Content uploaded by Bernadett Bajnóczi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Bernadett Bajnóczi on Jul 24, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
43
PURE GOLD WITH POOR WORKMANSHIP
– SOME UNUSUAL PIECES OF POLYCHROME METALWORK
FROM THE 5TH-CENTURY CARPATHIAN BASIN•
AZ ARANY TESZI AZ EMBERT – GYENGE KIDOLGOZÁSÚ POLIKRÓM
ARANYTÁRGYAK AZ 5. SZÁZADI KÁRPÁT-MEDENCÉBÕL
HORVÁTH, Eszter1; MOZGAI, Viktória2; BAJNÓCZI, Bernadett2
1Department of Archaeometry, Archaeological Heritage and Methodology, Institute of Archaeological Sciences,
Eötvös Loránd University, H-1088 Budapest, Múzeum krt. 4/b, Hungary
2Institute for Geological and Geochemical Research, Research Centre for Astronomy and Earth Sciences,
Hungarian Academy of Sciences, H-1112 Budapest, Budaörsi út 45, Hungary
E-mail: e-horvath@caesar.elte.hu
Abstract
Jewellery, dress accessories and other personal ornaments made of precious metal and decorated with
gemstones were representative elements (prestige objects) of Migration-period supra-regional fashion in
Europe. Due to their valuable materials and impressive appearance, these polychrome artefacts are highlighted
items in art albums and exhibition catalogues as the key objects of the period. Their vast majority represents
high standard of workmanship even from a modern perspective. A small minority comprises, however, objects of
lower or even poor quality, falling below the standard. This paper focuses on these exceptions. Dozen finds
showing low-quality workmanship are collected, analysed and interpreted below, with special attention to their
technical features, material compositions as well as their functions as status indicator.
Our results indicated that the poorly-made objects were produced in workshops of local significance following
and imitating high-standard models. The observed technological features pointed out that their makers were
inexperienced in techniques requiring meticulous work and precision. The analytical data revealed, however,
that they were dominantly made of high purity gold with a composition of partly or wholly identical to that of the
technically outstanding items. Apparently, the high social status was not so demanding on the workmanship,
rather the quality of the processed gold.
Kivonat
A színes ékkövekkel berakott, nemesfémből készült ékszerek, viseleti tárgyak és egyéb díszítmények a
népvándorlás kori divat meghatározó elemei (presztízstárgyai) voltak Európában. Ezek a polikróm ötvösmunkák,
értékes alapanyagaik és látványos megjelenésük miatt a korszak leleteit bemutató művészeti albumok és kiállítási
katalógusok elmaradhatatlan elemei. Döntő többségük technikai kidolgozása modern szemmel nézve is
kiemelkedő színvonalú, de szűk kisebbséget képezve vannak közöttük olyan darabok is, melyek (jóval) alulmúlják
a sztenderd minőséget. Jelen írásban ezekről a kivételekről lesz szó, összesen tizenkét tárgyról. Elemzésünk és
értelmezésünk során főként technikai jellemzőikre, anyagösszetételükre, valamint státuszjelző szerepükre került
hangsúly.
Eredményeink azt támasztják alá, hogy a gyengébb kivitelű tárgyak lokális jelentőségű műhelyekben, minőségi
előképe(ke)t követve és imitálva készültek el. A megfigyelt technológiai jegyek azt a benyomást keltik, hogy
készítőiknek nem volt elegendő tapasztalata az aprólékos munkát és precizitást igénylő eljárásokban. A
vizsgálatok ugyanakkor rávilágítottak, hogy anyagösszetételük részben vagy egészében megegyezik a
technikailag kiemelkedő darabokéval, ebben a minőségükben tehát nem, vagy csak pontszerűen mutatkozik éles
különbség. Mindez arra utal, hogy a tárgyak viselőinek társadalmi megítélése függetlenedett a technikai
színvonaltól, és inkább a feldolgozott alapanyagok minőségén, abszolút értelemben vett értékén múlt.
KEYWORDS: 5TH-CENTURY ELITE, POLYCHROME METALWORK, HIGH PURITY GOLD, WORKMANSHIP, IMITATION
KULCSSZAVAK: 5. SZÁZADI ELIT, POLIKRÓM ÖTVÖSSÉG, NAGY TISZTASÁGÚ ARANY, KIVITELEZÉS, IMITÁCIÓ
• How to cite this paper: HORVÁTH, E., MOZGAI, V. & BAJNÓCZI, B., (2019): Pure gold with poor
workmanship – some unusual pieces of polychrome metalwork from the 5th-century Carpathian Basin. ,
Archeometriai Műhely XVI/1 43-56.
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
44
Fig. 1.: Chemical composition of the objects discussed in the paper, plotted in the gold–silver–copper ternary
diagram: a) shoe buckles, b) bracelets with animal-head terminals, c) sword accessories. The colouring indicates
the colours of various gold–silver–copper alloys (after Leuser 1949). Diagram: Viktória Mozgai
1. ábra: A cikkben említett tárgyak kémiai összetétele az arany–ezüst–réz háromszög diagramon ábrázolva: a)
cipőcsatok, b) állatfejben végződő karperecek, c) kard szerelékek. A színezés a különféle arany–ezüst–réz
ötvözetek színét jelzi (Leuser 1949 nyomán). Diagram: Mozgai Viktória
Introduction
In the Carpathian Basin, the first bloom of the
polychrome metalwork can be dated to the late 4th and
5th centuries AD, which corresponds to the Hunnic
period and the subsequent decades. This group of
goldsmiths’ works – unearthed mainly from
aristocratic burials, hoards and ritual deposits – are
generally interpreted as the legacy of the elite members
of the barbarian communities of these times, primarily
as markers of prestige (e.g. Tejral 1999; Schmauder
2002; Quast 2009). Their owners – chiefly military or
political officials in alliance with the Roman Empire
and their relatives – were in a privileged position. They
could afford to display their wealth, authority, and
power through valuable objects with special decoration
and workmanship (Hardt 2004, 60-96.). Their sources
were diplomatic gifts accepted from the Empire, as
well as the golden tribute (tributum) received annual in
terms of the alliance (Kiss 1986, 108-110; Hardt 2004,
187-190.)
