DU ROYAUME GOTH AU MIDI MÉROVINGIEN ausonius éditions — Mémoires 56 — — T. 35 coll. Mémoires de l’AFAM — DU ROYAUME GOTH AU MIDI MÉROVINGIEN Actes des 34e Journées d’Archéologie Mérovingienne de Toulouse, 6, 7, et 8 Novembre 2013 édité par Emmanuelle Boube, Alexis Corrochano et Jerôme Hernandez avec la collaboration de Jean-Luc Boudartchouk, Michel Kazanski et Patrick Périn avec le soutien du Ministère de la Culture, de la région Occitanie-Pyrénées-Méditerranée, du laboratoire TRACES de l’Université Jean Jaurès de Toulouse, de l’Institut National de Recherches Archéologiques Préventives (Inrap), de l’Association française d’archéologie mérovingienne (AFAM) et de l’Association archéologique de Martres-Tolosane. — Bordeaux 2019 — Notice catalographique Boube, E., Corrochano, A., Hernandez, J., éd. (2019) : Du Royaume goth au Midi mérovingien, Ausonius Mémoires 56, Actes des XXXIVe Journées d’Archéologie Mérovingienne de Toulouse, 6, 7 et 8 Novembre 2013, Bordeaux. Mots clés Goths, Wisigoths, Ostrogoths, Gépides, Germains orientaux, culture de Černjahov (Tcherniakhov), Antiquité tardive, haut Moyen Âge, Aquitaine wisigothique, Espagne wisigothique, Gaule mérovingienne, Hispanie, péninsule Ibérique, sources écrites, hagiographie, chroniques, droit, archéologie funéraire, tombes privilégiées, nécropole, cimetière, inhumation habillée, pratiques et rites funéraires, archéo-anthropologie, déformation crânienne, ethnicité, archéologie monumentale, urbanisme, culture matérielle, plaques-boucles, fibules, peignes, parure. AUSONIUS Maison de l’Archéologie Université Bordeaux Montaigne F – 33607 Pessac Cedex http://ausoniuseditions.u-bordeaux-montaigne.fr Directeur des Publications Ausonius : Sophie Krausz Secrétaire des Publications : Astrid Biry & Valentine Beau Couverture : Valentine Beau Tous droits réservés pour tous pays. La loi du 11 mars 1957 sur la propriété littéraire et intellectuelle interdit les copies ou reproductions destinées à une utilisation collective. Toute représentation ou reproduction intégrale ou partielle faite par quelque procédé que ce soit sans le consentement de l’éditeur ou de ses ayants droit, est illicite et constitue une contrefaçon sanctionnée par les articles 425 et suivants du Code pénal. © AUSONIUS 2019 ISSN : 1283-2995 EAN : 9782356132468 Achevé d’imprimer sur les presses de l’imprimerie Rochelaise, groupe Le nouvelR Zone d’Activité de Villeneuve les Salines Rue du Pont des Salines, B.P. 197 - 17006 La Rochelle Cedex 1 Octobre 2019 Sommaire Avant-propos, Carole Delga .............................................................................................................................................................................. 11 Le mot des présidents de l’AFAM, Édith Petreymann, Laurent Verslype............................................................................................... 13 Introduction ou Le mot des organisateurs ................................................................................................................................................... 15 I – LES GOTHS DE PART ET D’AUTRE DES PYRÉNÉES : LES SOURCES ÉCRITES Luis Agustín García Moreno, La expedición del Balto Teuderico II a la diócesis de las Españas según las fuentes literarias ... 21 Alain Dubreucq, La législation wisigothique aux ve et vie siècles.............................................................................................................. 35 Michel Rouche, Une loi universelle et perpétuelle proclamée à Toulouse : le Bréviaire d’Alaric ....................................................... 45 Fernand Peloux, Mémoire des conflits, conflits de mémoire. Le souvenir des Wisigoths et des Francs dans le Midi médiéval : l’exemple du martyre de saint Volusien ...................................................................................................................................... 49 II – POUVOIR ET MÉMOIRE DANS LA VILLE Emmanuelle Boube, De la mutations des espaces politiques romains aux lieux de pouvoir du royaume wisigothique (Gaule, Hispanie) ............................................................................................................................................................................. 57 Jean Catalo, Quitterie Cazes, Didier Paya, Le monument d’époque wisigothique du site École d’économie à Toulouse, première interprétation .................................................................................................................................................................. 83 Didier Paya, Les lieux de sépulture et les tombes à Toulouse à la fin de l’Antiquité et durant la période mérovingienne............ 99 III – ARCHÉOLOGIE FUNÉRAIRE ET MOBILIER GERMANIQUE ORIENTAL DE L’AQUITAINE ET DE L’ESPAGNE ENTRE LES ve ET vie siècles Simon Esmonde Cleary, The Historiography of “Germanic Ethnicity” in the Migration Period: a British Perspective ................ 115 Alexis Corrochano, Sélim Djouad, Claire Mitton avec la collaboration de Francis Dieulafait et Laëtitia Pedoussaut, Le site de Blanzac-Porcheresse (Charente, France) : un ensemble funéraire des ve-vie siècles en Aquitaine .............. 127 Jérôme Hernandez, Christian Scuiller, La nécropole de Belou Nord à Saint-Laurent-des-Hommes (Dordogne, 24) .................. 143 Fabienne Médard, Clotilde Proust, Christian Scuillier, Exemples de restes organiques minéralisés du site de Belou Nord à Saint-Laurent-des-Hommes (Dordogne, 24)........................................................................................................................... 165 Jérôme Hernandez, Didier Paya, Aspects et évolution du cimetière du Mouraut (Vernet, Haute-Garonne, 31) : organisation, tombes et mobilier funéraire ................................................................................................................................ 173 – Du Royaume goth au Midi mérovingien, p. 5 à 7 6– Du royaume goth au Midi mérovingien Jean-Paul Cazes, La nécropole wisigothique de Pezens (Aude, 11)............................................................................................................. 199 Joan Pinar GiI, La nécropole de “Las Tombas” à Estagel (Pyrénées-Orientales) et sa place dans l’archéologie funéraire du haut Moyen Âge en Languedoc-Roussillon .......................................................................................................................... 211 Mikel Pozo Flores, The Cemeteries of Vasconia (Sixth-Eighth Centuries) ............................................................................................. 227 Yulene Gourgoury , La parure féminine wisigothique en Espagne. Actualisation des connaissances par l’approche du costume dans son ensemble ..................................................................................................................................................... 239 Jorge López Quiroga, Dépôts et pratiques funéraires dans le centre-ouest de la péninsule Ibérique (ve et vie siècles)................. 255 IV – TERRITOIRES, CONTACTS ET CULTURE MATÉRIELLE Alfonso Vigil-Escalera Guirado, Habitats de época visigoda en la région de Madrid ......................................................................... 269 Michel Kazanski, Les petites fibules germaniques de tradition danubienne en Gaule méridionale à l’époque des Grandes Migrations .............................................................................................................................................. 281 Emmanuelle Boube, Deux peignes inédits de la culture de Černjahov conservés au musée Saint-Raymond de Toulouse. ........ 297 Emmanuelle Boube, Les plaques-boucles germaniques orientales à têtes de rapace de Gaule et d’Hispanie. .............................. 305 Jean-Paul Cazes, La frontière lauragaise : toponymie et archéologie des modes vestimentaires aux ve-viie siècles ..................... 333 Lola Briceno-Boucey, Isabelle Souquet-Leroy, Mark Guillon, Les sépultures de la fin de l’Antiquité sur le site de la gare SaintLaud à Angers (Pays de la Loire, France) : approches archéo-anthropologiques, caractérisation biologique et identités de la population. .......................................................................................................................................................... 347 Egle Micheletto, The Lady from Pollentia: an East-Germanic Grave Dating Back to the First Decades of the Fifth Century p.C.................................................................................................................................................................... 361 Egle Micheletto, Giostra Caterina, Bedini Elena, The Gothic Settlement of Frascaro (Piedmont, Province of Alessandria)..... 367 Caterina Giostra, Luisella Pejrani Baricco, Emmanuele Petiti, Il gruppo familiare goto di Collegno The Gothic family group from Collegno (Piedmont, province of Turin) ............................................................................................................................ 373 Barry Ager, L’influence byzantine sur les objets wisigothiques de la collection du British Museum de Londres ............................ 381 Jean Soulat, Étude et analyse du mobilier de type wisigoth et méditerranéen dans le sud-est de l’Angleterre .............................. 397 Joan Pinar Gil, Jiřík Jaroslav, Jiří Vávra, Raiders, Federates and Settlers: Parallel Processes and Direct Contacts between Bohemia and the Western Mediterranean (Late Fourth-early Sixth Century) .................................................................. 415 V – ACTUALITÉS ARCHÉOLOGIQUES : LA GAULE MÉROVINGIENNE Bernard Gratuze, Constantin Pion, Des perles en verre provenant du sous-continent indien en Gaule mérovingienne ............ 449 Amélie Vallée, Les seaux en bois en Gaule mérovingienne : approche typologique et examen de la distribution des récipients 473 Lise Saussus, Nicolas Thomas, Laurent Verslype, La fonderie de petits éléments de parure dans le nord-ouest de la Gaule mérovingienne. ................................................................................................................................................................................. 481 Barbara Armbruster, Damien Martinez, Julie Viriot, Des indices d’orfèvrerie au sein de l’établissement de hauteur mérovingien de “La Couronne” à Molles (Allier, 03). ........................................................................................................................................ 489 Sommaire –7 Julien Bohny, Alexis Corrochano, Cécile Rousseau, avec la collaboration de Bruno Bosc Zanardo, Une tombe à armes du vie siècle à Castelnaudary, Bartissol (Aude, 11, France)................................................................. 497 Arnaud Coiffé, Jean-Luc Boudartchouk, Le site funéraire de la grotte des Ancêtres (Malvezie, Haute-Garonne, 31) : contexte de découverte et étude du mobilier associé aux sépultures .................................................................................... 509 Marie Maury, Natacha Crépeau, Sylvain Renou, Sophie Vallet, Relations entre monde des morts et monde des vivants durant le haut Moyen Âge : l’exemple du site des Sablons à Luxé (Charente, 16).............................................................. 517 Laurent Fournier, Édith Rivoire, avec la collaboration de Marie-Pierre Chambon, La place de la construction en pierre dans les habitats ruraux du début de la période mérovingienne : l’exemple des sites du Subdray et de Saint-Florent-sur-Cher au sud-ouest de Bourges (Cher, 18). .............................................................................................................................................. 531 Hélène Barrand Emam, Fanny Chenal, Thomas Fischbach, avec la collaboration de Justine Lyautey, Lucille Alonso, Évolution et gestion de l’ensemble funéraire d’Artzenheim (Haut-Rhin, 68) à la transition entre les périodes mérovingiennes et carolingiennes. ............................................................................................................................................... 537 Christine Dieulafait, Julie Gasc, Les fours domestiques des Bringuiers (Saint-Jory, 31) ...................................................................... 545 Jean-Paul Cazes, Présentation du musée du haut Moyen Âge de Mazères (Ariège) ............................................................................ 551 Laurent Verslype, Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................................... 555 Auteurs Ager Barry Conservateur honoraire, Department of Britain, Europe and Préhistory, Bristish Museum, London WC1B 3DG, Royaume-Uni Alonso Lucille Céramologue Armbruster Barbara Directrice de recherches au CNRS, TRACES UMR 5608, Université de Toulouse Jean Jaurès Crépeau Natacha Anthropologue, Inrap RAA (CDD), UMR 5199 PACEA Delga Carole Présidente de la région Occitanie Pyrénées-Méditerranée Dieulafait Christine Drac Occitanie-SRA, site de Toulouse, TRACES UMR 5608 Dieulafait Francis Hadès Djouad Sélim Hadès Dubreucq Alain Professeur émérite d’Histoire médiévale, Université Jean Moulin, Lyon 3, UMR 5648 CIHAM Esmonde Cleary Simon Professeur émérite d’archéologie romain, Université de Birmingham Barrand Emam Hélène ANTEA ARCHÉOLOGIE, UMR 7044 Bedini Elena Anthropozoologica L.A.B., Livorno Bohny Julien Archéodunum Bosc-Zanardo Bruno Archéodunum Boube Emmanuelle Maître de conférences en archéologie romaine, Université de Toulouse Jean Jaurès, TRACES UMR 5608 Fischbach Thomas Boudartchouk Jean-Luc Inrap GSO, directeur scientifique et technique adjoint ANTEA ARCHÉOLOGIE, doctorant de l’Université de Strasbourg / Albert-LudwigsUniversität Freiburg Fournier Laurent Inrap Briceno-Boucey Lola UMR 5199 – PACEA, Université de Bordeaux, Pessac Garcia Moreno Luis Agustin Real Academia de la Historia, España Callède Fabien Topographe cartographe, Inrap Gasc Julie Hadès Catalo Jean Responsable de recherches archéologiques, Inrap, UMR 5608 TRACES Geneviève Vincent Numismate, Inrap, IRAMAT-CEB, UMR 5060 CNRS, Université d’Orléans Cazes Daniel Ancien conservateur en chef du Musée Saint-Raymond de Toulouse Giostra Caterina Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milano Cazes Jean-Paul Archéologue indépendant Gourgoury Yulene Archéologue médiéviste et médiatrice indépendante Cazes Quitterie Maître de conférence HDR en histoire de l’art médiéval, Université Toulouse Jean Jaurès, Framespa Gratuze Bernard Centre Ernest-Bablon, IRAMAT, UMR 5060, CNRS Université d’Orléans Chambon Marie-Pierre Inrap, UMR ArScan 7041 Guillon Mark Inrap, UMR 5199 – PACEA, Université de Bordeaux, Pessac Chenal Fanny Inrap, UMR 7044 Hernandez Jérôme Inrap, URM 5140, MEP Coiffé Arnaud Chargé d’études archéologiques JiřÍk Jaroslaw Corrochano Alexis Evéha (PhD) Institute of Archeology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University in Prague: Archeological Department, Prácheň Museum in – Du Royaume goth au Midi mérovingien, p. 9 à 10 10 – Du royaume goth au Midi mérovingien Písek, Velké náměnstí 114, Písek 397 24 Proust Clotilde Musée d’Archéologie Nationale Kazanski Michel Directeur de recherche au CNRS, UMR 8167 – Orient et Méditerranée Renou Sylvain Archéozoologue Rivoire Édith Inrap, UMR CRAHAM 6273 Rouche Michel Lopez Quiroga Jorge Université Autonome de Madrid (UAM) Professeur émérite d’Histoire médiévale, Université ParisSorbonne Lyautey Justine Anthropologue Rousseau Cécile Archéodunum Martinez Damien Ingénieur d’études DRAC/SRA Bourgogne-Franche-Comté (site de Besançon), ARTEHIS UMR 6298 Saussus Lise Marty Pierre Céramologue, Inrap Centre de recherches d’archéologie nationale, UCLouvain, LabEx HaStec, Laboratoire de médiévistique occidentale de Paris, UMR 8589, LAMOP Maury Marie Archéologue Scuiller Christian Inrap – GSO Médard Fabienne Association Anatex Soulat Jean Mitton Claire Hadès Laboratoire LandArc, UMR 6273 CRAHAM Micheletto Egle Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici del Piemonte Souquet-Leroy Isabelle Inrap Grand-Sud-Ouest, Bègles, UMR 5199 – PACEA, Université de Bordeaux, Pessa Paya Didier Responsable de recherches archéologiques, Inrap, UMR 5288 Thomas Nicolas Pedoussaut Laëtitia Hadès Inrap, Laboration de médiévistique occidentale de Paris, UMR 8589 – LAMOP Vallée Amélie Aspirante F.R.F.-FNRS, Centre de recherche d’archéologie nationale, UCLouvain Vallet Sophie Archéologue VÁvra JiřÍ Mgr., Labrys o.p.s. Hloubětínská 16/11 Verslype Laurent Centre de recherches d’archéologie nationale, UCLouvain, co-président de l’AFAM Pejrani Barrico Luisella Soprintendenza per i Ben Archeologici des Piemonte Peloux Fernand Post-doctorant, Université de Namur Petiti Emmanuele Anthropozoologica L.A.B., Livorno Petreymann Édith Ingénieure chargée de recherches à l’Inrap, HDR, UMR 6273, coprésidente de l’AFAM Pinar Gil Joan PhD, Department of Historical Studies, University of Turin, via S. Ottavio 20, 10124 Torino Pion Constantin CReA-Patrimoines, Université libre de Bruxelles Pouget Nathalie Responsable de recherche archéologiques, Inrap Pozo Flores Mikel UPV – EHU Vigil-Escalera Guirado Alfonso University of the Basque Country (UPV – EHU), GIPyPAC (Grupo de Investigación en Patrimonio y Paisajes Culturales) Viriot Julie Archéologue responsable d’opération, Hadès Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts between Bohemia and the Western Mediterranean (Late 4th-early 6th Century) Jaroslav Jiřík, Joan Pinar Gil, Jiří Vávra T he arrival of the Visigoths to southern Gaul in 413 AD concludes a chapter of the long anabasis of the “Eastern Barbarians”, marked by extreme circumstances and numerous episodes of violence on Imperial soil. During this time span, these “Gothic” groups alternatively supported and opposed interests of the Roman Empire, re-shaped and re-integrated various barbarian groups and had the leading role in shocking historical events like the sacks of Athens or Rome. From an archaeological point of view, this time span (turn of the 4th – 5th century AD) is defined by a large spatial dispersion of the material culture related to the latest stage of the Chernyakhov-Sîntana de Mureş culture, whose core territory corresponds to today’s Ukraine, Romania and Moldova, and also the Wielbark culture, placed in north-eastern Poland. During this relatively short time span, archaeology records an astonishing fast emergence of a variety of (post-) Chernyakhov small finds in distant regions in Central and Western Europe, such as southern Moravia and south-western Slovakia, northern Italy, southern Gaul, the Rhine area or central Hispania. In other regions we observe a spread also of so-called “federate” culture, which could be in some ways understood as a modified Chernyakhov culture with deep and substantial provincial influences. To understand the nature of changes of this period we should turn back to South-Eastern Europe, where a series of catastrophic events taking place in the last third of the 4th century AD led to the gradual collapse of the Chernyakhov- Sîntana de Mureş culture and a domino-effect culminated by the invasions of Eastern “Barbarians” on the Imperial territory. To determine how the archaeological finds reflect this dynamic development in different European regions a close look on the ChernyakhovSîntana de Mureş material culture is necessary. Cemeteries, settlements as well as central sites of the final phase of Chernyakhov- Sîntana de Mureş culture revealed a wealth of forms of many objects of daily use, metal manufacturing being of particular importance. Among the dominant forms we can mention belt and shoe-buckles with thickened round frame, sometimes equipped with round, oval or rectangular belt-plate (plate 1:32-42). Later phase of Chernyakhov and Wielbark cultures is represented also by “classical” bow fibulae made of silver or bronze sheet (plate 1:27, 31), and also by various bow and crossbow brooches, some of them equipped with solid catchplates (Spiralplattenfibeln, some of them probably representing direct prototypes for Central and Western European types such as Prša-Levice, Bratei and Vyškov, but probably also other types such as Niederflorstadt-Wiesloch classes, etc.) (plate 1:17-26, 28-30). 1 Characteristic are also combs with bell-shaped handle of Thomas’s class III (plate 1:43-48), which play an important role in the (post-) Chernyakhov development in the “West”. 2 Special attention requires pottery, which could be divided into “kitchen” and “dining” forms. The first group represents mainly coarse pots, the second group, usually wheel-thrown ceramic, reveals, however, a wealth of shapes: bowls and jugs with burnished decoration (plate 1:2-3) and faceting (plate 1:10), bowls with burnished (plate 1:5, 7, 9), plastic (plate 1:8), and oval decoration, bowls with faceted carination, various pitchers also plastically decorated, large storage vessels with T-shaped rim (plate 1:4, 6), etc. Some of these shapes have direct later parallels in Central and Western parts of Europe (plate 8:2). 3 1. 2. 3. Andrzejowski et al. 2008, 24, 49, fig. 3; compare to provincial prototypes: Schulze-Dörrlamm 2000; see also: Kokowski 1996. Nikitina 1965, fig. 5. For example: Rusanova & Symonovich 1993; Schultze & Strocen 2008; Magomedov 2001; Koshelenko 1984, pl. 54:21, 130:12. – Jiřík et al., in : Du Royaume goth au Midi mérovingien, p. 415 à 445 Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra 416 – Fig. 1. Bříza near Litoměřice (after Svoboda 1965). Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts – 417 Plate 1. Late phase of Chernyakhov-Sîntana de Mureș culture: 1. Krinichki, 2, 42. Novo-Alexandrovka, 3. Furmanovka (all after: Rusanova, I. P. and Symonovich, Je. A. 1993), 4-16. Lazuri (Lázári)-Rȃtul lui Béla (all after Lazin and Gindele, R. 2010) , 17, 30. Gradzhisk, 18-19, 21-22, 26, 29, 32, 35, 37-38, 40-41. Kosanovo, 20, 23, 25. Ruzhichanka, 24. Dumanov, 27, 39, 44. Zhurovka, 28. Ruzhevka, 33. Kompaniycy, 34, 36. Kantemirovka,), 45. Stretovka, 46. Gavrilovka, 47. Koblevo, 48. Dancheny, gr. No 176 (all after: Rusanova and Symonovich 1993), 31. Kerch (after Mastykova 2007), 43. Tanais (after Koshelenko 1984). Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra 418 – Although inheriting some common features with roots in so-called “federate” culture, the local developments of the Visigothic West and the Vinařice group in Bohemia throughout the 5th century AD increased the distances between the material culture in both regions. The sparse proofs of direct contacts during the 5th – early 6th centuries, however, convey interesting evidence on occasional continuity of past relations. “Intermezzo” of Radagais in Moravia? With regard to (post-) Chernyakhov influences in Central European Barbaricum around 400 AD One of the main regions of occurrence of the (post-) Chernyakhov material is southern Moravia, south-western Slovakia and Lower Austria. Jaroslav Tejral observes substantive changes of the settlement structure in Moravia and North Danubian “Barbaricum” around 400 AD. The instability of this period is the cause behind the settlement of the more peripheral regions of Moravia in the highlands and the emergence of new settlements located on the top of the hills, as well as the reoccupation of prehistoric hill forts. This phenomenon continues into the first half of the 5th century AD (for example the finds from “Hradisko“ u Znojma (plate 2:25-27), Brno-Obřany, Gars-Thunau). 4 Jaroslav Tejral focuses on the problem of the development of the settlement of Moravia during the Late Antique period several times. The author observes a mixed culture, with local Suebic component of Late Roman period with essential influences from the cultures of south-eastern Europe of that time. It is the case of inhumations at Pohořelice – Nová Ves (Southern Moravia), where the grave goods represent a syncretic culture with local (ceramics and fibulae), provincial (ceramics, glass vessels) and (post-) Chernyakhov (glass beads, combs with bell-shaped handle of Thomas’s class iii) elements (plate 2:21-24). 5 Similar mixed culture was recognized also within the settlements, for example at Zlechov, in southern Moravia, a site sharing features with several other settlements in the Central Danube region of the “Barbaricum”. 6 The author thus prefers an ongoing development of the local Suebic tradition of Late Roman period. A slightly different picture is conveyed by the re-examination of the settlement at Zlechov, undertaken recently by Tomáš Zeman. From a total of 432 excavated features, 10-12 were identified as early medieval, while the rest belongs to the Late Roman and Migration periods. The settlement is formed by semi-sunken huts, pits, clay-pits, furnaces and post-holes. Tomáš Zeman distinguishes two phases in the Late Antique settlement. The first one is dated into the C3 period after J. Tejral; in this phase, the settlement mirrors a continuity of local Suebic traditions. The portable finds dating from this period are the bow fibulae of the type Almgren 158 from feature No. 55/67, hand-made pots and wheel-thrown ceramics of so-called Jiříkovice tradition (named after the important site with furnaces containing this type of ceramics) 7. The later phase, ascribed to the stage D1 after J. Tejral, mirrors essential changes of the material culture. An important set of the objects with closest parallels within the late Chernyakhov culture occurs: rough hand-made pots of “hybrid” shapes (plate 2:2, 4-5), which are clearly distinguishable from the previous local Suebic pottery, further antler combs with bell-shaped handle of Thomas’s class III (plate 2:9-10), belt buckles with the thickened round frame and rectangular belt-plate, iron cross-bow brooches (plate 2:8), pyramidal “prismatic” pendant made of bone or antler (plate 2:6-7) 8. The material culture of this period includes also provincial import in form of wheel-thrown fragments of pitchers and glazed mortarium. 9 In some of the specimens of the pitchers we may not exclude direct Chernyakhov influence, especially if compared with the material from the settlement at Lazuri Râtul lui Béla of late Sîntana de Mureş culture (plate 1:10-16). The same is valid for the wheel-thrown vessel, whose upper part is decorated by a series of horizontal ribs (plates 2:1 and 1:1). In other words that means that the difference between the late “Suebic” assemblages and (post-) Chernyakhov material could have a chronological background. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Tejral 1998, 196. Tejral 1999, 208-220. Ibid., 220-229. Zeman 2006, 457-460, figs. 5-6. Ibid., 462, fig. 7. 5-6, 9-16. Zeman 2006, 463-464, fig. 7. 18-19. Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts – 419 Another good example of multilayered settlement is the site at Mušov, also in southern Moravia. The older phase is dated back to the second half of the 4th century AD. It consists predominantly of semi-sunken huts with a “classical” construction with six post-holes (two in the mid of the shorter sides and four dividing the longer sides into thirds). A characteristic find of this period is a set of shield umbae of the so-called Dobrodzień type (which are also known from the diptych of Stilicho at Monza). The objects of the younger phase clearly differ from the previous settlement phase: semi-sunken huts with post-holes in the corners or with the post-holes in the mid of the shorter sides predominate. Very similar situations repeat themselves on other sites of the region. One could mention the example of Štúrovo in SW Slovakia. The development of this settlement is traced back from the 2nd century to 400 AD. The latest stage of the Roman period settlement is formed by semi-sunken huts, aboveground structures and several pits, including one containing the remains of two human skeletons) 10. The material culture of the early 5th century AD is represented by a comb with bell-shaped handle of Thomas’s class III (plate 2:29). Unusual is a presence of the imported provincial ceramics from the features of the latest phase, for example glazed mortaria. The presence of provincial ceramics ranges from 7% to 34% of the material found in huts 6/6A, 10, and 11. An extraordinary find is represented by the shard of a rim of a wheel-thrown pot decorated with grooves (plate 2:30), with analogies in the late Chernyakhov culture 11. A similar example is a grave in Brno-Horní Heršpice 12 (plate 2:13-20), the settlement at Michelstetten (plate 2:31-35) or Unterlanzendorf (plate 2:36) in Lower Austria, also ending with the occurrence of “eastern” elements 13. The evidence of the presence of the late Chernyakhov material from the period around 400 AD is very sparse in Bohemia, but significant. The first example is a settlement-burial found in pit No. 92B in Trmice (okr. Ústí nad Labem, NW Bohemia), which was provided with an iron bell and a comb of Thomas’s class III (plate 6:27-29). 14 A similar example is a yet unpublished chamber warrior grave with spatha from Vlíněvec, central Bohemia. The grave is further provided with belt components, hand-made pottery of local Late Roman origin and another comb with semicircular handle of Thomas’s class III (plate 3:1). 15 Turning westwards from Bohemia, an important find has been recorded at Götting in southern Germany: it is a grave equipped with a fibula and a wheel-thrown vessel with burnished decoration of the late Chernyakhov culture (plate 3:2). 16 At Schloßberg near Geisfeld in upper Main river region an example of fibula of a type E4 Hărman after Andrzej Kokowski made of sheet-metal is known (plate 3:3), 17 a similar evaluation deserves a specimen of a comb with an omegashaped handle of Thomas’s class III from Geldersheim (plate 3:4), which has analogy for example with a grave at Pruszcz Gdański–of the late Wielbark culture. 18 Some “eastern” influences is possible to point out also on example of the wheelthrown ceramics with burnished patterns from Eggolsheim. 19 The presence of (post-) Chernyakhov material within the latest phase of a cluster of settlements in Central Danubian “Barbaricum” rises the question of the interpretation of this widespread phenomenon. Oleg Charov and Mark Schukin, and recently Boris Magomedov and Michel Kazanski as well, interconnected the later phase of Chernyakhov culture with the exodus of the Goths under the leadership of king Radagais to Italy. 20 The traces of his followers throughout the “Barbaricum” are unknown in general. Similar patterns shared by the late Chernyakhov culture and the sites in the Middle Danube region could, however, at least partly indicate mutual relations. 10. Beljak & Kolník 2008, 63-72. Several other excavations revealed that the concluding phases of some settlements are connected not only to Chernyakhov material, but also probably to proofs of violence. Another example is the grave H1, discovered within the area of the settlement at Olomouc-Slavonín, see: Kalábek 2006, 442, fig. 9. H1. 11. Beljak & Kolník 2008, 76, 80, fig. 13. 6. 12. Tejral 1999, 208, fig. 4. 5-11. 13. Neubauer 2011, 123-124, figs. 44-45; Stadler 1981. 14. Reszczyńska 2008, 233-241, fig. 1. 15. Limburský & Jiřík, in preparation; for newly discovered cremation burial ground in Pšovlky with an assemblage of artefacts of mixed Elbe-Germanic and Chernyakhov- Sîntana de Mureş or even Baltic character see: Droberjar 2015. 16. Keller 1979, 57-62. 17. Böhnlein 1995/96, 31, fig. 29. 9; Kokowski 1996, 156, fig. 12. 18. Pescheck 1978, 50, pl. 74:3; Mączyńska 2007, 371, fig. 2. 4-5. 19. Haberstroh 1995, 17, fig. 9. 4-5. 20. Schukin & Charov 1999, 329-337; Magomedov 2001; Kazanski 2012. 420 – Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra Plate 2. (Post-) Chernyakhov influences in “Zlechov” type: 1-10. Zlechov, settlement (after Tejral 1999; Zeman 2006), 11. Rymice, 12. Havřice, 13-20. Brno-Horní Heršpice, 21-22. Pohořelice – Nová Ves, grave No. 13, 23-24. Pohořelice – Nová Ves, grave No. 17, 25-27. Znojmo-Hradiště, 28. Bratislava – Dúbravka (all after Tejral 1999), 29-30. Štúrovo – vojenské cvičisko (after Beljak and Kolník 2008), 31-35. Michelstetten (after Neubauer 2011), 36. Unterlanzendorf (after Stadler 1981). Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts Plate 3. (Post-) Chernyakhov influences in Central, Southern and Western Europe: 1. Vlíněves (Bohemia), chamber grave (drawing and photo P. Limburský), 2. Götting (S Germany) (after Keller 1979), 3. Schloßberg near Geisfeld (upper Main river region, Germany) (after Böhnlein 1995/96), 4. Geldersheim (after Pescheck 1978), 5. Sacca di Goito, grave No. 213 (Italy) (after Menotti 2006), 6. Sacca di Goito, grave No. 210 (after Sannazaro 2006), 7. Sacca di Goito, grave No. 206 (after Sannazaro 2006), 8. Sacca di Goito, grave No. 214 (after Sannazaro 2006), 9. Sacca di Goito, grave No. 214 (Menotti 2006), 10. Angers (N France) (after Kazanski 2012), 11. Monasterio de San Claudio (Spain) (after Morin de Pablos 2007), 12. El Cerro de la Gavia (Spain), (after Lopez Quiroga 2007). – 421 Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra 422 – Federates in Roman Danube Provinces The so-called “federate” culture comprises a large register of objects, ranging from wheel-thrown and burnished ceramics of “Barbarian” or adopted provincial forms to dress accessories, combs and military equipment. This material culture is usually attributed to the troops which entered the Roman military service in the last decennia of the 4th – early 5th century AD. The traces of this culture are numerous. For example, in the Lower Danube provinces, Lyudmil Vagalinski identifies a number of finds of pottery related to characteristic (post-) Chernyakhov forms with burnished decoration. In that area, “federate” burnished ceramics are usually found at the sites of military character (for example fortress Iatrus, plate 1:3, city Nicopolis ad Istrum and nearby fortress at Dichin, city and fortress Transmarisca/Tutrakan, Durostorum, Abritus, plate 4:1-2, Marcianopolis, Augusta Traiana). Another interesting assemblage is a cemetery in the surroundings of the fortress Abritus, where one grave was furnished with a comb with a bell-shaped handle of Thomas’s class III, of Chernyakhov origin. Buried “barbarians” are noticeable also by the presence of the individuals with artificially deformed skulls.21 Similar situation was observed in frontier regions of Moesia and Dacia Ripensis by Perica Špehar. The finds connected with federates are known from numerous sites from section of the limes between Lederata and Aquae. From this region several examples of combs of Thomas’s class iii are reported (plate 4:10), as well as wheel-thrown ceramics with burnished decoration, which is probably a local production, adopted by the federates. This material is dated into the first period form late 4th – mid 5th century AD. The decline of the federate settlement of this region is connected with the great invasion of the Huns in 441/42. 22 In the provinces of Pannonia and Valeria the presence of the federate troops is also attested by the dissemination of various types of wheel-thrown ceramics with burnished motives. Sándor Soproni mentions characteristic finds from some border castella and watch-towers like Szentendre-castrum, Leányfálu or Visegrád-Sibrik-castrum (plate 4:5). 23 Into the same period (late 4th century AD), the warrior grave at Lébény is dated. This grave is equipped with a conical beaker, probably of eastern provenance, a ceramic pitcher of “Chernyakhov” style and buckles with thickened frame and with cloisonné style decorated belt-plates (plate 4:6). 24 Soproni tries to place these finds in the context of the presence of federates under the leadership of Alatheus and Saphrax, who entered the Middle Danube provinces after AD 383. The author treats the cemeteries of type Csákvár and Szabadbattyán as “index fossils” of the federate group. 25 In Csákvár Laszlo Barkóczi identifies the emergence of a new glasswork during this period, where beakers (plate 4:4) and jugs with trail-decorated necks are favored as grave goods. The author also considers the possibility that these assemblages, apparently associated with the advent of “barbarian” groups, was influenced by the arrival of new glass-workers, who followed the migrating troops, perhaps from the Lower Danube or North-Pontic territories.26 This is clearly possible, especially if we take into account the cluster of material innovations which this group of foederati had brought with them. It is particularly important to note that in these assemblages, the artefacts represent a mixed “barbarian-Late Antique” culture, which indicates a syncretism of “barbarian” forms and provincial production and decorative methods and procedures. A clear example is conveyed by the antler combs with bell-shaped handle of Thomas’s class iii, which are said to develop from (post-) Chernyakhov prototypes. However, Mária Bíro assumes their production in provincial fabricae, in accordance with “barbarian” taste. Similar examples are combs decorated with horse head protomes. 27 With (post-) Chernyakhov horizon after Jaroslav Tejral (i.e. phase D1-Villafontana after Völker Bierbrauer) can be linked the diffusion of other evidence of “innovation” finding its formal prototypes in south-eastern Europe, such as certain types of buckles and fibulae. Among them it is worth mentioning the large bow brooches made of sheet of the type Villafontana, and the gold or gilded belt buckles with thickened round frame with attached cloisonné plate of the type Schulze-Dörrlamm C1-C6/Lébény. In both cases, different authors point out technological features having an origin in workshops of Eastern Empire of Late Antiquity. 28 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. Vagalinski 2002, 51-85. Špehar 2012, 35-45. Soproni 1985, pl. 12-17. Tejral 1997, fig. 13. 2. Soproni 1985, 86-93. Barkóczi 1988, 27-47. Petković 1998. For example: Schulze-Dörrlamm 2009, 84-101; Fehr 2002-03, 211-213; Kleemann 2008, 69-70. Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts – 423 The issue of the provincial influence upon the material culture of federates concerns also another important group of material – ceramics, especially pitchers with burnished decoration of local Middle Danube origin, which became very popular as grave goods. 29 These so-called “federate” pitchers are frequent in the layers of the late Roman limes in Pannonia, 30 and also in “Barbaricum”, where they are known especially from funerary contexts. 31 In the Middle Danube region, these vessels are known in different forms from the mid 4th century AD until the mid 5th century AD. 32 Their maximal occurrence can, nonetheless, be noticed in the late 4th century AD and the first third of the 5th century AD. 33 Remarkable finds are the examples from graves at Arpás in Pannonia or Vienna-Inzerdorf, which reflect certain nomadic features. 34 Following the Danube westwards one can find a number of examples of federate ceramics from several important sites of Noricum (plate 4:16), less frequently also Raetia. Here on the other hand is located for example an inland castel at Teriola/ Zirl – Martinsbühel, Raetia II, nowadays Tyrol. The finds include chip-carved belt-set components and a bow-fibula with a wire wrapped around the bow (plate 4:7), finding analogies in “East-Germanic” culture of early 5th century. 35 Another “eastern” single find is known for example from border fortress “Bürgle” near Gundremmingen, also in Raetia. Namely it is a specimen of a belt buckle with a thickened round frame and round belt-plate (plate 4:29). Besides, Late Antique military material, especially the arrow heads, are numerous. Helmut Bender considers a presence of a cavalry troop known as equites stablesiani iuniores. 36 Special account should be paid to auxiliary fortress Abusina-Eining located on Danube in today’s Bavaria. The assemblage known from this site is a unique combination of Late Roman military and “barbarian” origin. The “eastern” cultural environment is especially represented by antler combs of Thomas’s class III (plate 4:19-24), a single bow-fibula (plate 4:30), a buckle with round frame (plate 4:28), arrow heads and bone or antler reinforcement plates for composite bows (plate 4:31-35). 37 The above mentioned series of combs from Abusiana finds close parallels also in the West, in Rhineland,38 but also in villas in the region south of Garonne (see below). Single finds of the combs of Thomas’s class iii represent specimens from Neuburg an der Donau (plate 4:26) or Regensburg (plate 4:25). 39 The interpretation of the meaning of the federate culture changes from an author to another. For example Jaroslav Tejral does not support the idea, that the cultural circle of the rich graves of this period must be necessarily connected only with Alatheus and Saphrax. He rather considers more waves of the “eastern Barbarians”, what is supported also by the written sources.40 The “federate” component of Vinařice group in Bohemia – implication for long distance contacts The problems of the presence and meaning of the federate culture in Bohemia, especially in the northern part of the country, has been recently examined by one of the authors. 41 The old find of a warrior grave in Bříza, near Litoměřice, represents one of the examples of the cultural changes which affected the northern part of Bohemia during the initial phase of the Vinařice group, in the first third of the 5th century AD. This grave fits in a general background of significant changes such as the decline of the cremation burial grounds and the setting of 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. Friesinger & Kerchler 1981. Ottományi 1989, 347, 517, fig. 122:19. See also Tejral 1972, 101; Svoboda 1965, 106-107, pl. XXVII:8; Pieta 1999, fig. 6. 2-4. Friesinger & Kerchler 1981, fig. 57. Ottományi 1989, 517. Tejral 2010, 100-102, fig. 11. 4, 12. 3. Höck 2003, 10-50, fig. 2, 3, 4, 5, 43-44. Bender 1996. Gschwind 2004, pl. 91-135. Kazanski 1993, 175; fig. 2:1-18; Buchinger 1997; for the grave assemblage in Gloucester in England see: Ager 2012. Keller 1979, 57; Schwarz 1972-73. Tejral 2007, 57-60; see for example: Doležal 2008, 254. Jiřík 2007, 131-135, fig. 6; id. 2010, 276-287. 424 – Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra Plate 4. “Federate” culture in Danubian provinces, adjacent part of “Barbaricum” and Western Europe: 1-2. Abritus, 3. Iatrus (after Vagalinski 1999), 4. Csákvár, grave No. 49 (after Barkóczi 1988), 5. Visegrád-Sibrik (after Soproni 1985), 6. selected finds from Lébény (1-3 and 5-9) and Untersiebebrunn (4, 10-13) (after Tejral 1997), 7. Teriola/Zirl (after Höck 2003), 8. Oslip and Carnuntum (after Tejral 1985), 10. Felix Romuliana (after Špehar 2012), 11. Leobendorf (Lower Austria), 9, 12. Grafenwörth (Lower Austria), 13. Bratislava-Devín, 14. Lednice (Moravia) (all after Tejral 1999), 15. Stillfried, 16. Vienna XI, 17. Laa an der Thaya, 18. Grafenwörth (all after Friesinger-Kerchler 1981), 19-24, 28, 30-35. Abusina-Eining (after Gschwind 2004), 25. Regensburg (after Schwarz 1972/73), 26. Neuburg a. d. Donau (after Keller 1979), 27. Wiesbaden-Schützenhofstrasse (after Buchinger 1997), 29. ürgle bei Gundremmingen (after Bender ed., 1996), 36. Beaucaire-sur-Baïse, 37. Moncrabeur-Bapteste, 38. MontréalSéviac (all after Balmelle 2001), 39. Herpes, 40. Monségur (after Kazanski 2013), 41. Castro Ventosa (Morin de Pablos 2007). Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts – 425 Plate 5. “Federate” and (post-) Chernyakhov finds in southern France and Spain: 1. Le Canet, 2. Sérignac (after Kazanski 1999), 3. Toulouse – Pl. Esquirol, 4. Toulouse – Gué du Bazacle, 5. Cazères (all after Bach et al. 2002), 6. Madrona, grave No. 24 (after Pinar Gil 2012), 7. Montmaurin, 8. Valentine (both after after Kazanski 1999), 9. Monségur, 10. Saint-Étienne-de-Gourgas (both after Camps 1972-73), 11. L’Estrade (after Ournac et al. 2009), 12. L’Hostalot, grave (after Hispania Gothorum 2007), 13-14. Bragayrac – Les Portes settlement (after Massendari 2006), 15-16. Bow brooches of type Villafontana from former F. Calzadilla’s collection, MAP Badajoz (photograph by J. Pinar), Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra 426 – new inhumation cemeteries with prevailing west-eastern orientation of the graves. Dieter Quast attributes this change of the burial rite around 400 AD to the strong influences from Roman provinces on the Danube. 42 The “eastern” character of the grave from Bříza (fig. 1) is especially underlined by a silver belt set, as well as shoe-buckles with thickened round frame and rectangular belt-plate. The belt buckle is further gilt and decorated with niello, a technique of Late Roman origin. Analogical finds are known in wealthy graves at Untersiebenbrunn or Airan. 43 As a symbol of a warrior served an unpreserved spatha, and as a symbol of federate service in Roman army or of membership in the scholae palatinae was a gold torques. 44 We observe also nomadic influences, especially metal parts of horse bridle and bit (with parallels in Coşoveni de Jos for example), or the buckles with rectangular frame (with parallels in grave No. 2 in Gilyach, Northern Caucasus, or specimens equipped with a segmented strap-plate from Lyon-Saint-Irénée, Traprain in Scotland, or Dombóvár, where they probably represent Roman goods designed especially for the nomadic warriors). 45 A classical form usually connected with Vinařice group is the antler comb with bell-shaped handle of Thomas’s class III (plate 6:22-29). Helmut Preidel, who first had collected the finds from Bohemia, refers about the finds from grave No. 2 in PragueRadotín, Prague-Bubeneč, two specimens from graves in Prague-Podbaba, Prague-Veleslavín and Vinařice. 46 Other exemplars have been recently found in Litovice, graves No. 17 and 19, 47 or at the above mentioned Trmice 48 and in the warrior grave in Vlíněves (see above). Three other recent finds come from the cemetery at Prague-Zličín (see below), and a richly decorated find is furthermore known from a settlement excavated at Prague-Kobylisy in 2009. 49 All together amount fourteen combs, representing an important assemblage related to (post-) Chernyakhov development and “federate” culture. The above mentioned pitchers with burnished decoration are also well known among the finds of the Vinařice group (plate 6:1-9, 13). They were found on several spots, especially around Prague and central Bohemia (Prague-Bubeneč: Juliska, Vinařice, Prague-Veleslavín, two specimens at Prague-Kobylisy, Řisuty u Slaného, Kolín – plynárna, Chotěšice u Nymburka, Litovice, graves No. 5 and 15).50 In addition, two settlement finds should be also mentioned: Závist-oppidum (unpublished find), and PragueKobylisy, hut No. 527.51 Once more a significant assemblage, clearly related to the presence of “federates” on the Middle Danube. The “federate” glass vessels, instead, are relatively rare. In Bohemia, the list of finds is limited to the presence of thimbleshaped beakers in graves at Prague-Kobylisy (plate 6:10) and Prague-Radotín. 52 A blue-blobbed thimble-shaped beaker is known from a wealthy grave in Měcholupy, which is, however, dated to the second third of the 5th century AD. 53 To complete the list, one should mention also the bow fibulae found at Závist settlement (plate 6:15-16), and PragueVeleslavín (plate 6:17-19) a cast fibula with engraved tremolo decoration related to the Carnuntum-Oslip class from an unknown site in Bohemia (plate 6:14) and an antler pyramidal pendant from grave 29B at Lužec nad Vltavou (plate 6:21). At Závist and at Lužec glazed mortaria and a glazed pitcher of provincial origin are also known. 54 Special attention, however, requires the newly excavated cemetery at Prague-Zličín (undertaken in 2005-08), which with 177 graves represents the largest necropolis of Vinařice group in Bohemia and one of the largest of that time in Central Europe. 55 Here we register another assemblage of goods connected to the so-called “federate culture”. One of the oldest graves within the cemetery is grave No. 15, with an unusual shape locating the burial itself by the northern wall of the grave 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. Quast 1997, 175. See Tejral 1985, 365-366; Ajbabin 1995, fig. 6:3-4. Speidel 1996, 235-243. Kazanski & Mastykova 2007, fig. 15:A:2; Kazanski & Akhmedov 2007, 253, fig. 5; Kazanski & Akhmedov 2007, 253. Preidel 1930, 290; see also: Píč 1909, pl. 4:14-15; Svoboda 1965, 124; pl. 26:9; Tejral 1985, 365, fig. 34:3. Pleinerová 2006, fig. 13:2, and 15. Reszczyńska 2008, fig. 1. Frolík et al. 2011, 439, fig. 20:1. Svoboda 1965, 106-109; Pleinerová 2006, figs. 7, 12. Frolík et al. 2011, 434-438, fig. 23:1. Svoboda 1965, pl. 27:7, 32:14. Ibid., pl. 27:6. Jiřík 2010, 276-287, with references. See Vávra et al. 2012. Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts – 427 cut (plate 7:a-e). From this grave comes a thimble-shaped beaker (plate 7:1), having parallels within the Vinařice group, as well as among the federates in the Middle Danube region. Another glass beaker of a half-egg shape, which can be possibly connected with the “federate” glass comes from grave No. 91 (plate 7:2). In the nearby grave No. 95, a fragment of the upper part of a wheel-thrown vessel, probably a pitcher, decorated with a horizontal rib was found (plate 7:4). This example finds the closest parallels in a rich grave of Lébény and among the specimens of (post-) Chernyakhov horizon. Very popular must have been the numerous shoe-buckles with thickened round frame and facetted tongues. In grave No. 16, a pair of these characteristic shoe-buckles was found in a combination with the “East-Germanic” silver “open-work” pendants of the type Solontsy (plate 7:5-6, 8:2-3). Another example of a similar medallion-shaped pendant is known from grave No. 53 (plate 8:6). Special form of shoe-buckles with trefoil fastening plate was recorded in grave No. 80 (plate 8:4-5). These examples have the closest parallels in the finds from Kosanovo, grave 97, of the late Chernyakhov culture (plate 1:41). 56 In several cases, we find evidence supporting that the material culture connected to the “federate culture” was preserved within the “living culture” of the Vinařice group until the middle third of the 5th century AD. A clear example is represented by a wheel-thrown pitcher with an ovoid body and a decoration consisting of the burnished pattern (plate 7:3) 57 combined to a pair of fibulae of Niederflorstadt-Wiesloch class from the child grave No. 101, and also a fragment of the lower part of a wheel-thrown ceramic vessel (plate 7:8) ffrom the higher level of the backfill of the secondary pit (therefore is not excluded that the find was originally connected to the next grave) in “golden” grave No. 42, dated by the presence of three-lobbed gold pendants with little handles of type Úherce. The neighboring grave No. 41 is probably even later, dated by the fibulae of the type Bákodposzta – Sokolnice – Gursuf. 58 Few in number are the combs of Thomas’s class III with bell-shaped or semicircular handle. An undecorated specimen is known in grave No. 108 (plate 7:7). From the grave No. 114 comes a further specimen with a rich engraved decoration and a protective case. 59 The Vinařice group in Bohemia, however, is not the only area in “Barbaricum”, where the presence of “federate” culture is attested. In Lower Austria, SW Slovakia and Moravia, Jaroslav Tejral and Karol Pieta register a number of sites, both cemeteries and settlements, where provincial pitchers with burnished decoration or combs of Thomas’s class III occur. The dating of the finds from Leobendorf (Lower Austria) (plate 4:11), Grafenwörth (Lower Austria) (plate 4:9, 12, 18), Bratislava-Devín (plate 4:13), Lednice (Moravia) (plate 4:14), Stillfried (plate 4:15), or Laa an der Thaya (plate 4:17) fall into the first half of the 5th century AD. 60 The wealthy graves from Untersiebenbrunn represent the ideal of “barbarian princely culture”; accordingly, the relative chronological stage of Migration Period is sometimes considered and named after them. 61 Interesting changes are also recorded in the upper Main river region, as Jochen Haberstroh observes. In a fortified site at a hill top of Reisberg near Burgellern he distinguishes two horizons of destruction. The first one, dated to the Untersiebenbrunn (or Smolín) stage, is characterized by the presence of “East-Germanic” belt sets and “nomadic” arrowheads. The author hesitates when ascribing these finds, because of the “international” character of these objects, which are known both in “purely” nomadic assemblages and in the “federate” culture, including Vinařice group (characteristic “nomadic” arrowheads appear for example in the cemetery at Prague-Zličín, child grave No. 70, or in settlement at Závist). The second horizon of destruction of Reisberg is dated to the Childeric stage, and directly connected by the author with the Vinařice group. The abandonment of the site is viewed as a consequence of Thuringian interests in Main river region in late 5th century AD. 62 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. Rusanova & Symonovich 1993, pl. 66:13. The nearest parallel is a specimen from Pöchlarn, grave 19, in Austria; see: Friesinger & Kerchler 1980, fig. 20:5. Vávra et al. 2012, 17. Ibid., 20, fig. 21. Tejral 1999, 249-258; Friesinger & Kerchler 1981; Pieta 1999, 175, fig. 6. Nothnagel 2008. Haberstroh 2003, 253-258. Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra 428 – (Post-)Chernyakhov and “federate” elements in the South-Western Provinces The material traces of the earliest phase of “eastern” influences in the Western provinces are not outnumbering. However, in the last years the corpus of the finds recorded in the Mediterranean area has increased remarkably, enabling to propose some general observations. 63 Important evidence of the migrating ‘Barbarian’ groups of East-European origin around 400 AD has been found in the large cemetery at Sacca di Goito (Mantua), in northern Italy (plate 3:5-9). Among the small finds we should mention the characteristic fibulae made of metal sheet of Chernyakhov origin, as well as an example of a metal “nomadic” mirror (graves 206, 210, and 214). Grave 213 of this cemetery is further provided with a thimble-shaped beaker, 64 which has rather parallels among the Middle Danube material and Gaul. A similar situation was recorded in the cemetery at Angers (Maine-etLoire, France), where further fibulae made of metal sheet were reported (plate 3:10). 65 Michel Kazanski has recently connected these finds with the traces of optimates of Radagais, who were recruited by Stilicho after the battle of Fiesole and later settled throughout the West. 66 On the other hand, Mantua was one of the cities stormed by Alaric’s Visigoths at the beginning of the 5th century AD. The date fits remarkably well with the chronology of the “eastern” features. But it seems unlikely that such a short-lived event could be linked to the cemetery at Sacca di Goito. On the other hand, a connection to “eastern” (Radagais’?) groups settled by the Roman authorities seems to us more plausible, although the location of this settlement (next to a city ravaged by “similar” Barbarians a few years before) can be regarded as problematic. Ultimately, the composition of the grave goods recorded at Sacca de Goito enables also a connection to Alan groups settled in northern Italy.67 A correspondence between small finds of Chernyakhov tradition and the areas of Alanic settlement in the West is visible in some territories of northern Gaul and Spain (for example, the bow brooches in bronze sheet from Troyes and Reims and the crossbow brooches with attached foot from El Hinojal and Casa de la Zúa).68 In any case, the site of Sacca di Goito represents the westernmost findspot of a north Italian group of assemblages and stray finds related to the (post-) Chernyakhov and federate cultures of the periods D1 to D2/D3, which includes one- and two-pieced crossbow brooches, Chernyakhov-reminiscent pots, Lébény type belt buckles, horsemen equipment, weaponry and evolved variants of bow brooches in metal sheet. 69 It is interesting to state that all these finds are concentrated in a consistent geographical area, corresponding to the north-eastern corner of present-day Italy. However, the finds are so far not numerous and do not enable to determine whether they could be mirroring a long-term process of integration of eastern elements into local uses, in a similar way as observed in southern Gaul or in south-western Spain. The south-western quadrant of the Iberian Peninsula, especially the territory of Mérida, shows indeed a remarkable concentration of finds relatable to the (post-) Chernyakhov and federate material culture and to their later development. Besides the already mentioned fibula from El Hinojal and the cemetery of Mérida – Almendralejo st., one can mention two bow brooches in silver sheet of type Villafontana (plate 5:15-16) and a silver belt buckle with trapezoidal plate from an unknown location in the area. 70 Some broadly contemporary finds of crossbow brooches from Conimbriga, Idanha-a-Velha and Santa Maria do Ameixial 71 complete a picture of remarkable heterogeneity that mirrors the various components of material culture relatable to the presence of “barbarians” (and/or federates?) in the early 5th century AD. It is not so clear how finds such as the spatha grave at Beja and the pair of big bow brooches in silver sheet of the Calzadilla collection fit into this picture, just as the latest graves at Mérida – Almendralejo st. do. 72 They are certainly too late to be connected with the barbarian groups coming to Spain in the early 5th century AD. The belt buckle with attached plate from Beja, the sword mount and even its pommel find their best counterparts in the north Pontic area. The Calzadilla Silberblechfibeln instead are clearly of middle-Danube origin. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. Kazanski 1989; id. 1993; id. 2016; id. forthcoming. Menotti 2006, 55-57, fig. 2; Sannazaro 2006, 60-61, fig. 1. Brodeur forthcoming. Kazanski 2012, 396, figs. 9-10. Bachrach 1973, 33-34; MacGeorge 2002, 231. Kazanski 2013, fig. 2:10-14; Pinar & Ripoll 2008, 109, both with earlier literature. Bierbrauer 1968; id. 1991; id. 1994, 35; Piussi 2008, 115-117; Possenti 2011; ead. 2015. Koenig 1980, 231-232, pl. 60:C-D, 62:E. Pinar & Ripoll 2008, 109, with further literature. Pinar 2012, 265-269, with further literature. Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts – 429 The Mérida grave belongs to a well defined, high-status group that, although displaying tight connections to the middle-Danube and the north-Pontic regions, is disseminated exclusively in the West. The general picture is that of a local synthesis of elements –most of which related to upper social strata– of federate and “eastern” cultures occurring for at least two generations, and reaching their end approximately by the time of the definitive Visigothic conquest of Mérida and its territory during the late 60s and early 70s of the 5th century AD. Instead, other elements characteristic of the upper strata of the federate culture display a different dissemination pattern in the Iberian Peninsula. Thus, a small group of feminine graves furnished with gold pins and other adornments occurs in the Alanic-Vandal area in the southern half of Spain in the early 5th century AD. The group is difficult to interpret: middle-Danube (Pannonian) or western Mediterranean? 73 What is beyond doubt is that these Spanish finds display consistent connections to the federate milieu: both the glass vessel with drop decoration from L’Hostalot (plate 5:12) and the buckles from Málaga find convincing counterparts in the middle-Danube area, while the Mérida finds are integrated in a funerary sector reminding of the 5th century AD small privileged cemeteries of the Danube area. 74 It is probably not by chance if also some buckles relatable to the (post-) Chernyakhov horizon of the D1 period have been documented. 75 A similar phenomenon is displayed by the dissemination of the gold belt buckles with cloisonné plates of Lébény type and morphologically related simple buckles: they occur in north-west, central and southern Spain. 76 Most of them lacking archaeological context, it does not seem possible to determine whether they reached Spain together with barbarian populations or reflected the expansion of a long-distance aristocratic fashion. One of the few contexts properly recorded, that of the rich grave at Torrejón de Velasco (Madrid), shows the integration of these gold buckles (plate 5:17-18) into an assemblage of local, central Spanish status symbols, including a Simancas type knife, a spearhead, terra sigillata pottery and glassware. 77 On behalf of the presence of this type of object among the Western Mediterranean status symbols witness the cloisonné patterns in the plates of some western finds, which are likely to have had a Western Mediterranean origin. 78 Direct links to the Chernyakhov and federate milieus are instead displayed clearly by a comb of Thomas’ class III with an engraved decoration, which was found at the fortified settlement of Castro Ventosa (Cacabelos, León) (plate 4:41). 79 All these finds correspond to clothing accessories, which is probably also valid for the combs, worn as a part of a headdress. Regarding the pottery finds, we may mention only a fragment of the upper part of the wheel-thrown pitcher with a horizontal rib and engraved decoration. Probably of local (Spanish) provenance (plate 3:11), 80 it reflects “eastern” influences as well. It is not likely that the aforementioned finds have a direct connection to the Visigothic presence in the West. Their dissemination and chronology places them in the background of the earliest barbarian presence in the Iberian Peninsula. One might then assume that the Sueves, Vandals and Alans settling in Spain in the early 5th century AD were also bearers of some aspects of the federate culture. For the finds in the south-western quadrant, as said, a rare and remarkable sequence of federate-related materials covers at least the first two thirds of the 5th century AD (plate 5:19-20), as the cemetery at Mérida – Almendralejo st. exemplifies best. In this case, the historically attested displacements of barbarians do not suffice to explain the picture outlined by archaeological finds: the presence of these components lasts for at least two generations. The background of the finds might be helpful to their interpretation: the latest gold finds are concentrated in important urban contexts (Beja and, especially, Mérida, the capital of the dioecesis Hispaniarum), they might be connected above all to relevant characters of the local society. They date approximately to the second third of the 5th century AD: during that time span, the control of Mérida shifted from Roman to Suevian to Visigothic to, probably, at least nominally Roman again. 81 On the other hand, important imperial armies, partially integrated by federate troops, entered Spain in Majorian’s times. All these events might explain the constant contacts with the federate culture that South-Western Spain displays at this time. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. Quast 2005, 263-272; Pinar & Ripoll 2008, 112-116. Heras & Olmedo 2015. The authors wish to thank A. Olmedo and J. Heras for kindly sharing information on the site. Pinar & Ripoll 2008, 107-109; Juárez & Pinar 2016, fig. 10. García-Vuelta et al. 2013. Pinar & Ripoll 2008, 108. Morín 2007, 211-212, figs. 83-84. Ibid., 210-211, fig. 82. Some years later, it will be contended again by Sueves and Visigoths before its definitive integration into the latter’s regnum. 430 – Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra Plate 6. “Federate” component of Vinařice group in Bohemia: 1. Litovice, grave No. 5 (after Pleinerová 2006), 2. Prague-Kobylisy, disturbed grave (after Svoboda 1965), 3. Litovice, grave No. 15 (after Pleinerová 2006), 4. Prague-Kobylisy grave from year 1930, 5. Prague-Podbaba (Juliska), 6. Vinařice, 7. Řisuty, (all after Svoboda 1965), 8. Prague-Kobylisy, hut No. 527 (after Frolík – Jílek – Jiřík – Urbanová 2011), 9. Chotěšice near Nymburk, 10. Prague-Kobylisy, grave No. III, 11. Prague-Veleslavín, 12. Prague-Podbaba, 13. Kolín-plynárna, grave No. 2, 14. Unknown site (all after Svoboda 1965), 15-16. Závist-settlement, 17-19. Prague-Veleslavín, 20. Prague-Radotín (all after Jiřík 2010), 21. Lužec nad Vltavou, grave No. 29b (after Korený – Kytlicová 2008, 22. Litovice, grave No. 17, 23. Litovice, grave No. 6, 24. Prague-Kobylisy, hut No. 510, 25-26. PraguePodbaba (Juliska) (after Píč 1903), 27-29. Trmice, settlement grave (after Reszczyńska 2008). Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts Plate 7. Prague-Zličín, cemetery: a-f. schema of excavation of the grave No. 15, 1. grave No. 15, 2. grave No. 91, 3. grave No. 101, 4. grave No. 95, 5-6. grave No. 16, 7. grave No. 108, 8. grave No. 42 (all drawings M. Černý). – 431 Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra 432 – Interestingly enough, the typological repertory (Thuburbo Maius-type crossbow brooches, Lébény type belt buckles, local derivations of Silberblechfibel brooches, gold foil appliqués) and the indicators of high economic wealth (gold jewellery items found in major cities and monumental complexes) recorded in South-Western Spain is remarkably similar to the earliest “eastern” elements recorded in northern Africa. 82 Thus the sequence, as outlined by the newest finds, suggests that the wealthy fashions recorded in the grave finds of the early Vandal kingdom are the result of the process of integration of federate culture elements into a local synthesis in South-Western Spain, in whose formation and spread, should we follow the 5th-century chroniclers, the Alan group would have played a significant role. Another cluster of finds, corresponding mainly to the Garonne valley in south-western Gaul deserves special attention. The recorded artefacts do not differ from those found in other areas of the West and are not especially numerous. Nonetheless, they deserve special examination for two main reasons. In the first place, their dissemination is remarkably compact. In the second, a geographic continuity between this group of finds and the earliest phases of the “classical” Visigothic-period cemeteries can be outlined. The most striking evidence is provided by a group of richly decorated combs of Thomas’s class III, recorded in several villas in the region south to the Garonne: Beaucaire-sur-Baïse – La Turraque, Moncrabeau – Bapteste, Montréal-du-Gers – Séviac and Mireval-Lauragais – L’Estrade (plate 4:36-38; 5:11), 83 which have their closest parallels in material of federates in Rhineland (plate 4:27), Danube regions and also Vinařice group in Bohemia (see above). The aforementioned comb from Cacabelos belongs to this group too. The picture of the dissemination of the combs is completed by the find spots of some fibulae characteristic of the Chernyakhov and federate milieus: we may mention the examples from the villae of PortSainte-Foy-et-Ponchapt – Le Canet (plate 5:1), Monségur – Neujon (plate 4:40, here also a fibula: plate 5:9), Montmaurin (plate 5:7) – Lassalles and Valentine (plate 5:8) – Arnesp and from the cemetery at Sainte-Bazeille – Sérignac (plate 5:2). 84 The find spots concentrate in a territory corresponding fairly well to the original settlement area of the Visigoths, stretching along the Garonne valley from the territorium of Toulouse (plate 5:3-5) to that of Bordeaux. Only two finds (the fibulae from Quarante and from Saint-Étienne-de-Gourgas – plate 5:10) appear in more distant territories. As seen, in comparison to Bohemia, the “eastern” components of the earliest Visigothic period in southern Gaul are represented mainly by the movable goods. They display mixed features of (post-) Chernyakhov and Wielbark cultures together with “federate culture”. Instead, fragile materials like glass and ceramic vessels were perhaps lost before they have arrived to the West and the dining dishes were replaced by the standard vessels of local provincial origin. A possible exception is attested at the site of Bragayrac – Les Portes near Toulouse, where the recorded forms of pottery include, besides typical 4th-5th century AD Western Mediterranean forms, some hand-made pots (plate 5:13-14) and dishes reminding of the technical and morphological features of the later Chernyakhov culture. 85 This group of early finds corresponds exclusively to settlement finds or stray finds. But the two sides of their dissemination territory, namely the areas around Toulouse and Bordeaux, are two of the main clusters where the first inhumations clothed after (post-) Chernyakhov and federate traditions are to be found. The earliest examples can be dated to about 450 AD; they display tight links with “eastern” traditions, although in an evolved form: locally-produced fibulae and belt buckles were combined and worn according to Chernyakhov culture traditions; 86 intentional skull deformation and crescent-shaped “nomadic” earrings. 87 The earliest evidences of the Visigothic-period burials after “eastern” traditions in central Spain can be dated to the last third of the 5th century AD, being immediately successive to the earliest counterparts in southern Gaul. In our opinion, there is little doubt that such cultural components were shaped in southern Gaul: first in the Garonne valley and, slightly later, in Narbonensis. Accordingly, the central Spanish finds can be interpreted as evidence for the arrival of population from southern France. Judging from the available documentation, these south-westwards movements did not involve significant amounts of people. In any case, identifying southern Gaul as the kernel of the prototype of the funerary culture at the Castilian 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. Eger 2012, with earlier literature. Kazanski & Lapart 1994; Balmelle 2001, 28-36, fig. 3; Ournac et al. 2009, fig. 330. Kazanski 1994, 168, fig. 7:2-4; Kazanski 1998, fig. 1:18, 6:1-3. Massendari 2006, 126-127, figs. 39-40. Pinar 2015, 531-538. Cazes 2008, 69; Paya 2010, 284, figs. 8, 11; Boudartchouk et al. 2012, 162. Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts – 433 cemeteries explains convincingly the significant differences between this group of finds and the somewhat earlier traces of (post-) Chernyakhov and federate culture in south-western Spain. A general overview on the earliest phases of the Castilian cemeteries is dominated by forms of brooches and belt buckles that ultimately derive from forms characteristic for the (post-) Chernyakhov horizon and the federate culture. 88 They present themselves as much evolved forms, recalling just distantly their original prototypes. In the earliest period, however, we can still find some evidence of tight contacts between the Spanish grave goods and their “eastern” prototypes. The clearest example is indubitably the grave 79 at the cemetery of Duratón, where a woman was wearing a pair of big bow brooches in silver sheet of Szabadbattyán type and a small crossbow brooch with attached foot. 89 The grave belongs probably to a relatively early moment of this funerary horizon. A similar chronology can be attributed to the grave 477 in the same cemetery,90 containing what can be interpreted as a Western Mediterranean counterpart of belt buckles with circular plate like the one found at Smolín gr. XXXII; another example of this type of buckle comes from Baamorto – Pol in north-western Spain. Found in the Suebian settlement zone, this find can be identified as an import from the Middle Danube area. 91 Two crossbow brooches with trapezoidal foot and bevelled decoration recorded at Duratón find good counterparts among the late Chernyakhov manufactures. 92 Both are difficult to date, as they were found in probably reused graves (10 and 294). Grave 10 lays in one of the sectors where the earliest burials are recorded, thus making likely a chronology before 500 AD. In that same sector, grave 22 contained a bronze belt buckle with a flat, rhomboid prong basis. The type is rare in Spain, finding counterparts in a probably reused grave 45 at El Carpio de Tajo and in grave 4 at the cemetery of El Cerro de la Gavía (Vallecas, Madrid). 93 The latter displays a thick front frame that connects it to “eastern” manufactures. To conclude this fast survey of examples, we may mention some examples of the so-called “nomadic”, crescent-shaped earrings found in graves such as Duratón 614 and Illescas – Boadilla de Arriba 9. 94 If regarded from a long-term perspective, the Castilian earliest inhumations clothed after “eastern” fashions appear to be the result of a process involving several generations of inhabitants of south-western Europe. Unlike Patrick Périn’s opinion, 95 it seems to us that the arrival of Vidimer and his retainers to the Visigothic court can hardly explain by itself the overall spreading of elements of “eastern” fashion in central Spain: it has already been stated that the typological repertoire of clothing items in Pannonia during the period D3 matches the earliest central Spanish finds only weakly. 96 It might however be a valid explanation for the introduction of a number of selected elements, such as belt buckles related to Domolospuszta type and also some big Silberblechfibeln, such as specimens of Szabadbattyán and Gyulavári types. 97 In any case, there is little doubt that the dissemination of “Danubian fashion” during the D3/E1 period is a supra-regional phenomenon deserving a thorough examination; the authors plan to address it in a further paper. The arrival in Hispania of this group of “eastern” artefacts is synchronic to the evidence of imports from other territories of Central or Western Europe: local fibulae deriving from Niederflorstadt and Gross-Umstadt forms (which could eventually be also connected to the “federate” milieu) (plate 5:6), sax elements from Guereñu and Tiermes and likely imports from the Alamannic area such as the fibulae from Deza and Madrona.98 Apparently, this period, which corresponds broadly to the time of the definitive conquest of Spain by Euric, witnessed of population displacements not only from southern Gaul and from eastern Central Europe, but also from other territories. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. Pinar 2012, 269-273. Molinero 1948, 34, pl. 27:1, 37; Molinero 1971, pl. V:1.; Kazanski 2000, 193; Pinar 2010, 27. Molinero 1971, pl. XLII:1. Koch 1999. Molinero 1948, 21, pl. 25:2; Molinero 1971, pl. I:2, 29.2; Kazanski 1994, 165, fig. 4:11, 15. Sasse 2000, pl. 5; Agustí et al. 2006, fig. 4; López Quiroga 2006, fig. 37. Molinero 1971, pl. LVII:1; Catalán & Rojas 2010, 228, fig. 4; Pinar 2012, 268, 275. Périn 1993. Pinar 2010, 32-33. Pinar 2014, 120; id. forthcoming 2. Dohijo 2007, fig. 2; Pinar 2008; Pinar 2013, 105-108, figs. 4-5. Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra 434 – Contacts between Bohemia and the Visigothic area in late 5th and early 6th century AD The belt-buckle from Prague – Zličín, grave No. 24 (plate 8:a-f, 1) is perhaps the clearest evidence for West Mediterranean imports in Bohemia. In spite of its fragmentary state, it can be easily identified as a characteristic Visigothic-period belt buckle with attached, cloisonné-decorated rectangular plate. The preserved decoration shows the presence of a cloisonné frame consisting of triangular cells which must originally have run along the central motive of the plate. In the Visigothic area, cloisonné frames begin to occur in burials about the end of the first third of the 6th century AD, it becomes a widespread decorative pattern in central Spain until the later decades of the 6th century AD. 99 This observation is apparently confirmed by the presence of three bronze fixation rivets in the proximal end of the plate, their heads lying above the cloisonné surface of the plate. Being a rare feature among Visigothic-period belt buckles, this technical detail does not appear before the second third of the 6th century AD, as its presence on cloisonné brooches of Duratón 192 type shows. 100 Just as in the Zličín example, this type of buckles displays often the presence of such rivets in the central register of the plate decoration. Regarding the measurements of the buckle and the plate, the example from Zličín is close to the Tinto Juan de la Cruz 72 type, being thinner than the bulk of Visigothic-period productions. This type is dated not precisely, but it may be placed somewhere between the first and the second third of the 6th century AD. 101 The mentioned features enable to date the Zličín buckle in the early or mid 6th century AD and to identify it as an import from central Spain. The metallographic analyses confirm this suggestion, as it has been made of quality brass, an alloy used frequently in Visigothic-period clothing accessories and far more exotic in Bohemia. The crossbow brooch found in grave 17 at Lužec nad Vltavou (plate 9:3) is another likely import from the Visigothic area. Its morphologic characteristics and roped decoration enable to identify it as a crossbow brooch of type Estagel, widespread in southern France and central Spain between the second half of the 5th century AD and the first third of the 6th century AD. 103 Unfortunately, this wide chronology cannot be refined by the Bohemian assemblage, as the grave had been disturbed and the associated artefacts (an oval belt buckle and an iron knife) are not precise chronological indicators. A similar case could be another crossbow brooch, said to come from Vinařice (plate 9:2). 104 Its general features enable to compare it with the brooches of type Invillino and Duratón, respectively disseminated in the Adriatic-Alpine region and in the Visigothic territory during the late 5th century AD and the early 6th century AD. 105 The Bohemian brooch combines a rope-like pattern on its bow and bevelled and X-shaped incised motives on its foot. No brooch of type Invillino displays such a decoration, although the three motives are broadly represented in the crossbow brooches of the Visigothic area. 106 In this context, it is important to cite the aforementioned, earlier brooch found by Idanha-a-Velha, which displays a very similar combination of decorative motives. 107 The morphology of the brooch enables a dating not later than the first half of the 5th century AD, and can be regarded as evidence supporting the Spanish origin of the alleged Vinařice brooch. 102 These evidences of contacts between north-western Bohemia and the Visigothic area enable a new approach to the bronze brooch found in the grave 1/1933 at Lovosice (plate 9:4). 108 Although it has been identified as a local derivation of the Carnuntum-Oslip brooches, its general measurements, proportions and foot’s form find their best counterparts in the Visigothic territory. 109 Some examples share with the Lovosice brooch also the presence of simple, engraved or punched geometric motives. All these West Mediterranean brooches belong to the type Estagel 78, which have a long lasting chronology 99. Pinar forthcoming 1. 100. Almagro 1947, pl. 15:19; Almagro 1950-51, 150, pl. 26:3; Molinero 1948, 60-61, pl. 32:3; Molinero 1971, pl. 16:1. 101. Almagro 1947, 66-67, pl. 18:28, 19:30; Molinero 1971, pl. XLVI:1; Barroso et al., 2002, 134-135, pl. CXXVI:72; Pinar forthcoming 1. 102. Korený & Kytlicová 2007, fig. 9; Droberjar 2008, fig. 6:7. 103. Schulze-Dörrlamm 1986, 643-650; Nuño 1991; Pinar 2015, 527-531. 104. Droberjar 2002, figs. 1-2; Droberjar 2008, fig. 6:5. 105. Schulze-Dörrlamm 1986, 643-650; Nuño 1991; Pinar 2015, 527-531. 106. Kazanski 2000; Pinar 2015, 522-523. 107. da Ponte 2006, 483. 108. Blažek & Kotyza 1991-93, fig. 2:1; Blažek 1997, fig. 3:1. 109. Lantier 1943, 170-171, fig. 3; Molinero 1948, 28-29, 53, pl. XXVI:1, 30:3; Almagro 1948-49, 39, pl. 9:27; Apraiz 1959, 232; Molinero 1971, pl. 3:1, 12:1, LXXIII:1, LXXVI:2, LXXX:1, LXXXII:2, LXXXIII:2, LII:1, LV:2, LVII:1, CIII:1; Historia de España 1985, fig. 120; Feugère 1994, 19, fig. 30; Escribano & Fatás 2001, fig. 149; Jepure 2004, 33-34. Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts Plate 8. Prague-Zličín cemetery: a-f. schema of excavation of the grave No. 24, 1. grave No. 24, 2-3. grave No. 16, 4-5. grave No. 80, 6. grave No. 53 (all drawings M. Černý). – 435 436 – Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra Plate 9. Bohemia – Finds from Visigothic area and Western Mediterranean: 1. Semice (after: Militký 2000), 2. Vinařice (?), (after Droberjar 2001), 3. Lužec nad Vltavou, gr. No. 17 (after Korený – Kytlicová 2008), 4. Lovosice, grave 1/1933 (after Blažek – Kotyza 1991-93), 5. Úherce, 6. Prague-Zličín, grave No. 37, 7. Prague-Zličín, grave No. 93, 8. Kolínplynárna, disturbed grave (all photos M. Frouz). Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts – 437 that stretches from the last third of the 5th century AD to the third quarter of the 6th century AD. 110 They may be regarded as Western Mediterranean local productions deriving from Carnuntum-Oslip prototypes: a brooch recorded at the cemetery of Herpes (plate 4:39) in southern France, 111 displaying a half-way form between the types Carnuntum-Oslip and Estagel 78, should be regarded as the chain link between Middle Danube (“federate”) and West Mediterranean manufactures. Another direct proof of the contacts between both regions is an old find corresponding to a Visigothic imitation of a solidus of Valentinian III, found at Semice (Bohemia) and conserved in the National Museum in Prague (plate 9:1). Jiří Militký describes this item as a solidus of 2nd series struck in Gaul during the period of AD 439-455. 112 Unfortunately, the lack of archaeological context of the coin does not allow us to precise the date and the circumstances of its arrival to Bohemia. The available archaeological data suggest though that Visigothic “pseudo-imperial” solidi were deposited both as grave goods and as components of coin treasures during the time span 470-520 in Western, Central and Northern Europe. 113 Should we accept that the coin arrived to Bohemia broadly in that moment, then it turns out that the bulk of imports from the Visigothic area belong to the same, relatively short period, corresponding to the late 5th century and the early 6th century. This small group of “Visigothic” imports has to be put in the wider background of contacts between Bohemia and the Western Mediterranean, which is best represented by glass vessels. The probably oldest specimen from this group is a bowl with indents of Isings class 117, found in a wealthy grave at Úherce (plate 9:5) dated to mid of the 5th century AD. Parallels can be found in Carthage, Conimbriga (Portugal), Marseille, they occur frequently also in Gaul, at the port of Classe near Ravenna or among Anglo-Saxon assemblages. 114 A second example is the beaker from grave No. 37 in Prague-Zličín, made of opaque white glass decorated with festoons (plate 9:6). The decoration on this item occur on specimens from Cairo (?), Monserrato (Sardinia), Marseille, La Bourse, Sidi Jdidi (Tunisia) and Conimbriga, and was achieved by impressing a sharp point into the molten metal and drawing the tool around the vessel´s circumference to the point of departure. In all cases, opaque white glass was reported. 115 Two finds of lamps terminating in a globular knob from Radovesice (also decorated with horizontal trails) and Prague-Zličín, grave No. 93 (decorated by 3 horizontal lines of glass thread under the rim) (plate 9:7) build up important evidence too; they may be dated into the turn of the 5th – 6th centuries. Parallels for both Bohemian vessels are known on examples from the oppidum of Saint-Blaise, Gardanne and Marseille (southeastern Gaul), Carthage and Nabeul (Tunisia) and many spots in Rome, Ravenna and Italy, and also in Eastern Mediterranean. 116 A conical beaker with everted rim and a wider flattened base of the Isings type 106, known from disturbed grave in Kolín (Bohemia) (plate 9:8), has its parallels in the West, as well in the East. They are known in Italy, Gaul, or Syria for instance. 117 All these types of glass vessels were frequently traded in Mediterranean, and found their final customers also among the “Barbarians” in the West, less often in Central Europe. In the case of the glasses circulating to Bohemia, the Burgundians of Sapaudia (rather than the Visigoths) appear to be the most probable mediators of these contacts; the observation is valid also for the imports of North-African red-slip ware, known from the settlement at Závist near Prague and Slavhostice. 118 110. Pinar forthcoming 1 and 2. 111. Delamain 1892, pl. VI:25; Kazanski 1984, 14, 20; id. 1989, 60; id. 1997, 285; id. 1998, 382; id. 1999, 17. 112. Militký 2000, 129-130, fig. 1:B. 113. Manzelli & Pinar forthcoming. 114. Svoboda 1965, 111, pl. 31:17; Fünfschilling 2009, 383-385, figs. 1-5; Alarcão 1976, 195-200; Foy 1995a, 201, pl. 17:100; Kazanski 2002, fig. 74:33; Evison 2008, 47, fig. 1:4. 115. Smith 1957, n. 425; Stiaffini & Borghetti 1994, 143, pl. 114; Foy & Bonifay 1984, 294, 305, fig. 2:37-38; Foy 2004, 318-329; Alarcão 1976, 195-200. 116. Svoboda 1965, 111, pl. 28:7; Foy 1995b, 205-206, pl. 14:154-160; Saguì 1993, 113-126; Uboldi 1995, 119-120, fig. 4; Foy et al. 2003, 41. 117. Svoboda 1965, 110, pl. 38:1; Gargiulo 1999, 165, fig. 4:1-3; Pirling 2000, pl. 17:4720; Dussart 1998, 182-184. 118. Jiřík 2010, 294, fig. 9:10:8. Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra 438 – Conclusions The studied contacts and parallel processes between the two territories take place, as seen, in a much wider background that have implications throughout the European continent. It corresponds to the final stage of the Chernnyakhov culture and to the emergence of a number of “post-Chernyakhov cultures” in distinct European territories. 119 The clearest cases are the Crimea and the middle-Danube region but, as seen, the components of these Chernyakhov-derived cultures are recognizable in many areas (and isolated points) of central Europe and the West, among them the Bohemian Vinařice group. Newest evidence suggests that we might place the Visigothic-period cemeteries of southern Gaul and (later) central Spain among the postChernyakhov cultures: a local mixture of late Chernyakhov, Wielbark and federate culture components will develop, within two or three generations, into what we recognize as “classical” Visigothic-period funerary culture. From this perspective, the comparative examination of material culture from Moravia from around 400 AD, and “federate” components in Vinařice group in Bohemia, reveal important details from the “prehistory” of the populations which will be later connected with the Visigothic (and not only) presence in the West. The picture is quite different by the end of the 5th century AD and the first half of the 6th century AD. This is the period in which the evidences of direct contacts between the two regions are more evident; differently from the earlier period, the connections are recognizable through the occurrence in Bohemia of some products of workshops located in the Visigothic area. The examined artefacts belong to types that, although not frequently, are also attested in other territories of western and central Europe. Thus crossbow brooches of Estagel type are known also in northern France and England,120 while small bow brooches of Romanillos de Atienza and Carpio de Tajo 262 types – closely related to brooches of Estagel 78 type – are attested in south-western Germany and the Carpathian basin. 121 The cloisonné belt buckle from Zličín, instead, appears to be the only find of this type recorded in central Europe. Moreover, it dates to a period in which the exports of “Visigothic” cloisonné belt buckles outside their core territory are extremely rare. One may mention some examples coming exclusively from northern and eastern France. 122 The general picture of exports from the Visigothic area is completed by a small group of Spanish and southern French radiated bow brooches, documented in Italy, south-western Germany and northern France. 123 The evaluation of the Chernyakhov features within the material culture of the late phase of settlements in central Danubian regions of “Barbaricum”, known sometimes as “Zlechov” type, opens also a problem of historical, eventually ethnical interpretations of the archaeological record. One of the possibilities mentioned in preceding chapters, namely the association with the troops and people commanded by the king of Goths Radagais requires further focus. Comparing the assemblages connected in the West with Radagais in Sacca di Goito and Angers latest by Michel Kazanski and the finds in central Danube “Barbaricum”, we observe one substantial difference. While the burials in the West are recognizable only on the basis of clothing accessories related to “middle class” wearers, the archaeological picture of “Zlechov” type settlements displays rather a rural environment with predominance of ceramics, harvest implements, workshops, semi-sunken huts, etc. The difference is clearly social (and professional?) and thus partly explains the invisibility of the majority of the Radagais’ group after the crossing of the Roman frontier. The lack of visibility is not a distinctive feature of Radagais’ group: the same can be said about Fritigern’s and Alaviv’s Goths crossing the Danube, and also Alaric’s Goths in Thracia: they remain almost invisible, just as many federate troops having left no trace of their quartering and their activity throughout the West. After decades of systematic research, it seems that we are dealing with an actual tendency instead of a product of random circumstances behind the archaeological finds: the lack of a structured, multi-layered distinct material culture has to be understood as a characteristic of the barbarian groups entering the Roman Empire in the 5th century AD: the only barbaricum-related objects, the only which will undergo 119. For the various influences of Post-Chernyakhov character in Niemberg group in Central Germany see: Schmidt 1982, 160, 211-213; alternatively also: Bemmann 2000, 76-92; for Chertovickoie-Zamyatino type in upper Don region see: Oblomskiy 2008, 213-230; for East-Carpathian groups Costișța-Menoia/Delalul Ceremiderei see: Gavritukhin 2000, 283-306; for North-Carpathian group with mixed Przeworsk-Chernyakhov character see: Madyda-Legutko & Tunia 2008. 120. Bierbrauer 1997; Kazanski et al. 2008; Schuster et al. 2006. 121. Csallány 1961, pl. CXXIV:7; Harhoiu 1998, 188, pl. XCII:3. 122. Eck 1895, pl. 16; Cabrol & Leclercq 1923, fig. 4447; Vallet & Kazanski 1995, fig. 5:3; Pilet 1994, pl. 93; Kazanski et al. 2008, 164, fig. 14:1. 123. Boulanger 1902-05, 72, pl. 24:12; Schaffran 1941, pl. 50:B; Joffroy 1974, pl. 20:182; Kühn 1974, pl. 262:65:1. Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts – 439 typological evolution and continuity of production, are the clothing accessories. An eloquent example of this phenomenon is conveyed by glass vessels: characteristic Chernyakhov productions, for example the conical beakers decorated with regular honeycomb patterns of the Cherom type, are unusual in the West. It has to be assumed that, instead of this glassware, the migrating groups quickly adopted the products of local glassworking in the Balkans and Pannonia and, later, in the Western Mediterranean provinces. Archaeological evidence of parallel processes taking place in Bohemia and the Visigothic area during the first half of the 5th century AD should not be assumed in any case simply as a proof of direct contact. It rather shows the nature of spatial distribution of particular material elements in literature described in general as a “federate” culture. On the other hand it also shows that different groups of “Barbarians” shared cultural features, which have “common” roots in (post-) Chernyakhov and provincial interactions in Imperial Danube territories in the turn of the 4th – early 5th century AD. We can thus presuppose that from the environment of “federate” material culture not only the followers of Athaulf or Alaric, but also of the Goths Sarus, Gainas and others were recruited. Furthermore it is not possible to exclude, as suggested, that the “federate” culture became even more “international”, shared thus not only by the “Gothic peoples”, but also a portion of Alans, Huns and other groups like the Sueves and Vandals settled in Spain. The displacements of particular groups out of Pannonia and Noricum (Sarus in Gaul, Athaulf and Walias in Italy, southern Gaul and Hispania, Vinařice group, etc.) during the first third of the 5th century AD left some traces in the material record and are consequently detectable by the archaeological research. The occurrence of the features connected with “federate” culture out their original “homeland” in the Middle Danube provinces, however, does not simply mean an import of isolated objects to the West and to the central European “Barbaricum”. Instead it implies the adoption of certain aspects of a different life-style, comprising a complex set of cultural innovations connected to the wearing of new types of costume (fibulae, belt sets), headdress (perhaps combs in hair), cooking and dinning standards (glass vessels and certain types of ceramics such like pitchers and mortaria), and burial practices (W-E oriented inhumations, frequently accompanied by clothing items that reflected faithfully the social status of the dead). Regarding the nature of the spread of these features, one could judge that migrations would have played an important role. On the other hand, also a cultural diffusion (perhaps with religious background?, i. e. Arianism?, especially in certain areas of the “Barbaricum”) may explain certain aspects of the phenomenon. In some regions (for example Vinařice group?) both above mentioned processes joined together would bring a kind of “standardization” thus forming the local cultural habitus. Regarding the later imports from the Visigothic West to Bohemia, the general typological repertory displayed by this small collection of objects enable to attribute them, yet with caution, to central Spanish production centers more than to southern French ones. The later Bohemian assemblages suggest that their final deposition should have taken place not long after their production, so a straightforward contact between both regions seems to be recognizable. On behalf of this suggestion witness the Bohemian find spots, concentrated in relatively small area (within a radius of less than 50km) in north-western Bohemia. The Bohemian contexts being disturbed, it is difficult to get an insight on the way and the circumstances in which these objects reached Bohemia in the late 5th century AD, early 6th century AD. So far we have no sure evidence that these objects were used in the same way in the Visigothic area and in Bohemia, and thus it is not possible to determine whether they travelled from the western Mediterranean together with their wearers or whether they reached Bohemia as objects of long distance trade – which seems rather unlikely if considering their dissemination pattern – or exotic goods. Acknowledgements The work was supported by the Czech Science Foundation, grants No. P405/11/2511 and P405/13-189 55S, and by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013 – MSCA-COFUND) under grant agreement n°245743 – Postdoctoral programme Braudel-IFER-FMSH, and Fulbrigt Foundation, IPERION CH, H2020-INFRAIA-2014-2015, under Grant No. 654028. We are also grateful to Hynek Švácha for adjustment of most of illustrations. 440 – Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra Bibliography Ager, B. (2012): “Kingsholm, Glousester, burial B1 revisited”, Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society, 130, 107-113. Agustí, E., Barroso, R., Benito, L. et al. (2006): “El Cerro de La Gavia. Una necrópolis tardoantigua en Villa de Vallecas (Madrid capital)”, in: Morín, 2006, 493-503. Ajbabin, A. (1995): “Les tombes de chefs nomades en Crimée”, in: Vallet & Kazanski 1995, 207-216. Alarcão, J., Delgado, M., Mayet, F., Moutinho, A. and da Ponte, S. (1976): Fouilles de Conimbriga VI. Céramiques diverses et verres, Paris, 193-229. Almagro, M. (1947): “Materiales visigodos del Museo Arqueológico de Barcelona”, Memorias de los Museos Arqueológicos Provinciales, VIII, 56-76. Almagro, M. (1950-51): “Materiales visigodos del Museo Arqueológico de Barcelona. Las hebillas de cinturón de bronce”, Memorias de los Museos Arqueológicos Provinciales, XI-XII, 13-23. Andrzejowski, J., Prochowicz, R. and Rakowski, T. (2008): “Brooches Type Gródek 47 and their dating”, in: NiezabitowskaWiśniewska et al. 2008, 39-61. Bachrach, B. S. (1973): A history of the Alans in the West, Minneapolis. Balmelle, C. (2001): Les demeures Aristocratiques d’Aquitaine. Societé et culture de ľAntiquité tardive dans le Sud-Ouest de la Gaule, Bordeaux–Paris. Barkóczi, L. (1988): Pannonische Glasfunde in Ungarn, Budapest. Barroso, R., Jaque, S., Major, M., Morín, J., Penedo, E., Oñate, P. and Sanguino, J. (2002): “Los yacimientos de Tinto Juan de la Cruz. Pinto, Madrid (ss. I al VI d.C.). 2ª parte”, Estudios de Prehistoria y Arqueología Madrileñas, 12, 117-174. Beljak, J. and Kolník, T. (2008): “Germanic settlement from the Late Roman and Early Migration Periods in Štúrovo”, in: Niezabitowska-Wiśniewska et al. 2008, 64-83. Bemmann, J. and Schmauder, M., eds. (2008): Kulturwandel in Mitteleuropa. Langobarden – Awaren – Slawen, Kolloquien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte, 11, Bonn. Ben Abed-Ben Khader, A., Fixot, M., Bonifay, M. and Roucole, S., eds. (2004): Sidi Jdidi. La Basilique Sud, Collection de l’École Française de Rome, 339, Rome. Bender, H., ed. (1996): Das ‚Bürgle‘ bei Gundremmingen : die Grabung 1971 und neue Funde, Passauer Universitätsschriften zur Archäologie, 3, Espelkamp. Berndt, G.M. and Steinacher, R., eds. (2008), Das Reich der Vandalen und seine Vorgeschichte(n), Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 14 = Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, Denkschriften, Vienna. Bierbrauer, V. (1968): “Das westgotische Fibelpaar von Villafontana”, in: Von Hessen, 1968, 75-80. Bierbrauer, V. (1991): “Das Frauengrab von Castelbolognese in der Romagna (Italien). Zur chronologischen, ethnischen und historischen Auswertbarkeit des ostgermanischen Fundstoffs des 5. Jahrhunderts in Südosteuropa und Italien”, Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums, 38, 541-592. Bierbrauer, V. (1994): “Germanen des 5. und 6. Jahrhunderts in Italien”, in: Francovich & Noyé, 1994, 33-56. Blažek, J. (1997): “Die neuen und unbekannten Funde der späten Kaiserzeit und der Völkerwanderungszeit in Nordwestböhmen”, in: Tejral, et al., 1997, 11-22. Blažek, J. and Kotyza, O. (1995): “Další pohřebiště z doby stěhování národů v Lovosicích, okr. Litoměřice”, Litoměřicko, 27-28, 7-11. Böhnlein, A. (1995/96): “Geisfeld, Gde. Litzendorf (Lkr. Bamberg)”, Ausgrabungen und Funde in Oberfranken, 9, 1993-1994, Geschichte am Obermain, 20, 31, 74. Boudartchouk, J.-P., Hernandez, J., Paya, D. and Scuiller, C. (2012): “L’archéologie préventive à la (re)découverte du peuple goth en Gaule du sud”, Archéopages, h.s., 165-169. Bourgeois, L., ed. (2010): Wisigoths et Francs : autour de la bataille de Vouille (507). Recherches récentes sur le haut Moyen Âge dans le Centre-Ouest de la France. Actes des 28e Journées Internationales d’Archéologie Mérovingienne. Vouillé et Poitiers, 28-30 septembre 2007, Mémoires de l’AFAM, XXII, Saint-Germain-en-Laye. Brodeur, J. (forthcoming): “Des tombes de germains orientaux à Angers (Maine-et-Loire, France)”, in: Pinar forthcoming 3. Buchinger, B. (1997): Die frühmittelalterlichen Grabfunde von Wiesbaden, Europäische Hochschulschriften, 3, Frankfurt am Main. Buora, M. and Villa, L., eds. (2006): Goti nell´arco alpino orientale, Archeologia di Frontiera, 5, Udine. Cabrol, F. and Leclercq, H. (1923): “Fibule”, DACL 5/2, 1923, col. 14781586. Carrié, J.-M., ed. (1996): Les églises doubles et les familles d’églises, Antiquité tardive, 4, Turnhout. Catalán, R. and Rojas, J. M. (2010): “La necrópolis de Boadilla (Illescas). Aspectos funerarios y contexto cronocultural de un asentamiento de época visigoda (siglos v-vii)”, in: Pinar & Juárez, 2010, 223-236. Cazes, J.-P. (2008): “La nécropole de Bénazet (Molandier, Aude): un témoignage archéologique sur les variations de la frontière entre royaumes wisigoth et franc, ve-viie siècles”, Archéo66, 23, 69-70. Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts Curta, F., ed. (2010): Neglected Barbarians, Studies in the Early Middle Ages, 32, Turnhout. Da Ponte, S. (2006): Corpus signorum das fíbulas proto-históricas e romanas de Portugal, Coimbra. Delamain, P. (1892): Le cimetière d’Herpes (fouilles et collection Ph. Delamain), Angoulême. Démians d’ Archimbaud, G., ed. (1995.): L’oppidum de Saint-Blaise du ve au viie s, Paris. Dohijo, E. (2007): “La necrópolis hispanovisigoda del área foral de Termes”, Pyrenae, 38-1, 129-162. Doležal, S. (2008): Interakce Gótů a římského impéria ve 3.-5. století n. l., Prague. Droberjar, E. (2002): “Opomenuté nálezy spon z doby stěhování národů z Kladna a Lovosic”, Archeologie Středních Čechách, 6, 409-410. Droberjar, E. (2008): “Thüringische und langobardische Funde und Befunde in Böhmen. Zum Problem der späten Phasen der Völkerwanderungszeit”, in: Bemmann & Schmauder, 2008, 229-248. Droberjar, E., ed. (2011): Archeologie barbarů 2010: Hroby a pohřebiště Germánů mezi Labem a Dunajem, Studia archaeologica Suebica, I, Olomouc. Droberjar, E. (2015): “Cizorodý nálezový soubor z konce doby římské až počátku doby stěhování národů z Pšovlk, okr. Rakovník”, Archeologie ve středních Čechách 19, 707-729. Droberjar, E. and M. Lutovský, eds. (2006): Archeologie barbarů 2005. Sborník příspěvků z I. protohistorické konference, Pozdně keltské, germánské a časně slovanské osídlení“, Kounice, 20-22, září 2005, Prague. Eger, C. (2012): Spätantikes Kleidungszubehör aus Nordafrika. Trägerkreis, Mobilität und Ethnos im Spiegel der Funde der spätesten römischen Kaiserzeit und der vandalischen Zeit, Munich. Escribano, M. V. and Fatás, G. (2001): La Antigüedad Tardía en Aragón (284-714), Mariano de Pano y Ruata, 20, Zaragoza. Evison, V. I. (2008): Catalogue of Anglo-Saxon glass in the British Museum, London. Fehr, H. (2002-03): “Bemerkungen zum völkerwanderungszeitlichen Grabfund von Fürst”, Berichte der Bayerischen Bodendenkmalpflege, 43/44, 209-228. Feugère, M. (1994): Activités et acquisitions de la Maison du Patrimoine en 1993, Cahiers du Patrimoine, 1, Montagnac. Foy, D., ed. (1995), Le verre de ľAntiquite tardive et du Haut Moyen Âge. Typologie – Chronologie – Diffusion, Val d’Oise. Foy, D. (1995a): “Le verre de la fin du ive au viiie siècle en France méditerranéenne. Premier essai de typo-chronologie”, in: Foy, 1995, 187-242. Foy, D. (1995b): “Le verre”, in: Démians d’ Archimbaud, 1995, 201-217. Foy, D. (2004): “Les verres”, in: Ben Abed, et al., 2004, 317-329. – 441 Foy, D. et Bonifay, M. (1984): “Eléments d’évolution des verreries de ľAntiquité tardive à Marseille d’après les fouilles de La Bourse (1980)”, RAN, 17, 289-308. Foy, D. et Nenna, M.-D eds. (2003): Échanges et commerce du verre dans le monde antique. Actes de ľAFAV Aix-en-Provence et Marseille, 7-9 juin 2001, Monographies Instrumentum, 24, Montagnac, 41-85. Foy, D. et al. (2003): “Caractérisation des verres de la fin de l’Antiquité en Méditerranée occidentale : émergence de nouveaux courants commerciaux”, in: Foy & Nenna, 2003, 41-85. Francovich, R. and Noyé, G. (eds.): La storia dell’Alto medioevo italiano (vi-x secolo) alla luce dell’archeologia, Florence. Friesinger, H. And Kerchler, H. (1981): “Töpferöfen der Völkerwanderungszeit in Niederösterreich. Ein Beitrag zur völkerwanderungszeitlichen Keramik (2. Hälfte 4. – 6. Jahrhundert n. Chr.) in Niederösterreich, Oberösterreich und dem Burgenland”, Arch. Austriaca, 65, 193-266. Frolík, J. et al. (2011): “Sídliště vinařické skupiny z Prahy-Kobylis – Settlement of the Vinařice group in Prague-Kobylisy”, in: Droberjar, 2011, 415-451. Fuchs, K., ed. (1997): Die Alamannen, Ausstellungskatalog, Stuttgart. Fudziński, M. and Panera, H., eds. (2007): Nowe materiały i intepretacje. Stan dyskusji na temat kultury wielbarsiej, Gdańsk. Fünfschiling, S. (2009): “Glass from the Canadian Excavations at Carthage”, in: Lafli, 2009, 383-390. Gabler, D., ed. (1989): The Roman fort at Ács-Vaspuszta (Hungary) on the Danubian limes, BAR International Series, 531/1, Oxford. García-Vuelta, O., Perea, A., Montero-Ruíz, I., Sanabria, P.J. and Flores, R. (2013): “Estudio arqueométrico del ajuar de la tumba tardorromana de Torrejón de Velasco (Madrid) ”, in: Actas de las séptimas Jornadas de Patrimonio Arqueológico en la Comunidad de Madrid, Madrid, 449-454. Gavritukhin, I. O. (2000): “Final tradiciy kultur rimskogo vremeni v vostochnoj Prikarpatye”, in: Mączyńska & Grabarczyk, 2000, 261-319. Gschwind, M. (2004): Abusina. Das römische Auxiliarkastell Eining an der Donau vom 1. bis 5. Jahrhunderts n. Chr., Munich. Haberstroh, J. (1995): “Germanische Stammesverbände an Obermain und Regnitz. Zur Archäologie des 3.-5. Jahrhunderts in Oberfranken”, Archiv für Geschichte von Oberfranken, 75, 7-40. Haberstroh, J. (2003): “Der Riesberg bei Scheßlitz-Burgellern in der Völkerwanderungszeit. Überlegung zum 5. Jahrhundert n. Chr. in Nordbayern”, Germania, 81, 201-262. Heras, F.J. and Olmedo, A.B. (2015): “Identidad y contexto en la necrópolis tardorromana de Mérida”, in: Quirós & Castellanos, 2015, 275-290. 442 – Höck, A. (2003): Archäologische Forschungen in Teriola 1. Die Rettungsgrabungen auf dem Martinsbühel bei Zirl von 1993-1997. Spätrömische Befunde und Funde zum Kastell, Fundberichte aus Österreich Materialheft A14, Vienna. Ivanišević, V. and Kazanski, M., eds. (2012): The Pontic-Danubian realm in the period of the Great Migration, Paris–Belgrade. Jepure, A. (2004): La necrópolis de época visigoda de EspirdoVeladiez. Fondos del Museo de Segovia, Estudios y Catálogos, 13, Valladolid. Jiřík, J. (2007): “Entstehung und Entwicklung der sogenannten Vinařice-Gruppe im Nordteil des Böhmischen Beckens. Forschungstand und Interpretationversuch”, in: Tejral, 2007, 121-145. Jiřík, J. (2010): “Bohemian Barbarians. Bohemia in Late Antiquity”, in: Curta 2010, 263-317. Juárez, T. and Pinar, J. (2016): “Recent finds of 5th century weapons in the territorium of Barcino: updating chronology, functionality and social attribution”, Journal of Roman Military Equipment Studies, 17, 223-234. Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra Kazanski, M. (2012): “Radagaise et la fin de la civilisation de Černjahov”, in: Ivanišević & Kazanski, 2012, 381-403. Kazanski, M. (2013): “Petites fibules ansées de tradition germanique en Gaule méridionale au ve siècle”, Bulletin de liaison de ľ AFAM, 34, 54-59. Kazanski, M. (2016): “The earliest East-Germanic finds from the Great Migration Period in the roman West (Cherniakhov and Wielbark civilizations)”, Materialy po Arheologii, Istorii i Etnografii Tavrii, XXI, 29-56. Kazanski, M. (forthcoming): “Les objets archéologiques du type Černjahov en Occident romain a l’époque des Grandes Migrations”, in: Pinar forthcoming 3. Kazanski, M. and Akhmedov, I. (2007): “La Tombe de Mundolsheim (Bas-Rhin): un chef militaire nomade au service de Rome”, in: Tejral, 2007, 249-261. Kazanski, M. and Lapart, J. (1995): “Quelques documents du ve siècle ap. J.-C. attribuables aux Wisigoths découverts en Aquitaine”, Aquitania, XIII, 193-202. Kalábek, M. (2006): “Germánské osídlení Olomouce”, in: Droberjar & Lutovský 2006, 431-450. Kazanski, M. and Mastykova, A. (2007): “Machtzentren und Handelswege: Westalanien im v.-vi. Jahrhundert”, in: Tejral, 2007, 173-197. Kazanski, M. (1984): “À propos de quelques types de fibules ansées de l’époque des Grandes Invasions trouvées en Gaule”, Archéologie Médiévale, 14, 7-27. Kleemann, J. (2008): “Lebten Barbaren in römischen Villen? – Ein Fallbeispiel aus Südwestungarn”, in: NiezabitowskaWiśniewska et al. 2008, 63-77. Kazanski, M. (1989): “La diffusion de la mode danubienne en Gaule (fin du ive siècle-début du vie siècle): essai d’interprétation historique”, Antiquités Nationales, 21, 59-73. Koch, A. (1999): “Zum archäologischen Nachweis der Sueben auf der Iberischen Halbinsel. Überlegungen zu einer Gürtelschnalle aus der Umgebung von Baamorto/Monforte de Lemos (Prov. Lugo, Spanien)”, Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica, 31, 156-198. Kazanski, M. (1993): “Les Barbares orientaux et la défense de la Gaule aux ive-ve siècle”, in: Vallet & Kazanski 1993, 175-186. Kazanski, M. (1994): “À propos de quelques types de fibules germaniques de l’époque des Grandes Migrations trouvées en Gaule au Sud de la Loire”, Antiquités Nationales, 26, 161-175. Kazanski, M. (1997): “La Gaule et le Danube à l’époque des Grandes Migrations”, in: Tejral et al. 1997, 285-319. Kazanski, M. (1998): “Les fibules germaniques orientales et danubiennes en Gaule (périodes C2-D2)”, in: Kunow, 1998, 375-386. Kazanski, M. (1999): “Les Barbares en Gaule du Sud-Ouest durant la première moitié du ve siècle”, in: Tejral et al. 1999, 15-23. Kazanski, M. (2000): “Les fibules originaires de l’Europe centrale et orientale trouvées dans les Pyrenées et en Afrique du nord. À propos des traces archéologiques des Suèves, des Vandales et des Goths dans la Méditerranée occidentale à l’époque des Grandes Migrations”, in: Svperiores Barbari. Księga pamiątkowa ku czci Profesora Kazimierz Godłowski, Kraków, 189-202. Kazanski, M. (2002): La nécropole gallo-romaine et mérovingienne de Breny (Aisne) d’après les collections et les archives du Musée des Antiquités Nationales, Montagnac. Koenig, G. G. (1980): “Archäologische Zeugnisse westgotischer Präsenz im 5. Jahrhundert”, Madrider Mitteilungen, 21, 220-247. Kokowski, A. (1996): “O tak zwanych blaszanych fibulach z półokrągłą płytą na glówce i rombowatą nóżką”, Studia Gothica, 1, 153-179. Koshelenko, G. A. (1984): Antichnyje gosudarstva Severnogo Prichernomorya, Archeologiya SSSR, Moscow. Kunow, J., ed. (1998): 100 Jahre Fibelformen nach Oscar Almgren, Forschungen zur Archäologie im Land Brandenburg, 5, Wünsdorf. Lafli, E., ed. (2009): Late Antique/Early Byzantine glass in the Eastern Mediterranean, Izmir. Lantier, R. (1943): “Le cimetière wisigothique d’Estagel (fouilles de 1935 et 1936)”, Gallia, I, 153-188. Lazin, G. and Gindele, R. (2010): “ Contribuții la probleme legate de evoluția ceramicii ȋn epoca Romanǎ tǎrzie și ȋn prima epocǎ a migrațiilor ȋn Bazinul Tisei superioare. Atelierele ceramice de la Lazuri (Lázári)-Râtul lui Béla”, in: Mǎgureanu & Gáll, 2010, 1-40. Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts Leube, A., ed. (1998): Haus und Hof im östlichen Germanien. Tagung Berlin vom 4. bis 8. Oktober 1994, Bonn. Limburský, P. and Jiřík, J. (in preparation): “Grave of Late Antique warrior from Vlíněves, okr. Mělník in Bohemia”, Archeologické Rozhledy. Lopez Quiroga, J. (2006): “¿Dónde vivían los ‘Germanos’? Poblamiento, habitat y mundo funerario en el occidente europeo entre los siglos v y viii. Balance historiográfico, problemas y perspectivas desde el centro del reino ‘Godo’ de Toledo”, in: Morín, 2006, 309-363. MacGeorge, P. (2002): Late Roman warlords, Oxford. Mączyńska, M. and Grabarczyk, T., eds. (2000): Die spätrömische Kaiserzeit und die frühe Völkerwanderungszeit in Mittel- und Osteuropa, Łódź. – 443 Morín de Pablos, J. (2006a): “Arqueología del poblamiento visigodo en el occidente de la Meseta Norte (siglos v-viii)”, in: Morín, 2006, 176-215. Neubauer, D. (2011): Die kaiser- und völkerwanderungszeitliche Siedlung in Michelstetten, Niederösterreich, Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie, 201, Bonn. Niezabitowska-Wiśniewska, B., Juściński, M., Łuczkiewicz, P. and Sadowski, S., eds. (2008): The turbulent epoch. New materials from the Roman Period and the Migration Period, Conference in Krasnobrod 18. 9.- 22. 9. 2007, Lublin. Nikitina, G. F. (1965): “Grebni cherniakhovskoi kuľtury”, Sovetskaia Arkheologiia, 147-159. Mączyńska, M. (2007): “Zmierzch kultury wielbarskiej – czego nie wiemy?”, in: Fudziński & Panera, 2007, 365-401. Nothnagel, M. (2008): Die völkerwanderungszeitlichen Bestattungen von Untersiebenbrunn, Niederösterreich, M.A. dissertation, Vienna. Madyda-Legutko, R. and Tunia, K. (2008): “Late Roman and Early Migration Period in Polish Beskid Mts., Carpathians. Settlement Aspect”, in: Niezabitowska-Wiśniewska et al. 2008, 227-248. Nuño, J. (1991): “A propósito de dos fíbulas visigodas procedentes de Los Santos de la Humosa (Madrid). Armbrustfibeln y Bügelknopffibeln en la Península Ibérica”, in: Mingorance 1991, 177-217. Magomedov, B. (2001): Chernyakhovskaya Kultura. Problema etnosa, Monumenta Studia Gothica, I, Lublin. Oblomskiy, A. M. (2008): “Germanskiye elementy v kulture Verkhnogo Podonya v gunnskoye vremya”, in: Niezabitowska-Wiśniewska et al. 2008, 213-239. Mǎgureanu, A. and Gáll, E., eds. (2010): Între stepǎ și Imperiu – Between the Steppe and Imperium, Bucharest. Manzelli, V. and Pinar, J. (forthcoming): “La tomba 185 del cimitero di Villa Clelia ad Imola: elementi di cronologia relativa e assoluta”, in: Pinar forthcoming 4. Ottományi, K. (1989): “Late Roman pottery”, in: Gabler 1989, 492-570. Ournac, P., Passelac, M. and Rancoule, G. (2009): CAG 11/2, L’Aude, Paris. Massendari, J. (2006): CAG 31/1, La Haute-Garonne (hormis le Comminges et Toulouse), Paris. Paroli, L. and Delogu, P., eds. (1993): La storia economica di Roma nell’alto Mediovo alla luce dei recenti scavi archeologici, Florence. Menotti, E. M. (2006): “Note relative alla necropoli tardo antica della ‘Strada Calliera’ a Sacca di Goito (MN)”, in: Buora & Villa 2006, 53-57. Paya, D. (2010): “Aux portes de Toulouse, le cimetière mérovingien et carolingien du Mouraut (Le Vernet, Haute-Garonne)”, in: Pinar & Juárez, 2010, 273-291. Militký, J. (2000): “Nálezy tzv. barbarskýchapodobenin pozdně římských solidů v Čechách. Příspěvek k problematice nálezů zlatých mincí z období stěhování národů”, Sborník Národního muzea v Praze, řada A – historie, 54 = Acta Musei Nationalis Pragae, series A – historia, 54, 129-138. Pescheck, C. (1978): Die germanischen Bodenfunde der römischen Kaiserzeit in Mainfranken, Munich. Mingorance, F. J., ed. (1991): Actas del I Curso de Cultura Medieval, Aguilar de Campoo. Molinero Pérez, A. (1948): La necrópolis visigoda de Duratón (Segovia). Excavaciones del Plan Nacional de 1942 y 1943, Acta Arqueológica Hispánica, 4, Madrid. Molinero Pérez, A. (1971): Aportaciones de las excavaciones y hallazgos casuales (1941-1959) al Museo Arqueológico de Segovia, Excavaciones Arqueológicas en España, 72, Madrid. Morín de Pablos, J., ed. (2006): La investigación arqueológica de la época visigoda en la Comunidad de Madrid, Zona Arqueológica, 8, Alcalá de Henares. Petković, S. (1998): ”Meaning and provenance of horses’ protomes decoration on the Roman antler comb”, Starinar, 49, 215-228. Píč, J. L. (1909): Starožitnosti země české II. Čechy za doby knížecí, Praha. Pieta, K. (1999): Anfänge der Völkerwanderungszeit in der Slowakei (Fragestellungen der Zeitgenössischen Forschung), in: Tejral et al. 1999, 171-189. Pinar Gil, J. (2008): “Bemerkungen zum spätantiken Fund aus Guereñu-Ozábal (Iruraiz-Gauna, Álava)“, MM, 49, 395-424. Pinar Gil, J. (2010): “Les tombes de femme à fibules en tôle dans l’Ouest (ca. 500): dispersion, chronologie, origine et interprétation. Un état de la question”, in: Bourgeois 2010, 23-40. 444 – Pinar Gil, J. (2012): “Ponto-Danubian traditions of dress in early Visigothic Hispania: chronology, dissemination, contexts and evolution”, in: Ivanišević & Kazanski 2012, 259-291. Pinar Gil, J. (2013): “A crossroad of cultures on a mosaic of regions? The early Visigothic regnum from the small finds’ perspective”, Archaeologia Baltica, 18, 2013, 103-117. Pinar Gil, J. (2014): “Coming back home? Rare evidence for contacts between the Iberian Peninsula and the Carpathian basin in the late 5th – early 6th century”, Ephemeris Napocensis, XXIV, 2014, 117-129. Jaroslav JiŘík, Joan Pinar Gil, JiŘí VÁvra Reszczyńska, A. (2008): “New materials from the Migration Period at the settlement Trmice-Ústí nad Labem in northwestern Bohemia”, in: Niezabitowska-Wiśniewska et al. 2008, 285-290. Rusanova, I. P. and Symonovich, J.A.(1993): Slavyane i ich sosedi v konce 1 tysyacheletiya do n.ye. – pervoy polovine 1 tysyacheletiya n.ye. Archeologiya SSSR, Moscow. Saguì, L. (1993): “Produzioni vetrarie a Roma tra tardo-antico e alto medioevo”, in: Paroli & Delogu 1993, 113-136. Pinar Gil, J. (2015): “A note on female dressing in 5th century southern Gaul”, in: Vida, ed. 2015, 517-555. Sannazaro, M. (2006): “Elementi di abbigliamento e ornamentali ‘barbarici’ da alcune sepolture della necropoli tardoantica di Sacca di Goito”, in: Buora & Villa 2006, 59-72. Pinar Gil, J. (forthcoming 1): La cronologia dei corredi funerari di epoca visigota in Spagna e Francia meridionale: peculiarità, problemi, soluzioni e stress testing, Bologna. Sasse, B. (2000): ‚Westgotische‘ Gräberfelder auf der Iberischen Halbinsel am Beispiel der Funde aus El Carpio de Tajo (Torrijos, Toledo), Madrider Beiträge, 26, Mainz. Pinar Gil, J. (forthcoming 2): “The earliest brooches from clothed inhumations in the regnum Tolosanum”, in: Droberjar, E. and B. Komoróczy (eds.): Řimské a germanské spony ve středni Evropě, Brno. Schulze-Dörrlamm, M. (1986): “Romanisch oder Germanisch? Untersuchungen zu den Armbrust- und Bügelknopffibeln des 5. und 6. Jahrhunderts aus den Gebieten westlich des Rheins und südlich der Donau”, Jahrbuch des RömischGermanischen Zentralmuseums, 33, 593-720. Pinar Gil, J., ed. (forthcoming 3): Romania Gothica IV: bárbaros en la ciudad tardoantigua. Presencias y ausencias en los espacios públicos y privados, Bologna-Barcelona. Pinar Gil, J., ed. (forthcoming 4): Small finds e cronologia: esempi, metodi e risultati, Bologna. Pinar, J. and Juárez, T., eds. (2010): Contextos funeraris a la Mediterrània nord-occidental (segles v-viii), Gausac, 34-35, Sant Cugat del Vallès. Pinar, J. and Ripoll, G. (2008): “The so-called Vandal objects of Hispania“, in: Berndt & Steinacher 2008, 105-130. Piussi, S., ed. (2008): Cromazio di Aquileia 388-408: al crocevia di genti e religioni, Milano. Pleinerová, I. (2006): “Litovice (okr. Ptraha-západ): hroby vinařického stupně doby stěhování národů”, in: Droberjar & Lutovský 2006, 483-498. Possenti, E. (2011): “Una tomba di cavaliere della metà del v secolo da Arzignano (Vicenza)”, Archeologia Medievale, XXXVIII, 2011, 431-457. Possenti, E. (2015): “Sepolture tardoantiche da Altino, località Mobilificio Filadelfia”, Rivista di Archeologia, XXXIX, 2015, 113-152. Preidel, H. (1930): Die germanischen Kulturen in Böhmen und ihre Träger, I: Die Kulturen, Kassel. Quast, D. (1997): “Vom Einzelgrab zum Friedhof. Beginn der Reihengräbersitte im 5. Jahrhundert”, in: Fuchs 1997 171-190. Quast, D. (2005): “Völkerwanderungszeitliche Frauengräber aus Hippo Regius (Annaba/Bône) in Algerien”, Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums, 52-1, 237-315. Quirós, J.A. and Castellanos, S., eds. (2015): Identidad y etnicidad en Hispania. Propuestas teóricas y cultura material en los siglos v-viii, Documentos de Arqueología Medieval, 8, Bilbao. Schulze-Dörrlamm, M. (2000): “Germanische Spiralplatenfibel oder romanisme Bügelfibel? Zu den Vorbildern Elbgermanischfränkisch Bügelfibeln”, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, 30, 599-613. Schulze-Dörrlamm, M. (2009): Byzantinische Gürtelschnallen und Gürtelbeschläge im Römischen Zentralmuseum, Teil I: Die Schnallen ohne Beschläg, mit Laschenbeschläg und mit festem Beschläg des 5. bis 7. Jahrhunderts, Kataloge Vor- und frühgeschichtlicher Altertümer, 30/1, Mainz. Schultze, E. and Strocen, B. (2008): ”Ovalfacettierte Keramik – eine Untersuchung zur Chronologie der Černjachov-Kultur”, in: Niezabitowska-Wiśniewska et al. 2008, 315-327. Schukin, M. and Charov, O. (1999): “À propos de la date de la fin de la civilisation de Tcherniakhov”, in: Tejral et al. 1999, 327-340. Schwarz, K. (1972/73): “Regensburg während des ersten Jahrtausend in Spiegel der Ausgrabungen in Niedermünster“, Jahresbericht der bayerischen Bodendenkmalpflege, 13/14, 20-98. Smith, R. W. (1957): Glass from the Ancient World. The Ray Winfield Smith Collection. A special exhibition, Corning. Soproni, S. (1985): Die letzten Jahrzente des Pannonischen Limes, Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte, 38, Munich. Speidel, M. P. (1996): “Late Roman military decorations I: neck- and wristbands”, in: Carrié 1996, 235-243. Stadler, P. (1981): “Völkerwanderungszeitliche Funde: eine Siedlung bei Unterlanzendorf und ein Gräberfeld bei Rannersdorf, Niederösterreich”, Archaeologia Austriaca, 65, 239-285. Stiaffini, D. and Borghetti, G. (1994): I vetri romani del Museo Archeologico nazionale di Cagliari, Mediterraneo Tardoantico e Medievale, Scavi e Ricerche, 9, Cagliari. Raiders, federates and settlers: parallel processes and direct contacts Svoboda, B. (1965): Čechy v době stěhování národů. Prague. Špehar, P. (2012): “The Danubian limes between Lederata and Aquae during the Migrating Period”, in: Ivanišević & Kazanski 2012, 35-56. Tejral, J. (1972): “Die Donauländische Variante der Drehscheibenkeramik mit eingeglätteter Verzierung in Mähren und ihre Beziehung zur Tschernjachower Kultur”, Vznik a počátky Slovanů, VII, 77-139. Tejral, J. (1985): “Naše země a římské Podunají na počátku doby stěhování národů”, Památky archeologické, 76, 308-397. Tejral, J. (1997): “Neue Aspekte der frühvölkerwanderungszeitlichen Chronologie im Mitteldonauraum”, in:. Tejral et. al. 1997, 321-392. Tejral, J. (1998): “Die Besonderheit der germanischen Siedlungsentwicklung während der Kaiserzeit und der frühen Völkerwanderungszeit in Mähren und ihr Niederschlag im archäologischen Befund”, in: Leube 1998, 181-206. Tejral, J. (1999): “Archäologisch-kulturelle Entwicklung im norddanubischen Raum am Ende der Spätkaiserzeit und am Anfang der Völkerwanderungszeit”, in: Tejral et al. 1999, 205-271. – 445 Tejral, J., Pilet, C. and Kazanski, M., eds. (1999): L’Occident Romain et ľEurope centrale à ľÉpoque des Grandes Migrations, Spisy archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno, 13, Brno. Uboldi M. (1995): “Diffusione delle lampade vitree in età tardoantica e altomedievale e spunti per una tipologia”, Archaeologia Medievale, 22, 93-145. Vagalinsky, L. F. (2002): Burnished pottery from the first century to the beginning of the seventh century AD from the region south of the Lower Danube (Bulgaria), Sofia. Vakulenko, L. V. (1998): “One-piece fibulae with chord in high position and inverted foot (Almgren 158) and aspects of chronology oft he Roman Age in the transcarpatian Ukraine”, in: Kunow 1998, 241-247. Vallet, F. and Kazanski, M., eds. (1993): L’armée Romaine et les Barbares du iiie au viie siècle, Paris. Vallet, F. and Kazanski, M., eds. (1995): La noblesse romaine et les chefs Barbares du iiie au viie siècle, Condé-sur-Noireau. Vávra, J., Jiřík, J., Kuchařík, M., Jarošová, I., Víšková, M. and Kubálek, P. (2012): “The Migration Period burial site in Prague-Zličín, Czech Republic”, Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters, 40, 1-26. Vida, T. (2015) : Romania Gothica II: The frontier world. Romans, barbarians and the military culture, Budapest 2015. Tejral, J., ed. (2007): Barbaren im Wandel. Beiträge zur Kultur- und Identitätsumbildung in der Völkerwanderungszeit, Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno, 26, Brno. Von Hessen, O., ed. (1968): I ritrovamenti barbarici nelle collezioni civiche veronesi del Museo di Castelvecchio, Verona. Tejral, J. (2007): “Das Hunnenreich und die Identitätsfragen der barbarischen „gentes“ im Mitteldonauraum aus der Sicht der Archäologie”, in: Tejral 2007, 55-119. Zeman, T. (2006): “Sídliště z pozdní doby římské ve Zlechově. Stav zpracování, východiska a cíle projektu”, in: Droberjar & Lutovský 2006, 451-469. Tejral, J. (2010): ”Zur Frage der frühesten Hunnischen Anwesenheit in Donauländischen Provinzen am Beispiel des archäologischen Befundes”, Slovenská archeologia, 58, 81-122. Tejral, J., Friesinger, H. and Kazanski, M., eds. (1997): Neue Beiträge zur Erforschung der Spätantike im mittleren Donauraum, Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno, 14, Brno. * Jaroslav Jiřík (PhD), Institute of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University in Prague ; Archeological Department, Prácheň Museum in Písek, Velké náměstí 114, Písek 397 24 Joan Pinar Gil (PhD), Department of Historical Studies, University of Turin, via S. Ottavio 20, 10124 Torino Jiří Vávra (Mgr.), Labrys, o.p.s. Hloubětínská 16/11