Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe 2503608612, 9782503608617

Citation preview

Power in Numbers

Borders, Boundaries, Landscapes Volume 4 General Editor Helen Fulton, University of Bristol Editorial Board Eleanor Rosamund Barraclough, Bath Spa University Anna Boozer, Baruch College, CUNY Keith Busby, University of Wisconsin-Madison Rob Collins, University of Newcastle Heide Estes, University of Monmouth Patrick Gleeson, Queen’s University, Belfast Richard Hingley, University of Durham Kathryn Hurlock, Manchester Metropolitan University Sverrir Jakobsson, Háskóli Íslands Previously published volumes in this series are listed at the back of the book.

Power in Numbers State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe

Edited by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan

F

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. The research in this publication was conducted with the financial support of the grant provided by the Faculty of Arts of Charles University, no. PRIMUS/21/HUM/019, entitled ‘Empowering the Voiceless. The Role of the Rural Population in State Building and Christianization in East-Central Europe’, implemented at the Faculty of Arts of Charles University, and the grant ‘Religiopolitics – the Imperium Christianum and its Commoners (REPLICO)’ supported by the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic (23-07883K).

© 2024, Brepols Publishers n.v., Turnhout, Belgium. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher. D/2024/0095/143 ISBN 978-2-503-60861-7 eISBN 978-2-503-60862-4 DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.135491 ISSN 2736-6871 eISSN 2736-688X Printed in the EU on acid-free paper.

Table of Contents

List of Illustrations

7

Introduction Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan13 1. Christianization of East-Central Europe as a Social Process Ivo Štefan19 2. The Establishment of an Ecclesiastical Organization in the Post–Carolingian Periphery Czech Lands: Networks – Structures – Sources David Kalhous and Josef Šrámek41 3. The Relationship between Early Medieval Burial Grounds and Churchyardsin the Process of the Christianization of Bohemia Martin Čechura59 4. Burial Practice in Transition — Sepulchral Evidence of Christianization in the Early Piast State Przemysław Urbańczyk73 5. On the Threshold of Christianity The Church in Kuyavia from the Tenth to the Twelfth Centuries Marcin Danielewski81 6. Fair Relations Marketplaces and the Formation of Cathedral Cities in East Central Europe Katalin Szende97 7. Pectorals and Amulets Data on the Spiritual Life of the Hungarian Rural Population in the Period of Christianization Tibor Ákos Rácz and Ágnes Füredi117 8. Wiślica as an Example of a Christian Town in the State of the First Piasts Nina Glińska129 9. Between the Local Power Centre and the Ecclesiastical Network Living in castrum Orod in the High Middle Ages Florin Mărginean143 10. Chronological Remarks on Early Medieval Jewellery and Evidence for Pilgrimage The Case Study of the Župna Cerkev Cemetery in Kranj (Slovenia) Jernej Rihter155

6

ta bl e o f co n t e n t s

11. From Blessing (Hand) Cross to Hanging Cross An Early Árpádian Cross from Tiszakeszi-Szódadomb Péter Langó and András Patay-Horváth177 12. Turning in Their Graves Prone Burials in the Early Medieval Northern Balkans Petar Parvanov189 13. ‘Oh, Come Little Children’ Burial Customs in the Eleventh-Century Burial Ground of Oberleiserberg (Austria) Nina Richards203 14. The Formation of the Regnum Marianum Exploring the Church Network of Early Árpádian Hungary and the Place of Marian Patrocinia Karen Stark219 15. Between Palermo and Cefalú The Role of the First Norman Monastic Foundations in the (Re)Christianization of the Island’s Rural Population in the Light of Archaeological Research in the Altavilla Milicia Region Sławomir Moździoch, Ewa Moździoch, and Monica Chiovaro229 16. The Pliska-Type Churches, the Great Basilica, and their Relation to the Settlements in the Outer City of Pliska Andrey Aladzhov and Roland Filzwieser241 17. Spatial Patterns as Historical Proxies A Case Study on the Development of the Early Church Network in Veszprém County (Hungary) László Ferenczi and Mária Vargha253 18. Empowering the Voiceless: The Role of the Rural Population in State Building and Christianization in East-Central Europe Preliminary Results about Bohemia Mária Vargha, Martin Janovský, and Martin Fajta271 19. Spatial Analysis of Archaeological and Linguistic DataReveals the Boundaries of Frankish Power in Northern Bavaria Viktorie Janovská, Nicolas M. Jansens, Martin Janovský, and Tomáš Klír285 20. THANADOS — The Anthropological and Archaeological Database of Sepultures Stefan Eichert301

List of Illustrations

1.  Christianization of East-Central Europe as a Social Process —­ Ivo Štefan Figure 1.1. The oldest known church cemeteries in various key ruling centres of Central Europe. The size of communities buried around churches varied considerably from region to region. 1. Great Moravian centre of Mikulčice, church no. 3; 2. Budeč, Bohemia 3. church no. 2 in Ostrów Lednicki, Poland; 4. Alt Lübeck, one of the main castles of Wagriens. Figure 1.2. The eleventh century brings a surprising unification of funeral rituals across the whole of Central Europe. Already in the field of cemeteries without churches, bodies were typically oriented east–west, and, gradually, equipment disappears from the graves of men, while typical S-shaped temple rings are often found in women’s graves. 1. Praha-Motol, Central Bohemia, grave no. 200; 2. Dziekanowice, Central Poland, grave no. 73/00; 3. Čakajovce, Slovakia (formerly northern Kingdom of Hungary), grave no. 660. Figure 1.3. The period after 1100 brought a boom in the construction of Romanesque churches in rural areas in Central Europe. A significant number of churches had a tribune in the western part, which served patrons from the local nobility or members of ecclesiastical institutions. We find surprisingly similar architectural forms across regions. 1. Prandocin near Krakow (Kingdom of Poland). The church was built sometime during the twelfth century either by comes Prandota or his descendants; 2. The church of St Peter and Paul in Kojice (The Kingdom of Bohemia) was probably built by the ancestors of Dalibor of Kojice mentioned in 1238; 3. Dražovce (Slovakia, formerly the Kingdom of Hungary). The church was built on the property of the Zobor monastery near Nitra, probably at the end of the eleventh century.

29

31

33

2.  The Establishment of an Ecclesiastical Organization in the Post–Carolingian Periphery —­ David Kalhous and Josef Šrámek Figure 2.1. The number of monasteries founded in the Czech lands up to 1306. 47 3.  The Relationship between Early Medieval Burial Grounds and Churchyards in the Process of the Christianization of Bohemia —­ Martin Čechura Figure 3.1. Map of the excavated medieval cemeteries mentioned in the text. 1. Albrechtice; 2. Myslív; 3. Planá; 4. Pilsen-Doubravka; 5. Přeštice; 6. Přívětice; 7. Sušice; 8. Žákava.  61 Figure 3.2. Sušice (Klatovy district). Map of the churches and the burial ground.  62 Figure 3.3. Sušice (Klatovy district). Church of the Virgin Mary. Northwest corner of the Romanesque church.  63 Figure 3.4. Sušice (Klatovy district). Church of the Virgin Mary. Grave K 16, older than the Romanesque church.  63 Figure 3.5. Albrechtice (Klatovy district). Church of the Virgin Mary, St Peter, and Paul.  63 Figure 3.6. Přívětice (Rokycany district). The situation of St Martin’s church and the burial ground.  65 Figure 3.7. Přeštice (Pilsen-south district). Map of the church of the Virgin Mary and the burial grounds.  67 Figure 3.8. Žákava (Pilsen-south district). The situation of St Lawrence’s church and the burial ground.  67

8

l i s t o f il lu s tr at i o n s

4.  Burial Practice in Transition — Sepulchral Evidence of Christianization in the Early Piast State —­ Przemysław Urbańczyk Figure 4.1. Chamber graves from Bodzia. 75 Figure 4.2. Eleventh-century barrow with inhumation burial encircled by boulders — Białowieża Forest in north-eastern Poland.  77 Figure 4.3. Atypical burials excavated at the medieval cemetery in Giecz.  77 5.  On the Threshold of Christianity —­ Marcin Danielewski Figure 5.1. Kuyavia and the Piast dominion in the tenth to twelfth centuries.  Figure 5.2. Distribution of graves in the grave field in Morawy.  Figure 5.3. Cremation grave no. 2 from the grave field in Morawy.  Figure 5.4. Distribution of graves in the grave field in Bodzanów.  Figure 5.5. Saint Peter’s church in Kruszwica.  Figure 5.6. Saint Procopius’s church in Strzelno.  Figure 5.7. Distribution of graves and grave fields in Kuyavia in the tenth through twelfth centuries.  Table 5.1. Medieval cemeteries from Kuyavia with well-established chronology. ‘A ZP’ indicates Polish Archaeological record. Table 5.2. Grave goods in the cemeteries of Kuyavia. ‘A ZP’ indicates Polish Archaeological Record. Table 5.3. Cult-related personal belongings excavated in the cemeteries of Kuyavia. ‘A ZP’ indicates Polish Archaeological Record.

82 84 85 86 90 90 91 83 87 88

6.  Fair Relations —­ Katalin Szende Figure 6.1. Overview of the examined sites. 99 Figure 6.2. Hilltop cathedrals with marketplaces at the foothill, eleventh and twelfth centuries, a) Eger, b) Nitra, c) Veszprém, d) Kraków-Okól, e) Prague: Malá Strana, f) Płock. 102 Figure 6.3. Cathedral cities with marketplaces on the adjoining slope, eleventh and twelfth centuries, a) Cenad (conjectured), b) Győr, c) Oradea, d) Pécs, e) Vác, f) Olomouc. 104 Figure 6.4. Cathedrals on an island with marketplaces across the water, eleventh and twelfth centuries, a) Gniezno, b) Poznań, c) Wrocław, d) Prague: marketplaces on both sides of the river, twelfth century. 105 Figure 6.5. Cathedral cities with marketplaces outside the fortified area, eleventh and twelfth centuries, a) Kalocsa (conjectured), b) Bács (conjectured), c) Włocławek, d) Zagreb, e) Alba Iulia. 106 Figure 6.6. Cathedral cities in Hungary with new marketplaces developed on the initiative of the bishop or the cathedral chapter, thirteenth century (red ring: old marketplace, blue ring: new marketplace), a) Vác, b) Alba Iulia, c) Pécs, d) Oradea, e) Veszprém, f) Győr. 109 Figure 6.7. Cathedral cities with new marketplaces developed on the initiative of the secular overlord in new settlement units, thirteenth century, a) Zagreb, b) Wrocław, c) Poznań, d) Kraków, e) Olomouc. 110 7.  Pectorals and Amulets —­ Tibor Ákos Rácz and Ágnes Füredi Figure 7.1. Animal bones worn as pendants from tenth-century women’s or children’s graves (found in Kiszombor, Tiszaroff, Csongrád).  Figure 7.2. Saw-teeth pendants from the Carpathian Basin. 1: Szob-Kiserdő (Pest County), grave 73. 2: Szakony (Győr-Moson-Sopron County), grave 2. 3: Bugyi-Felsővány (Pest County), stray find in the cemetery. 4: Csongrád-Vendelhalom (Csongrád-Csanád County).  Figure 7.3. Crescent pendant from Gödöllő (Pest County), grave 2.  Figure 7.4. The cross and pendants of grave 60, in Szob-Kiserdő (Pest County).  Figure 7.5. The pendants and the reconstructions of the graves of Püspökladány-Eperjesvölgy (HajdúBihar County). 1: Bronze cross, clothing ornaments as pendants, and an iron rattle in grave 95. 2: Bronze cross and crescent pendant in grave 107.  Figure 7.6. The pendants of grave 8 in the Gödöllő cemetery (Pest County) placed around the neck of a child. 1: The finds in the grave. 2: The bronze pectoral cross. 3: Canine tooth. 4: Lead bead. 5: Bronze cast leaf-shaped pendant. 7: Bronze cast leaf-shaped pendant from Győr-Víztorony (Győr-Moson-Sopron County).  Figure 7.7. Silver pendant from grave 2 in Piliny-Leshegy (Nógrád County).  Figure 7.8. Dabas, churchyard cemetery. 1: Gold band ring with a Latin inscription. 2: Round bronze pendant. 3: Axe-shaped amulet. 

119 120 120 120 121

121 122 123

li st o f i llu strations

8.  Wiślica as an Example of a Christian Town in the State of the First Piasts —­ Nina Glińska Figure 8.1. Location of Wiślica.  Figure 8.2. Three-dimensional projection of the city area together with the stronghold ‘on the meadows’.  Figure 8.3. Wiślica. 1. stronghold ‘on the meadows’; 2. ‘Regia’- highest point of the ‘town island’, ‘Regia’ fortified settlement; 3. ‘Batalionów Chłopskich Street’ site and St Nicholas’s Church; 4. collegiate church; 5. ‘St Martin’s Church’ site; 6. cemetery in Gorysławice; 7. reconstructed river crossing; 8. market square of the chartered town; 9. town walls; 10. ‘Church of the Holy Spirit’ site; 11. House of Jan Długosz; dots mark the area of the Nida River ice-marginal valley flood plain  Figure 8.4. ‘Batalionów Chłopskich Street’ site. So-called ‘baptismal font’. View from the west, 2018.  Figure 8.5. Wiślica — ‘Regia’. Remains of stone architecture.  Figure 8.6. Wiślica — ‘Regia’. Phase I of the graveyard, located around the conch rotunda (building B).  Figure 8.7. Reconstruction of the urban development phases of Wiślica; I. c. 950–1350; II. 1350–1400; III. after 1550. 9.  Between the Local Power Centre and the Ecclesiastical Network —­ Florin Mărginean Figure 9.1. 1) The location of old Orod on a map from the eighteenth century; 2) Satellite image and fortification planimetry detail after Lidar scanning. Figure 9.2. The general plan of the archaeological excavation and some photos from the excavation.  Figure 9.3. Simple and S-shaped temple rings found in the graves of the cemetery of the fortification. Figure 9.4. 1. The plan of the fortification after the magnetometric survey; 2. Location of the archaeological features in Vladimirescu after a Lidar scan. 10.  Chronological Remarks on Early Medieval Jewellery and Evidence for Pilgrimage —­ Jernej Rihter Figure 10.1. Plan of the Župna Cerkev cemetery in Kranj (Slovenia).  Figure 10.2. Section of a plan of the Župna Cerkev in Kranj cemetery. Distribution of two-horned forged crescent head circlets (marked in red) in graves and among scattered finds.  Figure 10.3. Examples of graves with head circlets of the first group in stratigraphic sequences.  Figure 10.4. Grave 1972_z0106, as part of an area with a ‘thick’ stratigraphy of graves and selected stratigraphic sequences in the immediate vicinity. Only early medieval artefacts in the graves and selected sections of the sequences are shown. Each rectangle with a code represents a grave.  Figure 10.5. Grave 1972_z0129, as part of an area with a ‘thick’ stratigraphy of graves (a) Graves 1965_z0160 and 1965_z0160 (b–c) as part of an area of ‘shallow’ stratigraphy. Only early medieval artefacts are shown in the graves and selected sections of the sequences. Each rectangle with a code represents a grave.  Figure 10.6. Grave 1972_z0113 in the stratigraphic sequence. Only selected sections of the sequences are shown. Each rectangle with a code represents a grave.  Figure 10.7. Section of a plan of the Župna Cerkev cemetery in Kranj. Distribution (marked in red) of graves with scallop shells (Pecten sp.) and scattered finds.  Figure 10.8. Extended stratigraphic sequence of grave 1969_p0171 with scallop shells. Each rectangle with a code represents a grave.  Figure 10.9. Stratigraphic sequence of graves 1970_p0537 and 1970_p0563 with scallop shells. Each rectangle with a code represents a grave.  Table 10.1. Two-horned forged crescent head circlets in graves and among the scattered finds in Župna Cerkev in Kranj cemetery. Table 10.2. The design features of the first and second groups of two-horned forged crescent head circlets.  Table 10.3. Scallop shells (Pecten sp.) and parts of iron staffs in graves and among the scattered finds in the Župna Cerkev cemetery in Kranj.  11.  From Blessing (Hand) Cross to Hanging Cross —­ Péter Langó and András Patay-Horváth Figure 11.1. Front and rear sides of the cross found at Tiszakeszi.  Figure 11.2. The broken part from below.  Figure 11.3. Early Byzantine blessing crosses of the crux gemmata type: 1. Coptic Museum in Cairo; 2. Bode Museum; 3. Tiszakeszi – Szódadomb; 4. Louvre, 5. Cardinal Friedrich Wetter’s collection; 6. unnamed private collection in Great Britain; 7. private collection in Munich. 