Although most of the 5th-century polychrome
goldsmiths’ works were made for the needs of the elite,
the sites and organisational framework of their
production are little known. There are only indirect
evidence derived from the analysis of the finished
products. Based on the previous studies (Horváth 2012;
2013), some the objects were made in the Barbaricum
and some in the Roman Empire, either in a local or
central workshop – actually, there are examples for any
combinations of these categories. The manufacturing
process involved at least two craftsmen – specialised in
the gem-processing and the metal-working.
Cooperation between them was not usual but rather
occasional. The phases of workflow were characterised
by low degree of standardisation. Gold of high purity
even up to a fineness of 99 wt% was often used as raw
material of the objects. In these cases, Roman solidi,
available in large quantities due to the tributum, could
have been directly processed (Hawkes et al. 1966, 99;
Kovrig 1985, 129; Giumlia-Maír 2013, 27.). Among
the coloured inlays, red garnets originating from India
and Sri Lanka were dominant, obtained in sets, ready
for setting or in pre-cut form, which still needed to be
shaped and sized (Horváth & Bendő 2011; Horváth
2013, 290-291.). Their acquisition required the
maintenance of long-distance trade relationships with
the sites where their extraction and/or preparation was
carried out.
The vast majority of the objects represents high
standard of workmanship even from a modern
perspective. They comprise simpler artefacts rich in
identical details and more complex, unique
masterpieces. Gold items are outstanding even in this
context: their shaping and decorating phases of
production usually relies on meticulous, time-
consuming techniques. Normally, they were crafted of
a large number of components – pieces of sheet metal
and small elements of filigree and granulation – which
were fixed to each other by precision soldering. All of
these indicate experienced and skilful makers. The
polychrome jewellery is however far from being
uniform in quality. In contrast to the splendid
exemplars some items are of lower or even poor
quality, falling below the standard described above
from one or more aspects. The present paper focuses
on these exceptions.
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
45
Table 1.: Short catalogue of the low-standard objects discussed in the paper.
1. táblázat: A cikkben tárgyalt gyenge kivitelű tárgyak rövid katalógusa.
Presentation of the objects
The finds representing low-quality workmanship form
a small minority of polychrome fine metalwork pieces.
Although further items may later be added to the list,
from the currently known nearly 250 late 4th-5th-
century gold objects (Horváth 2012, Table 4.1), only
twelve belong here. These artefacts involve a pair of
buckles from the Egger’s collection preserved in
Budapest and London, another buckle of an unknown
provenance, three earrings with polyhedral beads from
Miskolc and Békéscsaba, a bracelet with animal-head
terminals from the Kárász’s collection without any
indication of the provenance, as well as five sheet
mounts decorating the double-edged sword (spatha) of
the ritual deposit from Bátaszék (Table 1.).
With the exception of the Bátaszék finds, all of them
are stray items – there is no information about the
context of their discovery or their owners. In terms of
their function, the artefacts show a mixed picture: they
can be identified as jewellery, dress accessories, or
ornaments of weaponry. Qualitative differences are
most discernible with respect to their object types.
Accordingly, the examples are described in four
groups: 1) shoe buckles; 2) earrings with polyhedral
beads; 3) bracelets with animal-head terminals; 4)
sheet mounts.
The following descriptions are based on our
technological and material analyses extended with
available previous data. The technological
characteristics were observed by optical microscope at
the accessible finds. In those cases where no previous
analyses were performed, the chemical composition of
the objects (their metals) was determined non-
destructively by handheld X-ray fluorescence analysis
(hXRF) (Fig. 1, Table 2)
Shoe buckles
The first examples belong to a notable object type of
the Hunnic period, a distinctive form of buckle with a
stumpy plate and a long tongue bent onto a massive
loop, made in gold. The small and medium-sized items
of this type form a significant part of 5th-century
polychrome gold finds in the Carpathian Basin
(Fig. 2d). Their characteristic feature is the golden
cellwork executed in standard cloisonné technique on
the plate (Horváth 2012b, 215, Fig. 2b). This was the
most time-consuming phase of the workflow, which
required special attention because of the multiple
joining and soldering. From the nearly thirty gold
buckles preserved in Hungarian museums, only two
items have their surface decorated with simpler bezel
settings instead of cellwork. One of them has a pair
currently found in the collection of the British
Museum. Their sizes indicate that all three pieces were
used to decorate the straps of footwear. In their
appearance, they are far below the average level of
Hunnic-period polychrome metalwork (Fig. 2, Table
1.1-3.).
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
46
Fig. 2.: Hunnic-period shoe buckles of the Egger’s collection from the British Museum (a) and from the Hungarian
National Museum (b), of unknown provenance (c) and from Bátaszék (d). Photo: Trustees of the British Museum (a),
Eszter Horváth (b-d)
2. ábra: Hun kori cipőcsatok az Egger gyűjteményből, a British Museumból (a), és a Magyar Nemzeti Múzeumból (b),
ismeretlen lelőhelyről (c) és Bátaszékről (d). Fotó: Trustees of the British Museum (a), Horváth Eszter (b-d)
Fig. 3.: Garnet inlays and granulation on the shoe buckle of unknown provenance. Photo: Eszter Horváth
3. ábra: Az ismeretlen lelőhelyű cipőcsat gránátberakásai és granulációs díszítése. Fotó: Horváth Eszter
Fig. 4.: Garnet inlays on the shoe buckle of the Egger’s collection from the Hungarian National Museum. Photo: Eszter
Horváth
4. ábra: A Magyar Nemzeti Múzeumban őrzött Egger-féle cipőcsat gránátberakásai. Fotó: Horváth Eszter
Two of the buckles survived thanks to the collecting
activity of the Egger brothers, who were influential
goldsmiths and antiques dealers during the dual
monarchy of Austria-Hungary (Kemenczei 2011). The
buckles originating from the region of Szeged
(Csongrád) (erroneously noted Tolna by Kiss 1969-70)
had different fates after the private collectors died in
the late 19th century. Following a brief interlude, one
was purchased by the Hungarian National Museum,
and the other by the British Museum (Bóna 1993, 256,
Fig. 93.5). The unity of the two finds, their
identification as a pair has never been questioned in
scholarship. Their technical execution is surprisingly
unhandy and negligent. Their plates are unusually plain
constructions made of folded sheet metals shaped as
irregular triangles.
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
47
Table 2.: Chemical composition of the objects discussed in the paper. 1SEM-EDS data from Craddock et al. 2010;
2new hXRF data, not published yet; 3hXRF data from Horváth 2012; 4AES data from Vorsatz 1985. (< LOD=below
limit of detection) Elements deriving from surface contamination or corrosion (e.g. Si, Fe, S) were not taken into
account during data evaluation.
