CC BY
41E. ISTVANOVITSa), V. KULCSARb)
a) Josa Andras Museum (Nyiregyhaza, Hungary), b) University of Szeged (Szeged, Hungary)
AN EARLY MIGRATION PERIOD BURIAL UNDER THE PILGRIMAGE CHURCH OF MARIAPOCS
Abstract: This paper publishes a looted, West-East oriented burial dated to the middle -second half of the 5th century, which was found during the rescue excavation and conservation of the Pilgrimage Church of Mariapocs (Szabolcs-Szatmar-Bereg Coutny). The assemblage includes a pair of Leva type bronze brooches of the Pannonian series by Igor' Gavritukhin, a bronze earring with blurred polyhedric knob, a large B-shaped iron buckle, and a small iron buckle with segmented frame, bronze prong and rivets. Originally, with a pair, it could belong to the shoe belts. Most of the finds have analogies west of the Danube, in Pannonia.
Keywords: Post-Hunnic period, B-shaped buckles, buckles with segmented frame, Leva type brooches.
In 2009, archaeological research was conducted in the famous Pilgrimage Church of Mariapocs (Northeast Hungary, Szabolcs-Szatmar-Bereg County), preceding the renovation works of the building (fig. 1). Excavation was led by Attila Jakab, the archaeologist of the Josa Andras Museum in Nyiregyhaza. In the course of investigation, he found an Early Migration Period burial in the SE corner of the crypt, 290 cm deep under the modern surface1, registered as feature 2.
Our colleague was able to investigate the vicinity of the grave in a 5.4x9 m large area, but no further graves were found either in the crypt, or in its southern foreground. However, we should take into consideration that the grave was found in the corner of the crypt, and on the basis of the excavated territory it is impossible to tell whether this was a single burial or a part of a cemetery.
1 This daily surface is obviously not identical with the one from the Early Migration Period, but it is notable, that at the southern entrance of the crypt, subsoil appeared 180 cm deep, that is to say, the contours of the grave were observed even more than 1 m deeper than it.
Feature 2
The contours of a W-E (290-110°) directed, rectangular pit with rounded corners and reddish-brown fill appeared in the loessy yellowish brown subsoil. The burial was looted2: the skull and the mandible laid in the northern part of the grave. Most of the human remains (long bones and fragment of a scapula) were heaped in the western part of the grave, while no bones were found in the eastern part. Anthropological material was in very poor condition. The line of the coffin could be traced 19 cm deep, in the western part of the grave, and in the southern part the line of the 50 cm wide coffin ran 76 cm long. The eastern end of the grave was cut by the foundation ditch of the eastern wall of the crypt. The grave-pit's survived length was 220 cm, width: 70 cm, depth (from the level of turnout) 25 cm.
Finds3:
1. A fragment of an iron object came to light 4 cm deep, in the western end of the grave. It could probably be the fragment of a chain or netting, consisting of some rings with circular cross section (exterior diameter 1.25 cm, interior diameter 0.8 cm) with a 1x2.8 cm large iron plate corroded to them. One of the rings is complete, and fragments of further two can be seen (Table I,2).
2. In the western end of the grave, 3 cm deep, NW of the latter object: a fragment of a small iron object, probably belonging to the same chain or netting, with a 1.9.x2.8 cm large iron plate. There is an imprint of textile piece on its exterior surface4 (Table I, J).
3. In the western part of the grave, around the place of the breast: a Leva/Prsa type brooch lying in N-S direction. Its triangular head is chip carved, ending in a pentagonal plain knob. The length of the head with the knob is 2.6 cm, width: 1.7 cm. The bow's cross section is a semi-spherical, it is 1.85 cm long and 0.5 cm wide. The foot is rhomboid, chip-carved, ending in a semispherical knob. Its length with the knob is 3.4 cm, width: 1.2 cm. The full length of the brooch is 7.4 cm. Its iron spring was low cord, but of very poor condition. The needle is missing. Width: 0.9 cm (Table II,7).
4. In the medium part of the grave, around the place of the breast bone: an earring made of thin bronze wire of round cross section, with a broken polyhedric knob at one end. Diameter: 1.5 cm. The knob is 0.5x0.7 cm large (Table I,4).
5. South of the middle of the grave, around the place of the right arm: ruined fragments of an iron object of unknown function (Table I,S).
6. 10 cm west of the previous object: a large iron buckle. It is B-shaped, with circular cross section, 2.5x4.5 cm large. Its prong originally could cope over the frame, iron
2 Homogenous fill and regular shape of the grave show that looters' pit was dug precisely onto the grave-pit.
3 The finds are kept in the collection of the Josa Andras Museum, inv.no. 2018.86.1-15. We thank Péterné Szinyéri for the restoration of the objects and Gabriella Beleznai for the illustrations.
4 We were not able to determine whether objects nos. 1 and 2 are fragments of a chain or of a netting, so we left them out of examination.
fragment no. 5 probably was its point. Double-plate, fragmented chape of the buckle was bent over the frame. It could be 3.2 cm wide, remained length: 2.5 cm (Table II, 3).
7. In the central part of the grave: fragment of an iron object, probably, part of a blade and handle piece of a small, middle handled, straight, one-bladed knife. Length: 3.15 cm, width: 1 cm. The length of the handle: 1.7 cm, a few traces of wood can be seen on it, its end was riveted with a 0.5. long rivet (Table I,5).
8. At the same place: an irregular shaped iron object, perhaps an oval buckle frame with fragments of plate rusted to it (Table 1,6).
9. Potsherd: fragment of a grey wheel made vessel with red core, at the northern wall of the grave, around the middle part of the pit; 1.8x1.9 cm5.
10. Small fragment of a piece of a slag slightly burned to fungosity, at the southern wall of the grave; 1.1x1.3x1.9 cm6.
11. In the eastern part of the grave: an iron buckle. The frame is oval, thickening, with circular cross section. Its 1.9 cm long bronze prong copes over the frame. Its rectangular base has four flutes running crosswise. Perhaps, the frame is segmented, it is 1.5x2 cm large. The badly fragmented chape bent over the frame was fixed with two 0.6 cm long bronze rivets with semi-spherical heads (Table I,11).
12. In the eastern part of the grave, 20 cm NE from the previous object: a 0.4 cm long bronze rivet with a round plate of 0.6 cm diameter (Table I,10).
13. In the western part of the grave, under the bones: a pressed globular shaped opaque green glass bead (diameter: 0.7 cm, height: 0.5 cm, diameter of the hole: 0.4 cm) and a coral bead of irregular shape, height: 1.3 cm (Table 1,7).
14. West of the skull, close to the bottom of the grave: a Leva/Prsa type brooch obviously made as the pair of the previously described one (Table II,2).
Single grave
Only a single grave was found under the church of Mariapocs, however, it can be suggested that there were more burials. The contours of the grave came to light just 1-2 cm under the floor of the crypt. Further graves could be destroyed during construction works. Besides, there were only limited possibilities for the research of the environment. Judging from the composition of the assemblage it is difficult to make assumptions on the character of the cemetery (if any). It could consist of relatively many burials, like the one from Csongrad-Kenderfoldek [17, p. 310-318; 18, p. 47-52] but could belong as well to a "small family" burial ground like the one from Szekszard-Palank [19, p. 3] or a of one-two graves group like the one in Maglod Site 17.
5 The sherd is uncharacteristic and is not suitable for exact dating. It can be contemporary to the grave, but taking into consideration that from one of the pits Roman Age finds came to light, it is more probable that the pottery fragment got into the fill of the grave from an earlier settlement layer.
6 Probably got to the grave secondary.
7 Unpublished excavation of Tibor Akos Racz (Ferenczy Museum, Szentendre). We thank him for the information.
Finds Brooches
The best basis for chronological determination is provided by the pair of brooches of Leva (Leva/Levice-Prsa or Leva-Tokari) type first circumscribed by Joachim Werner who collected and dated its pieces [24, S. 428-429]. On the basis of assemblages from Leva (today Levice, Slovakia) and Bodrogmonostorszeg (today Backi Monostor, Serbia) (roll shaped hairring, broken nomadic mirror, silver cicada brooch; chip carved buckle, cicada brooch8, Rautenfibel), he dated the type to the middle - second half of the 5th century. Judging from the distribution of the finds Werner suggested that these brooches took shape in the area of Kerch from where the type spread to the West [24, S. 431, Verbreitungskarte 1]. According to Istvan Bona „wurden von Germanen, Alanen und vielleicht auch Hunnen in gleicher Weise getragen" [2, S. 248-249, Abb. 34]. Recently, Igor' Gavritukhin published the most complete catalogue of the type, typology and summary of the scholarship [5]9. According to his convincing opinion based on the spread area and accompanying finds, this type must had appeared in the period preceding the Battle of Nedao, that is to say, before the middle of the 5th century, in its second quarter. It could stay in use after the fall of the Hunnic Empire [5, p. 114, 117]. In connection with the appearance of the Leva brooches in Bulgaria, Alexandr Stanev pointed out that they did not occur together with 6th century objects. So, with all probability, they are to be connected with Theoderich's people who left the Lower Danube region in 488. That is to say, in this region, this date seems to be the upper border of the use of the type [20, c. 373]. The main spread areas of the Leva brooches are the Carpathian Basin and the European steppe [5, fig. 5-7]. A specific feature of their distribution in the Carpathian Basin is that they are missing from the left bank of the Tisza (i.e. the territory east of the river): the ones from Mariapocs are the first pieces found here10.
So, the finding of Leva type brooches in Mariapocs is special from two aspects. First, as it was mentioned above, they are extremely rare east of Tisza. Second, our brooches belong to a characteristic variant registered by I. Gavritukhin as Pannonian series [5, p. 112, fig. 6:f]. To the main features of this series belong elongated triangular head and the size exceeding the average (6-6.6 cm). Out of the three sites listed by Gavritukhin we have to point out Halbturn. Finds from there remind the ones from Mariapocs most of all. The subtype got its name (Pannonian) because all of the sites (Carnuntum, Halbturn, Level) lie in the NW corner of the Carpathian Basin. From typological point of view this subtype belongs to the latest group of the Leva type brooches. Based on these, we can most
8 In the reality, it must have been the knob of a double-plate brooch and not a cikada.
9 To the pieces collected by him we can add pair of brooches found in 2006 during preventive excavations of Motorway M0, in Maglod Site 1, grave 1068 (see footnote 7) and a stray find from Rakoczifalva. We thank Zsofia Masek for providing this yet unpublished information [12].
10 Rakoczifalva mentioned in the previous footnote is situated on the left bank of the Tisza, but the brooch found here is a stray find, we have no information on its context.
probably date the manufacture time of the pieces from Mariapocs to the third quarter of the 5th century.
The looting of the burial does not allow us to evaluate the way of wearing the brooches. It is obvious that wearing them in pairs corresponds to the general custom of using brooches. One of them laid in the western part of the grave, around the right part of the breast, in N-S direction, while the other one was found west of the skull, close to the bottom of the grave-pit. Recently, Boglarka Meszaros dealt with the wearing custom of the brooch type in the Carpathian Basin [14]. Out of 29 sites collected by her, only seven burials contained enough information for such an examination. In all cases, Leva type brooches got into burials as part of female costume. Pieces from Csongrad-Kenderfoldek and Jaszbereny-Szolo-dulo were found in pairs on the shoulders, referring to peplos like costume. In the case of Mariapocs the situation must had been similar11. At the same time, we would not take it for granted that this type of costume is Germanic. This assumption is problematic at least because two brooches on a costume are relatively frequently met also in Sarmatian burials. According to Valeria Kulcsar's data brooches in pairs occur in 12% of the cases in Sarmatian graves collected by her up to 1993 [9, p. 52].
Material composition of the brooches from Mariapocs - the high contents of zinc -shows that iron buckle with bronze prong formed one group with them12.
Polyhedric earring
Simple bronze hair/earrings with cast polyhedric knob are common in the graves of the 5th century. The one found in Mariapocs is a simplified version, the angles of the knob are blurred, reminding more a sphere than a polyhedric shape. A similar piece was found e.g. in grave 14 of Viminacium, dated to phase C of the cemetery, that is to say, to the third third of the 5th - beginning of the 6th century. We should note that in the same grave a D-shaped iron buckle was found, that can be considered the antecedent of B-shaped buckles (see later) [6, p. 119, fig. 14:13, pl. 2:2].
11 Though we cannot be sure that the brooches were found in situ in the looted grave, however, the fact that they laid more or less in one line with the height of the shoulders, refers to a peplos. At the same time, we know that one of the brooches came to light directed from north to south, that is to say, perpendicular to the body. So, diagonal way of closing the costume can be also suggested.
12 We thank for the examination and evaluation of the data Miklos Kis-Varga (Institute for Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Debrecen). According to it, composition of bronze objects is the following:
Sample Fi Cu /II At Sn Ili
Bronze rivet K7,3 7.G7 O.Of. - 4.5V
Kamnt riiw (1.7] 7ft 6.32 (Ufp 12.4 2-2'f
1 iamiifi, krmb 0-57 10,3 f..H7 D.OK .3 1«
nutlk' with broil/Lr j>Rsiijj DjGB S3.5 13.2 Oil 1.43 0 y .3
linnn-h 1 078 83 J8 in,2 0.19 — n A<i
1 ITIHIOII 2 O.yfi XI K.,3 Q.43 — 1.2«
Beads
Out of the two beads found in the grave, the glass one is uncharacteristic. As to the other one, we have to emphasise that coral ones were customary in earlier, Sarmatian graves, but are very rare in the 5th century burials of the Carpathian Basin. The same is the situation in the North Pontic region, where they belong to frequent finds in the Roman Age, but become single objects in the Migration Period [13, c. 104]. There may be a cessation of the source after the Roman Age in the backround of this phenomenon.
Buckles
There were two or three buckles in the assemblage: one bigger B-shaped piece and a smaller one with oval frame and bronze prong and rivets. In case of the third iron object (Table I,6) we can suggest that it belonged to a buckle. It is not easy to examine these finds, because the scholarship mostly deals with golden, silver and bronze buckles, while evaluation of iron buckles - obviously because of their poor preservation and hardly reconstructable shape - has been neglected, so it is not surprising that most of the analogies are not iron pieces.
The larger (2.5x4.5 cm) iron buckle (Table II,J) has a B-shaped, thickening frame (version at fig. 2:2). Its has a characteristic feature: its side meeting the point of the prong is arched. In our opinion, this form makes a serious difference comparing to the regular D-shape pieces (version at fig. 2:7). While the latter are met in a large number in the 5th century material, the B-shaped ones are much rarer - similarly to the liver shaped oval buckles (where the side of frame joining the prong is profiled). Such oval buckle can be mentioned e.g. from Zsâmbok grave 2 [8, p. 4, tab. VI:1] or from Siôagârd-Gyumôlcsôs grave 2 differing only with its oval cross section and missing prong and chape. The author of the Siôagârd publication dated the find to the first half - middle third of the 5th century [15, p. 39, 40, fig. 2:1]. Fragmented iron buckle coming from grave 6 of the Zsâmbok cemetery can be, probably, also mentioned here. Its publisher dated it on the basis of the accompanying finds to the middle third - third quarter of the 5th century [8, p. 34, tab. VIII:2). To the same version belongs the piece found in grave 666 of Fonyôd-Mérnôki-telep. It is B-shaped, but - contrary to the buckle from Mâriapôcs - its side is not straight but arched. According to Péter Straub, the publisher, the site belongs to the group of small cemeteries of southern Transdanubia (territory west of the Danube), dated to the middle third of the 5th century. He also noted that this kind of buckles cannot be dated more precisely inside the 5th century [21, S. 213, 218, 220, Taf. 5:4]. Perhaps the closest analogies of the Mâriapôcs buckle were found in the cemetery of Môzs also dated to the middle of the 5th century. They are especially characteristic for their damascened decoration [16, p. 349, fig. 7:1-2]. (This poses the question whether they could have segmented surface like the smaller buckle from Mâriapôcs. In the case of the bigger one, this cannot be determined because of its poor state of preservation.) It is conspicuous that all the pieces listed above, probably the antecedents of the big buckle from Mâriapôcs, come from Transdanubia.
We know well dated B-shaped iron buckles - though not many - from the steppe region, e.g. from the cemetery of Djurso near Novorossijsk grave 408. On the basis of a glass plate and a double-plate brooch, the grave belongs to the third phase of the cemetery, that is to say, to phase D3/E-E (470/480-530/540 AD) [7, p. 45, 48, fig. 10:28].
B-shaped buckles were generally spread in the Roman provincial find material [11, S. 53, Abb. 52:2,4,6,8,9,11, 53:39]. We meet mainly their bronze version supplied with rectangular chape bent through the frame. The Late Roman cemetery of Sagvar is to be mentioned, where 33 bronze and two iron pieces came to light, most of them belonging to this shape (noting that the character of iron buckles is questionable). According to Alice Burger they can be dated between 351 and 375 [3, p. 144]. In Intercisa (Dunaujvaros), judging from their large number, such pieces were dated to the 4th century and described under the term of the so-called Kerbschnittschnalle. Already in this publication the possibility of the type's continuity in the later Germanic material has been suggested [1, S. 460, Abb. 101-102]. We did not consider our aim to make a systematic collection, so we mention here only as an example grave 123 of the provincial Andernach-Kirchberg cemetery in Germania inferior and a stray find from the same site. Pieces of such type come to light from late 4th and sometimes early 5th century context [4, S. 109-111]. These Late Roman products can be probably considered the antecedents of the iron buckles of the Hun Age.
The smaller iron buckle with bronze prong, judging from its size, probably belonged to shoes. Iron object described under number 8 could be its pair, but its frame is hardly readable, the prong and chape are missing. As we have already mentioned, on the basis of the material composition of the smaller buckle's bronze prong, it can be definitely related to the brooches. We have not succeeded in finding an exact analogy. The closest parallels are perhaps the golden plated iron shoe buckles of the grave with deformed skull found in Drslavice. They have segmented frame and prongs bending over the frame, with profiled base [22, p. 35, tab. VIII:2-3]. They were dated to the first half of the 5th century [23, S. 110, Taf. 43:11]. A close analogy of the piece from Mariapocs, a buckle with iron chape and bronze frame was found in grave 793 of the Ullo Site 9 cemetery. Bronze rivets with semispherical heads are especially similar. Segmented buckles were mostly spread in the second half of the 5th century and in the 6th century [recently in details: 10].
Rivet
Judging from the position and analogies of the rivet with decorated plain head could have belonged to the belt. Metal composition of the rivet differs from the rest of the bronze objects coming from the assemblage.
A similar piece with plain head decorated with notches on the edge (height 0.7 cm) came to light as a stray find from Biharkeresztes-Artand, Nagyfarkasdomb13. Parallels
13 Deri Museum, Debrecen, inv.no. 77.131.2.
are known from the Migration Period cemetery of Viminacium. These objects described by their publishers as "nail like" rivets were found as part of belts. Their analogies come both from Illyricum and Gepidian territory north of the Lower Danube from 6th century environment, but pieces with notched edge are also known from earlier assemblages dated to the classical Hun Age (Untersiebenbrunn) [6, p. 26, fig. 13:1-13].
We can assume that, judging from the pair of brooches, the burial, in all probability, was made in the last decades of the 5th century. Neither the further objects, not the W-E orientation of the grave tell against it. Analogies of most finds have appeared already in the second half/end of the 5th century and became widely spread in the beginning/first half of the 6th century. The assemblage is special because of its several Pannonian connections. The brooches have analogies in the NW part of the province, and in the territory east of the Tisza they are the first representatives of the Léva type. The assemblage from Mâriapocs is a specific component of the very complex and colourful, continuously multiplying find horizon of the Hun and post-Hun Age in the Upper Tisza region.
REFERENCES
1. Alföldi M.R. Schmucksachen. Intercisa II. (Dunapentele): Geschichte der Stadt in der Römerzeit, Budapest, Akadémiai Kiado Publ., 1957, pp. 399-476. (Archaeologia Hungarica XXXVI).
2. Bona I. Das Hunnenreich. Budapest, Stuttgart, Corvina Publ., 1991.
3. Burger A.Sz. The Late Roman Cemetery at Sâgvâr. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 1966, XVIII, pp. 99-234.
4. Brückner M. Die spätrömischen Grabfunde aus Andernach. Mainz, 1999. (Archäologische Schriften des Instituts für Vor- und Frühgeschichte der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität 7).
5. Gavritukhin I. Brooches of the Levice-Tokari sub-group. I. Khrapunov, F-A. Stylegar (Eds.), Inter AmboMaria: Northern Barbariansfrom Scandinavia toward the Black Sea, Kristiansand, Simferopol, Dolya Publ., 2013, pp. 107-127.
6. Ivanisevic V., Kazanski M., Mastykova A. Les nécropoles de Viminacium à l 'epoque des grandes migrations. Paris, Centre de Recherche d'Histoire et Civilisation de Byzance Publ., 2006.
7. Kazanski M.M. Khronologia nachal'noi fazy mogil'nika Diurso. Istoriko-arkheologicheskij almanakh, Armavir, Moscow, 2001, vol. 7, pp. 41-58.
8. Kiss A. A zsâmboki 5. szâzadi temetö. Alapszakos Szakdolgozat (BA thesis). Budapest, 2015. URL: https://www.academia.edu/11955874/A_zs%C3%A1mboki_5._sz%C3%A1zadi_temet%C5% 91._BA_szakdolgozat_2015.
9. Kulcsâr V. A kârpât-medencei szarmatâk temetkezési szokâsai [The burial rite of the Sarmatians of the Carpathian Basin]. Aszod, Osvâth Gedeon Mùzeumi Alapitvâny Publ., 1998. (Mùzeumi Füzetek 49).
10. Kulcsâr V. Hun kori nyùzott lovas temetkezés Üllöröl [Hun Age burial with horse skin from Üllö]. M.L. Nagy, K. L.Szölösi (Eds.), „To make a fairy's whistle from a briar rose". Studies presented to Eszter Istvânovits on her sixtieth birthday, Nyiregyhâza, Josa Andrâs Mùzeum Publ., 2018, pp. 381-393.
11. Lânyi V. Die spätantiken Gräberfelder von Pannonien. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 1972, XXIV, pp. 53-214.
12. Masek Zs. Levai tipusü fibulatöredek Rakoczifalvarol. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae, 2019, in print
13. Mastykova A.V. Zhenskij kostium Central'nogo i Zapadnogo Predkavkaz'ia v konce IV -seredine VI v. n.je. Moscow, Institut arkheologii RAN Publ., 2009.
14. Meszaros B. 5. szazadi viseletrekonstrukciok nehany fibula alapjan [Clothing in the 5th century AD, according to some of the brooches types]. Gy. Biro (Ed.), Szakkolegiumi Füzetek II. A Mora Ferenc Szakkollegium Evkönyve, Szeged, 2015, pp. 134-146.
15. Odor J.G. 5. szazadi temetö Sioagardon [Das Gräberfeld von Sioagard aus dem 5. Jahrhundert]. A Wosinsky Mör Müzeum Evkönyve. Vol. XXIII.Hadak ütjän XII. „Regiök es kistajak a nepvändorläs koraban". A nepvändorläs kor fiatal kutatöi konferenciajanak elöadäsai Simontornya, 2001. szeptember 3-5, Szekszard, 2001, pp. 39-50.
16. Odor J.G. The 5th century cemetery and settlement at Mözs (Tolna County, Hungary) - some issues concerning the "East-Germanic" period in Transdanubia. O. Heinrich-Tamaska (Hrsg.), Keszthely-Fenekpuszta im Kontext spätantiker Kontinuitätsforschung zwischen Noricum und Moesia. Castellum Pannonicum Pelsonense 2, Budapest, Leipzig, Keszthely, Rahden/Westf., Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH, 2011, pp. 347-359.
17. Parducz M. Archäologische Beiträge zur Geschichte der Hunnenzeit in Ungarn. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 1959. vol. 11, pp. 309-398.
18. Parducz M. Die ethnischen Probleme der Hunnenzeit in Ungarn, Budapest, Akademiai Kiado Publ., 1963. (Studia archaeologica 1).
19. Salamon A. Nepvandorlas temetök Szekszard-Palankon. Szekszard, 1968. (A szekszardi Balogh Adam Müzeum füzetei 9).
20. Stanev A. Elementi na germanskiafibulen kostium na iug otDunav. Po arheologicheski danni ot balkanskite provincii na Iztochnata Rimska Imperia V-VI vek. Sofia, Avangard print, 2012.
21. Straub P. Hunnenzeitliche Gräbergruppen in der Gemarkung von Fonyod (Kom. Somogy) [Burial groups of the Hun period in the district of Fonyod (County Somogy)]. O. Heinrich-Tamaska, P. Straub (Hrsg.), Mensch, Siedlung und Landschaft im Wechsel der Jahrtausende am Balaton. Budapest, Leipzig, Keszthely, Rahden/Westf., Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH, 2014, pp. 207-222. (Castellum Pannonicum Pelsonense, Bd. 4).
22. Tejral J. Morava na sklonku antiky. Praha, Academia Publ., 1982. (Monumenta Archaeologica XIX).
23. Werner J. Beiträge zur Archäologie des Attila-Reiches. München, 1956. (Abhandlungen Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 31).
24. Werner J. Studien zu Grabfunden des V. Jahrhunderts aus der Slowakei und der Karpatenukraine. Slovenska Archeolögia, 1959, vol. VII.2, pp. 422-438.
СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ
1. Alföldi M.R. Schmucksachen // Intercisa II. (Dunapentele): Geschichte der Stadt in der Römerzeit. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado, 1957. S. 399-476. (Archaeologia Hungarica XXXVI).
2. Bona I. Das Hunnenreich. Budapest, Stuttgart: Corvina, 1991.
3. Burger A.Sz. The Late Roman Cemetery at Sagvar // Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 1966. XVIII. P. 99-234.
4. Brückner M. Die spätrömischen Grabfunde aus Andernach. Mainz, 1999. (Archäologische Schriften des Instituts für Vor- und Frühgeschichte der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität 7).
5. Gavritukhin I. Brooches of the Levice-Tokari sub-group // Inter Ambo Maria: Northern Barbarians from Scandinavia toward the Black Sea / Eds. I. Khrapunov, F-A. Stylegar. Kristiansand, Simferopol: Dolya Publ., 2013. P. 107-127.
6. Ivanisevic V., Kazanski M., Mastykova A. Les nécropoles de Viminacium à l'epoque des grandes migrations. Paris: Centre de Recherche d'Histoire et Civilisation de Byzance, 2006.
7. Казанский М.М. Хронология начальной фазы могильника Дюрсо // Историко-археоло-гический альманах. Армавир, М., 2001. Вып. 7. C. 41-58.
8. Kiss A. A zsamboki 5. szazadi temetö. Alapszakos Szakdolgozat (BA thesis). Budapest, 2015 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.academia.edu/11955874/A_zs%C3%A1mboki_5._ sz%C3%A1zadi_temet%C5%91._BA_szakdolgozat_2015 (дата доступа: 05.05.2018).
9. Kulcsar V. A karpat-medencei szarmatak temetkezési szokasai. Aszod: Osvath Gedeon Mùzeumi Alapitvany, 1998. (Mùzeumi Füzetek 49).
10. Kulcsar V. Hun kori nyùzott lovas temetkezés Üllöröl // „To make a fairy's whistle from a briar rose". Studies presented to Eszter Istvanovits on her sixtieth birthday / Eds. M.L. Nagy, K. L.Szölösi. Nyiregyhaza: Josa Andras Mùzeum, 2018. P. 381-393.
11. Lanyi V. Die spätantiken Gräberfelder von Pannonien // Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 1972. Vol. XXIV. S. 53-214.
12. Masek Zs. Lévai tipusù fibulatôredék Rakoczifalvarol // Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae. 2019 (в печати).
13. Мастыкова А.В. Женский костюм Центрального и Западного Предкавказья в конце IV - середине VI в. н.э. М.: Институт археологии РАН, 2009.
14. Mészaros B. 5. szazadi viseletrekonstrukciok néhany fibula alapjan // Szakkolégiumi Füzetek II. A Mora Ferenc Szakkollégium Évkônyve / Ed. Gy. Biro. Szeged, 2015. P. 134-146.
15. Odor J.G. 5. szazadi temetö Sioagardon // A Wosinsky Mor Mùzeum Évkônyve. Szekszard, 2001. Vol. XXIII. Hadak ùtjân XII. „Régiok és kistâjak a népvândorlâs korâban". A népvândorlâs korfiatal kutatoi konferenciâjânak elôadâsai Simontornya, 2001. szeptember 3-5. P. 39-50.
16. Odor J.G. The 5th-century cemetery and settlement at Mözs (Tolna County, Hungary) - some issues concerning the "East-Germanic" period in Transdanubia // Keszthely-Fenékpuszta im Kontext spätantiker Kontinuitätsforschung zwischen Noricum und Moesia / Hrsg. O. Heinrich-Tamaska. Budapest, Leipzig, Keszthely, Rahden/Westf.: Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH, 2011. P. 347-359. (Castellum Pannonicum Pelsonense 2).
17. Parducz M. Archäologische Beiträge zur Geschichte der Hunnenzeit in Ungarn // Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 1959. Vol. 11. S. 309-398.
18. Parducz M. Die ethnischen Probleme der Hunnenzeit in Ungarn. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiado, 1963. (Studia archaeologica 1).
19. Salamon Â. Népvandorlaskori temetök Szekszard-Palankon. Szekszard, 1968. (A szekszardi Balogh Âdam Mùzeum füzetei 9).
20. Станев A. Елементи на германския фибулен костюм на юг от Дунав. По археологически данни от балканските провинции на Източната Римска Империя V-VI век. София: Авангард принт, 2012.
21. Straub P. Hunnenzeitliche Gräbergruppen in der Gemarkung von Fonyod (Kom. Somogy) // Mensch, Siedlung und Landschaft im Wechsel der Jahrtausende am Balaton / Hrsg. O. Heinrich-Tamaska, P. Straub. Budapest, Leipzig, Keszthely, Rahden/Westf.: Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH, 2014. S. 207-222. (Castellum Pannonicum Pelsonense 4).
22. Tejral J. Morava na sklonku antiky. Praha: Academia, 1982. (Monumenta Archaeologica XIX).
23. Werner J. Beiträge zur Archäologie des Attila-Reiches. München, 1956. (Abhandlungen der Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 31).
24. Werner J. Studien zu Grabfunden des V. Jahrhunderts aus der Slowakei und der Karpatenukraine // Slovenska Archeologia. 1959. Vol. VII.2. S. 422-438.
Э. ИШТВАНОВИЧа), В. КУЛЬЧАРЬ)
а) Музей им. Андраша Йожа (Ньиредьхаза, Венгрия), б) Университет Сегеда (Сегед, Венгрия)
ПОГРЕБЕНИЕ РАННЕЙ ЭПОХИ ПЕРЕСЕЛЕНИЯ НАРОДОВ ПОД ПАЛОМНИЧЕСКОЙ ЦЕРКОВЬЮ В Г. МАРИАПОЧ
Аннотация: В статье публикуется ограбленное погребение широтной ориентации, датированное серединой - второй половиной V в. н.э., найденное в ходе охранных раскопок при реставрации паломнической церкви в г. Мариапоч (обл. Саболч-Сатмар-Берег). Характерными находками являются пара бронзовых фибул типа Лева паннонской серии по классификации Гавритухина, бронзовая серьга с 14-гранником расплывчатой формы, большая В-образная железная пряжка, а также маленькая, вероятно, первоначально парная обувная железная пряжка с ребристой рамкой, бронзовым язычком и штырями. Большинство вещей находит аналогии к западу от Дуная, в Паннонии.
Ключевые слова: пост-гуннское время, В-образные пряжки, пряжки с ребристой рамкой, фибулы типа Лева.
Fig. 1. Situation of Mariapocs in Hungary and in Szabolcs-Szatmar-Bereg County.
DDOO
I
4
Fig. 2. Variants of buckles mentioned in the text: 1 - D-shaped; 2 - B-shaped; 3 - oval; 4
kidney shaped.
Table I. Finds from Mariapocs-Pilgrimage Church, feature (grave) 2.
Table II. Finds from Mariapocs-Pilgrimage Church, feature (grave) 2.
