direct outcome the group membership of each case from a dataset but, as already mentioned, it produces a hierarchical tree. In order to obtain an actual grouping of the cases it is necessary to cut the tree. Deciding where to cut it is usually done according to pure observation by the user (Drennan 1996, 316). However, it is also possible to use functions from the Dynamic Tree Cut R package (Langfelder Et Al. 2008) which contains novel dynamic branch cutting methods for detecting clusters in a dendrogram. Running the functions from the Dynamic Tree Cut package gives the group membership of each case of the dataset. 4 5 For my analysis the cases refer to burials. Some have suggested that comparing clustering results between each other is not necessarily a solid validation technique (Nakoinz personal comment), but many scholars think otherwise (Everitt Et Al. 2011, 264; Lockyear personal comment). ‘Till Death Do Us Part’ A Statistical Approach to Identifying Burial Similarity and Grouping | 407 The second clustering algorithm deployed is Partitioning Around Medoids which is a more robust version of the model-based K-Means method (Everitt–Horthorn 2009, 322–323). The main principle of Partitioning Around Medoids (Kaufman– Rousseeuw 1990, 68–122) is to construct an optimum set of clusters around a specified number of optimally chosen cluster centres. The cluster centres are determined so that they minimize the sum of dissimilarities to their closest neighbours. Afterwards each case is assigned to the closest cluster. The number of clusters normally needs to be given initially by the user. However, I employed an R function in which the user only specifies a cluster interval, for instance between two and ten clusters, and the algorithm selects the solution that is considered to be optimal based on an internal cluster validation method, the silhouette calculation. The algorithm returns the cluster membership of each data case, offering the possibility of displaying the solution as a two-dimensional graph (Fig. 4). Fig. 4. Example of graphic result produced with The third clustering method deployed is Partitioning Around Medoids method. Fuzzy Clustering (Everitt Et Al. 2011, 242– 249). This method requires for the users to specify beforehand how many clusters are assumed to exist. The algorithm returns, for every case of the database, the probability of it being in each of the clusters. This method allows thus to observe in a more delicate manner how well delimited the groups are and how much overlap occurs between them. The R function that performs fuzzy cluster analysis is largely based on the method described by Kaufman and Rousseeeuw (Kaufman–Rousseeuw 1990, 164–196). Additionally to the three clustering methods I also deploy a Multidimensional Scaling tool to help visualise the clusters and their relationships. The purpose of this method, also known as Principal Coordinates Analysis, is to produce an n-dimensional graphic representation of the cases based on how similar or different the cases are to each other (Drennan 1996, 285–297). The basic principle is that the cases that are similar will be placed close to one-another in the n-dimensional graph, while the ones that are dissimilar will be placed at a large distance. Hence the similarity of the cases is proportional to the distance between them in the graph. Ideally it would be for the graph to have only two dimensions as such a representation is easy to read by the user (Fig. 5). Unfortunately, when a low number of dimensions is used the correlation between the points corresponding to each case on the graph and the similarity between the cases becomes weaker. That is why often more than two dimensions need to be employed, but such graphical representations are harder to read and interpret. In R I decided to employ a modified Principal Coordinate Analysis algorithm, one that does Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling with Stable Solution from Random Starts. This method has the enormous advantage that, unlike most multidimensional scaling algorithms, is adapted to work with nonmetric data. At the same time, it is considered to be a very robust method that can produce highly accurate results. The solutions obtained from applying the four algorithms described above are then validated to confirm that a good and robust solution has been determined. First of all, clustering results are internally validated using silhouette measurements (Rousseeuw 1987) and the Dunn coeffiFig. 5. Example of graphic results produced with Multidimensional Scaling method. cient (Dunn 1974). The silhouette is a calculation 408 | C. N. Popa made for each individual case that determines how well it is clustered by comparing the separation of that case from its cluster, against the cluster’s heterogeneity. The Dunn coefficient, especially useful for the Fuzzy Clustering method, indicates how fuzzy or crispy the clustering solutions are (Everitt Et Al. 2011, 246). Besides calculating the two indexes for internal validation, the clustering solutions are externally validated by comparing them to each-other. This is done by merging the clustering results into a single matrix and examining this matrix to identify how similar or different the outputs are. If the results are very different, especially if different numbers of groups were obtained, then the adjusted Rand index is utilised (Hubert–ARabie 1985; Miligan–Cooper 1986; Everitt Et Al. 2011, 264–265). Post clustering exploratory procedures The results obtained from running the similarity and clustering algorithms are exported to SPSS together with the initial data. SPSS is employed in order to further validate the clustering results and to determine the elements that are characteristic to each of the identified groups. Hence, all the variables that were used in the cluster analysis, as well as individual variable values, are counted in relations to the group numbers. This allows to observe the preponderance of each variable in the outcome of the clustering and to check whether the absence of data had a dramatic influence on the results. For instance, if one of the groups contained all the burials for which there is no information related to settlement proximity, then it is highly likely that the clustering is incorrect as the absence of data was a reason for which those burials were identified as being similar to each-other. Besides looking at individual variables, several variables and variable values are taken together and corsstabulated with the group numbers to identify whether they have a tendency to occur together as sets in the burials. At this step the independent variables that were left out of the cluster analysis, such as age, sex, chronology, geographical position, are also brought in. Their distribution across the different groups is examined so as to identify whether certain values are preponderant in particular groups. This can help to pin point specific types of identities that were manifested in the funerary ritual (e.g. gender identity, regional identity). Apart for these procedures, ArcGIS is employed to observe the geographical distribution of the burials, of the individual variable values and of the groups obtained by the cluster analysis. The generated map, created using satellite imagery, is also compared to the two-dimensional graph produced by the Multidimensional Scaling tool. The differences or similarities between the two can help identify the types of identities that are manifested as well as the presence of identity barriers. Case Study. The Late La Tène Burials from the Carpathian Basin In the last part of the paper I will briefly describe the partial results obtained from applying the above statistical method to the Late La Tène burials from the Carpathian basin with the question of group identity.6 210 graves were analysed, most of which contained very low resolution data; they all come from different regions of Romania and are dated between the second century BC and the first century AD. The variables used to record the burials were set up so as to accommodate such low resolution data, while at the same time provide enough information for the statistical methods to function. Additionally the variables needed to contain information relevant to group identity. The statistical analysis was run on six variables relating to the burial and eight variables relating to the inventory items. The first group of six variables contained information such as the use of cremation or inhumation, whether the graves were flat or tumular, but also the proximity to settlements and water sources; age, sex and geographical position were left out. The grave-good variables described the artefact through four hierarchical variables in which both function and shape were recorded, but function was given primacy. Another four variables recorded details about the material from which the objects were made, decoration or state of the items. The statistical analysis has determined the existence of two large groups, each with two further subgroups and some of these with further variants (Fig. 6). Group one contained almost exclusively inhumations in flat graves and had the subgroups 1.1 and 1.2, one corresponding to individuals generally put in a multiple burial with no inventory and the other to individuals with some inventory, usually adornments or pottery, and coming from a single burial. Age and sex seemed to not have been a factor for the grouping. There were also no evident geographical patterns present, as the graves were distributed across the entire area under study (Fig. 7/1). 6 These results have been described in detail in a separate publication (Popa 2012). ‘Till Death Do Us Part’ A Statistical Approach to Identifying Burial Similarity and Grouping | 409 GROUP 1 • • • inhumations flat little inventory 1.1 1.2 2 • • • cremations and some cenotaphs flat or tumular varying amount of inventory 2.1 2.2 • • • • • • • • • • SUBGROUP VARIANT multiple burials no inventory – single burials some adornments and pottery as inventory – cremations flat little inventory cremations and some cenotaphs flat and tumular large inventory 2.1A • • one to two weapons each no other inventory 2.1B • • • no weapons adornments and pottery small range of grave-goods 2.2A • • • tumular often two or more weapons large range of grave-goods 2.2B • • • flat often two or more weapons large range of grave-goods 2.2C • • • tumular no weapons large range of grave-goods Fig. 6. Summary of groups, subgroups and variants with main characteristics. Group two contained mostly cremations and had individuals coming from both flat and tumular burials. While the geographical expansion of this group covered again the entire area under study, that of its two subgroups 2.1 and 2.2, as well as their variants, was more constrained. Age and sex was usually not determined so it was not possible to say whether they played a role. The burials from subgroup 2.1 were mostly flat cremations and contained usually little inventory. One variant (2.1A) contained just one to two weapons without any other inventory. On the other hand, the 2.1B variant had no weapons but instead included pottery or adornments, although the range of object types was very small. 2.1A appeared only in Oltenia; 2.1B was also found mostly in Oltenia, but also Muntenia and partly in South-Western Transylvania (Fig. 7/2). The burials from subgroup 2.2 were mainly cremations, but also cenotaphs, coming from both tumular and flat graves. These burials contained more than 60% of the artefacts included in the database. The subgroup was made of three variants. The 2.2A variant corresponded to tumular burials where weapons were present, often two or more, and always together with other items, especially pottery and adornments and sometimes horse gear. The 2.2B variant is similar to 2.2A, just that all the graves were flat. Finally, the 2.2C variant included tumular burials which did not have weapons but had a range of other objects, especially adornments. 2.2A appeared in Muntenia and South-Western Transylvania; 2.2B appeared in Oltenia and South-Western Transylvania, while 2.2C could be found only in Moldova (Fig. 7/3). The two large groups, 1 and 2, seem to have coexisted together within the same chronological sequence and geographical area. They even appeared in the same cemetery or at short distances from one another. Additionally there was little similarity between them in terms of both ritual and grave goods. This could suggest that they corresponded to different strata of society, maybe defined according to social status. 410 | C. N. Popa 1 2 3 Fig. 7. 1. Geographical distribution of Group 1; 2. Geographical distribution of Subgroup 2.1; 3. Geographical distribution of Subgroup 2.2. Group 1 and its two subgroups were relatively unitary distributed across the entire area under study. While there are some small regional patterns appearing in subgroup 1.2, there is generally little internal division visible. Hence no group identity dynamic seems to be present in this case. On the other hand, group 2 presents a much more complex picture. The geographical distribution, along with the subgroup and variant components, suggest that we are dealing in this case with competing identities, which generally functioned distinct from each other. In the areas where the two subgroups (2.1 and 2.2) did come in contact, local variants were formed, existing in parallel with the ‘original’ model (hence the A, B variants). Only in one area, South-Western Transylvania, nearly all group identity forms were present, indicating an intense exchange of cultural traditions which could even have been transported through actual migration processes from Oltenia and Muntenia. On the contrary, in Moldova, the opposite phenomenon appeared, with only one model ever employed (2.2C), indicating the active maintenance of an identity barrier. The picture presented so far is of course only partial. More funerary data will be added in the near future, coming especially from Bulgaria and Serbia. The end result should contribute to a better understanding of group identity dynamics in the entire area of the Carpathian Basin. ✴✴✴ Through this paper I have tried to show that statistical analysis can be a useful tool for the analysis of burial data. The statistical method described calculates the similarity between burials and groups them together in a way that mimics the human mind. As such, it allows for the identification of either close or very loose groupings, which can prove to be extremely useful, especially when looking for the manifestation of identity. Additionally, the method is developed to be very flexible, which opens up the possibility for it to be applied in various archaeological contexts and with variables containing any type of information that the researcher considers important. Moreover, because the similarity algorithm allows for weights to be applied to variables and to different values of the variables, it gives the possibility for archaeologists to practically personalise the algorithm by transposing their empirical observations into ‘Till Death Do Us Part’ A Statistical Approach to Identifying Burial Similarity and Grouping | 411 the statistical analysis. Hence, the method does not only simulate the human mind in general, but, given the proper input, can mimic the way of thinking of the researcher operating it. Nevertheless, one should never forget that statistical analysis is only a tool; the interpretation will always remain entirely with the archaeologist. Acknowledgements I would like to thank my PhD supervisors, Simon Stoddart and Gelu Florea, for the help and support they have given me throughout my research. My thanks also go to Mariana Egri and Aurel Rustoiu for the numerous advice and encouragements received. Last but not least, I am grateful to Barbara Hausmair for the countless discussions relating to archaeological theory, identity and mortuary practices. References Agresti 1990 Agresti, A., Categorical data analysis, New York. Agresti 2007 Agresti, A., An introduction to categorical data analysis, 2nd ed., Hoboken, N. J. Baxter 2003 Baxter, M., Statistics in Archaeology, Chichester. Canuto–Yaeger 2000 Canuto, M.-A.–Yaeger, J., Introducing an Archaeology of Communities, IN: Canuto, M.A.–Yaeger, J. (eds.), The Archaeology of Communities: a New World perspective, London, 1–15. Drennan 1996 Drennan, R. D., Statistics for Archaeologists: A Commonsense Approach, New York. Dunn 1974 Dunn, J. C., Some recent investigations of a new fuzzy partitioning algorithm and its application to pattern classification problems, Journal of Cybernetics, 4, 1–15. Everitt–Hothorn Everitt, B.–Hothorn, T., A handbook of statistical analyses using R, London–New York. 2009 Everitt Et Al. 2011 Everitt, B.–Landau, S.–Leese, M., Cluster Analysis, 5th ed., Chichester. Hubert–Arabie 1985 Hubert, L.–Arabie, P., Comparing Partitions, Journal of the Classification, 2, 193–218. Jovanović 2005 Jovanović, B., The Challenge of Plural Identity, Balcanica, 36, 71–83. Kaufman–Rousseeuw Kaufman, L.–Rousseeuw, P. J., Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Cluster Analysis, 1990 New York–Chichester. Kuhn 1955 Kuhn, W., The Hungarian Method for the assignment problem, Naval Research Logistic Quarterly, 2, 83–97. Langfelder Et Al. Langfelder, P.–Zhang, B.–Horvath, S., Defining clusters from a hierarchical cluster tree: the 2008 Dynamic Tree Cut package for R. Bioinformatics, 24, 5, 719–720. Lucy 2002 Lucy, S., Burial Practice in Early Medieval Eastern England: constructing local identities, deconstructing ethnicity, IN: Lucy, S.–Reynolds, A. J. (eds.), Burial in Early Medieval England and Wales, London, 72–87. Miligan–Cooper 1986 Miligan, G. W.-Cooper, M. C., A study of the comparability of external criteria for hierarchical cluster analysis, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 21, 41–58. O’Shea 1981 O’Shea, J., Social configurations and the archaeological study of mortuary practices: a case study, IN: Chapman, R.–Kinnes, I.–Randsborg, K. (eds.), The Archaeology of Death, Cambridge, 39–52. Parker Pearson 1993 Parker Pearson, M., The powerful dead: Archaeological relationships between the living and the dead, Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 3, 203–229. Parker Pearson 1999 Parker Pearson, M., The Archaeology of Death and Burial, Stroud. Popa 2012 Popa, C. N., The Quest for Group Identity in Late Iron Age Romania. Statistical Reconstruction of Groups based on Funerary Evidence, IN: Popa, C. N.–Stoddart, S. (eds.), Fingerprinting the Iron Age, Oxford, Oxbow, forthcoming. Robb in press Robb, J., Creating death: an archaeology of dying, IN: Tarlow, S.–Nilsson-Stutz, L. (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Death. Rousseeuw 1987 Rousseeuw, P. J., Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 20, 53–65. Shennan 1997 Shennan, S., Quantifying Archaeology, 2nd ed., Edinburgh. Williams 2004 Williams, H., Death Warmed up: The Agency of Bodies and Bones in Early Anglo-Saxon Cremation Rites, Journal of Material Culture, 9, 263–291. 412 | C. N. Popa List of figures Fig. 1. Example of sword description using four hierarchical variables. Fig. 2. The advantage of using sex as an independent variable. Fig. 3. Example of dendrogram with 30 cases. Fig. 4. Example of graphic result produced with Partitioning Around Medoids method. Fig. 5. Example of graphic results produced with Multidimensional Scaling method. Fig. 6. Summary of groups, subgroups and variants with main characteristics. Fig. 7. 1. Geographical distribution of Group 1; 2. Geographical distribution of Subgroup 2.1; 3. Geographical distribution of Subgroup 2.2. Cremated Human Remains from Hunedoara– Grădina Castelului / Platou Additional Information Inferred by XRD, FT-IR and SEM/EDX Analyses Beatrice S. KELEMEN*–Iosif Vasile FERENCZ**–Cristian C. ROMAN***– Delia M. ROMAN***–Oana PONTA*–Simon SIMION* *Babeș–Bolyai University, Interdisciplinary Research Institute on Bio-Nano-Sciences Cluj-Napoca, Romania b.kelemen@hasdeu.ubbcluj.ro oana.ponta@phys.ubbcluj.ro simion.simon@phys.ubbcluj.ro **Dacian and Roman Civilisations Museum, Deva, Romania fiosifvasile@yahoo.com ***Corvin Castle, Hunedoara, Romania cricr2001@yahoo.com deliamariaroman@yahoo.com Keywords: Dacians, cemetery, cremations, inhumations, XRD, FT-IR, SEM/ EDX The paper represents a part of a larger study regarding the discoveries from Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului (Luca Et Al. 2003; 2004; Sîrbu Et Al. 2005; 2006; 2007a; 2007b), presenting new data on some of the cremated human remains, dated from the end of the 2nd century BC to the beginning of the 1st century AD. These features are designated M7/C12, M13a/C18, M16a/C30, M17/C33 and M18/C34; two of these – M13a/C18 and M16a/C30 – are double graves, containing both cremated and skeletal remains, for this reason the two complexes were investigated together. The present study presents preliminary results of research aimed at testing and calibrating new methods of X-Ray Diffraction (XRD), Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FT-IR) and Scanning Electron Microscopy/Energy-Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (SEM/EDX) on Dacian cremated human remains. From Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului / Platou four incinerated sets of human remains (M7/C12, M13a/C18, M16a/C30 and M18/C34) dated between the 2nd century BC and 1st century AD and one set of buried human remains (M17/C33) were analysed as part of the present study. The graves were discovered on a dolomite plateau situated on the western side of Corvin Castle in Hunedoara (Pl. 1/1). The first two features – M7/C12 and M13a/C18 – were identified on the eastern side of the plateau, while graves M16a/C30, M17/C33 and M18/C34 were discovered in the approximate centre of the site (Pl. 1/2). All inhumations – including bone deposits, cremated remains or artefacts – were at a shallow depth (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, 57). Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 413–424 414 | B. S. Kelemen–I. V. Ferencz–C. C. Roman–D. M. Roman–O. Ponta–S. Simion M7/C12 (Pl. 2) The richest among the analyzed features, it was a circular setting made of local stone on a layer of dirt and fragments of dolomite. The human remains and the artefacts were covered with the same mixture of dirt and fragments of dolomite (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, 24). Grave inventory: 1. Iron spearhead (Pl. 2/9), willow leaf shaped, with a cylindrical tang and the blade with a rhomboid profile and a median rib (A 4734). 2. Curved knife, a so-called sica (Pl. 2/8), with a curved blade and a tang with traces of a rivet. The blade is thicker on both sides of the unsharpened part. Its state of conservation suggests that it was burned (A 4686). 3. Bronze ring (Pl. 2/5), almost round in shape and with an oval cross-section. According to information on the inventory label in Corvin Castle Museum (CCM) it was discovered on the northern part of the feature (A 4653). 4. Bronze ring (Pl. 2/6), almost round in shape and with an oval cross-section. It was discovered in the general area of the grave (information: records of CCM), therefore it is questionable whether this artefact actually did or did not belong to the grave (A 4675). 5. Glass bead (Pl. 2/7), ‘ribbed’ type with a bi-conical shape and a cylindrical opining (A 4673). 6. Bone object (Pl. 2/3), partially preserved, burned, made of a thin bone and decorated with circles with points in the middle. It was probably a handle (A 4683). 7. Bone object (Pl. 2/4), similar to the previous artefact, burned. (A 5003). 8. Iron artefact (Pl. 2/2), probably a belt buckle spike or object connected to the bone pieces, burned and poorly preserved, discovered according to the rec. CCM on the northern part of the complex (A 4655). 9. Iron object (Pl. 2/1), probably a belt-buckle tongue, fragmentary, flattened at one end, while the other end is slightly bent, as if to form a hook. It was discovered in the general area of the grave (information: records of CCM), therefore the object might not belong to this complex (A 4663). 10. Two pottery fragments (Pl. 2/10–11) belonging to this complex are also mentioned by the discoverers (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, 25, pl. 34/10–11), missing from the museum. M13a/C18 In the double burial the human bones were placed in a groove of the rock with local boulders placed on its sides. A layer of dirt mixed with crushed dolomite was placed over the rock. The cremated remains were placed first, then the skeleton of a child. All these along with the scanty inventory were covered by a layer of soil mixed with crushed dolomite. Traces of later disturbance to this complex were not observed (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, 30). Grave inventory: 1. Iron bracelet (Pl. 3/2), fragmentary, Rustoiu-2c (?) type (Rustoiu 1997a, 94–95). Only the median part of the artefact was preserved, with a raised area and a groove observable on the interior (A 4662). 2. Bronze fibula (Pl. 3/1), Rustoiu-19c type (Rustoiu 1997b, 52). Its lower part has the form of a spherical button; the pin is intact.. The arc is strongly profiled and it is decorated with three discs. The spring has an exterior cord made of 4–3 spiral turns (A 4664). M16a/C30 The double burial also had a poor inventory. Similarly to C18, it contains a cremated individual and an inhumed one, both placed in a groove of the rock, marked with large dolomite boulders. The same layer of soil mixed with crushed dolomite covers the rock and the human remains. The cremated remains were placed first followed by the skeleton of a child. The inventory consisted of a bronze, bucket-shaped pendant (Pl. 3/3), decorated with x-shaped incisions (A 4784). M17/C33 The grave was dug into a layer of the Basarabi culture. Framed by stones on both sides, the skeleton was placed in a supine position and covered with fragments of local limestone. The lower part of the body was disturbed, but in the area of the right foot the fragment of an iron bracelet (Pl. 3/4) similar to the one from M13a/C18 was discovered (A 4769). M18/C34 Covered with an 8–10 cm thick layer of soil, the grave was in the top surface of the Basarabi cultural layer. It was delimited with large limestone boulders; the cremated remains were placed in a small area and the complex also contained two heavily burned glass objects, probably glass beads. The first (Pl. 3/5) was probably a blue glass bead, which was placed at the time of the cremation close or even on the body, which left traces on the surface of the artefact (A 4761). Of the examined graves only one contained military equipment. The association of curved knives, spears and other weapons in graves across LT C2 and LT D in south-western Transylvania (Rustoiu 2008, Cremated Human Remains from Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului / Platou | 415 142) is not unusual. They seem to indicate the arrival of groups of warriors from the northern Balkan area in the 2nd and 1st centuries BC, determining a significant demographic growth and profound changes of the society by imposing new cultural patterns (Rustoiu 2008, 167). Based on its inventory, M7/C12 may be dated during the 1st century BC, or even slightly earlier, at the end of the 2nd century BC. Initially it was dated broadly between the end of the 2nd century BC and the last part of the 1st century BC (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, 35; Sîrbu Et Al. 2007b, 157). As for the dating of the other graves, careful analysis of the funerary inventory may allow one to formulate a different point of view. The Rustoiu type 19c fibulae from M13a/C18 are dated throughout preRoman Dacia in the 1st century AD (Rustoiu 1997b, 53). In the workshop from Poiana, Galaţi County, the numbers of such objects increases during the second half of the 1st century AD (Rustoiu 1997b, 53). Therefore the artefact from Hunedoara could also be dated during the second half of the 1st century AD (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, 30). The fragmented iron bracelet (Pl. 3/2) does not have analogies from Dacia from secure archaeological contexts. A decade and a half ago Aurel Rustoiu noticed that such artefacts appeared in Scordisci contexts, the resemblance consisting in the presence of the ‘socket’, since the bracelet he referred to had the ends crossed but open (Todorović 1968, pl. XXIX/7). Due to all these characteristics, Rustoiu (1997a, 95) considers that the objects discovered in Dacia could be dated during the 1st century BC. Bracelets with the middle part thickened are also found in contexts of the Scordisci and Bastarni (Popović 1999, 48–51) and are dated in the 2nd century BC. Such examples are scarce in Dacia inside the Carpathian arch but the discovery from Hunedoara may bring some chronological clarifications. According to the field records of M13a/C18 the feature seems to be undisturbed (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, 30). The grave inventory consists of one iron bracelet – interpreted by the discoverers firstly as torc and then a bracelet – and one bronze fibula (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, 29–30), objects which date the grave during the second half of the 1st century AD, noting that such items could have been used for an extended period, or they could be associated with the Scordisci (see Popović 1999, 51). Because its association with the bronze fibula, the bracelet from M13a/ C18 from Hunedoara can be dated to the second half of the 1st century AD. Another argument is that the individuals within this complex could very well be related: although DNA analyses have not yet been made, it is very possible that in the grave a mother and her new-born child were buried. The only artefact discovered in M16a/C30 was the small bucket-shaped pendant (Pl. 3/3). Such artefacts are extensively used over long periods, from the 1st century BC to the 1st century AD, but they are also used during the 2nd to the 3rd centuries AD (Rustoiu 1997a, 125). Because the feature is a closed find containing two persons – similar to the case of M13a/C18 – its dating may be broadly established by this single find, from the 1st century BC to the 1st century AD. M17/C33 is dated by a fragment of an iron bracelet (Pl. 3/4) similar to the one from M13a/C18, dated during the 1st century AD. The inventory from M18/C34 consisted of two glass artefacts, much damaged by fire, making the dating of this feature uncertain. The only evidence, the fact that the individual was cremated, cannot be considered an element that can establish a precise dating as proposed previously (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, 35). Osteological Analysis of Human Remains Although cremated bone survives better than the skeletons from inhumation graves, the fragmentary nature of cremated human remains from archaeological contexts, the shrinkage of commonly minimum 15% of bone occurring during incineration, poor and random survival of diagnostic fragments, together with particularities of funerary rites (complete vs. incomplete recovery of incinerated remains prior to final interment) make the analysis of these elements hard to interpret correctly (Mays 1998). Sex determination greatly depends on survival of diagnostic features and can be done with some degree of certainty in some conditions; usually 25% of individuals from a cremation deposit can be attributed to a specific sex with a modicum of certainty. When sex determination is done based solely on the robust nature of the surviving bone fragment, in more robust populations males may be overrepresented in the finds, while in the case of more slender populations, female will be overrepresented (Mays 1998). Determination of age at death often stops at pre-adult/adult age classes without further refining of the conclusions (Mays 1998). Diet inferences from stable isotope analysis of cremated bone should not be attempted (Mays 1998), due to shifts in carbon and nitrogen stable isotope ratios during heating/burning (Harbeck Et Al. 2011). The survival of organic matter in cremated bone – amongst which protein and DNA are of importance – depends on the duration and temperature of burning (Harbeck Et Al. 2011) and is important to 416 | B. S. Kelemen–I. V. Ferencz–C. C. Roman–D. M. Roman–O. Ponta–S. Simion assess prior to engaging in high-cost, time-consuming analyses. Knowledge of cremation rites for Dacian populations from the period of interest is circumstantial at best, without any objective data on the type of pyres used, temperature of burning and so forth. Temperature of firing can be inferred empirically from the colour of bone fragments and by more objective means characterizing the microscopic appearance and the X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) spectra of the cremated bone fragments (Person Et Al. 1996; Pijoan Et Al. 2007; Piga Et Al. 2008; 2010; Huls Et Al. 2010; Rogers Et Al. 2010). This assessment depends on comparisons of results from experimental studies on modern animal and human cadavers and skeletons (Mays 1998; Ubelaker 2009). Organic matter survival and diagenesis processes in cremated bone may be assessed, among other methods, by Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FT-IR) analysis (Ottoni Et Al. 2009; Thompson Et Al. 2009; Huls Et Al. 2010; Squires Et Al. 2011). In our study, visual characterization, SEM/EDX, XRD and FT-IR analyses where carried out in order to determine sex and age at death, assess firing temperatures and survival of organic matter in the bone fragments of cremated individuals from the 2nd century BC–1st century AD Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului / Platou Dacian cemetery. This represents a preliminary study done in order to test and calibrate these methods. Sex and age at death estimations made in previous studies (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a) were confirmed and refined by visual and X-Ray investigations. The human remains were characterized by: colour, weight, macroscopic and microscopic appearance (done by SEM). Diagnostic features, where present, were identified, characterized and used for sex and age attribution. Mays (1998) gives a summary of elements to be analysed visually with cremated archaeological bone. Colour helps us empirically to infer firing temperature; weigh may contribute, in ideal cases, to establishing age at death, robustness and sex (Fig. 1). In this instance, an ideal case is characterized by the burning of a body in an incinerator, and in the absence of solid fuel which will contribute to the total weight of the ashes. Archaeological cremations are, in this sense, not an ideal case, but weight may be used in such circumstances in determining if all the resulting ashes were collected and deposited during funerary rites. Diagnostic features are the most important elements used to establish sex and age at death, but their occurrence in the burial site is either random and depending on what elements survive a ritual incineration, or in the case of burial rites, may be associated with the intentional collection of only certain elements for burial. Grave no. Weight Colour (secondary colour) 7 484 g Grey (blue and white) 13a 1103 g White (grey) 16a 49 g Grey (white) 18 196 g Grey (white) Diagnostic fragments 1. pubic symphysis none 1. fragmentary tibia 1. fragmentary acetabulum 2. maxilla diaphysis 2. fragmentary tibia 3. femur diaphysis diaphysis Fig. 1. Weight, colour and diagnostic elements. The osteological inventory and diagnostic features used in the physical anthropology analysis for the buried remains of M17 consisted of the left clavicle, unfused sternal epiphysis (11.9 cm); post-mortem fractured and fragmentary mandible with bilateral M1 and M2 erupted, right PM2 erupted, slight right alveolar activity for M3; left fragmentary maxilla with PM2 and M1 erupted; and petrous part of the right and left temporals (mastoid process score 1). Partial closure (2/3) of mandibular and Fig. 2. Dental age diagnostic elements on maxilla and maxilar PM2 and of mandibular M2 can be mandible fragments from M17/C33. observed on the X-Ray (Fig. 2). For the XRD, FT-IR and SEM/EDX analyses, a fine powder of one representative bone fragment per individual was collected with the use of a dental motor and sterile dental drills at running at medium Cremated Human Remains from Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului / Platou | 417 Intensity (a.u.) speed (25000–35000 rpm). Representative bone fragments were deemed most representative for colour and structure for the bone fragments associated with one individual. Given the fact that in archaeological contexts incineration rarely results in a collection of very uniform fragments, this is an important factor influencing conclusions on incineration temperature. The XRD patterns were recorded with a Shimadzu XRD–6000 diffractometer using Cu Kα (λ = 1.5405 Å) radiation. Crystallographic identification was accomplished by comparing the experimental XRD patterns with standard inorganic crystal structure data JCPDS. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopic (FT-IR) analyses were performed in absorption configuration with a JASCO 6200 FT-IR spectrometer in the 1300 to 400 cm-1 spectral domain with a spectral resolution of 4 cm-1 using KB pellet technique. The sample powder is mixed – usually heavily diluted – with KB powder, a material having no IR-active vibrations in the mid-IR range. The mixture can then be pressed into a transparent disk and inserted in the beam path. Surface morphology was assessed with a – FEI QUANTA 3D FEG dual beam scanning electron microscope (SEM) in high vacuum work mode using EDT (Everhart Thornley Detector). Quantitative elemental analyses were provided by Energy Dispersive X-ray (EDX) equipment combined with SEM. In order to amplify the secondary electrons signal a cover of 5 nm thickness was applied with Pt-Pd into an Agar Automatic Sputter Coater, in Ar atmosphere. Concerning the anthropological analysis, finds of the previous study (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a) were largely confirmed, but, with the help of X-Ray imaging refined in the case of the buried individual (M17/ C33), as to the age at death (12–13 years old as opposed to approximately 15 years old in the previous study). This is important if we consider that one of the most interesting questions when dealing with Dacian funerary rites, and assuming that children were buried and adults cremated, is at what age an individual is considered of adult age and thus cremated? All cremated remains appear to belong to adult individuals. The double burials (M13a–b and M16a–b) contain an incinerated adult and the buried remains of neonates or children no more than several months old. Adult age could be deduced with a modicum of certainty based on the dimensions of cremated fragments for three out of four cremated individuals (M7/ C12, M13a/C18 and M18/C34). In the case of individual M16a/C30 only a small quantity of heavily fragmented cremated bone is available for analysis, thus the inference of adulthood is more uncertain. Diagnostic fragments could be used to infer sex for only one of the cremated adult individuals: M7/ C12, presumptive male, in accord with the associated finds. In the rest of the cases, diagnostic fragments could be used to assign the analysed individuals into the adult group. Colour and the degree of vitrification of the cremated bone fragments analysed indicate thorough burning of the human remains, possible at high temperature, a conclusion which is supported by the XRD analysis. Weights of the cremated remains available for analysis as completely recovered from the burial site, indicate that not all remains – of the ashes – were collected from the funeral pyre after incineration. XRD is used in the identification of crystalline materials. Bone is largely comprised of calcium phosphate, similar in structure to the inorganic apatite group known in literature as bioapatite. During cremation, recrystallization of bioapatite helps and simplifies analyses performed on cremated bone. The resultant material is distinguishable from geologic apatite and a correlation between temperature of burning and bioapatite crystal dimensions can be established, with crystal sizes increasing with the temperature. The aspect of peaks corresponding to different crystalline M7/C12 M13a/C18 phases (Fig. 3) is also an indication of cremation temM16a/C30 perature; narrow high peaks (M7/C12, M13a/C18) M18/C34 M17/C33 correspond to a higher incineration temperature than low large peaks (M16a/C30, M17/C33, M18/C34). The crystallite sizes (Fig. 5) calculated for our samples indicate higher temperatures of burning – greater crystallite size – for samples M7/C12 and M13a/C18; in the case of M18/C34, supplementary peaks in the area of analysis introduce errors in the inference of the crystallite sizes of this sample and thus should be ignored. The result of this analysis places burning of M7/C12 and M13a/C18 at temperaTheta-2 Theta tures ranging between 700–900ºC and those of M16a/ C30 and M18/C34 at temperatures well below 500ºC. Fig. 3. XRD patterns of samples. 418 | B. S. Kelemen–I. V. Ferencz–C. C. Roman–D. M. Roman–O. Ponta–S. Simion From this point of view, in our case, XRD does not differentiate between buried bone (M17/C33) and bone burned at small temperatures (M16a/C30 and M18/C34). Nevertheless, topographical proximity of the two samples incinerated at greater temperatures and of the two samples burned at lower temperatures may indicate a pattern possibly related to type of pyre or funeral ritual used, a possible indication of relationship of the individuals buried next to each other and cremated in a similar fashion. The FT-IR analysis (Fig. 4) allows us to distinguish organic and inorganic compounds in our sample and in our case to correlate them with burning temperature intervals inferred from XRD. The organic fractions of interest in this case are the I–III amides, while the inorganic fractions of interest are the carbonates and phosphates from bone (P-O, C, PO43-). Assuming that interment of all samples was done in equivalent conditions, survival of amides in incinerated archaeological samples was clearly correlated to the temperature of the burning (Fig. 4). In the unburnt samples or in those burned at lower temperatures, one can observe the presence of all three amides: amide I, II and III, while in the samples burned at higher temperatures, amide III is undistinguishable, amide II appears in traces and only amide I is clearly observable. More subtle patterns may be observed also when analysing the inorganic fraction peaks. This kind of analysis Fig. 4. FT-IR analysis samples. permits us to select the most suitable fragments for further, more expensive analyses such as ancient DNA extraction and Crystallite size (nm) amplification, and stable isotope analyses. In this particular Sample (M) 17 17,6 case, most certainly, the fragments analysed for M7/C12 and 18 62,32 M13a/C18 would be unusable for these kinds of analyses. 16a 14,73 Surface images of our samples indicate a difference in 13a 41,39 vitrification between these samples and those more heavily 7a 53,53 burned samples having less surface structure than samples Fig. 5. Crystallite size for the analyzed burned at lower temperatures or unburned samples (Fig. 6). fragments. The clearest difference is observable between cremated samples and unburned samples. This method supplements visual information such as that pertaining to colour and other macroscopic observations of the surface of burned bone fragments. M16a M7a M18 M13a 17 Fig. 6. SEM images of samples. Cremated Human Remains from Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului / Platou | 419 EDX analysis revealed an interesting fact. Along with the normal presence of Ca and P – which are normal components of bioapatites – Si from the burial ground and other trace elements, a large amount of Al was detected on the surface of every analysed fragment, demonstrating the infiltration of elements from the air into soil and then their seepage in time penetrating the archaeological bone. Aluminium is a metal that was not used during prehistory, but can clearly be associated with manufacturing activity in 18th–20th century Hundeoara. Fig. 7. EDX analysis of samples. ✴✴✴ The just described methods allowed the inferring of temperature ranges in samples from the Dacian necropolis in Hunedoara during incineration. Both low and high temperature incinerations seem to have been performed, with the possible indication that related individuals may have been cremated in similar conditions, in other words suggesting the possible familial transmission of funeral customs, although other factors may have caused these patterns. Survival of organic matter in cremated bone samples was assessed by FT-IR analysis, allowing a better selection of samples for further, more expensive, analyses. Surface modifications of bones during incineration was assessed by means of SEM and elemental analysis was performed by EDX, leading to observations pertaining to the consequences of metallurgic activity in the area, on the trace elements present on the surface of the analysed bone. Among the studied graves, only one belongs to a warrior, M7/C12. Grave M13a/C18 and M16a/C30 are very interesting as they each contain two individuals who, with regard to the burial rite, were treated differently. The association between incinerated adults and buried neonates or children no more than a few several months old, which can be observed in these two cases (M13a–b and M16a–b), may indicate the interment of mother and new-born child, although sex determination was not possible in either case (M13a/C18 and M16a/C30). The first authors to analyse the discoveries from Hunedoara considered that all the cremated individuals may be dated in a clearly defined chronological period (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, 59). We consider that at least one of the cremated individuals (M13a/C18) can be dated with certainty in the 1st century AD, while M16a/C30 might also be dated to the same period. The inventory from M18/C34 does not allow a precise dating; incineration per se should not be used as a criterion of dating (based only on the funerary rite, namely cremation, the cemetery was dated “definitely at the end of 2nd and the first half of 1st century BC”; see Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, 59). The present results and earlier observations have shown that only adults were cremated, constituting a relevant source of information when studying the effect of certain beliefs on the development and manifestation of funerary rituals. However, based on the analysis of grave goods the inventory of the graves was poor – except for M7/C12. One can conclude that cremation was practiced during the entire use of the cemetery. The small number of Dacian funerary features discovered to date (Sîrbu 1993, 126) greatly heightens the scientific importance of the cemetery from Hunedoara. 420 | B. S. Kelemen–I. V. Ferencz–C. C. Roman–D. M. Roman–O. Ponta–S. Simion References Harbeck Et Al. 2011 Harbeck, M.–Schleuder, R.–Schneider, J.–Wiechmann, I.–Schmahl, W. W., Grupe G, Research potential and limitations of trace analyses of cremated remains, Forensic Science International, 204, 191–200. Huls Et Al. 2010 Huls, C. M.–Erlenkeuser, H.–Nadeau, M.-J.–Grootes, P. M.–Andersen, N., Experimental study on the origin of cremated bone apatite carbon, Radiocarbon, 52, 2–3, 587–599. Luca Et Al. 2003 Luca, S. A.–Sîrbu, V.–Roman, C.–Diaconescu, D.–Cerișer, N.–Purece, S., Hunedoara, jud. Hunedoara, Punct Grădina Castelului, CCA 2002, 143–144. Luca Et Al. 2004 Luca, S. A.–Purece, S.–Sîrbu, V.–Roman, C.–Diaconescu, D.–Cerișer, N.–El Susi, G.– Comșa, A., Hunedoara, jud. Hunedoara, Punct Grădina Castelului, CCA 2003, 142–144. Mays 1998 Mays, S., The Archaeology of Human Bones, Routledge, London–New York. Ottoni Et Al. 2009 Ottoni, C.–Koon, H. E. C.–Collins, M. J.–Penkman, K. E. H.–Rickards, O.–Craig, O. E., Preservation of ancient DNA thermally damaged archaeological bone, Naturwissenschaften, 96, 2, 267–278. Person Et Al.1996 Person, A.–Bocherens, H.–Mariotti, A.–Renard, M., Diagenetic evolution and experimental heating of bone phosphate, PPP, 126, 135–149. Piga Et Al. 2008 Piga, G.–Malgosa, A.–Thompson, T. J. U.–Enzo, S., A new calibration of the XRD technique for the study of archaeological burned human remains, JAS, 35, 2171–2178. Piga Et Al. 2010 Piga, G.–Hernandez-Gasch, J.–Malgosa, A.–Ganadu, M. L.–Enzo, S., Cremation practices coexisting at the S’Illot des Porros Necropolis during the Second Iron Age in the Balearic Islands (Spain), HOMO, 61, 440–452. Pijoan Et Al. 2007 Pijoan, C. M. A.–Mansilla, J.–Leboreiro, I.–Lara, V. H.–Bosch, P., Thermal alterations in archaeological bones, Archaeometry, 49, 4, 713–727. Popović 1999 Popović, P., The Scordisci and the Bastarnae, IN: Le Djernap/Les Portes de Fer a la deuxième moitie du premier millénaire av. J. Ch. Jusqu’aux guerres Daciques, Kolloquium in Kladovo–Drobeta Turnu Severin, Beograd, 47–54. Rogers Et Al. 2010 Rogers, K.–Beckett, S.–Kuhn, S.–Chamberlain, A.–Clement, J., Contrasting the crystallinity indicators of heated and diagenetically altered bone mineral, PPP, 296, 125–129. Rustoiu 1997a Rustoiu, A., Metalurgia bronzului la daci (sec II î.e.n.–sec. I d. Chr.). Tehnici, ateliere și produse de bronz, București. Rustoiu 1997b Rustoiu, A., Fibulele din Dacia preromană (sec II î.e.n.–sec. I e.n.), București. Rustoiu 2008 Rustoiu, A., Războinici și societate în aria celtică transilvăneană, Cluj-Napoca. Sîrbu 1993 Sîrbu, V., Credinţe și practici funerare, religioase și magice în lumea geto-dacilor, Brăila-Galaţi. Sîrbu Et Al. 2005 Sîrbu, V.–Luca, S. A.–Roman, C.–Purece, S.–Diaconescu, D., Hunedoara, jud. Hunedoara, Punct Grădina Castelului, CCA 2004, 178–179. Sîrbu Et Al. 2006 Sîrbu, V.–Luca, S. A.–Roman, C.–Purece, S.–Diaconescu, D., Hunedoara, jud. Hunedoara, Punct Grădina Castelului, CCA 2005, 176–177. Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a Sîrbu, V.–Luca, S. A.–Roman, C.–Purece, S.–Diaconescu, D.–Ceriser, N., Vestigiile dacice de la Hunedoara (The Dacian Vestiges in Hunedoara), Alba Iulia–Sibiu. Sîrbu Et Al. 2007b Sîrbu, V.–Luca, S. A., Roman, C., Tombs of Dacian Warriors (2nd–1st c. B.C.) found in Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului (Hunedoara county), Funerary Practices in Europe, before and after the Roman Conquest (3rd century BC–3rd century AD), Proceedings of the 8th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology, ActaTS, VI, 1, Sibiu, 155–177. Squires Et Al. 2011 Squires, K. E.