2. táblázat: A cikkben említett tárgyak kémiai összetétele. 1SEM-EDS adatok Craddock et al. 2010 alapján; 2új,
közöletlen hXRF adatok; 3hXRF adatok Horváth 2012 alapján; 4AES adatok Vorsatz 1985 alapján. (< LOD=kimutatási
határ alatt) Az adatok kiértékelésénél a felületi szennyeződésből, illetve korrózióból származó elemeket (pl. Si, Fe, S)
figyelmen kívül hagytuk.
Note to Table 2.:
1: New hXRF data were acquired by a SPECTRO xSORT Combi type handheld X-ray fluorescence spectrometer
(Peltier cooling, Rh anode X-ray tube, energy-dispersive, SDD detector, 15–50 kV, 30–120 µA, ‘Light Elements’
built-in calibration, 3 mm measured area in diameter, 30 sec acquisition time).
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
48
According to the results of material analysis, the
buckle kept in the British Museum was made up of
parts of extremely different quality, which were
certainly used secondarily (Fig. 2a). The material of
the plate is pure gold (99.3 wt% Au, 0.7 wt% Ag, 0.2
wt% Cu), like Roman solidi, whereas the loop and the
tongue are alloys containing more silver and copper,
(loop: 90.7 wt% Au, 8.1 wt% Ag, 1.2 wt% Cu; tongue:
85.1 wt% Au, 13.8 wt% Ag, 1.1 wt% Cu) (Table 2.1.)
(Craddock et al. 2010, 57-59, Table 1). Similarly, the
surface of the buckle was decorated with re-used
inlays. The settings enclose two flat beads (one of
which is broken in half) and a flat-cut, lozenge-shaped,
chipped slab, with bevelled edges. Thus, the buckle
comprises the remains of three or four individual
objects.
The other piece of the pair, kept in the Hungarian
National Museum, is much more homogenous in
general (Fig. 2b). Its components were all made of
gold of great fineness (99.5–99.7 wt% Au, 0.3–0.4
wt% Ag, 0.03–0.1 wt% Cu) (Table 2.2, Fig. 1a). It is
inlaid with regular-shaped garnet slabs, however one of
the lozenge-shaped slabs has a rough or chipped
surface, which indicates that still not only carefully
processed gemstones were selected for the decoration
of this item (Fig. 3.).
The third buckle, which is of unknown provenance,
was also acquired by the Hungarian National Museum
towards the end of the 19th century (Fig. 2c). It can be
connected to the previous pair of buckles since its
maker was also inexperienced and had little artistic
sense. Among the three examples it represents the
lowest material quality. Based on the results of the
metal analysis, its plate was made of less pure gold
(87.8–89.5 wt% Au, 9.1–9.9 wt% Ag, 0.9–3.0 wt%
Cu) (Table 2.3.1-3, Fig. 1a). The low purity is even
reflected by the dull colour of gold (Fig. 2c). In
contrast with the plate, the loop and the tongue were
made of a silver-copper alloy (loop: 93.9 wt% Ag, 3.7
wt% Cu; tongue: 93.6 wt% Ag, 4.3 wt% Cu). The
chemical composition of the two parts is quite similar,
even in minor and trace element composition (loop: 1.1
wt% Au, 0.6 wt% Pb, 0.1 wt% Bi; tongue: 0.9 wt%
Au, 0.6 wt% Pb, 0.1 wt% Bi (Table 2.3.4-5, Fig. 1a).
Apparently, the object was patched together from
elements of different origins. Similarly to the examples
above, the plate of this buckle is decorated with
secondarily used garnet inlays enclosed by poorly
made, irregular bezel settings, accompanied by three
awkwardly arranged granules (Fig. 4.). One bezel
contains the broken angle of a concave, triangular slab
decorated with concentric circles, while the other
contains another chipped triangle. The third inlay of
the buckle is missing, but the shape of its setting
suggests that it was again irregular.
Earrings with polyhedral bead
The next three examples represent another
characteristic type of 4th- and 5th-century polychrome
jewellery, the earring with polyhedral bead. The
appearance of the earrings is greatly unified in the
discussed period, which is primarily due to the same
material and construction they have, as well as their
distinctive form that resembles rhombic dodecahedron
garnet crystals. They were made from relatively plain
elements, with a simple workflow. Normally, their
hoop is a single undecorated wire most often made of
gold, occasionally of gold-plated copper alloy. Seldom,
it was made by twisting three or four fine round wires
(for the examples see Horváth 2012). Their ornament –
the bead – was crafted of a single hammered sheet of
gold, cut-out for the inlays, which was then folded
serving as the edges of a polyhedron, soldered at its
vertices (Fig. 5a-b).
Fig. 5.: Earring with polyhedral bead from
Bakodpuszta (a), polyhedral bead fold-out (b). Photo:
Eszter Horváth
5. ábra: Poliédergombos fülbevaló Bakodpusztáról
(a), a poliédergomb kiterített rajza (b). Fotó: Horváth
Eszter
Inside, the bead was filled with backing paste, in which
the garnet slabs of matching size and shape were set.
There are only minimal differences in the design of the
openwork settings – occasional enrichment or division
of the central settings or alternative shapes of inlay on
the triangular faces of the beads (Horváth 2012).
Among the multitude of uniform pieces in the
collections of Hungarian museums there are only two
stray finds that stand out. One was found in Miskolc,
on the bank of River Sajó (Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén),
and the other (a pair) was discovered in the area of a
brick factory in Békéscsaba (Békés) (Fig. 6., Table
1.4-6.). Similarly to other items, these earrings were
made of gold sheets (unfortunately, chemical analysis
was not yet performed on them) and garnet slabs, but
with unusual technical and geometric solutions. All
three lack the characteristic network structure. The real
openwork settings were replaced by an alternative.