130 131

132 132 134 136 138

145 147 149 150 157 159 163 164

165 166 168 169 170 160 162 167 179 179 182

9

10

l i s t o f il lu s tr at i o n s

12.  Turning in Their Graves —­ Petar Parvanov Figure 12.1. Grave 11 from Gradishte (Bulgaria).  Figure 12.2. Grave 40 from Aradac (Serbia).  Figure 12.3. Grave 1 from Site 2 on the Hemus Highway near Shumen (Bulgaria).  Figure 12.4. Distribution of complete (ventral) prone burials. Figure 12.5. Distribution of face-down burials. Figure 12.6. The mass grave from Capidava. Plan of the second level.  Table 12.1. Complete (ventral) prone burials. Table 12.2. Face-down burials. Table 12.3. Chronological sequence of ventral prone burials. Table 12.4. Chronological sequence of face-down burials. 13.  ‘Oh, Come Little Children’ —­ Nina Richards Figure 13.1. Plan of the cemetery on the Oberleiserberg.  Figure 13.2. Drawing of burials in grave 31 in a squat position and grave 32 in the so-called ‘frog position’.  Figure 13.3. Results of radiocarbon dating for the Oberleiserberg: The analyses support the dating of the necropolis on the basis of the archaeological finds and features to the first half of the eleventh century.  Figure 13.4. Age distribution according to anthropological analysis.  Figure 13.5. Distribution of δ15N values in the Oberleiserberg burial ground.  Figure 13.6. Age distribution on the Oberleiserberg necropolis in comparison with other contemporary cemeteries.  14.  The Formation of the Regnum Marianum —­ Karen Stark Figure 14.1. Marian parish churches, (non-parish) churches, and chapels in medieval Hungary mentioned in the historical record before 1300. Figure 14.2. Churches dedicated to the Virgin Mary, St Michael, or both in early Árpádian seats according to Németh. Figure 14.3. Topography of the ispán’s castle of Sopron and immediate surroundings up to 1240  Figure 14.4. Vasvár in the eleventh century. 1: ‘Roman rampart’; 2: valley of the swollen stream (later the site of fishponds); 3: palisade gate (later the town gate); 4: ispán’s castle; 5: church of the Virgin Mary of the archdiocese; 6: suburbium; 7: marketplace of the suburbium; 8: St Michael parish church.  15.  Between Palermo and Cefalú —­ Sławomir Moździoch, Ewa Moździoch, and Monica Chiovaro Figure 15.1. Location of the remains of the monastery of Santa Maria di Campogrosso.  Figure 15.2. Traces of a timber and lime construction discovered in the nave of the convent church.  Figure 15.3. The church of St Ceneri le Gerei.  Figure 15.4. Traces of the walls of the monastery buildings discovered to the south of the church during GPR surveys.  Figure 15.5. Fragment of a Norman period gravestone with Kufic inscription.  Figure 15.6. Bronze appliqué with the symbols of Saint Mary. 

190 191 192 193 194 195 197 198 199 199 205 206 207 209 210 211

220 221 223

225 231 232 234 235 236 237

16.  The Pliska-Type Churches, the Great Basilica, and their Relation to the Settlements in the Outer City of Pliska —­ Andrey Aladzhov and Roland Filzwieser Figure 16.1. Pliska with the extent of its Outer City marked with a red line and its Inner City with a blue line (a) Larger areas of the Outer City were surveyed in 2016 by the LBI ArchPro (b) mainly using motorized magnetics (red).  242 Figure 16.2. Three examples of the different types of churches discovered in the Outer City. Churches (a) and (b) (8 and 5 respectively in Škorpil’s numbering), show very similar dimensions and a similar ground plan. Church c is one of the so-called ‘Pliska type’ basilicas.  243 Figure 16.3. Magnetic survey of the Outer City using a motorized system with eight Förster FEREX CON650 probes and 25 cm cross-line spacing on 8 November 2016.  244 Figure 16.4. Enclosed building complex in the Outer City, including a so-called boyar church in the southeast. 245

li st o f i llu strations

Figure 16.5. The area around the Great Basilica was one of the most densely populated zones of the Outer City comprising hundreds of pit houses, large yards, and wooden fences (a, c) In the northern part of the survey area (b) the measurements had to bypass three already known churches whose remains are still visible on the surface. They lie on a perfect east–west axis (dashed line) with another church (d) further west, newly discovered by the measurements in 2016. Figure 16.6. A comparison between the magnetic data (a) of the newly discovered church and its respective interpretation (b) and another comparison with the Great Basilica (c). 

247 248

17.  Spatial Patterns as Historical Proxies —­ László Ferenczi and Mária Vargha Figure 17.1. The extent of Veszprém County and its position within the Kingdom of Hungary. 255 Figure 17.2. The high medieval church network, and its correlation to service villages. 258 Figure 17.3. The cost-distance model of service settlements and its correlation to the high medieval church network.260 Figure 17.4. The church network compared with late medieval settlement boundaries.  261 Figure 17.5. Kernel Density analysis of population data (1488). 262 Figure 17.6. Choropleth map of population data (1488); with churches recorded in 1332/37; and filiation data documented in the late eighteenth century. 263 Figure 17.7. Ecclesiastical, royal, and noble estates in the late medieval period; references on churches sorted according to chronology: 1) before the early fourteenth century; 2) early fourteenth century — roughly contemporary with the papal registers; 3) late fourteenth to early sixteenth centuries . 264 Figure 17.8. Ecclesiastical, royal, and noble estates in the late medieval period and the chronological groups of churches according to our database. 265 18.  Empowering the Voiceless: The Role of the Rural Population in State Building and Christianization in East-Central Europe —­ Mária Vargha, Martin Janovský, and Martin Fajta Figure 18.1. Map of the Czech Republic showing the historical regions of Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia, and the areas of the pilot study as follows: A) Prague, B) Pilsen, C) Ústí and Labem. Terrain data was created with the water cover and DEM from the Copernicus Land Service.  274 Figure 18.2. Frequency of occurrence of field cemeteries and churches in the selected study regions.  275 Figure 18.3. Prague. 1) The distribution of field cemeteries in comparison with a 2 km buffer drawn around churches dated to the ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries. 2) The Thiessen network of all the churches combined and their relation to field cemeteries.  277 Figure 18.4. Pilsen region. 1) The distribution of field cemeteries in comparison with a 2 km buffer drawn around churches dated to the ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries. 2) The Thiessen network of all the churches combined and their relation to field cemeteries.  278 Figure 18.5. Ústí region. 1) The distribution of field cemeteries in comparison with a 2 km buffer drawn around churches dated to the ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries. 2) The Thiessen network of all the churches combined and their relation to field cemeteries.  280 19.  Spatial Analysis of Archaeological and Linguistic Data Reveals the Boundaries of Frankish Power in Northern Bavaria —­ Viktorie Janovská, Nicolas M. Jansens, Martin Janovský, and Tomáš Klír Figure 19.1. A: The study region, within which Bavaria Slavica is located. B: Regions of Bavaria. Made with 287 Natural Earth (2022) and data from the Bundesamt für Kartographie und Geodäsie (2022)  Figure 19.2. Linear Pearson correlations comparing the distributions of settlements with ‘SLAV’ and ‘SLAV/ GRMC’ place names against ‘CAROL/OTT’ cemeteries. 291 Figure 19.3. KDE analysis comparing the distribution of the categories ‘DORF’ and ‘BACH’ against ‘CAROL/ OTT’.292 Figure 19.4. KDE analysis comparing the distribution of the category ‘HAUSEN_HOFEN’ against ‘CAROL/ OTT’.293 Figure 19.5. KDE analysis comparing the distribution of the category ‘WINDEN’ against ‘CAROL/OTT’. 294 Table 19.1. Frequency of occurrence of selected categories. 291

11

12

l i s t o f il lu s tr at i o n s

20.  THANADOS — The Anthropological and Archaeological Database of Sepultures —­ Stefan Eichert Figure 20.1. Archaeological data model of burial finds. 303 Figure 20.2. Logical data model using mappings to classes and properties of the CIDOC CRM. 304 Figure 20.3. Hierarchy of Site, Feature, Stratigraphic Unit, and Finds/Osteology Datasets. 304 Figure 20.4. Links to external reference systems. 305

Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan

Introduction

This volume presents the proceedings of a two-part conference (‘Power in Numbers. The Role of the Rural Population in Christianization and State Formation’) held in October 2021 and May 2022 at the Department of Archaeology at Charles University, Prague, in the framework of a research project conducted there, titled ‘Empowering the Voiceless. The Role of the Rural Population in State Building and Christianization in East-Central Europe’. The project itself focused on how the conversion of the rural population and their integration into the lower church network relate to the power dynamics of state formation, comparing Bohemia and Hungary. For a better, comparative, overview, we decided to organize a series of conferences on the theme of the project. The exciting new results and the lively discussion of the meetings demonstrated that it was time to have a more comprehensive image of the research conducted on this theme in the region, and so, the idea of the present book was born. Before turning to the historical contextualization of the volume, two questions need to be addressed; firstly, why the particular geographic and chronological frames were chosen, and secondly, why and how the contributors and their themes were chosen. In answering these questions, we have to refer back to the initial ideas behind the project that inspired the present volume. Around the turn of the first millennium, Christianization reshaped the world along the northern and eastern fringes of the territory that later became the

Holy Roman Empire. While the northern peripheries, and thus the Christianization of Scandinavia, are widely known and integrated into western scholarship, awareness of the emergence of new Christian polities along the eastern edges is still somewhat marginal. Nonetheless, several excellent synthetic volumes exist on the Christianization and state formation of this region (such as Berend (ed.) 2007; Berend and others 2013; Curta 2019). Such works usually give an overview driven by the historical narratives focusing predominantly on the elite and the top-layer of these processes, largely overlooking the involvement and the impact of these processes on the majority of the population, primarily due to their sporadic appearance in the traditional sources. In this volume, choosing a general geographical label for the region under discussion was necessary. For quite pragmatic reasons, we decided on the term ‘Central Eastern Europe’, which is commonly used in several variants in contemporary historiography. Needless to say, ‘Central (Eastern) Europe’ has never formed an ethnic or political unit and is a modern historical and political construct with a rather vague and fluid definition (on this theme see e.g. Raffensperger 2021; Zečević 2022). Nevertheless, this is still a useful term and, unfortunately, we do not have a better one at our disposal. In medievalist discourse, it is usually understood as the geographical zone on the eastern edge of the later Holy Roman Empire, which adopted

Mária Vargha • ([email protected]) was the PI of the project ‘Empowering the Voiceless. The Role of the Rural Population in State Building and Christianization in East-Central Europe’, conducted within the PRIMUS scheme, and the Lead Agency WEAVE tri-lateral project REPLICO conducted at Charles University, Prague and in cooperation with the Naturhistorisches Museum Vienna and the Slovenian Academy of Sciences. She has also obtained an ERC StG grant titled ‘RELIC – Religiopolitics – The Imperium Christianum and its Commoners’, with which she returned to the University of Vienna. Her research is mainly focused on the material culture, social and landscape archaeology of the high Middle Ages, as well as on digital humanities, with a particular focus on GIS and network analysis of diverse archaeological and historical data. Ivo Štefan • ([email protected]) is an Associate Professor at the Department of Archaeology at Charles University, Prague. He is an archaeologist and historian of the early and high Middle Ages. His main areas of research are the socioeconomic and religious transformations of medieval societies in Central Europe and their reflection in material evidence. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 13–18. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138104