–Thompson, T. J. U.–Islam, M.–Chamberlain, A., The application of histomorphometry and Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy to the analysis of early Anglo-Saxon burned bone, JAS, 38, 2399–2409. Thompson Et al. 2009 Thompson, T. J. U.–Gauthier, M.–Islam, M., The application of a new method of Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy to the analysis of burned bone, JAS, 36, 910–914. Todorović 1968 Todorović, J., Kelti u Jugoistočnoj Evropi, Beograd. Ubelaker 2009 Ubelaker, D. H., The forensic evaluation of burned skeletal remains: A synthesis, Forensic Science International, 183, 1–3, 1–5. Cremated Human Remains from Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului / Platou | 421 List of figures Fig. 1. Weight, colour and diagnostic elements. Fig. 2. Dental age diagnostic elements on maxilla and mandible fragments from M17/C33. Fig. 3. XRD patterns of samples. Fig. 4. FT-IR analysis samples. Fig. 5. Crystallite size for the analyzed fragments. Fig. 6. SEM images of samples. Fig. 7. EDX analysis of samples. List of plates Pl. 1. 1. Corvin Castle showing the lay-out with the emplacement of the fortress, the open settlement and the cemetery. Photo Z. Czajlik, June 2012; 2. The plan of the burials in Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului necropolis (after Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a). Pl. 2. M7/C12 grave inventory (drawings after Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a; photo: I. V. Ferencz). Pl. 3. Grave goods. 1–2. M13a/C18; 3. M16a/C30; 4. M17/C33; 5. M18/C34 (drawings after Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, photo: I. V. Ferencz). for t res s 422 | B. S. Kelemen–I. V. Ferencz–C. C. Roman–D. M. Roman–O. Ponta–S. Simion settlement emetery in umation ra e remation ra e . st . – st nd – st st . . Plate 1. 1. Corvin Castle showing the lay-out with the emplacement of the fortress, the open settlement and the cemetery. Photo Z. Czajlik, June 2012; 2. The plan of the burials in Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului necropolis (after Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a). Plate . . or in astle s o in t e lay out it t e empla ement of t e fortress t e open settlement and t e emetery. P oto . a li une . e plan of t e a. urials in unedoara– r ina a e i ne ropolis after Cremated Human Remains from Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului / Platou | 423 5 m m remated uman ones 5 animal ones Plate 2. M7/C12 grave inventory (drawings after Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a; photo: I. V. Ferencz). Plate . ra e in entory dra in s after a p oto . . eren . 424 | B. S. Kelemen–I. V. Ferencz–C. C. Roman–D. M. Roman–O. Ponta–S. Simion 5 Plate 3. Grave goods. 1–2. M13a/C18; 3. M16a/C30; 4. M17/C33; 5. M18/C34 (drawings after Sîrbu Et Al. 2007a, photo: I. V. Ferencz). Plate . ra e oods. – . dra in s after a . a . 5. a p oto . . eren . Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène* Andreea DRĂGAN Babeș–Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania andreea.dragan@yahoo.com Keywords: Iron Gates of the Lower Danube, Scordisci Microi, Padea–Panagjurski Kolonii group, Late Iron Age, comparative approach, burials, settlement pattern, feasting practices Burials have enjoyed a particular interest within archaeological research, owing to the possibilities that they offer as result of a human activity invested with a wide spectrum of meanings. In this respect, archaeologists have sought in burial characteristics means of identifying social practices, identities, beliefs, interference processes from the past, as well as chronological determinations learned from the association of artefacts (Parker Pearson 1999). The study of the funerary manifestations from the past is furthermore important for the Iron Gates region of the Lower Danube which is known as a contact zone between many cultural environments, posing therefore multiple issues of group and individual self-definition. The term ‘Iron Gates’ initially designated the gorges near Orșova and Drobeta-Turnu Severin, Romania. However, following the construction of two hydroelectric plants in the 1960–80, this was extended to the river sector mainly encompassed by them between Baziaș, Romania and Prahovo, Serbia (Medeleţ 1997, 63). The fact that the area is included today in two modern states, Romania and Serbia, has generated differences in the level and character of archaeological research, but also has given rise to a largely individual perspective of the archaeological situation from each country. A series of discoveries have been made so far in the area belonging both to cemetery sites and settlements. On the Serbian territory, namely on the right side of the Iron Gates sector, these finds have been mainly the result of development-led excavations associated with the construction of the hydroelectric plants (most of the results have been published in the series Cahiers des Portes de Fer. A synthesis of archaeological finds in Serbian, can be found in Popović 1990). In the Romanian sector the research carried out for the construction of the plants has left less information, while the major elements of settlement history are known from relatively long-term systematic archaeological works (Berciu 1939, 190–200; Popilian 1999; Rustoiu 2005a). Nevertheless, in spite of the biased focus inherent in each approach, this has resulted in a relatively wellinformed picture of the Late Iron Age in the whole Iron Gates area (Fig. 1). The ancient configuration of the local population has been mainly established using the historical sources which are relatively abundant in references, for the time scale covered by this paper (Papazoglu 1978, 271–388). On the right side of the Iron Gates the population has been connected with the Scordisci Microi. Their territory is identified as lying east of the Scordisci Macroi, from whom they differ owing to * I wish to express my gratitude towards M. Egri and A. Rustoiu, whose useful advices helped the elaboration of this paper. I wish to express special thanks to M. Schönfelder for his useful indications. This work was possible with the financial support of the Sectoral Operational Programme for Human Resources Development 2007–2013, co-financed by the European Social Fund, under the project number POSDRU/107/1.5/S/77946 with the title “Doctorate: an Attractive Research Career”. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 425–451 426 | A. Drăgan their mixed Celtic–Thracian–Illyric character also mentioned by ancient sources. The mixed aspect of artefacts in the area has been regarded as a reflection of this description and used further to demarcate their settlement. This was set east of the Morava River, downstream from Kladovo, Serbia and DrobetaTurnu Severin, as far as the Jiu River, additionally encompassing south-western Oltenia, a configuration considered to have been limited to the Danube during the campaigns of Burebista. A possible settlement zone was also argued for the area of Vidin, Bulgaria (Popović 1993, 19–20). While the main lines of this interpretation are generally accepted, the reality of a Celtic presence in south-western Oltenia is not. The area, despite some particularities and Celtic influences related to funerary rite and material aspects is thought, particularly by Romanian archaeologists, to belong to the territories inhabited by the Dacians and later included in the political structure ruled by Burebista and his followers, an affiliation marked by the fortified settlements (Sîrbu–Rustoiu 1999, 87; Rustoiu 2005a). Mircea Babeș dismisses a large Celtic presence in Oltenia, and argues for a limited evidence of Celtic population at Gruia and Ciupercenii Vechi, Romania (Babeș 1988, 10–11). Relying on the territorial identifications, the interpretation of finds followed the argument of identifiable ‘ethnic’ artefacts, such as Dacian, Celtic and Scordiscan, Thracian and Illyrian. This view has been based on certain types and styles with their main occurrence in the territories attributed to the historically defined populations. The study of ethnicity on a more recent theoretical basis which has established discussion of more nuanced views on identity and contextual data, dismissing the simple equation style = ethnicity, is however just at the beginning in this area. Therefore, in view of the lack of an established view of the various identities in the region, in the following paragraphs the attribution ‘Dacian’, ‘Celtic’ and ‘Scordiscan’ for artefacts will be used solely in connection to the territories traditionally defined where these occur over an area, and should in no way be linked to the actual ethnic identifications of their users. . 5 m . . 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. . . . . . 5 m Fig. 1. Map of Late Iron Age sites from the Iron Gates area. A. cemeteries; B. individual burial; C. isolated find; D. fortified settlement; E. open settlement. 1. Gruia; 2. Viiașu; 3. Balta Verde; 4. Hinova; 5. Corcova; 6. Ostrovul Șimian; 7. Turnu Severin; 8. Orșova; 9. Dubova; 10. Liubcova–Stenca; 11. Pescari–Culă; 12. Divici–Grad; 13. Socol–Palanački Breg; 14. Židovar; 15. Kumane–Prevod; 16. Mala Vrbica–Ajmana; 17. Mala Vrbica–Konopište; 18. Zbradila–Korbovo; 19. Vajuga–Pesak; 20. Velesnica; 21. Ljubičevac; 22. Brza Palanka; 23. Mouth of the river Slatinska Reka. Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 427 In the light of the main distribution of artefacts, archaeological evidence does not offer in all cases a clear picture of the cultural make-up of the region. On the island of Ostrovul Șimian, Romania, for example, previous excavations have yielded material associated with both Celtic and Dacian sites, a fact that has caused Popović (2008) to connect this pattern of settlement with the nearby Scordiscan cemeteries. However, more recent researches on well-established settlements have failed to provide further material connected with the Celtic area (Popilian 1999). The monolithic cultural attribution of the fortified settlement of Židovar, Serbia has also been replaced by a dynamic interpretation of its development, from a Celtic to a Dacian centre in the first half of the 1st century BC (Jevtić–Ljuština 2008, 29–30). Although this argument follows a strictly artefact explanation and must be further verified within contextual data for a consistent conclusion, it illustrates the need for new approaches, including the reconsideration of the static picture of cultural groups, bound to obey the political borders that have been set for them. This is further supported by the frequent occurrence of artefacts otherwise largely associated respectively with the Dacian area and Balkan–Danubian tradition. This includes a number of other sites in the Iron Gates area attributed to the Scordisci (Popović 2000, 87–88, 95–97), which have been interpreted either as markers of the autochthonous population (Sladić 1986, 64–65; Popović 1990, 176), or as the result of interactions with other communities (Sîrbu Et Al. 1999, 221). Further on this topic,, one should take into consideration the fact that a frontier, especially in the time span that is our concern here, should not be regarded as a physical structure, isolating strictly and statically defined unitary groups, but rather as a dynamic concept defined through the constantly negotiated acknowledgement of a different identity by the groups of populations on either side of it (Okun 1989, 10–11). It has been demonstrated that population groups inhabiting marginal areas generally experience cultural processes characteristic of contact zones, such as assimilation and acculturation.1 This feature must be considered when trying to understand differences and similarities, and in it lies the importance of an analysis that focuses on both sides of the Danube rather than taking them separately. Thus, in the following pages a comparative approach to the discoveries of cemeteries from each side of the Danube has been preferred focusing on the identity model that can be inferred from the funerary rite and ritual taken with the social definition of the communities. The contempory settlements cannot be excluded from this discussion, and will also be taken into consideration. Description of funerary finds During the development-led excavations for the construction of the hydroelectric plants in the Danube gorge, parts of several cemeteries were identified on the right bank of the river, grouped in the downstream half of the area, some of them already highly affected by changes in the course of the river bed: eight graves from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana and Mala Vrbica–Konopište, twelve graves from Vajuga–Pesak, a cemetery at Ljubičevac–Ostrvo, and two graves at the mouth of the river Slatinska Reka, in Serbia (Popović 1990). The finds have been so far only partially published: two graves from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana, a third one (destroyed) only described (Stalio 1986, 32–34, fig. 28–49); selected finds from Konopište (Popović 1990, pl. 3/12–13; 5/1–2; 6/2–6; Popović 2000, pl. 10/1–2, 4–5, 7–9); one grave from Vajuga–Pesak and selected finds (Popović 1990, 3/1, 3–4, 11; 4; 5/4–5; 6/3–5, 7–8; Popović 2000, pl. 10/3, 6); selected finds from Ljubičevac–Ostrvo (Popović 2008, pl. I–V) and the two graves from the mouth of the river Slatinska Reka (Jovanović Et Al. 1986, 379, fig. 2–3). Another grave has been identified at Kumane–Prevod, Serbia, but is without any detailed information as to context; this is the only burial available for analysis from the upstream part of the gorge (Sladić 1988). Except for the latter assemblage, all finds come from identified cemetery areas. The deceased were cremated and the remains were placed in flat graves. For many assemblages there is no information about the pit or the arrangement of the grave goods and funerary remains. However, where this could be established the burial type appears not to be uniform. At Mala Vrbica–Ajmana the remains of the cremation were placed directly in the pit with the grave goods arranged in separate groups (Pl. 1; 2), whereas at the 1 Okun (1989, 12–13) separates assimilation, which occurs ‘when cultural objects or attributes are adopted’, without affecting the general cultural system, from acculturation, which in turn results in cultural change; Woolf (1998, 14–15) includes in the definition of acculturation both exchange of objects and attributes with following cultural change, as well as those without resulting change. According to Gosden (2004, 82–113) (colonial) encounters result in a ‘middle ground’ – encompassing all renegotiated material and cultural forms – which applies to all the parts involved as mutual active participants to their construction through a process of appropriation focusing on those elements from ‘the other’ that can be efficiently integrated in self-determined cultural values and practices. 428 | A. Drăgan mouth of the river Slatinska Reka the cremation was placed in a covered urn. This practice appears also to have influenced the position of the artefacts which were found packed together under the funerary urn (Jovanović Et Al. 1986, 389–390, fig. 2; 3). This situation is consistent with the data gathered from the Scordiscan cemetery of Beograd–Karaburma, in which both types of cremation were documented. The excavator’s conclusion that the generally large number of grave goods found in urn burials reflects a higher social position of the deceased (Todorović 1972, 44–45) is not confirmed in the Iron Gates area. For the rest of the burials with unknown details about the pit both types of interment are possible. Further, information about the arrangement of the graves from Vajuga–Pesak into three small groups (Popović 1990) links the burial rite from the Iron Gates with the Scordiscan cemetery from Beograd– Karaburma, in which the individual groups of graves have been given a tribal identity (Todorović 1972, 45). Such an explanation cannot be confirmed at Vajuga–Pesak, given the small number of burials in a group, a factor which can also be ascribed to the limited examination of the cemetery. Most of the burials comprise grave goods with generally good chronological determination value, particularly Roman imports. Based on these artefacts, Popović (1992, 64–66, 69–73) has proposed a general dating at the end of the 1st century BC and the beginning of the 1st century AD. However, the artefacts associated in the graves in fact relate to an earlier dating; this is as already pointed out by Rustoiu (2005c, 62, 66), who has argued for the existence of the burials in the LT D1 phase. His argument is based on the Gallarate bronze cups from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (Pl. 2/4); Vajuga–Pesak (Pl. 3/4) (Boube 1991, 26–27) and other artefacts from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (Pl. 1/11), Ljubičevac–Ostrvo (Popović 2008, pl. I/1–5) and the mouth of the river Slatinska Reka (Pl. 3/3), where LT C2–D1 brooches are recorded (Rustoiu 1997, 33–36, Type 2c, 2d; Sîrbu Et Al. 1999, 220). A difficult point has been the presence of an imported bronze basin at Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (Pl. 1/ 7, 8). This has no real analogies among the common forms. However, similar a bronze basin whose typological significance was recognized, was found in a warrior grave at Châtillon-sur-Indre. Judging by the association with a jug of Kelheim type and a pan of Aylesford type, the assemblage relates to the period of the LT D1 burials, but could date as late as the Augustan period (Ferdière–Villard 1993, 96–107), and corresponds mainly to the use of such types of vessels in the area and around Iron Gates (Rustoiu 2005a). Furthermore, particularly problematic is the identification of the sword excavated at Vajuga–Pesak – which Popović used to support a late dating – as belonging to the class of Germanic swords with the end of the hilt in the shape of a spur, associated with the LT D2 period (Frey 1986, 52). However, the piece exhibits particular features that do not relate to this Germanic form. The grave from Kumane–Prevod, on the basis of the spear-heads (P. 4/5) can be dated, to some time in the Belgrade 3 phase (Guštin 1984, Beil. 1/95). On the left bank of the Danube gorge discoveries of burials are mainly isolated chance finds resulting in a limited number of complete assemblages. So far, these have been analysed together with those from south-western Romania as they appear to belong to the same archaeologically identified group (Babeș 1988, 10–11; Sîrbu–Rustoiu 1999). Except for Gruia (Pl. 6/8–11), where isolated arms and several burials were unearthed, no cemeteries have been identified (Sîrbu Et Al. 1999), a situation specific to the whole area (Sîrbu–Rustoiu 1999, 79): one cemetery at Turburea–Spahii (Gherghe 1978, 16–18) and small groups of graves at Corlate (Nicolăescu-Plopșor 1947, 20–23) and Padea (Bondoc 2009). Nevertheless, it is quite possible that this merely reflects the current level of research. At Ostrovul Șimian (Pl. 4/7) the skeletons of two children were excavated inside the settlement (Popilian 1999, 63, fig. 11). Other isolated but complete assemblages were found at Corcova (Pl. 6/1–7) (Sîrbu Et Al. 1999) and Dubova (Pl. 5) (Spânu 2002). Based on the presence of artefacts generally associated with contempory burials in the region further isolated finds have been assumed to come from graves, (see below for the associated finds with burials in the Padea–Panagjurski Kolonii), documented at Balta Verde (Berciu–Comșa 1956, 399– 400, fig. 124/4; 128/3), Hinova (Nicolăescu-Plopșor 1947, 26–27, pl. IV/8), Orșova (Roska 1944, 67, 79, kat. no. 98), Ostrovul Șimian (Bărcăcilă 1924, 296, fig. 270), Drobeta-Turnu Severin (NicolăescuPlopșor 1947, 29, pl. IV/13) and Viiașu (Berciu 1966, fig. 5/1, 3; 7; see also: Sîrbu–Rustoiu 1999, 88–89, no. 1, 18, 23, 24, 36, 42). Other than the two inhumation graves found at Ostrovul Șimian,2 the burials are cremation, lacking however information about the grave pits. The process of cremation has left visible traces on the grave 2 Babeș (1988, 11–15) excludes the skeletal finds found in the area of the Dacian population from the funerary practices due to a series of characteristics, among which is their discovery inside settlement areas; the same opinion is expressed by Sîrbu (1993, 31–36). It is noteworthy that the majority of these skeletons belong to children. Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 429 goods which show evidence of burnt and even melting of the costume accessories, such as the fibulae from Corcova (Pl. 6/2–3). More data has been gathered from the neighboring area, at Turburea Spahii where cremation in flat graves was practiced. Unfortunately, once more the exact shape of the pits not observed. In only one case could it be determined that the cremated bones were placed in an urn, while in the majority of the graves they were placed directly into the pit. In some cases traces of the cremation pyre has been observed together with burnt clay on the bottom of the pits, pointing to the use in the case of some burials of the pit for the actual act of cremation (Gherghe 1978, 16–18). Given the information that the pot from Corcova contained ash rests (Pl. 6/1), in-urned burial can be assumed in the present case, whereas for the rest of the graves further identification is uncertain. Chronological determination of the graves found on the left side of the river is based on sound dating evidence which corresponds to the general types found in burials from the region, placing them at the end of LT C2 and into LT D1 period, or the end of the 2nd and the first half of the 1st century BC respectively (Sîrbu Et Al. 1999; Spânu 2003). At Ostrovul Șimian the burials have been dated according to the sherds associated with the dead in the late La Tène period (Popilian 1999, 63). Funerary ritual. Aspects related to gender and functionality It is a well-established principle today that the manner in which a person is buried, as much as it can be inferred through archaeology, can offer more information than was possible in the past. This is a result of the abandonment of universal models, comprising clear-cut categories and contemporary misconceptions about how a society may have worked in the past and embracing the principles of diversity (Dietler 2005). This was reflected with regards to evidence for funerary rites through the shift from a political and economic focus to the cultural construct of the social (Babić 2005), and closely intertwined with it, the acknowledgement of the existence of a variety of identities. Moving from theory to practice, this approach has drawn more attention to the treatment of the body in burials, patterns of consumption as reflected in the arrangement of grave goods, funerary architecture and organization, as well as cemetery structure, all as means of identifying symbolized gender (Díaz-Andreu 2005, 37–41), age (Lucy 2005a, 62–65), social and group identities (Babić 2005, 81–84), including here ethnicity (Lucy 2005b, 101–106), and the relations that structure the world of individuals and groups (Dietler 1996; Arnold 1999). The straightforward interpretation of gender, as a direct function of sex, has proven to be a biased perception of ancient societies. The existence of more than two genders, as an accepted practice, is to be assumed for past people, with the proviso that one should not transfer our contempory negative response to different chronological and cultural contexts (Arnold 2002, 239–244). Nevertheless, the identification of the untraditional genders – other than masculine and feminine – in archaeological funerary practices remains limited to a number of examples (see also Arnold 1996). The issue is particularly fraught for the attribution of the graves presented in this paper, given the limited number of burials that can be compared. The Late Iron Age cemetery from Beograd–Karaburma, however, enjoyed both systematic archaeological research between 1958 and 1963, and a monograph devoted to the finds (Todorović 1972), which is now a key text in the study of the funerary practices in the Scordiscan territory. The 96 graves cover a time-span beginning with the first settlement of the Celtic population in the area at the end of the 4th century BC, until the early Roman period (Božič 1981, 326–330). The burials have been attributed to either female or male gende according to the nature of the grave goods, the main criterion referring to the presence of arms associated with male warriors (Todorović 1972, 47; Guštin 1984, 315–316, Abb. 5). While this has not been verified by physical anthropological examination of the earliest inhumation graves, the results from the cemetery of Dobova, which belongs to the Western Celtic group in the former Yugoslavian territory, confirm such an attribution (Guštin 1984, 313–315, Abb. 4). The same combination of grave goods appear in the Iron Gates area as well. Therefore, given the lack of further data or of any anomaly that could indicate a third gender,3 the burials containing arms such as grave 1 from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (Pl. 1); or grave 1 from the mouth of the river Slatinska Reka (Pl. 3/11–15); Vajuga–Pesak; Kumane–Prevod (Pl. 4/1–6) should be attributed to men, whereas those having jewellery, like grave 2 from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (Pl. 2/1–5) or grave 2 from mouth of the river Slatinska Reka (Pl. 2/6–12) to women, at least as concerns ‘gender identity’ and/or ‘gender attribution’ (Arnold 1996, 153–154). This aspect is particularly important for the present discussion, given that the functional analysis of grave goods has the potential to illustrate specific traits related to gender participation in common 3 For a discussion about ‘engendered’ grave goods see Arnold 2002, 244–247. 430 | A. Drăgan activities (on feasting and gender see Dietler 2001, 90–93), which has already been noted out for the territory of the Scordisci (Egri–Rustoiu 2009). It has been characteristic for archaeology in the past, and to a significant measure in the present, that ‘style’ or ‘type’ were considered the deciding element in the interpretation of grave goods and the past realities that they reflect. This was not unproductive, and typologies remain an essential instrument in archaeological interpretation. However, the direct link made between artefact and culture has led to limitations in the evaluation of social and cultural identities, and even to misinterpretations (Shennan 1994, 5–9). This has been the case of the direct correspondence made between the presence of Roman artefacts in Iron Age contexts and the adoption of Roman practices, together with the dominant mercantile signification given to this phenomenon, the Iron Age people being seen as enthusiastic receivers of whatever available Roman (that is, superior) products in exchange for raw materials (Glodariu 1974, 171–179; Wells 1980). While the importance of Roman imports for funerary expression of higher social status remains unproven, it is now established that Roman imports are only part of the representation of social identity. In this respect, the analysis of grave goods as functional categories, rather than types, has made a considerable contribution. This has pointed to the use of Roman objects not as a reflection of adopted Roman practice but as an appropriation of foreign artefacts in the context of local practice related to feasting activities and differential roles in the participation in those activities as means of structuring the social positions of individuals (Dietler 1990, 356–358, 380–390; Poux 2004, 229–230, 237–249). This position motivated the use of a functionalist approach in the interpretation of grave goods from the Iron Gates area. Functional analysis has been applied by classifying the inventory into three main functional categories, the first referring to the preparation, serving and consumption of food and drinks, in order to observe the representation of common practices (Hayden 2001), the second comprising garments, that could reflect gender and self-identity expression, and the third including arms, which in turn allows observations on ‘gender ideology’ (Arnold 1996, 154) and status definition. Additionally, objects for which no clear-cut association with these three main functional categories could be made, mainly due to their special nature, have been discussed separately (Pl. 7). A previous study focusing on aspects of feasting amongst the Scordisci, as reflected in funerary assemblages, centred on the graves found on the right bank of the Iron Gates (Egri–Rustoiu 2009). In the first category are placed pottery and metal vessels and implements, amongst the latter are also included products of Roman provenance. The reason for such a general approach to objects related to eating and drinking is the impossibility to argue for an exclusive practical function in some cases. The majority of artefacts in this category belong to tableware, which is almost exclusively represented by pottery. The bowls and/or the bowls on an elevated foot, traditionally called ‘fructiera’ (translated as ‘fruit stand’, a term that is avoided in this paper, since it implies an erroneous idea about the functionality of this type of pottery), were found in all graves (Pl. 1/2, 4; 2/1, 3, 6; 3/1, 2, 12; 4/ 2–3). They illustrate on a regular basis the activities related to the consumption of food. Some of them – at Mala Vrbica–Ajmana, (Pl. 1/4–5) and at the mouth of the river Slatinska Reka (Pl. 2/6; 3/14) – were used as lids. The relatively high occurrence of bowls on an elevated foot in cemeteries from the downstream part of the Iron Gates area has influenced researchers to suppose a special ritual role for the burial (Popović 1990, 173; Popović 2000, 96). However, their marked occurrence in settlement areas as well does not support the idea that they were specially destined for graves. It is generally agreed that this type of pottery was used for the consumption of food (Andriţoiu–Rustoiu 1997, 86–87), hence the shallow shape and the decoration that appears sometimes on the inner side, further supporting their use in funerary contexts as part of the symbolical selection of food and its consumption. The fact that the simple bowls and bowls on an elevated foot do not appear together elsewhere than in graves with relatively rich grave goods seems to support their similar use. At Kumane–Prevod this may be reflected by a higher number of simple bowls in the absence of those with an elevated foot Some of the pots whose fine quality marks them for display (Hayden 2001, 40, Tab. 2/1), and renders them rather unsuitable for cooking (Pl. 1/1, 3). They seem related to the storage and serving of food and drink, or for the preparation of beverage. With the latter use is further associated the two-handled beaker from the first grave from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (Pl. 1/5), a form particularly linked to the milieu of the Scordisci (Rustoiu–Egri 2010, 236). A discussion of contextual functionality is required particularly in the case of cooking vessels. Included here are handmade pots used as funerary urns; these appear at the mouth of the Slatinska Reka river (Pl. 2/7; Pl. 3/11) and Kumane–Prevod (Pl. 4/1). It is difficult to determine whether their primary Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 431 use, one assumes for cooking, had any connection with their employment in the grave, or rather to certain standards applied in the choice of funerary urn, perhaps a selection based on the quality of manufacture. Drinking vessels are represented in a limited number of male graves and only in one female grave, at Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (grave no. 2). These consist mainly of Roman bronze imports, cups (Pl. 2/4; Pl. 3/4), a simpulum (Pl. 1/7) and a basin (Pl. 1/8). Other isolated imports are known from Ljubičevac–Ostrvo (Popović 1992, 62), Mala Vrbica–Konopište (Popović 1992, 66). The inclusion here of three handmade ceramic wares from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (Pl. 1/6; 2/2) and Vajuga–Pesak (Pl. 3/3) is debatable. The signs of secondary burning that the former bears (Stalio 1986, 32; Tombe I/5) suggest its possible use in firerelated activities, yet their small size rather recommends them for consumption purposes. The Roman bronze basin was found in the first grave from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana with the simpulum placed inside. Given the association, despite the former being used in Roman contexts for toilet purposes (Bolla 1991, 117), this has been considered as a local custom in the preparation or serving of drink. However, their inclusion in the grave should be regarded as most probably symbolical, due to the difficulty of using the simpulum, with a 4.8 cm tall cup, for serving or stirring the beverage in a basin whose height is merely of 6 cm. The long Celtic knifes of the type found in the male grave from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (Pl. 1/13) and Kumane–Prevod (Pl. 4/6), with a ball or a ring at the end of the handle, have traditionally been considered as offensive arms. Currently this was reconsidered by some writers who associate them with the consumption of meat, for portioning it and sharing. Their separation from arms and association with the group of implements related to the preparation, serving and consumption of food and drinks, has been further argued by the absence of ritual deposition specific to arms (Schönfelder 2010, 225–229), which is also confirmed in the context of Iron Gates burials. The second main category refers to garments. As part of the costume the deceased wore on the funerary pyre, these always bear marked signs of burning, in some cases leading to the melting of the metal, and are found together with the remains of the cremation Characteristic of male graves are the fibulae (Pl. 1/10–11; 3/9; 13) and small curved blades (Pl. 1/9; Pl. 3/8). The latter were probably attached on the body by straps of organic material, as it appears to be the case for longer knifes from the graves at Bussy-le-Château (Dép. Marne) and Léglise Gohimont (Belgian Ardenne) (Schönfelder 2010, 229). Relatively small knifes of the same type found in the Eastern Celtic areal have generally been interpreted as razors (Todorović 1972, 79–80; Guštin 1984, 316). One ring (Pl. 3/10) and a tubular metal bar with rivet holes (Pl. 3/7) found in the grave form Vajuga–Pesak can be only supposed to relate to male costume. Most representative artefacts for women’s graves appear to be the belt-plaques of Laminci type (Pl. 2/5; 2/8) (on the typological classification and chronology of Laminci belt-plaques see: Guštin 2011). This situation has also parallels in the burial assemblages from Beograd–Karaburma (Todorović 1972, 69, M14, M39, M110). Together with the belt-plaques, brooches, bracelets (Mala Vrbica–Ajmana, Tombe III) and rings probably also for a necklace (Pl. 2/9–12), have been documented. Glass beads from undeterminate funerary contexts have been found at Ljubičevac–Ostrvo (Popović 2008, pl. I/17). Arms are associated with male burials and consist invariably of spearheads (Pl. 1/14–15; Pl. 3/6, 15; 4/4–5). It is noteworthy that Vajuga–Pesak is the only site in which they are associated with a sword (Pl. 3/5). Furthermore, from the same site comes the only umbo known in the area so far (Popović 1990, fig. 3/4). Nonetheless, this is not uncommon for burials attributed elsewhere to Scordisci (Todorović 1972, 77, M92, M222; Božič 1981, T. 8/6, T. 9/4, Sotin; Guštin 1984, 313, Abb. 4, Dobova). A special feature for the downstream section of the Iron Gates is the use of relatively long curved Thracian knifes (Pl. 1/12; 3/14), though they are documented, though less frequently also further away from the Danube in the territory of the Scordisci (Rustoiu 2002, 62). The blades of these knives is decorated with zoomorphic, geometric and vegetal motifs, which have been interpreted as symbolizing astral elements. The decoration was placed on the same side with a blood groove that runs on the length of the blade (Rustoiu 2001). Such knifes are known as sicae, arms that have been largely associated with Dacian warriors, and which are illustrated on Trajan’s Column. Although there is a general use of the term sica for all curved knifes (Rustoiu 2007), some researchers separate smaller knifes from the sica as a weapon due to their size being too small for efficient use in battle (Łuczkiewicz–Schönfelder 2008, 165–170; see also Bochnak 2003, 15–16). Furthermore, their symbolic decoration, generally agreed to represent their special, ritual signification, and the parallels with the presence of Celtic Hiebmesser in burial contexts in association with meat offerings, have been used to argument the sacrificial purpose of these curved knifes (Rustoiu 2007, 70–71). 432 | A. Drăgan Based on the functional categories established above and on their associations in graves, a certain pattern can be observed. The first aspect that has been studied was the identification of feasting practices. This has led to the observation of a selective representation interpreted in connection to social and gender identity. Although the investigation focuses on qualitative rather than quantitative data, it appears that some graves contain richer ceramic assemblages (Mala Vrbica–Ajmana, graves no. 1, 2; Vajuga–Pesak) in comparison to others (mouth of the river Slatinska Reka, graves no. 1–2; Kumane–Prevod), associated with imported items which are also present as well as a higher number of arms and other implements. These characteristics correlate further with a greater functional variety of the objects related to feasting activities, visible in the size of vessels and a restricted access to serving and sharing. The pattern matches the archaeological markers proposed for the entrepreneurial feast by M. Dietler, which were meant to ensure the conversion of economic capital into informal political power (prestige) in the interest of particular members of the community through the display of generosity. The model integrates, however, some elements of the feast, the special style of consumption being reflected in special aerefacts (Roman imports, long knifes) that affirm an exclusive circle of feasting partners who demarcate themselves from the others (Dietler 1996, 92–99. Hayden 2001, 37 names such feasts as functional, for creating alliance, cooperation or social distinctions). A first standard of discrimination among the dead is the addition of drink-related grave goods. Here are included all the Mediterranean imports, associated either with the preparation and serving, or the consumption of drink. In Western Iron Age Europe, a similar selective acquisition of Mediterranean objects can be observed in connection with the intentional employment of alien material of restricted access in the local practices of feasting, and used as a marker of higher status (Dietler 1996, 107–112). Additionally, some graves possess implements for serving food and drink, such as simpula and large pots, implying that the deceased was represented as a provider for food and beverage at the table. The pattern complies with the model developed for the territory of the Scordisci (Fig. 2), confirming therefore the shared elements of cultural identity. The authors classified the dead on the basis already established by Poux (2004, 222–226, fig. 124) a division into participants in feasting practices and organizers (Mala Vrbica–Ajmana, grave no. 1) associated with larger pots and implements for cutting up the allotted portions , whom Schönfelder (2010, 229) has christened Ernäher and Gastgeber. indi idual use ole ti e use r ani ers irst roup of parti ipants e ond roup of parti ipants Fig. 2. Model of the differential participation in feasting practices developed for the territory of the Scordisci (after Egri–Rustoiu 2009). Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 433 The feasting identity is paralleled by the martial ideology of manhood reflected in the occurrence of arms in male graves. The most characteristic elements are spearheads, associated in the downstream half of the Iron Gates with curved knifes, whose probable sacrificial use has already been noted. Additional elements, such as the sword from the grave 3/83 from Vajuga–Pesak, and an umbo from the same site, remain to be explained.. The better representation of arms in the first grave from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana appears to double the symbolic position in feasting practices, according to which it was associated with one of the ‘organizers’. Feasting emerges as an important element of social identity also in the case of women. In the symbolic context of burial, this can be interpreted as a representation of status differentiation, functioning in parallel to that applied in male burials. Nevertheless, women’s access appears to be limited to the group of ‘participants’, whereas the position of ‘organizer’ seems restricted to men. Furthermore, the absence of curved knifes point to their exclusion from the practice of sacrifice, or at least from those implying the slaughtering. The situation on the left side of the Danube is somehow different, due to the more limited range of artefact categories represented in the graves. The scarceness of pottery, which appears in three of the graves, with respectively two pots and a single example (Pl. 6/1, 8–9), hardly supports the identification of symbolic feasting practices. It is still debated whether the almost total absence of pottery is a result of unsystematic excavation, or the reflection of a historical reality (Sîrbu–Rustoiu 1999, 84). It is significant that at the nearby sites of Padea and Turburea Spahii pottery is seldom associated with graves (Zirra 1971, 235; Gherghe 1978). So far, urn burials are documented only in three cases at Padea and at one case out of the 29 graves at Turburea Spahii. Other pottery was found, but the excavation’s character and the information that is available today about the funerary contexts are too scarce to allow a pertinent conclusion as to their employment in the graves (Gherghe 1978; Bondoc 2009). The funerary assemblages, none of which has been archaeologically excavated, are formed almost entirely of arms (Pl. 5/4–7; Pl. 6/4, 7, 10–11). At Dubova this is complemented by harness elements (Pl. 5/2, 8). Together with these, only some fibulae appear, as reflecting the costume wore by the deceased on the funerary pyre as indicated by the high level of melting (Pl. 6/2–3). Additional elements are the curved knifes (Pl. 5/7; Pl. 6/5–6), whose highly symbolic value was already pointed above, a silver bracelet (Pl. 5/1) and a small knife (Pl. 5/3) in the assemblage from Dubova. Considering the occurrence of arms, it has been assumed that they all belong to male burials (Sîrbu– Rustoiu 1999, 79). The anthropological analyses from other contemporaneous sites from the territory linked to the Dacians have confirmed the connection of male individuals with arms. Furthermore, the analyses have proved that jewellery, although uncommonly, appears in association with men in graves containing arms (Sîrbu Et Al. 2007). This perhaps could also explain the inclusion of a silver bracelet in the grave assemblage from Dubova. The inhumation depositions from Ostrovul Șimian have been attributed to two Infans I (3–4 and 1–2 years old), but no anthropological analysis has been conducted so as to establish the sex of the deceased. The skeletons are associated with a few sherds, described as of Dacian aspect with no further information given (Popilian 1999, 63, fig. 11). The few pots identified with the cremation burials at Gruia consist of ware related to serving and drinking; it remains however uncertain whether this is the case of urn burial. One cup from Corcova is confirmed as a burial urn. A domestic use has been proposed also for the small knifes of the type found in the assemblage from Dubova and which appear in significant numbers in settlements (Andriţoiu– Rustoiu 1997, 105–106, fig. 115; Popilian 1999, fig. 8/8; 10/5). Therefore, arms remain the main element through which the funerary expression of identity appears to be manifested. The graves have been all included by scholars within the Padea Panagjurski–Kolonii group (Sîrbu Et Al. 1999, 217), initially defined by Woźniak for the areas of Oltenia, in Romania, the north and the centre of Bulgaria, and dated to the LT C and LT D periods. Based on funerary assemblages that contain mixed Celtic and local elements, Woźniak explained this as possible traces of Thracian tribes in the time of the Celtic and Bastarni domination in the region and through a population movement from the north-west (Woźniak 1976). These burials share a certain combination of typologically related grave goods, reflecting a martial ideology – Celtic swords, spearheads, curved knifes of local tradition, shield umbos and harness mounts (Woźniak 1976, 390–395; Rustoiu 2008, 146–147). Their area of distribution (Fig. 3) has been since extended to the right bank of the Danube in the area studied in this paper, to south-western Transylvania, along with the left bank of the Danube in south-western Romania and East 434 | A. Drăgan of the Olt river, as well as to some isolated graves in Dobrudja that have been connected with mercenaries (Rustoiu 2002, 41–46; Rustoiu 2008, 147–148, fig. 73). The deceased have been identified as members of a warrior élite belonging to heterogeneous ethnic entities, with supra-regional connections forged by joint participation in attacks against the Roman presence in the Southern Balkans which explains the similar suite of weapons (Spânu 2003, 3–5; Rustoiu 2005b). a Fig. 3. Distribution map of the burials ascribed to the Padea–Panagjurski Kolonii and proposed model for a standard funerary gear in the Dacian milieu (after Rustoiu 2008). The definition of the Padea–Panagjurskii Kolonii group can be regarded as quite general and flexible as far as concerns the assemblage structure, namely the categories of grave goods that can occur or are absent from the burials. This is well illustrated by the grave assemblages from the Iron Gates area, from Dubova. The former contains most of the elements that are generally associated with burials of the Padea–Panagjurskii Kolonii area, with the exception of the sword type. Corcova and Gruia, on the other hand, lack both the defensive arms and the harness elements. They are nevertheless, contemporary and can be compared with Dubova, the grave goods presenting the same typological characteristics further encountered in the Padea–Panagjurski Kolonii group. Given the importance of martial ideology in the formation of the funerary assemblages shown by the preponderance of arms, the selective inclusion of the assemblage components should be understood rather as means of status differentiation based on the martial definition of manhood and status identity. This suggests the superior authoritative position of the deceased from Dubova, in relation firstly to Corcova, and further to Gruia, dictated in the first place by a social network locally defined. Within the larger geographical area, while their characteristics point to the possible identification of the graves from Dubova and even Corcova with the supra-regionally interconnected élites among the Padea–Panagjurski Kolonii group, the grave from Gruia indicates neither such an ‘international style’, nor clear elements of an élite status. The argument remains to be additionally supported, given the small number of complete grave assemblages available. The intentional destruction of arms is documented in all graves discussed above. It is only this category of objects that has been affected. The phenomenon has been generally related to arms as an emblem of authority and personal identity of a warrior (Grinsell 1961, 477; Rustoiu 2009, 3–4). It is, nevertheless, to be considered, that for the male grave from the mouth of the river Slatinska Reka the structure of the Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 435 grave makes possible also the explanation that the spearhead was bent so as to fit (Grinsell 1961, 478). The above remarks, point once more to the importance of arms in the representation of the identity of the deceased, particularly male. This is the case on both sides of the river, with a higher preponderance on the left side in the definition of social and personal identity. Settlement analysis The separate study of contemporary settlements and burials within an area can lead to artificial divisions (Babić–Palavestra 2005) and partial conclusions. The need for comparative analysis has been particularly felt in the case of the Padea–Panagjurski Kolonii group, given the difficulty of establishing the nature of the relationship between the deceased associated with the group and the historical realities that lay behind such widespread of assemblages of similar structure. The focus has fallen on ethnic attribution related to the main groups historically defined. Due to the fact that the funerary assemblages failed to provide a conclusive image in this direction, the settlements were brought in to clear the picture (Sîrbu– Rustoiu 1999, 85–86; Sîrbu–Arsenescu 2006). While settlement analysis will also be approached from the point of view of group identity, further consideration will be given to the functional aspects of the material, namely in order to identify particular uses in graves noting the differences that can be observed in comparison to funerary assemblages. Additional implications of the composition of settlement finds are at present not possible due to the lack of more detailed material analysis. Settlement patterns in the area have also been used to indicate social structure and identity. On the right bank of the Danube several settlements have been identified as result of salvage excavations in the 1960–1980 followed by a fairly high level of publication (Cahiers PF 1986; Popović 1990; 1993; 2008). The settlements were discovered mainly downstream of the Danube gorges, the same area where most of the graves are grouped. In some cases the association with a cemetery could be asserted (Popović 1990; 2008). The identified sites are open settlements placed in the proximity of the river bank resulting in their having been affected by changes of the river bed. As a result intact structures have been difficult to recover. On the left bank of the river the nature of settlements is different, as well as the circumstances under which they were studied. Identified are a series of fortified settlements placed on dominant positions, some of which have been systematically researched. They appear to have been established as part of a wider strategic plan, connected later with the larger political structure of the Dacian kingdom (Rustoiu 2005a). Nevertheless, open settlements have been also identified at Ostrovul Șimian (Popilian 1999) and at the base of the hill occupied by the fortification of Divici (Gumă Et Al. 1995, 402). Although not verified by excavation, at Dubova the probable signs of a settlement have been mentioned (Medeleţ ms., 188–189, no. 104/f–g, v. Dubova). All of the settlements have been associated with the Dacian population. On the same side of the river, Židovar is the closest site to the Iron Gates on which a fortified settlement that could be associated with the Scordisci has been identified (Sladić 1997; also note above alternative interpretations for the settlements from Ostrovul Șimian and Židovar). The vast proportion of material recovered on these settlements is, as might be expected, pottery. On the right side of the Iron Gates it forms almost the entire assemblage of finds (Babović 1986a; 1986b; Popović–Mrkobrad 1986; Vasić 1986). On the left side of the river, including Židovar, as well as pottery metal objects have been unearthed from open sites and identified living structures both in fortified and open settlements (Gumă 1977, 89–101; Gumă Et Al. 1995, 407–410; Sladić 1997; Popilian 1999). Among the differences noted in material composition, the aspect of pottery assemblages shows similar elements in both areas. Therefore, it is characteristic of both banks of the Danube (Pl. 9–10) that the wheel-turned bowls and metal objects have a generally Celtic aspect, while the handmade pottery has a Dacian aspect (Popović 2000, 95–96). Additionally, the specific forms of the bowls with a raised foot and the curved knife, commonly encountered in the settlements assigned to the Dacians, are a characteristic of the whole area of the Iron Gates. Elements of Celtic style of decoration, such as the comb ornament applied on the so-called graphite ware (Pl. 8/3, 6) and the grid-like burnished ornament applied on the two-handled beakers specific to the Scordisci (Pl. 8/7–8, 12), have also been identified in settlements from the left side of the Danube (Pl. 8). Furthermore, the elements that can be clearly associated with the Scordisci are relatively uncommon further from the Iron Gates area in the Dacian territory (Sîrbu–Rustoiu 1999, 87–86). The situation is similar for the settlements on the right side of the Iron Gates, with regard to pottery and other Dacian material, which is particularly characteristic of the eastern Srem area (Popović 2000, 97). 