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
49
Fig. 6.: Earrings with polyhedral bead from Miskolc
(a) and Békéscsaba (b). Photo: Eszter Horváth
6. ábra: Poliédergombos fülbevalók Miskolcról (a) és
Békéscsabáról (b). Fotó: Horváth Eszter
The earring from Miskolc more or less resembles the
other items in shape. As a significant difference from
the standard, its polyhedral bead is formed from two
four-pronged sheets, folded and soldered to each other
on their vertices (Fig. 6a, 7a). The sheets enclose four
rectangular holes, but no additional shapes (round or
triangular) were cut out. As a consequence, the earring
could be set only with four inlays instead of the usual
twelve pieces. The maker of the pair from Békéscsaba
was apparently unaware of even the basic steps of
producing a polyhedral bead. The basis of the
ornaments is a rectangular prism, onto which the bezel
settings of the lozenge-shaped, rectangular and round
inlays were soldered (Fig. 6b, 8a). Both of the beads
could be set with altogether five inlays.
In addition to the structural differences, the hoops of
the earrings were also produced and adorned in an
unusual way. While in the case of the Miskolc
example, the maker tried to prepare beaded wire using
a single-bladed tool (Fig. 7b), in the case of the pair
from Békéscsaba, twisting was employed to a simple
wire of square cross-section (Fig. 8b).
Finally, the objects are also outliers as their technical
execution falls below the standard. In the case of the
item from Miskolc, the jagged edges of the gold sheets,
the uneven and unfinished character of the beaded
wire, whereas at the pair from Békéscsaba, the
irregular twisting of the wire and the unaligned beads
of unequal size and shape suggest careless, negligent
work.
Fig. 7.: Details of the earring from Miskolc, a)
polyhedral bead, b) hook, c) garnet inlay. Photo: Eszter
Horváth
7. ábra: A miskolci fülbevaló részletei, a)
poliédergomb, b) karika, c) gránátberakás. Fotó:
Horváth Eszter
Fig. 8.: Details of the earring from Békéscsaba, a)
polyhedral bead, b) hook, c) garnet inlay. Photo: Eszter
Horváth
8. ábra: A békéscsabai fülbevaló részletei, a)
poliédergomb, b) karika, c) gránátberakás. Fotó:
Horváth Eszter
The irregular shape and the uneven edges of the
majority of the garnets, which might have been shaped
by breaking, convey an even more clumsy impression
(Fig. 7c, 8c).
Bracelets with animal-head terminals
Our next example leads to the golden bracelets
terminating in animal heads. The earliest examples of
this jewellery type – combining Greek Hellenistic and
Early Roman elements with the Sarmatian polychrome
animal style – is dated as early as the 1st century AD
(Schiltz 2006, 173, 272, Cat. 58; Mordvinceva &
Treister 2007). These are particular items produced in
relatively small quantities – only six whole examples
are known from the 5th-century Carpathian Basin.
Compared to the buckles and earrings discussed above,
they are more diverse in manufacturing technique,
construction and ornamentation.
Four bracelets are solid casts with a simple, open ring
construction, ending in robust or plane heads.
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
50
Fig. 9.: Bracelets with animal-head terminals from Bakodpuszta (a, d), Beregszász (Berehove/Beregovo, Ukraine) (b,
e), and from the Kárász’s collection (c, f). Photo: Eszter Horváth
9. ábra: Állatfejben végződő karperecek Bakodpusztáról (a, d), Beregszászról (b, e), és a Kárász gyűjteményből (c, f).
Fotó: Horváth Eszter
Examples with robust heads are from Beregszász
(today: Berehove/Beregovo, Ukraine) (Hampel 1905,
418.), and from the Kárász’s collection (Fig. 9b-c,
Table 1.7, 1.A), whereas pieces with plate heads are
from Diósjenő (unpublished material). In contrast with
them, the pair of bracelets discovered in grave No. 1 at
Bakodpuszta (today: Dunapataj-Bödpuszta, Bács-
Kiskun) (Fettich 1951, 22-23, 82.) represents a special
technical solution with hollow structure, hinged
construction and screw-clasp (Fig. 9a). In addition to
its exact parallel from the Kiev treasure
(Merowingerzeit 2007, 363, Cat. III.18.1.), analogues
are known only among the early Byzantine goldsmiths’
works, such as the extraordinary pieces from the
princely grave at Malaya Pereschepina, dated to around
600 (Werner 1984, 19, Taf. 25; Deppert-Lippitz &
Krause 1995, 171-172, Abb. 134).
Despite the decisive structural differences, the
bracelets from Beregszász and the Kárász’s collection
show similarities with the Bakodpuszta pair in terms of
the decorative techniques and ornamentation. Their
settings played essential role in the design of the
animal heads. While the eyes and ears were
highlighted by bezel settings, the collars were formed
by cellworks executed in standard cloisonné technique
(Fig. 9d-f). This latter ornamentation – being unusual
on polychrome bracelets, occurring rather on other
object types of the period (Nagy 2007, 31) – is of key
importance.
With regard to the quality of workmanship, different
levels including extremities can be discerned. While
the highest level is shown by the Bakodpuszta pair,
which can be considered as a kind of prototype, the
example from the Kárász’s collection represents the
lowest standard. This latter one is even the most
robust, with a weight of over 150 grams. Comparing
with the Beregszász item, the quality of its casting
process shows a significant decline from technical and
aesthetical aspects. This can be observed especially on
its surface; the simplified workflow lacked the post-
casting treatment. The bezels and the cell walls
forming the eyes, ears and collars were clumsily set to
the raw cast (Fig. 10a). They are almost completely
empty now, only one single backing foil has remained
as a possible evidence to the former inlays (Fig. 10b).
The rough edges and the lack of inlays suggest that it is
an unfinished object. Nevertheless, it must have been
in use, as the round bezels are fragmented, and the
central part of the ring is broken (Fig. 10c-d).
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
51
Fig. 10.: The raw cast surface (a), a backing foil (b), fragmented round bezels (c), and the broken ring (d) of the
bracelet from the Kárász’s collection. Photo: Eszter Horváth
10. ábra: A Kárász-féle karperec nyers öntvény felülete (a), megmaradt fólia alátéte (b), töredékes állapotú
pántfoglalatai (c), és megrepedt karikája (d). Fotó: Horváth Eszter
The technical and quality differences are not reflected
by the material composition. Based on the performed
analyses, the four bracelets with cloisonné cellwork
were made of high purity (but not pure) gold, without
significant differences in the fineness (93.7–96.2 wt%
Au, 3.0–3.8 wt% Ag, 0.6–1.4 wt% Cu) (Table 2.7,
2.A-C; Fig. 1b). The measured silver and copper
amount can suggest conscious alloying and primary
natural gold-silver alloy as well (Craddock 1995, 111;
Mozgai 2017, 232-233.).