14

m á r ia va rgha an d i vo š t e fan

the principles of a monarchy and Latin Christianity around the turn of the millennium. The core of this zone is the territory of present-day Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Austria, and Slovenia. Further eastward and south-eastward, the influence of Byzantium and the Orthodox Church became stronger. However, Central, Eastern, and South-Eastern European borders cannot be clearly delineated. The present volume involves studies that focus (at least partially) on almost all the mentioned modern countries and includes some that are further outside central Europe, such as Bulgaria and Sicily, two territories that, while they do not belong to the typical understanding of Central Eastern Europe, had political and cultural ties to these territories, and therefore provide an interesting contrast to what we understand as the eastern edge of Latin Christendom. This region, connected historically and geographically, experienced Christianization simultaneously, with many similarities but also differences, many of which, primarily those that concerned the elite, were emphasized in the mentioned synthetic volumes. However, the region is also fragmented; it comprises several different languages and, somewhat consequently, different research traditions. Therefore, it is perhaps not surprising that a western audience knows little of a region that is not united in itself and often communicates its results in various difficult languages. However, exciting and innovative research is being conducted throughout the investigated region, and new, comparative narratives have emerged along with the application of cutting-edge digital methods, highlighting — among others — the role of the often-overlooked, yet, in numbers, the largest part of society: the commoners. Our aim for this book was, therefore, to unite this region as much as possible, inviting contributors primarily from across Central Eastern Europe. We deliberately chose people conducting research in this specific region to enhance the visibility of local scholars whose work concerns the large-scale events of Christianization and state formation, but also the often marginalized people who drove these events — the rural population. Both during organizing the conference and the preparation of the present volume, we consciously included researchers from the fields of both history and archaeology and from all career stages, to create a more inclusive narrative and a more complete overview of what is happening right now in this field. The result is the first volume of its kind, giving a contextual overview but including thematic case studies of history and archaeology examining state formation and religious change, providing not only a synthetic overview but also detailed information and an accurate sample of the current state of research. Furthermore, it is the first synthetic study to directly compare the

north-east and south-east peripheries of what is later known as the Holy Roman Empire and explore these processes from the perspective of the everyday people. Concerning the historical contextualization of the area, in the greater part of this region we do not observe a smooth continuity from the previous period to the early Middle Ages. From the sixth and seventh centuries onwards, the various Central European regions gradually became part of the Slavic-speaking area, while the former Pannonia was first dominated by the Avars and then, at the turn of the ninth century, by the Hungarians. Today’s Austria and later also Slovenia became part of the ‘Germanic’ sphere. From the end of the eighth century, the Carolingian Empire began interacting intensively with its eastern neighbours from the Baltic to the Adriatic. Shortly thereafter, we find in written sources the first references to the conversion of local elites to Christianity. The so-called (Great) Moravia was the first to get its own (arch)diocese in the 880s. Centralization processes associated with the adaptation of western models accelerated during the tenth century under the Ottonian dynasty. Around 1000, three formally Christian monarchies already existed in Central Europe — Bohemia, Poland, and Hungary. The Byzantine influence in the region was infinitely weaker. The conversion of these territories and the laying of the foundations of ecclesiastical organization greatly expanded the sphere of Latin Christianity to the east and north and was related to the formation of a new identity of Christian medieval Europe (e.g. Bartlett 1993; Fletcher 1998; Wieczorek and Hinz (eds) 2000; Curta (ed.) 2021). But not all regions welcomed the pattern of Christian monarchy with open arms. A special path was followed until the second half of the twelfth century by the gentes settled between the Elbe and Oder rivers, who confidently resisted political centralization and the adoption of a Christian identity. The specific historical development of the region, which was somewhat delayed compared to the western part of Europe, was also reflected in a chronological convention that may be somewhat confusing for readers from another region. While western tradition generally dates the high Middle Ages between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries, and Hungary follows suit, starting the high Middle Ages with the foundation of the kingdom in 1000, in the Czech lands and Poland its beginning is only placed at c. 1200. Similarly, the connected cultural context, yet divided research, can be excellently traced in the material culture as well. For that perhaps the best example are the humble wire rings used to adorn the head (see Fig. 1.2). While variations of this simple jewellery appeared in all the regions discussed in the present volume, their social, economic, and religious interpretations are embedded

i nt ro duction

differently in each national or regional research tradition, also illustrated by the diverse nomenclature used in the present volume, such as temple rings, lock rings, head circlets, or earrings. In fact, Czech, Polish, and Hungarian polities from the end of the tenth century were structurally similar, and their development followed similar basic trajectories. They were based on the authority of rulers whose power was based on territorial castle systems. This also applies to the course of Christianization, which spread through society from top to bottom. In both a social and spatial sense, Christianity spread from the centres to the peripheries. In the first phase, the church organization was closely linked to the ruler’s institutions. It is only in the course of further development that land-based nobility established itself and became a key agent in the spread of Christianity to the rural environment. Historical and archaeological research into the complex process of Christianization in East Central Europe has a deep domestic tradition. Until recently, however, the master narrative of Christianization has been constructed largely on the basis of written accounts that refer primarily to the highest ecclesiastical institutions, i.e. the secular and ecclesiastical elite. Moreover, compared to Scandinavia, for example, individual Central European ‘national’ discourses are still insufficiently integrated and remain primarily in a national context. Consequently, only a limited amount of information is available to the English-speaking audience (especially Urbańczyk 1997; Wieczorek and Hinz (eds) 2000; Berend (ed.) 2007; Berend and others 2013; Kouřil (ed.) 2014; Curta 2019; Kąkolewski and others 2020 (eds); Štefan 2021). Archaeology has long offered a new dimension of insight into processes and phenomena that are insufficiently or distortedly recorded in written sources. New, comparative narratives emerged by applying cutting-edge digital methods to rarely examined sources highlighting the role of everyday people. Furthermore, new, primarily archaeological evidence permits a new approach: the interdisciplinary examination of the Christianization of the commoners based on the transformation of funeral rituals and the development of the early rural church network, including the comparative assessment of archaeological and historical evidence by applying digital methods to large-scale data, such as spatial analysis of archival archaeological data or non-destructive investigation of larger areas and monuments. While individual archaeological features are difficult to interpret on their own, often causing controversy, and can say little about larger processes, when combined, they offer source material for the study of the Christianization process of the rural population that, even considering its fragmentary state and its conservation issues, is still incomparable to any

other kind of sources, even simply by the amount of material. Not to mention that the digital modelling of the data offers a unique perspective that is uncommon in archaeological research. Stepping away from the comparison of similarities of archaeological features and embedding them only in their chronological and spatial context, more angles have opened up than in traditional research methods. However, recognizing the importance of space is not a new approach to investigating the archaeology of Christianization or social and religious processes in general (see for example Bullough 1983; Andrén 2013; and recently: Štular and others 2022; Vargha 2022). But neither historical nor archaeological sources reveal the historical reality as such. Historical explanation is more than the simple sum of available data. We now know well that Christianization was not only a matter of religious change, but was also fundamentally influenced by social, economic, and political factors. Its study, therefore, requires the development of a methodological framework that can be greatly improved by the application of sociological and cultural anthropological approaches and critical structural comparisons of different regions and societies (e.g. Rambo 1993; Stark 1996; Insoll 2004; Garipzanov 2014). The volume is divided into three parts according to the thematic focus of the individual studies. The first contains studies examining various aspects of Christianization at a broader regional level. Ivo Štefan’s introductory comparative study attempts to thematize the social dimension of the spread of Christianity across East Central Europe. He demonstrates by various examples that the speed and intensity of the spread of Christianity were directly dependent on the existence of elite social networks, conducive to innovation. The author further suggests that even medieval local communities were not isolated and socially homogeneous, and adaptation to Christian customs could often be voluntary. Similar questions are raised in the historical study by David Kalhous and Josef Šrámek, who analyse the building of the church organization on the example of the Czech lands. The authors first give a concentrated overview of the Christianization of the Přemyslid Principality and soon take a detailed look at the building of local churches, concluding with an analysis of the role of monasteries as nodes of both ecclesiastical and secular elite social networks. Martin Čechura chose the region of western Bohemia as a case study, where he investigates the emergence of a network of local churches in the eleventh and twelfth centuries by studying the transformation of burial topography and the remains of sacral architecture. He shows that the material evidence provides crucial testimony to the transformation of local communities and their burial practices not found in written sources. The same

15

16

m á r ia va rgha an d i vo š t e fan

applies to the study of Przemysław Urbańczyk, who focuses on the archaeological correlates of the early Christianization of Poland. The author considers the abandonment of cremation in favour of inhumation to be a key ‘barometer’ of the adaptation of Christian norms. With respect to the late onset of this change, Urbańczyk then convincingly negates existing conceptions of the rapid and effective spread of Christianity in the early Polish monarchy soon after the conversion of Mieszko I in 966. Marcin Danielewski follows the same line based on a detailed archaeological study of the Kuyavia region, situated on the periphery of the core of early medieval Poland. He proves that as late as the eleventh century, cremation ritual was observed here, and there was no church organization until the twelfth century. The first section concludes with a comparative study by Katalin Szende, who focuses on the changing topography of marketplaces in cathedral cities in East Central Europe between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries. The aim of the study is to understand the changing relations between ecclesiastic centres and the secular society coexisting with them. The second part investigates smaller regions and specific case studies and focuses on thematic questions about the investigated processes. Tibor Ákos Rácz and Ágnes Füredi focus on the region of central Hungary in the tenth and eleventh centuries, but they pay attention to the general phenomenon of grave finds of pectorals and amulets. On the basis of the transformation of ‘symbols in action’, they examine the Christianization of magical thinking in the rural environment. Christianization also significantly affected the structure and form of early medieval power centres. Nina Glińska summarizes the development of the important, though still little-known, centre of Wiślica in Lesser Poland. She demonstrates how burial grounds responded to the change in sacral topography and concludes by placing the spatial arrangements of Wiślica in a wider context. Similar themes, this time using the example of one of the fortified centres in the east of the Hungarian kingdom at Vladimirescu near Arad (now Romania), are addressed in Florin Mărginean’s study. Jernej Rihter focuses on the typochronology of grave jewellery in the Eastern Alpine area on the basis of a precise analysis of the church cemetery in Župna Cerkev in Kranj (Slovenia) with almost three thousand graves dating from the eighth to the eighteenth centuries. The author demonstrates the great potential of the precise analysis of complex grave stratigraphy for understanding the development of material culture. Péter Langó and András Patay-Horváth present another material study, this time based on a broadbased comparative analysis of a blessing cross found at the Hungarian burial site of Tiszakeszi-Szódadomb. Petar Parvanov opens the complex topic of deviant burials by analysing the region of the Middle and Lower

Danube between the seventh and eleventh centuries. Based on an analysis of prone burials, the author rejects simplistic monocausal interpretations in favour of a contextual approach. Nina Richards’ multidisciplinary study demonstrates the synergistic potential of the collaboration between archaeology and osteobiology. The burial site at Oberleisterberg in Austria, with its high proportion of child burials, raises, among other topics, the question of the transformation of ‘communities of the dead’ as a result of Christianization. Karen Stark’s study explores the connection between the Marian cult and the ruler’s sacral legitimation in the early Hungarian kingdom. Through careful analysis, she confirms the earlier hypothesis of the connection between Marian patronage churches and important centres of power. The study by Sławomir Moździoch, Ewa Moździoch, and Monica Chiovaro breaks out of the chosen geographical framework. The Polish-Italian team presents the results of interdisciplinary research on the monastery of Santa Maria di Campogrosso aimed at understanding the (re-) Christianization of Sicily during the Norman period. The study shows that the methodological approaches to the analysis of funerary customs, architecture, and material culture used in research on the Christianization of Central Europe can be successfully applied in other cultural settings. Finally, the third section is comprised of studies that address the study of social and religious changes with diverse, non-traditional, digital approaches, analysing hitherto unused source materials and providing a more extensive overview of the archaeological material, having in common the theme of topographical changes. The study of Andrey Aladzhov and Roland Filzwieser showcases an excellent example of international cooperation in the investigation of the first capital of Bulgaria, Pliska, where they demonstrate how large-scale, non-destructive surveys can be used to uncover the impact of Christianization on the transformation of the plan of an urban centre and its immediate periphery. László Ferenczi and Mária Vargha exhibit a retrospective geospatial approach to the development of the early church network, presenting a case study on Veszprém County, which — despite it having one of the earliest centres, and cathedral cities, of the Christian Hungarian Kingdom, also named Veszprém — has surprisingly limited evidence of its beginnings. The next study, written by Mária Vargha, Martin Janovský, and Martin Fajta, displays the preliminary results of the project behind this volume, also focusing on the emergence of the early church network, by conducting a geospatial analysis on the relations between early churches, cemeteries, and secular power centres. The chapter comprises three case studies of three regions with different social, economic, and geographic conditions, Prague, Ústí and Pilsen, creating a comparative analysis investigating the

i nt ro duction

regional differences of Christianization and its causes in these three regions of Bohemia. The analysis by Viktorie Janovská, Nicolas M. Jansens, Martin Janovský, and Tomáš Klír, focusing on Northern Bavaria, a contact zone of Germanic and Slavic, Christianized and non-Christian populations, explores the correlations of linguistic and archaeological evidence by a comparative geospatial analysis, and demonstrates a cutting-edge, interdisciplinary approach towards studying social and religious changes in border zones. The volume comes to an end with a window to the future with the paper by Stefan Eichert, showcasing a truly ground-breaking, interdisciplinary application, THANADOS (The Anthropological and Archaeological Database of Sepultures), which, while in this particular case focusing on the early medieval cemeteries of Austria, will doubtlessly revolutionize how we present, collect, and analyse large-scale socioeconomic and religious datasets. Ultimately, the primary aim of the conference series was to facilitate more discussions and create new networks in the historically both interconnected and yet

divided region of Central Eastern Europe and provide a cross-section of the research happening there around the theme of Christianization. With the present volume, we intend to present these results to a wider audience, in the hope that it can be a starting point for further discussions, cooperation, and building bridges within the divided research traditions, languages, and approaches.

Acknowledgements This study has been published with the financial support of the grant provided by the Faculty of Arts of Charles University, no. PRIMUS/21/HUM/019, entitled ‘Empowering the Voiceless. The Role of the Rural Population in State Building and Christianization in East-Central Europe’, implemented at the Faculty of Arts of Charles University, and the grant ‘Religiopolitics – the Imperium Christianum and its Commoners (REPLICO)’ supported by the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic (23-07883K).