436 | A. Drăgan A clearer separation is visible when analysing the functional aspects of artefacts. On the right side of the Danube imported products from the Mediterranean and drinking vessels are particularly found in burials and are almost absent from settlement contexts. This points to their particular role in the funerary rites involving the social construction of identity similar to the phenomenon documented in the Western Hallstatt area, where their special importance for this purpose was linked with their scarcity and the limited access to them that would have led to a certain value having been placed on the (Dietler 1990, 111– 112). The similarity however refers only to some aspects, such as the particular location of these products as a means of expressing social identity, while the rich assemblages and the political organization from the western Hallstatt milieu are lacking in the Iron Gates area. It is noteworthy in this discussion the absence of places that could be related to collective feasting activities, where such activities could have provided this type of material evidence. On the left bank of the river, there are scarcely any categories of ware found in burials. However, imports of relatively diverse forms and functions, strictly related to drinking activities, occur in settlements such as amphorae (Pl. 8/5), bronze situlae, cups, simpula, strainers, and patella or pans (Rustoiu 2005c). Some strainers were also locally made in pottery (Pl. 8/13). As expected, arms are not a common feature in settlements. It appears from the above discussion that the material representation of feasting activities in these settlements relate particularly to the construction of social/group networks within the communities through ‘real-life’ practice, rather than being employed in the symbolic context of the funeral. In burial contexts the martial ideology of male individuals stands out as the driving determination for the employment of grave goods, and as such for the definition of status through it. The differences pointed above for the two banks of the Iron Gates area are paralleled by the different settlement pattern. On the right side of the Iron Gates area the settlement aspect is characterized by open settlements that show a low level of population concentration. It is impossible, due to the circumstances of excavation, to speak of any structure that stands out inside settlements. However, the aspect of finds, including the absence of special artefacts, such as imports, additionally suggests the lack of clear power structures within the communities. This is limited to the funerary domain. On the left bank of the area, the habitat is marked by fortified hill-top settlements which present also categories of special material. Within the settlement areas sometimes in the uppermost terrace, ‘tower-houses’ stand out, associated with special artefacts, such as painted pottery (Gumă Et Al. 1995, 409), arguing further for the existence of a central focus in the communities that might be regarded in connection to the affirmation of a warrior élite in the graves. Final considerations. Criteria for identity patterns in the Iron Gates communities The realities concerning the Late Iron Age in the Iron Gates area, particularly in the late La Tène period, have enjoyed up to now relatively wide attention in the archaeological literature. Nevertheless, the approach has been mainly marked by a separate study of each bank of the Danube with some comments integrating the differences and similarities between them. The focus has been placed on proximity and interaction between the populations and the consequences that these had upon their cultural and identity structure. On the right side of the Iron Gates the archaeological remains have, in the view of the authors, come to confirm the mixed ethnic configuration of the Scordisci Microi argued in the literary sources, explained partially through the marginal position of the region in the Eastern Celtic territory (Popović 2000, 95–96). From a funerary point of view, the evidence from the two banks of the river has been shown to present two distinct models. On the right bank the association with the Scordisci appears justified, while also revealing diverse influences, among which are specifically the Dacian influence in artefacts and the elements considered to be highly symbolic for the local population with whom the Celts came into contact, particularly the curved knifes generically called sica and the two-handle beaker of Illyrian provenance. The elements of ritual have a general connection to other cemeteries further to the west ascribed to the Scordisci. This is identified by the feasting definition of social configuration, reflected in the arrangement of grave goods, from which the groups of ‘organizers’ and ‘participants’ can be distinguished. It is noteworthy that at this stage of research, except for some elements mentioned in the cemetery of Vajuga–Pesak, burials rich in arms that include defensive weapons and cavalry gear such as those found in the cemetery of Beograd–Karaburma are absent in the area. On the left bank of the river, weapons appear as the focus element in the composition of grave goods, while the representation of feasting is practically non-existent. Furthermore, the communities on the left bank of the river do not employ Roman imports in the funerary Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 437 expression of the deceased’s identity, in which direction the artefacts reflecting a martial character seem to have played the role.4 The use of imports remains limited to settlement areas. The differences are also displayed in the settlement pattern. So far, the right bank of the river is characterized by open settlements. The settlement on the left bank of the Danube presents a higher degree of nucleation, marked by fortified settlements in strategic positions, on hilltops with good perspective on the riverbed, while open settlements are less represented, which can nevertheless relate to the archaeological interest. In these settlements, evidence of élite manifestations has been documented. While this shows a different way of social and political organization, the absence of fortified settlements is specific in the Scordiscian territory only to the Iron Gates area, pointing to a local peculiarity. By corroborating these observations, sufficient arguments exist to support the differential construction of identity for the populations on each bank of the Iron Gates. Although these identities hint at a connection with larger identity groups, there are manifest elements of a local identity for which the special position at the crossroads of diverse cultural milieus appears to have played a significant role. However, the presence in the burials of artefacts coming from diverse areas in the region connected to more cultural environments occurs within different models of assembling correspondent to particular identities. The development of a local aspect in the archaeological record on the right bank of the Danube has been connected in the first place to the local substratum with whom the Celts would have come into contact on their arrival. Some of the changes have been connected to the political actions of Burebista, the expansion of so-called Dacian artefacts in settlements belonging to the Scordisci territory, in the first place at Židovar, but also as far as Gomolava (Jovanović–Jovanović 1988), being contemporaneous with his rule. On the other hand, the circulation of people must not be excluded in a period for which the archaeological evidence reflects a greater mobility. Other channels of material exchange, and perhaps information, can be equally connected to mutual interactions generated by proximity and collaboration in actions of shared interest. In the latter phenomenon is included the argument for the emerging of the Padea – Panagjurski Kolonii facies. This phenomenon finds its parallels in temperate Europe in the 1st century BC, when burials sharing a particular distribution of arms have been interpreted as an expression of the emergence of an ‘international warrior style’, resulted from the development of long-range relations between élites and an increased communication and mobility of people, goods and ideas, additionally reflected in settlement material (Wells 1999, 61–63). References Andriţoiu–Rustoiu Andriţoiu, I.–Rustoiu, A., Sighișoara–Wietenberg. Descoperirile preistorice și așezarea dacică, 1997 București. Arnold 1996 Arnold, B., ’Honorary males’ or women of substance? Gender, status and power in Iron Age Europe, JEA, 3, 2, 153–168. Arnold 1999 Arnold, B., ‘Drinking the Feast’: Alcohol and the legitimation of power in Celtic Europe, CAJ, 9, 1, 71–93. Arnold 2002 Arnold, B., ’Sein und Werden’: Gender as Process in Mortuary Ritual, IN: Nelson, S.–RosenAyalon, M. (eds.), In Pursuit of Gender: Worldwide Archaeological Approaches, Walnut Creek, 239–256. Babeș 1988 Babeș, M., Descoperiri funerare și semnificaţia lor în contextul culturii geto-dacice clasice, SCIVA, 39, 1, 3–31. Babić 2005 Babić, S., Status identity and archaeology, IN: Díaz-Andreu, M.–Lucy, S.–Babić, S.–Edwards, D. N., The archaeology of identity. Approaches to gender, age, status, ethnicity and religion, London, 67–85. Babić–Palavestra Babić, S.–Palavestra, A., Northern Serbia in the second half of the first millenium BC. Socio2005 economic aspects, IN: Vasić, M. (ed.), Le Djerdap/Les Portes de Fer a la IIeme moitie du Iere millenaire av.J.Chr., Beograd, 28–32. 4 Although not all conclusions apply to the Iron Gates burials, the importance of the martial construction of identity in late La Tène on the territory of Romania is pointed out by Popa (2010, 417–419), who also focusses on local identities inferred from the construction of the funerary assemblages, which argues against the existence of a Dacian supra-regional ethnic consciousness. 438 | A. Drăgan Babović, L., Zbradila-Korbovo. Compte-rendu des fouilles en 1981, IN: Cahiers des Portes de Fer. Đerdapske sveske, III, 95–115. Babović 1986b L. Babović, „Zbradila-Fund”, Korbovo. Compte-rendu des fouilles, IN: Cahiers des Portes de Fer. Đerdapske sveske, III, 116–132. Bărcăcilă 1924 Bărcăcilă, A., Antiquités pré- et proto-historique des environs de Turnu-Severin, Dacia, I, 280–296. Berciu 1939 Berciu, I., Arheologia preistorică a Olteniei, Craiova. Berciu 1966 Berciu, I., Les celtes et la civilisation de La Tène chez les géto-daces, Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology, 6, 75–93. Berciu–Comșa 1956 Berciu, D.–Comșa, E., Săpăturile arheologice de la Balta Verde și Gogoșu (1949 și 1950), MCA, II, 251–489. Bochnak 2003 Bochnak, T., “Długie noże” w grobach kultury przeworskiej z młodszego okresu przedrzymskiego - broń czy narzędzie?, MatArch, XXXIV, 5–18. Bolla 1991 Bolla, M., Les bassins, IN: Feugère, M.–Rolley, C. (eds.), La vaisselle tardo-républicaine en bronze. Actes de la table-ronde CNRS organisée à Lattes du 26 au 28 avril 1990 par l’UPR 290 (Lattes) et le GDR 125 (Dijon), Dijon, 113–120. Bondoc 2009 Bondoc, D., Descoperirile de epocă La Tène de la Padea, jud. Dorj, SCIVA, 59–60, 2008–2009, 137–163. Boube 1991 Boube, C., Les Cruches, IN: Feugère, M.–Rolley, C. (eds.), La vaisselle tardo-républicaine en bronze. Actes de la table-ronde CNRS organisée à Lattes du 26 au 28 avril 1990 par l’UPR 290 (Lattes) et le GDR 125 (Dijon), Dijon, 23–45. Božič 1981 Božič, D., Relativna kronologija mlajše železne dobe v Jugoslovanskem Podonavju, ArhVest, 32, 315–347. Cahiers PF 1986 Cahiers des Portes de Fer. Đerdapske sveske, Beograd. Díaz-Andreu 2005 Díaz-Andreu, M., Gender identity, IN: Díaz-Andreu, M.–Lucy, S.–Babić, S.–Edwards, D. N., The archaeology of identity. Approaches to gender, age, status, ethnicity and religion, London, 13–42. Dietler 1990 Dietler, M., Driven by drink: The role of drinking in the political economy and the case of Early Iron Age France, JAA, 9, 4, 352–406. Dietler 1996 Dietler, M., Feasts and commensal politics in the political economy: food, power, and status in prehistoric Europe, IN: Wiessner, P.–Schiefenhövel, W. (eds.), Food and the Status Quest: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, Oxford, 87–125. Dietler 2001 Dietler, M., Theorizing the feast: rituals of consumption, commensal politics, and power in African contexts, IN: Dietler, M.–Hayden, B. (eds.), Feasts. Archaeological and ethnographic perspectives on food, politics and power, Washington, 65–114. Dietler 2005 Dietler, M., The Archaeology of Colonization and the Colonization of Archaeology: Theoretical Challenges from an Ancient Mediterranean Colonial Encounter, IN: Stein, G. (ed.), The Archaeology of Colonial Encounters: Comparative Perspectives, Santa Fe, 33–68. Egri–Rustoiu 2009 Egri, M.–Rustoiu, A., The social significance of conviviality in the Scordiscan environment, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Funerary practices of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Central and South-Eastern Europe. Proceedings of the 9th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology, Bistriţa, May 9th–11th 2008, Cluj-Napoca, 83–93. Ferdière–Villard Ferdière, A.–Villard, A., La tombe augustéenne de Fléré-la-Rivière (Indre) et les sépultures 1993 aristocratiques de la cité des Bituriges, Saint-Marcel. Frey 1986 Frey, O-H., Einige Überlegungen zu den Beziehungen zwischen Kelten und Germanen in der Spätlatènezeit, IN: Frey, O-H. (Hrsg.), Gedenkschrift für Gero von Merhart, MSVF, 7, Marburg–Lahn, 45–70. Gherghe 1978 Gherghe, P., Cercetările arheologice de salvare efectuate în necropola și așezarea geto-dacică de la Turburea-Spahii, Litua, 1, 15–31. Glodariu 1974 Glodariu, I., Relaţii comerciale ale Daciei cu lumea elenistică și romană, Cluj-Napoca. Gosden 2004 Gosden, C., Archaeology and Colonialism. Cultural Contact from 5000 BC to the Present, Cambridge. Grinsell 1961 Grinsell, L. V., The Breaking of Objects as a Funerary Rite, Folklore, 72, 475–491. Gumă 1977 Gumă, M., Cercetări arheologice pe Stenca Liubcovei (jud. Caraș-Severin), Banatica, 4, 69–104. Babović 1986a Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 439 Gumă Et Al. 1995 Guštin 1984 Guštin 2011 Hayden 2001 Jevtić–Ljuština 2008 Jovanović– Jovanović 1988 Jovanović Et Al. 1986 Lucy 2005a Lucy 2005b Łuczkiewicz– Schönfelder 2008 Medeleţ ms. Medeleţ 1997 NicolăescuPlopșor 1947 Okun 1989 Papazoglu 1978 Parker Pearson 1999 Popa 2010 Gumă, M.–Rustoiu, A.–Săcărin, C., Raport preliminar asupra cercetărilor arheologice efectuate în cetatea dacică de la Divici între anii 1988–1994. Principalele rezultate, IN: Cercetări arheologice în aria nord-tracă, I, București, 401–426. Guštin, M., Die Kelten in Jugoslawien. Übersicht über das archäologische Fundgut, Jahrbuch RGZM, 31, 305–363. Guštin, M., Eastern imports from the end of Late Iron Age at Novo Mesto / Slovenia, IN: Măgureanu, D.–Măndescu, D.–Matei, S. (eds.), Archaeology: making of and practice. Studies in honor of Mircea Babeș at his 70th anniversary, Pitești, 239–254. Hayden, B., A prolegomenon to the importance of feasting, IN: Dietler, M.–Hayden, B. (eds.), Feasts. Archaeological and ethnographic perspectives on food, politics and power, Washington, 23–64. Jevtić, M.–Ljuština, M., Dacian pottery from Židovar, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Stînga, I. (eds.), The Iron Gates region during the second Iron age. Settlements, necropolises, treasures. Proceedings of the international colloquium from Drobeta –Turnu Severin (June 12–15th 2008), Craiova, 27–37. Jovanović, B.–Jovanović, M., Gomolava. Naselje mladeg gvozdenog doba, Novi Sad–Beograd. Jovanović, A.–Korać, M.–Jankovic, D., L’embouchure de la rivière Slatinska Reka, IN: Cahiers des Portes de Fer. Đerdapske sveske, III, Beograd, 378–400. Lucy, S., The archaeology of age, IN: Díaz-Andreu, M.–Lucy, S.–Babić, S.–Edwards, D. N., The archaeology of identity. Approaches to gender, age, status, ethnicity and religion, London, 43–66. Lucy, S., Archaeology, ethnic and cultural identities, IN: Díaz-Andreu, M.–Lucy, S.–Babić, S.–Edwards, D. N., The archaeology of identity. Approaches to gender, age, status, ethnicity and religion, London, 86–109. Łuczkiewicz, P.–Schönfelder, M., Untersuchungen zur Ausstattung eines späteisenzeitlichen Reiterkriegers aus dem südlichen Karpaten- oder Balkanraum, Jahrbuch RGZM, 55, 159–210. Medeleţ, Fl., Epoca Latène în Banat, manuscript. Medeleţ, Fl., Zona Porţilor de Fier ale Dunării. Istoricul cercetărilor arheologice dintre Baziaș și Orșova pe malul românesc al Dunării (Partea I – până la cucerirea romană a Daciei), Analele Banatului, 5, 63–73. Nicolăescu-Plopșor, C.S., Antiquités celtiques de Olténie, Dacia, 11–12, 1945–1947, 17–33. Okun, M. L., The early Roman frontier in the Upper Rhine area: assimilation and acculturation on a Roman frontier, BAR, 547, Oxford. Papazoglu, F., The Central Balkan tribes in pre-Roman times: Triballi, Autariatae, Dardanians, Scordisci and Moesians, Amsterdam. Parker Pearson, M., The archaeology of death and burial, Glouchestershire. Popa, C., A new framework for approaching Dacian identity. The burial contribution, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, 9–11 October 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 395–423. Popilian 1999 Popilian, Gh., Découvertes archéologiques dans l’Île Ostrovul Șimian, IN: Vasić, M. (ed.), Le Djerdap/Les Portes de Fer a la IIeme moitie du Iere millenaire av.J.Chr., Beograd, 55–64. Popović 1990 Popović, P., Mladje gvozdeno doba Djerdapa (The Late Iron Age on the territory of Djerdap (Iron Gate)), Starinar, 40–41, 1989–1990, 165–176. Popović 1992 Popović, P., Italische Bronzegefässe im Skordiskergebiet, Germania, 70, 1, 61–74. Popović 1993 Popović, P., The territories of Scordisci, Starinar, 43–44, 1992–1993, 13–21. Popović 2000 Popović, P., La céramique de La Tène finale sur les territoires des Scordisques (Ier siècle av n.è. – Ier siècle de n.è.), Starinar, 50, 83–111. Popović 2008 Popović, P., Les îles du Danube et les habitats laténiens des Portes de Fer, IN: Sîrbu, V.–Stînga, I. (eds.), The Iron Gates region during the second Iron age. Settlements, necropolises, treasures. Proceedings of the international colloquium from Drobeta –Turnu Severin (June 12–15th 2008), Craiova, 63–71. Popović–Mrkobrad Popović, P.–Mrkobrad, D., Prospection par sondage de la localite Ljubičevac–Obala, IN: 1986 Cahiers des Portes de Fer. Đerdapske sveske, III, 308–320. Poux 2004 Poux, M., L’âge du vin : rites de boisson, festins et libations en Gaule indépendante, Montagnac. 440 | A. Drăgan Roska, M., A kelták Erdélyben, Közlemények Kolozsvár, IV, 1–2, 53–80. Rustoiu, A., Fibulele din Dacia preromană (sec. II î.e.n. –I e. n.), București. Rustoiu, A., Ornamentica pumnalelor curbe traco-dacice, IN: Cosma, C.–Tamba, D.–Rustoiu, A. (eds.), Studia archaeologica et historica Nicolao Gudea dicata. Festschrift für Professor Nicolae Gudea Gelegentlich des 60. Geburstages, ActaMP–BMP, IV, Zalău, 181–194. Rustoiu 2002 Rustoiu, A., Războinici și artizani de prestigiu din Dacia preromană, Cluj-Napoca. Rustoiu 2005a Rustoiu, A., Die dakischen Befestigten Siedlungen im Gebiet der Eiseren Tore der Donau (2 Jh.v.Chr.–1 Jh.n.Chr.), IN: Nemeth, E.–Rustoiu, A.–Pop, H. (Hrsg.), Limes Dacicus occidentalis. Die Befestigungen im Westen dakiens vor und nach der römischen Eroberung, Cluj-Napoca, 60–77. Rustoiu 2005b Rustoiu, A., The Padea–Panagjurski Kolonii group in south-western Transylvania (Romania), IN: Dobrzańska, H.–Megaw, V.–Poleska, P. (eds.), Celts on the margin: studies in European Cultural Interaction 7th Century BC–1st Century AD. Dedicated to Zenon Woźniak, Kraków, 109–119. Rustoiu 2005c Rustoiu, A., Dacia și Italia în sec. I a.Chr. Comerţul cu vase de bronz în perioada republicană târzie (Studiu preliminar), IN: Cosma, C.–Rustoiu, A., Comerţ și civilizaţie. Transilvania în contextul schimburilor comerciale și culturale în Antichitate / Trade and civilization. Transylvania in the frame of trade and cultural exchanges in Antiquity, Cluj-Napoca. Rustoiu 2007 Rustoiu, A., Thracian sica and Dacian falx. The history of a “national” weapon, IN: Nemeti, S.–Fodorean, F.–Nemeth, E.–Cociș, S.–Nemeti, I.–Pîslaru, M. (eds.), Dacia Felix. Studia Michaeli Bărbulescu oblata, Cluj-Napoca, 67–82. Rustoiu 2008 Rustoiu, A., Războinici și societate în aria celtică transilvăneană. Studii pe marginea mormântului cu coif de la Ciumești, Cluj-Napoca. Rustoiu 2009 Rustoiu, A., Războinicii celţi din Transilvania. Modele culturale și identitare în a doua vârstă a fierului, StudiaUBB, 54, 1–2, 1–17. Rustoiu–Egri 2010 Rustoiu, A.–Egri, M., Danubian Kantharoi – Almost three decades later, IN: Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureș, 9–11 October 2009, BMM, II, Cluj-Napoca, 217–287. Schönfelder 2010 Schönfelder, M., Speisen mit Stil – Zu einem latènezeitlichen Hiebmesser vom Typ Dürrnberg in der Sammlung des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums in Mainz, IN: Borhy, L. (Hrsg.), Studia Celtica Classica et Romana Nicolae Szabó Septuagesimo Dedicata, Budapest, 223–233. Shennan 1994 Shennan, S., Introduction: archaeological approaches to cultural identity, IN: Shennan. S. (ed.), Archaeological approaches to cultural identity, London. Sîrbu 1993 Sîrbu, V., Credinţe și practici funerare, religioase și magice în lumea geto-dacilor, Galaţi. Sîrbu–Arsenescu Sîrbu, V.–Arsenescu, M., Dacian settlements and necropolises in Southwestern Romania (2nd 2006 c.–1st c. A.D.), ActaTS, V, 1, 164–187. Sîrbu–Rustoiu 1999 Sîrbu, V.–Rustoiu, A., Découvertes funéraires géto-daces du sud-ouest de la Roumanie (+150–+50 av.J.Ch.), IN: Vasić, M. (ed.), Le Djerdap/ Les Portes de Fer a la IIeme moitie du Iere millenaire av.J.Chr., Beograd, 77–91. Sîrbu Et Al. 1999 Sîrbu, V.–Rustoiu, A.–Crăciunescu, G., Descoperiri funerare din La Tène-ul târziu din zona Porţilor de Fier, Thraco-Dacica, 20, 1–2, 217–229. Sîrbu Et Al. 2007 Sîrbu, V.–Luca, S. A.–Roman, C., Tombs of Dacian Warriors (2nd–1st c. BC) found in Hunedoara–Grădina Castelului (Hunedoara county), ActaTS, VI, 1, 155–177. Sladić 1986 Sladić, M., Keramika Skordiska: latenska keramika u jugoslovenskom Podunavlju, Beograd. Sladić 1988 Sladić, M., Grob ratnika iz sela Kumane kod Velikog Gradišta (A tomb of warrior from the village Kumane near Veliko Gradište), Viminacium, 2, 19–23. Sladić 1997 Sladić, M., Židovar in the Late Iron Age, IN: Ŭzelac, J.–Lazić, M.–Jeftić, M.–Sladić, M.– Jovanović, A., Židovar. Bronze Age and Iron Age settlement, Beograd–Vršac, 53–67. Spânu 2002 Spânu, D., Un mormânt de epocă târzie Latène de la Dubova, SCIVA, 52–53, 2001–2002, 83–132. Spânu 2003 Spânu, D., Un posibil inventar funerar Latène târziu din zona Porţilor de Fier, Ea-online, June 2003, www.archaeology.ro/dsh_portile.htm (10.01.2011). Stalio 1986 Stalio, B., Le site prehistorique Ajmana à Mala Vrbica, IN: Cahiers des Portes de Fer. Đerdapske sveske, III, 27–50. Todorović 1972 Todorović, J., Praistorijska Karaburma I. Nekropola mladeg gvozdenog doba, Beograd. Roska 1944 Rustoiu 1997 Rustoiu 2001 Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 441 Vasić 1986 Wells 1980 Wells 1999 Woolf 1998 Woźniak 1976 Zirra 1971 Vasić, R., Compte-rendu des fouilles du site préhistorique à Velesnica (1981–1982), IN: Cahiers des Portes de Fer. Đerdapske sveske, III, 264–285. Wells, P. S., Contact and change: an example on the fringes of the Classical world, WArch, 12, 1, 1–10. Wells, P. S., The barbarians speak: how the conquered peoples shaped Roman Europe, Princeton. Woolf, G., Becoming Roman: the origins of provincial civilisation in Gaul, Cambridge. Woźniak, Z., Die östliche Randzone der Latène Kultur, Germania, 54, 382–402. Zirra, V., Beiträge zur Kenntnis des keltischen Latène in Rumänien, Dacia N. S., 15, 171–238. List of figures Fig. 1. Map of Late Iron Age sites from the Iron Gates area. A. cemetery; B. individual burial; C. isolated find; D. fortified settlement; E. open settlement. 1. Gruia; 2. Viiașu; 3. Balta Verde; 4. Hinova; 5. Corcova; 6. Ostrovul Șimian; 7. Turnu Severin; 8. Orșova; 9. Dubova; 10. Liubcova–Stenca; 11. Pescari–Culă; 12. Divici–Grad; 13. Socol–Palanački Breg; 14. Židovar; 15. Kumane–Prevod; 16. Mala Vrbica–Ajmana; 17. Mala Vrbica–Konopište; 18. Zbradila–Korbovo; 19. Vajuga–Pesak; 20. Velesnica; 21. Ljubičevac; 22. Brza Palanka; 23. Mouth of the river Slatinska Reka. Fig. 2. Model of the differential participation in feasting practices developed for the Scordiscian territory (after Egri–Rustoiu 2009). Fig. 3. Distribution map of the burials ascribed to the Padea–Panagjurski Kolonii and proposed model for a standard funerary gear in the Dacian milieu (after Rustoiu 2008). List of plates Pl. 1. Grave 1 from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (after Stalio 1986; Popović 1992). Pl. 2. 1–5. Grave 2 from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (after Stalio 1986); 6–12. Grave 2 from the mouth of the river Slatinska Reka (after Jovanović Et Al. 1986). Pl. 3. 1–10. Grave 3/1983 from Vajuga–Pesak (after Popović 1990); 11–15. Grave 1 from the mouth of the river Slatinska Reka (after Jovanović Et Al. 1986). Pl. 4. 1–6. Grave inventory from Kumane–Prevod (after Sladić 1988); 7. Skeletal deposition from Ostrovul Șimian (after Popilian 1999). Pl. 5. Grave inventory from Dubova (after Spânu 2003). Pl. 6. 1–7. Grave inventory from Corcova; 8–11. Grave 1 from Gruia (after Sîrbu Et Al. 1999). Pl. 7. Functional tables of grave goods found in burials from the right side of the Iron Gates. 1. Male burials; 2. Female burials. Pl. 8. Ceramic assemblages from settlements on the left side of the Danube. 1–8. Divici (unpublished; drawings: M. Gumă); 9–13. Ljubcova (drawings: M. Gumă); 14–22. Ostrovul Șimian, dwelling 2 (after Popilian 1999). Pl. 9. Ceramic assemblage from the settlement from Zbradila–Korbovo. 1–2, 6–10, 12–14, 17–18, 21–22. Excavation no. 2; 3–5, 11, 15–16, 19–20. Pit no. 1 (after Babović 1986b; different scales). Pl. 10. Ceramic assemblage from the settlement from Ljubičevac–Obala (after Popović–Mrkobrad 1986; different scales). 442 | A. Drăgan 5 5 5 m 5 – 5 – 5 5 m m Plate 1. Grave 1 from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (after Stalio 1986; Popović 1992). Plate . ra e from ala r i a– mana after P P . Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 443 5 5 m 5 Plate 2. 1–5. Grave 2 from Mala Vrbica–Ajmana (after Stalio 1986); 6–12. Grave 2 from the mouth of the river Slatinska Reka (after Jovanović Et Al. 1986). – Plate . –5. ra e from ala r i a– mana after . ra e from t e mout of t e ri er latins a e a after . 444 | A. Drăgan 5 5 Plate 3. 1–10. Grave 3/1983 from Vajuga–Pesak (after Popović 1990); 11–15. Grave 1 from the mouth of the river Slatinska Reka (after Jovanović Et Al. 1986). Plate . – . ra e from a u a– e a after P – 5. ra e from t e mout of t e ri er latins a e a after P . Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 445 5 m 5 Plate 4. 1–6. Grave inventory from Kumane–Prevod (after Sladić 1988); 7. Skeletal deposition from Ostrovul Șimian (after Popilian 1999). Plate . – . ra e in entory from Kumane– re after . eletal deposition from stro ul imian after P P . 446 | A. Drăgan 5 Plate 5. Grave inventory from Dubova (after Spânu 2003). Plate 5. ra e in entory from u o a after P . Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 447 5 Plate 6. 1–7. Grave inventory from Corcova; 8–11. Grave 1 from Gruia (after Sîrbu Et Al. 1999). Plate . – . ra e in entory from or o a – . ra e from ruia after . 448 | A. Drăgan Preparation er in and onsumption ser i e arments t er eaponry ala r i a – mana r ot illustrated fra mentary spear ead . m. a u a– e a r out of t e ri er latins a e a r Kumane– re 1 Preparation er in and onsumption ser i e arments t er eaponry ala r i a – mana r out of t e ri er latins a e a r Plate 7. Functional tables of grave goods found in burials from the right side of the Iron Gates. 1. Male burials; 2. Female burials. Plate . un tional ta les of ra e oods found in urials from t e ri t side of t e ron ates. . ale urials . emale urials. 2 Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 449 5 5 Plate 8. Ceramic assemblages from settlements on the left side of the Danube. 1–8. Divici (unpublished; drawings: M. Gumă); 9–13. Ljubcova (drawings: M. Gumă); 14–22. Ostrovul Șimian, dwelling 2 (after Popilian 1999). – . Plate . erami assem la es from settlements on t e left side of t e anu e. – . i i i unpu lis ed dra in s . um u o a dra in s . um – . stro ul imian d ellin after P P . 450 | A. Drăgan 5 5 Plate 9. Ceramic assemblage from the settlement from Zbradila–Korbovo. 1–2, 6–10, 12–14, 17–18, 21–22. Excavation no. 2; 3–5, 11, 15–16, 19–20. Pit no. 1 (after Babović 1986b; different scales). Plate . erami assem la e from t e settlement from radila– r – – – – – . a ation no. –5 5– – . Pit no. after different s ales . Late Iron Age Burials in the Iron Gates Area. A Functional Approach to Funerary Expression in the Late La Tène | 451 5 5 Plate 10. Ceramic assemblage from the settlement from Ljubičevac–Obala (after Popović–Mrkobrad 1986; different scales). from Plate u i e a – . erami assem la e from t e settlement a a after P P – K different s ales . A Late Iron Age Grave Find from Syrmia Milica TAPAVIČKI-ILIĆ–Vojislav FILIPOVIĆ Archaeological Institute Belgrade, Serbia mtapavic@sbb.rs vfilipov1@gmail.com Keywords: Iron Age, grave find, Syrmia, Scordisci, burial rite In 2004, a local amateur-archaeologist Branko Najhold came into possession of a set of different objects, apparently dating back from the Late Iron Age (Najhold 2010, 215–219). The objects were excavated by a farmer, somewhere in Syrmia, most probably close to modern Sremska Mitrovica (Fig. 1). No closer finding data are known. The number and structure of objects indicate that one is most likely dealing with grave goods. The find includes the following objects: a bronze kettle, a bronze simpulum, two spears, one of which was bent twice, an iron knife and four pieces of a sward scabbard, decorated with geometric ornaments. There is also a bronze fibula, a belt buckle of Laminci type, a pair of iron spurs and a pair of iron snaffle-bits. All of the objects were poorly preserved but still easily recognizable. According to data given by the finder, the bronze fibula, the ‘Laminci’ belt buckle and the iron spurs were placed inside the kettle. The finder did not come upon any skeletal remains, which indicates that this grave was a Fig. 1. Location of Syrmia and Sremska Mitrovica (map: V. Ilić). cremation (Fig. 2). All of the finds, as well as the cremation itself, have close parallels on sites like Židovar, Gomolava or Ajmana-Konopište and Mala Vrbica. They can be dated into 1st century BC and ascribed to a member of the tribe of Scordisci. Four fragments of a scabbard made of bronze were incorporated into the find (Pl. 1/1). The scabbard was once decorated with horizontal and vertical grooves, as well as concentric circles (Fig. 1/1). Since only small fragments remained preserved, one cannot tell much about its original structure. In comparison with earlier times, Late Iron Age scabbards were not richly decorated (Jovanović 1987, 834). There is no information about the sword itself, so one cannot tell whether it was a long one, typical for the Late Iron Age, or a short one, made during the last decades of the 1st century BC in this area after the Roman gladii. The accompanying sword was most likely sold separately from the rest of this grave find, which is also a Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 453–459 454 | M. Tapavički-Ilić–V. Filipović hypothesis suggested by Najhold (2010, 215–216), the owner of the find. One out of two iron spears was bent (Pl. 1/5). Its length measures 21.5 cm and its original length is estimated to 45 cm. Both spears belong to the widely spread Late Iron Age spears with narrow, long leaf, a rib in the middle and with a rhomboidal cross-section (Pl. 1/4). Finds of two or more spears are often encountered in the Late Iron Age graves from the Danube valley. Such are the examples of Karaburma graves 13 (Todorović 1972, 14, T. V/4–6) and 92 (Todorović 1972, 30–31, T. XXVII/4–6), as well as the Zmajevac grave 3 discovered near Sotin (Božič 1984, 80, 125, fig. 61). The two snaffle bits are L-shaped (Pl. 1/7). On the bent parts, there are broadenings with rectangular openings for binding belts, while the opposite endings are bent into smaller rings. This kind of snaffle bits was previously not published, but according to other finds, they can be dated into 1st century BC. Two iron spurs with button-shaped endings and a thorn put up on a profiled base have a bowspan of about 6 cm (Pl. 1/2). One of the spurs has a bow decorated with shallow parallel carvings. This pair of spurs belongs to the first variant of the La Tène spur type 1 in Serbia (Filipović 2011, 178, fig. 8). Chronologically, they belong to 1st century BC. What makes this find of spurs special is that so far, at the territory of Central Balkans, there was only one more pair of spurs discovered as a grave find in Popica in Bulgaria Fig. 2. Imagined scenery of the Syrmia grave (after (Torbov 1998, 59). Usually, only a single spur is Najhold 2010, 219). encountered as a grave good. An iron knife with a bronze ring is 14.5 cm long (Pl. 1/6). The blade is straight and damaged at the end, while the handle is disproportionally long and possesses a bronze ending. There is a small ring on the handle, on which there is a bigger ring assembling an earring. The bronze ending is of high quality, almost inadequate for a simple iron blade. Contrary to typical Celtic fighting knives, which possess a massive bent blade and a short handle, the knife example from Syrmia is only 1.5 cm wide. During the Late Iron Age, there are knives with handles ending in a round, ring-shaped opening, but such handles are massive and made along with the rest of the knife out of a single piece of iron. Examples are known from Karaburma graves 50, 92, 114, 172 and 222 (Todorović 1972, 23–24, 30–31, 36–39, T. XIX/12; XXVII/12; XXXV/4; XXXVII/3; XL/13; Jovanović 1987, fig. 42/19), as well as from the Zmajevac grave 3 near Sotin (Božič 1984, 80, 125, fig. 61). The bronze ring from the Syrmia knife (Pl. 1/6) resembles silver earrings and bracelets from the Bare hoard (Popović–Borić-Brešković 1994, cat. no. 7–15, T. IV; V/1–2; VII/1–4; VIII/1– 3). Even though the Bare hoard was deposited during Roman times, the fabric of all of the objects found in it indicates Late Iron Age traditions of the area concerned. This type of knife could on no occasion be determined as a weapon. The bronze earring-like ornament on its handle could indicate that it belonged to a female person. The bronze kettle (Pl. 1/10) discovered as a part of this interesting find has a conical rim, bent slightly upwards and a conical upper part of the body. The lower part is spherical. On two places of the rim, opposed to one another, there are visible traces of lootings which once held the handle. Its height measures 15 cm and the diameter of the vessel is 16 cm. Analogies for this kind of kettle include several examples. The most similar one comes from grave number 3/1983 from Vajuga–Pesak, but its dimensions are smaller (Popović 1990, 171, fig. 4/4; Popović 1992, 72, Abb. 8/2). Another example is known from Židovar (Gavela 1952, 60). Two examples with unknown finding places are kept at the National museum in Belgrade (Popović 1992, 71, Abb. 8/3–4; National museum in Belgrade, inv. no. 2827/III and 2840/III. It is presumed that they were found somewhere along the Danube in Serbia). Finally, there are five more A Late Iron Age Grave Find from Syrmia | 455 examples from Romania (Tigănesti, Bobaia, Vedea, Costești and Pescari), all dated into 1st century BC according to accompanying numismatic finds (Popović 1992, 71–72). It is presumed that this kind of vessels was used for mixing water and wine. When combined with a simpulum, this opinion can easily be supported. Kettles are considered to be of north Italian origin, imported over Aquileia and Segestica, down the Sava River to the Danube valley. The finds of Roman republican denarii and imported ware show that this route gained on importance during the Late Republic, especially after Octavian’s Illyrian war in 35 BC. After this war and after the fall of Segestica, the way to the Danube’s valley was opened free (Popović 1992, 73–74). The simpulum presented here belongs to the Pescate type (Pl. 1/8). It has a conical rim and a spherical body. Its height measures 5 cm and the diameter of the vessel 6 cm. In many cases, there was a preserved handle, which was placed around the neck of the vessel. Simpuli belong to the classical Greek-Italian wine services. They are often found with sieves, which indicate that they were used for taking liquids from bigger dishes and pouring them into sieves. Jürgen Kunow suggested other ways of usage, presuming that simpuli were not only used for taking liquids out of bigger dishes, but also for catching liquids that were poured through sieves. It is also possible that they were put under sieves for catching liquid remains dipping from sieves (Kunow 1983, 77). Fully preserved or fragmented simpuli of this type build the greatest percentage of all the Late Iron Age bronze vessels from the territory of the Scordisci (Popović 1992, 64). Such examples often come from Late Iron Age or Early Imperial cemeteries and they are dated into the period of the late 1st century BC and early 1st century AD (Dautova-Ruševljan–Brukner 1992, 62). A good preserved example was found in the Danube, near the bridge of Novi Sad, while the second one comes from the Late Iron Age settlement by Voganj–Bare, close to Ruma (Brukner 1987, 101). The Pescate simpuli were found within eight Karaburma graves in Belgrade. The finds from three graves, 11, 12 and 92 (Todorović 1972, 13–14, 30–31, T. III/8; IV/7; XXVIII/15), were fully preserved, while finds from three other graves, 36, 97 and 203 (Todorović 1972, 21, 32, 38–39, T. XIV/2; XXIX/1; XXXVIII/3), were fragmented. In the grave 137 (Todorović 1972, 36–37, T. XXXVI/2, 3), a simpulum was found together with a handle, while in the grave 110 (Todorović 1972, 34, T. XXXII/8) there was only a fragmented handle. According to other finds discovered within these graves, they were dated at the turn of the Eras (Todorović 1972, 92, 95). During the excavations of the area of the Danubian Iron Gates, two simpuli were discovered in cremation graves close to the village of Mala Vrbica. In the grave number 1 of the Ajmana cemetery, a simpulum was still lying within a bronze bowl. Apart from these finds, grave goods also included weapons (a spear head and a knife), locally produced pottery, a Middle La Tène bronze fibula from the 1st century BC and another iron fibula with perforated foot, dating at the end of the Iron Age. All of the accompanying finds indicate that this grave dates from the second half of the 1st century BC (Popović 1992, 64). In grave number 18/1988, discovered in Konopište, a village some 3 km away from Ajmana, another simpulum of this kind was discovered, along with weapons, pottery and jewellery, as well as an iron fibula typical for the Late Iron Age. Since in both of the mentioned graves there were deposited weapons, one can conclude that they were warrior graves. The same can be said about the grave discussed in this paper. Most of the Pescate simpuli discovered so far originate from northern Italy (Popović 1992, 66). Single finds from Late Iron Age graves are scattered throughout Middle Europe. The belt buckle from this find belongs to the Laminci type (Pl. 1/9). It was made of iron and then covered with bronze tin on its front side. Despite corrosion, its slightly oval shape can be recognized. It is 14.5 cm long and 6.5 cm wide. There is a mechanism for fastening onto a leather or textile belt on one side, while the other side is broken. On other, fully preserved pieces, there is a hook at this part of the buckle, used for closing the belt by hooking it to the other ending. On two spots, traces of carved decoration can be noticed, showing concentric circles or semi-circles. The ‘Laminci’ belt buckles belong to the local products of the inhabitants of the Sava and the Danube valleys, actually of the Scordisci. The type gained its name after finds (Sladić 1994, 134, fig. 3/1–6) from the village of Laminci in north-western Bosnia, in the Sava valley (Jovanović 1987, 834, pl. LXXXIII/4). An example of such a belt buckle was found in Gomolava, also bearing the same ornamentation with carved concentric semi-circles, divided into several fields. According to its finding contexts, it was dated into the Gomolava phase VI/b, actually to the Late Iron Age (Jovanović–Jovanović 1988, 96–97, fig. 40). 456 | M. Tapavički-Ilić–V. Filipović Three other parallels come from the Karaburma graves 14, 39 and 110. The ‘Laminci’ belt buckle from Karaburma grave 14 (Todorović 1972, 15, T. V/5) was found together with two bracelets (one made of iron and the other one made of bronze), a knife and a bowl. Just like the Syrmia example, it is also damaged, but clearly recognizable, even when the decoration is concerned. The belt buckle from grave 39 was found with four pottery vessels, a circular belt part and a fibula (Todorović 1972, 21–22, T. XV/5). Its form and especially its ornamentation are simplified, but it can still be ascribed to the ‘Laminci’ belt buckles. The belt buckle from the Karaburma grave 110 (Todorović 1972, 34, T. XXXII/4) was found along with a handle of a simpulum, a fibula, a bracelet, a knife and two pottery vessels (a pot and a bowl). Since the belt buckle and the handle of a simpulum were found together, they resemble the Syrmia example even more. The ‘Laminci’ belt buckles belong to female jewellery sets, since the grave goods of the graves in which they were found always indicate burials of female persons. Their spreading area includes the northern part of the mid Balkans and the southern part of Vojvodina (Sladić 1994, 133, 135, fig. 2). It is interesting to observe that in three of the Karaburma graves with the ‘Laminci’ belt buckles all of the grave goods also indicate burials of female persons (bracelets, fibulae). Weapons are clearly absent, which is opposed to the complex of grave goods from Syrmia. According to that, the Syrmia grave might be considered either as a double burial or even as two separate graves. The bronze fibula from this find is 11 cm long (Pl. 1/3). It is cast in bronze, it possesses a spiral winding on its head (consisting most likely of four windings) and an upturned foot looted onto the bow. The needle holder is spout-like, but the needle is missing. Similar fibulae were found in two graves on the Vajuga–Pesak necropolis (graves 8/83 and 27/83), only these examples were made of iron (Tapavički-Ilić 2004, 109, 110, cat. no. 175 and 176). In Vajuga–Pesak grave no. 27, the fibula was found along with a knife, just like in the here presented find from Syrmia. In grave 1 from the Ajmana cemetery, only three kilometres away from Vajuga–Pesak, a fibula of this type was also discovered, along with a simpulum. According to the assembly of finds, the whole grave was dated into the second half of 1st century BC (Popović 1992, 64, 65, Abb. 3; Popović 1990, 170, fig. 3/11). Another parallel was discovered in the Karaburma grave number 35 (Todorović 1972, 20, T. XIII/1). This fibula was discovered together with an iron knife and a piece of knife’s handle made of iron. Similar examples of fibulae are kept at the Iron Age collection of the National Museum in Belgrade. They were discovered at the site Beli breg near Brestovik and ascribed to the type of the Middle La Tène scheme (Vukmanović–Radojčić 1995, 24, 25, cat. no. 23 and 25). On the other hand, similar examples are known from the Late Iron Age settlement of Gomolava, where they were unearthed in the layer VI/b (Jovanović–Jovanović 1988, 84, 172–173, T. XLI/10–12). Jovanović correctly recognized them as regular finds on the territory of the Scordisci, but rarely with a clearly defined finding context (Jovanović–Jovanović 1988, 84). According to the typology and chronological division of Waldhauser, in Moravia and Slovakia such fibulae belong to the LT D1 period, actually to the first half of 1st century BC (Waldhauser 2001, 40). Despite the absence of a massive spherical ornament on the bow, the fibula from Syrmia could derive from the fibulae of the Middle La Tène scheme and be dated into the second half of 1st century BC. The period of the second half of 1st century BC is characterized with the loss of Scordisci power and domination in the areas of the Danube and the Sava valleys. They were more and more often defeated by Roman legions, coming both from the south and the west. Another force, the one of the Dacians, rose in the east, also pushing the Scordisci back. All of this led to building of settlements of refugee character, actually the oppida (Jovanović 1987, 840, 843, fig. 42). This last phase of Scordiscian independence was also characterized with new shapes and forms of material culture. Some of the objects are incorporated into what we here present as the Syrmia grave find (Fig. 3). The fibula from this find originates from the fibulae of Middle La Tène scheme, but it possesses no decorative knobs on its bow. The broad ‘Laminci’ belt buckles with stroke geometrical ornaments are also typical for this phase. Their finds are spread throughout the northern part of the Middle Balkans and southern Pannonia. At the end of this phase, actually only a few decades before the turn of the Eras, Roman imported ware appears. It mostly includes the so called wine sets, consisting of simpuli, kettles and other related vessels. Weapons of this period include long swords, long spear heads and knives. If the authors of this paper decide to trust the words of the finder, than one would here be dealing with a double funeral of a man and a woman. Man’s possessions would include weapons and spurs, while the possessions of the woman would include the fibula, the belt buckle and the knife. The two bronze A Late Iron Age Grave Find from Syrmia | 457 Fig. 3. Grave find from Syrmia (photo: V. Ilić). vessels could belong either to the one or to the other burial. Another speculation, also not to be neglected, could simply indicate two separate graves. Graves with these combinations of finds are often encountered on the territory of the Scordisci and there is no reason to doubt that the grave find from Syrmia represents just another one among them. References Božič 1984 Brukner 1987 Dautova-Ruševljan– Brukner 1992 Filipović 2011 Gavela 1952 Jovanović 1987 Jovanović–Jovanović 1988 Kunow 1983 Najhold 2010 Popović 1990 Popović 1992 Popović–BorićBrešković 1994 Božič, D., Naoružanje ratnika mlađeg željeznog doba, IN: Keltoi, Kelti i njihovi suvremenici na tlu Jugoslavije (exhibition catalogue), Ljubljana, 77–83. Brukner, O., Voganj-Bare, kasnolatensko naselje, ArhPregl, 1986–1987, 26–27, 101. Dautova-Ruševljan, V.–Brukner, O., Gomolava (rimski period), Novi Sad. Filipović, V., Mamuze iz mlađeg gvozdenog doba u Srbiji, Glasnik SAD, 25, 163–188. Gavela, B., Keltski opidum Židovar – L’oppidum celtique Židovar, Beograd. Jovanović, B., Keltska kultura u Jugoslaviji, Istočna grupa, IN: Benac, A.–Čović, B. (eds.), Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Željezno doba, Sarajevo, 815–855. Jovanović, B.–Jovanović, M., Gomolava, naselje mlađeg gvozdenog doba, Novi Sad–Beograd. Kunow, J., Der römische Import in der Germania Libera bis zu den Markomannenkriegen (Studien zu Bronze- und Glasgefäßen), Neumünster. Najhold, B., Taurunum Skordiska, Zemun. Popović, P., Mlađe gvozdeno doba Đerdapa, Starinar, 1989–1990, XL–XLI (zbornik Milutina Garašanina), 165–175. Popović, P., Italische Bronzegefäße im Skordiskergebiet, Germania, 70/1, 61–74. Popović, I.–Borić-Brešković, B., Ostava iz Bara (The Bare Hoard), Beograd. 