Sheet mounts
Qualitative difference can be observed among items of
the same find assemblage or even among ornaments of
a particular artefact. An example of this is the ritual
deposit from Bátaszék (Tolna), and within that, those
pieces of polychrome metalwork, which decorated the
accessories of the spatha i.e. the handle, the scabbard
as well as the sword-bead (Fig. 11., Table 1.8-12,
1.D). These gold ornaments with garnet inlays do not
represent the same technological standard in spite of
that they were set together during the ritual. Their
common origin and workshop affinity can be clearly
excluded, as Ilona Kovrig had already deduced in her
detailed analysis of the finds (Kovrig 1985, 129).
The sword-bead is adorned with a cellwork (standard
cloisonné) of high technical quality: the appearance of
the wing-shaped inlays is uniform and regular, the
finishing of the upper rims of the cell walls was carried
out with great care, the cells enclose patterned backing
foils, and the beaded wire frame is evenly distributed
(Fig. 12a). As opposed to this, the mounts of the
handle and scabbard – one wider and four narrower
sheets – show extremely poor workmanship. The edges
of the sheets are uneven, the length of the bezel
settings does not correspond to the circumference of
the inlays, and the size and shape of the garnet slabs
are not uniform, either. The latter is particularly true
for the widest sheet, which is decorated with slabs of
mixed size and irregular shape – including a flat bead
broken in half (Fig. 12b). Besides, one of the narrower
sheets was also inlaid with secondarily used garnet
slabs (Fig. 12c).
Fig. 11.: Sword accessories from the ritual deposit
from Bátaszék, a) scabbard mouthpiece, b-e) various
sheet mounts, f) sword-bead. Photo: Wosinsky Mór
Museum (a, c-d), Eszter Horváth (b)
11. ábra: Kard szerelékek a bátaszéki áldozati
együttesből, a) tokszájveret, b-e) különféle
lemezveretek, f) kardfüggesztő gomb. Fotó: Wosinsky
Mór Múzeum (a, c-d), Horváth Eszter (b)
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
52
Fig. 12.: Details of the garnet inlays and their settings
on the sword-bead (a), scabbard mouthpiece (b) and
one of the sheet mounts (c) from Bátaszék. Photo:
Eszter Horváth (a), Wosinsky Mór Museum (b-c)
12. ábra: Gránátberakások és foglalásuk részletei a
bátaszéki kardfüggesztő gombon (a), tokszájvereten
(b) és az egyik lemezvereten (c). Fotó: Horváth Eszter
(a), Wosinsky Mór Múzeum (b-c)
Based on the results of the previous material analysis,
even the metal composition of the ornaments is diverse
(Vorsatz 1985, 146-147, Table 1. nr. 3, 12; Horváth
2012, Table 6.2.). The mounts of the handle and
scabbard were made of unalloyed gold (97.0–98.7 wt%
Au, 0.6–1.1 wt% Ag, 0–1.0 wt% Cu) (Table 2.8-11;
Fig. 1c), most probably obtained directly by the
melting of solidi. However, the cloisonné mount of the
sword-bead was made of less fine gold (95.0 wt%),
containing considerable amount of silver and copper
(4.0 wt% Ag, 1.0 wt% Cu) (Table 2.D.1; Fig. 1c). The
fineness of gold and the delicacy of workmanship are
in inverse relation. A similar phenomenon occurs in
case of analogous gold mounts from Nagyszéksós
(Giumlía-Mair 2013, 29-35).
The differences above can partly be explained by the
different purposes of the objects. The decorated sword-
bead – including both the magnesite bead and the
mounted cellwork – clearly bear the signs of use. The
sheet mounts, on the other hand, – which are damaged
but not worn – were obviously designed for a single
use. The simpler design, and the less elaborate details
are generally typical of the garnet inlaid sheet gold
ornaments belonging to Hunnic-period ritual deposits.
Fig. 13.: Bow brooch with spiral ornamentation from
Szilágysomlyó (Şimleu Silvaniei, Romania) (a), details
of the irregularly arranged filigree ornaments and
inlays. Photo: Eszter Horváth
13. ábra: Spiráldíszes kengyelfibula Szilágysomlyóról
(a), a szabálytalanul elrendezett rátétdíszek és
berakások részletei (b). Fotó: Horváth Eszter
The pieces from Bátaszék represent the lowest quality
even among them. Analogues of extremely poor
quality are known only from outside the Carpathian
Basin, from Jakuszowice (Poland) (Kürti 1987, 180,
Taf. 8. Kat. III.49.d; Bóna 1993, 233). The scabbard
mount from Pécsüszög reflects a barely better
workmanship, whereas the horse harness ornaments
from Pécsüszög and Nagyszéksós bear more
adornments, and their inlays are in greater harmony in
terms of shape and size (Alföldi 1932, 65, 67; Fettich
1953, 21.). Furthermore, the cross-guards of the
spathae discovered in Pannonhalma (Tomka 1986,
438-441, Fig. 18; Bóna 1993, 250, Fig. 58.) and
Katzelsdorf (Austria) (Müller & Nowotny 2018, 955-
956, Abb. 3.) as well as the dagger mouthpiece from
Telki (Szenthe et al. 2019, Fig. 10.) were decorated
with more massive and compact cloisonné cellworks.
The twelve examples presented here were dominantly
made of high purity gold with poor workmanship.
Their special position is manifested in the selection of
the ornaments and related goldsmiths’ techniques, as
well as the quality of execution of the latter. These
products must have been made by craftsmen, who did
not reach up to the general outstanding level of the
period, either in terms of their knowledge (i.e. “know-
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
53
how”) or their skills in practice. The organisational
framework and infrastructure of production –
reconstructed indirectly – also point out more primitive
conditions.
In case of the objects normally rich in identical
features, the distinctive forms and techniques are
missing, as if the standard design had not been known
to the makers. Some ornaments and mounts were
carried out in a specifically amateur manner or poorly.
This is shown by the clumsy use of tools, the uneven
and irregular features, as well as the imprecise joining
and soldering. There is a lack of consistency in size
and design. Further common phenomena are the
secondary use of items or their remnants that became
unsuitable for wearing, the shortening of workflow,
and the replacing of certain procedures with simpler
techniques (such as employing casting instead of
hammering and soldering). The result gives the
impression that the makers were inexperienced in
techniques requiring meticulous work and precision.