17

18

m á r ia va rgha an d i vo š t e fan

Works Cited Andrén, Anders. 2013. ‘The Significance of Places: The Christianization of Scandinavia from a Spatial Point of View’, World Archaeology, 45: 27–45 Bartlett, Robert. 1993. The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization, and Cultural Change, 950–1350 (Princeton: Princeton University Press) Berend, Nora (ed.). 2007. Christianization and the Rise of Christian Monarchy: Scandinavia, Central Europe and Rus’ c. 900– 1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Berend, Nora, Przemysław Urbańczyk, and Przemysław Wiszewski. 2013. Central Europe in the High Middle Ages: Bohemia, Hungary and Poland c. 900 – c. 1300 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Bullough, Donald Auberon. 1983. ‘Burial, Community and Belief in the Early Medieval West’, in Ideal and Reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon Society: Studies Presented to J. M. Wallace-Hadrill, ed. by Patrick Wormald, with Donald Bullough and Roger Collins (Oxford: B. Blackwell), pp. 177–201 Curta, Florin. 2019. Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages (500–1300) (Leiden: Brill) Curta, Florin (ed.). 2021. The Routledge Handbook of East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 500–1300 (Oxford: Routledge) Fletcher, Richard. 1998. The Conversion of Europe: From Paganism to Christianity 371–1386 (London: Fontana Press) Garipzanov, Ildar. 2014. ‘Christian Identities, Social Status, and Gender in Viking-Age Scandinavia’, in Conversion and Identity in the Viking Age, ed. by Ildar Garipzanov with the assistance of Rosalind Bonté, Medieval Identities: Socio-Cultural Spaces, 5 (Turnhout: Brepols), pp. 139–66 Insoll, Timothy. 2004. Archaeology, Ritual, Religion (Oxford: Routledge) Kąkolewski, Igor, Christian Lübke, and Przemysław Urbańczyk (eds). 2020. The Dawning of Christianity in Poland and across Central and Eastern Europe: History and the Politics of Memory (Berlin: Peter Lang) Kouřil, Pavel (ed.). 2014. The Cyril and Methodius Mission and Europe 1150 Years since the Arrival of the Thessaloniki Brothers in Great Moravia (Brno: Archeologický ústav AVČR, vv.i.) Raffensperger, Christian. 2021. Situating Medieval Eastern Europe: Historiography and Discontent, in The Routledge Handbook of East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 500–1300, ed. by Florin Curta (New York: Routledge), pp. 9–22 Rambo, Lewis. 1993. Understanding Religious Conversion (New Haven: Yale University Press) Stark, Rodney. 1996. The Rise of Christianity. A Sociologist Reconsiders History (Princeton: Princeton University Press) Štefan, Ivo. 2021. ‘Conversion and Christianization: Bohemia, Poland, Hungary and Rus’ (9th to 12th Centuries)’, in The Routledge Handbook of East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 500–1300, ed. by Florin Curta (Oxford: Routledge), pp. 101–20 Štular, Benjamin, Edisa Lozić, Mateja Belak, Jernej Rihter, and Iris Koch. 2022. ‘Migration of Alpine Slavs and Machine Learning: Space-Time Pattern Mining of an Archaeological Data Set’, PLoS ONE, 17.9: e0274687 Urbańczyk, Przemysław. 1997. Early Christianity in Central and East Europe (Warsaw: Semper) Vargha, Mária. 2022. Modelling Christianisation. A Geospatial Analysis of the Archaeological Data on the Rural Church Network of Hungary in the 11–12th Centuries (Oxford: Archeolingua-Archeopress) Wieczorek, Alfried, and Hans-Martin Hinz. 2000. Europe’s Centre Around ad 1000: Contributions to History, Art and Archaeology (Stuttgart: Theiss) Zečević, Nada. 2022. ‘Introduction: “Central Europe”: Perceptions, Definitions, and Comparisons in a Historiographical Context’, in Oxford Handbook of Medieval Central Europe, ed. by Nada Zečević and Daniel Ziemann (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 1–21

Ivo Štefan

1. Christianization of East-Central Europe as a Social Process

A bs t r act  The present paper aims to create a comparative overview of the Christianization of East Central Europe, approaching it as a social rather than a purely religious process and examining how the individual polities’ different political histories and social structures played a role in this process. The study challenges the traditional narrative of oppressive top-down Christianization and focuses on the different circumstances of adapting the new religion through the interactions of various social groups.

T

K e y wo r ds  Christianization, Central Eastern Europe, social history, church organization, medieval Bohemia, medieval Poland, medieval Hungary

T

Introduction Conversion to Christianity and the emergence of centralized societies were essential prerequisites for integrating large areas of former ‘barbarian’ northern and eastern Europe into the new civilizational circle of medieval Latin Christian Europe. This process began in Ireland in the fifth century and ended in the Baltics in the fourteenth century (Fletcher 1997; Brown 2003; Berend 2007; von Padberg 2009). When looking deeper into Christianization, we are confronted with a nexus of complex questions related to the dynamics and specific mechanisms of this fundamental cultural change. Why did the inhabitants of some regions embrace Christianity relatively quickly and without problems, while elsewhere, several centuries elapsed between the first contacts with Christianity and its official introduction and the emergence of ecclesiastical institutions? Why did a new sacred landscape with a

dense network of local churches quickly take shape in some places, while elsewhere, until the end of the Middle Ages, rural people had to travel tens of kilometres to the nearest church? Did the penetration of Christianity into rural communities always take the form of coercion and repression by the central authority, or were there other mechanisms to make the new cultural code attractive to ordinary people? The aim of the following study is to highlight the critical moments of interplay between social and economic dimensions and religious change, using the example of the Central European region, i.e. mainly the territory of the present-day Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, and former East Germany. The key theoretical assumption is that in all the societies under discussion, it took quite a long time for the Church to gain an independent status and become an autonomous social and economic force. Until then, Christianity’s ‘public relations’ and material security depended on existing power structures and networks.

Ivo Štefan • ([email protected]) is an Associate Professor at the Department of Archaeology at Charles University, Prague. He is an archaeologist and historian of the early and high Middle Ages. His main areas of research are the socioeconomic and religious transformations of medieval societies in Central Europe and their reflection in material evidence. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 19–40. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138105

20

i vo š te fa n

Always and everywhere, the dynamics and shape of religious change were determined by the political and social macrocontext as well as the local microcontext of personal and local relations (e.g. Rambo 1993; Stark 1996).1 Our task is complicated by the fact that the shape of the social engines of individual early medieval societies is presented by contemporary written sources in an entirely unrepresentative manner and is, therefore, itself the subject of investigation. Each type of source offers a specific testimony, which at the same time has its own limitations: 1) Most written testimonies about the origins of Christianity were written at a considerable distance from the events they describe. The credibility of the information usually cannot be independently verified; 2) Their authors belonged to the clergy and presented a complex confrontation of Christian and ‘traditional’ worldviews through binary perspectives and time-honoured clichés. Moreover, local social reality was usually viewed through the prism of their own social order; 3) If we were to restrict ourselves to the available accounts of particular regions, their informational potential would be quickly exhausted. For example, we have only a few brief reports on the Christianization of Great Moravia or Poland. Thus, to gain a deeper understanding of the mechanisms of adapting Christianity to medieval societies, we often resort to a few scattered information-rich reports from different periods and regions of Europe or work even with examples and models from outside Europe. But we have to admit that this is not an accurate comparison. It is never possible to sufficiently take into account local specificities and, thus, the adequacy of transferring patterns to other environments. Although such ‘analogies’ can be misleading, they are hard to avoid. But a hypercriticism limited to local sources would condemn it to stagnation; 4) The available written accounts of early medieval society focus almost exclusively on the elites and thus report primarily on the broader geopolitical



1 ‘Macrocontext refers to the total environment, including such elements as political systems, religious organisations, relevant ecological considerations, transnational corporations, and economic systems. These forces can either facilitate or obstruct conversion, and may have individual impacts as well as broad, societal ones. […] Microcontext is the more immediate world of a person’s family, friends, ethnic group, religious community, and neighborhood. These immediate influences play an important role in the creation of a sense of identity and belonging and in shaping a person’s thoughts, feelings, and actions. Microcontext and macrocontext interact in various ways; some elements of the microcontext affirm and foster the larger context (as when a religious organisation reinforces patriotic values), while other elements oppose and seek to alter the macrocontext (as when a group challenges prevailing political values). The microcontext can, with enormous effort, neutralize the influence of the macrocontext’ (Rambo 1993, 21–22).

and institutional macrocontext of Christianization. Older historiography often simply transferred these narratives to all social groups. A much more nuanced social perspective is seemingly offered by the archaeological record. Analysing the variation and transformation of burial practices, the distribution of symbolic artefacts, and the remains of sacred objects provide insight into the microcontext of individual communities, from political centres to rural settlements. However, the interpretation of each category of sources necessarily requires contextualization and integration into a theoretical framework deduced again from historiography or the social sciences (e.g. Geake 1997; Schülke 1999; Effros 2003; Petts 2011). The most in-depth attention has traditionally focused on funerary rituals, but these not only reflected religious affiliation and eschatological concepts but could also manifest other identities. In terms of understanding the psychological and social motives for religious conversion, a critical reflection on sociological and cultural anthropological models based on the study of religious change in modern and even recent non-European societies can offer new, fresh perspectives. Some ‘exotic’ analogies may paradoxically be even closer to early medieval reality in Northern and Eastern Europe than the reports of contemporary Christian authors (see Higham 1997, 7–52).

Historical Background Most Central European societies, like those in Scandinavia or Anglo-Saxon England, did not adopt Christianity under the threat of violence, but on the initiative of their own elites through contacts with imperial culture. In all regions, we can also observe a very close interplay between Christianization and political centralization (cf. Berend (ed.) 2007). In the literature, we find several applicable schemes that emphasize the study of Christianization as a long-term process. From all of them, let us mention here the three-stage scheme developed for Scandinavia, distinguishing a ‘contact phase’ associated with the process of ‘cultural osmosis’, a ‘moment of conversion’ associated with the official baptism of the main authority, and a final phase of ‘consolidation’ encompassing ‘growing familiarity with Christian images, concepts and claims’ (Foote 1993; Garipzanov 2014a; Jón Viðar Sigurðsson 2014). However, as the following basic overview already demonstrates, the macrocontext of Christianization varied considerably for the different Central European regions, and the separation of the ‘evolutionary’ stages of Christianization cannot be clear-cut. Moreover, as the example of the Polabians explicitly shows, the adaptation of Christianity may not have been

1 .   chri st i ani zat i o n o f e ast-ce nt ral e u ro pe as a so ci al proces s

unidirectional and cumulative, at least in the first two stages. A number of communities probably returned to traditional ‘paganism’ or rather ‘neo-paganism’ for a shorter or longer period of time. The different political and temporal contexts and other local specificities of each political territory resulted in the phenomenon that Peter Brown called micro-christendoms (Brown 2003). Individual territories were characterized by their own cults of local saints and somewhat different principles of church organization. The beginning of the ‘contact phase’, involving the multifaceted interaction of ‘traditional’ societies centred around local ‘pagan’ cults with the Christian Frankish imperial one, is linked to the reign of Charlemagne. While at least a basic familiarity with Christianity can already be assumed in most societies before then, it was not until the Carolingian expansion that there was a major turning point. It began to systematically encroach on the neighbouring eastern regions from the Baltic to the Adriatic coast and to build a system of border marches (Smith 2008). According to the so-called ‘Bavarian Geographer’ from around the middle of the ninth century, there were dozens of ‘tribes’ (gentes) in the territory of the ‘new barbarians’ in the area between the Danube, Elbe, and Baltic, which were composed of a varying number of smaller territorial units (civitates). Many of these polities are mentioned in Frankish annals as targets of military campaigns. These usually entailed an obligation to pay tribute or the installation of local leaders; only a few resulted in permanent subjugation and annexation to the Empire. The main representatives of these groupings are mentioned by Frankish authors as duces, who undoubtedly existed there for a long time before (Heather 1997; Lübke 1997). The interaction with the dominant Frankish culture, however, was far from being merely a military confrontation. Archaeology throughout the Slavic contact zone has traced a heavy influx of prestigious Frankish objects, weapons, and coins since the early ninth century. This implies intensive trade and diplomatic traffic on long-distance communication networks, which necessarily involves the transfer of information and ideas. Already the Capitulary of Diedenhofen from 805 speaks of ‘merchants going to the lands of the Slavs and Avars’ and forbids them to sell weapons there (Capitulare missorum, c. vii). Some prestigious objects undoubtedly entered the Slavic environment also as diplomatic gifts. In addition to the documented regular attendance of representatives of the various Slavic gentes at official imperial assemblies, we can also assume less formal and personal contacts on both sides of the wide permeable border zone (e.g. Wolfram 2002; Hasil 2011), whose actors were important mediators of ‘cultural osmosis’. Military, political, and economic interactions with the dominant culture in all these societies (unless affiliated

with the Frankish Empire) significantly accelerated the internal development and consolidation of collective identities or even their formation (Heather 1997). The most common reactions were political centralization and the gradual monopolization of power by elites, which, as we will show below, were closely related to the Christian model of authority. As early as the eighth century, multi-ethnic Carinthia, represented by the local princes, came under the strong influence of neighbouring Christian Bavaria. After 750, the son and nephew of the last ‘pagan’ prince Boruth, who had been brought up as Christian in a Bavarian monastery, succeeded to the princely throne. After 752 Prince Cheitmar is said to have called missionaries from Salzburg to the country. Efforts to convert the local population were to spark pagan and anti-Bavarian uprisings, which were violently suppressed at the initiative of Bavarian Duke Tassilo III in 772. Several princes of native origin installed by the Bavarians subsequently succeeded to the local princely throne. However, by the decision of Louis the Pious (r. 813–840), the local elite was eventually removed from power, and Carinthia became a Frankish county in 828 (Wolfram 2021; Eichert 2017). In the Central Danube region, after the defeat and collapse of the Avar Kaganate, Salzburg, Passau, and Regensburg became the most important Christianizing centres. Already in 796, a synod took place somewhere on the Danube to include this diverse zone within the liturgical boundaries of the Carolingian Empire (Reimitz 2001), and in the subsequent period, we can assume the presence of missionary activities, but of which we have few concrete accounts. The extent to which this was a systematic missionary programme or individual ad hoc activities is unclear from the sources. The Life of Methodius states that before the arrival of Byzantine missionaries in 863, ‘Christian teachers from Italy, Greece and Germany’ were to work in Moravia (Life of Methodius, p. 144). Probably before 829, the bishop of Passau consecrated the church in Nitra to the local chief, Pribina. But the latter was not baptized until a few years later in exile at the court of Louis the German. The church may have been intended for his wife, who probably came from East Marche. In 831, according to the younger but reliable Passau tradition, ‘all Moravians’ received baptism (Třeštík 2001, 115–26). These events were accompanied by political centralization under the rule of a local dynasty of princes, which became dangerous opponents of the East Frankish Empire under Svatopluk (871–894) (Goldberg 2004) and in the 880s Moravia became the first in the region to have its own archdiocese, although we know very little about the local ecclesiastical organization from the available sources. Furthermore, the period of the late ninth century was marked by an internal crisis of the