458 | M. Tapavički-Ilić–V. Filipović Sladić, M., Pojasna kopča sa lokaliteta Židovar, IN: Tasić, N. (ed.) Kulture gvozdenog doba jugoslovenskog Podunavlja, Acta of the congress held in Sombor (1993), Beograd, 131–136. Tapavički-Ilić 2004 Tapavički-Ilić, M., Die Skordisker – ein keltisches Volk im Mittelbalkan, IN: Silber der Illyrer und Kelten im Zentralbalkan, Ausstellungskatalog, Eberdingen, 56–73, cat. no. 138–201. Todorović 1972 Todorović, J., Praistorijska Karaburma 1. Nekropola mlađeg gvozdenog doba, Dissertationes et Monographiae, 13, Beograd. Torbov 1998 Torbov, N., Spurs from the 2nd century BC–1st century AD found in North western Bulgaria, ArchBulg, 2/1, 54–63. Vukmanović–Radojčić Vukmanović, M.–Radojčić, N., Katalog metala II (Catalogue of Metalwork II), Narodni 1995 muzej, Beograd. Waldhauser 2001 Waldhauser, J., Encyklopedie Keltŭ v Čechách, Praha. Sladić 1994 List of figures Fig. 1. Location of Syrmia and Sremska Mitrovica (map: V. Ilić). Fig. 2. Imagined scenery of the Syrmia grave (after Najhold 2010, 219). Fig. 3. Grave find from Syrmia (photo: V. Ilić). List of plates Pl. 1. 1. Scabbard fragments and detail; 2. Iron spur; 3. Bronze fibula; 4. Iron spear; 5. Bent iron spear; 6. Iron knife with bronze ring on the handle; 7. Snaffle bits; 8. Simpulum; 9. The ‘Laminci’ belt buckle; 10. Bronze kettle with looting traces (photo: V. Ilić). A Late Iron Age Grave Find from Syrmia | 459 5 Plate 1. 1. Scabbard fragments and detail; 2. Iron spur; 3. Bronze fibula; 4. Iron spear; 5. Bent iron spear; 6. Iron knife with bronze ring on the handle; 7. Snaffle bits; 8. Simpulum; 9. The ‘Laminci’ belt buckle; 10. Bronze kettle with looting traces (photo: V. Ilić). Plate . . a ard fra ments and detail . ron spur . ron e fi ula . ron spear 5. ent iron spear . ron nife it ron e rin on t e andle . naffle its . im m . amin i elt u le . ron e ettle it lootin tra es p oto . li . Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety Marcin RUDNICKI Institute of Archaeology, University of Warsaw, Poland rudnis@yahoo.com Keywords: Przeworsk culture, Celts, Dacians, Germans, La Tène, Roman, Şimleul Silvaniei type bracelets The subject of the present analysis are bronze rings (bracelets/armlets?) decorated with a cord ornament, known in archaeological literature as type Șimleul Silvaniei and Rustoiu 3. The paper starts out with an overview of past research on the impact from the Dacian territory on Iron Age inhabitants of Poland since type Șimleul Silvaniei bracelets are an element of this phenomenon. It follows with an analysis of the context of discovery of these ornaments in the area to the north of the Carpathians and the Sudety. Next, insights obtained from this analysis are used as a point of departure to examine the chronology, origin and distribution of type Șimleul Silvaniei in reference to the conclusions of Romanian researchers Aurel Rustoiu and Cristinel C. Plantos. Connections between the inhabitants of Dacia and peoples residing on the territory of today’s Poland during the Iron Age were noted in archaeological literature for the first time relatively early (Reyman 1948, 185–186; pl. 24/2, 25/3, 5). Nevertheless, greater interest in this subject came only during the 1970s. This was true mainly of southern and south-eastern Poland where the largest number of traces of southeastern impact was recorded. The inventory of a Cloche Grave culture burial discovered at Błonie, powiat Sandomierz, published in 1972, dated to the Early or Middle La Tène period, included two wheel-thrown vessels provenanced to the Thraco-Dacian environment (Jamka 1972, 162–163, pl. 8/b, c; Mycielska– Woźniak 1988, 50, pl. LIV/B3, B4). At this time Dąbrowska (1973, 224) in her analysis of exchange between the Przeworsk and the Lipitsa cultures, noted the presence of vessels of non-local provenance in the series of finds from the cemetery at Gać, powiat Przeworsk, the type-site of the Przeworsk culture. Incidentally, among the materials from Gać published by Hadaczek (1909, pl. M/4; T/38, 39, 40, 43, 46, 47; U/48, 49; W/59) there was a series of vessels of Dacian form. Soon afterwards, based on linguistic data, which he treated in a rather controversial manner, and on a cavalier interpretation of the archaeological and palaeobotanical evidence, Sulimirski (1974, 82–83) hypothetically presumed that the area of northern Carpathians and their foothills (Polish: Podkarpacie) was inhabited during prehistory by ThracoDacian tribes. With his article published in 1976 Makiewicz began a series of publications focused on perplexing archaeological features: floors of fired clay datable to the close of the Pre-Roman and the Early Roman period. Commonly interpreted as the remains of sanctuaries, recorded in settlements of Przeworsk culture, mostly in Kujawy (central Poland), but also at Jarosław, powiat Jarosław, and in a number of other sites in Poland, these features have been identified also in the Jutland Peninsula. In their origin they were traced to the La Tène culture environment or, alternately and perhaps more convincingly, to Thraco-Dacian culture (Makiewicz 1976; 1977; 1986; 1987; 2003; Cofta-broniewska 1979, 198–204; Kieferling 1999, 258–259; Florkiewicz–Bochnak 2006, 131). Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 461–492 462 | M. Rudnicki In 1986 Karol Pieta observed that the earliest Dacian elements in the pottery found in inventories of the Tyniec group enter the record during phase LT D2 – that is, earlier than on the territory of Púchov culture. The same researcher identified Dacian elements in western Lesser Poland, in assemblages of Przeworsk culture datable to the Early Roman period (Pieta 1986, 86). The question of the presence of these elements in the Kraków region at large, especially, in the context of the Tyniec group, drew increasingly more attention. In archaeological literature it became an established practice to refer to the ceramics from the turn of the La Tène and the Roman periods (LT D2 and Roman-B1a), similar in its technology of execution, form and ornamentation to Dacian pottery, as the ‘Púchov’ or the ‘Púchov–Dacian’ current. Its presence in the Kraków region was thought to confirm strong connections between the people of the Tyniec group and the bearers of the Púchov culture. The latter, identified with the Cotini, not only were indicated as the go-between in the exchange with the Middle Danube region but were also thought to have been living in western Lesser Poland (Pieta 1986, 26–27; Woźniak 1996, 169–170; Woźniak 2004, 55–56; Poleska 2006, 141, 258). In my view the hypothesis on such a close relationship of the Tyniec group with Púchov culture raises serious doubt. It is much more likely that the presence of Dacian culture elements in the Tyniec group is not an effect of influence from Púchov culture but of direct relations maintained by the inhabitants of Lesser Poland and Dacia on the turn of the La Tène and the Roman period (Rudnicki 2009, 298–299). The existence of this form of exchange had been admitted earlier, although to a limited extent, also by Woźniak (1990, 76). The early 1990s brought new discoveries and the publication of Dacian material from southern Poland (Podgórska-Czopek 1991). A more notable piece of evidence is the grave assemblage discovered at Łętowice, powiat Tarnów. This cremation pit burial is dated to the end of the 1st century BC, possibly, the beginning of the next century, and includes three vessels, two of them characteristic for Dacian culture (Szpunar 1991). One of these was a form known as fructieră or ‘Dacian fruit bowl’: a wheel-thrown bowl on a high pedestal base. Its companion was a jar decorated on the broadest part of its body with applied bosses. The question of impact from the area of Dacia on the inhabitants of the part of the Carpathian region found in Poland, their foothills and areas on the Upper Vistula, was discussed more broadly by MadydaLegutko (1996), who distinguished a group of Early Roman finds which, while they differ significantly from Przeworsk culture and Púchov culture material displays several features characteristic for Dacian cultures. She proposed to define this material as type ‘Wietrzno-Solina’ (Madyda-Legutko 1996, 51–54), and she re-examined the Dacian features of some of the vessels from the cemetery at Gać which have been observed also – and this may seem somewhat unexpected – on Przeworsk culture ceramics discovered in Lower Silesia (Pescheck 1939, pl. 9/6). Taking into account the high frequency of elements of Dacian pottery making in the eastern part of the Polish Carpathians the same researcher argued that the influence from the south-east could have penetrated the region through the Lipitsa culture, from lands on the Dniester, travelling along the outer arc of the Carpathians (Madyda-Legutko 1996, 63–65). The question of the presence in south-eastern Poland of ceramics displaying Geto-Dacian features in the context of Przeworsk culture settlement was discussed at more length by Kokowski. His conclusion was that this pottery must have been relatively easy to obtain in the region of interest and suggested that Dacian impact was stronger than previously accepted by researchers (Kokowski 2001, 113, 117). With time a series of new discoveries were made in Poland, mainly of ceramics from the Roman period provenanced to the Dacian environment. Next to pottery these include human and animal clay figurines, interpreted as fragments of vessels. In this context the number of metal finds – as it seemed until recently – was much less impressive: e.g., a horse-bit from an Early Roman grave at Malkowice, powiat Staszów, published by Jamka (1947), a silver ornament from the elite grave at Sandomierz-Krakówka, powiat Sandomierz (Kokowski–Ścibior 1990, pl. 385[7]/35), and a bronze pendant from Zofipole, powiat Kraków (Gajewski 1966, 434). More of an enigma is the origin of a silver bull’s head discovered at Radymno, powiat Jarosław, recently the object of a detailed analysis (Bochnak–Kieferling 2009). Finds from more recent and from older research made in southern Poland were brought together and discussed by Florkiewicz (2004), who examined them on two more occasions (Florkiewicz–Bochnak 2006; Florkiewicz 2008). The question of the participation of Dacian elements in the culture makeup of the Tyniec group and routes by which they penetrated to the area of western Lesser Poland were discussed recently by the author (Rudnicki 2009, 298–299). The point of departure for the present reflections on this subject was provided by material from archaeological fieldwork carried out by the author and his predecessors at Pełczyska, powiat Pińczów, the site of a rich, multicultural settlement complex. A fragment of a Șimleul Silvaniei Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 463 type bronze armlet was found among the material. The discovery of two further fragments of type Șimleul Silvaniei in Central Poland provided an opportunity to formulate new arguments on the occurrence of these ornaments on the territory of the Przeworsk culture. In turn, these arguments encouraged us to make a broader reassessment of the nature of contacts linking the inhabitants of Pre-Roman Dacia and central Poland on the turn of the Pre-Roman and the Roman period (Rudnicki–Miłek 2011). In discussing the finds from the area north of the Carpathians and the Sudety, interpreted as evidence of contacts maintained by local communities with inhabitants of Pre-Roman Dacia, we cannot overlook the coin finds, which, as a rule, are regarded as a separate class of sources. In the 1980s the question of the origin and circulation of Geto-Dacian coins on the territory of Poland and in western Ukraine was addressed by Mikołajczyk (1982; 1984; 1986), who catalogued the small number of these finds. In 2003 this line of research was taken up by Rudnicki (2003, 16–17) in the publication of Huși–Vovriești type tetradrachms from the settlement at Pełczyska. Soon afterwards Florkiewicz (2010) undertook a comprehensive description of Geto-Dacian coin finds from Poland and gave an overview of the status of research. The main deficiency of this particular contribution is the unwarranted inclusion by this researcher in the database of a number of coins with an unknown provenance now in keeping of some museums in Kraków. The group of published coins of Geto-Dacian provenance from present-day Poland includes nine Huși–Vovriești type tetradrachms (Hrebenne, powiat Hrubieszów, Medyka, powiat Przemyśl, Pełczyska, powiat Pińczów, Przemyśl-Kruhel Mały, powiat Przemyśl), a Rădulești–Hunedoara type (vicinity of Kraków) and a Vârteju–București type (Przemyśl-Zasanie, powiat Przemyśl). We can add to this list an early imitation of a Philip II tetradrachm (from Nowa Cerekwia, powiat Głubczyce) and two other of undetermined type (from Wschowa). A coin find we have to strike off our list – often published incorrectly as a find from Poland (from Działoszyn, distr. Zgorzelec) – is an Ocniţa–Cărbunești type tetradrachm from the German locality Königshain, Kreis Görlitz. A separate, still poorly understood group, are Dacian imitations of Republican denarii. Discoveries of Șimleul Silvaniei type armlets/bracelets north of the Carpathians and the Sudety Although at present we have a relatively well developed database and an appreciable number of publications, we cannot claim that the subject of penetration of influences from Pre-Roman Dacian cultures to the area north of the Carpathians and Sudety is understood sufficiently. Actually we find it hard to state with any accuracy the time-frame of this process, although one could expect this task to be relatively the easiest. We encounter many more problems when we set out trace the chronological rhythm and the nature of this influence as well as its geographic range. Consequently, we find it necessary to extend the conclusion of Madyda-Legutko (1996, 66) that the process of penetration of Dacian influence to the area of the Polish Carpathians is insufficiently well understood to other parts of the country. First of all it is hard to determine with what form of impact we are dealing in case of individual finds. When do they document contacts of commercial nature, other forms of exchange, and when do they attest to the physical presence of individual representatives, or even, entire groups – arrivals from the Carpathian Basin? In this situation every new source potentially helpful for investigating the group of issues addressed here merits special attention. And this brings us to the finds of bronze bracelets, possibly armlets,1 decorated with a cord ornament (Ringe mit schnurartiger Verzierung). They have been described in literature as ‘bracelets with a cord ornament, Șimleul Silvaniei type’, and also, as bracelets type 3, in the classification of the jewellery finds from Dacia (Rustoiu 1990; 1991; 1996). Even though the first finds of these bracelets were recorded in Poland as early as during the first half of the 20th century (Kumm 1912, 26–27; Rosen-Przeworska 1939, 122–123, fig. 31/1–2; Andrzejowski–Bursche 1987, 268–269, pl. VII/8) we can refer to them as ‘a new source’ for two reasons. First, the number of these finds has increased significantly over the recent years. Secondly, and more importantly, in Polish literature their typology and origin as a Dacian import were defined correctly only relatively recently (Rudnicki 2009, 306, 308). Previously, the Șimleul Silvaniei type was linked broadly to impact from the Celts (Andrzejowski 1994, 323), or even through them with Wielbark culture metalworking in the context of a phenomenon referred to as a ‘Celtic renaissance’ (Balke 1999, 69, 72). Definitely, the design of this bracelet form may be traced back to Celtic metalwork, but after the decline of La Tène culture it continued to evolve in the Dacian environ1 Depending on their diameter some of these finds can be interpreted as armlets, others as bracelets. In the present study we use these two terms interchangeably, unless the preservation of an individual specimen justifies the use of only one of them. 464 | M. Rudnicki ment, something which is discussed below. The only researchers to have a similar view on the origin of Șimleul Silvaniei type rings were Margos and Stąporek. Although from their database they left out most of the Romanian finds, after taking into consideration a number of potential ‘source environments’ they ultimately indicated the “eastern Celtic or Dacian world” as “the most likely” (Margos–Stąporek 2001, 261). Finds of Șimleul Silvaniei/Rustoiu 3 type armlets/bracelets have a broad distribution in Central European Barbaricum. One of the westernmost point on the map of their distribution (Fig. 1) is a type Rustoiu 3b from Lalendorf in Mecklenburg (Pl. 1/1), well known from archaeological literature (Keiling 1977, 137f., fig. 14). Due to the circumstances of discovery the context of this stray find is not fully clear. It is possible that this ornament was in an association with the remains of a skeleton discovered reportedly at the same time as a richly furnished inhumation burial from the turn of phases Roman-B1 and B2. The burial, supposedly of a woman, at least twenty-years old, was furnished – next to the armlet – with two bronze knobbed rings of Knotenring type (Pl. 1/3, 4) and a large amber bead (Pl. 1/2) (Keiling 1973, 132, 134, 164, fig. 84; 85/a, b; 86; Keiling 1977, fig. 6/5; 13/1, 2; 14). According to Keiling this assemblage was older (Eggers phase A) than the elite grave of another individual, presumably a thirteen years old female. Keiling’s hypothesis on the discovery of these two burials was questioned by von Richthofen who concluded that all the stray finds discovered at Lalendorf in 1970 come from one and the same grave inventory (von Richthofen 1993, 21, 25, 28–29). He argued that all three bronze rings belonged to a single suite of ornaments, even though their production must have occurred at a different time. His view was that the larger Knotenring (Pl. 1/4) and the armlet of interest to us here, originated from Eggers phase A. Irrespective of which of the two hypotheses is correct it appears that the Rustoiu 3b type armlet, the two knobbed rings and the amber bead actually belonged to the same assemblage. Its dating to the Pre-Roman period, while possible, is not certain because a somewhat later dating is also feasible (B1). Fig. 1. Finds of Șimleul Silvaniei / Rustoiu 3 type bracelets/armlets (for legend see Appendix 1 and the list of figures). Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 465 At least one more Șimleul Silvaniei type find comes from the Elbian environment. It is a fragment of a bracelet (Pl. 1/15) from a richly furnished cremation burial no. 2520 (Pl. 1/5–30) discovered in a gravefield at Plötzin in Brandenburg (Hundt 1935, 241, fig. 2/1; Seyer 1976, 170–171, pl. 21/a; Leube 2000, fig. 7/3). Other objects in this assemblage included a bronze bucket with dolphin-like attachments (Eggers type 18), a fragment of a pane of a bronze mirror, eight bronze pyriform pendants, bronze knobbed rings, a ‘good many’ glass beads, an amulet in the form of a hand with fingers clenched to form a ‘fig sign’, and two fibulae: Kostrzewski type M and type N. According to Leube (2000, 94) the burial dates from phase Roman-B1a, a dating justified by the conclusions of Th. Völling regarding the chronology of Kostrzewski type N fibulae, and the presence of the anthropomorphic amulet, which he recognized as a Roman import. However, the question of the dating of the assemblage is not as obvious as Leube believed. The presence of a frame-shaped catchment in the fibula discovered in grave 2520 helps to attribute it to as one of the more rare, older sub-variants of a form classified by Völling (2005, 124–125) as type Kostrzewski N-a. The same researcher demonstrated that this early variant is encountered in context both with materials typical for the close of the Pre-Roman period and with forms typical for the onset of the Roman period. This observation is confirmed by the situation recorded e.g., on the Lower Vistula where finds of type N fibulae are relatively well represented in sites of Oksywie culture (Bokiniec 2008, 48–50). In this context of some interest may be the rich inventory of a cremation pit burial (no. 33) discovered in a cemetery of Oksywie culture at Podwiesk, powiat Chełmno. Dated to phase A3, the inventory contained a fibula, variant N-a, with a frame-shaped catchment (Bokiniec 2005, 17–18, 96, pl. XV/12). There were also five bronze knobbed rings and three glass rings (Ringperle), type 23 and type 25 in the classification of Haevernick (1960). Glass rings of the same type, to judge from the drawing, and four (?) knobbed rings, are known also from grave no. 2520 in the cemetery at Plötzin. Kostrzewski N-a type fibulae surfaced in assemblages of Przeworsk culture, in the context of materials from phase A3 (Kurowicz–Olędzki 2002, 22–23, pl. XVII/1). The ‘fig sign’ amulet, a find unique in NE Germany (Leube 2000, 94), can hardly be regarded as a dating tool, even if it is a Roman import. We have to take into consideration the fact that during phases LT D1 and D2 there was intensification in the influx of Roman imports to the barbarian territory. Many Italic forms were imitated in workshops operating in the oppida (Pieta 1996). The question of provenance and dating of the fig-sign amulet is outside the scope of the present analysis but we have to note that similar amulets are known from Late La Tène sites, e.g., from oppidum Staré Hradisko (Čižmář 1989, fig. 2/7) and the settlement at Bořitov in Moravia (Čižmář 1990, fig. 2/8). In the view of M. Čižmář (2002, 212–213), Central European pendants in the form of a clenched fist have their prototypes in the Roman Republican environment but their local Celtic production is not out of the question either. A Late Celtic provenance needs to be ascribed also to the pyriform pendants, something which Čižmář already noted. This is because very similar ornaments have surfaced at the oppidum Staré Hradisko (Čižmář 2002, 208, 210, fig. 7, 10/5) and in hoard no. 10/2005 from the oppidum Pohanská at Plavecké Podhradie (Pieta 2010, photo F23/2). It seems therefore that the burial from Plötzin is slightly older than Leube postulated, i.e., it is from the close of the Pre-Roman period. And so, we can agree without any reservation only with a part of Leube’s assertion – repeated after Hundt (1935, 239–240) – that in the grave assemblage from Brandenburg we find echoes of Celtic and Roman culture impact. If there was any reception of Roman influences at all, most likely it occurred through the Celts. Given its preservation status there may be some doubt as to how to classify the bracelet decorated with a cord ornament a fragment of which turned up in the inventory of grave no. 2520. In its construction design this piece resembles most the rarely encountered variant Rustoiu 3c, but definitely it is not the same as the only specimen used as a basis in distinguishing this variant (Pl. 1/31) discovered at Popești (Rustoiu 1991, 146, fig. 1/2, with literature). At least one way in which the two differ is by the presence of knobs in the central part of the split body in the specimen from Plötzin. A fully preserved specimen (Pl. 1/33), variant 3a, was discovered at the site Krásný Les near to the Czech locality Nakléřov, okres Ústí nad Labem – next to the border with Saxony. Both the context and closer dating of this piece are a puzzle. This time also, a Șimleul Silvaniei type bracelet (?) was accompanied by a bronze Knotenring (Pl. 1/32) (Čižmář 2008, 230, fig. 3/1–2). The type of ornaments of interest to us is represented also in the inventory of finds from south-western Slovakia. We mean here an armlet – nearly identical as the one from Lalendorf – discovered at Gajary, okres Malacky. The site where this specimen was discovered was described as a “Late La Tène settlement” (Eisner 1933, 177, LIX/4; Zachar 1977, fig. 3/2), but only on the basis of surface finds. Consequently, we cannot be certain whether it is attributable to Celtic or to the somewhat later Germanic settlement. Therefore, it may seem rather 466 | M. Rudnicki unexpected that from the territory of Boiohaemum at large we have no finds of ornaments that correspond closely to the classification of Rustoiu which could be tied in a conclusive manner to the Celtic context. The answer to the question if this is only due the status of research or whether this situation is the result of some other factor could come from analysis of the hoard no. 10/2005 from the oppidum Pohanská at Plavecké Podhradie, okres Malacky (Slovakia). This assemblage, known only from general photographs (Pieta 2008, 368, photo F23; Pieta 2010, 400, photo F23/1, 2), contained e.g., four cord-ornamented pieces of jewellery (Fig. 2). In case of three of them, the details of construction and typological classification, determined based only on the published photograph, are problematic. It seems that only one of them (in Fig. 2/2 indicated by an arrow) can be a classic Șimleul Silvaniei type, one of the variants included in the classification of Rustoiu (3a?). Two more, definitely related to them typologically, differ in their construction design (prototypes?). All the other ornaments of the type under discussion were recorded in Romania or Poland, where their number has increased significantly in recent years. Fig. 2. Plavecké Podhradie, oppidum Pohanská, hoard no. 10/2005. 1. Selected objects (after Pieta 2008); 2. A part (?) of the objects (after Pieta 2010). The arrow marks the Șimleul Silvaniei type bracelet (Rustoiu type 3a?). Without scale. Discussing in 1994 links between Wielbark and Przeworsk cultures as reflected by the bracelet finds Andrzejowski (1994, 323) focused on six specimens with a cord ornament and traced them to the Celtic environment. Five of these pieces had surfaced in cemeteries of Wielbark culture: two bracelets from Lasy known for a long time (Rosen-Przeworska 1939, 122–123, fig. 31/1, 2), two from Malbork-Wielbark (Andrzejowski–Bursche 1987, 269, pl. VII/8; Andrzejowski–Martens 1996, pl. XXVII/3), finally, an as yet unpublished find from Małe Czyste. This last specimen was an element of the inventory of grave no. 2, dated to phase B1a of the Roman period (Andrzejowski 1994, 323). The preservation of this find (Margos–Stąporek 2001, fig. 8/a) significantly hinders its classification, although, very likely, it represents type Rustoiu 3a (Pl. 1/34). Of the two specimens from Malbork-Wielbark, one is certain to represent variant 3a (Pl. 1/38), of the other it is known only that it consisted of “two fragments of a similar bronze bracelet” (Andrzejowski–Bursche 1987, 269). The described ornaments turned up Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 467 in the inventory of a cremation pit burial no. 1703 (Andrzejowski–Bursche 1987, 269, pl. VII/2–8; Andrzejowski–Martens 1996, pl. XXVII/1703), said to be dated reliably to phase B1a (Andrzejowski 1994, 323). However, this dating is questioned by the presence in the same assemblage of an Almgren 45b fibula (Pl. 1/36) which has a chronological covering from phase B1a to phase B1b (Droberjar 1999, 74–75). From the perspective of the inquiry made here, other elements of furnishings of burial no. 1703 (Pl. 1/35–41) appear to be of major interest. They included a bronze knobbed ring, glass beads, including a fragment of a large specimen in blue glass (Ringperle?), and an openwork pendant (Pl. 1/39). Once more, in a single assemblage we find a type Șimleul Silvaniei bracelet as an element of a similar set of objects (Knotenringe, Ringperle), and what is more, the openwork pendant from Malbork-Wielbark, despite obvious differences, resembles the ornament from Plötzin in Brandenburg (Pl. 1/20). The dating and the context of the complete bracelets from Lasy, known in literature for many years, was clarified somewhat by Margos and Stąporek. In the archives of the Archaeological Museum in Gdańsk they succeeded in identifying photographs of a group of finds discovered at Lasy in 1910, including also ornaments of interest to us, and a note on their subject (Margos–Stąporek 2001, 250, fig. 1; 5/a, b). Based on the analysis of this archival material they considered that all the objects discovered there presumably belong to a single inhumation burial of Wielbark culture (previously the same site was used as a cemetery by the Oksywie culture) from phase B1, most likely, its older segment B1a, which, however, cannot be taken for granted. Other objects discovered by accident at Lasy in 1910 were three bronze fibulae and fragments of a necklace consisting of 42 or 43 beads (Margos–Stąporek 2001, 253–254, fig. 2; 4; 6). One of them was made of rock crystal, the rest were glass. Among the latter were specimens decorated with the ‘eye’ ornament and inserts of gold foil, as in grave no. 1703 at Malbork-Wielbark. The position of the three fibulae in the archival photograph greatly impedes their typological classification. Margos and Stąporek determined one of them (Pl. 2/5) as Almgren type 2b, the two other (Pl. 2/3–4) as Almgren type 45. The classification of the first of the fibulae is open to most serious reservations. If one takes into account the broad bow and the shape of the knob, contrary to what Margos and Stąporek suggest, it resembles more prototype forms of Kragenfibeln, the so-called Vorform Bern-Gergovia (BöhmeSchönberger 1994, fig. 5/1–3), identical with variant 10a2 in the system of Feugère (1985, 243–245 and footnote no. 99). The Kragenfibeln from Poland were listed recently (Rudnicki 2009, 310, 312, fig. 8/3, 9), and earlier, by Andrzejowski (2005), who distinguished the variant Obory–Konopnica–Nitriansky Hrádok, which encompasses prototypes of Kragenfibeln proper, produced in the western areas of Celtica during the third quarter of the 1st century BC (Andrzejowski 2005, 62), or, approximately, from the onset of phase A3 in Przeworsk culture. Much less open to controversy is the classification of the two other fibulae which definitely represent type Almgren 45 although it is hard to say which of its variants. It is quite likely that the larger specimen (Margos–Stąporek 2001, fig. 2, 4/b) represents type Almgren 45b (Pl. 2/4), the dating of which was mentioned earlier in this text. In view of the described circumstances the problem of the context of the bracelets from Lasy can hardly be regarded as solved. This is because we cannot rule out that they originate from a destroyed grave of Oksywie culture from the Pre-Roman period rather than from a grave of Wielbark culture from phase B1 of the Roman period. One thing seems certain: both pieces belong to a single set of ornaments. Margos and Stąporek concluded that all the finds from Lasy were lost during World War II. Meanwhile, during an inquiry made by Żórawska in the museum in Kwidzyn it turned out that one of the bracelets from Lasy is now in keeping of this museum (Żórawska 2005, 282, no. 7, fig. 6/1). The ornament (Pl. 2/1), displaying the features of type Rustoiu 3a, presumably is identical with the larger of the two specimens shown in the photographs preserved in the archive of the museum in Gdańsk (Margos–Stąporek 2001, fig. 5/a). There is no doubt that the second bracelet (Pl. 2/2), of a slightly smaller diameter but chunkier, should be classified within the same type. Another bracelet decorated with a cord ornament possibly associated with Wielbark culture classified as Rustoiu 3a type is known from Lubiechowo, possibly, from a cemetery (Kunkel 1936, 22, footnote no. 92). Its drawing (Pl. 2/6) survives in the index card file of Eggers, now in the archive of the National Museum in Szczecin. Once again, we owe our intelligence about this specimen to the query of sources made by Margos and Stąporek (Margos–Stąporek 2001, 258, fig. 7/d). The two researchers have made a series of valuable observations related to the ornaments of interest to us, which they described as “bracelets with windows”. The point of departure for their analysis was the finds from Lasy. Looking for analogies they succeeded in collecting information on twelve similar finds, from eleven sites in Central Europe, but only three from Dacia. Their partly incorrect conclusions on the chronology of type Rustoiu 3 bracelets presumably are the consequence of the incomplete source base. 468 | M. Rudnicki There was a similar situation with Balke (1999, 69, 72, fig. 8), who at a slightly earlier date took interest in Șimleul Silvaniei armlet finds from Poland. Her analysis included only five of them, even so overlooking the find from Małe Czyste. Except for the armlet from Șimleul Silvaniei she did not take into account the rest of analogical finds from the territory of Dacia. This approach resulted incorrect conclusions, including the hypothesis about their local production, supposedly, during phase B1a of the Roman period, supported according to Balke by the concentration of the five similar bracelets in the region on the Lower Vistula and in northern Masovia. Moreover, she argued that the bracelets spread over great distances, all the way to Mecklenburg. The ‘bracelet with windows’ from northern Masovia taken into account by Balke was a complete specimen (Pl. 2/11) from the cemetery at Niedanowo – used also by the people of the Wielbark culture, starting from phase B2b of the Roman period (Ziemlińska-Odojowa 1999, 140) – mentioned briefly by Andrzejowski (1994, 323). Until recently, the only specimen of the type under discussion from the Przeworsk culture territory, classified as variant Rustoiu 3a, was an element of the inventory of a pit cremation burial, recorded as grave no. 478 (Ziemlińska-Odojowa 1999, 85, pl. CLXXIV; CCLI/3). Two analyses were made of human bone remains from this deposit, bringing disparate results. One determination was that the grave was of two individuals: a woman aged approximately 20–25, and a child of twelve months or thereabouts. The other determination was of a single individual, a woman aged around 25–35. Włodzimiera Ziemlińska-Odojowa, author of the analysis of the cemetery at Niedanowo determined the discussed bracelet as a Knotenring deriving from the Celtic territory. Citing the studies of Keiling (1977), Andrzejowski–Bursche (1987) and Andrzejowski (1994), she concluded that the chronology of this type of ornament belonged to the phase A of the Pre-Roman period and B1a of the Roman period (Ziemlińska-Odojowa 1999, 114). Among the inventory of grave no. 478 from Niedanowo were two identical knobbed rings – one complete (Pl. 2/9) and the other fragmentary – some burnt glass beads (rings?) and fragments of two bronze fibulae. One of these (Pl. 2/7) is likely to be Almgren type 45b (on its dating see above) but the chronology of the entire inventory is decided by the fragment of the second fibula (Pl. 2/8). This is one of the older variants of trumpet fibulae of the main group (Almgren 77?) which should be dated on the whole not earlier than to phase B1b (Droberjar 1999, 84). The glass beads from the inventory of interest, presumably because of their preservation, were not classified. We do not know therefore whether there were any Ringperle among them but worth noting is the co-occurrence of bronze knobbed rings with a Șimleul Silvaniei type bracelet. The question of the provenance of the ornaments of this type discovered north of the Carpathians was addressed by the author of the present paper in the study of the culture situation in western Lesser Poland at the close of the La Tène and onset of the Roman period (Rudnicki 2009, 306, 308, fig. 7). Their number increased by a find from the settlement of the Tyniec group at Pełczyska. The fragment (Pl. 2/14) is too small to make a conclusive typological classification. Nevertheless, the most likely interpretation is that it is an armlet, as suggested by the thickness of the surviving fragment, a type 3a or 3b. Taking into account the specimens from Gajary and Lalendorf – presumably the closest in size – this latter identification appears the more probable. Soon afterwards, during an archaeological investigation made in the same settlement a fragment of another armlet (?) with a corded ornament (Pl. 2/15) came to light. It represents a hitherto unknown variant of ornaments discussed here, much more elaborate in form. The main modifications had been made to the form of the rings separating the body which now became a part of a fairly heavy openwork rod of biconical shape. At the same time the number of the decorative knobs had been reduced: at the junction of the ring with the rod instead of three only one was left. It seems that the body was decorated with one strand of twisted wire only, attached at the top. The find under discussion is different from Rustoiu 3a and 3b, therefore we propose to name, for the time being – with reference to the established typology – Rustoiu 3d. Both fragments of the armlets from Pełczyska are stray finds discovered in the ploughed topsoil. The dating and reconstruction of circumstances in which they found their way to the region are based on the analysis of the overall cultural context recorded within the settlement and the cemetery associated with it, or more broadly in western Lesser Poland. The rhythm of settlement and culture change in this region during the 1st century BC and at the onset of the Roman period (phases LT D1 / Roman-B1a) was quite complex (Rudnicki 2009, 324–327). The area of western Lesser Poland, inhabited by the Celts until the close of phase LT B, suffered during the older phase of the Late La Tène period (LT D1) a total collapse of the existing settlement network. This process may have started back at the close of the Middle La Tène period if we are to judge by inventories from settlements which contain no chronologically diagnostic objects younger than LT C2. Soon after, presumably around the turn of phases LT D1 and D2, when the Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 469 area of Púchov culture was swept by a wave of destruction, new settlers came to western Lesser Poland. One group was mostly Celtic craftsmen from the northern region of the Carpathian Basin (around Zemplin), tangible in the archaeological record as ‘the Celto-Dacian horizon’. We may assume that this was a small but nevertheless influential group. Around the same time as the Celts and from the same region came small Dacian groups and, from a different direction altogether a large wave of the Przeworsk population. Next to the prevailing Germanic population this latter group may have included small groups of people of a different ethnic stock, as suggested by a small number of inhumation graves from the second half of the 1st century BC. This culturally mixed and, presumably, multi-ethnic company, referred to as the Tyniec group (of Przeworsk culture, Rudnicki 2009, 327), may have formed a social structure at the head of which were mainly Celtic elites grouped in a number of settlements in the region of Kraków. This however does not mean that this structure did not take in the rest of Post-Celtic areas in western Lesser Poland. There is confirmation to be found in material culture, including imports, which display a considerable diversity at the opposite ends of the region. The only manifestation of differences between the two is the frequency of painted pottery in finds inventories from individual sites. Still during phase B1a of the Roman period another change in settlement is observed in western Lesser Poland, probably the result of new migrations. The cluster of settlements around Kraków was abandoned. The activity of Celtic potteries producing painted wares and of mints supplying the gold Boii coins stopped. The Celts and their culture are no longer visible in the archaeological material suggesting that the people had left the region. How do the finds from Pełczyska, a settlement approximately 55 km north-east of Kraków, fit in this picture? During the Middle La Tène period it was one of the richest Celtic centres in Lesser Poland (sites: 1, 2, 4). It was established soon after the arrival of this people from the South. The oldest horizon of finds, datable to the end of phase LT B2 (?) and to LT C1 phase, is represented by inventories with Celtic ceramics, without Przeworsk culture components. In the settlement features the predominant form is wheelthrown pottery (fired in a reducing atmosphere and with an admixture of graphite), accompanied by glass and sapropelite bracelets and plentiful metal finds. Attributable to the same horizon are the remains of a scattered hoard of tetradrachms, type Huși–Vovriești (Rudnicki 2003, 16–20). The richness of the finds inventory from this period places the settlement at Pełczyska, among the most important sites in the region, presumably with the rank of a local centre of production and trade. Celtic settlement at Pełczyska flourished uninterrupted throughout phase LT C2. This was also the time of the appearance in the area of small groups of the Przeworsk culture people, indicated by finds of their ‘older style’ pottery in contexts with Celtic material. It seems that this relationship, recorded within the settlement at the end of the Middle La Tène, carried over into the early LT D1 phase. It seems moreover that it was quite good, as suggested by the find of an imported Nauheim type bronze fibula (Rudnicki 2009, fig. 6/1), 1/8 stater struck in Lesser Poland and a lump of gold weighing 6.34 gram and gold content of a little over 80% (Rudnicki 2003, 4). The latter is certain to be the semi-product of a gold stater, suggesting local coinage activity in the early 1st century BC. The changes in the settlement model of the Tyniec group at Pełczyska were associated with a major transformation of culture. Traces of physical presence of the Celts, including local pottery-making, are no longer tangible. Apparently there was a sudden collapse of settlement and an exodus of the Celtic population from the area. On the same spot a new settlement (site 2) was set up, on a different culture model. This is shown by changes in the ceramic inventory (which corresponds to the inventory of settlements in the Kraków region, only there is little painted pottery), and even in the construction of dwellings. Change is visible also in the sphere of ideology: a number of canine burials were discovered within the settlement, and a cemetery was started nearby, while the site of burial of members of the Celtic community at Pełczyska continues to be elusive. In the archaeological literature one may even come across an incorrect view, that the settlement at Pełczyska started around the middle of the 1st century BC lay in the zone of settlement of ‘pure’ Przeworsk culture (Woźniak 1996, 169). Most elements foreign to the inventory of this culture from the latter half of the 1st century BC and the first two or three decades of the next (phases Roman-A3 / LT D2 / Roman-B1a) recorded at Pełczyska need to be derived from the area of Dacia. This is mainly handmade pottery decorated with plastic ornaments (Pl. 3/2–3), which in the archaeological features accompanies Przeworsk ‘younger style’ ceramics. Also present in the ceramic series from the settlement are vessels which originated as a result of the interpenetration of the Dacian and the Przeworsk pottery tradition. The best example of this type of forms is a fully reconstructed approximately 13 cm tall jar (Pl. 3/3). Its S-profile and an un-thickened, rounded rim and plastic bosses with a dent applied onto the maximum perimeter of the vessel body, are attributes of Dacian ceramics. The technology of execution, 470 | M. Rudnicki e.g., fine-grained temper, the firing to a brown colour, characteristic for ‘early Przeworsk’ ceramics and an original method of rustication reaching the maximum perimeter are attributes typical for the pottery tradition of Przeworsk culture. Vessels of Dacian provenance are also represented in the pottery series from the nearby cemetery, e.g., by a form known as ‘ceașca dacică’ the Dacian cup (Pl. 3/1), discovered in grave no. 4/2005, dated to phase A3 (LT D2). The presence of handmade Dacian vessels, often made with little care, and adoption of forms characteristic for them and of ornamentation in the pottery-making of Przeworsk culture, should be treated as confirmation of the presence of Dacian groups in western Lesser Poland at the close of La Tène period and the onset of the Roman period. Presumably, with this chronological horizon we can associate the stray find from the settlement at Pełczyska of a hybrid imitation of a Roman Republican denarius. Its obverse, with the bust of Diana, was borrowed from a denarius (serratus) of Tiberius Claudius Nero, struck in 79 BC (Crawford 1974, no. 383/1). The reverse, with an image of Victoria in a biga over a warrior fighting a lion, comes from a denarius of Cn. Domitius Calvinus or Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus, struck in 128 BC (Crawford 1974, no. 261/1). The imitation of a Republican coin from Pełczyska (Pl. 3/4) was probably coined in Dacia, where such coins were produced in large numbers, also hybrid imitations of Tiberius Claudius Nero (Davis 2006, 331). Finds that we can provenance to Dacian cultures are quite common also in other settlements of the Tyniec group in the area around Kraków at large. These however are mostly fragments of pottery and on the whole account for just a few percent in the ceramic inventories in individual settlements (Poleska 2006, 115). An exception is the Șimleul Silvaniei type bracelets; outside Pełczyska they are recorded at two more sites. One of these is the settlement at nearby Jakuszowice, from which comes a fragment of a presumably Rustoiu 3a type bracelet (Pl. 3/5), discovered during a surface survey (Margos–Stąporek 2001, 260, fig. 8/b). There is no doubt as to the classification to variant 3a of a random find of an armlet fragment (Pl. 3/6) from Nowe Brzesko, at a small distance north-east of Kraków. We may assume that the time and circumstances of arrival of these ornaments in western Lesser Poland were similar in all four cases and had to do with the functioning of the Tyniec group during the phases LT D2 (A3) and Roman-B1a, or in absolute dating, the second half of the 1st century BC and the first two or three decades of the next century. Three new finds of bracelets of interest to us here were recorded recently in central Poland, on the territory settled by Przeworsk culture people. Two of these, from Brodnia and Jastrzębniki, were recently the subject of a separate publication (Rudnicki–Miłek 2011). The first is a fragment of a Rustoiu 3a type armlet (Pl. 3/7), from a stray find made on the east shore of Lake Jeziorsko, a large storage reservoir on the Warta River. In the area indicated by the finder as the find spot on the surface of the topsoil there was a substantial quantity of Przeworsk culture ceramics from the younger Pre-Roman period and the Roman period, documenting the existence at this location of a settlement or a burial ground. The stray find fragment of an armlet from Jastrzębniki (Pl. 3/8) represents the same variant as the specimen from Brodnia, only it comes from regular archaeological fieldwork. On its surface there are clear traces of high temperature suggesting that it comes from the inventory of a destroyed cremation burial (?). The settlement context of this find is much better understood than of the find from Brodnia. Jastrzębniki lies on the right bank of the Prosna, about 10 km to the north-west of Kalisz. The multicultural site from which comes the fragment of the ornament lies on the high scarp of the Prosna. Its area is almost 40.000 m2. The oldest traces of occupation are associated with the closing phases of Lusatian culture. Subsequently the settlement was used by the people of Przeworsk culture, starting from somewhere during the Pre-Roman period until at least the end of phase C of the Roman period. For many years the area around Jastrzębniki has been an object of interest of archaeologists and numismatists, the name of this locality being known in literature (Rudnicki–Miłek 2011, with earlier bibliography). Surface surveys and excavations made over many seasons at Jastrzębniki and around it have documented intensive occupation during the Pre-Roman and the Roman period. The name of this locality is among the most significant sites of that age on the Middle Prosna River. Archaeological fieldwork resumed at Jastrzębniki in 2008 brought entire series of finds datable to the Pre-Roman and the Roman period and documented directions of extensive contacts sustained by the local population. In this group of these as yet mostly unpublished finds are: an iron Jastorf fibula wrapped in bronze foil, two bronze elements from astragal belts, a fragment of a bronze mirror of Eastern Alpine provenance, a bronze Kostrzewski type G fibula, a Gaulish fibula derivative of type Aucissa, and an iron axe-head with a rectangular sleeve. Among the coin finds three are Celtic issues (Rudnicki ET AL. 2009, 104), including two 1/8 stater of a form recognized as a local type of late Boii emissions of ‘Janków type’ (Rudnicki ET AL. 2009, 109, no. 13, 14). Presumably, they were struck in the vicinity of today’s Jastrzębniki, in a settlement identified at the nearby Janków Drugi where at least Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 471 eleven late Celtic coins were discovered as well as bars of metal used in minting. The third coin discovered at Jastrzębniki is a subaeratus of a 1/3 stater (Rudnicki ET AL. 2009, 108, no. 12), an oppidum import from beyond the Carpathians. Still back in the Pre-Roman period Roman Republican denarii were brought to the region on the Middle Prosna (Rudnicki–Ziąbka 2010, 19). One of them could be the denarius of Quintus Antonius Balbus from 83–82 BC discovered at Jastrzębniki (Romanowski 2010, 33). Regrettably, little is known about the stray find of a complete type 3a armlet from the area of Skierniewice.2 We were unable to obtain closer details on circumstances of discovery, other than its low quality photographs (Pl. 3/9) and information about the approximate location of the find spot. The fine condition of this piece suggests that the bracelet could have been part of a grave inventory (?). Even so, it bears no traces of high temperature whatsoever, something we could expect to see in such a case. Taking into account what is known of the prehistory of this area during the Pre-Roman and the Roman period we may assume that the supposed burial would have been a Przeworsk culture one.3 An older find is the fragment of a bracelet (?) with a cord ornament from the archaeological research made in 1964–1972 in a Przeworsk culture cemetery at Kleszewo. As yet no information about this piece has been published in archaeological literature.4 This partly melted fragment (Pl. 3/10; 4/16) is made of a round-sectioned central rod about 0.4 mm in diameter, and three twisted wires, each with a diameter of about 0.15 mm. In the site documentation this specimen was described (no. of the field inventory 614/615/s.1/68) as one of the objects from pit 614/615; presumably, it was lifted from the feature when it still appeared to be a single deposit; at a greater depth it separated into two features found next to each other, recorded as no. 614 and 615 (inv. no. MSHM/A/481). In the end, the stratigraphic relationship between the two pits, identified as the remains of cremation burials, was not determined. Analysis of both assemblages made by the author proved that not only they display far-reaching similarities but they even contain fragments of the same vessels. We cannot rule out therefore that this was actually a single feature of a non-standard shape, or possibly, two related burials, deposited in the ground at the same time. The only more serious difference between the inventories of features 614 and 615 after they were separated is that the latter is much richer. From these assemblages (assemblage?) comes a total of 29 fragments of melted glass objects (Fig. 3), not less than 25 of them attributed to the inventory of burial 615, and a single object – to burial 614, the rest 5 – had been recovered before the outlines of the pits had separated (614/615). The majority is damaged to an extent which makes typological identification impossible. Because of surface corrosion for some of them it was even impossible to identify the colour of the glass. Where this could be done it was mostly transparent honeycoloured or brown glass (Fig. 3/2–15, 28), blue (Fig. 3/1, 20, 25) greenish (Fig. 3/16, 18) and possibly violet (Fig. 3/22). The list closes with two balls of white opaque glass (Fig. 3/17, 26). Fig. 3. Kleszewo, glass inventory of the graves no. 614 and 615. 