The metallic raw material of the objects is gold, or
gold and silver. Their composition – based on the
available data – is partly or wholly identical to that of
the technically outstanding items. Consequently, there
is no or little difference in the quality of their material.
This consistency rules out the option of forgery,
implied by the obscure context of the objects
(Craddock 2009, 370.). The direct use of the gold of
great fineness available in the form of solidi must have
been disadvantageous from a practical aspect. Pure,
unalloyed gold is too soft, and has little tensile
strength. Although it can be shaped well, it is less
resistant to be damaged, and the surface of finished
objects gets easily worn. Thus, the purity of gold may
indicate not only the status of the customers, but the
professional knowledge of the makers as well. Ideally,
the craftsman adjusted the raw material to the character
of the object: prepared and alloyed the gold according
to need. In the majority of the discussed items, this step
– by negligence or through necessity – was omitted
from the workflow.
Discussion
These artefacts raise many intriguing questions. The
low technical standards, the contrast between the high-
quality raw materials and the poor workmanship, the
similarities between high standard masterpieces and
these items combining poor technical quality with high
valued materials: how could we explain the low
technical standards? What does it imply? Who were
the owners? Same of the high-quality counterparts or
others?
All of the poorly-made items – whether unique
artefacts or objects rich in identical traits – have high-
quality analogues among the pieces of fine metalwork.
Due to their rare occurrence they are typically
overlooked. The lower level of workmanship observed
is not related to the traditions of the region or to the
typical characteristics of the individual artefacts. It
may be explained by the practices special for the
particular production sites or makers. Necessity driven
unique conditions as well as intentional individual
decisions played decisive roles in the development of
the special practices of individual workshops. The
organisational frames of workshops, the available
equipment and set of tools limited the technical
possibilities of goldsmiths working there. Similarly,
the knowledge and skills of the goldsmiths were
restricting them to certain techniques at a certain level,
setting thereby the steps of manufacturing workflow,
as well as the quality of the execution. On the other
hand, the individual styles of goldsmiths also had
decisive impact on the workshops. The artistic
intention – practically the taste and creativity of
goldsmiths – could have influenced the practice of
workshops by setting the conservative or innovative
steps of production (Horváth 2018, 356-357.). The
finds discussed here represent particular cases, where
the identified imperfect technical solutions were
consequences of different constraints.
The differences versus good-quality analogues are
much more obvious today due to the methods of
archaeometry than it was for the naked eye at the time
of wearing. The similarities, however, could be
perceived in the past, just like today. This was
certainly the intention of customers or makers. The
latter ones might have consciously used other objects
as models and had their own ideas how to reproduce
them. However, the result was below the standard of
the original items due to the lack of a profound
knowledge of them or certain professional skills. The
design suggests that the customers did not have
(regular) contact with workshops and goldsmiths
making high-quality products. That is why they had
their objects manufactured by less skilled craftsmen.
All of the listed items must be regarded as products of
workshops of local significance following high-
standard contemporary models, in other words, they
may be labelled as imitations. If the imitation was the
intention of the maker, he was most probably focusing
on the quality of the object; if it was driven by the
customer, the mediated status and prestige could have
been an additional motivation. Unfortunately, we do
not have any evidence about the identity of the
customers/owners, except for the Bátaszék find
assemblage, which certainly represented a prominent
member of the ruling circles. In the absence of an
archaeological context, we can only set hypotheses
within the frames of the given economic and social
conditions.
On the one hand, we can start with the assumption that
the owner did not belong to the elite, but wanted to
appear as he was – hence, he imitated not only the
object, but also the related content, i.e. status and
prestige. From the examples discussed above, the three
small buckles can be connected to this interpretation
the most. Their incongruously varied parts suggest that
their wearers were not the primary recipients of
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
54
obtained gold (presumably the golden tribute) but
acquired the valuable raw materials and other
components in alternative ways. The processing – i.e.
their reuse – was also unusual. It cannot be explained
by a general shortage of raw materials. The abundant
gold supply attested by written sources and
archaeological evidence, as well as the average quality
of 5th-century finds rule out this explanation.
On the other hand, we must also consider the
possibility that the goldsmiths’ items owned by the
members of the elite did not represent equally high
standards. The status and wealth of the customers did
not necessarily go hand in hand with the demand for
high-quality fine metalwork. Despite their high status,
they might have had to settle for the products of less
experienced goldsmiths and their potentially available
raw materials, for example, due to craftsmen working
at a high standard becoming temporarily inaccessible.
A similar scenario could explain the production of the
solid gold bracelet terminating in animal heads of the
Kárász’s collection. The weight of the object and its
gold material imply a wealthy customer, belonging
probably to the elite. The clumsy design of the animal
heads, the simplified production technique, the lack of
post-casting treatment as well as garnet inlays,
however, indicate the poor skills of the maker and his
limited access to resources.
The sheet mounts of the Bátaszék spatha, might lead to
the same conclusion except the difference in their
use/function. The thin sheets prepared for a ritual
deposit were primarily of symbolic significance and
were not intended for permanent use. That is why they
were originally made during a simplified and shortened
workflow, and it also provides a reasonable
explanation for the direct use of the metallic raw
material without alloying (corresponding to the
fineness as solidi). However, it does not explain the
poor workmanship below standards: the careless
execution of the chosen techniques and the
mismatched character of the garnets, some of which
showed the signs of secondary use. The context of the
finds and their gold material – considered to be the
highest standard in this period – leave no doubt that
they were indicators of status: their owner certainly
belonged to the ruling circles. Therefore, although they
were produced as imitations, the meaning conveyed by
them is authentic.
Concerning the earrings from Miskolc and Békéscsaba,
we do not have enough information to decide between
the options mentioned above or to derive another one.
In their case, material analysis may again provide
further, valuable insights. However, the production of
the Kárász’s bracelet and the Bátaszék mounts raises
another intriguing question: how important was the
technical execution of the objects in the period under
discussion? Was there a generally accepted quality, a
required standard of appearance in the case of status
indicators? The case of the bracelet gives the
impression that the large amount of gold alone was
sufficient for representation. Furthermore, the garnet
inlaid sheet mounts of the spatha make it clear that –
despite the technical deterioration – the sacrifice was
considered to be complete and the ritual took place.
Considering the question further, in addition to the
examples above, mention must be made about a pair of
brooches decorated with spiral ornaments belonging to
the hoard from Szilágysomlyó (today: Şimleu
Silvaniei, Romania) (Fettich 1932, 30-32.) (Fig. 13a).
