468  

forces of tension on the outside, the reinforcements thus acting as

levers. We have merely a vague notion of the types of glue which
were used. In our regions, only the antler reinforcements of this
miraculous weapon remain, but bows of this type which have been
preserved complete are known from the Caucasus. It is quite prob-
able that in the Avar Empire, simple wooden bows, which usually
cannot be detected by the archaeologists, were also used in addition
to the composite bows. While in the west, the main responsibility
of fighting still lay with the infantry, all Avars were mounted. Iron
stirrups, without exception, formed part of the equipment of every
Avar warrior. They stabilize the riding position in combat, which is
particularly important when using the long lance, which was appar-
ently part of the equestrian warrior’s standard equipment. This set,
consisting of two stirrups, iron bit and lance-head, sometimes occurs
as a “votive deposit pit” (Opfergrubenfund ), without human remains
(plates 1, 2 & 3). These definitely belong to the Early Avar Period,
but at least for now, cannot be dated more precisely.2 However, here
there is evidence of a burial custom which seems to have existed
among the Huns in the first half of the fifth century, although with-
out evidence of cremation. The earliest Avar finds in the Carpathian
Basin also include various bone objects, among them belt buckles,
needle containers and a tool for undoing knots. All of these gener-
ally correspond to the fashion of the eastern steppes.3 The strange
Avar burial place at Börcs-Nagydomb has even yielded an entire
belt-set which had been carved from bone.4
There is a significant accumulation of typical artefacts from the
Early Avar Period in present-day western Hungary (former Pannonia)

2
C. Bálint, “Probleme der archäologischen Forschung zur awarischen Landnahme”,
Ausgewählte Probleme europäischer Landnahmen des Früh- und Hochmittelalters. Methodische
Grundlagendiskussion im Grenzbereich zwischen Archäologie und Geschichte 1, ed. M. Müller-
Wille and R. Schneider, Vorträge und Forschungen 41 (Sigmaringen 1993) pp.
195–273, esp. pp. 203–4.
3
É. Garam, “Bemerkungen zum ältesten Fundmaterial der Awarenzeit”, Typen
der Ethnogenese unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Bayern 2, ed. H. Friesinger and F.
Daim, Denkschriften der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-
historische Klasse 204. Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Frühmittelalterfor-
schung 13 (Wien 1990) pp. 253–72; Bálint, “Awarische Landnahme”, pp. 199; 217.
4
P. Tomka, “Frühawarenzeitliche Hirten in der kleinen Tiefebene”, Ethnische und
kulturelle Verhältnisse an der mittleren Donau vom 6. bis zum 11. Jahrhundert. Symposium Nitra
6. bis 10. November 1994, ed. D. Bialeková and J. Zábojník (Bratislava 1996) pp.
141–9, esp. pp. 142 ff.
   () 469

and a somewhat lesser concentration to the east of the Tisza, while

the region between the rivers Danube and Tisza remains empty.5
The reasons for this are self-evident: Pannonia offered a certain infra-
structure and large cleared areas, which were perhaps still being cul-
tivated. It also had at least a sparse local population. In addition to
this, there was the network of Roman roads, which presumably could
still be used extensively, even if it had not been restored for more
than 200 years. In the course of their settlement process, the Avars
also settled in the formerly Gepid territory east of the Tisza. As
Herwig Wolfram once said, “To rule only makes sense if one is rul-
ing people”. As far as we know today, in the Early Avar Period,
comparatively large and wealthy settlements existed only in western
Hungary (Budakalász-Dunapart, Zamárdi). However, if we want to
draw conclusions about the location of the centres of power from
the wealth of the graves, then the focus of the Avar Empire would
appear to have been located close to the Danube, between Danube
and Tisza and just east of the Tisza. This is demonstrated in a par-
ticularly impressive manner by the distribution of the princely graves
of the Bócsa-Kunbábony group (e.g. pl. 19–22) which belong to the
middle of the seventh century and—apparently—seem to manifest a
certain turning away from the Byzantine model. They are all located
east of the Danube.6
Byzantine culture seems to have held great appeal for the Avar
rider-nomads. Byzantine authors appear to have actually made fun
of this fact. However, this does not necessarily imply that the Avars
were in the process of turning into provincial Romans. The Avars
selected carefully what they wanted to integrate into their culture.
As this involves aspects of mentality, of collective psychology and of
a set of cultural values, we still have to deal with this question at
length.
As even before they settled, the Avars had had enough time to
acquaint themselves with Byzantium, it is possible that they had
already brought some of the Byzantine means of representation with
them when they came into the Carpathian Basin. In this context,
one should consider the belts with cast silver “mask fittings”. These
were common in the Black Sea and the Caucasus region in the sixth