2 3 4 I wish to thank mgr Sławomir Miłek, who kindly informed me about bracelet from the area of Skierniewice. The problems with obtaining closer information about the find are the consequence of the defective law now in force in Poland on heritage objects discovered in the ground. Until this law is changed information about this category of sources will not be available to the research community at all, or only with great difficulty. But without this input our understanding of the past not only will be far from comprehensive but, outright, divorced from reality, which after all is the object of archaeological inquiry. I wish to thank dr Andrzej Maciałowicz for drawing my attention to these two assemblages, and even more particularly, to Dorota Słowińska, Director of the Museum of Ancient Mazovian Metallurgy, who very kindly made it possible for me to analyze them. 472 | M. Rudnicki It is hard to confirm conclusively to what extent these retain the original shape of the object or objects. Balls of white opaque glass appear sporadically among La Tène culture material datable to the Middle and Late La Tène period (Zepezauer 1993, 91–93). Finds which may be identified reliably include the remains of beads of blue glass, and even more so, of brown glass. The former are not a good dating tool, since small beads of blue glass are known from a broad chronological and geographic framework (Venclová 1990, 49–50). Much more useful are the Haevernick 23 and 25 type glass rings (Ringperle). A ring (or rings) of brown glass with an ornament in the form of parallel bands of a yellow substance survived in feature 615 in the form of two partly melted fragments, the third was recovered before the outlines of pits 614 and 615 became separate (Fig. 3/4, 5, 28). Haevernick 23 type Ringperle are ornaments characteristic for phase LT D1, the horizon of type Nauheim fibulae (Zepezauer 1993, 58, 95, fig. 8). Previously, from the territory of Poland some 13 (possibly 15) finds of rings of this type were known (Karwowski 1997, 44) including seven from the area of the Oksywie culture (Bokiniec 2005, 100). Specimens in brown glass, analogically to the finds under discussion, are known from Błonie, powiat Sandomierz, Rumia, powiat Wejherowo, and from that same Kleszewo, where two fragments were present in grave no. 48 (Karwowski 1997, 59, 60, 63, no. 4, 12, 23, with literature). From grave no. 615 comes a fragment of a type 25 ring, made of brown glass (Fig. 3/3). This type also may be regarded as characteristic for the Late La Tène period (phase LT D1, possibly the beginning of LT D2) taking into account the knobbed rings with which it has appeared in contexts (Zepezauer 1993, 59, 95, fig. 8). Until recently from Poland ten similar finds were known (Karwowski 1997, 44) but their number has increased significantly in recent years (Bokiniec 2005, 100). An analogous ring of brown glass with a yellow decoration comes from the settlement at Jakuszowice (Karwowski 1997, 60, no. 9, with literature). Finds of glass rings are numerous in the south from which area they were imported to the north of the Carpathians and the Sudety. Haevernick 23–25 type specimens formed part of the deposit from the oppidum Pohanská at Plavecké Podhradie (Pieta 2008, 194, 367, 368, photo F22/6, F23; Pieta 2010, 399, 400, photo F22/6, F23). The only metal object from feature 614 is a fragment of a melted and strongly distorted Knotenring type ring. During the exploration of the fill of grave 615, next to a number of unidentified lumps of bronze at least four fragments of two rings of the same type were recovered (Pl. 4/13, 14). More fragments – possibly of one of these – were discovered before the fill of pits 614 and 615 separated (Pl. 4/15, 17). A find from feature 615 worth special attention is a partly preserved bronze mirror handle (Pl. 4/12). Similar finds from the territory of Central European Barbaricum are relatively rare. Their up-to-date, not fully comprehensive list is included in a publication of a bronze mirror handle from a settlement at Pasieka Otfinowska, powiat Tarnów (Szpunar–Dulęba 2009, 128, fig. 14). Mirrors were already in use among the inhabitants of Bohemian oppida, as evidenced by the find from Stradonice, okres Beroun (Pič 1903, pl. XXVIII/11). According to Pieta (1996, 193) this type of toiletry item could have been produced in workshops in the oppida in Boiohaemum. However, most of the finds from Barbaricum definitely belong in a later period, the time of manufacture of metal ornaments and dress accessories in the Norican-Pannonian style. Mirrors with an openwork tear-drop handle which presumably had their centre of production in the Easten Alpine region, were especially popular at the close of the La Tène period and the onset of the Roman period (Szpunar–Dulęba 2009, 136). As is shown by a slightly later find from the elite grave in Lalendorf, there were also other ways of attaching and securing the mirror pane (Keiling 1973, 160–161). Outside Lubieszewo and Kleszewo, seven finds of similar mirrors have been recorded in Poland so far. One comes from a grave-field of Wielbark culture at Elbląg-Nowe Pole. The others form two concentrations, with three specimens each: on territory of the Tyniec group (Kraków-Mogiła, Pasieka Otfinowska, Pełczyska) and in Central Poland (Charłupia Mała, Jastrzębniki, Zadowice), that is, exactly in the same region from which we have Șimleul Silvaniei type bracelets. A handle identical with the find from Kleszewo was discovered in a cemetery of Przeworsk culture at Charłupia Mała, in grave no. 25 dated to phase A3 (Kurowicz–Olędzki 2002, 22–23, pl. XVII/2). This is the same feature from which comes the Kostrzewski N-a type fibula mentioned earlier. It is notable that Charłupia Mała is just 20 km to the south of Brodnia, the site of discovery of one of the Șimleul Silvaniei bracelets. On the other hand, a stray find of a mirror handle from Jastrzębniki comes from the same site as the bracelet Rustoiu 3a. There is a little more than 20 km between Jastrzębniki and Zadowice, which yielded the find of a fully preserved mirror with a handle similar to the one from Kleszewo. It was a part of the furnishings of grave no. 773, dated to phase A3, discovered in a cemetery of Przeworsk culture (Kaszewska 1982, 186, pl. I/2). Finds of mirrors recorded in Lesser Poland so far are attributable to Tyniec group settlement. The fragment from Kraków-Mogiła was discovered in a culture layer dated to phases LT D1b–D2 Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 473 (Szpunar–Dulęba 2009, 129–130), which in the chronology of the Pre-Roman period corresponds approximately to phase A3. The feature no. 5 from Pasieka Otfinowska datable to the same period next to an openwork tear-drop mirror handle yielded a Haevernick 23 type glass ring (Szpunar–Dulęba 2009, 126, fig. 2/c). The fragment of a mirror pane from Pełczyska (Rudnicki 2007, 98, fig. 4/10) admittedly is a stray find from the area of the cemetery but the vast majority of materials from this site are attributable to phases A3 and B1. The dating of graves no. 614 and 615 from Kleszewo is decided by the analysis of ceramic forms present in their inventory. The first of them included 17 fragments of handmade pots and three fragments of Celtic painted ceramics. Forms characteristic among the handmade wares include: a facetted rim, triangle-sectioned, from an unidentified vessel (Pl. 4/5), fragments of barrel-shaped pots (handled cups?) with an undefined rim (Pl. 4/3, 4), a hemispherical bowl with an inverted and diagonally truncated rim (Pl. 4/1). Differently from barrel-shaped cups with a handle of various sizes, this type of bowl is not a form widespread on the territory of Przeworsk culture (Marciniak 1957, pl. II). Not so in areas of Tyniec group settlement in western Lesser Poland where they are noted much more often (Woźniak 1990, 46, basins type XXIII-3b). The ceramic inventory of feature 615 comprises 95 fragments of handmade vessels and 42 fragments of Celtic painted ceramics (Pl. 4/11). Even though the characteristic fragments of handmade vessels are relatively few in this series we may conclude that they represent a set of forms and ornamentation typical for Przeworsk culture pottery-making tradition from phase A3. One of the bowls (Pl. 4/8) is a leading form for this phase (Dąbrowska 1988, pl. V/78). Other dating tools are the Celtic wheel-thrown vessels fired in an oxidising environment, with a painted decoration. The burnt fragments of pottery from graves 614 and 615 in Kleszewo still retain visible remains of white and red paint. These luxury ceramics are certain to be imports from settlements of the Tyniec group in the region of Kraków, where during the second half of the 1st century BC and at the onset of the next (phases LT D2 / B1a) there were centres of production of this pottery. The ceramics secured from features no. 614 and 615 before they separated (91 fragments described in the inventory as feature 614/615) in no way differ from the material presented above. We are left then with the key question of whether the fragment of the personal ornament from Kleszewo decorated with a cord ornament may be classified to type Șimleul Silvaniei or not? Its alternative feasible interpretation would be an ornament in the form of a ring similar to the one discovered, e.g. in a Late La Tène settlement at Bořitov, okres Blansko in Moravia (Čižmář 1990, 313, fig. 2/7). Because of its exposure to high temperature during cremation it is doubtful whether the chemical analysis (see Appendix 2) of this specimen will help resolve the above question. Thus we are left only with evidence from the analysis of the archaeological context. Ring-like ornaments from Bořitov belong to a group of relatively rare finds, most of which originate from the Eastern Alpine Region (Čižmář 2002, 216, fig. 17). Analogical finds are known from Velem St. Vid, Šmarjeta and Novo Mesto (Guštin–Teržan 1975; Božič 1993, 146), and also, from the hoard no. 10/2005 from Plavecké Podhradie (Fig. 2/2) (Pieta 2010, photo F23/2). In the view of Božič (1993, 146) they are evidence on exchange between the inhabitants of today’s Slovenia and Central Europe. However, to my knowledge, in the area north of the Carpathians so far not one find of this type has been recorded. Not so with Șimleul Silvaniei type bracelets which were brought north of the Carpathians already during phase A3. At the same time, the coexistence of the latter in grave assemblages with other objects derived from the Celtic tradition (Kleszewo, Lasy, Niedanowo, Plötzin) does not automatically prove that they were produced on the territory of La Tène culture. This is because some of them, like the bronze knobbed rings, were evidently manufactured also outside that area. Their finds in Transylvania are equally or possibly more numerous, than on the territory of Boiohaemum. They are known also from Moldavia, Dobrogea and the northern Black Sea region, where their production has been confirmed at Olbia (Čižmář 2002, 206, with literature). In our view it is most likely that the find decorated with a cord ornament discovered at Kleszewo is a fragment of a Rustoiu 3 type bracelet, although we still cannot rule other interpretations. And so, in our analysis we have reached a question which is in need of a broader discussion. It has to do with the origin of ornaments classified by Rustoiu as type 3, more particularly, their finds from the area north of the Carpathians and the Sudety. The hypothesis proposed by Balke, that they are a local product – whether of Wielbark culture or Przeworsk culture – does not find confirmation in the source material. First of all it is contradicted by the distribution of Șimleul Silvaniei ornaments which appear to concentrate in Transylvania, especially in the south-western part (Fig. 1). Outside this area their finds either have a thin distribution or form small concentrations, visibly restricted in territory, as in western Lesser Poland 474 | M. Rudnicki and the Lower Vistula region. Not less relevant in this case is the lack of a tradition of manufacture of this type of ornament in both these cultures. To gain more insight on the origin of pieces under discussion we turn to the results of chemical analyses made of their metal alloy composition (see Appendix 2). This was done with X-ray fluorescence analysis using two different spectrometers (for energy dispersive: ED XRF and wavelength dispersive: WD XRF). Five objects were examined, the only that were available for this sort of analysis. Samples were taken from their surface, cleaned down to its raw metal. Contrary to appearances the measurement results obtained from X-ray spectrography are not so easy to interpret. Nevertheless, what is apparent is the high, and in case of the armlet from Brodnia, even very high percentage of lead in the alloy. At the same time, we find it hard to explain the wide range of results obtained for this element (10.78–24.42%). Presumably, this could be the effect of an uneven mixing of the components of the alloy with different concentrations of lead. We have to take into account the potential error associated with this situation since all the measurements were of one-off type. The third component in the case of all the analyzed objects, next to copper and lead, is tin, its content at a similarly high level. Except for the armlet from Nowe Brzesko in which the content of tin was found to be below 1%. Also outstanding in the group is the composition of the specimen from Jastrzębniki, with lead content on the level of 1%. In this case it seems likely that this is because the armlet from Jastrzębniki had been exposed to high temperatures (cremation?). We can easily imagine that lead – with its low melting point – was the first to melt and escape in the heat. In any case, its present percentage on a level of more than 1% may be regarded as relatively high. In comparing the results of analysis of five ornaments, different in size and form, discovered at some distance from each other, we cannot ignore the similarity of their material. Consequently we can risk a hypothesis that a special type of copper alloy was used in the making of Șimleul Silvaniei type bracelets/armlets, one with a relatively high lead content (average: 9.81%), and a not much lower tin content (average: 6.38%) and a small admixture, observed regularly, of molybdenum (average: 0.71%). This hypothesis obviously needs confirmation which will be possible once we have a longer series of analyses of these forms. But even at this stage we can say with conviction that this type of alloy lacks analogy among Przeworsk culture bronzes (Andrzejowski 1998, 125–130) recorded so far. This fact has the force of an unambiguous confirmation that we have here imports manufactured outside the Przeworsk territory, and certainly, also outside the territory settled by the people of Wielbark culture, also because of a conflict between its chronology and some finds of ornaments under discussion. In looking for an alternative place of manufacture Eastern Alpine workshops cannot be an option because, at least at the onset of the Roman period, the alloy commonly used by them was aurichalcum (Droberjar–Frána 2004). It would have been interesting to compare the results of our analysis with the ones made of the finds from the cemetery at Podwiesk (Bokiniec 2005, 161–164). Unfortunately, without a commentary they are hard to interpret. It is unclear which of the analyzed objects was cremated and whether their surface was treated in any way, and if so, in what way. Objects with a high, and even a very high, lead content were relatively numerous. Even so, lead content of as much as 30%, even 96% (!) gives rise to various reservations. All that we may conclude is that almost invariably the objects which have a high lead and tin content in the alloy are the perplexing ‘ordinary’ rings of obscure function having a circular, oval, semi-circular and lonzengic crosssection (Bokiniec 2005, 102). Aurel Rustoiu – author of the classification system for Șimleul Silvaniei type bracelets with a cord ornament, and of the largest number of their analyses (Rustoiu 1990; 1991; 1992; 1996) – described them at first as ‘Dacian’ ones. Sometime later he changed his theory and concluded that they cannot be given an ‘ethnic’ attribution since they appear across a large area of East-Central Europe and were used by different populations. He sought their origin – to our belief, most correctly – in the Celtic environment, where similar objects executed in a plastic style appear already during the Middle La Tène period. At the same time, Rustoiu concluded that the majority of Șimleul Silvaniei forms originated from the area of Transylvania where their production centre would have been (Rustoiu 1996, 95). Similar views were presented recently by Cristinel C. Plantos, who concluded that these bracelets were an echo of Celtic influence on Pre-Roman Dacian metalworking (Plantos 2005, 80). At first he proposed to date these forms quite broadly, from the end of the 2nd century BC until the 1st century AD, inclusive. At the same time, he was inclined to narrow down this time-period to the 1st century BC, possibly, also the early years of the next century. Șimleul Silvaniei bracelets/armlets have been discovered mainly in forts and important centres. He concluded that they were used by Dacian aristocracy as a symbol of prestige. Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 475 There is no doubt that the form and technology of production of Șimleul Silvaniei type bronze bracelets (armlets) with a cord ornament should be derived from the Celtic metalworking tradition. At the same time, variant 3a and its typologically younger derivative, 3b, had a different prototype than variant 3c. The former, not too numerous in any case, are represented by bracelets which sometimes have their body decorated with several strands of twisted wire (cord ornament), divided into segments by horizontal rings. A complete armlet of this type, without the cord ornament, surfaced at Obrigheim-Albsheim, Kreis Bad Dürkheim (Pl. 5/1). In 1882 it passed into the collections of the Museum der Stadt Worms im Andreasstift, where it still remains today (inv. no. BE 237).5 Presumably it was an element of the grave furnishings of one of two Early (?) La Tène burials discovered at Albsheim (Hettner 1883, 217). These forms are recorded also in Bohemia: in grave no. 81 in the cemetery at Jenišův Újezd, okres Teplice (Filip 1956, pl. XLVIII/1; Waldhauser 1978, 73, pl. 6/13, no. 17) and in the settlement at Močovice, okres Kutná Hora (Filip 1956, pl. LXIV/9), a third in Romania. The latter surfaced in grave no. 8 dated to phase LT C1 (C1b?), in the cemetery at Orosfaia, judeţul Bistrița-Năsăud (Vaida 2000, 143, fig. 9/2). In opposition to C. Plantos, we are against classifying it to type Șimleul Silvaniei / Rustoiu 3, it rather belongs among their prototypes. Anyhow, the Romanian researcher himself observed that the bracelet from Orosfaia is different from similar, younger ornaments (Plantos 2005, 78). Characteristic features of the latter include: a body fashioned from a rod and three strands of twisted wire fixed to it, divided into three segments by three horizontal rings. At the point of junction of the rings with the bracelet body there are, as a rule, three knobs (Rustoiu 3a), with, occasionally, more of the same at mid-length of each bracelet body segment (Rustoiu 3b). All these features are never seen together in any of the prototype forms. At the same time it is hard to indicate even a single find of a Rustoiu 3a or 3b type bracelet with a reliably ‘Celtic’ context. An exception here could be the already invoked ornament from the hoard no. 10/2005 (Pieta 2010, photo F23/2) from the oppidum Pohanská at Plavecké Podhradie (Slovakia), but this cannot be confirmed on the basis of the published illustration (Fig. 2/2). Until the question of its typological position has been resolved we can adopt the following hypothesis on the origin of the type of interest to us. The first specimens representing the ‘classical’ form (Rustoiu 3a) could have originated in Late La Tène workshops in Boiohaemum. Their production continued developing during the younger segment of phase LT D, under other geographic and culture conditions, in the area of Dacian Transylvania. An alternative solution is that Rustoiu 3a and 3b type bracelets were manufactured in Transylvania rather than in Bohemia, Moravia or southwestern Slovakia to which region they found their way as imports. Very likely the case of 3c type bracelets is similar. Their prototype form would be the bronze bracelets from the Middle La Tène period, similar to them in shape, decorated with pseudofiligree (Pieta 2008, 365, photo F20) (Fig. 4). As time passed (phase LT D?) this decoration was replaced with the cord ornament and a new construction detail, the horizontal rings, was added. Ornaments of the described form would have been produced in Celtic workshops operating in Bohemian and Moravian oppida, as evidenced by finds of these forms at the oppidum Staré Hradisko (Čižmář 1989, fig. 2/12) (Pl. 5/2) and at Plavecké Podhradie (Pieta 2008, photo F23) (Pl. 5/3). The feature which sets them apart from variant Rustoiu 3c, and also from all other variants of type Șimleul Silvaniei, is the construction of the bracelet body, fashioned only from a length of twisted wire and not from a rod to which this wire would be attached, as a decorative element. This type of construction is thought to be characteristic for objects originating from the bronze workshops in Transylvania. A significant argument in the analysis of the origin of the type under discussion is chronology of these specimens, which we can refine using the finds from the region north of the Carpathians. This is especially valuable given the problems Fig. 4. Nimnica (Holýš). A Middle La Tène bronze armlet with the closer dating of the Romanian (after Pieta 2008). Without scale. finds (Plantos 2005). 5 I wish to thank dr Mathilde Grünewald, Director of the Museum der Stadt Worms im Andreasstift, who very kindly made it possible for me to publish the armlet from Obrigheim-Albsheim. 476 | M. Rudnicki In the North the chronological frames of closed assemblages with Rustoiu 3 type bracelets take in phase A3 of the Pre-Roman period (Kleszewo?, Plötzin) and phases B1a (Lasy?, Małe Czyste) and B1b (Niedanowo, Malbork-Wielbark?), possibly, also the turn of phase B1/B2 (Lalendorf?) of the Roman period. This dating is confirmed by the settlement context of the stray finds from Jakuszowice, Jastrzębniki, Nowe Brzesko, Pełczyska, and also, by the deposit from the mountain pass at Nakléřov, between Bohemia with Saxony (Čižmář 2008, 230, fig. 3/1, 2). It is hard to say to what extent this period corresponds exactly to the time of manufacture of the ornaments under discussion. However, if we take into account the number of finds deriving from Early Roman contexts we need to discard the possibility that the specimens from the Early Roman context were deposited in the ground with considerable delay in relation to the time of their production. We have to assume that they were produced mainly or perhaps only, after the decline of Central European oppida, the most important centres of Celtic craft production during the Late La Tène period. Even if the Celts had something to do with their manufacture they would have been individuals or small groups, part of a Dacian population residing in Transylvania, where the production centre (or centres) of Șimleul Silvaniei bracelets should be located. An argument in support of this solution is the concentration of these finds in areas where continuity of La Tène culture traditions is nothing strange. The hypothesis proposed by Plantos that Șimleul Silvaniei type ornaments were used by the aristocracy and were status symbols appears to find confirmation in archaeological material. Even if we disregard the find from Lalendorf (because of its uncertain context) we can safely say that the burials discovered at Kleszewo, Malbork-Wielbark, Niedanowo, or Plötzin belonged to the wealthy. The nature of the furnishings, and only exceptionally, also the results of anthropological analyses (Niedanowo) suggest that most of these burials were of women. This brings us to the next question: how were these ornaments worn: as bracelets, armlets, or possibly, elements of neckrings? In literature there are a few different ideas on this subject (von Richthofen 1994, 25). Menke proposed to interpret objects of the type of ornaments under discussion, and ones similar to them, not as ornaments or elements of clothing but as amulets (Menke 1974, 149–150). With the current database available to us as it is now it may be too early to resolve this problem conclusively. But we need to note that bracelets decorated with the cord ornament occur relatively often in association with bronze Knotenring forms (Kleszewo, Lalendorf, Malbork-Wielbark, Nakléřov, Niedanowo, Plötzin), as well as with glass rings (Kleszewo, Niedanowo?, Plötzin), or their possible substitute, the large amber beads (Lalendorf). It is hard to say whether these three types of object were worn together, for example, in a single neck ornament, or more likely belonged to a single set of jewellery – and were all worn at the same time. Or does their co-occurrence mean only that wearing them – whether as ornaments or as amulets – was in fashion during the same period? Irrespective of whether Rustoiu 3 type bracelets were treated as jewellery or as amulets, one thing sees certain: they were worn by the rich and must have been marks of prestige. Șimleul Silvaniei type armlets/bracelets and ‘the Daco-Lugian Road’ Finally, what remains to be resolved is the pivotal question of the culture background of the items under discussion. Namely, we need to explain the circumstances in which they reached the area of today’s Poland, and farther west, Mecklenburg and Brandenburg. To do this we have to broaden our perspective by looking at the settlement context of finds. The subject of the culture transition and changes in settlement of the Late La Tène period and the onset of the Roman period in western Lesser Poland was addressed in passing in the earlier discussion of finds of armlets decorated with the cord ornament from Pełczyska. If we look at the map of distribution of Șimleul Silvaniei type rings, it becomes evident that Tyniec group communities residing in this region must have played the role of a key transit link, instrumental in spreading these ornaments farther north and north-west. A clear confirmation of this proposition is the presence in the region of not less than four finds of Șimleul Silvaniei type bracelets (Nowe Brzesko, Jakuszowice and two at Pełczyska). The archaeological inventory of the Tyniec group would be a reflection of its multicultural and, presumably, multi-ethnic character (Rudnicki 2009, 324). Next to the quantitatively dominant East Germanic elements attributable to Przeworsk culture we find in this inventory traces of a Celtic presence (painted pottery, coinage), and also of the presence of representatives of other cultures, also Dacian. The not too great but still observable percentage of vessels characteristic for the latter, observed in the ceramic inventory of the Tyniec group, confirms not so much the existence of an unspecified form of ‘contacts’ as the physical presence of Dacians in the region of Kraków during phases LT D2 / Roman-B1a. After all, we can hardly Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 477 imagine that the crude handmade vessels, as for instance, the Dacian cups from Pełczyska (Pl. 3/1), or Podłęże (Woźniak 1990, pl. XVII/c), could be objects of distant commercial exchange (!). The richness of the inventory of finds attributable to the Tyniec group, including traces of activity of workshops producing painted ceramics and gold Celtic coins according to the Boii system, is a confirmation of multi-directional contacts and of the special position of the local community within the Przeworsk culture at large. In case of the Tyniec group we may speak of the existence of a power group which would have included a party, admittedly small but very influential, of representatives of the Celtic elite. A similar situation is observed in Central Poland. During the Late Pre-Roman period the site at Jastrzębniki was part of a large concentration of Przeworsk culture settlement on the Prosna River in the region of Kalisz, one recorded already during the Late Pre-Roman period, as well as during phase B1 of the Roman period (Godłowski 1985, 45). This concentration was made up of several settlements and cemeteries associated with them, situated along the river. It is worth focusing on at least a few of the better understood sites in this group. In a cemetery at Zadowice, powiat Kalisz, 20 km or so to the south of Kalisz, one of the burial assemblages (grave no. 11) from the 1st century BC yielded a painted pottery vessel (Jasnosz 1958, 223, pl. XXXIII). At Piwonice (now a part of Kalisz) were unearthed the remains of Przeworsk culture settlements from the Pre-Roman and the onset of the Roman period. Among finds which surfaced there is a Roman Republican denarius and a late Celtic coin, a 1/8 stater, type Janków (Rudnicki–Ziąbka 2010). At Zagorzyn, powiat Kalisz, close to Jastrzębniki, a cemetery from the PreRoman period was discovered (Dąbrowski 1970, 331–332). Two settlements from the turn of the era and a cemetery from the same period were recorded at Szadek, powiat Kalisz, nearby (Pudełko 2001, 20–23). A grave-field in the village Kurza, powiat Kalisz, a little more to the north, furnished materials from the Early Roman period (Kaszewska 1977, 106–107). Near Janków Drugi, powiat Kalisz (known formerly as: Oszczywilk, Piłat, Wesółki) the remains of two settlements and two cemeteries were uncovered. Of these the best known is the cemetery at Wesółki. Its excavators determined the time of its use as early 1st century BC and second half of 2nd century AD (Dąbrowska–Dąbrowski 1967, 7–9, 82–83). In the same village of Janków Drugi (its part formerly known as Oszczywilk and Piłat), was another cemetery, its chronology was defined as of the Pre-Roman and the Roman period (Kozłowska 1972, 350, 389). About 150 metres to the north of the cemetery at Wesółki, in the area of a multicultural site investigated on a small scale in 1964, were identified the remains of a settlement from the same period (Kozłowska 1966, 104). One more settlement at Janków Drugi, discovered in the 1920s by Kostrzewski (Karpińska 1927, 239), was investigated on several occasions. The first excavation was carried out by Fitzke in 1934 (Fitzke 1934, 21–22, 35). Not only archaeologists but also treasure hunters were attracted to this site. The fruit of the labour of amateurs, and since 2007, also of archaeologists, are eleven Celtic coins and other finds confirming that the coins were manufactured at that location (Rudnicki et al. 2009). The conclusion that during the 1st century BC and early years of the next century a mint workshop was operating on the Middle Prosna producing gold coins according to the Boii system has serious consequences of historical nature. The minting of coins by the Celts, considered the most sophisticated specialised production and the highest achievement in their economic development, required not only appropriate organization but also a technologically advanced ‘know-how’ (Rudnicki–Ziąbka 2010, 20). There is no doubt that at the close of the La Tène and long afterwards the Germanic population had neither. Thus, we need to attribute the minting activity in the region of Kalisz to the physical presence of Celts in the area. We have to surmise that one or several settlements on the Middle Prosna had as its inhabitants a small group of Celts – probably aristocracy – as it were they who had the right to mint coins. The most plausible explanation why the representatives of the Celtic elite settled and started minting coin in central Poland, far from centres of settlement of their kinsmen, was to organize commerce, or more broadly distant trade routes linking the North with the South. The Celts were presumably the architects of these contacts, their small groups then residing not only in the region of Kraków and Kalisz, but very likely, also in Kujawy and Lower Silesia. Most probably, they derived from the earlier confederation of Boii tribes, something which possibly is evidenced by the universal and consistent use of the coin system proper for the Boii in all the mints operating to the north of the Carpathians and the Sudety. It seems that together with the Germanic aristocracy they formed the social tribal elite – presumably, of a few of the most important tribes – whose seats we need to locate on the territory under Przeworsk culture settlement. These tribes would have co-created a federation, described in the written sources as the Lugian federation (Lugiorum nomen), mentioned by Tacitus, Claudius Ptolemy and Strabo (Kolendo 2008, 160). This would explain the Celtic origin of the name ‘Lugii’. 478 | M. Rudnicki A confirmation of two-way contacts between communities residing in western Lesser Poland and in some areas of central Poland on the turn of the La Tène and the Roman period would be the painted vessel discovered in the cemetery at Zadowice. At the same time, it is notable that most finds of type Șimleul Silvaniei bracelets discovered on the territory of Przeworsk culture were accompanied by objects which had a Celtic provenance. The bracelet from the cemetery at Kleszewo was associated with fragments of Celtic painted wares and glass rings. From a findspot less than 30 km to the south of Brodnia, near Sieradz, comes a stray find of a Celtic coin, a late Pełczyska type 1/8 stater (Rudnicki 2003; 2005). From the vicinity of Skierniewice, where a 3a type bracelet was found, comes an unpublished Celtic coin, a Kraków type stater struck in western Lesser Poland. In any case this phenomenon is more wide-ranging. When we compare the map of Rustoiu 3 type ornaments with the distribution of southern imports, not only Late La Tène, but also Early Roman ones, we shall see that they overlap. A fine case in point are mirror finds, discussed earlier, but also Almgren 67 type fibulae (Demetz 1999, maps 40, 41), or TKF Ia and Ib2 (Rudnicki 2009, fig. 11). The same observation applies to the finds from the Lower Vistula region, which area abounds in southern imports – especially, during the Roman period – something that was linked to the intensification of exchange along the Amber Road. The find of a Celtic coin, type Janków (variant A.4 of Rudnicki Et Al. 2009, 107, no. 5), in a cemetery of Wielbark culture at Leśno (Walenta 1992, 174–175, pl. 1/2) proves that the operation of the route in a similar form reaches back to at least the Late La Tène period, if not earlier. A question which in its scope goes beyond the frames of the present publication is how to reconstruct the nature of the Dacian–Lugian relationship, the effect of which was – among other things – the introduction of type 3 bracelets to the area north of the Carpathians. Could it be that, on the turn of the La Tène and the Roman period when we have evidence of Dacian presence on the territory of Przeworsk culture (western Lesser Poland) the people of the latter had found their way to the Carpathian Basin? So far, the oldest traces of the Przeworsk presence in the area south of the Carpathians (Malaya Kopanya, Zakarpats’ka oblast’) are dated to phase B1 of the Roman period (Kobal 1997, 51). Nevertheless we know that the expansion of the Przeworsk people to the south-east began earlier, already during the Pre-Roman period (Śmiszko 1932, 106–108). Very likely, at the very beginning of the Roman period they would have reached the lands on the Upper Dniester and during phase B1b (?) its integration with the local Dacian population had taken place. Archaeological relics of this process are the Zvenigorod-Bolotnoe type materials from which the Lipitsa culture subsequently took form (Vakulenko 1989, 33). But this does not explain how ornaments produced at the close of the La Tène period and at the onset of the Roman period – most likely, in south-western Transylvania – spread even to distant Mecklenburg and Brandenburg. A valuable clue in analyzing the routes of contact which linked these far-off regions comes from finds discovered in the Dacian cemetery at ancient Porolissum (Moigrad, județul Sălaj). Among the ceramics from this site not only were there fragments of wheel-thrown Celtic painted pottery, but also of handmade wares (Macrea–Rusu 1960, 212–213, fig. 11/12), typical for the Elbian environment. Taking into account the shape of one of these vessels and its execution (Pl. 5/4) close analogies to it can be found in the Elbian region, in grave assemblages datable to the very last phase of the Pre-Roman period and the onset of the Roman period, for example, from the much cited cemetery at Plötzin (Seyer 1976, pl. 2/e; 22/h) (Pl. 5/10). Similar vessel forms and ornamentation from that period are known from other sites in the northern Elbe region (Seyer 1976, pl. 10/h, k; 14/f; 15/d; 16/a; 28/a; 31/a, c; 34/b) and Holstein (Hingst 1983, pl. 36). What is significant here is that the vessel from Porolissum has no analogies from the territory under settlement of the Poienești–Lukaševka culture (Babeș 1993) – so it cannot be linked with Bastarnae. Its presence on Dacian territory is not the work of chance, this is evidenced by a fragment of a vessel decorated with a plastic boss and graved vertical lines (Pl. 5/11) discovered in the cemetery at Großbeeren, Kr. Teltow-Fläming, in Brandenburg (Seyer 1976, 171, pl. 23/f). Both in its form and ornamentation this vessel represents features so typical for the Geto-Dacians and, at the same time, entirely foreign in the Elbian culture tradition. Its presence in north-east Germany indicates that the relations of the local inhabitants with a population residing in Transylvania were of a bilateral nature. If we take into account the location of the ceramic finds described here, and also that of Șimleul Silvaniei type bracelets, we can see clearly that, next to the Amber Road linking Caput Adriae with the Baltic seacoast by way of the territory of today’s Poland, there was another route of distant exchange. It started in Dacia and led northward, across western Lesser Poland and central Poland, reaching westward as far as Mecklenburg and Brandenburg. The pivotal role which the Celtic members of the political community of the Lugii must have played in distant exchange, integrating the inhabitants of this vast territory, would have been Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 479 substantial, and is supported by the presence of painted ceramics in the cemetery at Porolissum. No mean role in the formation of this exchange would have been played by Germanic peoples of Przeworsk culture, something which is suggested by traces of elements of a funerary tradition known from Porolissum for which Macrea and Rusu were able to find analogies in the cemetery at Warsaw-Wilanów (Macrea–Rusu 1960, 228). Bringing together and looking deeper into issues addressed here only very briefly seems a step indispensable for the progress of studies of the subject under discussion. Nevertheless, it is not too early to examine the phenomena associated with the route of distant exchange linking Pre-Roman Dacia with the region north of the Carpathians and the Sudety using the term ‘the Daco-Lugian Road’. Appendix 1 Șimleul Silvaniei / Rustoiu 3 type bracelets/armlets6 Germany 1. Lalendorf, Kreis Güstrow, Bundesland Sachsen; from an inhumation burial; chronology: B1/B2 or earlier (B1a?); literature: Keiling 1971; 1973; 1977; von Richthofen 1993. 2. Plötzin (Werder/Havel), Kreis Potsdam-Mittelmark, Bundesland Brandenburg; from a cremation burial; chronology: A3 (B1a?); literature: Hundt 1935, 241, fig. 2/1; Seyer 1976, 170–171, pl. 21/a; Leube 2000, fig. 7/3. Poland 3. Brodnia, powiat Poddębice, woj. łódzkie; a stray find from a settlement or a cemetery of the Przeworsk culture; chronology; ?; literature: Rudnicki–Miłek 2011. 4. Jakuszowice, powiat Kazimierza Wielka, woj. świętokrzyskie; a stray find from a settlement of the Tyniec group; chronology: A3-B1a (?); literature: Margos–Stąporek 2001, 260, fig. 8/b. 5. Jastrzębniki, powiat Kalisz, woj. wielkopolskie; a stray find from a settlement or a cemetery of the Przeworsk culture; chronology: ?; literature: Rudnicki 2009, 308, fig. 7; Rudnicki–Miłek 2011. 6. Kleszewo, powiat Pułtusk, woj. mazowieckie; from a cremation pit grave of the Przeworsk culture (feature 614, or 615); chronology: A3; unpublished find. 7. Lasy, powiat Sztum, woj. pomorskie; accidental finds from an inhumation attributed to the Wielbark culture; chronology: B1 (B1b?) but earlier chronology cannot be excluded (Oksywie culture, A3 ?); literature: Kumm 1912, 26–27; Rosen-przeworska 1939, 122–123, fig. 31/1–2; Balke 1999, 69, 75, no. 10, fig. 8/1, 2; Margos–Stąporek 2001, 250, fig. 1, 5/a, b; Żórawska 2005, 282, no. 7, fig. 6/1; Rudnicki 2009, 308, fig. 7. 8. Lubiechowo, powiat Białogard, woj. zachodniopomorskie; from a cemetery of the Wielbark culture (?); chronology: ?; literature: Kunkel 1936, 22, footnote no. 92; Margos–Stąporek 2001, 258, fig. 7/d. 9. Malbork-Wielbark, powiat Malbork, woj. pomorskie; from a pit cremation burial (grave no. 1703) of the Wielbark culture (2 specimens); chronology: B1a (B1b?); Andrzejowski–Bursche 1987, 269, pl. VII/8; Andrzejowski 1994, 323; Andrzejowski–Martens 1996, pl. XXVII/3; Balke 1999, 69, 75, no. 12, fig. 8/3; Rudnicki 2009, 308, fig. 7. 10. Małe Czyste, powiat Chełmno, woj. kujawsko-pomorskie; Andrzejowski 1994, 323; Margos–Stąporek 2001, 258, fig. 8/a. 11. Niedanowo, powiat Nidzica, woj. warmińsko-mazurskie; Andrzejowski 1994, 323; Ziemlińska-Odojowa 1999, 85, pl. CLXXIV/4, CCLI/3; Balke 1999, 69, 75, no. 15, fig. 8/5; Rudnicki 2009, 308, fig. 7. 12. Nowe Brzesko, powiat Proszowice, woj. małopolskie; a stray find from a settlement of the Tyniec group; chronology: A3-B1a (?); unpublished find. 13. Pełczyska, powiat Pińczów, woj. świętokrzyskie; stray finds from a settlement of the Tyniec group (2 specimens); chronology: A3–B1a (?); literature: Rudnicki 2009, 306, 308, fig. 6/7; 7. 14. Skierniewice, vicinity, woj. łódzkie; unknown context; chronology: ?; unpublished find. Czech Republic 15. Nakléřov, okres Ústí nad Labem, Ústecký kraj; deposit (?) from a waterlogged area in the site Krásný Les; chronology: ?; literature: Čižmář 2008, 230, fig. 3/1. Slovakia 16. Gajary, okres Malacky; a stray find from the settlement; chronology: Late La Tène period (?); literature: Eisner 1933, 177, fig. LIX/4; Zachar 1977, fig. 3/2. 17. Plavecké Podhradie, okres Malacky, Bratislavský kraj; a deposit of some 60 glasses and bronzes discovered In the NE slope of the hill below the oppidum Pohanská, dated to phases LT C2–LT D1; chronology: LT D1; literature: Pieta 2008, 194, 368, photo F23; Pieta 2010, 400, photo F23/1, 2. 6 Numbering corresponds to Fig. 1. 480 | M. Rudnicki Romania (after Plantos 2005, with literature) 18. Ardeu, jud. Hunedoara; 19. Blaj, vicinity; 20. Costești, jud. Hunedoara; 21. Cuciulata, jud. Brașov; 22. Grădiștea de Munte, jud. Hunedoara; 23. Ocniţa, jud. Vâlcea; 24. Orăștie Mountains; 25. Pecica, jud. Arad; 26. Popești, jud. Giurgiu; 27. Șimleul Silvaniei, jud. Sălaj; 28. Tilișca, jud. Sibiu. Appendix 2 Chemical analysis of Rustoiu 3 type bracelets/armlets7 Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Content (%) Abs. error (%) Content (%) Abs. error (%) Content (%) Abs. error (%) Cu 67.60 0.10 82.16 0.12 78.86 0.07 Pb 24.42 0.07 10.78 0.05 12.52 0.03 Sn 5.806 0.057 5.364 0.056 6.886 0.029 Mo 1.362 0.018 1.184 0.017 1.165 0.008 Zn <0.013 (0.0) <0.012 (0.0) <0.0090 (0.0) Others >0.799 >0.5 >0.56 Table 1. Brodnia. Results of WD XRF analysis of micro-areas at the fractured end of the central bar (area 1) and one of the fractured ends of the ring (areas: 2, 3). Element Element Content % Cu 73.36 Pb 17.42 Sn 8.83 Mo 0.021 Zn 0.194 Others 0.175 Table 2. Brodnia. Measurement results (ED XRF) of the micro-area at the fractured end of the central bar. Element Cu Sn Pb Mo Zn Others Area 1 Content (%) Abs. error (%) 90.64 0.13 6.738 0.059 1.109 0.017 1.035 0.015 <0.012 (0.0) >0.466 Area 2 Content (%) Abs. error (%) 89.56 0.07 8.325 0.032 0.8432 0.0075 0.9176 0.0068 <0.0077 (0.0) >0.3465 Area 3 Content (%) Abs. error (%) 90.90 0.13 6.351 (0.0) 1.121 0.017 0.978 0.015 <0.012 (0.0) >0.638 Table 3. Jastrzębniki. Measurement results (WD XRF) of micro-areas at the fractured end of the central bar (areas: 1, 2) and at one of the fractured ends of the ring (area 3). 7 Analysis of the chemical content of armlets from Brodnia and Jastrzębniki was made using SPECTRO MIDEX (WD XRF) and FISCHER XAN-150 (ED XRF) X-ray spectrometers by mgr Przemysław Zdanowski at the District Assay Office in Warsaw (Okręgowy Urząd Probierczy w Warszawie) to whom we are indebted for his contribution. Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 481 Element Content (%) Abs. error (%) Cu 89.30 0.08 Pb 7.791 0.022 Mo 1.203 0.009 Sn 0.704 0.012 Ag 0.5627 0.0081 Others 0.4393 Table 4. Nowe Brzesko. Measurement results (WD XRF) of micro-area at one of the fractured ends of the ring. Element Content % Cu 88.75 Pb 9.69 Sn 0.781 Ag 0.484 Others 0.295 Table 5. Nowe Brzesko. Measurement results (ED XRF) of micro-area at one of the fractured ends of the ring. Element Content (%) Abs. error (%) Cu 72.63 0.09 Pb 13.06 0.05 Sn 12.29 0.07 Mo 0.938 0.011 Others 1.082 Table 6. Pełczyska. Measurement results (WD XRF) of micro-area at the fractured end of the central bar of the Rustoiu 3a or 3b type armlet. Element Content % Cu 75.10 Pb 13.01 Sn 11.64 Others 0.25 Table 7. Pełczyska. Measurement results (ED XRF) of micro-area at the fractured end of the central bar. Area 1 Area 2 Element Content (%) Abs. error (%) Content (%) Cu 84.52 0.11 83.07 Pb 8.280 0.039 10.98 Sn 5.077 0.045 3.750 Mo 1.083 0.014 1.159 Zn <0.014 (0.0) <0.012 Others >1.026 >1.029 Table 8. Pełczyska. Measurement results (WD XRF) of micro-areas at one of the fractured ends of the ring of the armlet of unlisted variant (3d) in Rustoiu’s classification. Area 1 Area 2 Element Content (%) Content (%) Cu 80.99 84.94 Pb 11.88 8.67 Sn 6.59 5.89 Others 0.54 0.50 Table 9. Pełczyska. Measurement results (ED XRF) of micro-areas at one of the fractured ends of the ring. 482 | M. Rudnicki References Andrzejowski, J., Powiązania kultur przeworskiej i wielbarskiej w świetle znalezisk bransolet, IN: Gurba, J.–Kokowski, A. (eds.), Kultura przeworska. Materiały z konferencji, Kultura przeworska, 1, Lubelskie Materiały Archeologiczne, 8, 1, Lublin, 317–341. Andrzejowski 1998 Andrzejowski, J., Nadkole 2. A Cemetery of the Przeworsk Culture in Eastern Poland, MAB, 5. Andrzejowski 2005 Andrejowski, J., Wczesna Kragenfibel z Obór i problem jej pochodzenia, WA, 57, 2004–2005, 57–66. Andrzejowski– Andrzejowski, J.–Bursche, A., Archeologia biblioteczna. Cmentarzyska kultury wielbarskiej Bursche 1987 w Krośnie stanowisko 1 i w Wielbarku, woj. elbląskie, IN: Pawłowski, A. (ed.), Badania archeologiczne w woj. elbląskim w latach 1980–1983, Malbork, 233–277. Andrzejowski– Andrzejowski, J.–Martens, J., The Wielbark Cemetery. Information on Unpublished MateMartens 1996 rial from the Personal Files of Carl-Axel Moberg, IN: Kokowski, A. (ed.), Studia Gothica, Lublin, 1, 19–72. Babeș 1993 Babeș, M., Die Poienești–Lukaševka-Kultur. Ein Beitrag zur Kulturgeschichte im Raum östlich der Karpaten in den letzten Jahrhunderten vor Christi Geburt, Bonn. Balke 1999 Balke, B., Unikatowa bransoleta znad Mogielanki, IN: Andrzejowski, J. (ed.), Comhlan. Studia z archeologii okresu przedrzymskiego i rzymskiego w Europie Środkowej dedykowane Teresie Dąbrowskiej w 65. rocznicę urodzin, Warszawa, 61–79. Bochnak–Kieferling Bochnak, T.–Kieferling, G., Srebrna głowa byka wydobyta z Sanu w Radymnie, IN: 2009 Karwowski, M.–Droberjar, E. (eds.), Archeologia Barbarzyńców 2008: powiązania i kontakty w świecie barbarzyńskim. Materiały i kontakty z IV Protohistorycznej Konferencji Sanok, 13–17 października 2008 = Archeologie der Barbaren 2008: Beziehungen und Kontakte in der barbarischen Welt. Materialien aus der IV. Frühgeschichtlichen Konferenz in Sanok, 13.