Although the hoard clearly comprises the most
outstanding finds of the era, these brooches show some
kind of imperfection in their details. The gold-plated
silver brooches are decorated with filigree ornaments
and gemstone inlays, the quality and technical
execution of which are not uniform. While the
cellwork reflects careful design and perfect
implementation, the bezel settings were made
carelessly. The inlays equally comprise beautifully cut
garnets, as well as secondarily used pieces and
replacements in glass. The strip-twisted and beaded
wires were manufactured evenly and accurately, but
they were used imprecisely and negligently (Fig. 13b).
The general picture is therefore rather controversial.
This unusual phenomenon rules out the possibility of
imitation, in contrast with the items above. The lack of
consistency may have been caused by co-operation
within the workshop (i.e. the division of work between
craftsmen). On the basis of the differences observed,
the pair of brooches must have been manufactured by
two craftsmen, at least: one of them was responsible
for the preparation of small ornaments and the other
for their arrangement and fixing (Horváth 2018, 365-
366.).
Artefacts that are different from the average are always
exciting, valuable parts of find assemblages, as through
the analysis of these, we may arrive at fundamental
questions, or gain fresh insights about the whole
period. This holds true here as well, even though the
number of finds discussed in our paper is relatively
small. Summarising our work, we can conclude that
the polychrome gold artefacts from the 4th- and 5th-
century Carpathian Basin do not represent uniformly
high standards. As the twelve items presented above
attest, the high-quality raw materials do not necessarily
go together with high-standard workmanship. We have
discussed some of the potential background aspects,
and addressed topics such as the differences between
the influence of the customer or the craftsman, and the
distinction between conscious imitation or the force of
circumstances as possible explanations.
It is important to note that although the discussed
technological differences were visible at the time of
wearing, they must have been less disturbing than one
would interpret today. Based on these concrete
examples, lower technical standards had presumably
no major consequences for the judgment of their
wearers. It rather depended on the outstanding quality
of the processed gold – that is its value in absolute
terms. As the saying goes, dress does not make a man
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
55
great, to which we may add that in the Hunnic period it
was not even the perfect technical execution of
jewellery that made a man look great, but the quality
and quantity of gold used for it.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Zoltán May, for the analytical
results on the gold sheet mounts from Bátaszék
contributed to Eszter Horváth's PhD thesis. The
research behind this study is part of a project supported
by a Grant from the Hungarian Scientific Research
Fund (OTKA/NKFIH-PD109234).
References
ALFÖLDI, A. (1932): Leletek a hun korszakból és
ethnikai szétválasztásuk (Funde aus der Hunnenzeit
und ihre ethnische Sonderung). Archaeologia
Hungarica 9 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 90.
BÓNA, I. (1993): Hunok és nagykirályaik. Corvina,
Budapest, pp. 274.
CRADDOCK, P. T. (1995): Early Metal Mining and
Production. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh
pp. 363.
CRADDOCK, P. (2009): Scientific Investigation of
Copies, Fakes and Forgeries. Taylor & Francis,
Oxford pp. 640.
CRADDOCK, P.T., COWELL, M., HOOK, D.,
HUGHES, M., La NIECE, S. & MEEKS, N. (2010):
Change and stasis: the technology of Dark Age
metalwork from the Carpathian Basin. The British
Museum Technical Research Bulletin 4 55–65.
CSALLÁNY, D. (1961): Archäologische Denkmäler
der Gepiden in Mitteldonaubecken. Archaeologia
Hungarica 38 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 406.
DEPPERT-LIPPITZ, B. & KRAUSE, R. (1995):
Katalog E. Armreifen und Armbänder aus Gold. In:
DEPPERT-LIPPITZ, B. Hrsg., Die Schraube zwischen
Macht und Pracht. Das Gewinde in der Antike.
Ausstellungskatalog. Sigmaringen, Thorbecke 164–
175.
FETTICH, N. (1932): A szilágysomlyói második kincs
(Der zweite Schatz von Szilágysomlyó). Archaeologia
Hungarica 8 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 72.
FETTICH, N. (1951): Régészeti tanulmányok a késői
hun fémművesség történetéhez (Archäologische
Studien zur Geschichte der späthunnischen
Metallkunst). Archaeologia Hungarica 31. Akadémiai
Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 205.
FETTICH, N. (1953): A szeged-nagyszéksósi hun
fejedelmi sírlelet (La trouvaille du tombe princière
hunnique à Szeged-Nagyszéksós). Archaeologia
Hungarica 33 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 205.
GIUMLÍA-MAIR, A. (2013): Metallurgy and
Technology of the Hunnic Gold Hoard from
Nagyszéksós. The Silk Road 11 12–35.
HAMPEL, J. (1905): Alterthümer des frühen
Mittelalters in Ungarn I-III. F. Vieweg und Sohn,
Braunschweig pp. 1859.
HARDT, M. (2004): Gold und Herrschaft. Die Schätze
europäischer Könige und Fürsten im ersten
Jahrtausend. Academie Verlag, Berlin, pp. 369.
HAWKES, S.C., MERRICK, J.M. & METCALF,
D.M. (1966): X-Ray fluorescent analysis of some Dark
Age coins and jewellery. Archaeometry 9 98–138.
HORVÁTH E. (2012a): Ékkő- és üvegberakásos
ötvösmunkák a Kárpát-medence hun kori és kora
meroving kori leletanyagában (Gemstone and glass
inlaid fine metalwork from the Carpathian Basin: the
Hunnic and Early Merovingian Periods). PhD thesis,
manuscript, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, pp.
269.
HORVÁTH, E. (2012b): Cloisonné Jewellery from the
Langobardic Pannonia. Technological Evidence of
Workshop Practice. In: IVANIŠEVIĆ, V.
KAZANSKI, M. eds.: The Pontic-Danubian realm in
the period of the Great Migration. Posebna izdanja 51
Beograd, Arheološki Institut, Monographies 36 Paris,
Association des amis du Centre 207–242.
HORVÁTH, E. (2013): Gemstone and glass inlaid fine
metalwork from the Carpathian Basin: the Hunnic and
Early Merovingian Periods. Dissertationes
Archaeologicae, Ser. 3. No. 1, 275–302.
HORVÁTH, E. (2018): Van új a lencse alatt – a
szilágysomlyói kincs fibuláinak műhelyösszefüggései a
legújabb optikai mikroszkópos vizsgálat alapján. In:
KOROM, A. (szerk.) Relationes rerum – Régészeti
tanulmányok Nagy Margit tiszteletére. Studia ad
Archaeologiam Pazmaniensia Archaeological Studies
of PPCU Institute of Archaeology 10 355–372.
HORVÁTH, E. & BENDÕ, Zs. (2011): Provenance
study on a collection of loose garnets from a Gepidic
period grave in Northeast Hungary. Archeometriai
Műhely / Archaeometry Workshop 8/1 17–32.
KEMENCZEI, Á. (2011): Az Egger műkereskedés és
kapcsolata a Nemzeti Múzeummal a dualizmus
korában. Folia Historica 27 99–116.
KISS, A. (1970): Unpublished finds from the V.
century originated from Transdanubia in the British
Museum and the Janus Pannonius Museum of Pécs.
Janus Pannonius Múzeum Évkönyve 14-15 (1969-70)
119–123.
KISS, A. (1986): Die Goldfunde des Karpatenbeckens
von 5-10. Jh. (Angaben zu den
Vergleichsmöglichkeiten der schriftlichen und
archäologischen Quellen). Acta Archaeologica
Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 38 105–145.
Archeometriai Műhely 2019/XVI./1.
HU ISSN 1786-271X; urn: nbn: hu-4106 © by the author(s)
56
KOVRIG, I. (1985): Das Diadem von Csorna. Folia
Archeologica 36 107–148.
KÜRTI, B. (1987): Fürstliche Funde der Hunnenzeit
aus Szeged-Nagyszéksós. In: BOTT, G. (Hrsg.):
Germanen, Hunnen und Awaren. Schätze der
Völkerwanderungszeit. Ausstellungskatalog.
Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nürnberg, 163–180.
LEUSER, J. (1949): Über die Besonderheiten der
Edelmetalllegierungen im Schmuckgewerbe. Metall 3
105–110.
LOVÁSZ, E. (1999): Hun és germán jellegű leletek
Borsod megyében. Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyve 32
237–265.
MENGHIN, W. Hrsg., (2007): Ėpocha Merovingov -
Evropa bez granic. Archeologija i istorija 5-8 vv.
Merowingerzeit - Europa ohne Grenzen. Archäologie
und Geschichte des 5. bis 8. Jahrhunderts. The
Merovingian period - Europe without borders
archaeology and history of the 5th to 8th centuries.
Ausstellungskatalog, Minerva, Berlin, pp. 591.
MORDVINCEVA, V. & TREISTER, M. (2007):
Toreutik und Schmuck im Nördlichen
Schwarzmeergebiet: 2. Jh. v. Chr. – 2. Jh. n. Chr.
Tarpan, Simferopol/Bonn, pp. 773.
MOZGAI, V. (2017): Aranyleletek archeometriai
kutatásának lehetőségei. Possible Methods for the
Archaeometric Research of Gold Artefacts. In:
RIDOVICS, A., BAJNÓCZI, B., DÁGI, M. & LŐVEI,
P. (szerk.): Interdiszciplinaritás – Archeometriai,
régészeti és művészettörténeti tanulmányok. Magyar
Nemzeti Múzeum – Szépművészeti Múzeum,
Budapest, 225–241.
MÜLLER, S. & NOWOTNY, E. (2018): Eine völker-
wanderungszeitliche Spatha mit granatverzierter
Parierstange aus dem Depotfund von Katzelsdorf. In:
DRAUSCHKE, J., KISLINGER, E., KUHTREIBER,
K., KUHTREIBER, T., SCHARRER-LIŠKA, G.,
VIDA, T. (Hrsg.): Lebenswelten zwischen Archäologie
und Geschichte – Festschrift für Falko Daim zu seinem
65. Geburtstag. Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen
Zentralmuseums, Mainz, 953–962.
NAGY, M. (2007): Állatábrázolások és az I. germán
állatstílus a Közép-Duna-vidéken. (Kr. u. 3-6. század).
Tierdarstellung und der germanische Tierstil I im
Gebiet der mittleren Donau (3.-6. Jahrhundert n. Chr.
Monumenta Germanorum Archæologica Hungariæ 5.
Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum, Budapest, pp. 208.
QUAST, D. (2009): Erben Roms, Völkerwanderungs-
zeitliche Prunkgräber auf ehemaligen römischen
Reichsgebiet. In: Varusschlacht im Osnabrücker Land
- Museum und Park Kalkriese (Hrsg.): 2000 Jahre
Varusschlacht. Konflikt. Theiss, Stuttgart, 372– 378.
SCHILTZ, V. (2006): Catalogue des oevres exposées.
Tillia tepe. In: CAMBON, P. (dir.): Afghanistan, les
trésors retrouvés. Collections du musée national de
Kaboul. Editions de la Réunion des musées nationaux,
Paris, 170–183.
SCHMAUDER, M. (2002): Oberschichtsgräber und
Verwahrfunde in Südosteuropa im 4. und 5.
Jahrhundert. Archaeologia Romanica 3 Editura
Academiei Române, Bukarest, pp. 355.
SZENTHE, G., MOZGAI, V., HORVÁTH, E. &
BAJNÓCZI, B. (2019): Ritual deposit from the Hun
period from the vicinity of Telki (Central Hungary). A
preliminary report. Hungarian Archaeology E-Journal
2019 Spring, 9–19.
TEJRAL, J. (1999): Die spätantiken militärischen
Eliten beiderseits der norisch-pannonischen Grenze aus
der Schicht der Grabfunde. In: FISCHER, T.,
PRECHT, G. & TEJRAL, J. (Hrsg.): Germanen
beiderseits des spätantiken limes: Spisy
Archeologického Ustavu AV ČR Brno 14 217– 292.
TOMKA, P. (1986): Das hunnische Fürstenfund von
Pannonhalma. Acta Archaeologica Academiae
Scientiarum Hungaricae 38 423– 488.
VORSATZ, B. (1985): Anhang – Analitische
Untersuchungen Archäologischer Goldfunde. In:
KOVRIG, I.: Das Diadem von Csorna. Folia
Archeologica 36 146– 147.
WERNER, J. (1984): Der Grabfund von Malaja
Pereščepina und Kuvrat, Kagan der Bulgaren.
Abhandlungen (Bayerische Akademie der
Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-Historische Klasse) 91
Verlag der Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften,
München, pp. 45.