5
Bálint, “Awarische Landnahme”, pp. 243 ff.
6
Garam, “Ältestes Fundmaterial”, fig. 11.
470  

century, while in the Carpathian Basin only a few examples have

been found so far. (pl. 2,1–3).7 Similar objects, which may be some-
what newer but appear to be related to the cast “mask fittings” occur
in two Lombard graves, Arcisa 2 and 5, in both cases together with
strap-ends of Sadovec-Arcisa type.8 A parallel was found in an Avar
grave from Budakalász (pl. 2,4). There can be no doubt that the
Lombards got to know both the strap-ends and the fittings in Italy,
as no comparable objects have been found so far in Lombard graves
in Pannonia. Grave 9 from Kisk rös  contains a belt-set, in which
cast-fittings which are related to those from Arcisa 2, have been
combined with strap-ends of Martynovka type. These are only rarely
decorated in openwork technique—as are the mask fittings—but
instead have a linear ornament which, in Hungary, has traditionally
(but incorrectly) been called Tamga-decoration (pl. 2,5).9
The belt-sets of Aradac type belong to the first half of the sev-
enth century. These are strap-ends and mounts pressed in a mould,
decorated with a triple hemispherical dent supplemented by dot-
comma ornament (e.g. from Keszthely-Fenékpuszta: pl. 2,7).10 A
mould of this type was found in Fenlac (Fönlak).11 The distribution
of this type suggests that it is in fact derived from the products of

7
C. Bálint, “Kontakte zwischen Iran, Byzanz und der Steppe. Das Grab von
Ü‘ Tepe (Sowj. Azerbajd≥an) und der beschlagverzierte Gürtel im 6. und 7.
Jahrhundert”, Awarenforschungen 1, ed. F. Daim, Archaeologia Austriaca 1. Studien
zur Archäologie der Awaren 4 (Wien 1992) pp. 309–496. Regarding the multi-part
belt-sets in the Mediterranean region see—most recently—C. Bálint, “Byzantinisches
zur Herkunftsfrage des vielteiligen Gürtels”, Kontakte zwischen Iran, Byzanz und der
Steppe im 6.–7. Jahrhundert, ed. id., Varia Archaeologica Hungarica 10 (Budapest
2000) pp. 99–162.
8
M. Martin, “Awarische und germanische Funde in Männergräbern von Linz-
Zizlau und Környe. Ein Beitrag zur Chronologie der Awarenzeit”, A Wosinsky Mór
Múzeum Évkönyve 15 (1990) pp. 65–90, esp. pp. 66–7; S. Uenze, Die spätantiken
Befestigungen von Sadovec, Münchener Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 43 (München
1992) pp. 187–92 and pl. 11.
9
N. Fettich, Die Metallkunst der landnehmenden Ungarn, Archaeologia Hungarica 21
(Budapest 1937) pl. CXXVI; L.V. Pekarskaja and D. Kidd, Der Silberschatz von
Martynovka (Ukraine) aus dem 6. und 7. Jahrhundert, Monographien zur Frühgeschichte
und Mittelalterarchäologie 1 (Innsbruck 1994) pl. 31,1–3; 32,1–4; 32,6.
10
Martin, “Linz-Zizlau und Környe”, p. 67 n. 8 and distribution map, fig. 4;
J. Werner, “Nomadische Gürtel bei Persern, Byzantinern und Langobarden”, Atti
del Convegno Internazionale sul Tema: La civiltà dei Longobardi in Europa. Roma 1971 (Rome
1974) pp. 109–56, esp. pp. 127 ff. with note 48.
11
J. Hampel, Alterthümer des frühen Mittelalters in Ungarn I–III (Braunschweig 1905)
pl. 446,2; see also in future Z. Rácz, Awarische Goldschmiedegräber, Monographien zur
Frühgeschichte und Mittelalterarchäologie (forthcoming).
   () 471

Byzantine craftsmen, but seems to have been restricted to the Balkans

(Gari‘in Grad)12 and the Carpathian Basin. No examples of this type
are known so far either from Italy or the Black Sea region. Syna
Uenze has suggested—at first not altogether convincingly—that the
strap-ends and belt-fittings with triple hemispherical dent may have
been derived from the buckles of Sucidava type.13 However, the vari-
ant of a Byzantine buckle from Gyenesdiás grave 64 appears to prove
that she may in fact have been right in doing so: it is decorated
with a similar motif in openwork and therefore—like a “missing
link”—establishes a definite typological connection (pl. 25,3). However,
Gyenesdiás 64 has a post quem date of 654, which is a little late
for the fittings of Aradac type.
The belt-sets of Kunágota-Mersin type (after Bálint) correspond
much more closely to the kind of belt fashion which was common
in Byzantium.14 The complete belt-set consists of matching strap-
ends and fittings, which have been either chased individually (Kunágota:
pl. 7,1) or “pressed” in a mould. The main strap-ends have medal-
lions with Christian monograms, which, however, have been replaced
by geometric ornaments—presumably especially to suit the Avar mar-
ket. One of the most beautiful examples of such a belt-set is in fact
a set of moulds from the smith’s grave of Kunszentmárton (pl. 6,2).
Belt-sets of Kunágota-Mersin type still occur—although of somewhat
lesser quality—up to the end of the seventh century, as is demon-
strated by the grave from Ozora-Tótipuszta, for which we have a
post quem date. Particularly interesting are the so-called “fringed
mounts” from horse harness, which are one of the most character-
istic types of mount from the Early Avar Period and of the early
Middle Avar Period.15 The origin of this square or triple hemi-
spherical type of fitting, which is characterised by a set of vertical
grooves, may be traced back to the cast mask fittings. For example,
three cast horse harness-mounts from Arcisa 5 have a fringe deco-
ration. A cast mask fitting of triple hemispherical shape with fringe
decoration is preserved in the ”umen museum (Bulgaria).
Especially in western Hungary, the Germanic component plays a
vital role within Avar material. This does not only mean that Germanic

12
Werner, “Nomadische Gürtel”, p. 129 n. 48.
13
Uenze, Sadovec, p. 185, fig. 14.
14
Bálint, “Awarische Landnahme”, p. 223.
15
Ibid., p. 214.
472  

types of decoration were adopted by Avar craftsmen. Corresponding

dress customs are usually linked with the “Germanic” objects. Examples
are the three- and four-part belt-sets with silver wire inlay (Tauschierung)
(Kölked-Feketekapu A), which have already been mentioned, but
especially the so-called “toothcut” decoration. The most famous
ensemble of this type, the so-called “Jankovich-Gold”, constitutes a
sword strap set of “western type” (pl. 15,1).16 Several pieces of jew-
ellery from two graves which have been published only recently, are
on a par with the Jankovich-finds: The artfully constructed gold disc
fibula, the bracelet and the fingering from the woman’s grave 119
of Kölked-Feketekapú B,17 which also included a wooden bowl with
silver fittings (pl. 14). The woman’s grave 85 did not contain quite
as much gold and silver, however, it is almost more interesting from
a historical point of view. The woman’s belt was decorated with a
lovely shield-tongue buckle made of gilded bronze with silver inlay,
which in turn was decorated with niello, and depicts a Germanic
god with two swords, around whose shoulders a snake was coiled,
biting the warrior’s left arm: According to Attila Kiss, this is a depic-
tion of Tiuz or Tyr18 (pl. 11,1). Next to it, a stylistically matching
rectangular mount had been found (pl. 11,2). The belt terminated
in a strap-end decorated with interlace (pl. 11,5), on her head, the
lady wore gold basket earrings and a hair-pin with a decorative part
made of gold (pl. 11,3). With the help of the objects’ exact position
in the grave (pl. 12), the deceased’s dress may be reconstructed, to
a certain degree (pl. 13). Splendid finds with “toothcut” ornament
occur in the necropolis of Zamárdi, south of Lake Balaton, which
has so far only been partly published and presented to the public
in the form of exhibitions. This includes a pair of bracelets made
of solid silver, but also belt pendants, which are part of female dress
(example from Kölked-Feketekapú B, grave 85: pl. 11,5 and 12) and
belt-sets as part of male dress, where the shape of the strap-ends is

16
F. Daim et al., Das awarische Gräberfeld von Leobersdorf, Niederösterreich, 2 vols.,
Studien zur Archäologie der Awaren 3. Denkschriften der Österreichischen Akademie
der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse 194. Veröffentlichungen der
Kommission für Frühmittelalterforschung 10 (Wien 1987) p. 132 n. 93; T. Vida,
“Merowingische Spathagurte der Awarenzeit”, Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae
(2000) pp. 161–75, esp. pp. 167 ff.
17
A. Kiss, “Elozetes
 jelentés (II.) A Kölked—Feketekapui avarkori települéles és
temetok  Folia Archaeologia 39 (1988) pp. 173–94, esp. Part 2, pl. 4; 5,1–4.
 ásatasárol”,
18
Ibid., Part 1, pp. 294–303.
   () 473

closely related to those from typical early Avar sets (pl. 15,2). Recently,
Tivadar Vida has devoted particular attention to the female costume
of the Germanic population of the Early Avar Period, starting with
some finds from the necropolis of Budakalász-Dunapart, where the
reciprocal permeation of eastern-Avar, Germanic, Roman and
Byzantine traditions is evident.19 Certainly, the defeated Gepids and
the remaining Lombards must have played a much more substan-
tial role within this massive agglomeration of Germanic traditions,
but it is nevertheless becoming increasingly clear that during the
Early Avar Period, intensive contacts must also have existed between
the Carpathian Basin and the Baltic, present-day north-western
Germany and the upper Danube region.20
The interaction between the local Romanic and Germanic popu-
lation and the new lords from the East, as well as the strong impulses
from Italy and the northern pre-Alpine region can be studied in one
of the most fascinating archaeological provinces of the Carpathian
Basin, the so-called “Keszthely culture”, located at the western end
of Lake Balaton. The term “Keszthely-Kultur”, which is now com-
monly used, was defined by Ilona Kovrig and Attila Kiss.21 In 1993,
Éva Garam called for a less rigid, more flexible and discerning view
of the cultural phenomena in the Lake Balaton region and in south-
ern Hungary.22 The archaeological phase comprises characteristic
types of disc fibulas and bracelets with terminals in the shape of

19
T. Vida and A. Pásztor, “Der beschlagverzierte Gürtel der Awaren am Beispiel
des Inventars von Budakalász-Dunapart, Ungarn, Grab 696”, Reitervölker aus dem
Osten. Hunnen + Awaren, ed. F. Daim (Halbturn 1996) pp. 341–7; T. Vida, “Die
Ziergehänge der awarenzeitlichen Frauen im Karpatenbecken”, Acta Archaeologica
Hungarica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 51 (1999/2000) pp. 367–77; A. Pásztór and
T. Vida, “Eine frühbyzantinische Bronzekanne aus dem awarenzeitlichen Gräberfeld
von Budakalász”, Kontakte zwischen Iran, Byzanz und der Steppe im 6.–7. Jahrhundert, ed.
C. Bálint, Varia Archaeologica Hungarica 10 (Budapest 2000) pp. 303–11.
20
M. Menke, “Zu den Fibeln der Awarenzeit aus Keszthely”, A Wosinsky Mór
Múzeum Évkönyve 15 (1990) pp. 187–214; Martin, “Linz-Zizlau und Környe”; id.,
“Zu den tauschierten Gürtelgarnituren und Gürtelteilen der Männergräber von
Kölked-Feketekapu A”, Das awarenzeitlich gepidische Gräberfeld von Kölked—Feketekapu A,
ed. A. Kiss and F. Daim, Monographien zur Frühgeschichte und Mittelalterarchäologie
2. Studien zur Archäologie der Awaren 5 (Innsbruck 1996) pp. 345–61.
21
I. Kovrig, “Megjegyzések a Keszthely-kultura kérdéséhez”, Archeologiai Értesíto
85 (1958) pp. 66–72; A. Kiss, “A Keszthely-kultura helye a pannoniai római kon-
tinuitás kérdésében”, Archeologiai Értesíto 95 (1968) pp. 93–101.
22
É. Garam, “Die awarenzeitlichen Scheibenfibeln”, Communicationes Archaeologicae
Hungariae (1993) pp. 99–143, esp. p. 131.
474  

animal heads (pl. 5) in the early period (end of the sixth and first
quarter of the seventh century), and so-called stylus-pins and over-
sized basket earrings (pl. 35,1,4) in the late period (eighth century),
but also many other objects and types, which however did not get
any attention because the researchers all focused on the “classical”
types. If we adhere to the definition established by Kovrig and Kiss,
the Keszthely-culture presently comprises 18 archaeological sites.23
Among the most important are the impressive late Roman castle
(“Keszthely-Fenékpuszta”) south of the present-day town Keszthely24
and the Dobogó, a hill north-west of the town of Keszthely, on
which an early medieval cemetery with approximately 4,000 graves
was found. Another large cemetery of the Keszthely-culture was
located in the south-western part of the town Keszthely (Gräberfeld
Keszthely-Stadt). The cemetery of Alsópáhok with around 1,500
graves was found to the west of the town. The necropolis at
Lesencetomaj-Piros kereszt seems to be an extremely promising site
for Avar archaeology. It is one of the most north-eastern cemeter-
ies of the Keszthely-culture and will presumably allow us to estab-
lish a fine chronological system for the types of objects which are
typical for the Keszthely-culture.25
The archaeological finds show clearly that the area around Keszthely
must have been one of the most important regions in the Carpathian
Basin during the Lombard and Avar Period. The extraordinary con-
centration of jewellery from Byzantium (earrings, belt-fittings from
the sixth and early seventh century) and the Adria region (dress-pins
with semi-circular head, presumably second half of the seventh cen-
tury),26 as well as fibulas from the Saxon27 and Frankish regions (exca-
vation by Róbert Müller 1999) is probably due to its location at the
cross-roads of important long-distance roads from Aquileia via Emona,

23
G. Kiss, “Funde der Awarenzeit in Wiener Museen—1. Funde aus der Umgebung
von Keszthely”, Archaeologia Austriaca 68 (1984) pp. 61–201. The most recent sum-
mary is: R. Müller, “Die Keszthely-Kultur”, Reitervölker aus dem Osten. Hunnen +
Awaren, ed. F. Daim (Halbturn 1996) pp. 265–74.
24
R. Müller, “Die Festung ‘Castellum’, Pannonia Inferior”, Reitervölker aus dem
Osten. Hunnen + Awaren, ed. F. Daim (Halbturn 1996) pp. 91–5.
25
Most recently Á.S. Peremi, “Lesencetowmaj-piroskereszt keszthely-kultúrás temeto
fülbevalói”, A Vesztprém Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei 21 (2000) pp. 41–75.
26
A. Distelberger, Das awarische Gräberfeld von Mistelbach, Niederösterreich, Studien zur
Archäologie der Awaren 6 (Innsbruck 1996) pp. 77–82.
27
Menke, “Fibeln”.
   () 475

Celeia, Valcum (Keszthely-Fenékpuszta) to Aquincum and from

Sirmium via Valcum to Carnuntum.28 Some of the pieces of jew-
ellery from the cemetery of Keszthely-Fenékpuszta-Horreum from
the sixth and early seventh century, especially the gold dress pins
with genuine pearls and the inscription “BONOSA”, the presum-
ably matching gold medallion with genuine pearls and rock crystal
inlay as well as the jewelled collar, are amongst the most precious
and most beautiful of their period (pl. 5,4).29 The silver S-fibulas,
the crescent-shaped gold earrings and the basket earrings are com-
mon in Italy and the regions north of the Alps. The disc fibulas will
be discussed below. A belt-set made of sheet silver of Aradac-Fönlak
type, as known from Linz-Zizlau and other Avar sites, is also impor-
tant in this context (pl. 2,7).30 The early phase of the Keszthely-cul-
ture is usually placed in the period between 568 and the early seventh
century. These dates are based on the assumption that the Keszthely-
culture is, so to speak, an archaeological branch of Avar culture,
which is methodologically incorrect. László Barkóczi alone has it
begin a little earlier. Does a local late Roman population stand
behind the Keszthely-culture, or should we—as most archaeologists
do—postulate immigrations to account for the unusually rich mate-
rial? As Ilona Kovrig has already observed, there is no continuous
settlement from Late Antiquity until the seventh century at the sites
of the Keszthely-culture (with the exception of Fenékpuszta itself ).
The remarkable heterogeneity of the archaeological material of the
late sixth and early seventh century from the Keszthely region is
another argument both against a purely local development as well

28
R. Müller, “Die spätrömische Festung Valcum am Plattensee”, Germanen, Hunnen
und Awaren. Schätze der Völkerwanderungszeit, ed. W. Menghin (Nürnberg 1988) pp.
270–3. The course of the roads in the region of Keszthely is, in detail, still sub-
ject to discussion. Recently for example E. Tóth, “Mosaburg und Moosburg”, Acta
Archaeologica Hungarica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 51 (1999/2000) pp. 439–56,
esp. fig. 4.
29
Regarding the jewelled collar see É. Garam, “Über Halsketten, Halsschmucke
mit Anhängern und Juwelenkragen byzantinischen Ursprungs aus der Awarenzeit”,
Acta Archaeologica Hungarica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 43 (1991) pp. 151–79.
30
L. Barkóczi, “Das Gräberfeld von Keszthely-Fenekpuszta aus dem 6. Jahrhundert
und die frühmittelalterlichen Bevölkerungsverhältnisse am Plattensee”, Jahrbuch des
Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 18 (1971) pp. 179–91, pl. 82. Recently:
É. Garam, “Gürtelverzierungen byzantinischen Typs im Karpatenbecken des 6.-7.
Jahrhunderts”, Acta Archaeologica Hungarica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 50 (1999/2000)
pp. 379–91, esp. p. 381 and fig. 1a.
476  

as against the view that the early Keszthely-culture constitutes the

remains of a particular population group which settled there.
Recently it has been possible to discover a living Christian com-
munity behind the early Keszthely-culture. Some of the disc fibulas
are decorated with Christian images, for instance Jesus busts flanked
by angels (pl. 5,8) or equestrian saints (pl. 5,5). At least a couple of
these fibulas are filled with beeswax, which is a popular secondary
relic. As the closest parallels for the disc fibulas are found in the
coastal regions of Montenegro, Albania and Calabria, it would seem
that at least some of the examples from Pannonia were in fact “pri-
vate reliquiaries”, amulets which pious pilgrims brought with them
from their travels. We can assume that before the political turmoil
following the events of the year 626, a suitable church organisation,
including a direct link with Rome, must have also existed in Keszthely.
The iron belt-sets consisting of three or four parts appear to be
linked to a strong local cultural element of Germanic origin, although
research by Max Martin suggests that contacts with the region of
present-day southern Germany must have also played a role.31 Direct
connections between the Avar territory and Italy and/or present-day
Bavaria are also evident from the “North Italian” belt-sets and iron
belt-sets with wire inlay in the form of spiral ornaments (pl. 16,1–4).
The following “western” belt-set types occur frequently in an early
Avar context:

• Iron 3– or 4–part belt-sets with wire inlay (Layer 2 according to

Joachim Werner and Rainer Christlein): for example Környe 1,
18, 66, 77, 97; Kölked-Feketekapu A 44, 180, 227, 24932 (around
600, first quarter of the seventh century).
• “North Italian” belt-sets, cast bronze: The ensembles first pre-
sented—and as far as we know today, interpreted correctly—in
1961/62 by István Bóna, occur relatively frequently in Avar con-
texts.33 Apart from genuine belt-sets, there were also—apparently—
a number of imitations. The following belt-sets are presumably

31
Martin, “Kölked-Feketekapu A”.
32
Ibid.; Martin, “Linz-Zizlau und Környe”.
33
I. Bóna, “Beiträge zu den ethnischen Verhältnissen des 6.–7. Jahrhunderts in
Westungarn I—Norditalischer Bronze-Gürtelschmuck in frühawarischen Gräberfeldern”,
Alba Regia 2/3 (1963) pp. 49–63.
   () 477

imports: Sommerein 216;34 Zamardi 1035 und Zillingtal D 46936

(first half of the seventh century, in exceptional cases also third
quarter of the seventh century) (pl. 16,1).
• Iron strap-ends and mounts with wire inlay in the form of spiral
ornament: Kölked-Feketekapu A 341;37 Pitvaros 72;38 Zamárdi;39
Zillingtal D 1440 (second quarter of the seventh century) (pl. 16,2–4).

Today, technological aspects play an important role in Avar archae-

ology. On the one hand, one would like to find out as much as pos-
sible about “daily life”, and crafts are part of it. In addition to this,
we have discovered that technological criteria allow us to refine the
chronological system of the finds and that fine chronology is the pre-
requisite for any historical interpretation of the results of archae-
ological research. The noblemen’s belt-sets were subject to rapidly
changing fashions and all kinds of techniques were used to produce
them.
The cast silver “mask fittings” (pl. 2,1–3) are one of the earliest
types of object which appear in Avar graves. However, among the
Avars they do not occur in the form of complete belt-sets. Possible
explanations for this may be either that the period during which
they were used was already more or less over and therefore the

34
F. Daim and A. Lippert, Das awarische Gräberfeld von Sommerein am Leithagebirge,
NÖ, Studien zur Archäologie der Awaren 1. Studien zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte
des Donau- und Ostalpenraumes 2. Denkschriften der Österreichischen Akademie
der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse 170 (Wien 1984) pl. 108,2,4,1;
108,2,5; 109,2,4,2; 109,2,6; 109,2,8; 109,2,10.
35
K. Bakay, “Az avarkor idorendjé
 ol.
 Újabb avar temetök a Balaton Környékén
[Zur Chronologie der Awarenzeit. Neue awarenzeitliche Gräberfelder in der Umgegend
des Plattensees]”, Somogyi Múzeumok Közleményei 1 (1973) pp. 1 ff., esp. p. 13, pl. IV.
36
F. Daim, “Das awarische Gräberfeld von Zillingtal: Sechs Gräber mit west-
lichen Gegenständen”, Wissenschaftliche Arbeiten aus dem Burgenland 100 (1998) pp.
97–135, esp. pl. 18 and 19.
37
Das awarenzeitlich gepidische Gräberfeld von Kölked—Feketekapu A, pl. 70 A 341,9.
38
L. Bende, “Tausírozott díszu övgarnitúra a pitvarosi avar temet ob  ol
 [Tauschierte
Gürtelgarnitur im awarischen Gräberfeld von Pitvaros]”, A Móra Ferenc Múzeum
Évkönyve—Studia Archaeologica 6 (2000) pp. 199–217 [German summary: pp. 209–11]
esp. fig. 5 ff.
39
Exhibition Museum Kaposvár 1999. Compare also the exhibition catalogue:
The largest cemetery from the Avar period in the Carpathian basin. Selection from the restored
material of the Avar cemetery at Zamárdi (Kaposvár 1998).
40
Daim, “Sechs Gräber mit westlichen Gegenständen”, pl. 2,10.