–17. Oktober 2008, Collectio Archaeologica Ressoviensis, 13, Rzeszów, 123–143. Bokiniec 2005 Bokiniec, E., Podwiesk, Fundstelle 2. Ein Gräberfeld der Oksywie-Kultur im Kulmer Land, Warszawa–Toruń. Bokiniec 2008 Bokiniec, E., Kultura oksywska na ziemi chełmińskiej w świetle materiałów sepulkralnych, Toruń. Božič 1993 Božič, D., Slovenija in srednja Evropa v poznolatenskem obdobju, ArhVest, 44, 137–152. Böhme-Schönberger Böhme-Schönberger, A., Die Kragenfibeln – eine treverische Fibelform?, IN: Dobiat, C. 1994 (ed.), Festschrift für Otto-Herman Frey zum 65. Geburtstag, Marburger Studien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte, 16, Marburg, 11–126. Cofta-Broniewska Cofta-Broniewska, A., Grupa kruszańska kultury przeworskiej. Ze studiów nad rozwojem 1979 regionalizmu społeczeństwa Kujaw, Poznań. Čižmář 1989 Čižmář, M., Erforschung des keltischen Oppidums Staré Hradisko in den Jahren 1983–1988 (Màhren, ČSSR), ArchKorr, 19, 3, 265–268. Čižmář 1990 Čižmář, M., Die Erforschung der spätlatènezeitlichen Siedlung in Bořitov, Bez. Blansko (Mähren, ČSFR), ArchKorr, 20, 3, 311–315. Čižmář 2002 Čižmář, M., Laténský depot ze Ptení. K poznání kontaktů našeho území s jihem, PamArch, 93, 194–225. Čižmář 2008 Čižmář, M., Příspěvek k otázce spojnice mezi Čechami a Saskem v době železné, IN: Černá, E.–Kuljavceva-Hlavová, J. (eds.), Archeologické výzkumy v severozápadních Čechách v letech 2003–2007, Sborník k životnímu jubileu Zdeňka Smrže, Příspěvky k pravěku a rané době dějinné severozápadních Čech, 15, 229–239. Crawford 1974 Crawford, M., H., The Roman Republican Coinage, Cambridge. Davis 2006 Davis, Ph., Dacian Imitations of Roman Republican Denarii, Apulum, 43, 321–356. Dąbrowska 1973 Dąbrowska, T., Wschodnia granica kultury przeworskiej w późnym okresie lateńskim i wczesnym okresie rzymskim, MatStar, 2, 127–254. Dąbrowska 1988 Dąbrowska, T., Wczesne fazy kultury przeworskiej. Chronologia-zasięg-powiązania, Warszawa. Dąbrowska– Dąbrowska, I.–Dąbrowski, K., Cmentarzysko z okresów późnolateńskiego i wpływów Dąbrowski 1967 rzymskich w Wesółkach, pow. Kalisz, Wrocław–Warszawa–Kraków. Dąbrowski 1970 Dąbrowski, K., Cmentarzysko z okresu późnolateńskiego w Zagorzynie pow. Kalisz, SprArch, 22, 331–397. Andrzejowski 1994 Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 483 Demetz 1999 Droberjar 1999 Droberjar–Frána 2004 Eisner 1933 Feugère 1985 Filip 1956 Fitzke 1934 Florescu 1986 Florkiewicz 2004 Florkiewicz 2008 Florkiewicz 2010 Florkiewicz– Bochnak 2006 Gajewski 1966 Godłowski 1985 Guštin–Teržan 1975 Hadaczek 1909 Haevernick 1960 Hettner 1883 Hingst 1983 Hundt 1935 Jamka 1947 Jamka 1972 Jasnosz 1958 Karpińska 1927 Karwowski 1997 Kaszewska 1977 Kaszewska 1982 Keiling 1971 Demetz, S., Fibeln der Spätlatène- und frühen römischen Kaiserzeit in den Alpenländern, Rahden/Westf. Droberjar, E., Dobřichov-Pičhora. Ein Brandgräberfeld der älteren römischen Kaiserzeit in Böhmen (Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis des Marbod-Reichs), FAP, 23, Pragae. Droberjar, E.–Frána, J., Antická mosaz (aurichalcum) v českých nálezech časné doby římské, ArchČechách, 8, 441–462. Eisner, J., Slovensko v pravěku, Bratislava. Feugère, M., Les fibules de la Gaule Méridionale de la conquete a la fin du V s. ap. J.-C., Paris. Filip, J., Keltové ve střední Evropě, Praha. Fitzke, J., Odkrycie osady z wczesnego okresu rzymskiego i cmentarzyska z okresu wędrówek ludów w Oszczywilku, w pow. Kaliskim, Z otchłani wieków, 9, 2, 21–38. Florescu, R., Die Kunst der dako-römischen Antike, Bukarest. Florkiewicz, I., Problem dackich elementów kulturowych w Karpatach polskich oraz na Podkarpaciu we wczesnym okresie wpływów rzymskich – stan badań, IN: Gancarski, J. (ed.), Okres lateński i rzymski w Karpatach polskich. Materiały z konferencji, Krosno, 659–678. Florkiewicz, I., Dakische Elemente in der frühen Römischen Kaiserzeit in der PrzeworskKultur auf dem Gebiet Polens, IN: Droberjar, E.–Komoróczy, B.–Vachůtová, D. (eds.), Barbarská sídliště. Chronologické, ekonomické a historické aspekty jejich vývoje ve světle nových archeologických výzkumů (Archeologie barbarů 2007), Brno, 279–303. Florkiewicz, I., Monety geto-dackie z obszaru Polski – nowe dane, IN: Karwowski, M.–Droberjar, E. (eds.), Archeologia Barbarzyńców 2008: powiązania i kontakty w świecie barbarzyńskim. Materiały i kontakty z IV Protohistorycznej Konferencji Sanok, 13–17 października 2008 – Archeologie der Barbaren 2008: Beziehungen und Kontakte in der barbarischen Welt. Materialien aus der IV. Frühgeschichtlichen Konferenz in Sanok, 13.–17. Oktober 2008, Collectio Archaeologica Ressoviensis, 13, Rzeszów, 101–122. Florkiewicz, I.–Bochnak, T., Les éléments celto-daces et daces dans le bassin de la Vistule, IN: Sârbu, V.–Vaida, D. L. (eds.), Thracians and Celts. Proceedings of the International Colloquim from Bistriţa 18–20 May 2006, Cluj-Napoca, 129–148. Gajewski, L., Wisiorek brązowy z Zofipola, pow. Proszowice, WA, 31, 4, 434. Godłowski, K., Przemiany kulturowe i osadnicze w południowej i środkowej Polsce w młodszym okresie przedrzymskim i w okresie rzymskim, Prace Komisji Archeologicznej PAN, Oddział Kraków, 23, Wrocław–Warszawa–Kraków–Gdańsk. Guštin, M.–Teržan, B., Malenškova gomila v Novem Mestu, ArhVest, 26, 188–202. Hadaczek, K., Album przedmiotów wydobytych w grobach cmentarzyska ciałopalnego koło Przeworska (z epoki cesarstwa rzymskiego), Teka Konserwatorska. Rocznik Koła C. K. Konserwatorów Starożytnych Pomników Galicyi Wschodniej, 3, 2, Lwów. Haevernick, Th. E., Die Glasarmringe und Ringperlen der Mittel- und Spätlatènezeit auf dem europäischen Festland, Bonn. Hettner, F., Westdeutsche Museographie über das Jahr 1882, WZGK, 2, Trier, 198–226. Hingst, H., Die vorrömische Eisenzeit Westholsteins, Offa-Bücher 49, Neumünster. Hundt, H. J., Spätlatèneimport in Grabfunden von Neu-Plötzin, Mark Brandenburg, Germania, 19, 239–248. Jamka, R., Grób z okresu rzymskiego z Malkowic, pow. pińczowski, Światowit, 18, 1939– 1945, 179–192. Jamka, R., Zagadnienie ciągłości kulturowej w okresie lateńskim ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem regionu kieleckiego, Rocznik Świętokrzyski, 3, 150–181. Jasnosz, S., Wielkopolskie znaleziska celtyckiej ceramiki malowanej, WA, 25, 3, 223–232. Karpińska, A., Nowe nabytki Działu Przedhistorycznego Muzeum Wielkopolskiego w Poznaniu w latach 1923–1925, PrzArch, 3, 3, 234–248. Karwowski, M., Keltische Glasfunde im polnischen Gebiet, PrzArch, 45, 33–71. Kaszewska, E., Materiały kultury przeworskiej w Kurzej, woj. Kalisz, FAPos, 26, 106–124. Kaszewska, E., Grób 773 z Zadowic w woj. Kaliskim, Prace Łodz Arch, 27, 185–191. Keiling, H., Ein reich ausgestattetes frühkaiserzeitliches Körpergrab von Lalendorf, Kr. Güstrow, AuF, 16, 200–204. 484 | M. Rudnicki Keiling 1973 Keiling 1977 Kieferling 1999 Kobal 1997 Kokowski 2001 Kokowski–Ścibior 1990 Kolendo 2008 Kozłowska 1966 Kozłowska 1972 Kumm 1912 Kunkel 1936 Kurowicz–Olędzki 2002 Leube 2000 Marcea–Rusu 1960 Madyda-Legutko 1996 Makiewicz 1976 Makiewicz 1977 Makiewicz 1986 Makiewicz 1987 Makiewicz 2003 Marciniak 1957 Margos–Stąporek 2001 Menke 1974 Mikołajczyk 1982 Mikołajczyk 1984 Mikołajczyk 1986 Keiling, H., Ein frühkaiserzeitlichen „Fürstengrab“ von Lalendorf, Kreis Güstrow, Jahrbuch Mecklenburg, 1972, 127–177. Keiling, H., Zur kulturgeschichtlichen „Fürstengrab“ von Lalendorf, Kreis Güstrow, IN: Chropovský, B. (ed.), Symposium Ausklang der Latène-Zivilisation und Anfänge der germanischen Besiedlung im mittleren Donauraum, Bratislava, 123–142. Kieferling, G., Zabytki z młodszego okresu przedrzymskiego i z okresu wpływów rzymskich w zbiorach Muzeum w Jarosławiu, IN: Czopek, S.–Kokowski, A. (eds.), Na granicach antycznego świata. Sytuacja kulturowa w południowo-wschodniej Polsce i regionach sąsiednich w młodszym okresie przedrzymskim i okresie rzymskim. Materiały z konferencji Rzeszów, 20–21.11.1997, Rzeszów, 229–269. Kobal, I. V., Kultura przeworska na Ukrainie Zakarpackiej, WA, 53, 2, 1993–1994, 31–56. Kokowski, A., Ramy chronologiczne osadnictwa kultury przeworskiej w południowowschodniej Polsce, WA, 54, 1995–1998, 109–128. Kokowski, A.–Ścibior, J., Tombe princière de Sandomierz-Krakówka, Pèriode Romaine Prècoce, Inventaria Archaeologica, 68, Warszawa–Łódź. Kolendo, J., Wstęp i komentarze, IN: Hendrysiak, M. (ed.), Publiusz Korneliusz Tacyt, Germania (translated from Latin by T. Płóciennik), FHA, 10, 105–203. Kozłowska, R., Badania archeologiczne osady lateńsko-rzymskiej w Wesółkach, pow. Kalisz, SprArch, 18, 104–106. Kozłowska, R., Cmentarzysko z okresów późnolateńskiego i wpływów rzymskich w Wesółkach, pow. Kalisz (stan. 5), SprArch, 24, 349–390. Kumm, P., XXXI. Und XXXII. Amtlicher Bericht über die Verwaltung der naturgeschichtlichen, vorgeschichtlichen und volkskundlichen Sammlungen des Westpreußischen ProvinzialMuseums für die Jahre 1910 und 1911, Danzig. Kunkel, O., Urgeschichte, Erwerbungs- und Forschungsbericht, 5–27. Kurowicz, P.–Olędzki, M., Cmentarzysko ludności kultury przeworskiej w Charłupi Małej koło Sieradza, Łódź. Leube, A., Etruskischer, keltischer und römischer Einfluss auf das nordöstliche Deutschland, SNMP, 54, 1–4, 91–106. Macrea, M.–Rusu, M., Der dakische Friedhof von Porolissum und das Problem der dakischen Bestattungsbräuche in der Spätlatènezeit, Dacia n. s., 4, 201–229. Madyda-Legutko, R., Zróżnicowanie kulturowe polskiej strefy beskidzkiej w okresie lateńskim i rzymskim, Rozprawy Habilitacyjne UJ, 304, 1, Kraków. Makiewicz, T., Ołtarze i „paleniska” ornamentowane z epoki żelaza w Europie, PrzArch, 24, 103–183. Makiewicz, T., W sprawie genezy trackich i dackich ołtarzy i palenisk kultowych, PrzArch, 25, 179–187. Makiewicz, T., Znaleziska z kręgu kultury celtyckiej i trackiej na Kujawach, IN: Paszkiewicz, B. (ed.), Celtowie i ich mennictwo. Materiały z sesji naukowej, Warszawa 26 kwietnia 1985, Warszawa, 25–33. Makiewicz, T., Formy kultu bóstw domowych na terenie Europy w starożytności, Poznań. Makiewicz, T., Gliniany ołtarz – palenisko z Jarosławia na tle porównawczym, IN: Rydzewski, J. (ed.), 150 lat Muzeum Archeologicznego w Krakówie, Kraków, 221–232. Marciniak, J., Cmentarzysko ciałopalne z okresu późnolateńskiego w Wilanowie koło Warszawy, MatStar, 2, 7–174. Margos, U.–Stąporek, M., Jeszcze jeden wczesnorzymski zespół z cmentarzyska kultury wielbarskiej w Lasach, pow. Sztum, Pomorania Antiqua, 18, 249–272. Menke, M., „Rätische” Siedlungen und Bestattungsplätze der frührömischen Kaiserzeit im Voralpenland, IN: Kossack, G.–Ulbert, G. (eds.), Studien zur vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie. Festschrift für Joachim Werner zum 65. Geburtstag, Teil I, MBVF, Ergänzungsband I, 142–159. Mikołajczyk, A., Północne znaleziska monet geto-dackich, Prace Łodz NK, 2, 5–30. Mikołajczyk, A., The transcarpathian finds of Geto-Dacian coins, ArchPol, 23, 49–66. Mikołajczyk, A., Problem napływu monet celtyckich i geto-dackich na ziemie Polski i Ukrainy zachodniej, IN: Paszkiewicz, B. (ed.), Celtowie i ich mennictwo. Materiały z sesji naukowej, Warszawa 26 kwietnia 1985, Warszawa, 34–40. Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 485 Mycielska, R.–Woźniak, Z., Cmentarzysko wielokulturowe w Błoniu. Część 1, MatArch, 24, 5–326. Pescheck, Ch., Die frühwandalische Kultur in Mittelschlesien (100 vor bis 200 nach Chr.), Quellenschriften zur ostdeutschen Vor- und Frühgeschichte, 5, Leipzig. Pič 1903 Pič, J. L., Hradiště u Stradonic jako historické Marobudum. Čechy na úsvitě dějin, Starožitnosti země České, II, 2, Praha. Pieta 1986 Pieta, K., Stand und Notwendigkeiten der Erforschung der Púchov-Kultur, IN: Godłowski, K.–Madyda-Legutko, R. (eds.), Stan i potrzeby badań nad młodszym okresem przedrzymskim i okresem wpływów rzymskich w Polsce, Kraków, 25–49. Pieta 1996 Pieta, K., Römischer Import der Spätlatènezeit in der Slowakei, ArhVest, 47, 183–195. Pieta 2008 Pieta, K., Keltské osídlenie Slovenska. Mladšia doba laténska, ASM, Studia, 11, Nitra. Pieta 2010 Pieta, K., Die keltische Besiedlung der Slowakei: Jüngere Latenezeit, ASM, Studia, 12, Nitra. Plantos 2005 Plantos, C., A dacian bracelet of “Simleul Silvaniei” type originating in the History museum “Augustin Bunea” - Blaj (Dep. Alba), Apulum, 42, 77–82. Podgórska-Czopek Podgórska-Czopek, J., Materiały do poznania kultury przeworskiej z terenu Polski 1991 południowo-wschodniej, SprArch, 43, 239–264. Poleska 2006 Poleska, P., Celtycki mikroregion osadniczy w rejonie podkrakówskim, BMAK, 2. Pudełko 2001 Pudełko, E., Szadek nad Prosną. Zarys dziejów osadnictwa w świetle ostatnich badań i odkryć archeologicznych, RoczK, 27, 9–24. Reyman 1948 Reyman, T., Zespół importów rzymskich z grobu ciałopalnego w Giebułtowie w pow. Krakówskim, WA, 16, 1939, 178–197. von Richthofen 1993 von Richthofen, J., Feinuntersuchungen an den Metallfunden aus dem älterkaiserzeitlichen Körpergrab von Lalendorf, Kreis Güstrow, Bodendenkmalpflege in MecklenburgVorpommern, Jahrbuch, 41, 19–44. Romanowski 2010 Romanowski, A., Dolina środkowej Prosny w świetle znalezisk monet rzymskich, IN: Suchodolski, S.–Zawadzki, M. (eds.), Od Kalisii do Kalisza. Skarby doliny Prosny. Katalog wystawy, Zamek Królewski w Warszawie, 30 kwietnia – 30 maja 2010, Warszawa, 29–41. Rosen-Przeworska Rosen-Przeworska, J., Zabytki celtyckie na ziemiach Polski, Warszawa. 1939 Rudnicki 2003 Rudnicki, M., Celtic coin finds from a settlement of the La Tène period at Pełczyska, Wiadomości Numizmatyczne, 47, 1 (Polish Numismatic News 7. Special Issue for the International Numismatic Congress in Madrid, September 2003), 1–24. Rudnicki 2005 Rudnicki, M., Złota moneta celtycka z osady w Pełczyskach, woj. świętokrzyskie, IN: Łuczkiewicz, P.–Gładysz-Juścińska, M.–Juściński, M.–Niezabitowska, B.–Sadowski, S. (eds.), Europa Barbarica. Ćwierć wieku archeologii w Masłomęczu, Monumenta Studia Gothica, 4, Lublin, 391–404. Rudnicki 2007 Rudnicki, M., Importy rzymskie z Pełczysk, IN: Droberjar, E.–Chvojka, O. (eds.), Archeologie barbarů 2006. Archeologické výzkumy v jižních Čechach. Supplementum 3, České Budějovice, 93–112. Rudnicki 2009 Rudnicki, M., Besiedlungs- und Kulturveränderungen in Kleinpolen während der späten Latènezeit und zu Beginn der älteren Römischen Kaiserzeit, IN: Salač, V.–Bemmann, J. (eds.), Mitteleuropa zur Zeit Marbods. Tagung Roztoky u Křivoklátu 4.–8.12.2006 anlässlich des 2000jährigen Jubiläums des römischen Feldzuges gegen Marbod. 19. Internationales Symposium Grundprobleme der frühgeschichtlichen Entwicklung im mittleren Donauraum, Praha–Bonn, 289–330. Rudnicki–Miłek 2011 Rudnicki, M.–Miłek, S., New evidence on contacts between Pre-Roman Dacia and territory of Central Poland, ActaArch Carpatica, 46, 117–143. Rudnicki–Ziąbka 2010 Rudnicki, M.–Ziąbka, L., Moneta celtycka z Kalisza-Piwonic a początki dziejów mennictwa na ziemiach Polski, IN: Suchodolski, S.–Zawadzki, M. (eds.), Od Kalisii do Kalisza. Skarby doliny Prosny. Katalog wystawy, Zamek Królewski w Warszawie, 30 kwietnia – 30 maja 2010, Warszawa, 13–22. Rudnicki Et Al. 2009 Rudnicki, M.–Miłek, S.–Ziąbka, L.–Kędzierski, A., Mennica celtycka pod Kaliszem = A Celtic mint near Kalisz, Poland, Wiadomości Numizmatyczne, 53, 2, 103–145. Rustoiu 1990 Rustoiu, A., Un tip de brățări dacice mai puțin cunoscut, SymThrac, 8, 187–188. Rustoiu 1991 Rustoiu, A., Ein dakischer Bronzearmring im Norden Deutschlands, Thraco-Dacica, 12, 143–147. Mycielska–Woźniak 1988 Pescheck 1939 486 | M. Rudnicki Rustoiu, A., O brățară dacică de la Șimleul Silvaniei, ActaMP, 16, 139–142. Rustoiu, A., Metalurgia bronzului la daci (sec. II î. Chr. – sec. I d. Chr.). Tehnici, ateliere și produse de bronz, BT, 15. Seyer 1976 Seyer, R., Zur Besiedlungsgeschichte im nördlichen Mittelelb-Havel-Gebiet um den Beginn unserer Zeitrechnung, Berlin. Sulimirski 1974 Sulimirski, T., Trakowie w północnych Karpatach i problem pochodzenia Wołochów, ActaArch Carpathica, 14, 79–103. Szpunar 1991 Szpunar, A., Dacko-przeworski zespół grobowy ze stanowiska nr. 2 w Łętowicach, gm. Wierzchosławice, woj. Tarnów, ActaArch Carpathica, 30, 237–241. Szpunar–Dulęba 2009 Szpunar, A.–Dulęba, P., Einmaliger Import aus Noricum gefunden in der Siedlung in Pasieka Otfinowska, powiat Tarnów, ActaArch Carpathica, 42–43, 2007–2008, 109–139. Śmiszko 1932 Śmiszko, M., Kultury wczesnego okresu epoki cesarstwa rzymskiego w Małopolsce Wschodniej, Archiwum Towarzystwa Naukowego we Lwowie, 9, 2, Lwów. Vaida 2000 Vaida, L., The celtic cemetery from Orosfaia (Bistriţa-Năsăud county), IN: Corneliu, G.– Rustoiu, A. (eds.), Les Celtes et les Thraco-Daces de l’est du Basin des Carpates. Les actes du colloque national qui a eu lieu a Bistriţa le 16–17 octobre 1998, Bistriţa, BMBistriţa, 3, 135–159. Vakulenko 1989 Vakulenko, L., Etnokul’turnaja situacija v Verchnem Podnestrov’e v I–II vv. n.e., IN: Tolochko, P. P. (ed.), Drevnie Slavjane i Kievskaja Rus’, Kiev, 22–34. Venclová 1990 Venclová, N., Prehistoric glass in Bohemia, Praha. Völling 2005 Völling, T., Germanien an der Zeitenwende. Studien zum Kulturwandel beim Übergang von der vorrömischen Eisenzeit zur älteren römischen Kaiserzeit in der Germania Magna, BAR IS, 1360, London. Waldhauser 1978 Waldhauser, J., „Klassische“ Beschreibung (Deskription) der Fundumstände und der Grabbeigaben, IN: Waldhauser, J. (Hrsg.), Das keltische Gräberfeld bei Jenisuv Újezd in Böhmen, 1, Teplice, 30–98. Walenta 1992 Walenta, K., Przyczynek do genezy wielbarskich cmentarzysk kurhanowych z kręgami kamiennymi, ActaUL, 16, 169–177. Woźniak 1990 Woźniak, Z., Osada grupy tynieckiej w Podłężu, woj. Krakówskie, Wrocław–Warszawa–Kraków. Woźniak 1996 Woźniak, Z., Neue Forschungsergebnisse über die jüngere Latèneziet in Südpolen, ArhVest, 47, 165–172. Woźniak 2004 Woźniak, Z., Rola Karpat Zachodnich w okresie lateńskim, IN: Gancarski, J. (ed.), Okres lateński i rzymski w Karpatach polskich. Materiały konferencji, Krosno, 43–70. Zachar 1977 Zachar, L., Príspevok k poznaniu neskorolaténskeho obdobia na Záhorí, Zborník SNM, 17, 35–58. Zepezauer 1993 Zepezauer, M., A., Mittel- und spätlatènezeitliche Perlen, Glasperlen der vorrömischen Eisenzeit III (mit Unterlagen von Th. E. Haevernick), MSVF, 15, Marburg. Ziemlińska-Odojowa Ziemlińska-Odojowa, W., Niedanowo. Ein Gräberfeld der Przeworsk- und Wielbark-Kultur 1999 in Nordmasowien, Kraków. Żórawska 2005 Żórawska, A., Materiały kultury wielbarskiej ze zbiorów Muzeum w Kwidzynie, Pomorania Antiqua, 20, 277–307. Rustoiu 1992 Rustoiu 1996 List of figures Fig. 1. Finds of Șimleul Silvaniei / Rustoiu 3 type bracelets/armlets. Fig. 2. Plavecké Podhradie, oppidum Pohanská, hoard no. 10/2005. 1. Selected objects (after Pieta 2008); 2. A part (?) of the objects (after Pieta 2010). The arrow marks the Șimleul Silvaniei type bracelet (Rustoiu type 3a?). Without scale. Fig. 3. Kleszewo, glass inventory of the graves no. 614 and 615. Fig. 4. Nimnica (Holýš). A Middle La Tène bronze armlet decorated with pseudofiligree (after Pieta 2008). Without scale. Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 487 List of plates Pl. 1. 1–4. Lalendorf, inhumation grave. 1, 3–4. bronze, 2. amber (after Keiling 1973); 5–30. Plötzin, cremation burial no. 2520; 5–15, 17–21, 25–26. bronze; 16, 29–30. iron; 22–24. glass; 27–28. bear claws (after Seyer 1976); 31. Popești (after Florescu 1986) without scale; 32–33. Nakléřov–Krásný Les, bronze (after Čižmář 2008); 34. Małe Czyste, grave no. 2, bronze (after Margos–Stąporek 2001); 35–41. Malbork-Wielbark, grave no. 1703. 35–36, 38–41. bronze, 37. glass (after Andrzejowski–Bursche 1987). Pl. 2. 1–5. Lasy, inhumation grave. 1–2. bronze armlet; 3–5. Bronze fibulae (after Żórawska 2005; Margos– Stąporek 2001); 6. Lubiechowo, bronze bracelet (after Margos–Stąporek 2001). 7–13. Niedanowo, grave no. 478. 7–9, 11. bronze 10, 12. iron (after Ziemlińska-Odojowa 1999). 14–15. Pełczyska, bronze (drawing: E. Pazyna; photo: M. Bogacki). 2, 6. without scale. Pl. 3. 1–3. Pełczyska. Ceramics from the settlement (2–3) and cemetery: feature no. 4/2005 (photo by M. Bogacki); 4. Pełczyska. Stray find from settlement, hybrid imitation of a Roman Republican denarius; 5–10. (Rustoiu 3a and 3b?) type bronze bracelets/armlets; 5. Jakuszowice (after Margos–Stąporek 2001); 6. Nowe Brzesko; 7. Brodnia; 8. Jastrzębniki; 9. Skierniewice (unknown photograph); 10. Kleszewo, grave no. 614 or 615. (6–8. drawing: E. Pazyna; photo: M. Bogacki); 9. without scale. Pl. 4. Kleszewo. Inventory of graves no. 614 and 615; 1–11. pottery (11. wheel-thrown), 12–17. bronze. Pl. 5. 1. Obrigheim-Albsheim. Bronze armlet (photo: M. Grünewald); 2. Malé Hradisko (Staré Hradisko). Bronze twisted wire bracelet (after Čižmář 1989); 3. Plavecké Podhradie (Pohanská). Bronze twisted wire bracelet (?) (after Pieta 2008); 4. Moigrad (Porolissum), Dacian cemetery. Pottery (after Macrea–Rusu 1960); 5. Plötzin (Werder/Havel), grave 2654; 5–9. iron, 10. Pottery (after Seyer 1976); 11. Großbeeren, pottery (after Seyer 1976). 2–4. without scale. 488 | M. Rudnicki 5 5 5 5 5– Plate 1. 1–4. Lalendorf, inhumation grave. 1, 3–4. bronze, 2. amber (after Keiling 1973); 5–30. Plötzin, cremation burial no. 2520; 5–15, 17–21, 25–26. bronze; 16, 29–30. iron; 22–24. glass; 27–28. bear claws (after Seyer 1976); Plate 31. . Popești – . alendorf in umation ra e. scale;– 32–33. . ronNakléřov–Krásný e . am er after K 5–2008); . Pl t in (after Florescu 1986) without Les, bronze (after Čižmář 34. Małe Czyste, remation urialgrave no. no. 5 2, bronze 5– 5 (after– Margos–Stąporek 5– . ron e 2001); 35–41. – . Malbork-Wielbark, iron – . lassgrave –no. 1703. . ear 35–36, 38–41. bronze, 37. glass (after Andrzejowski–Bursche 1987). la s after . Pope ti after it out s ale – . a l o – r n e ron e . a e yste ra e no. ron e after – P K . al or iel ar ra e no. . – – . ron e . lass after K– . Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 489 5 5 Plate . –5. asy in umation ra e. – . ron e armlet –5. ron e fi ulae after K 5 – P K . u ie o o ron e ra elet after – P K Lasy, inhumation grave. 1–2. bronze armlet; 3–5. Bronze fibulae (after Żórawska 2005; . Plate – .2. 1–5. iedano o ra e no. . – . ron e . iron after K Margos–Stąporek 2001); 6. Lubiechowo, bronze bracelet (after Margos–Stąporek 2001). 7–13. Niedanowo, . – 5. Pe ys a ron e dra in . Pa yna p oto . o a i . – . it out s ale. grave no. 478. 7–9, 11. bronze 10, 12. iron (after Ziemlińska-Odojowa 1999). 14–15. Pełczyska, bronze (drawing: E. Pazyna; photo: M. Bogacki). 2, 6. without scale. 490 | M. Rudnicki 5 p oto 5– Plate 3. 1–3. Pełczyska. Ceramics from the settlement (2–3) and cemetery: feature no. 4/2005 (photo by M. Bogacki); 4. Pełczyska. Stray find from settlement, hybrid imitation of a Roman Republican denarius; 5–10. Plate(Rustoiu . – . 3a Peand ys from t e settlement – and emetery feature no. 5 3b?)a. typeerami bronze sbracelets/armlets; 5. Jakuszowice (after Margos–Stąporek 2001); 6. 7. Brodnia; 9. Skierniewice (unknown 10.aKleszewo, . Nowe o a Brzesko; i . Pe ys a.8. Jastrzębniki; tray find from settlement y ridphotograph); imitation of oman grave epuno.li 614 an denarius drawing: Pazyna; photo: 5. M. Bogacki); . ustoiu a and or 615. type(6–8. ron e ra E.elets armlets a us o 9.i without e afterscale. – P K . o e r es o . Kles e o ra e no. . rodnia . astr ni i . iernie i e un no n p oto rap or 5. – . dra in . Pa yna p oto . o a i . it out s ale. Finds and Context of Șimleul Silvaniei Type Bracelets North of the Carpathians and the Sudety | 491 5 5 – – Plate 4. Kleszewo. Inventory of graves no. 614 and 615; 1–11. pottery (11. wheel-thrown), 12–17. bronze. Plate . Kles e o. n entory of ra es no. and – . pottery . eel t ro n – . ron e. 5 492 | M. Rudnicki 5 5– Plate 5. 1. Obrigheim-Albsheim. Bronze armlet (photo: M. Grünewald); 2. Malé Hradisko (Staré Hradisko). Bronze twisted wire bracelet (after Čižmář 1989); 3. Plavecké Podhradie (Pohanská). Bronze twisted wire bracelet (?) Plate(after 5. Pieta . ri2008); eim l s eim. ron e Dacian armletcemetery. p oto Pottery . r (after ne Macrea–Rusu ald . al 1960); radis o 4. Moigrad (Porolissum), 5. 2654; 5–9. 10. Pottery Großbeeren, pottery arPlötzin ra (Werder/Havel), i . ron egrave t isted ire iron, ra elet after(after Seyer 1976); 11.. Pla e Pod radie (after Seyer 1976). 2–4. without scale. an . ron e t isted ire ra elet after P . oi rad r i m a ian emetery. Pottery after – 5. Pl t in erder a el ra e 5 5– . iron . Pottery after . ro eeren pottery after . – . it out s ale. The Tumuli Necropolis from Șimleu Silvaniei Horea POP–Zsolt CSÓK County Museum of History and Art Zalău, Romania horeapopd@yahoo.com csok_zsolt@yahoo.com Keywords: tumuli, Șimleu Silvaniei, Bronze Age, Iron Age, La Tène, roman period, early middle ages In 1993 Mihalache M. Brudiu, archeologist from Galaţi published a series of mound burial graves, identified in the area of Șimleu Silvaniei (Brudiu 1993). The 35 mounds and three prehistoric sites published came as fruit of some field researches made in 1987–1988. Of these 35 burial mounds, 22 are on the outskirts of Huseni village and the surroundings of Șimleu Silvaniei, but the rest, consisting of 35 points, are set on the territory of Boghiș village. Moreover, Brudiu notified the County Museum of History and art from Zalău, during the autumn of 1991 about the existence of the mounds, more precisely those which are set on the peak known as Sós Domb (Dealul Sării/Salt Hill), around point Brădet from Șimleu Silvaniei. Among the three mounds discovered by Brudiu, after setting them on a sketch, researchers from the museum of Zalău discovered in September 191 another hump, south from the peak path (mounds 42–43, 46–47 from Appendix 1A), right next to the mentioned three mounds. During this occasion pottery fragments were discovered, probably belonging to Coţofeni culture, or late Bronze Age. Later field surveys aimed as first phase habitat elements as well in the close surrounding of the four massive burial mounds, although other researches undertaken in September 1993 by Horea Pop in the Cuzupetiului Valley (northern bank) did not reveal archeological traces. In the area set west from the 4 mound group there were made field surveys determined by recent anthropogenic activities (clay exploit for brick production, pipelines, forest infrastructure, etc.). A ditch that sectioned the northern slope Brădet Hill did not provide archeological information (field survey by H. Pop in 1991). In 2001 telecommunication antennas were set on Brădet Hill likewise, an access road was also made towards the hill’s peak from the east. The field research undertaken by Pop, Bejinariu and Tamba in April 2001 did not provide archeological clues. The hill was previously checked for prehistoric features by Horea Pop and Ioan Bejinariu in March 1994, mainly mounds no. 42 and 43 were taken to aim. Mound no. 42 already had a vineyard planted on it, making possible the clear view of the mound’s contour on the local fine sand, even more, a prehistoric pot handle fragment was discovered. In 1998 mound no. 42 was ploughed. In February 1998 prehistoric pottery was discovered here by Pop and Zsolt Csók (three fragments), and the darker contour of the mound was perfectly visible. The building of a water tank westwards from the four mounds, probably affected an other one, or a prehistoric settlement, clues in this sense were the pottery fragments found during a new field survey of Pop (March 1993). In the pasture between the mounds and the Brick Factory, Brudiu (1993, 195) identified the Iron Age settlement from the point known under the name of Brijigă. Northwards from this point, another site was identified, where recently Cotnari Street was arranged. In the surroundings, sporadic prehistoric archeological material was found by Pop in March 1993 and May 1999, that can be dated towards Coţofeni Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 493–502 494 | H. Pop–Zs. Csók culture, but very probably La Tène as well. In the rims of the Brick Factory exploit ditches prehistoric pottery was found as well in May 1998 by Csók; and later in May 1999 and September 2002 by Pop. A peak path was made on Sós Domb (Dealul Sării) Hill, but luckily the mounds were not affected by the new infrastructural feature, in 2002 (field survey in September by Pop). Unfortunately, in 2003 mound no. 42 was centrally affected by an intervention made with a bulldozer, on its entire diameter, on N–S direction. The width of the unauthorized intervention was at approximately 3 meters and the depth, in the central area of the mound at 1.5 meters. The field survey that intervened at that point in September 2003 allowed the collection of observations concerning the mound’s features (Pl. 3/1–2). At the basis of the unauthorized excavation there were visible horizontal cavities with correspondents on every profile, which could have been the parts of the wooden frame for the possible burial chamber. There were also visible the fine sand layers that formed the mantle of the burial mound. In the western profile of the excavation it was clearly visible a plunging pit towards the tomb, having a diameter of 1 m. As it starts right below the top-soil, it is very probable that it forms an intervention of the so-called archeologists activity at the end of the 19th – beginning of the 20th century. During this field research, there were discovered only small adobe fragments. The mound burial phenomenon in the area of Șimleu was approached systematically since 1995 during Pop’s field survey that started at Șimleu through Bic, continuing on the peak on which Brudiu discovered during the 80’s the mound group II (Pl. 1; 2/2). At this occasion 36 new features were recorded as possible funerary monuments. Four years later, in April 1999 during another filed research concerning the burial mounds from the area of Șimleu Pop discovered the mounds no. 1–20 forming group I (Pl. 2/1). Bic Valley is the unit that separates the two groups discovered by Brudiu and more recently, by the authors of the present paper. The last approach on the burial mound issue around Șimleu Silvaniei, was made through GPS mapping, with the occasion of preparing the city’s General Urbanistic Plan during the autumn of 2011 (H. Pop and Zs. Csók). Groups I and II were mapped during this research session, in the, followings another session will aim to map group III, with at leas 20 mounds identified by Brudiu. The area traced by Silvașului Valley westwards and Ratova Stream eastwards, can form the space of a hypothetical mound group, named by us, group IV. Groups III and IV are set on the outskirts of Huseni Village, as do some of the mound of group II (Pl. 2/2). The research in 2011 came to clarify the topography, morphology (Appendix 1) and chronological nature even though none of the mounds was systematically investigated. Returning to mound 42, the hill that dominates Șimleu Sos Domb, on the south, was found the presence of an ulterior deposit in the mound (Pl. 3/2). A further hole was observed in the western profile of the feature in 2003. The hole diameter of 0.6 m and a depth of 0.5 m, of which 0.2 humus, have in inventory ashes, adobe, and an atypical pot fragment, difficult to set into a straight chronology. It may be dated to the early Iron Age or late Bronze Age. In this case, the heap can not be earlier than this complex. Big mounds as it is no. 42, with diameters between 40–60 m are few, only 6 in number. A chronological division of the mounds on the criteria of diameter is tempting but risky, although size can serve the social status of the deceased. On the other hand the state of conservation, erosion can induce us in error. Hilly formations, on which mounds were built, are likely sedimentary mounds and is likely to be high, primarily made of soil found in the surroundings (mound 21, e.g. at Figurie from Bic was set with earth from a Neolithic settlement). Large stones were not observed on the surface. The mapped mounds have medium sizes (Fig. 1) between 10–20 m diameter there are 35 mounds, between 20–30 m 5 mounds, so the rest of 7 mounds are between 30–70 m. Their heights, also, can suggest different chronology, yet again confronting ourselves with risky hypotheses. Of course, the mounds with larger diameters show a considerable height as well (Fig. 2). The majority of the mounds have a height between 0.5–3 m, only 6 mounds pass by, reaching even the relative height of 7. All mounds are set on heights (Appenix 1), only a part of them being set on the edges of hilly formations (T1, T44, T45), or saddles between heights (T5, T6). On the other hand we can observe their position amongst each-other (Fig. 3). There are two-by-two, three-by-three, three and four mounds grouping, the other 25 not being associated in such features. If this issue reflects family ties, or other relations, it is premature to affirm. In other news, we have no knowledge of secondary burials in time or in another position, in the absence of archaeological research. We only mention the filing of mound 42. The complexity of human habitation in the area Șimleu, along the time, we expect that some mounds should present phenomena of secondary funerary deposits and beyond. The other 11 mounds were certainly disturbed during the The Tumuli Necropolis from Șimleu Silvaniei | 495 last hundred years by forest paths that have been cut or arrangements during the world wars, or terminal topographic and geodetic points (Appendix 1). The chance of their research remained unaltered, the damage does not affect the central part of the so-called archaeological researches made at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century (mounds 38 and 42). Fig. 1. Mound diameters. Fig. 2. Mound heights. Group I 1, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 41, 44, 45 25 Group II Group III Group IV 5–6, 32–33 2–4, 38–40 14–17, 24–27, 42–43, 46–47 2 2 Fig. 3. Mound groups. 3 Information about the ‘research’, which probably penetrated through a pit towards the center of the tomb, is few and contradictory. Financed by the county authorities in the 1870’s, the excavations were targeting a burial mound that we can not localize today. The materials collected may suggest a Bronze Age or maybe even an early Iron Age dating of the monument (Bejinariu 2006, 33). The burial mound phenomenon is not unknown in Sălaj County. In some cases, there are burial mounds, in others anthropogenic features having no connection with such structures. At Câmpia, at the edge of the forest situated at south-east from the village, in the point called Holmuţ, there is a hump with a diameter of approx. 25 m, and of 2–3 m in hight (field survey by H. Pop, S. and D. Băcueţ-Crișan in April 1999). Another, more flat one, according to the locals, can be found towards the neighbor village of Sălăjeni. In their opinion, both were erected by ‘giants’. In the village of Doh, at the point Holmuri, there were mentioned three massive earth humps. A site visit has demonstrated that they are the remains of huge brick-kilns, built along a stream, where there was access to water, clay and timber, needed for the firing. Probably this is the area where the bricks used in the 19th century, for building downstream 496 | H. Pop–Zs. Csók the Măieriște castle, were manufactured and burned. One of the 10 burial mounds, identified in 1997 at Domnin–Dealul Barcului has been researched in the same year by S. and D. Băcueţ-Crișan and has been dated to the Coţofeni culture, but lately a ceramic fragment found on the mantle of the hump, may suggest a different dating (Bejinariu 2005, 61). Another likely burial mound exists in the village of Hereclean close to the greenhouses set up on the right banks of the river Zalău, on its second terrace. The hump is a landmark in the local geomorphologic landscape, but it is so large, that it has not been considered anthropogenic. Work hypothesis were launched by Alexandru V. Matei, according to which the burial features could be set up afterwards the battle of Guruslău from the summer of 1601, situated at about 2 km north, on the same valley of Zalău River. In the village of Mălădia, in the neighborhood of Șimleu, there are burial mounds at Cenuși point, where the locals pretend that there are Jewish burials. The information provided by I. Mocanu (from Șimleu Silvaniei, born in Mălădia) has not been verified yet, but it is possible that there are burial mounds. The famous tumuli from Nușfalău, dated in the 2nd half of the 8th century AD (Stanciu 1999), set up on the low terraces of the left banks of river Barcău, have no corresponding funeral monument in Sălaj county nor in north-western Romania. In this part of the country, there were identified and researched burial tombs in Maramureș and Satu Mare counties. The mounds from Maramureș County became famous due to the ones belonging to the Lăpuș group from Bicaz (Kacsó 2011, 228–230) and Lăpuș (Kacsó 2011, 350–378), dated at the end of the Bronze Age. Also, Németi suggests that the ‘humps’ from Carei area are similar to the western ‘mounds’, dating them at the end of the Bronze Age (Németi 1999, 117, 125–126, fig. 54). The discoveries dating from the roman period, from the upper Tisa basin, are offering a strong base to date burial mounds from the Șimleu area in the same period. The large number of mounds researched or charted in the upper-Tisa area, belonging to Przeworsk culture or even to the free Dacians (Kotigoroško 1995, 122–132), can at least suggest that their disposal area can be larger, reaching even the area of Șimleu. In fact the high prehistoric and antique population density (Appendix 2–3) in the area of Șimleu and the almost total absence of adjacent necropolises, transform the mound groups presented here in the only actual manifestation of funerary deposits in the area. Even if it is dated to Bronze Age (Bejinariu 2006, 31–44), Hallstatt (Sana 2006, 45–66), Dacian (Pop 2006a, 67–96) or roman (Pop 2006b, 97–112) periods, burials specific to these periods are almost totally missing, or, if there are discoveries of such kind, these are uncertain or unknown. The majority of the habitat elements and of those that are defensive are cumulated on the right bank of Crasna River, nut on the imposing Măgura Șimleului as well. The burial mound groups are set exactly on the opposite side, in the ‘afterworld’, beyond Crasna River. It is very possible that from the beginning of the Bronze Age, all burial feature discoveries to be cumulated in a delimited sacred space, marked by the mounds set on the hills south of Șimleu, even during the late bronze age, or even beyond. Of course the current stage of research, for these special cemeteries, assumptions made are provisional. Systematic approach to Șimleu Silvaniei tumular necropolis would provide arguments for or against them. Our approach was that the primary purpose of mapping, as full repertory of the mounds, to create a working tool for professionals interested in this sensitive area of funeral events. Appendix 1 Tumuli in the area of Șimleu Silvaniei Mound Diam Height Top-name, observations 1 32 3 Șimleu, right bank of Cuzupetiului Valley point called Pusta 2 20 2 Bic, WW II machine-gun nest 3 17 1 Bic 4 16 0.5 Bic 5 30 2.5 Bic 6 20 3 Bic 7 20 1.5 Bic 8 20 2 Bic 9 20 1 Bic 10 15 0.5 Bic Type peripheral hill-top hill-top hill-top saddle saddle peak peak peak peak The Tumuli Necropolis from Șimleu Silvaniei | 497 Mound Diam Height Top-name, observations 11 20 2 Bic 12 15 1 Bic 13 20 1.5 Bic 14 20 1.5 Bic 15 15 1 Bic, concrete milestone 16 15 0.5 Bic, milestone between T15 and T16 17 20 0.5 Bic, deranged 18 15 0.5 Bic 19 15 1 Bic 20 20 1.5 Bic 21 20 3 Bic, Figurie 22 20 1 Bic 23 30 2 Bic 24 15 1 Bic, cut by the road 25 13 1.5 Bic 26 15 3 Bic, deranged by a dwelling 27 15 0.5 28 20 1 isolated 29 10 1 isolated 30 10 1 isolated 31 20 2 isolated 32 20 1 At crossroads 33 20 1.5 Cut by the road 34 50 7 Geodesic point, isolated 35 20 2.5 Isolated 36 10 1 Isolated 37 30 5 Isolated 38 30 3 With robbery pit 39 15 1.5 40 25 3 41 20 4 Isolated 42 60 5 With an ulterior pit, cut by a bulldozer, with robbery pit or “archeological research”. Diameter of the pit = 0.6 m, depth 0.5 m of which 0.2 humus. Inventory: ashes, adobe, atypical. Top-name Sos Domb 43 60 6 Sos Domb 44 10 1.5 Corlate isolated 45 50 5 Isolated in the precinct of Randra Pension 46 50 3 Sos Domb 47 50 3 Sos Domb cut by the road Type peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peak peripheral peripheral peak peak Appendix 2 Main discoveries in the area of Șimleu Silvaniei 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Place CEHEI CEHEI CEHEI CEHEI ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU Top-name Tău Fără Fund Omanu Între Urât Street Pusta-punct Nove Mesig Valea Corlate 1 Valea Corlate 2-Pensiune Randra Valea Corlate 3-Pensiune Randra Valea Corlate 4-Bűdős Kút 1 S F S S S 2 3 4 S S S S S S S 5 S 6 S S S S S 498 | H. Pop–Zs. Csók 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Place ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU ȘIMLEU Center Top-name Valea Corlate 5 Ferma Piersecărie nr. 9 – punct 1 Ferma Piersecărie nr. 9 – punct 2 Pământul lui Bacsadi Cariera Fabricii de Cărămidă Street Cotnari Brijigă Brandt Halta C.F.R. Street Soarelui Ferma nr. 13 Nagy Pista Ștrand Broscărie Street Oașului, T. Vladimirescu, G. Coșbuc, G. Bariţiu, Horea Dealului Street Street M. Eminescu nr. 12 Spitalului Street (dr. Martonfi) nr. 1 S. Bărnuţiu Street Bathory Castle Observator Uliul Cel Mic-Kiskesselyu Cetate-Varhegy Cetăţii Street 1 S 2 S S S S 3 4 5 6 S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S? F FS S FS S F S F A. Mureșanu Street S S S Argeșului Street S S S Parcul Mare S Dunării Street (1 Decembrie 1918) nr. 1 S S Dâmbul Bisericii Romano-Catolice S I. Creangă Street S S GIURTELEC Coasta lui Damian S FS F GIURTELEC Crâstor S S S GIURTELEC Tărbăcii S UILEAC Zgherle S BĂDĂCIN Bidișbig S BĂDĂCIN Dealul Hempului F BĂDĂCIN Dealul Ţarinii S S BĂDĂCIN Vatra Bătrână S S S S PERICEI Miliceri Tag S S S S S PERICEI Kalou, C.A.P. S S S PERICEI Darvas S S S PERICEI Keller Tag S S S S S S PERICEI Polyas S PERICEI Somkerek S PERICEI Gouţ S S CRASNA Retkely S CRASNA Csereoldal S S S HUSENI Biserica Ortodoxă S HUSENI Dealul deasupra bisericii S NUȘFALĂU Barat ret S S S S S TOTAL 18 31 14 18 19 17 1. Neolithic; 2. Bronze Age; 3. Early Iron Age; 4. Late Iron Age; 5. Roman Period; 6. Early Middle Ages. S. Settlement; FS. Fortified settlement; F. Fortress The Tumuli Necropolis from Șimleu Silvaniei | 499 Appendix 3 Distribution of discoveries on periods in the area of Șimleu 1 2 3 4 5 6 TOTAL Settlement 17 29 13 14 19 16 108 Fortified settlement 1 1 1 3 Fortress 1 1 3 1 6 TOTAL 18 31 14 18 19 17 117 1. Neolithic; 2. Bronze Age; 3. Early Iron Age; 4. Late Iron Age; 5. Roman Period; 6. Early Middle Ages. References Bejinariu 2005 Bejinariu 2006 Brudiu 1993 Kacsó 2011 Kotigoroško 1995 Németi 1999 Pop 2006a Pop 2006b Sana 2006 Stanciu 1999 Bejinariu, I., Cercetările arheologice de la Giurtelecu Șimleului-Coasta lui Damian (III). Descoperirile culturii Coţofeni, Sargetia, 51–94. Bejinariu, I., Descoperirile din epoca bronzului si prima epoca a fierului, IN: Pop, H.– Bejinariu, I.–Băcueţ-Crișan, S.–Băcueţ-Crișan, D.–Sana, D.–Csók, Zs., Șimleu Silvaniei. Monografie arheologică. I Istoricul cercetărilor, Cluj Napoca, 31–44. Brudiu, M., Cercetări arheologice în zona Boghiș–Șimleu Silvaniei, ActaMP, XVII, 191–198. Kacsó, C., Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Maramureș, Baia Mare. Kotigoroško, V., Ţinuturile Tisei Superioare în veacurile III î.e.n.–IV e.n. (perioadele La Tène și romană), București. Németi, J., Repertoriul arheologic al zonei Careiului, București. Pop, H., Descoperirile dacice de la Șimleu Silvaniei, IN: Pop, H.–Bejinariu, I.–BăcueţCrișan, S.–Băcueţ-Crișan, D.–Sana, D.–Csók, Zs., Șimleu Silvaniei. Monografie arheologică. I Istoricul cercetărilor, Cluj Napoca, 67–96. Pop, H., Descoperirile din epoca romană de la Șimleu Silvaniei, IN: Pop, H.–Bejinariu, I.–Băcueţ-Crișan, S.–Băcueţ-Crișan, D.–Sana, D.–Csók, Zs., Șimleu Silvaniei. Monografie arheologică. I Istoricul cercetărilor, Cluj Napoca, 97–112. Sana, D., Descoperiri ale primei epoci a fierului, IN: Pop, H.–Bejinariu, I.–Băcueţ-Crișan, S.–Băcueţ-Crișan, D.–Sana, D.–Csók, Zs., Șimleu Silvaniei. Monografie arheologică. I Istoricul cercetărilor, Cluj Napoca, 45–66. Stanciu, I., Über die Slawischen. Brandhügelgräber vom Typ Nușfalău–Someșeni (Nordwestern Romäniens), ActaMN, 36, I, 245–263. List of figures Fig. 1. Mound diameters. Fig. 2. Mound heights. Fig. 3. Mound groups. List of plates Pl. 1. General map of the studied area, groups of mounds and numbers of tumulus identified in each group. Upper right corner, position of the studied area in the context of north-western Romania. Pl. 2. 1. General and detailed map of the group I with the identified 20 tumulus; 2. General and detailed map of the group II with the identified tumulus. Pl. 3. General sample images of the mapped mounds. 1. Tumulus 42, general view; 2. Tumulus 42, profile of the mound, with the subsequent pit; 3. Tumulus 23; 4. Tumulus 32; 5. Tumulus 37. 500 | H. Pop–Zs. Csók Plate 1. General map of the studied area, groups of mounds and numbers of tumulus identified in each group. Upper right corner, position of the studied area in the context of north-western Romania. Plate . eneral map of t e studied area roups of mounds and num ers of tumulus identified in ea roup. pper ri t orner position of t e studied area in t e onte t of nort estern omania. The Tumuli Necropolis from Șimleu Silvaniei | 501 Plate 2. 1. General and detailed map of the group I with the identified 20 tumulus; 2. General and detailed map of the group II with the identified tumulus. Plate . . eneral and detailed map of t e roup it t e identified tumulus . eneral and detailed map of t e roup it t e identified tumulus. 502 | H. Pop–Zs. Csók 5 Plate 3. General sample images of the mapped mounds. 1. Tumulus 42, general view; 2. Tumulus 42, profile of the mound, with the subsequent pit; 3. Tumulus 23; 4. Tumulus 32; 5. Tumulus 37. Plate . eneral sample ima es of t e mapped mounds. . umulus eneral ie . umulus profile of t e mound it t e su se uent pit . umulus . umulus 5. umulus . ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia* Mariana EGRI Babeș–Bolyai University Cluj Napoca, Romania marianaegri@yahoo.com Keywords: burial, tradition, collective memory, identity, symbolic landscape The ‘archaeology of death’ – the term being first coined as a book title, before becoming a sub-discipline within archaeology (Chapman 2004, 1) – produced and continues to produce a vast literature, covering two main and sometimes overlapping fields of investigation – one mainly dealing with the concrete and systematic analysis of funerary discoveries (i.e. graves, cemeteries and other related archaeological contexts and artefacts) and another, more theoretical and constantly resorting to ethnographic, sociologic, anthropologic and even philosophic arguments and methodologies, which aims to understand the universal human problem of dealing with the death and the resulting great variety of responses across space, time and cultures. The study of funerary practices attracted many specialists right from the beginning of archaeology, initially because the graves provided ‘closed archaeological contexts’, frequently perceived as snapshots of the past times, containing intact objects suitable for dating and typological classification. More recently the study of funerary practices played a critical role in the development of processual and post-processual archaeology (Parker Pearson 1999; Chapman 2004; Brown 2007; Laneri 2007, etc.), as they were considered important social-political means of expressing individual and communal status or identity, displaying ideologies, asserting power relations, etc. Furthermore the funerary and commemorative practices received significant attention in recent archaeological literature seeking to understand the ways in which various individuals and social groups engaged with the real or mythical past (Jones 2003; 2007, 39–46; Williams 2003; 2004, 419–420; Van Dyke–Alcock 2003, etc.; for the manipulation of material culture within these ‘technologies of remembrance’ see also Castillo Et Al. 1996). It has been therefore noted that both individuals and groups used different ‘technologies of remembrance’ to fulfil a variety of goals – to maintain social cohesion, to built, reiterate or modify aspects defining individual or communal identities and status, to support territorial claims or an outstanding lineage, etc. The systematic reference to tradition plays an important role in these commemorative practices (and also in funerary ceremonies) by providing a sense of continuity and familiarity, as well as the necessary formal and repetitive elements which define all types of ritual. As ritualised public events they are characterised by a large degree of stability, but certain less formalised elements can be modified or ‘improved’ to convey certain ideological or symbolic meanings (Cohen 1985, 49–50; Bradley 1991, 209–212; Castillo Et Al. 1996, 7–10). * A draft of this article was discussed within the Getty Seminar The Arts of Rome’s Provinces, and the author is grateful to the Getty Foundation for supporting the project and to the organizers, N. Kampen and S. Alcock, for the invitation to be part of this project, as well as to G. Woolf, E. Jerem and P. Ramsl for comments and suggestions. Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin, 2012, p. 503–529 504 | M. Egri Moreover the traditions, as more-or-less formally transmitted practices, beliefs or values, usually experiencing a slow evolution during longer periods, can be intentionally modified or even invented on certain occasions to achieve a variety of goals. Albeit the invention or manipulation of tradition has been mostly discussed in modern contexts (Hobsbawm–Ranger 1992), the practice also characterised earlier periods, see for example the Early Bronze Age England (Mullin 2001), Classical and Hellenistic Sparta (Flower 2002) or Athens (Gehrke 2009), and closer to the present subject, the Cisalpine (MartinKilcher 1998, 234–239), Roman Palestine (Belayche 2009) or the Batavians in Roman times (Roymans 2009). Hobsbawm (1992, 4–6) notes that the invented traditions occur more frequently at times of social stress, when local structures and social patterns are often challenged by newcomers, or even from the inside, due to political, demographic, economic or military events. Another important observation is that the invented traditions always incorporate older, genuine elements, facilitating their adoption and integration into existing social practices and systems of values. Returning to the subject of this study, in the territory between the Sava and the middle Danube rivers (Fig. 1) one such socially challenging period was determined by the gradual advance of the Roman power, starting in the late Republican – early Augustan times. The administrative, military and economic changes of the last decades of the 1st century BC and the first half of the 1st century AD, which defined the creation of Pannonia as a Roman province, had a major impact on the social structure of indigenous communities (for the main political, military and administrative events in the region see Mócsy 1974; Fitz 1993; Wilkes 1996; Horvat–Bavdek 2009, 132–150, with further bibliography). However the present analysis is concentrating on only certain aspects resulting from the analysis of archaeological evidence belonging to the funerary domain. Fig. 1. Map of Pannonia with the sites mentioned in text. From this point of view perhaps the most striking phenomenon in early provincial Pannonia is the resurgence of the practice of carefully interring the human remains in properly set up funerary structures, which was abandoned at the end of the LT C1 sub-phase in most of the discussed area (for the Late Iron Age relative and absolute chronology in the Carpathian Basin and south-eastern Alpine region, and the correlation with Central Europe see Božič 2008, 144–148, Tab. 5; Rustoiu–Egri 2011, 18; Guštin 2011). A consistent part of these early provincial burials is clearly related to the newcomers, but in many cases the practice also resurfaced in different indigenous communities. In latter situations the funerary rites and rituals frequently resemble the Late Iron Age ones, albeit commonly including grave goods of non-local origin. At the same time formal burials containing cremated human remains continued to be used by several communities from southern Pannonia during the last phases of the Late Iron Age. They frequently maintained the traditional funerary rites and rituals during the early provincial times, although gradually incorporating grave goods of foreign origin. ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 505 The persistence of local traditions, including the funerary ones, was often considered a form of resistance to Romanization (Mócsy 1974, 150–151;1 Wells 1999, 159–160) if not of the backward character or the isolation of certain settlements and of their inhabitants. Similarly, the adoption of written tombstones or of other Roman status-related paraphernalia was commonly considered a sign of the emulation which had driven the local elites, eager to become Romans. However, this interpretative model is mono-dimensional, presuming that each individual is characterised by a single, static identity throughout his or her entire life, and ignoring the variability of ‘human biographies’ as products of individual and collective actions and attitudes (in the way argued by Robb 2007, 288), and their diverse symbolic and material expressions. More than that, the variability of the social, political and economic environments in which local individuals and groups lived and inter-related, as well as their physical and social mobility, or the structural development and dynamic of the provincial society, are often overlooked. Therefore the article is going to investigate the reasons behind the preservation of certain Late Iron Age funerary practices during the early provincial times and the ways in which they were sometimes combined with carefully selected Roman symbols of status and identity to achieve a variety of personal and collective goals. The resurgence of proper burials in central and north-western Pannonia is discussed using case studies, the analysis focusing on the role played by local funerary traditions and places in the construction and maintenance of collective social memory, as well as in the creation and reiteration of new personal or group identities. Dolenjska – archaeological evidence Starting with examples which illustrate the continuous practice of interring cremated human remains in properly set up graves during the later phases of the Late Iron Age (LT C2–D), some communities from southern Pannonia are brought into discussion, more precisely those from Dolenjska region between the Krka and Sava rivers, in nowadays Slovenia (Fig. 1). According to ancient authors the area was inhabited by Latobici communities of Celtic origin, which very probably arrived there around the end of the 4th century BC, but archaeological evidence is also underlining the existence of an earlier indigenous substratum (see Guštin 2011 for further comments). Several cemeteries dated to the middle and late La Tène, and continuing in the early provincial times, were investigated starting from the late 19th century, but only some were completely published: Novo mesto (different burial plots, Knez 1992; Božič 2008), Bela Cerkev (Dular 1991) and Pristava near Trebnje (Knez 1969; Slabe 1993). Moreover the funerary inventories recovered from Novo mesto–Ljubljanska cesta were only partially reconstituted and several graves from this plot and from nearby Beletov vrt were disturbed, so their contents may be incomplete (Knez 1992, 84–85; Božič 2008, 13–28, 112). On the other hand only some of the most spectacular graves from Verdun near Stopičah (Breščak 1995) and Mihovo (Windl 1976, his doctoral dissertation remained unpublished) are available for investigations. Anthropological analyses of the cremated human remains were carried out only for Novo mesto– Beletov vrt cemetery (Tomazo-Ravnik 1992), but unfortunately they provided limited information regarding the gender and age of the deceased. As a consequence the primary analysis of the inventory had to rely on the presence of certain gender-specific artefacts. Their identification was mainly based on the absence/presence of “opposed symbols” (Péré-Noguès 2008, 152), for example the presumed exclusive placing of weaponry in male graves, the most plausible functionality and frequency of certain gender-related objects in daily life, or the depiction of some jewellery and garment accessories on figurative monuments (see further comments in Guštin 1984, 313–315; Egri 2012; a nearly similar methodology in Martin-Kilcher 1998). Although the biological gender or age might not coincide with the gender or age identity assumed or expressed in funerary contexts (Díaz-Andreu 2005; Péré-Noguès 2008), the present discussion is only taking into consideration the latter ones. Moreover the structure of each assemblage has to be analysed and not only certain objects, to identify the gender and age identity of the deceased, since the grave goods and their particular association may have had multiple significances at both personal and collective levels. In the Dolenjska cemeteries typical LT C2–D1 funerary inventories belonging to men (Pl. 1/2) usually contain a few garment accessories, weaponry and military equipment (swords, spears, shields and 1 A. Mócsy also interestingly suggests that Roman influence may have created the opportunity to express or revive local practices and beliefs, and the local elites actively chose to combine certain traditional features with Roman means of expressing status and identity in order to adapt to the new social-political environment. 506 | M. Egri sometimes helmets), and in some cases knifes or toiletries. Ceramic assemblages frequently consist of a set of three ceramic vessels, a footed ribbed goblet (Fig. 2), a large bi-truncated flagon and a bowl or a small jar, albeit some male graves only contain the mentioned specific drinking vessel (Knez 1992, 88, pl. 88–90, fig. 11; Božič 1999, 198–199; Guštin 2011, 125–126). At the same time contemporaneous burials belonging to women (Pl. 1/1) usually include jewellery and garment accessories (mainly the typical pair or set of brooches), toiletries or utensils and quite frequently more than three ceramic vessels, mainly bowls, jars and flagons of various dimensions, together with the footed ribbed goblet. The intention was very probably to display an abundance of foodstuffs as a symbol of household prosperity and to accompany the deceased in the afterlife, which may explain the preference for storage and serving vessels. Food (mainly pork meat) and beverage offerings were commonly placed in both male and female burials, whereas similar foodstuffs were probably consumed during the funerals (Guštin 1984, 313; Turk 1992). At the same time the frequent presence of a single, very specific drinking vessel (the footed ribbed goblet, see Fig. 2) in burials seems to underline the individual character of the personhood which is maintained and expressed as such in funerary contexts (for the individual/dividual personhood, see below). This particular ceramic form is also pointing to a well-defined convivial tradition of these communities. Therefore it may be presumed that the single goblet was also meant to accompany the deceased in an afterlife in which feasting played an important part, requiring an appropriate drinking vessel. First imported items of Italic origin appear in graves dated to the LT D2, their number increasing significantly in the Augustan and early Tiberian period in all of the mentioned cemeteries (Pl. 2). During this period and in the early provincial times the rite of cremation was preserved, whereas the shape and structure of the burial pit, and the ways in which human remains were placed inside, display a greater variation (Knez 1992, 85–86; Guštin 2011, 127), very probably due to foreign influences and population movements. At the same time the typical structure of the indigenous funerary inventories was largely preserved and the main functional categories of grave goods can be still recognized in many burials despite the incorporation of an increasing number of non-local objects. In the case of weaponry or military equipment, several gladii and some helmets of Weisenau type were recovered from male Fig. 2. Typical footed ribbed goblet graves from Verdun near Stopičah and Mihovo. Archaeological from Novo mesto–Beletov vrt and written evidence indicate that some of the locals served as (after Knez 1992). auxiliary soldiers during the late Augustan and Tiberian times (Guštin 1984, 349; Breščak 1995, 21; Gaspari 2008, 36–38; see also Mráv 2006, 49–51), and returned home with their belongings, some of which were later placed in graves. At least two burials (no. 1 and 136) from Verdun near Stopičah (Breščak 1995, 18–21) (Pl. 2/3), which seem to belong to former auxiliary soldiers, contain military equipment and sigillata plates of Italic origin, alongside other goods, like bronze vessels, broken amphorae and typical sets consisting of three local ceramic vessels. The legionary equipment (helmets and gladii) is quite often present in other burials from Dolenjska region (and from other areas in the south-eastern Alpine region), so it has been presumed that the deceased were local chieftains who obtained or assumed the Roman military rank (Gaspari 2008, 41–43; Mráv 2006, 51–52). Still, the offensive weaponry was sometimes ritually bent (for example the sword from grave 1 at Verdun near Stopičah), irrespective of its origin, following a traditional, widespread custom (for the ritual destruction of weaponry in Late Iron Age contexts see Rapin 1993; Lejars 1994, 113–116; Rustoiu 2009, 3–4). During the same period the local tableware was gradually replaced by thin-walled and sigillata vessels of north Italic origin (Zabehlicky-Scheffenegger 1992; Márton 2008, 136–140; Egri 2012) in both male and female graves from all of the mentioned cemeteries. However, true Italic sigillata services are missing, so several plates, dishes and bowls were sometimes combined according to local dinning preferences, or more likely, funerary prescriptions. A relevant example is the grave 55 from Novo mesto– Beletov vrt (Knez 1992, 35–36, pl. 17–18) in which several sigillata belonging to services I and II were combined with other local and Roman vessels in a traditional manner (Pl. 2/1), being probably intentionally broken at the end of the funerary meal (Márton 2008, 140). On the other hand, Italic sigillata drinking forms were less successful and the local footed ribbed goblets remained in use for a while, being slowly ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 507 replaced by Italic thin-walled beakers and cups. Still, the traditional habit of placing a single drinking vessel in each grave was maintained. As mentioned above, a few graves containing weaponry also included some bronze vessels of Italic origin, like beakers and simpula, which were integrated into the drinking-related assemblages commonly encountered in male burials (Egri 2008, 53–54, fig. 3.9). The practice is also known in cemeteries from the Cisalpine, although in this case the metal vessels were also placed in female graves (Martin-Kilcher 1998, 210–211 and 215–216). Some new types and variants of brooches (Alesia, Jezerine, strongly profiled etc), of local or foreign origin were also integrated into the indigenous costume. The typical (so-called Norican-Pannonian) female one usually consisted of a pair or set of brooches and a decorated belt with a large buckle, often depicted later on provincial funerary monuments (Garbsch 1985, 554–557, Tab. 2, Abb. 4 and 12/3–4). On the other hand lamps and balsamaria of Italic origin can be listed amongst the newly-adopted grave-goods, having no functional correspondence in Late Iron Age funerary inventories from Dolenjska (Knez 1992, 90–91). Both categories of finds are commonly encountered in typical Italic burials of the same period (Fasold–Witteyer 1998; Wells 1999, 159) and also in early urban and military sites from southern Pannonia (Mikl Curk 1995). Still very few come from indigenous contexts dated before the late Tiberian period. Their presence may suggest that a few individuals might have got accustomed with some daily practices of Mediterranean origin, like the use of olive oil-fuelled lighting devices and bathing/ cosmetics, very probably through regular direct contacts with people coming from the mentioned area. Thus it has to be noted that during the early provincial times the indigenous communities from Dolenjska region actively preserved their traditional funerary rite and rituals, while selecting and using only certain foreign items and foodstuffs as grave-goods. The latter nearly always replaced indigenous grave-goods having similar functions within the rituals. The same can be said about Roman military equipment which replaced the local weaponry in the late Augustan and Tiberian times. Still it has to be noted that the practice of placing weaponry in local graves was gradually abandoned in Dolenjska (see the chronological list of such burials from entire Pannonia in Márton 2002, 136–144), although other traditional material and symbolic means of expressing status and identity remained in use for a longer period. The offering of an abundance of foodstuffs as a means of underlining household prosperity and status remained a relevant practice, whereas the use of less accessible containers and dining utensils (Italic sigillata or bronze and glass items), or beverage (wine amphorae), was probably perceived as an enhancing addition. The individuals were still accompanied in the afterlife by their personal possessions and individual feasting implements, sometimes consisting of complete dining sets. The adoption of new elements, like different structures in the burial pit, the occasional use of containers for the cremated remains or the placing of lamps and balsamaria, was slow and appeared under the influence of newcomers or as a consequence of population movements (including the local warriors recruited as auxiliaries). These funerary practices resembling the Late Iron Age ones remained nearly unchanged for at least two generations, the only other addition being an occasional reference to the veteran status of certain individuals, who perhaps gained prominence in the local community due to their connections with Roman authority. Moreover the veteran status might have been perceived as an added quality to the warrior identity which was still expressed in a largely traditional manner. Funerals and late La Tène society – a theoretical excurse Slightly different seems to be the situation in most of the region between the Drava and the middle Danube, in which properly set up graves containing human remains reappeared after more than a century and a half, quite frequently reusing older burial plots. As previously mentioned the practice of interring human remains in properly set up burials was abandoned at the end of the LT C1, so it has been presumed that the corpses were disposed off in a manner which left little or no direct archaeological traces. Still skeleton parts, cremated or not, were discovered in a variety of contexts dated to the LT C2 and LT D sub-phases, the great majority lacking the usual characteristics of a proper burial: the careful placing of human remains in a purposefully set up burial structure, accompanied by material evidence of the funerary rituals and other related practices (the so-called ‘gestes funéraires’); in one word they are lacking the intentionality, in the way defined by Leclerc (1990). The absence of proper burials has been noted on a wider area of the late La Tène Central Europe, being commonly interpreted as a consequence of some radical changes in the religious structures and 508 | M. Egri concepts of the local communities (further comments in Krämer 1985, 34–38; Babeș 1988, 23–29; Morris 1992, 47–48). Moreover, the way in which the corpse is regarded and treated, both concretely and symbolically, is directly related to the way in which the personhood and its relation with the physical body is acknowledged by a community. In certain societies the individual personhood is perceived as the sum of own actions and attitudes, and is related to a concrete, bounded entity – the body, so this connection persists after the death of the person, being reflected in the treatment of the corpse. Other societies perceive the social person as a dividual entity, divisible and composed of multiple features, many resulting from the interactions with others, and the physical body is only a part of this symbolic structure (ParkerPearson 1999, 45–56; Fowler 2004, 3–5; Robb 2007; Chapman 2010, 30–31). As a consequence a variety of mortuary treatments of the human body may be encountered between and within different societies, and dismemberment in particular may have various motivations and meanings (Robb 2007, 293–294), so the attempt to find a single explanation for an apparently widespread phenomenon without taking into consideration other regional factors can be unproductive. A significant part of the mortuary practices, including those concerning the disposal of the corpse, are designed to facilitate the separation of the deceased from the world of the living and their integration into another world by severing the connections established between the deceased as a social person and the community (Hertz 2004). During the separation phase the identity and also the personhood of the deceased are transformed, and the process may require a shorter or longer period in which the material remains of the deceased also suffer physical transformations. In the case of dividual personhoods, both the social person and the physical body may have to be removed from one world and reintegrated into another, as different entities, by partitioning them symbolically or concretely (Fowler 2004, 44–55). In certain societies the human remains or at least some parts may serve further as a symbolic bridge between these two worlds. For example a symbolic partition may require the distribution of the personal belongings of the deceased to relatives and friends in a more-or-less formalised manner. These objects are invested with a dual function in this case, first to restore the integrity of the social structure defining the group to which the deceased previously belonged by sharing things that facilitate the recollection of communal bonds, and second to reintegrate the deceased as a different entity in the group’s collective social memory through a mnemonic. Similarly the practice of fragmenting and dispersing the corpse or the use of multi-stage mortuary treatments (implying a variety of procedures) may suggest the existence of the concept of dividual personhood (Chapman 2000, 134–145; Rebay-Salisbury 2010, 65–66). This in turns points to a society in which the individuals and their identities are perceived as combinations of personal and collective features, relations and values, and are therefore subsumed, in life or death, to the well-being of their social group or community. As in the case of symbolic partitioning, the fragmented corpse may define the final stage of separation from the community of the living, in which the connections between the former personhood of the deceased and the community are severed. At the same time it may contribute to a faster restoration of social equilibrium after the separation of the deceased, and also to the collective construction of the group’s social memory and identity. Furthermore the existence of the concept of dividual personhood may explain the differences noted in the mortuary treatment of different individuals and social groups within certain communities, defined by gender, age, economic or religious status, for example the multi-stage funerary practices encountered in some cemeteries of the 5th–3rd centuries BC in the Carpathian Basin and the Lower Danube region (Babeș–Miriţoiu 2011), or the proper albeit simple burial of infants within settlements in contrast with the deliberate dispersal of the body parts of certain adults or the elaborate funerals of others in pre-Roman Dacia (Popa 2012). In certain cases the corpses belonging to prominent individuals may suffer successive mortuary treatments, including fragmentation and sometimes a ritualised dispersion of body parts, within a process of veneration and perhaps heroisation, through which the deceased were included amongst the mythical ancestors guarding the integrity and well-being of the family and community. Still, the disposal of the corpse was only a part of the funerary scenario and several other practices define different stages before and after that part, like the mourning, the restoration of the social structure affected by the departure of the deceased through purification or feasting, the subsequent commemoration etc (Hertz 2004; Morris 1992, 1–2; Parker Pearson 1999, 142–168). As in the case of the disposal of the corpse, there is a wide variability of the mortuary practices between and within different communities, and of their resulting material traces (Fahlander–Oestigaard 2008, 6), and they can change over time in a subtle or more dramatic manner due to internal or external factors. ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 509 The death of any member of a social group2 is always a challenging event, threatening the internal structure and the often complicated network of relationships established between its members and with other social groups. For that reason the funerary ceremonies, the commemorative rituals, as well as the less formalized associated practices, seek to restore both the internal group structure and the related networks of relationships, albeit some individuals or groups may use the event to challenge precisely these things for their own benefit. Thus even in the cases in which the human remains were not placed in properly set up burial structures, giving the impression that no archaeological traces of the funerary ceremonies can be identified, other elements of the accompanying rituals, defining the remaining mentioned stages, may have left enough evidence. For example the ‘consumption’ (literally during private or public feasts, or symbolically by fire, ‘mutilation’ or ‘drowning’, etc.) of more-or-less large quantities of offerings, or the ritual destruction of personal belongings of the deceased or of the gifts brought by mourners, which characterised the mortuary practices of certain communities, may provide relevant archaeological evidence. Such ceremonies were usually organised in specially-designed places in which the offerings were displayed and ‘consumed’ in one way or another, while the remains and other related objects were ritually destroyed or discarded, being very probably considered taboo due to their connection with the death. Since at least a part of the funerary rituals were meant to facilitate the transition of the deceased from the world of the living to the after-world, the objects used in these practices may have had an uncertain or even dangerous character, as they were ‘travelling’ both worlds. Thus it may be presumed that mainly the concepts regarding the relation between the human body and personhood, and the character of the latter in relation with the social structure of local communities were modified during the LT C2 and LT D phases. It has to be noted that the late La Tène is characterized by significant transformations in the social structure of many communities from Central Europe, which led to the appearance of oppida and of other centres of power, changing the social hierarchies and the ways in which different social groups interacted within and between the communities. Furthermore the social competition3 might have focused less on personal qualities and achievements during this period, so the size and nature of the social and economic networks, as well as the degree of success in controlling and maintaining them to obtain and reiterate a certain status, were more relevant. As a result, other types of ceremonies or rituals more suitable for the mentioned purposes became important, for example the collective feasts and rituals in which the organizers could affirm their status and authority, and assert their economic and political control and prowess. Thus in contrast with the early and middle La Tène funerary ceremonies in which the body of the deceased, as a material expression of the individual personhood, was the symbolic and practical centre, thus requiring a period of exposure or preservation, and further commemorative manipulations, or the creation of a material replica (for example a statue or a mortuary mask), the practices varying from one community to another, during the late La Tène the human remains were relegated to a different role, reflecting not only the dividual character of the personhood, but also the place of the deceased within the social dynamic of the community. In a few words, during the early and middle La Tène the deceased was the main subject of the funerals as a public ritual, whereas during the late La Tène he/she was mainly the pretext, and the centre of interest move on to the social group to whom he/ she belonged and who organized the ceremony. As a consequence it might be presumed that many public elements of the middle La Tène funerary ceremonies might have survived throughout the late La Tène, which explains their apparent resurrection in the early provincial times. North-western and central Pannonia – archaeological evidence Returning to the archaeological evidence coming from the region between the Drava and the middle Danube, some representative cemeteries located in north-western and central Pannonia (Fig. 1) will be discussed: Katzelsdorf (Urban 1984b; Urban Et Al. 1985) and Weiden am See (Urban 1984a) in 2 3 The term ‘social group’ is preferred to the more restrictive ones ‘community’, ‘tribe’, ‘clan’ or ‘family’, because is avoiding social categorization and the inferred social relationships. Furthermore any individual might have concomitantly belonged to a series of social groups, each having to deal in one way or another with the loss, and at the same time he/she might have been excluded from others due to various reasons. Thus even an outcast or an infant were members of at least one social group. It is frequently considered that only the elites were engaged in various forms of social competition, but nearly every individual and certainly every social group was engaged in one way or another, at various levels and scales, the scopes being very different and mainly determined by the social dynamic of each community and its reactions to internal and external factors (political, economic, cultural, demographic, etc.). 510 | M. Egri present day Austria, which contain only tumulus graves, and Magyarszerdahely (Horváth 1979; 2005) and Cserszegtomaj (formerly known as Keszthely–Dobogó; Szántó 1953) in Hungary, consisting of flat graves. The two mentioned tumulus cemeteries were first investigated in the late 19th and early 20th century so archaeological information is limited, but Otto H. Urban resumed the excavations in the 1980s at Katzelsdorf, and both older and newer evidence were published, including anthropological analyses. The Late Iron Age contexts from this cemetery consist of two tumuli dated to the LT B2–C1 (Urban Et Al. 1985, 25) and partially disturbed in ancient times, and at least one or two other damaged burials (very probably contemporaneous) from which only some of the metal objects (weapons) were recovered. The rite was of inhumation, with the human remains placed in a rectangular pit with timber panelling (scarcely preserved); both skeletons recovered from the tumuli belonged to adult men, according to the anthropological analysis. The funerary inventories (Pl. 3) include weaponry, a few garment accessories, toiletries and typical wheel-made vessels (large flagons, jars and bowls), as well as remains of meat offerings (Urban Et Al. 1985, 17–24, Abb. 7–8 and 11). It seems that during this phase the small cemetery was exclusively used to bury deceased belonging to the warrior social group. Very probably the location (Fig. 3) was purposefully chosen in the close vicinity of an Early Iron Age tumulus (Urban Et Al. 1985, 15, Abb. 2), a suitable and very visible marker of a sacred landscape in which remains of the – real or imaginary – worthy ancestors were laid to rest. Fig. 3. Plan of the tumulus cemetery at Katzelsdorf (after Urban 1984b). The same burial plot was reused during the early provincial period, when at least four tumuli (only traces of the fifth have been identified on the field) were erected (Urban 1984b, 74–77, Abb. 3). The funerary rite is different, the corpses being cremated on the spot (bustum burials) together with most of the funerary offerings. Two tumuli include two graves each, the first one containing the remains of an adult and of a newborn, whereas the second tumulus contains a burial belonging to a woman and another to a man. As previously mentioned, most of the grave-goods are badly damaged by fire, but the functional structure of the inventories (Pl. 4) resembles quite well the Late Iron Age ones, despite the discontinuity of proper burials throughout the LT C2–D sub-phases (Nagy 2002, 302). They consist of jewellery and garment accessories, as well as several ceramic, glass and bronze vessels of local and Italic origin, which probably contained food and beverage offerings, including meat (Urban 1984b, 82–95, Abb. 11–15 and 19–20). Weapons were also placed in graves, surely in tumulus 2 (Pl. 4/2) and probably also in tumuli 1 and 4. Furthermore the iron sword from the tumulus 2 was ritually bent in a traditional manner and buried separately in a small pit, next to the cremated remains of a man (Urban 1984b, 92–94). Urban has considered that the deceased from Katzelsdorf were of Germanic origin and settled in the area during the population movements which marked Vannius’ rule. His interpretation is based on the presence of certain specific artefacts, like the long sword and the shield-boss from tumulus 2 or the bronze fittings of a drinking horn from tumulus 4, as well as on the general dating of the three larger burials in the late Tiberian – early Flavian period (Urban 1984b, 95–98). Márton has contested this interpretation and ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 511 dating, and argued that the deposition of weaponry in provincial graves cannot be confined solely to the Germanic environment. Indeed the practice has been well documented in several indigenous graves from Pannonia, having Iron Age origins (Márton 2002, 133–137; Mráv 2006, 49–54). Moreover, as previously mentioned, the functional structure of the funerary inventories resembles quite well the local Late Iron Age one, but the latter also has several common elements with the one characterizing the burials from south-western Slovakia, usually described as Germanic. In the 1st century AD this territory was inhabited by a mixture of populations having various origins, dominated by Germanic elites who gained prominence during the Augustan times (Vrba 2008, 25–26). The so-called Quadi burial practices of the first half of the 1st century AD are characterized by the rite of cremation (the few inhumation graves being usually assigned to the elites), the remains being placed in urn or directly in a pit, whereas the grave-goods, usually burnt and broken, consist mainly of garment accessories, ceramic and metal vessels, toiletries and utensils, and weaponry in the case of men (Kolník 1980; Vrba 2008, 44–47). Aside from the political and military events of the LT D and early provincial period, the common ethnic and cultural background as well as the frequent interactions and population movements across the Danube may also explain the mentioned similarities. In this context it has to be noted that the funerary inventories from Katzelsdorf consist of goods having various origins, not only Roman or Germanic, but also several ceramic vessels displaying Norican, Celtic or Dacian features (see for example Urban 1984b, Abb. 19/3–6), once again pointing to the ethnic and cultural mixture which characterized north-western Pannonia during the mentioned period. However these ethnic labels are irrelevant since those who were engaged in the funerary ceremonies more likely selected the vessels and other goods which were first, accessible to them in terms of market availability and purchase power, and second, considered appropriate for various specific functions within the rituals, irrespective of their origin. Furthermore, the choice of the burial place and the external aspect of the grave are even more relevant. Tumulus burials are scarce in the Germanic environment from southwestern Slovakia – the single known cemetery is Zemplín, in south-eastern Slovakia (Budinský-Krčka– Lamiová-Schmiedelová 1990) –, but quite popular in certain areas from Noricum, Pannonia and other provinces (Becker 1993, Abb. 1; Nagy 2002, 300, Abb. 1; Hudeczek 2004; Crowley 2009, 114–115), in which the majority of them are related to local elites. In north-western Pannonia certain members of the Boii elites, who developed and maintained fruitful relationships with Roman administration and were thus able to preserve their social status, expressed a distinctive preference for this type of burial, albeit its origin is still disputed (Becker 1993, 367–368; Nagy 2002, 299–301; Palágyi–Nagy 2002, 158–160; with further bibliography). Furthermore, at Katzelsdorf the provincial tumuli were erected in the close vicinity of the Early and Late Iron Ages ones (Fig. 3), again pointing to a desire to create a connection with a localized mythical past and possibly to develop a kind of cult place. In this case the real ethnic identity of the deceased is less relevant, since the burials and their location were meant to emphasize a certain status and authority within the local community by appealing to traditional familiar symbols. On the other hand Mócsy (1974, 57–58) already suggested many years ago that Vannius and his followers might have belonged to the local Boii population, but thrived under Germanic rule. In the second cemetery brought into discussion, at Weiden am See, the tumuli dated to the early provincial times were erected amongst others belonging to the Early Iron Age period, but only some of them were investigated (Barb 1938, 177–184, Taf. LVI/1–7; Urban 1984a, 170–171). Unfortunately, aside from some of the imported grave-goods which were analysed by different specialists (further bibliography in Márton 2008, 168, cat. no. 341–342), the information regarding their archaeological contexts is limited and the exact composition of each funerary inventory is difficult to reconstruct. The ritual is of cremation, with the remains placed in an urn (tumulus I) or in a pit (tumuli II and III), surrounded by rectangular limestone structures within the mounds. From what has been published so far the funerary inventory of each burial contains several broken ceramic vessels: north Italic and south Gaulish sigillata plates and bowls (Pl. 5), and also local forms resembling late La Tène jars and flagons. All of the investigated provincial tumuli also contain glass and bronze vessels and garment accessories, whereas a small stone relief showing two trumpet players on the front side and a dancer on the left lateral side was recovered from tumulus II. Márton has recently noted that the composition of the sigillata assemblages from tumuli I (13 items) and III (9 items) resemble the so-called early Italic services, combining vessels which are complementary from a functional point of view even if they were purchased in successive stages (Márton 2008, 139–140). More than that, there is a chronological interval between first purchase and the date on which the dining sets were used in funerals, of nearly half of a century, suggesting that the vessels might 512 | M. Egri have been used for a while in households before being placed on the pyre. Tumulus I also contains several fragmentary bronze vessels: casseroles, a ladle, a patera, a beaker, a bowl and a bucket (Urban 1984a, 170; Radnóti 1938, 40–43, 87, 103) probably belonging to a complete drinking set. The owners might have been familiarised with the Mediterranean style of dining, perhaps during the military service,4 or more likely during their – perhaps occasionally convivial – encounters with the representatives of Roman authority of Mediterranean origin. However the practice of placing in grave several vessels containing food and beverage offerings, as well as dining ware, is not of Roman origin, but of indigenous one, resembling the situation encountered in certain LT B2–C1 burials from the same region (Nagy 2002, 302) – for example at Mannersdorf, female grave 3 or male graves 117 and 230 (Ramsl 2011; see also Nebehay 1993, 78–80), and mainly in the already discussed tumulus burials from Katzelsdorf (Urban Et Al. 1985). Similarly the presence of a bronze drinking set of Mediterranean origin does not necessarily mean that the owners used it in the way it would have been used in its place of origin. The next two case-studies come from flat cemeteries which were also reused during the early provincial times. The one from Magyarszerdahely (Fig. 4) was investigated and published in the 1970s, and consists of 29 Late Iron Age and 34 provincial burials, plus several stray finds coming from disturbed contexts, a large part of the burial plot being destroyed before the excavations (Horváth 1979; 2005). The few LT C1 funerary inventories recovered from male burials (Pl. 6/3) consist of garment accessories, weaponry, toiletries and ceramic vessels, usually typical bi-truncated flagons with flared rims, jars and bowls. Contemporaneous female burials (Pl. 6/1–2) usually contain jewellery and garment accessories, toiletries and sometimes utensils, and the same ceramic forms as in the case of men. Remains of meat offerings have also been noted in some graves. During this period the funerary rite was of cremation, with the remains placed in a pit, possibly bundled in a cloth (Horváth 1979, 52–65; Horváth 2005, 62). The burial ground was reused (Fig. 4) starting with the middle of the 1st Fig. 4. Plan of the cemetery at Magyarszerdahely century AD and up to the first half of the (after Horváth 1979). 3rd century AD (Horváth 1979, 90–92). It has to be noted that the provincial graves never disturb the Late Iron Age ones and the general location of the former may suggest that the people were aware of the presence of older burials despite the chronological gap of more than a century and a half (Horváth 1979, fig. 14). The earliest provincial graves are of cremation, with the remains placed in a pit, whereas later they were also placed in urn. In certain cases, for example in graves 1, 3, 33, 36, 53, 62 etc, the functional structure of the funerary inventory resembles quite well that of the LT C1 ones, albeit the weaponry is missing – the knife having a 18 cm long blade from grave 34 is more likely an utensil (Horváth 1979, 27, no. 1, pl. 24/1). Ceramic assemblages (Pl. 7) consist mainly of Roman forms, bowls, dishes, beakers, jars and pitchers which replaced traditional vessels having similar functions, many being very probably used as containers for food and beverage offerings. 4 The army is frequently considered the main means of introducing the Mediterranean style of dining, albeit the military diet, as well as the related culinary and convivial practices, was quite different and continued to differentiate over time due to cultural and economic regional influences (see for example Pearce 2002; Carroll 2005). ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 513 Due to the predominance of Roman material, especially sigillata, and the presence of graffiti containing Latin names on some vessels Horváth suggested that some of the deceased were of northern Italic origin and the local population was rapidly Romanized, taking over the burial customs of the newcomers (Horváth 1979, 92–94). Still, in several cases the funerary rite and rituals of earlier burials are different from those identified in contemporaneous Italic graves. In the latter situations the human cremated remains were usually placed in a container together with very little inventory, consisting mainly of personal objects like jewellery and garment accessories (usually heavily burnt on the pyre), a lamp or an unguentarium and sometimes a coin or a small vessel for wine libations, whereas food and beverage offering were largely absent (Fasold 1993; Fasold–Witteyer 1998; Wells 1999, 159). Such burials are also present at Magyarszerdahely, for example in grave 29 (Horváth 1979, 22–23, pl. 18/29). On the other hand, as mentioned above, the practice of placing several vessels containing food offerings has a local Late Iron Age origin, which may suggest that the indigenous population preserved some of their traditional funerary rituals throughout the late La Tène. The last cemetery brought into discussion is located at Cserszegtomaj (known as Keszthely–Dobogó) in Transdanubia, Hungary, being excavated in the 1940s. An archaeological report was published a few years later (Szántó 1953), whereas some finds were included in repertoires and specialists studies (Márton 2008, 155, cat. 64, with further bibliography). The site consists of several Early Iron Age (HaB) and a few provincial graves, and sparse LT B traces; other graves might have been destroyed. It seems that the Early Iron Age cemetery was reused from the first half of the 1st century AD, according to the dating of some finds (brooches and Italic pottery). Unfortunately the funerary inventories and their contexts of discovery are only summarily presented in the original report and anthropological analyses are missing. In most cases the funerary rite is of cremation, with the remains placed in urn; the single recovered inhumation grave is the later dated no. 14 (Szántó 1953, 55, no. 14). The inventories consist of garment accessories, sometimes jewellery or utensils, and several ceramic vessels of both local – jars and bowls – and Roman origin – jars, bowls, dishes and beakers, including some northern Italic sigillata (Márton 2008, 138). Grave 12 also contain an iron spear head alongside many other grave-goods, like garment accessories, a bracelet, a knife and several ceramic vessels, some containing remains of meat offerings (Szántó 1953, 55, no. 12, pl. XVI/1–8, 10–12, 14–17, 19, 23, 27; XVII/19–22). The author lists another iron spear head amongst the finds from grave 24 (Szántó 1953, 56, no. 24/5), which is not illustrated, but the identification can be dismissed since the total length of the supposed weapon is of only 7 cm, so the object is perhaps a knife. A more interesting find is coming from the same grave 24, a two-handled grey beaker (Fig. 5/1) bearing the burnished graffiti DA BIBERE (Szántó 1953, 56, no. 24/2, pl. XVII/28). This vessel is typical of the entire Carpathian Basin during the Late Iron Age, being a creation of the local potters who combined an indigenous form – the tall bi-truncated bowl – with certain features of the Hellenistic kantharoi (Rustoiu–Egri 2011, 44–51, fig. 4.2; 15, type II of the Danubian kantharoi). First examples appeared in the LT B2 sub-phase, responding to an increasing demand for the popular twohandled drinking vessels. Beakers that are nearly similar to the one from Cserszegtomaj are frequently encountered in LT C1 funerary contexts, for example at Kistokaj–Kültelkek (Hellebrandt 1999, 206, no. 4, pl. LXXV/1; other finds in Rustoiu–Egri 2011, 125, Annex 3) (Fig. 5/2). 2 1 Fig. 5. 1. Kantharos from grave 24 at Cserszegtomaj (after Mócsy 1974); 2. Kantharos from grave 21 at Kistokaj–Kültelkek (after Hellebrandt 1999). 514 | M. Egri However, this type of Danubian kantharoi seems to have disappeared from settlements and cemeteries in the Carpathian Basin in the first decades of the 2nd century BC, being replaced in certain areas by late variants of the so-called Illyrian–Pannonian kantharoi (Rustoiu–Egri 2011, 103–105, fig. 38). These vessels are characterised by a bi-truncated body, usually having a burnished decoration on the upper half, and two raised vertical handles; the fabric is always grey. In some cases they resemble the middle La Tène Danubian kantharoi, albeit having higher raised handles, for example certain finds from Gomolava which belong to the VIb horizon, corresponding to the 1st century BC (Jovanović–Jovanović 1988, 173, pl. XLIII/3a–b). Similar beakers also appear in the late La Tène settlement at Gellérthegy–Tabán (Bónis 1969, 181, Abb. 59/7). Such two-handled vessels continued to be produced by early provincial workshops, but the body tended to be rounder or ovoid, the handles less raised and the predominant firing is oxidized – for example at Gomolava, many examples being encountered in southern Pannonia and in Moesia Superior close to the Danube (Bojović 1977, 52–53; Brukner 1981, 41). However the shape and colour, as well as the decorative circular elements on the shoulder of the beaker found in grave 24 resembles the older version, suggesting an earlier dating and consequently a longer lifespan of this object. On the other hand the practice of marking personal belongings was widespread in the Roman world for various reasons, being frequently encountered among certain groups sharing a communal living, for example in military camps (Bakker–Galsterer-Kröll 1975, 56; Evans 1987, 199; see also Egri 2007, 44–46 for a wider discussion concerning the presence of graffiti on vessels placed in graves). In these contexts such inscriptions – usually scratched or carefully incised – are mostly found on tableware and consist of names – complete or abbreviated – or particular signs. A separate albeit related category includes inscriptions related to conviviality, more precisely to wine drinking, and Da bibere was one of the most popular, being commonly placed on the upper, most visible part of the drinking vessels.5 Thus the owner of this beaker marked his favourite ware, having a local traditional form, with a truly Roman convivial motto.6 The cemetery from Cserszegtomaj was initially interpreted as belonging to Italic colonists or veterans (Mócsy 1959, 40–41), but the functional structure of the funerary inventories bear no resemblance to the one characterising contemporaneous Italic burials. As previously mentioned they consist of several vessels, tableware and containers loaded with food and probably also with beverage offerings. Furthermore grave 12 contains an iron spear head, which may suggest that the deceased was a former auxiliary soldier (Márton 2002, 136) buried with his weapon according to the indigenous traditions. Grave 24, containing the two-handled beaker bearing the burnished graffiti DA BIBERE, may have also belonged to a local former soldier, or at least to someone who was aware of particular convivial practices commonly associated with the army, but who also cherished a very old vessel. ✴✴✴ The presented examples of funerary contexts from early Roman Pannonia can be formally grouped into two distinct categories, one consisting of cemeteries which were continuously used from the middle La Tène to the early provincial times, and another which comprises burial grounds reused after a gap of at least a century and a half or more. In the case of Dolenjska the traditional functional structure of the funerary inventories was largely maintained during the first decades of the provincial times, but their composition is showing a gradual adoption and integration of various objects of foreign origin. The process already started in the LT D2 subphase, but the number of finds increased in the Augustan and Tiberian times. Amongst the most common foreign items placed in these graves are garment accessories, bronze vessels and fine tableware. They are always replacing local artefacts having similar functions within the funerary assemblages. The Roman weaponry and other pieces of military equipment are also present, albeit the number of burials containing such items is sharply decreasing towards the end of the Tiberian period, the practice being later abandoned in Dolenjska. On the other hand the grave-goods which from a functional point of view have no local correspondents and are related to certain Mediterranean-specific practices, like the olive oil-fuelled lamps, balsamaria and coins are significantly later adopted by the indigenous people from Dolenjska. Several reasons might have determined the gradual replacement of local objects with the foreign ones in funerary contexts. One of the most obvious is the increasing availability of such goods on the 5 6 See various examples in Claustres 1958; the practice continued later in the Roman times, similar mottos being painted on the so-called Rhenish beakers (Symonds 1992, 114). Mócsy 1974, 124, pl. 1b, considered that the vessel is an example of the early acquiring of Roman trappings of life, probably referring to wine drinking which was largely absent in pre-Roman Pannonia (see further on this subject in Egri 2008, 62–63). ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 515 provincial market. In the first instance these had to be brought over mainly from Italy, but provincial ceramic workshops in southern Pannonia started to produce imitations of Roman forms, including thinwalled and sigillata vessels, in the late Tiberian or no later than the early Claudian period (Istenić 1999, 103). As previously mentioned, some of the local people were recruited as auxiliaries during this period, and this activity increased their purchase power and facilitated a direct access to several goods and foodstuffs of foreign origin. On the other hand in certain funerary contexts such goods and foodstuffs might have been preferred due to their novelty. Ceramic, metal and glass vessels mainly of Italic origin are often encountered in large assemblages consisting of several food containers and tableware, which were very probably meant to express the status and economic power of the household or of the social group who organized the funerals. The use of foreign and less accessible ware for displaying and consumption of food and beverage offerings, instead of the local ones, might have been considered an additional enhancing element, especially during the beginning of the discussed period, when they were less common in the indigenous environment. On the other hand the presence of weaponry (sometimes ritually bent), irrespective of origin, is more likely related to the personal status and identity of the deceased, and is following a local La Tène tradition. The decreasing number of finds in comparison with the early and middle La Tène, and then the absence of such artefacts in later provincial burials from Dolenjska may suggest that the martial element ceased to be relevant for the expression of male identity and status. In the second case, in which some indigenous burial grounds were reused in the provincial times after a significant chronological gap, there are two inter-related aspects, first the reappearance of proper burials and second, the apparent rediscovery of tradition. Different motivations might have contributed to the resurgence of the practice of interring cremated human remains in properly set up graves. It is commonly considered that the large number of soldiers and colonists coming in Pannonia during the first decades of the 1st century AD might have contributed to the resurgence of the old local funerary customs, which were abandoned during the late La Tène. This might have happened because either indigenous people wanted to integrate themselves into the new society by adopting a more desirable practice, or they were more likely forced to abandon the late La Tène practices of disposing off the corpses, which must have been significantly different from those commonly encountered in Italy and around the Mediterranean. According to Roman customs (Toynbee 1996, 39–42, 43–50, 54–55; Morris 1992, 31–32, 42–47) the corpses were impure and had to be removed in a certain manner from the world of the living to avoid contamination and restore the social equilibrium. The cremation was preferred during the late Republic and early Empire, perhaps because it was a powerful and rapid technique which reduced the duration of the transformative albeit impure initial phase of separation (RebaySalisbury 2010, 64), but other social, economic or demographic motivations have also been suggested (Morris 1992, 42–49). On the other hand Haselgrove (1987, 116), in his study concerning Gallia Belgica, suggests an interesting hypothesis about the resurgence of proper burials, that the indigenous elites may have lost their major sources of wealth after the Roman conquest, so the local social competition for status moved from sanctuaries and their associated practices to funerals. The latter required less resources and were probably used as means of expressing not only personal or familial identity and status, but also new social and political connections and allegiances. The gradual appearance of mixed families and communities, the military service, the creation of various provincial forms of social aggregation, as well as the adoption of certain foreign deities and of their related beliefs and practices may have also played a role in the resurgence of proper burials within the indigenous communities (examples from other provinces in Morris 1992, 49–50). However, from a sociological point of view, it has been already noted that societies experiencing rapid and socially stressful changes tend to resort almost instinctively to real or invented traditions as points of reference and justification, and funerary practices are commonly involved (Hobsbawm 1992, 4–6; Cohen 1985, 46). Amongst the case-studies brought into discussion, two are focusing on tumulus burials and other two on flat cemeteries. A few common elements are characterizing all of these sites, the reuse of old Iron Age burial grounds and the predominance of funerary inventories which are significantly different from the contemporaneous Italic ones. These local assemblages nearly always include a combination of foreign and indigenous goods, whereas their functional structure frequently resembles the Late Iron Age one. The occasional presence of weaponry, sometimes ritually bent, is also considered as being of indigenous origin. All four cemeteries discussed above were ascribed to different ethnic groups – Roman, more or less rapidly Romanized natives, Germanics etc. Still, these labels are less relevant, first because the ethnic 516 | M. Egri makeup both in the late La Tène and in the early provincial times is more complex and diverse, and is also characterised by a large degree of fluidity due to a quite rapid succession of political, military and demographic events, which might have affected the material expression of status and identity. Aside from that, the question is whether there is a real perpetuation of local funerary traditions, overcoming the chronological gap, or quite disparate elements were combined with carefully chosen local features to obtain a familiar imagine resembling what it has been regarded as traditional practice. Starting from the problem of the funerary rite, it has to be noted that the cremation was not the sole practice during the middle La Tène (see the inhumation burials from Katzelsdorf), but it was widespread in the early 1st century AD in various cultural and ethnic environments. Furthermore the use of different containers for the cremated human remains is encountered in many cemeteries from the region and also in other early provincial graves and in Italy. The predominant use of ceramic urns even in graves containing funerary inventories resembling the Late Iron Age one might have been the result of the influence of Roman funerary practices (Morris 1992, 48–50). On the other hand the use of tumulus burials seems to be more complicated. Their origin is still debated, some specialists considering them as being of Italic origin, whereas others point to different earlier practices of erecting funerary mounds (Becker 1993, Abb. 1; Nagy 2002, 300, Abb. 1; Hudeczek 2004; Crowley 2009, 114–115). The problem cannot have a single explanation, since there are several regional differences in terms of chronology, location and even more important, shape and structure. Tumulus burials dated to the Early and Late Iron Ages are also known in north-western Pannonia, pointing to the existence of a local practice. However, there are certain differences regarding the size, shape and internal structure from one period to another. Perhaps the most significant feature of the tumuli is that they are very visible in the landscape, and as any other obvious landmarks, they tend to remain in one way or another in the collective memory for a longer period of time, usually becoming part of a locale narrative. It has to be noted that at Katzelsdorf the middle La Tène tumuli were erected in the vicinity of the massive Early Iron Age one, pointing to a particular way of interpreting and using the landscape by local people nearly two centuries prior to the creation of the Roman province. However, it is not necessary that the same populations reused the burial ground in either case or that there is a continuous use of the site in the same manner, but merely that the very visible landmarks were invested in both cases with relevant symbolic meanings, making them suitable for certain rituals, including the funerary ones. During the middle La Tène only a few warriors were interred at Katzelsdorf, the scope being probably to draw a symbolic demarcation between this social group and the rest of the community who was buried elsewhere. At the same time the distinct location and shape of the burials were probably meant to reiterate their leading status and authority, and perhaps a territorial claim, by creating connections with a mythical past in what it has been considered a sacred space. Commemorative ceremonies or other rituals related to the cult of ancestors, leaving no archaeological traces, might have been performed in this location. A nearly similar process happened in the early provincial times on both mentioned sites, the new tumuli being erected in the vicinity of the Early and Late Iron Ages ones. Still this time men, women and even children were buried in tumuli, some of them containing more than one grave. From this point of view there is no continuation of the funerary rite from the middle La Tène, nor is the use of cremation. On the other hand, as previously mentioned, the functional structure of the funerary inventories is not Italic, but resembles the Late Iron Age one and the same can be said about the occasional presence of weaponry in male graves. The deceased might have been indigenous or newcomers of Germanic origin, or both, but the resurgence of this type of burial has to be investigated from a different perspective. The choice of these old burial grounds and of the shape of the burials was very probably motivated by the same desire to establish a symbolic connection with a mythical past. A very interesting parallel can be found in the region of the civitas Tungrorum, in which tumulus burials reappeared in the provincial times after a hiatus of about 300 years, sometimes in the vicinity of similar Iron Age graves (Crowley 2009). In this case an ethnically heterogeneous social group, comprising ‘middle-class’ landlords, deliberately chose this form of burial to create a connection with the past using a localised traditional symbol. Their aim was to delimitate themselves from other social groups and to assert their territorial claims and lineage. Nearly similar motivations might have driven certain individuals or groups from north-western Pannonia when they started to reuse Iron Age burial grounds. The indigenous population was organized in civitates under Roman control, but their size and boundaries did not necessarily correspond to ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 517 the traditional ones (Mócsy 1974, 66). Furthermore, as previously mentioned, the ethnic makeup of the region was quite heterogeneous. All these factors might have threatened the cohesion of local communities. At the same time a part of the indigenous aristocracy was gradually involved into the local administration and was thus able to preserve at least some of its land possessions, later developed into villae (Gabler 1994). These local leaders very probably sought to maintain closer connections with their communities, and also to assert their authority in a suitable manner, using a symbolic language which brought everybody on a common, familiar ground. The symbolic appeal to the (mythical) past and its apparent material expression was a powerful instrument for developing and maintaining social cohesion at community level, as it was transmitting a sense of continuity (Bradley 1987). Since the funerals were public events, and traditionally those of the local leaders might have been large-scale ones, the organizers were very probably keen to display an adherence to local customs. These scopes may explain the preservation of the functional structure of the funerary inventory during the early provincial period, including the occasional placing of weaponry in burials. The question is how these practices survived during the late La Tène. As previously mentioned in some cases they continued to be used in the Germanic environment and were brought over by certain groups. In other cases in which indigenous groups were involved, certain funerary rituals might have been performed despite of the abandonment of proper burials, for example the offering of food and beverage as a form of commemoration of the deceased. As suggested above, these commemorative practices might have been incorporated into the social competition amongst the indigenous elites, albeit other social groups might have also used them for own purposes. The reuse of flat burial grounds might have followed a similar pattern, albeit in both presented cases there is no direct evidence of elite or ‘privileged’ burials (for the definition see Crowley 2009, 117–118 with further bibliography). It has been already noted that the provincial graves do not disturb the Iron Age ones, so they might have been marked somehow in the landscape, for example with stone stellae as in the case of the La Tène cemetery from Mannersdorf in Austria (Ramsl 2011, 29, Abb. 17). Furthermore the cemeteries might have been integrated into the symbolic landscape of the local communities as a sacred space, perhaps having the physical boundaries marked on the field, for example the cemetery from Magyarszerdahely occupied a sand dune. Nevertheless it is not necessary that the same communities reused the older burial grounds, but the functional structure of the early provincial funerary inventories points to the presence of people of non-Italic origin. However this preference may represent a deliberate action of certain individuals or groups who sought to establish a connection with the past by manipulating a locale narrative, as in the case of tumuli. Resuming the observations resulting from the analysis of the indigenous cemeteries included in this study, several patterns specific to the early provincial time can be identified. In the case of the funerary rite, the cremation was preserved in southern Pannonia, but the internal structure of the grave and the occasional use of urns seem to be the result of some external influences. Similar influences more likely determined the reappearance of cremation in north-western Pannonia. In both discussed areas a common feature is the maintenance of the functional structure of the middle and late La Tène funerary inventories (retaining specific regional characteristics) in the early provincial times, albeit certain foreign influences can be also noted. The indigenous grave-goods were gradually replaced by foreign objects having similar practical or symbolic functions. It is important to note that the weaponry and the tableware were amongst the earliest replaced, whereas some indigenous types of jewellery and garment accessories, as well as storage vessels and kitchen ware remained in use for a longer period. The gradual nature of this process of replacement is more visible in cemeteries which were continuously used, whereas in areas in which proper burials are absent during the late La Tène period the change is apparently more drastic, thus probably contributing to the impression of an ‘early’ or ‘faster Romanization’ of these communities. Another common feature is the incorporation of certain symbols of status, identity and authority of Roman origin, acquired or assumed, in the local funerary ceremonies. For example former auxiliary soldiers were buried with their weaponry according to local traditions, while their association with the Roman army was more probably considered an (perhaps enhancing) element of their warlike identity. Similarly, some graves belonging to both men and women contain large sigillata dining sets, sometimes distinctly different from the local ones and resembling the Italic services, perhaps more difficult to acquire and suggesting a certain economic status. On the other hand certain individuals might have been familiarised with the Mediterranean style of dining, hence the interest in purchasing appropriate sigillata services, like the ones from Weiden am See. However these foreign vessels (as single items or as sets), as well as the 518 | M. Egri bronze and glass ware, were integrated into tableware assemblages maintaining a traditional functional structure, and very probably having the same meanings as the La Tène ones in funerary contexts. Some of the burials which combine traditional symbols of status, like weaponry, certain types of drinking-related vessels and a particular structure of the inventory, with others of Roman origin, like the Italic dining sets, may be ascribed to the local elites seeking to place themselves into the newly created provincial social structures. They integrated some acquired or assumed symbols of authority into familiar symbolic structures and mechanisms involved in building or reiterating a certain social position. It can be concluded that the funerary rite and rituals, as well as the symbolic language used in these early provincial contexts from Pannonia, are mainly of indigenous pre-Roman origin despite using certain foreign goods or symbols, but responded to some new social challenges. The preservation of traditional practices was not confined to a particular social status or gender, although the careful amalgamation of local and foreign elements is more visible in burials related to the indigenous elites. This persistence or revival of traditional funerary practices was often interpreted as a cultural resistance to Romanization, or a sign of the remoteness of these communities, but the context in which they were performed has to be taken into consideration. First, as previously mentioned, in every society there is an almost instinctive tendency to appeal to familiar traditional symbols and practices during socially challenging period. Second, almost all of the mentioned burials are located in rural areas so the participants were mainly members of the local community, with whom the deceased and the mourners shared a common baggage of norms, habits and beliefs. Third, the funerals were social events in which the status of the deceased and the mourners was negotiated through an active manipulation of various elements, including the architecture of the grave, its location, the inventory and the ceremony itself. Furthermore, the real or mythical past was usually involved in the construction of communal identity and a period marked by radical social-political transformations is often characterised by the resurgence of certain old local customs and beliefs, but also by the appearance of ‘invented traditions’ involving mythical values and ancestors. The reuse of cult places and cemeteries, often following a considerable chronological gap, represents another active engagement with real or invented traditions, which helps maintaining the communal identity, or even the construction of new ones. These sacred places must have remained in the collective memory, in one form or another, although many of the related original practices were lost or transformed. Instead, local social groups and communities integrated such places into their own traditions as means of connecting with a mythical past and perhaps also to legitimise territorial claims, especially during the early provincial period. Thus within early provincial burials from Pannonia the indigenous funerary traditions were frequently preserved or even manipulated, while sometimes incorporating certain Roman symbols of status and identity, to support a variety of individual and communal aims and interests. Furthermore, at least some of them can be regarded as an expression of the social and cultural tensions which characterised a period of radical social transformations, like the beginning of the province. References Babeș 1988 Babeș–Miriţoiu 2011 Bakker–GalstererKröll 1975 Barb 1938 Becker 1993 Belayche 2009 Bojović 1977 Bónis 1969 Božič 1999 Babeș, M., Descoperirile funerare și semnificaţia lor în contextul culturii geto-dace clasice, SCIVA, 39, 1, 3–32. Babeș, M.–Miriţoiu, N., Practici funerare birituale prelungite în spaţiul carpato-dunărean în secolele V–III a.Chr., ArhMold, 34, 103–149. Bakker, L.–Galsterer-Kröll, B., Graffiti auf römischer Keramik im Rheinischen Landesmuseum Bonn, Bonn. Barb, A., Frührömische Gräber von Burgenland, DissPann, ser. II, no. 6, Budapest. Becker, M., Einführung von neuen Begräbnissitten: Neue Bevölkerungsströmung oder eine autochthone, romanisierte Bevölkerung?, IN: Struck, M. (ed.), Römerzeitliche Gräber als Quellen zu Religion, Bevölkerungsstruktur und Sozialgeschichte, Mainz, 361–370. Belayche, N., Foundation myths in Roman Palestine. Tradition and reworkings, IN: Derks, T.–Roymans, N. (eds.), Ethnic constructs in antiquity. The role of power and tradition, Amsterdam, 167–188. Bojović, D., Rimska keramika Singidunuma, Beograd. Bónis, E. B., Die spätkeltische Siedlung Gellérthegy–Tabán in Budapest, Budapest. Božič, D., Die Erforschung der Latènezeit in Slowenien seit Jahr 1964, ArhVest, 50, 189–213. ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 519 Božič, D., Late La Tène – Roman cemetery in Novo Mesto. Ljubljanska cesta and Okrajno glavarstvo, Katalogi in monografije, 39, Ljubljana. Bradley 1987 Bradley, R., Time regained: the creation of continuity, JBAA, 140, 1–17. Bradley 1991 Bradley, R., Ritual, time and history, WArch, 23, 2, 209–219. Breščak 1995 Breščak, D., Roman bronze vessels in Slovenia, new finds 1982–1991, IN: Acta of the 12th International Congress on Ancient Bronzes, Nijmegen, 15–21. Brown 2007 Brown, J. A., Mortuary practices for the third millennium: 1966–2006, IN: Laneri, N. (ed.), Performing death. Social analyses of funerary traditions in the ancient Near East and Mediterranean, Chicago, 299–308. Brukner 1981 Brukner, O., Rimska keramika u jugoslovenskom delu provincije Donje Pannonije, Beograd. Budinský-Krčka– Budinský-Krčka, V.–Lamiová-Schmiedelová, M., A late 1st century BC–2nd century AD Lamiová-Schmiedelová cemetery at Zemplín, SlovArch, 38, 245–344. 1990 Carroll 2005 Carroll, M., The preparation and consumption of food as a contributing factor towards communal identity in the Roman army, IN: Visy, Zs. (ed.), Limes XIX. Proceedings of the XIXth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies held in Pécs, Hungary, September 2003, Pécs, 363–372. Castillo Et Al. 1996 Castillo, L. J.–DeMarais, E.–Earle, T., Ideology, materialization and power strategies, CurrA, 37, 1, 15–31. Chapman 2000 Chapman, J., Fragmentation in archaeology: people, places and broken objects in the prehistory of South-Eastern Europe, London. Chapman 2010 Chapman, J., ‘Deviant’ burials in the Neolithic and Chalcolithic of Central and SouthEastern Europe, IN: Rebay-Salisbury, K.–Stig Sørensen, M. L.–Hughes, J. (eds.), Body parts and bodies whole. Changing relations and meanings, Oxford, 30–49. Chapman 2004 Chapman, R., Beyond the archaeology of death?, Historiae, 1, 1–15. Claustres 1958 Claustres, G., Les graffites gallo-romains de Peyrestortes (Pyrénées-Orientales), Gallia, 16, 1, 41–81. Cohen 1985 Cohen, A. P., The symbolic construction of community, London. Crowley 2009 Crowley, L., Creating a community: the symbolic role of tumuli in the villa landscape of the Civitas Tungrorum, IN: Driessen, M.–Heeren, S.–Hendriks, J.–Kemmers, F.–Visser, F. (eds.), TRAC 2008. Proceedings of the eighteenth annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Oxford, 113–126. Díaz-Andreu 2005 Díaz-Andreu, M., Gender identity, IN: Díaz-Andreu, M.–Lucy, M.–Babic, S.–Edwards, D., The archaeology of identity. Approaches to gender, age, status, ethnicity and religion, Oxford, 13–41. Dular 1991 Dular, A., Prazgodovinska grobišča v okolici Vinjega vrha nad Belo cerkvijo, Katalogi in monografije, 26, Ljubljana. Egri 2007 Egri, M., Graffiti on ceramic vessels from the western cemetery at Poetovio, IN: Cosma, C. (ed.), Funerary offering and votive depositions in Europe’s 1st millennium AD. Cultural artefacts and local identities, Cluj Napoca, 37–48. Egri 2008 Egri, M. E., Communal identity and provincial integration in the Lower Danube: an archaeological study of ceramics (late 1st century BC – early 2nd century AD), PhD thesis, University of Cambridge. Egri 2012 Egri, M., Early presence of sigillata in indigenous sites from Pannonia and Moesia Superior – comparative models of consumption, IN: Fulford, M.–Durham, E. (eds.), Seeing Red: new economic and social perspectives on terra sigillata, London (forthcoming). Evans 1987 Evans, J., Graffiti and the evidence of literacy and pottery use in Roman Britain, Archaeological Journal, 144, 191–204. Fahlander–OestiFahlander, F.–Oestigaard, T., The materiality of death: bodies, burials, beliefs, IN: gaard 2008 Fahlander, F.–Oestigaard, T. (eds.), The materiality of death: bodies, burials, beliefs, BAR, 1768, Oxford, 1–16. Fasold 1993 Fasold, P., Romanisierung und Grabbrauch: Überlegungen zum frührömischen Totenkult in Rätien, IN: Struck, M. (ed.), Römerzeitliche Gräber als Quellen zu Religion, Bevölkerungsstruktur und Sozialgeschichte, Mainz, 381–395. Fasold–Witteyer 1998 Fasold, P.–Witteyer, M., „Römisches“ in den Gräbern Mittel- und Norditaliens, IN: Fasold, P.–Fischer, T.–von Hesberg, H.–Witteyer, M. (Hrsg.), Bestattungssitte und Kulturelle Identität, Xantener Berichte 7, Bonn, 181–190. Božič 2008 520 | M. Egri Fitz 1993 Flower 2002 Fowler 2004 Gabler 1973 Gabler 1994 Garbsch 1985 Gaspari 2008 Gehrke 2009 Guštin 1984 Guštin 2011 Haselgrove 1987 Hellebrandt 1999 Hertz 2004 Hobsbawm 1992 Hobsbawm–Ranger 1992 Horvat–Bavdek 2009 Horváth 1979 Horváth 2005 Hudeczek 2004 Istenič 1999 Jones 2003 Jones 2007 Jovanović–Jovanović 1988 Knez 1969 Knez 1992 Kolnik 1980 Krämer 1985 Laneri 2007 Leclerc 1990 Lejars 1994 Martin-Kilcher 1998 Fitz, J., Die Verwaltung Pannoniens in der Römerzeit I, Budapest. Flower, M. A., The invention of tradition in Classical and Hellenistic Sparta, IN: Powell, A.–Hodkinson, S. (eds.), Sparta: beyond the mirage, London, 191–217. Fowler, C., The archaeology of personhood. An anthropological approach, London. Gabler, D., Italische Sigillaten in Nordwestpannonien, Wissenschaftliche Arbeiten aus dem Burgenland 51, Eisenstadt. Gabler, D., Die Ländliche Besiedlung Ober Pannoniens, IN: Bender, H.–Wolff, H. (eds.), Ländliche Besiedlung und landwirtschaft in den Rhein–Donau-Provinzen des römischen Reiches, Espelkamp, 377–419. Garbsch, J., Die norisch-pannonische Tracht, IN: Anstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, II.12.3, 546–577. Gaspari, A., Posoški bojevniki med samostojnostjo in rimsko vojaško službo, IN: Vojske, orožje in utrdbeni sistemi v Posočju, Tolmin, 29–48. Gehrke, H.-J., From Athenian identity to European ethnicity – the cultural biography of the myth of Marathon, IN: Derks, T.–Roymans, N. (eds.), Ethnic constructs in antiquity. The role of power and tradition, Amsterdam, 85–99. Guštin, M., Die Kelten in Jugoslawien, Jahrbuch RGZM, 31, 305–363. Guštin, M., On the Celtic tribe of Taurisci. Local identity and regional contacts in the ancient world, IN: Guštin, M.–Jevtić, M. (eds.), The eastern Celts. The communities between the Alps and the Black Sea, Koper–Beograd, 119–130. Haselgrove, C., Culture process on the periphery: Belgic Gaul and Rome during the late Republic and early Empire, IN: Rowlands, M. J.–Larsen, M.–Kristiansen, K. (eds.), Centre and periphery in the Ancient World, Cambridge, 104–124. Hellebrandt, M., Celtic finds from northern Hungary. Corpus of Celtic finds from Hungary III, Budapest. Hertz, R., A contribution to the study of the collective representation of death, IN: Robben, A. C. G. M. (ed.), Death, mourning and burial. A cross-cultural reader, Oxford, 197–212. Hobsbawm, E., Introduction: inventing traditions, IN: Hobsbawm, E.–Ranger, T. (eds.), The invention of tradition, Cambridge, 1–14. Hobsbawm, E.–Ranger, T. (eds.) 1992. The invention of tradition, Cambridge. Horvat, J.–Bavdek, A., Ocra. The gateway between the Mediterranean and Central Europe, OIAS, 17, Ljubljana. Horváth, L., A Magyarszerdahelyi kelta és római temető, Zalai Gyűjtemény, 14, Zalaegerszeg. Horváth, L., Grave of a Celtic warrior from Magyarszerdahely (Zala County), Zalai Múzeum, 14, 61–73. Hudeczek, E., Hügelgräber und Romanisierung, FÖ, 43, 527–535. Istenič, J., Poetovio, the western cemeteries I, Ljubljana. Jones, A., Technologies of remembrance, IN Williams, H. (ed.), Archaeologies of remembrance. Death and memory in past societies, New York, 65–88. Jones, A., Memory and material culture, Cambridge. Jovanović, B.–Jovanović, M., Gomolava. Naselje mlađeg gvozdenog doba, Novi Sad–Beograd. Knez, T., Novi rimski grobovi na Dolenjskem, Razprave, 6, 107–159. Knez, T., Novo mesto II. Keltisch-römisches Gräberfeld, Novo mesto. Kolnik, T., Römerzeitliche Gräberfelder in der Slowakei, I, Bratislava. Krämer, W., Die Grabfunde von Manching und die latènezeitlichen Flachgräber in Südbayern, Die Ausgrabungen in Manching 9, Stuttgart. Laneri, N., An archaeology of funerary rituals, IN: Laneri, N. (ed.), Performing death. Social analyses of funerary traditions in the ancient Near East and Mediterranean, Chicago, 1–13. Leclerc, J., La notion de sépulture, Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d’anthropologie de Paris, 2, 3–4, 13–18. Lejars, T., Gournay III. Les fourreaux d’épée, Paris. Martin-Kilcher, S., Gräber der späten Republik und der frühen Kaiserzeit am Lago Maggiore: Tradition und Romanisierung, IN: Fasold, P.–Fischer, T.–von Hesberg, H.–Witteyer, M. (eds.), Bestattungssitte und Kulturelle Identität, Xantener Berichte, 7, Bonn, 191–252. ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 521 Márton 2002 Márton 2008 Mikl Curk 1995 Mócsy 1959 Mócsy 1974 Morris 1992 Mráv 2006 Mullin 2001 Nagy 2002 Nebehay 1993 Palágyi–Nagy 2002 Parker Pearson 1999 Pearce 2002 Péré-Noguès 2008 Popa 2012 Radnóti 1938 Ramsl 2011 Rapin 1993 Rebay-Salisbury 2010 Robb 2007 Roymans 2009 Rustoiu 2009 Rustoiu–Egri 2011 Slabe 1993 Symonds 1992 Szántó 1953 Tomazo-Ravnik 1992 Toynbee 1996 Turk 1992 Márton, A., Roman burial with a weapon from the Bécsi Road cemetery (Aquincum– Budapest), CommArchHung, 117–152. Márton, A., Mobilier en terre sigillée dans les sépultures pannoniennes, CommArchHung, 135–189. Mikl Curk, I., Lagoena, Öllampe und Balsamarium in Slowenien – zum aufkomen der römischen Lebensweise, Živa Antika, 45, 213–222. Mócsy, A., Die Bevölkerung von Pannonien bis zu dem Markomannen Kriegen, Budapest. Mócsy, A., Pannonia and Upper Moesia: a history of the Middle Danube provinces of the Roman Empire, London–Boston. Morris, I, Death-ritual and social structure in classical antiquity, Cambridge. Mráv, Z., Paradeschild, Ringknaufschwert und Lanzen aus einem römerzeitlichen Wagengrab in Budaörs, ArchÉrt, 131, 33–73. Mullin, D., Remembering, forgetting and the invention of tradition: burial and natural places in the English Early Bronze Age, Antiquity, 75, no. 289, 533–537. Nagy, L., Beiträge zur Herkunftsfrage der norischen und pannonischen Hügelgräber, ActaArchHung, 53, 299–318. Nebehay, S., Latènegräber in Niederösterreich, Kleine Schriften, 41, Marburg. Palágyi, S. K.–Nagy, L., Römerzeitliche Hügelgräber in Transdanubien (Ungarn), Budapest. Parker Pearson, M., The archaeology of death and burial, Phoenix Mill. Pearce, J., Food as substance and symbol in the Roman army: a case study from Vindolanda, IN: Limes XVIII. Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of the Roman Frontier Studies held in Amman, Jordan (September 2000), BAR, 1084 (II), 931–944. Péré-Noguès, S., Recherches autour des “marqueurs funéraires” à travers l’exemple de quelques sépultures féminines de la nécropole du Fusco (Syracuse), IN: Jacquet-Rimassa, P. (ed.), Voyages en Antiquité. Mélanges offerts à Hélène Guiraud, PALLAS, 76, 151–171. Popa, C., The quest for group identity in Late Iron Age Romania. The statistical reconstruction of groups based on funerary evidence, IN: Popa, C. N.–Stoddart, S. (eds.), Fingerprinting the Iron Age. Approaches to identity in the European Iron Age. Integrating South-Eastern Europe into the debate, Oxford, forthcoming. Radnóti, A., Die römischen Bronzegefässe von Pannonien, DissPann, 2.6, Budapest. Ramsl, P. C., Das latènezeitliche Gräberfeld von Mannersdorf am Leithagebirge, Flur Reinthal Süd, Niederösterreich, Wien. Rapin, A., Destructions et mutilations des armes dans les necropolis et les sanctuaries au second Age du Fèr: reflections sur les rituels et leur description, Revue archéologique de l’Ouest, Suppl. 6, 291–298. Rebay-Salisbury, K., Cremations: fragmented bodies in the Bronze and Iron Ages, IN: Rebay-Salisbury, K.–Stig Sørensen, M. L.–Hughes, J. (eds.), Body parts and bodies whole. Changing relations and meanings, Oxford, 64–71. Robb, J., Burial treatment as transformations of bodily ideology, IN: Laneri, N. (ed.), Performing death. Social analyses of funerary traditions in the ancient Near East and Mediterranean, Chicago, 287–297. Roymans, N., Hercules and the construction of a Batavian identity in the context of the Roman empire, IN: Derks, T.–Roymans, N. (eds.), Ethnic constructs in antiquity. The role of power and tradition, Amsterdam, 219–238. Rustoiu, A., Războinicii celţi din Transilvania. Modele culturale și identitare în a doua vârstă a fierului, StudiaUBB, 54, 1–2, 1–17. Rustoiu, A.–Egri, M., The Celts from the Carpathian Basin between Continental traditions and the fascination of the Mediterranean, Cluj Napoca. Slabe, M., Antična nekropola na Pristavi pri Trebnjem, Ljubljana. Symonds, R., Rhenish wares. Fine dark coloured pottery from Gaul and Germany, Oxford. Szántó, I., A Cserszegtomaji kora-vaskori és kora-császárkori urnatemetö (Veszprém m.), ArchÉrt, 80, 53–62. Tomazo-Ravnik, T., Antropološka analiza žganih kostnih ostankov iz Novega mesta– Beletov vrt, IN: Knez, T., Novo Mesto II. Keltisch-römisches Gräberfeld, Novo Mesto, 95–102. Toynbee, J. M. C., Death and burial in the Roman world, London. Turk, I., Živalski pridatki iz žganih keltsko-rimskih grobov na grobišču Novo mesto–Beletov vrt, IN: Knez, T., Novo Mesto II. Keltisch-römisches Gräberfeld, Novo Mesto, 103–105. 522 | M. Egri Urban, O. H., Das Gräberfeld von Kapfenstein (Steiermark) und die römischen Hügelgräber in Österreich, München. Urban 1984b Urban, O. H., Die frühkaiserzeitliche Hügelgräberfeld von Katzelsdorf, ArchAustr, 68, 73–110. Urban Et Al. 1985 Urban, O. H.–Teschler-Nicola, M.–Schultz, M., Die latènezeitlichen Gräberfelder von Katzelsdorf und Guntramsdorf, Niederösterreich, ArchAustr, 69, 13–104. Van Dyke–Alcock 2003 Van Dyke, R. M.–Alcock, S. E., Archaeologies of memory: an introduction, IN: Van Dyke, R. M.–Alcock, S. E. (eds.), Archaeologies of memory, Oxford, 1–13. Vrba 2008 Vrba, E. M., Ancient German identity in the shadow of the Roman Empire, BAR, 1881, Oxford. Wells 1999 Wells, P. S., The Barbarians speak. How the conquered peoples shaped Roman Europe, Princeton. Wilkes 1996 Wilkes, J. J., The Danubian and Balkan provinces, IN: Bowman, A. K.–Champlin, E.– Lintott, A. (eds.), The Cambridge Ancient History. Volume X – The Augustan Empire 43 BC–AD 69, Cambridge, 545–585. Williams 2003 Williams, H., Introduction. The archaeology of death, memory and material culture, IN: Williams, H. (ed.), Archaeologies of remembrance. Death and memory in past societies, New York, 1–24. Williams 2004 Williams, H., Potted histories – cremation, ceramics and social memory in early Roman Britain, OJA, 23, 4, 417–427. Windl 1976 Windl, H. J., Zur Chronologie des Gräberfeldes von Mihovo, Unterkrain (Dolejnsko), AnnalenWien, 80, 877–894. Zabehlicky-ScheffZabehlicky-Scheffenegger, S., Terra sigillata aus dem Gräberfeld Beletov vtr, IN: Knez, T., enegger 1992 Novo Mesto II. Keltisch-römisches Gräberfeld, Novo Mesto, 75–82. Urban 1984a List of figures Fig. 1. Map of Pannonia with the sites mentioned in text. Fig. 2. Typical footed ribbed goblet from Novo mesto–Beletov vrt (after Knez 1992). Fig. 3. Plan of the tumulus cemetery at Katzelsdorf (after Urban 1984b). Fig. 4. Plan of the cemetery at Magyarszerdahely (after Horváth 1979). Fig. 5. 1. Kantharos from grave 24 at Cserszegtomaj (after Mócsy 1974); 2. Kantharos from grave 21 at Kistokaj– Kültelkek (after Hellebrandt 1999). List of plates Pl. 1. Novo mesto–Beletov vrt. LT C2 and LT D1 graves. 1. Grave 201, female funerary inventory; 2. Grave 169, male funerary inventory (after Knez 1992, different scales). Pl. 2. LT D2 and early provincial graves. 1–2. Grave 55 and 1887 from Novo mesto–Beletov vrt (after Knez 1992, different sclaes); 3. Verdun near Stopičah (after Breščak 1995, different scales). Pl. 3. Lt C1 graves from Katzelsdorf. 1. Grave LT 1; 2. Grave LT 2 (after Urban Et Al. 1985). Pl. 4. Early provincial graves from Katzelsdorf. 1. Tumulus 4; 2.Tumulus 2 (after Urban 1984b, 2. different scales). Pl. 5. Sigillata from the tumuli I and III at Weiden am See (after Gabler 1973, without scale). Pl. 6. LT C1 graves from Magyarszerdahely. 1. Grave 2; 2. Grave 19 (after Horváth 1979); 3. Grave 63 (after Horváth 2005). Pl. 7. Early provincial grave from Magyarszerdahely (after Horváth 1979). ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 523 Plate 1. Novo mesto–Beletov vrt. LT C2 and LT D1 graves. 1. Grave 201, female funerary inventory; 2. Grave 169, male funerary inventory (after Knez 1992, different scales). Plate . o o mesto– e e r. and ra es. . ra e female funerary in entory . ra e male funerary in entory after K different s ales . 524 | M. Egri Plate 2. LT D2 and early provincial graves. 1–2. Grave 55 and 1887 from Novo mesto–Beletov vrt (after Knez 1992, different sclaes); 3. Verdun near Stopičah (after Breščak 1995, different scales). Plate . after K and early pro in ial ra es. – . ra e 55 and different s ales . erdun near topi a after from o o mesto– e e r K 5 different s laes . ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 525 Plate 3. Lt C1 graves from Katzelsdorf. 1. Grave LT 1; 2. Grave LT 2 (after Urban Et Al. 1985). Plate . t ra es from Kat elsdorf. . ra e . ra e after . 5. 526 | M. Egri Plate 4. Early provincial graves from Katzelsdorf. 1. Tumulus 4; 2.Tumulus 2 (after Urban 1984b, 2. different scales). Plate . arly pro in ial ra es from Kat elsdorf. . umulus . umulus after . different s ales . ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 527 Plate 5. Sigillata from the tumuli I and III at Weiden am See (after Gabler 1973, without scale). Plate 5. i illata from t e tumuli and at eiden am ee after it out s ale . 528 | M. Egri Plate 6. LT C1 graves from Magyarszerdahely. 1. Grave 2; 2. Grave 19 (after Horváth 1979); 3. Grave 63 (after Horváth 2005). . ra e Plate . . ra e after ra es from a yars erda ely. . ra e after 5. ‘A Warrior Never Dies’. The Manipulation of Tradition in Early Funerary Contexts from Pannonia | 529 Plate 7. Early provincial grave from Magyarszerdahely (after Horváth 1979). Plate . arly pro in ial ra e from a yars erda ely after . ABBREVIATIONS ActaAA ActaArchHung ActaArch Carpatica ActaArch København ActaB ActaMN ActaMP ActaTS ActaUL AFN Agria AIH AJB Alba Regia Analele Banatului AnnalenWien Angustia AnthrKözl Apulum ArchAustr ArchBaltica ArchBulg ArchČechách ArchE ArchÉrt ArchHung ArchIug ArchKorr ArchKözl ArchPol ArchRoz ArchS ArhMold ArhPregl ArhRR ArhVest Arrabona ASF ASM AuF Balcanica Banatica BAR BAW BCȘS Acta Antiqua et Achaeologica, Szeged Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, Budapest Acta Archaeologica Carpathica, Academia Scientiarum Polona Collegium Cracoviense, Kraków Acta Archeologica, København Acta Bernensia, Bern Acta Musei Napocensis, Cluj-Napoca Acta Musei Porolissensis, Zalău Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis, Sibiu Acta Universitatis Lodziensis, Folia Archaeologica Archäologische Forschungen in Niederösterreich Agria, Annales Musei Agriensis / Az Egri Múzeum Évkönyve (1982), Eger Régészeti Kutatások Magyarországon / Archaeological Investigation in Hungary, Budapest Das archäologische Jahr in Bayern Alba Regia, Annales Musei Stephani Regis, Székesfehérvár Analele Banatului, Muzeul Banatului, Timișoara Annalen des Naturhistorischen Museums in Wien Angustia, Muzeul Carpaţilor Răsăriteni, Sfântu Gheorghe Anthropológiai Közlemények, A Magyar Biológiai Társaság Embertani Szakosztályának folyóirata, Budapest Apulum, Acta Musei Apulensis, Alba Iulia Archaeologia Austriaca, Wien Archaeologia Baltica, Vilnius Archaeologia Bulgarica, Sofia Archeologie ve středních Čechách Archäologie in Eurasien, Mainz am Rhein Archaeologiai Értesítő, Budapest Archaeologia Hungarica, Budapest Archaeologia Iugoslavica Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseum in Mainz Archeologiai Közlemények Archeologia Polona Archeologické Rozhledy, Prague Archäologie in Salzburg Arheologia Moldovei, Iași Arheološki Pregled, Arheološko društovo Jugoslavije Arheološki radovi i rasprave, Zagreb Arheološki vestnik (Acta Archaeologica), Inštitut za arheologijo, Lubljana Arrabona, a Győri Múzeum Évkönyve Archaeologia Slovaca Fontes, Bratislava Archaeologica Slovaca Monographiae Ausgrabungen und Funde, Nachrichtenblatt der Landesarchäologie Balcanica, Beograd Banatica, Muzeul de istorie al judeţului Caraș-Severin, Reșiţa British Archaeological Reports, International Series, Oxford Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, München Buletinul Cercurilor Știinţifice Studenţești, Alba Iulia 532 | Abbreviations Beiträge UFM BerRGK BHAUT BMA BMAK BMBistriţa BMM BMMK BMP BT CA CAJ Carpica CCA ComArchHung Corviniana Crisia CurrA ČUsŠ Dacia (N. S.) Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Mitteleuropas, Weissbach Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission Bibliotheca Historica et Archaeologica Universitatis Timisiensis Biblioteca Mvsei Apvlensis, Alba Iulia Biblioteka Muzeum Archeologicznego w Krakówie Biblioteca Muzeului Bistriţa Bibliotheca Mvsei Marisiensis, Seria Archaeologica, Târgu Mureș / Cluj Napoca Békés Megyei Múzeumok Közleménye, Békéscsaba Bibliotheca Mvsei Porolissensis, Zalău Bibliotheca Thracologica, București Cercetări Arheologice Cambridge Archaeological Journal Carpica, Muzeul Judeţean de Istorie și Artă „Iulian Antonescu“, Bacău Cronica Cercetărilor Arheologice din România Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae, Budapest Corviniana, Acta Musei Corviniensis, Hunedoara Crisia, Muzeul Ţării Crișurilor, Oradea Current Anthropology Časopis Učené Společnosti Šafáříkovy, Bratislava Dacia, Recherches et décuvertes archéologiques en Roumanie, I–XII (1924–1948), București; Nouvelle série (N. S.), Dacia. Revue d’archéologie et d’histoire anciene, București DissPann Dissertationes Pannonicae, ex Instituto Numismatico et Archaeologico Universitatis de Petro Pázmány nominatae Budapestinensis provenientes, Budapest DMB Dissertationes et Monographiae Beograd DolgKolozsvár (Ú. S.) Dolgozatok az Erdélyi Nemzeti Múzeum Érem- és Régiségtárából, (új sorozat, 2006–), Kolozsvár DolgSzeged Dolgozatok, Szeged EA Eurasia Antiqua, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Ea-online European archaeology – online (www.archaeology.ro) ÉC Études Celtiques, Paris EMÉ Az Egri Múzeum Évkönyve EphemNap Ephemeris Napocensis, Cluj–Napoca ET Etudes Touloises, Toul FAP Fontes Archaeologici Pragenses FAPos Fontes Archaelogici Posnanienses FHA Fontes Historiae Antiquae, , Poznań FolArch Folia Archeologica, a Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum Évkönyve, Budapest FÖ Fundberichte aus Österreich, Wien FS Fundberichte aus Schwaben, Stuttgart Germania Germania, Frankfurt am Main Glasnik SAD Glasnik Srpskog Arheološkog Društva, Beograd Glasnik ZM Glasnik Zemaljskog Muzeja Bosne i Hercegovine u Sarajevu Hierasus Hierasus, Muzeul Judeţean Botoșani HOMÉ A Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyve, Miskolc HOMO HOMO, Journal of Comparative Human Biology IA Internationale Archäologie, Buch am Erlbach, Espelkamp, Rahden/Westf. IPH Inventaria Praehistorica Hungariae, Budapest ISPRS International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing – International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences Istros Istros, Buletinul Muzeului Brăilei, Brăila JAA Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, Amsterdam Jahrbuch Liechtenstein Jahrbuch des Historischen Vereins für das Fürstentum Liechtenstein, Vaduz Jahrbuch Mecklenburg Jahrbuch für Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg Jahrbuch RGZM Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz Abbreviations | 533 JahrOM JAMÉ JAS JBAA JEA JPMÉ JRA JSP KÖK Közlemények Kolozsvár Litua MAB Marisia Marmatia MatArch MatStar MAZ MBVF MCA MFMÉ MittAGW MittAIUAW MKCSM MΩMOΣ MPK MSVF NMMÉ OIAS OJA OpArch ÖAW Ősrégészeti levelek PA PamArch PAS PB PBF Peuce Prace Łodz NK Prace Łodz Arch Pontica PPP PPS Prilozi IAZ PrzArch PZ PUD RadMV RAO RAP RBPA Jahrbuch des Oberösterreichischen Musealvereines, Linz A Nyíregyházi Jósa András Múzeum Évkönyve, Nyíregyháza Journal of Archaeological Science, London Journal of the British Archaeological Association Journal of European Archaeology, Durham, UK A Janus Pannonius Múzeum Évkönyve, Pécs Journal of Roman Archaeology Journal of Sedimentary Petrology Kulturális Örökségvédelmi Kismonográfiák, Budapest Közlemények az Erdélyi Nemzeti Múzeum Érem- és Régiségtárából, Cluj Litua, Muzeul Gorjului Monumenta Archaeologica Barbarica, Kraków Marisia (V–), Studii și Materiale, Târgu Mureș Marmatia, Anuarul Muzeului Judeţean Maramureș Materiały Archeologiczne, Kraków Materiały Starożytne (i Wczesnośredniowieczne) Mainzer Archäologische Zeitschrift Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte, München Materiale și Cercetări Arheologice, București A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve, Szeged Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft Wien Mitteilungen des Archäologischen Instituts der Ungarisches Akademie der Wissenschaften, Budapest Múzeumi kutatások Csongrád megyében MΩMOΣ, Őskoros Kutatók Összejövetelének konferenciakötete Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommision, Viena Marbuger Studien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte, Marburg Nógrád Megyei Múzeum Évkönyve Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae Oxford Journal of Archaeology Opuscula Archaeologica, Arheološki zavod, Filozofski fakultet u Zagrebu Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien Ősrégészeti levelek / Prehistoric newsletter, Budapest Patrimonium Apulense, Alba Iulia Památky Archeologické, Praha Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa, Berlin, Kiel, München Patrimonium Banaticum, Timișoara Prähistorische Bronzefunde, München / Stuttgart Peuce, Studii și cercetări de istorie și arheologie, Institutul de Cercetari Eco-Muzeale Tulcea, Institutul de Istorie si Arheologie, Tulcea Prace i Materiały Muzeum Archeologicznego i Etnograficznego w Łodzi. Seria Numizmatyczna i Konserwatorska Prace i Materiały Muzeum Archeologicznego i Etnograficznego w Łodzi. Seria Numizmatyczna i Konserwatorska Pontica, Anuarul Muzeului de Istorie Naţională și Arheologie Constanţa Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, London Prilozi Instituta za arheologiju iz Zagreba Przegląd Archeologiczny, Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk Praehistorische Zeitschrift, Berlin Publications de l’Université de Dijon, Paris Rad Muzeja Vojvodine Revue archéologique de l’ouest, Rennes Revue archéologique de Picardie, Amiens Regensburger Beiträge zur Prähistorischen Archäologie 534 | Abbreviations RégFüz RevBis RevMuz RGF RGZM RoczK Sargetia Savaria SBA SBHM SCIV(A) SHN SMA SlovArch SMMK SNMB SNMP SpecNova SprArch SSUUB Starinar StCom Satu Mare StCom Sibiu StudiaUBB Studii Študijné zvesti Swiatowit SymThrac TAT Thraco-Dacica UPA VAMZ VDBMB VMMK VKGLBW VMUFP VNMW VSADS VsP VTLF VVSM WA WArch WFA WissSchrN WMBH WPZ WZGK Zalai Múzeum Zborník SNM Ziridava Régészeti Füzetek, Budapest Revista Bistriţei, Complexul Judeţean Muzeal Bistriţa-Năsăud Revista Muzeelor, București Römisch-Germanische Forschungen, Mainz / Berlin Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Monographien, Bonn / Mainz Rocznik Kaliski Sargeţia, Buletinul Muzeului judeţului Hunedoara, Acta Musei Devensis, Deva Savaria, a Vas Megyei Múzeumok Értesítője, Szombathely Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde, Bonn Schriften des Bernischen Historischen Museums, Bern Studii și Cercetări de Istorie Veche (și Arheologie 1974–), București Studia Historica Nitriensia Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology Slovenská Archeológia, Nitra Somogy Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei, Kaposvár Sbornik Narodnog Muzeija Beograd Sborník Národního muzea v Praze, řada A – Historie / Acta Musei Nationalis Pragae, Series A – Historia, Praha Specimina Nova Dissertationum ex Institutom Historico Universitatis Quinqueecclesiensis de Jano Pannonio nominatae, Pécs Sprawozdania Archeologiczne, Kraków Schriften des Seminars für Urgeschichte der Universität Bern Starinar, Arheološki institute, Beograd Studii și Comunicări Satu Mare Studii și Comunicări, Muzeul Brukenthal, Sibiu Studia Universitatis Babeș–Bolyai, series Historia, Cluj-Napoca Studii. Revistă de știinţă și filosofie Študijné zvesti, Archeologického Ústavu Slovenskej Akadémie Vied, Nitra Swiatowit, Rocznik katedry archeologii pierwotnej i wczesnosredniowiecznej Universytetu Warszawskiego Symposia Thracologica, Institutul Român de Tracologie, București Tübinger Archäologische Taschenbücher Thraco-Dacica, Institutul de Tracologie, București Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie, Bonn Vjesnik Arheološkog muzeja u Zagrebu Veröffentlichungen aus dem Deutschen Bergbau-Museum Bochum A Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für geschichtliche Landeskunde in Baden-Württemberg Veröffentlichungen des Museums für Ur- und Frühgeschichte Potsdam Veröffentlichungen aus dem Naturhistorischen Museum, Wien Veröffentlichungen des Staatlichen Amtes für Denkmalpflege Stuttgart Východoslovenský pravek, Archeologický ústav Slovenskej Akadémie Vied, Nitra Veröffentlichungen des Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum, Innsbruck Veröffentlichungen des Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars Marburg, Marburg–Espelkamp Wiadomości Archeologiczne, Państwowe Muzeum Archeologiczne, Warsaw World Archaeology, Oxford, Oxbow Wiener Forschungen zur Archäologie, Wien Wissenschaftliche Schriftenreihe Niederösterreich Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen aus Bosnien und der Herzegowina, Wien Wiener prähistorische Zeitschrift, Wien Westdeutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Kunst Zalai Múzeum, Közlemények Zala megye múzeumaiból, Zalaegerszeg Zborník Slovenského Národného Múzea, Bratislava Ziridava, Muzeul Arad

Log In

Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureş, 7–9 October 2011, BMM, V, Tg. Mureș, Mega, 2012.

Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureş, 7–9 October 2011, BMM, V, Tg. Mureș, Mega, 2012.

Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureş, 7–9 October 2011, BMM, V, Tg. Mureș, Mega, 2012.

Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureş, 7–9 October 2011, BMM, V, Tg. Mureș, Mega, 2012.

Berecki, S. (ed.), Iron Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Târgu Mureş, 7–9 October 2011, BMM, V, Tg. Mureș, Mega, 2012.

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS