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