21

22

i vo š te fa n

Moravians’ political formation, which subsequently disappeared due to Hungarian attacks (Štefan 2011). However, Christianity had already become so entrenched that it survived the collapse of the Moravian secular and ecclesiastic structures in ‘stand-by mode’. In any case, in the following period, we have no more reports of pagan revivals or missionary activities. Another nucleus of embryonic political structures and Christianity around the middle of the ninth century became the area around Lake Balaton, entrusted by Louis the German as comitatus to the aforementioned Moravian exile and fresh convert Pribina (Wolfram 2002, 207–08). Pribina and his son Kocel created a multi-ethnic political territory here and built a number of religious buildings under the patronage and with the material and know-how support of the Salzburg bishopric (Szőke 2010). As in the case of Moravia, however, the arrival of the Hungarians brought here a collapse also. The question of the continuity of Christianity in the following period is a matter of debate. In Bohemia, in the first decades of the tenth century, there were still several independent or rather semi-independent political territories. By the end of the ninth century, the Přemyslids of Central Bohemia had already gained dominance, backed by a system of massive fortresses (Varadzin 2011; Štefan and Boháčová 2018). During the tenth century, under unclear circumstances, the Přemyslids also took control of the rest of Bohemia and expanded further east (Lutovský 2014). Of the ecclesiastical centres, nearby Regensburg had a major influence on local events, but Moravia also began to develop Christianization activities during the reign of Svatopluk. A long discussion is accompanied by a laconic reference in the Annales Fuldenses to the baptism of fourteen Bohemian princes in 845 in Regensburg in the presence of Louis the German, which has no resonance in the younger sources. A younger, inconsistent tradition linked the reception of baptism to members of the Přemyslid dynasty. The most commonly accepted is the Christiani legend from the late tenth century, according to which the first historically known Přemyslid, Bořivoj, received baptism in Moravia sometime before 885. After 895, however, Bohemia rejoined Bavaria, and until the foundation of the Bishopric of Prague in 973–976, the ‘little Bohemian Church’ remained the missionary space of the Bishopric of Regensburg (Sommer and others 2007; Štefan 2022; see the study by David Kalhous and Josef Šrámek in this volume). The vast territory of today’s Poland between the Oder and Vistula rivers was separated from imperial centres by the territory of the ‘Polabian Slavs’ and was a peripheral region in terms of Frankish and Byzantine interests. Even archaeological evidence up to the second half of the tenth century does not indicate intensive contact with the west, but mainly with eastern or

northern Europe (Bogucki 2016). From the beginning of the tenth century, however, Baltic amber flowed into Bohemia on a large scale, suggesting a connection with the territory of Poland (Tomková 1998). The process of political centralization and the adoption of Christianity thus raises a number of questions here, given the lack of written sources. According to the Geographer of Bavaria, there were already ‘tribal’ political territories here before the Piast dynasty. The Life of Methodius mentions the baptism of a ‘very powerful pagan prince residing on the Vistula’ allegedly forced by the Moravian prince Svatopluk before 885 (Life of Methodius, p. 156). But this was certainly nothing more than a political episode without wider implications and has left no trace in the archaeological record. According to contemporary archaeology, the embryonic territorial structure of the early Piast state does not emerge in central Poland until the second quarter of the tenth century. During the reigns of Mieszko I (r. 960–992) and Bolesław Chrobry (or Boleslaus the Brave, r. 992–1025), the Piasts gradually annexed other areas to the core, establishing regional fortified centres (Kara 2010; Trzeciecki, 2016). Thus, the conversion of the first historical Piast, Mieszko, probably in 966, seems like a flash in the pan. Thietmar of Merseburg and Gall Anonym attribute the main initiative to his wife Doubravka, daughter of the Bohemian duke Boleslaw I. But Bohemia could hardly have provided Mieszko with institutional support at that time. The missionary bishop, Jordan, and the first bishop of Poznań, Ungar, were directly subordinate to the pope (Wiszewski 2010, 3–10). During the reign of Mieszko’s son Boleslaw the Brave, in 1000, after a visit by Emperor Otto III (r. 996–1002), he gained new political territory with the Archbishopric of Gniezno and the Bishoprics of Wrocław, Cracow and Kołobrzeg (Michałowski 2016). The invasion of the Bohemian prince Břetislav and a major internal political crisis in the 1130s also led to a long-term breakdown of the entire ecclesiastical organization (summarized in Urbańczyk and Rosik 2007). The emergence of the early monarchy and the subsequent establishment of a territorial church organization in Hungary also belong to the same period as in Poland. However, the initial assumptions of the two regions were significantly different. The defeat at Augsburg in 955 is considered to be the turning point in the transformation of the polycentric nomadic empire, which had threatened the whole of Europe since the beginning of the tenth century, into a medieval territorial state. However, the available sources here are also insufficient and often even contradictory (Berend and others 2007; Zsoldos 2020, 35–43). Due to their geographical location, individual Hungarian chieftains ‘flirted’ with both Latin Christianity and Byzantium before the official conversion. In the middle of the tenth

1 .   chri st i ani zat i o n o f e ast-ce nt ral e u ro pe as a so ci al proces s

century, the chiefs Bulcsú and Gyula, whose godfather was Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus himself, are said to have been baptized in Constantinople. As late as the beginning of the eleventh century, the ruler of eastern Hungary, Ajtony, one of the main opponents of King Stephen, was baptized in Byzantium. The leaning towards different Christian centres seems to have reflected internal political tensions and the search for different allies. A key initiator of the Latin orientation was Géza († 997), to whose reign there are variously credible accounts of the activities of several missions from the empire and even the mission of St Vojtěch/ Adalbert and his disciples. At the end of his reign, a monastery was founded in Pannonhalma and a bishopric in Veszprém. Early in his reign, his son Stephen took advantage of a prestigious marriage to Henry II’s sister Gisela and, with the help of the German cavalry, defeated his rival Koppány, whose rebellion may have had pagan elements. During his long reign, Stephen I (r. 997–1038) unified the country through the liquidation and subjugation of rival leaders and, like the rulers of Bohemia and Poland, established a system of regional castles that also became the backbone of ecclesiastical organization. He established the Archbishopric of Esztergom, to which the bishoprics of Veszprém, Győr, Transylvania, Pécs, Eger, and Csanád were subordinated (Koszta 2010). But even Hungary did not escape a major internal crisis in the 1040s after Stephen’s death, which was accompanied by pagan uprisings, attacks on church institutions and violence against the clergy (Lübke 2001, 487–91; Berend and others 2007). The complex development in most regions under discussion, of which we undoubtedly know only the basic contours, can, therefore, certainly not be considered linear. Nevertheless, Christianity everywhere entered, sooner or later, a third phase of ‘consolidation’ from which there was no turning back (although it is difficult to pinpoint its onset). However, an extremely interesting ‘laboratory’ of failed centralization and Christianization was the region between the Elbe and the Oder, populated by a series of segmentary polities collectively called Polabian Slavs or Polabians. The most prominent of these, the Abodrites, connected with the Vagrians, Velets/Lutizi, and Sorbs (and with them a number of smaller units), appear quite frequently in Frankish sources from the late eighth and ninth centuries onwards. Their leaders (duces, principes, or even reges) entered into political contacts, and their representatives attended imperial assemblies. Thus, we seem to identify similar processes and structures here in the written and archaeological sources as elsewhere in the contact Slavic zones on the edges of the Frankish Empire (Fritze 1960; Friedmann 1986; Lübke 1997; on the archaeology Gabriel 1986; Brather 1996; Biermann 2014). Until the tenth century, the different religious

identities of the Franks and Polabans did not seem to have played a significant role in their interactions, and if any missionary attempts were made, they had no effect (Gläser 2002). The situation changed significantly as a result of the shift of the centre of gravity of the Empire to Saxony. During the reigns of Henry I (r. 919–936) and Otto I (r. 936–973), a military expansion to the east was underway, which between the 920s and 950s annexed to the Empire vast regions between the Elbe, Saale, and Oder, and was carried on by harsh Christianizing rhetoric. The spread of Christianity among the Slavic population was to be handled by the newly established bishoprics of Brandenburg, Havelberg (948), and Starigard/Oldenburg (872) and the archbishopric of Magdeburg with the bishoprics of Merseburg, Zeitz, and Meißen (968). Nevertheless, the enormous pressure on Slavic societies in 983 triggered a major pagan uprising that brought resistance to Christianity, the long-term demise of the first three bishoprics, and a search for alternatives to the hierarchical model of social structure. On the foundations of the older Velets, the supra-ethnic confederation of the Lutizi was formed, eliminating from its leadership the princes, who were replaced by a corps of priests. Under the influence of competing Christianity, it organized its new identity around a pagan cult centre at Riedegost-Rethra. The political situation eventually led to an alliance with Henry II (r. 1002–1024) against the Polish Boleslaw the Brave. Although the confederation crumbled from the mid-eleventh century onwards, paganism was alive in the region until the fall of Arkona in 1168 (Lübke 2008; Hardt 2015). Exceptional evidence that Christianization may not have been a linear process is offered by the Abodrites and the Vagrians, consisting of several semi-independent segments (sometimes with their own sub-reguli) that never quite managed to become completely unified. However, unlike the Lutzes, the Abodrites and Vagrians did not eliminate the principle of princely rule. As early as 934, during Henry I’s campaign to Hedeby, the Danish king was to be baptized together with an unnamed rex Abodritorum. The establishment of the bishopric of Oldeburg, subordinate to Hamburg, was also to strengthen the sacral legitimacy of the local princes. However, as archaeological research has revealed, a pagan shrine was established on the site of the church of Oldenburg after the pagan uprising in 983 or in the 1100s (Ruchhöft 2011). Another attempt to Christianize the Abodrites and probably to consolidate central power through a network of castles was associated with the zealous Christian Gottschalk (r. 1046–1066), educated at the monastery of the Saxon dukes at Lüneburg. But the diligent conversion of the Abodrites to the faith and the construction of a church organization was not

23

24

i vo š te fa n

without coercion. Eventually, Gottschalk ‘was killed by the pagans he was striving to convert to Christianity’, and the government was taken over by his pagan rival Kruto. Churches and monasteries were again destroyed, and priests allegedly sacrificed to pagan gods. In 1093, with the help of the Danes and Saxons, Gottschalk’s son Heinrich (r. 1090–1127) returned from exile and ordered the Abodrites to submit to Christianity and pay tribute to the Saxons. The memory of his father’s activities, however, aroused such resentment that he preferred to resign himself to the Christianization of the population, contenting himself with a private church in Alt-Lübeck with a single priest. The next ruler, Niklot, again arose from pagan opposition. The final assertion of Christianity and the restoration of the church structure only occurred during the reign of his successor Pribislav, who received the land as a fief from the Duke of Saxony, Henry the Lion (Kahl 2011, 181–232). At this time, a rapid transformation of society began, associated with the coming of colonists from western Europe and a complex change in socioeconomic patterns (Lübke 2014).

Proponents and Opponents of the God of the Christians One does not have to be a fan of Karl Marx to notice that every social change has its proponents and opponents. The former initiate it, or at least actively welcome it, with a vision of benefits of various kinds, while the latter may perceive it as a threat for various (real or perceived) reasons. There is a general consensus that Christianity entered early medieval European ‘barbarian’ societies at the initiative of its authorities and, in the first phase, spread through prestigious social networks. Although one must be wary of the extremely simplified top-down model presented by most contemporary Christian authors, its principled validity is beyond question. With the exception of Iceland and a few other island societies, we know of no society in medieval Europe without a central authority that embraced Christianity. Unfortunately, unlike in Scandinavia ( Jørgensen 2014) or England (Mason and Williamson 2017), we are not yet able to archaeologically identify most of the pre-Christian, or better, non-Christian, cult sites in Central Europe, except for the Polabians (Słupecki 1994; Štefan 2022, 102–03; on Poland, Moździoch 2014). Written sources only provide information about the situation in the eleventh and twelfth centuries and only from the Polabians and Pomeranians in the north (cf. Álvarez-Pedrosa 2021). However, all the reports of Thietmar of Merseburg, Adam of Bremen, Helmold of Bossau, and the biographers of Otto of Bamberg (Rosik 2020; Biermann and Ruchhöft (eds) 2017; Klápště 2022)

reflect only the situation after the great pagan revolt of 983. However, the clearly defined ‘pagan’ identities here were only created by a long-term confrontation with Christianity, some elements of which paganism adapted. The novelty was probably the centralization of the cult around large shrines manned by a layer of professional priests, which simultaneously became supra-regional political centres (Lübke 2008; Wichert 2010). Therefore, the situation in these regions can hardly be projected onto Bohemia, Poland, or even Hungary before the adoption of Christianity. As in England or in Saxony and Friesland, traditional cults were probably originally much less organized and rather cyclical in character (Wood 1995). Traditional religions encompassed all spheres of community life in a single sacral unity, were ethnocentric, orally transmitted, and therefore highly elastic and eclectic, and therefore usually tolerant in relation to other religions (e.g. Urbańczyk 2003, 16–22). Unfortunately, however, due to the lack of sources, we may not be able to go beyond these general characteristics (cf. Štefan 2021, 102–03). The ‘careers’ of individual gods and cults could be linked to the military and political successes of particular political segments that associated their identities with them. Medieval writers were keen to confuse the moment of conversion of rulers or leaders and the founding of the first churches with the unconditional acceptance of God’s Word by all population groups. This scenario was based on the imperial model of authority, where the ruler’s decisions are binding on the entire community (e.g. Latowsky 2013). However, in order to effectively enforce hierarchical decisions, there had to be a central authority with an ordered hierarchical structure possessing the tools of repression. In contrast, the societies of the former period were based on different social concepts and codes. The colourful story of St Ansgar’s second missionary journey to Sweden in 852, recorded by Rimbert, stands out from the stylized descriptions of conversions. It aptly documents the clash between the universalist imperial model of Christianity and the complex local reality. Some missionaries may have taken similar experiences with them from central Europe. As an experienced missionary, Ansgar began by meeting the highest local authority, King Olaf, at Birka, from whom he apparently expected personal conversion and effective support for the spread of God’s Word. But after receiving rich gifts and blessings from Louis the Pious, King Olaf is said to have told him, In former times there have been clergy who have been driven out by a rising of the people and not by the command of the king. On this account I have not the power, nor do I dare, to approve the objects of your mission until I can consult our gods by the

1 .   chri st i ani zat i o n o f e ast-ce nt ral e u ro pe as a so ci al proces s

casting of lots and until I can enquire the will of the people in regard to this matter. Let your messenger attend with me the next assembly and I will speak to the people on your behalf. And if they approve your desire and the gods consent, that which you have asked shall be successfully carried out, but if it should turn out otherwise, I will let you know. It is our custom that the control of public business of every kind should rest with the whole people and not with the king. Olaf first presented Angar’s proposal to his princeps and together they were then to draw lots on a certain plain to see if it was in accordance with the will of the gods. After the announcement at the council there was a stormy discussion. On the intercession of one of the ‘elder men’ (senior natu), the operation of the mission was finally universally approved. The king then rose up from amongst the assembly and forthwith directed one of his own messengers to accompany the bishop’s messenger, and to tell him that the people were unanimously inclined to accept his proposal and at the same time to tell him that, whilst their action was entirely agreeable to him, he could not give his full consent until, in another assembly, which was to be held in another part of his kingdom, he could announce this resolution to the people who lived in that district (Rimbert, Vita Anskarii, ch. 26, 27). Let us just add that the real promotion of Christianity in Sweden did not begin until 150 years later, during the reign of Olaf Skötkonung (995–1022) (Sanmark 2003). Rimbert’s narrative is not, of course, an ethnographic record, but it is nevertheless a very valuable ‘thick description’ of the social institutions throughout the former barbaricum that may have blocked the promotion of social change. As Karol Modzelewski (2015) has shown in a number of examples, the main organizing principle of the social architecture of pre-state societies was kinship and affiliation with regional units. While these territorial ‘segments’ could temporarily become part of larger confederations, they usually continued to retain their identity and autonomy. Phases of integration alternated with phases of disintegration. The main institutions of decision-making and law were the assemblies, which, at least in theory, interpreted the will of all the free inhabitants of a given territory by delegating representatives. They could have several levels, from local to supra-regional. As Rimbert makes clear, the decision of one regional assembly was not binding on another. In some areas, assemblies were able to manage large groups of people in the long term and effectively, quite without the authority of

the monarch.2 The Scandinavian thing (Iversen 2019) and the Anglo-Saxon witan corresponded to the wiece or sněm in Slavic settings (Zernack 1967; Boroń 1999). Collectivist decision-making institutions undoubtedly existed in various forms in all the other Central European regions under discussion before the emergence of stable monarchies. According to the Legenda Christiani (pp. 22–23, 30–31) of the late tenth century, a hundred years earlier in the core of Bohemia, a political representation of the great men met without a duke. The tradition of assemblies continued to survive even within the structures of Christian monarchies in the form of land assemblies, although there is no unanimous opinion on the continuity with the pre-state period, and the participation of the non-nobles was mostly symbolic (Zernack 1967; Žemlička 1993; Wihoda 2011). In addition to ordinary assemblies attended by representatives of prominent families and representatives of the Church, information about large assemblies still occurred in Bohemia, Poland, and Hungary in the twelfth century. In all these monarchies, the acclamation of rulers was still (even if only symbolically) a matter for all free people.3 It was not until the thirteenth century that the ancient collectivist principle of public administration was definitively replaced in Central Europe by an elite model of dominance. We can therefore conclude that at the time of the advent of Christianity, dukes were certainly not autocratic rulers, but, rather, charismatic and generous leaders. Like Olaf of Sweden, they may have been significantly constrained by ‘tribal’ institutions. But the functions and powers of leaders undoubtedly varied region by region and, moreover, changed very dynamically. In any case, non-consensual claims could easily meet resistance (cf. Thurston 2010). All the dynasties of Central Europe began their careers as leaders of pagan, gentile societies. Unfortunately, written sources do not inform us about their role in pre-Christian religions and public ritual activities. For the Hungarians in the ninth century, Muslim

2 ‘Saxons had no king but satrapas over each village; and their custom was to hold a general meeting once a year in the centre of Saxony near the river Yser at a place called Marklo’ (Vita Lebuini Antiqua, p. 793). In the Slavic environment, the functioning of the akephal polity of Lutitzi is aptly described by Thietmar of Merseburg (Thietmar, Chronicon, vi. 22–25). 3 ‘So young Bolesław returned, and on arrival called a meeting, first of the leading townsmen and elders, and then of the people as a whole (totum populum).’(Gall, Chronicon, ii. 16), and in 1130 the Bohemian prince called an assembly of ‘almost three thousand men’ to Vyšehrad (FRB ii, p. 209). In Hungary, the general assemblies, where trials were held and laws were established, were attended by two representatives (eloquent sages) from every village in the land to represent the Hungarian people (Zupka 2016, 74–75).

25

26

i vo š te fa n

sources mention two chiefs, a nominal ruler or king (kündü or kende) and a military leader (gyula), which is sometimes interpreted as a dual kingship (sacral and military authority). In any case, this duality of ruling authority no longer appears in the later period (Berend and others 2007, 322–23). Nevertheless, it is very likely that the protection and organization of the public cult and active participation in the main public ceremonies were among the important duties of the leaders (cf. Wood 1995, 257–59; Sonne 2014).4 In Rus’, Prince Vladimir allegedly attempted to reform the pagan cult before adopting Christianity, which he therefore had to manage (Urbańczyk 2003, 19). The great seasonal religious festivals were probably regularly linked to the sessions of the assemblies (Modzelewski 2015, 305). The very fact that in all the early states of Central Europe, the first churches under the control of the ruling elites were established on the grounds of fortified centres is sufficient to argue for a prior link between government and cult. The motivations of early medieval elites to convert have been discussed many times. For Central Europe, too, we can accept the initial thesis of Nicolas J. Higham (1997) that the Christian rulers of the first generation did not share the worldview, value system, or beliefs of the missionaries they protected and sheltered. More than a pious awakening, it was probably usually a pragmatic decision, as political macrocontext played an essential role for leaders involved in international elite networks. Christianity was part of a prestigious cultural package, the acceptance of which enhanced the domestic leaders’ ratings as political partners and their alliance and marriage possibilities. The political potential of conversion was purposefully handled by both Frankish and Byzantine rulers, who often became godfathers to local elites and invested in costly baptismal gifts. As in Anglo-Saxon contexts, baptismal patronage could become a symbolic tool of domination (Angenend 1973; Coupland 1998; Althoff 2013a).5 The social handicap of pagans, for example, was the justification for the conversion of the Bohemian prince Bořivoj at the court of the Moravian prince Svatopluk in Legenda Christiani (pp. 18–20). The primary motivation, however, may have been pressure from a powerful neighbour, who may additionally have offered Bořivoj military support against competition from other Bohemian princes (Třeštík 1997, 312–47; Sommer and

4 The Czech and Polish words for priest (kněz, ksiądz) both derive from the Common Slavic term for ruler (kъnęzь, itself derived from the Germanic word kunigaz). 5 It is possible that the luxurious Carolingian warrior set placed together with the magnificent liturgical chalice in a tomb in Kolín in central Bohemia could be related to the baptism of fourteen Bohemian princes in 845 (Košta and Lutovský 2014).

others 2007, 226–27). We have already mentioned the Frankish military support of the Hungarian king Stephen against local opposition. The Abodrites princes of the eleventh and twelfth centuries had similar motivations and sought to reinforce their precarious position within their own society by loyalty to neighbouring Christian Saxony and Denmark (Kahl 2011, 181–232). In the long run, however, Christianity also offered significant symbolic capital, reinforcing the power of the ruler at the expense of the old collectivist institutions associated with pagan cults. Pagan religion was inherently decentralized, and individual regional cult centres must therefore have been challenging to control and establish a common ideology around, integrating the entire political territory (Higham 1997, 25–26). Rulers subsequently became the main protectors and sponsors of the church, which in turn provided them with new sacral legitimacy and administrative ‘know-how’ (see, e.g., Urbańczyk 2003, 23–26; Jón Viđar Sigurđsson 2014, 231–33). The main practical condition was the provision of permanent and independent resources, which the ruler and the elites had to possess (Wickham 2005, 304–05). Thus, an alternative, hierarchized ecclesiastical network gradually formed, in which the rulers, through their influence over bishops and main ecclesiastical institutions, directly controlled and used to integrate their territory. The sacralization of the ruling dynasty through the canonization of saintly kings could also be a powerful ideological tool, but only some dynasties of Central Europe capitalized on it (Klaniczay 2002). A number of examples suggest the inclusiveness of ‘gentile’ religions (von Padberg 1995; Urbańczyk 2003). As Rimbert recounts, if the local gods agreed, the Christian god could join them. In any case, the ruler’s personal conversion to Christianity itself was not perceived as a threat by pagan societies. Almost all the polities of the former barbarian zones found themselves in a situation where for a shorter or longer period, a Christian leader represented the pagan communities. As the stories of the Abodrites and Vagrians illustrate, in extreme cases, the coexistence of Christian rulers and a predominantly pagan population could last for many generations (Kahl 2011, 181–232). The threat, then, became not the adoption of Christianity itself but its exclusive claims, which required a radical collective severing of ties with traditional ancestral customs. As several missionary narratives note, the disruption of the old order threatened the world order and economic prosperity, according to the locals. The destruction of pagan cult sites associated with regional identities could be seen as a violation of the traditional social code. In this context, the close connection between Christianization and political centralization in the early Middle Ages makes clear sense. It is no coincidence

1 .   chri st i ani zat i o n o f e ast-ce nt ral e u ro pe as a so ci al proces s

that, unlike other Central European dukes, the rulers of the Abodrites and Vagrians succeeded in neither. The converting leaders were certainly well aware of this critical moment. What the Christian authors present as a radical cut must therefore have been a complex and long-term process of negotiation with various social groups. Pagan and Christian institutions, therefore, probably coexisted in many places for a shorter or longer time. Adrian Hasings’s characterization of the socio-religious identity of Islamic medieval West African rulers can probably be applied to most princes and kings on the northern and eastern peripheries of the Frankish Empire in the early Middle Ages: If the kings were mostly Muslim, they remained, for the most part, hardly less participants in the network of traditional religion, and Muslim visitors may often have been offended by the rapid transition from one form of discourse to another. From an international and intertribal perspective, their status rested in their Islamic identity, but in terms of local support at the heart of their kingdom, it rested in the rituals of traditional religion, and only the greatest king could afford to abandon the latter. As his power waned and traders moved away, the warm embrace of traditional religion, its rituals and its own monarchical mystique remained the only safe option (Hastings 1994, 60). The Christianization of symbolic communication and rituals of power (Althoff 2013b; Dalewski 2008) was a long-term affair. Intronization rituals and political myths of origo gentis and the origins of dynasties survived from pagan times (Třeštík 2003; Banaszkiewicz 2010). Effective Christianization was, therefore, not possible without the active support of the elites. Mass baptism, preceded by a consensus decision of the council, had a much greater chance of lasting effect than an individual ruler’s conversion.6 For example, it was at



6 When Princess Olga of Rus’ attempted to persuade her son Sviatoslav (962–962) to accept baptism, he is said to have replied, ‘How shall I alone accept another faith? My followers will laugh at that’ (The Russian Primary Chronicle, 6463 (995), pp. 83–84). The Bohemian Prince Bořivoj is said to have received baptism in Moravia with his closest retinue of thirty warriors, but his return was followed by a ‘pagan uprising’ (Legenda Christiani, pp. 20–21). The Danish ‘king’ Harald was said to have been baptized in Mainz in 826 with a retinue of 400 in total. But even this was no guarantee of success at home (Annales Xantenses, pp. 6–7). King Eldwin of Northumbria († 632/633) was more successful. When urged by bishop Paulinus to finally accept Christianity, he declared, according to Bede, ‘that he was both willing and bound to receive the faith which Paulinus taught; but that he would confer about it with his chief friends and counsellors, to the end that if they also were of his opinion,

the assembly of Bohemian grandees that the pagan opposition to Bořivoj was to be defeated, according to the Legenda Christiani (pp. 24–29). In any case, without the representatives of the noble families, who formed intermediaries between the central power and the regional nodes through their own social networks, the initial Christianization was not realizable. There is a perpetual debate within Central Medieval Studies concerning the continuity between the pre-state elites and the nobility of early medieval states. Although the one-time liquidation of the old social structures seems inconceivable, it was precisely this territorial expansion that allowed rulers to monopolize the public sphere and become its sovereign owners. Nobles of various origins formed the core of military retinues and, in all Central European monarchies, subsequently provided the administration of the different regions through a system of regional fortified centres subordinate to the monarch. Castle churches (eventually churches in the courts of the rulers), too, gradually became key nodes of Christianization (Mordovin 2016). The spread of Christianity became a form of loyalty, rewarded with various benefits. The highest domestic elites were often offered prestigious careers as bishops and abbots not long after the establishment of local sees. For instance, the second bishop of Prague, in succession, became Vojtěch-Adalbert, a family member of local magnates. Other domestic nobles became members of prestigious chapters and monasteries. Communication between regional centres and rural settlements had to be handled by lower ‘management’. Thanks to extant law codes, we know the most about the early state of Hungary, where a hierarchical system of counties with clearly legally and professionally defined population groups was already established under Stephen (e.g. Engel 2001, 66–82). In Bohemia and Poland, we, unfortunately, learn about the organization of the interaction between the central power and local communities only from a few unrepresentative references (Kalhous 2012).7 Information about the new religion, its benefits, and pitfalls undoubtedly flowed through these channels.

they might all together be consecrated to Christ in the font of life’. What follows is a vivid description of the council, where everyone, including the pagan priest, had the opportunity to express his attitude towards the new faith (Bede, Hist. Eccl, ii. 13). Let us recall the baptism of ‘all Moravians’ in 831 according to the younger Passau tradition. 7 For example, Cosmas (Chronicle, i. 19) in the early twelfth century speaks in an anecdotal story about the building of a wall in Stará Boleslav in Central Bohemia of the communication between the prince and the populi primates. On the delegation of power and the creation of a network of local loyalties under Bolesław the Brave in Poland see Gall, Chronicon, i. 15.

27

28

i vo š te fa n

However, despite the rapid territorial expansion and establishment in the international political field associated with the founding of bishoprics and archbishoprics, the early Central European states were still structurally weak and insufficiently integrated internally. The great crises of Poland and Hungary in the 1030s and 1040s, following the reigns of the exceptionally able and charismatic rulers Boleslaw the Brave and Stephen, were caused by a combination of external and internal factors. Written sources in both cases speak of both rebellions against the elites and opposition to Christianity associated with the destruction of churches and the killing of priests. Thus, in both polities, there were still large groups of the population and part of the elites who did not accept either the hierarchical principle of the monarchy or the new religion. In Poland, the subsequent renewal of church organization took many decades, while in Hungary, the last pagan uprising broke out at the general council as late as 1061, although it was soon suppressed (Lübke 2001; Takács 2014). Archaeology bears crucial testimony to other dimensions of Christianization. Other factors not mentioned in written sources also influenced the possibilities for promoting any innovation in society. Individual Central European polities differed demographically at the time of the ‘official conversion’, which affected the ‘density’ of social contacts and the degree of involvement of regional structures in larger political units. A more significant material indicator of integration is the existence of a hierarchy of regional and supra-regional centres. In this respect, based on current knowledge, settlement patterns prior to the ‘official conversion’ in (Great) Moravia and Bohemia appear to be quite complex (Macháček 2010; Poláček (ed.) 2020; Štefan and Boháčová 2018). In the territory of Greater Poland, a system of larger regional centres emerged only a few decades before the conversion (Trzeciecki 2016), and in the case of Hungary, these were more or less parallel processes (Mordovin 2016). However, neither the aforementioned individual conversions of the elite nor the consensus decisions of the councils could have had a such a great effect without the existence of accessible churches served by professional clergy. As we have already noted, the first stage of all Central European polities was characterized by the close connection between the church organization and fortified centres of governance. This is thus a different pattern from the one we know from post-Roman western Europe, where churches were also established in large numbers in the countryside on the initiative of local elites (Wood 2006). However, there are still many questions about the development of the earliest church organization that only archaeological research can answer. In any case, in Bohemia and Poland, for a long time, there was a significant disproportion between

the centralizing nuclei, where the first churches were established in connection with the most important political and ecclesiastical centres, and the peripheries with a very sparse network of church buildings, or with no churches at all. Although we lack precise dates, it seems that in the more developed Bohemia, churches were established in all the major regional centres during the second half of the tenth or the first half of the eleventh century. In the case of the much larger Poland, the process of building the foundations of church organization took considerably longer. In the vast region of Kuyavia, for example, on the border of the crystallizing core of the early state, the first church was not established until the end of the eleventh century, more than a century after the ‘official conversion’ (see Marcin Danielewski’s study in this volume). The eastern regions, then, were even more significantly belated. Where did the regional elites worship God? Or did they not yet worship the Christian God? In any case, such regional studies strongly erode the traditional historical narrative of the smooth and homogeneous Christianization of entire formally dominated territories. Thietmar of Merseburg also included several mocking remarks about the ambitious Polish king, Boleslaw the Brave, in his chronicle. He writes that even in the time of Prince Mieszko, ‘who was still a pagan, every wife had to follow her husband after death. She was beheaded and burned with him’ (Thietmar, Chronicon, ii. 5). Archaeology gives him credit, at least in the latter. With the exception of Hungary, in all the regions under discussion before the advent of Christianity, cremation was entirely predominant. Although the negative attitude towards the burning of the dead was not based on any clear theological justification, this ‘barbaric’ custom was associated by the Church with a pagan identity and, as such, was completely unacceptable (Effros 1997). Although the onset of inhumation was not necessarily linked to conversion everywhere, abandoning cremation was certainly one of the first requirements for fresh converts (Štefan 2007; Brather 2018). The dynamics of burial ritual change may thus be one of the other important ‘barometers’ not only of the promotion of Christianization but also of the impact of central power at the local level. Unfortunately, cremation burials rarely survive, so we can usually only assess the appearance of inhumation graves. In Great Moravia and Bohemia, the mass abandonment of cremation probably occurred within a few decades after the ‘official conversion’ and not only in the agglomerations of important centres but also in the countryside (Štefan 2007; Macháček 2017). In Poland, the structural weakness of the central government assumed above is also manifested in the area of burial. As the studies by Przemysław Urbańczyk and Marcin Danielewski in this volume show, it is likely that even when Emperor Otto III travelled in 1000 to the

1 .   chri st i ani zat i o n o f e ast-ce nt ral e u ro pe as a so ci al proces s

Figure 1.1. The oldest known church cemeteries in various key ruling centres of Central Europe. The size of communities buried around churches varied considerably from region to region. 1. Great Moravian centre of Mikulčice, church no. 3 (ninth and early tenth centuries; according to Klanica and others 2019); 2. Budeč, Bohemia (turn of the ninth and tenth centuries; according to Bartošková 2014); 3. church no. 2 in Ostrów Lednicki, Poland (turn of the tenth and eleventh centuries; after Górecki 1996); 4. Alt Lübeck, one of the main castles of Wagriens (first phase: turn of the eleventh/twelfth centuries; second phase: twelfth century; after Grabowski 2010). (Modified by the author.)

Gniezno summit, soon followed by the establishment of the archbishopric, he would see burning funeral pyres on the way. The very low representation of skeletal burials older than the early eleventh century around the main centres of the early Piast dynasty (e.g. compared to Prague Castle and other strongholds in Central Bohemia) indicates the practice of cremation by perhaps some proportion of the retinue of the ruler and their kinship groups. The abandonment of cremation in favour of the burial of unburnt bodies was also a long-standing process among various groups of Polabinans. The first inhumation burials in Starigard-Oldenburg tied to a

wooden structure, probably the oldest church, are associated with the conversion of a duke of Abodrites in 936 (Gabriel and Kempke 2011). Eloquent evidence of the resistance of the majority of the population was provided by the excavation of the church foundations at the main seat of the Christian prince of Vagrinas, Heinrich (1093–1127), in Alt-Lübeck (Fig. 1.1). After a pagan uprising in which his father Gottschalk was killed and churches and monasteries destroyed, he abandoned his efforts to spread Christianity among his subjects. The private scale of the local Christian community is evidenced by only twelve burials discovered in and

29

30

i vo š te fa n

around the church (Biermann 2010, 338). The general population of eastern Polabinas did not definitively abandon cremation until the second half of the twelfth century (Pollex 2004; Brather 2018).

arranged marriages, are among the cultural universals of all agrarian societies. The socially consolidating function of collective rituals is indispensable for any agrarian society (cf. Rappaport 1999; Trigger 2003, 509–16; Feinman 2016, 4–6; Insoll 2004). It was thus up to the new Christian elites to satisfy the old demands in a new, albeit superficially Christianized form. Where an accessible network of castle churches could be built in a relatively short time, the involvement of rural communities in public Christian rituals could be relatively smooth and unconflicted. In regions where the central government or Christian elites were still weak and thus unable to effectively meet the need for public festivals, the general population was left with non-Christian alternatives. In some places, there may have been a Christianization of the old supra-communal centres, such as among the Northwest Slavs (GringmuthDallmer 2010); in contrast, in other regions, such as central Bohemia, we observe a marked discontinuity between the older and newer Přemyslid centres (Štefan and Boháčová 2018). The early form of spiritual care, provided only by the few castle churches, must have been quite extensive from a later perspective — rural people probably visited them at most a few times a year. But the great public festivals that drew them out of the round of everyday life in their small community must have been an attractive programme that tempted them to go on a long journey. The customary participation of priests in secular public festivals is referred to in Hungarian law codes (Bak 2000, 122–23). Christianity in Estonia or in Russia operated on a similar principle in many places until the early modern period (e.g. Valk 2001; Musin 2017). The extent of burials at castle churches varied from polity to polity (Fig. 1.1). From the early period, large ‘public’ cemeteries are known only from the environs of Great Moravia and the Carolingian Zalavár of the ninth and early tenth centuries, where they probably also served the ordinary inhabitants of the agglomerations.9 In Bohemia, only small elite communities were buried around castle churches, and in Poland, the number of graves in the first cemeteries was even lower. Thus, the vast majority of the population of Central Europe had long buried their dead in local ‘field cemeteries’ without churches. The form of burial rituals was thus a matter for members of individual communities, and neither the church nor the central authorities had effective means to control and regulate it (cf. Geake 2003). Yet,

Active Centre vs Passive Periphery? At the beginning of the twelfth century, Cosmas of Prague referred to the Bohemian peasants as semipaganes, attributing to them such pagan practices as, among others killing victims at wells, sacrificing to evil spirits, and burying dead in fields and forests (Cosmas, Chronicle, iii. 1).8 These lines of his chronicle often serve in Central European discourse as one of the key pieces of evidence for the long-lasting weak impact of Christianity on rural communities. Around the same time, though, a code of King Coloman was written in Hungary that says something different about the common population. The pious king was said to have already been able to dispense with the harsh laws of his great predecessor Stephen, by which he disciplined those who had hitherto been Christians only in name. But now, it is said, subjects were willing to sacrifice their lives for the faith (The Laws, pp. 108, 116). Cosmas’ depiction implies an image of an unchanging countryside enclosed within itself, populated by a socially homogeneous agrarian population that only passively reproduced the old customs of their fathers and must be forced into Christianity by the apparatus of an autocratic ruler. The Hungarian code, on the other hand, suggests that the population may have dynamically changed its habitus over several generations and actively adopted the cultural code articulated by Christianity. It makes no sense to measure early medieval religiosity by later medieval or even younger standards. Let us just recall that rural agrarian and magical rituals contained many non-Christian elements in most of Europe until the advent of modernity. I believe that the schematic model of oppressive Christianization experienced in Central Europe not only fails to capture a much more complex reality, but also limits the interpretive possibilities of archaeologically recorded phenomena and processes. As I have indicated, the regional centres of the pre-Christian cult functioned as key nodes of social life and collective transcendence, where the social and cosmic order was symbolically articulated. Festivities, public rituals, and sacrifices ensuring health and prosperity, as well as supra-communal exchanges of information and



8 We must also consider the literary context of Cosmas’ narrative. He connected the suppression of pagan evils with the rise of his favourite, Břetislav II. Much of this may therefore be a topos glorifying a pious ruler.



9 More than 2000 dead were buried in the cemetery around the church in Staré Město – Na Valách during the ninth and early tenth centuries (Galuška 2010, 165); the cemetery around the Basilica of St Hadrian in Zalavár contained a similar number (Szőke 2010, 36–37).

1 .   chri st i ani zat i o n o f e ast-ce nt ral e u ro pe as a so ci al proces s

Figure 1.2. The eleventh century brings a surprising unification of funeral rituals across the whole of Central Europe. Already in the field of cemeteries without churches, bodies were typically oriented east–west, and, gradually, equipment disappears from the graves of men, while typical S-shaped temple rings are often found in women’s graves. 1. Praha-Motol, Central Bohemia, grave no. 200 (after Kovářík 1991); 2. Dziekanowice, Central Poland, grave no. 73/00 (after Wrzesiński 2019); 3. Čakajovce, Slovakia (formerly northern Kingdom of Hungary), grave no. 660 (after Rejholcová 1995). (Modified by the author.)

31

32

i vo š te fa n

in all the regions discussed (with the exception of the peripheries and the Polabians), we observe a gradual unification of burial practices at the field cemeteries. First, burials under mounds disappear, the orientation of graves stabilizes, and subsequently food and vessels vanish as well. The deceased in late field cemeteries in Bohemia, Hungary (by the second half of the eleventh century), and Poland (by the first half of the twelfth century) were usually no longer accompanied by any objects except for temple rings or individual coins (Krumphanzlová 1966; Türk 2014; Kara and Kurnatowska 2000). Burials in the countryside no longer differ from burials near religious buildings in major centres. Unification across the whole Central European area indicates intense interactions between polities down to the level of rural communities (Fig. 1.2). Thus, the designation of ‘pagan burial sites’ for late field cemeteries, found even in some more recent studies, does not capture the reality. Rural people apparently voluntarily adopted the norms of Christian burial without direct ecclesiastical control. We can assume that these changes also indicate the adoption of the Christian habitus and of other requirements of Christian norms into the everyday practice of the general population. An important mediating role within communities may have been played not only by local authorities who were in contact with regional centres but also by the numerous unfree servants who were donated to important monasteries and chapters in Bohemia and Hungary from the early eleventh century and in Poland from the second half of the eleventh century. Some of them performed (probably seasonally) various services directly in the ecclesiastical centres (Petráček 2017; Sutt 2015). However, the final consolidation of Christianity at the level of rural communities could only be secured by a sufficiently dense network of rural churches that allowed the church to require regular attendance at services and direct control of the daily practice. By the thirteenth century, in all the monarchies under discussion, there was already a functioning parish network with a system of deaneries based on the territorial principle, which gradually became denser ( Jan 2008; Marosi 2018; Górecki 1993). However, considerable differences in the size of parishes persisted between regions (e.g. Bylina 2002, 21–28). The basis of parish organization in many areas was a mosaic of older churches that had probably already been performing basic ‘parish’ functions for a long time and had been integrated into a single hierarchical system subordinate to the local bishop as a result of the emancipation of the church to secular power in the early thirteenth century. Unfortunately, the circumstances and time of construction of most rural ecclesiastical buildings are not given in the written sources, but we know

from the available accounts that in all regions (but in varying proportions), all social groups were involved in their construction, i.e. the monarch, the ecclesiastical institutions, the secular elite, and, in practical terms, certainly the ordinary rural people. Already in the code of King Stephen of Hungary, it was decreed that ‘ten villages shall build a church and endow it […]. The king shall provide vestments and altar cloths, and the bishop the priests and books’ (The Laws, p. 46). The archaeological evidence, however, shows that this centrally controlled plan was not completely put into practice during Stephen’s reign. Field cemeteries operated continuously in most regions of Hungary until the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries, when they were abandoned en masse (Vargha 2022, 70–71). In Bohemia, this process falls within the same period (Štefan and Varadzin 2014; see the study by Mária Vargha, Martin Janovský, and Martin Fajta and that by Martin Čechura in this volume) and may perhaps be linked to Břetislav II’s prohibition of burials ‘in fields and forests’ (Cosmas, Chronicle, iii. 1). The temporal coincidence between Bohemia and Hungary again demonstrates the convergence of development trends in the Central European monarchies. The local topographical variations of burials in the territory of Poland would require a new modern analysis, but there were probably much more significant regional variations. To build on the previous conclusions, the abandonment of local burial sites ‘in fields and forests’ in favour of necropolises on consecrated ground was not necessarily under coercive pressure from the central authorities but may even have been welcomed by the local Christian population. In any case, the effective relocation of the burial sites of thousands of rural communities would have been difficult without their active cooperation. In Bohemia, at the beginning of the twelfth century, new, large necropolises were created, which were used jointly by several settlements. However, it remains an open question whether burials were always moved to an already existing church, or whether there were also consecrated cemeteries where the sacred building was built some distance away (Vargha 2022, 59–70; Štefan and Varadzin 2014; see the study by Martin Čechura in this volume). During the eleventh century, the traditional exclusive relationship between the monarch and freemen began to be eroded by ecclesiastical institutions acquiring numerous landed estates across the different regions. From the end of the eleventh and especially during the twelfth century, a new social group of landed nobles became established in the rural environment of central Europe. Unfortunately, the origins of individual families again mostly elude us. A number of the nobles seem to have acquired scattered estates as a reward for previous services to the monarch, but at least some of them

1 .   chri st i ani zat i o n o f e ast-ce nt ral e u ro pe as a so ci al proces s

Figure 1.3. The period after 1100 brought a boom in the construction of Romanesque churches in rural areas in Central Europe. A significant number of churches had a tribune in the western part, which served patrons from the local nobility or members of ecclesiastical institutions. We find surprisingly similar architectural forms across regions. 1. Prandocin near Krakow (Kingdom of Poland). The church was built sometime during the twelfth century either by comes Prandota or his descendants; 2. The church of St Peter and Paul in Kojice (The Kingdom of Bohemia) was probably built by the ancestors of Dalibor of Kojice mentioned in 1238; 3. Dražovce (Slovakia, formerly the Kingdom of Hungary). The church was built on the property of the Zobor monastery near Nitra, probably at the end of the eleventh century (after Mencl 1965 and Tomaszewski 1974).

may have come from local chieftains. But no overall the first references to private foundations of churches by the nobility date from the late eleventh and early twelfth characterization of this group can be attempted here without intolerable simplification (cf. Klápště 2012, centuries (Cosmas, Chronicle, ii. 19; Gall, Chronicon, 46–102; Rady 2000, 28–44; Zsoldos 2020, 157–65; ii. 33). Already at this time, the elite in some areas were Jurek 2012, 37–56). The intensive contact between the becoming key patrons of local Christian communities. monarchical courts and individual nobles and the The leading Polish magnate, Piotr Włostovic († 1153), Western European milieu enabled the transmission of reportedly founded seventy churches and two mona new cultural pattern linking the secular warrior with asteries (Dobosz 2020, 264–77).10 The emerging local nobility seems to be the dominant social force behind the protector and propagator of the Christian faith in the Christianization of the countryside in many areas this period (Antonín 2014). of Central Europe. The consecration ceremonies of Especially during the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries, this ideal, in addition to donations to important the churches, with the obligatory participation of the ecclesiastical institutions in Central Europe, materialized bishop and often presumably of the monarch, must have in the form of several hundred Romanesque sacred been extraordinary events in which the central power, buildings still partially preserved in the rural landscape, for a moment, intersected with the local community which combined social representation, personal piety, in a ritual framework. and funeral and memorial functions with the pastoral After many generations, Christianity eventually came to offer social uplift to the countryside. The care of the serfs (Fig. 1.3; e.g. Tomaszewski 1974). common practice of appointing plebeians of local origin The old western model of the proprietary church (Wood 2006), which seems to have been briefly applied is indicated by a remarkable story from the village of in the Great Moravian agglomerations and in Zalavár Běstvina in eastern Bohemia, recorded by one of the County in the late ninth and early tenth centuries, followers of the chronicler Cosmas in 1137 (FRB ii, was adapted to local conditions, but had no further 225–27). In the will of the Prague canon Zbyhněv, continuity (Macháček 2019; Kalhous 2019; Szőke 2010). No later than around the middle of the eleventh century, private monasteries of noble families were established in 10 On Bohemia Klápště 2012, 58–64; Velímský 2019; see also the Hungary (Szőcs 2014, 39–41). In Bohemia and Poland, study by David Kalhous and Josef Šrámek.

33

34

i vo š te fa n

who sometime in the first third of the twelfth century founded a miniature chapter with two canons at his proprietary church in Únětice near Prague, we find a wish that a certain Nescada, one of the local unfree yeomen, should attain an education. If he succeeds, he will be free (liber) and become a priest, if not, he will remain a slave (servus) (CDB, no. 124, p. 130).

Conclusions As the various Central European regions gradually entered into multifaceted interactions with the Frankish (and marginally also Byzantine) imperial power associated with the Christian cultural code during the ninth and tenth centuries, they followed somewhat different developmental trajectories. Written and archaeological sources indicate significant differences in demographics, degree of integration into larger political territories, and the intensity and form of previous contact with Christian societies. These macro- and microcontextual differences created different conditions for the adaptation of a new cultural and social code, whereby the collectivist and heterarchical principle of social management was gradually replaced by an elite hierarchical model of power, and identification with a supra-regional political regnum suppressed regional ‘gentile’ identities. In the environment of European barbaricum, the adaptation of Christianity appears as an ideological and cosmological correlate of the new social code associated with the emergence of early states. It is, therefore, impossible to determine what was the cause, and what was the effect. The Christianization of the society, therefore, could not have been a one-time act, as Christian authors liked to present it, but a complex process of negotiation in which old elements were incorporated into a new framework. Different social groups benefited from these changes to varying degrees. In all the polities under discussion, the church became an autonomous social force only during the twelfth century, but not to its full extent until the thirteenth century. Until then, the promotion of Christianity and the protection and material security of ecclesiastical institutions were entirely dependent on the elites. Thus, the stronger their authority had already been in the previous period, the easier and more lasting it was to enforce change. One of the main reasons for the collapse of church organization among the Polabians at the turn of the tenth century seems to have been the weak authority of the rulers, who had long failed to break the power of traditional local elites and integrate segmented territories into a single political unit. A similar structural weakness was behind the political crises and pagan uprisings

in Poland and Hungary in the 1030s and 1040s. These followed a period of rapid territorial expansion and ‘westernization’ of the early states, from which some social groups seem to have benefited much more than others. We can suggest that an archaeological reflection of the weak impact of Christianity in the so-called first Polish state is the failure to enforce a Christian form of funerary ritual among the wider population. The situation could only change with the construction of churches in regional centres administered by elites loyal to the rulers. Only a sufficiently dense network of Christian ‘hotspots’ could offer local communities an effective alternative to the non-Christian supra-communal rituals that were an essential part of the life of any traditional society. The gradual adaptation of Christian forms of burial rituals that archaeology identifies in field cemeteries belonging to common rural settlements during the eleventh century indicates the voluntary acceptance of Christian norms by the general population and their implementation into local everyday life. The subsequent changes associated with the gradual construction of a mosaic of rural churches thus no longer seem to have caused social tension, and the village church became the heart of a local community and an entirely new social unit — the parish. The transfer of burials to consecrated ground was, therefore, not necessarily enforced by repression. Initially, in most areas of Central Europe, the founders and patrons of local churches claimed ‘ownership’ rights to their churches. By the end of the eleventh century, a new dynamic group of landed nobles was forming in Central Europe, for whom founding activities became an important source of social capital and prestige. Only the emancipation of the church in the thirteenth century made it possible to unite the mosaic of churches into a single system governed by a local bishop. The different dynamics and forms of Christianization of the individual regions of medieval Europe cannot be fully understood without taking into account the socioeconomic micro- and macrocontexts. A deepening multidisciplinary approach integrating all medieval disciplines, digital humanities, and other social sciences can offer a new, often surprising picture of the transmission of Christianity across medieval societies.

Acknowledgements This study is an output of the project ‘Religiopolitics – the Imperium Christianum and its Commoners (REPLICO)’ supported by the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic (23-07883K).

1 .   chri st i ani zat i o n o f e ast-ce nt ral e u ro pe as a so ci al proces s

Works Cited Primary Sources Álvarez-Pedrosa, Juan Antonio (ed.). 2021. Sources of Slavic Pre-Christian Religion (Leiden: Brill) Annales Xantenses = Annales Xantenses, ed. by Bernhard von Simson, MGH: SRG 12 (Hanover: Hahn, 1909) Bede, Hist. Eccl. = Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English People, ed. by Bertram Colgrave and Roger Mynors, Oxford Medieval Texts (Oxford: Clarendon, 1969) Capitulare missorum = Capitulare missorum: Duplex capitulare missorum in Theodonis villa datum, in MGH: Capitularia regni Francorum 1, ed. by Alfred Boretius (Hanover: Hahn, 1883), pp. 120–26, nos 43–44 CDB I = Codex diplomaticus et epistolaris Regni Bohemiae, Vol. i, ed. by Gustav Friedrich (Prague: Comitiorum Regni Bohemiae, 1904–1907) Cosmas, Chronicle = Cosmas of Prague, The Chronicle of the Czechs, trans. by Lisa Wolverton (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2009) FRB II = Fontes rerum Bohemicarum II, ed. by Josef Emler (Prague: Museum Království českého, 1874) Gesta Principum Polonorum: The Deeds of the Princes of the Poles, trans. by Paul W. Knoll and Frank Schaer (Budapest: Central European University, 2003) Legenda Christiani = Legenda Christiani. Vita et passio sancti Wenceslai et sancte Ludmile ave eius, ed. by Jaroslav Ludvíkovský (Prague: Vyšehrad, 1978) Life of Methodius = Magnae Moraviae fontes historici II, ed. by Dagmar Bartoňková and others (Brno: Universita J. E. Purkyně, 1967), pp. 134–63 Rimbert, Vita Anskarii = Vita Anskarii auctore Rimberto, ed. by Georg Waitz, MGH SS rer. Germ. 55 (Hanover: Hahn, 1884) Thietmar, Chronicon = Thietmari Merseburgensis episcopi Chronicon, ed. by Robert Holtzmann, MGH SS rer. Germ. N.S. 9 (Berlin, 1935) The Laws = The Laws of the Medieval Kingdom of Hungary, vol. i, 1000–1301, ed. by János M. Bak, György Bónis, and James Ross Sweeney (Bakersfield: Charles Schlacks) The Russian Primary Chronicle, trans. by Samuel Hazzard Cross and Olger P. Sherbowitz-Wetzor (Cambridge, MA: Medieval Academy of America, 1953) Vita Lebuini Antiqua, ed. by Adolf Hofmeister, MGH SS, 30, 2 (Leipzig: Hiersemann, 1934) Secondary Studies Althoff, Gerd. 2013a. ‘Strategien und Methoden der Christianisierung einer kriegerischen Gesellschaft’, Credo – Christianisierung Europas im Mittelalter. 1: Essays (Petersberg: Imhof), pp. 310–20 —— 2013b. Die Macht der Rituale Symbolik und Herrschaft im Mittelalter (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft) Angenend, Arnold. 1973. ‘Taufe und Politik im frühen Mittelater’, Frühmittelterliche Studien, 7: 101–42 Antonín, Robert. 2014. ‘From Warrior to Knight: The Paths of Chivalric Culture in Central European Space Using the Example of the Bohemian Lands’, Czech and Slovak Journal of Humanities, Historica, 1: 8–18 Bak, János M. 2000. ‘Signs of Conversion in Central European Laws’, in Christianizing Peoples and Converting Individuals, ed. by Guyda Armstrong and Ian N. Wood (Turnhout: Brepols), pp. 115–24 Banaszkiewicz, Jacek. 2010. Podanie o Piaście i Popielu. Studium porównawcze nad wczesnośredniowiecznymi tradycjami dynastycznymi (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN) Bartošková, Andrea. 2014. Budeč. Významné mocenské centrum prvních Přemyslovců (Prague: NLN) Berend, Nora (ed.). 2007. Christianization and the Rise of Christian Monarchy: Scandinavia, Central Europe and Rus’ c. 900– 1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Berend, Nora, József Laszlovszky, and Béla Zsolt Szakács. 2007. ‘The Kingdom of Hungary’, in Christianization and the Rise of the Christian Monarchy. Scandinavia, Central Europe and Rus’ c. 900–1200, ed. by Nora Berend (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 319–68 Biermann, Felix. 2010. ‘Slawenzeitliche Kirchen im nordostdeutschen Gebiet’, in Frühmittelalterliche Kirchen als archäologische und historische Quelle, ed. by Lumír Poláček and Jana Maříková-Kubková, Internationale Tagungen in Mikulčice, 8 (Brno: Archeologický ústav AVČR), pp. 331–43 Biermann, Felix. 2014. ‘Zentralisierungsprozesse bei den nördlichen Elbslawen’, in Zentralisierungsprozesse und Herrschaftsbildung im frühmittelalterlichen Ostmitteleuropa, ed. by Przemysław Sikora (Bonn: Habelt), pp. 157–94 Biermann, Felix, and Fred Ruchhöft (eds). 2017. Bischof Otto von Bamberg in Pommern. Historische und archäologische Forschungen zu Mission und Kulturverhältnissen des 12. Jahrhunderts im Südwesten der Ostsee (Bonn: Rudolf Habelt)

35

36

i vo š te fa n

Bogucki, Mateusz. 2016. ‘Intercultural Relations of the Inhabitants of Polish Territory in the 9th and 10th Centuries’, in The Past Societies. Polish Lands from the First Evidence of Human Presence to the Early Middle Ages 5: 500 ad – 1000 ad, ed. by Przemysław Urbańczyk (Warsaw: Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology), pp. 224–76 Boroń, Piotr. 1999. Słowiańskie wiece plemienne (Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego) Brather, Sebastian. 1996. ‘Merowinger- und karolingerzeitliches Fremdgut bei den Nordwestslawen: Gebrauchsgut und Elitenkultur im südwestlichen Ostseeraum’, Prähistorische Zeitschrift, 71: 46–84 —— 2018. ‘Körperbestattungen und Christianisierung bei den nordwestlichen Slawen. Zum gegenwärtigen Stand der Debatte’, in Lebenswelten zwischen Archäologie und Geschichte. Festschrift für Falko Daim zu seinem 65. Geburtstag, Monographien des RGZM, Band 150, ed. by Jörg Drauschke and others (Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz), pp. 83–100 Brown, Peter. 2003. The Rise of Western Christendom: Triumph and Diversity, ad 200–1000, 2nd edn (Malden: Blackwell, 2003) Bylina, Stanisław. 2002. Chrystianizacja wsi polskiej u schyłku średniowiecza (Warsaw: Instytut Historii PAN) Coupland, Simon. 1998. ‘From Poachers to Gamekeepers: Scandinavian Warlords and Carolingian Kings’, Early Medieval Europe, 7: 85–114 Dalewski, Zbygniew. 2008. Ritual and Politics Writing the History of a Dynastic Conflict in Medieval Poland (Leiden: Brill) Dobosz, Jószef. 2020. Monarchia i możni wobec Kościoła w Polsce do początku XIII wieku (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie) Eichert, Stefan. 2017. ‘“Great Men”, “Big Men” and “Chiefs” in Carantania?’, in Archäologische Studien zum frühen Mittelalter. Internationale Konferenz Nitra vom 18. bis 20. October 2016, ed. by Gabriel Fusek (Nitra: Archeologický ústav SAV), pp. 15–26 Effros, Bonnie. 1997. ʻDe partibus Saxoniae and the Regulation of Mortuary Custom. A Carolingian Campaign of Christianization or Suppression of Saxon Identity?’, Revue belge de philologie et d’historie, 75: 268–87 —— 2003. Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of Early Middle Ages (Berkeley: University of California Press) Engel, Pál. 2001. Realm of St Stephen: A History of Medieval Hungary, 895–1526 (London: I. B. Tauris & Co) Feinman, Gary M. 2016. ʻVariation and Change in Archaic States. Rituals and Mechanisms of Sociopolitical Integration’, in Ritual and Archaic States, ed. by Joanne M. Murphy (Gainesville: University Press of Florida), pp. 1–22 Fletcher, Richard. 1997. The Barbarian Conversion: From Paganism to Christianity (New York: Henry Holt) Foote, Peter. 1993. ‘Historical Studies: Conversion Moment and Conversion Period’, in Viking Revaluations: Viking Society Centenary Symposium, 14–15 May 1992, ed. by Anthony Faulkes and Richard Perkins (London: Viking Society for Northern Research, 1993), pp. 137–44 Friedmann, Bernhard. 1986. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des abodritischen Fürstentums bis zum Ende des 10. Jahrhunderts (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot) Fritze, Wolfgang. 1960. ʻProbleme der abodritischen Stammes- und Reichsferfassung und ihrer Entwicklung vom Stammeszum Herrschaftstaat’, in Siedlung und Verfassung der Slawen zwischen Elbe, Saale und Oder, ed. by Herbert Ludat (Giessen: Schmitz), pp. 141–219 Gabriel, Ingo. 1986. ʻ“Imitatio imperii” am slawischen Fürstenhof zu Starigard/Oldenburg (Holstein). Zur Bedeutung karolingischer Königspfalzen für den Aufstieg einer “civitas magna Slavorum”’, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, 16: 357–67 Gabriel, Ingo, and Torsten Kempke. 2011. Starigard / Oldenburg: Hauptburg der Slawen in Wagrien. 6, Die Grabfunde. Einführung und archäologisches Material, Offa-Bücher. Neue Folge, Band 85 (Neumünster: Wachholtz) Galuška, Luděk. 2010. ‘Kirchliche Architektur des großmährischen Veligrad und die Besiedlung des Machtzentrums. Funktion und Lage einzelner Bauten im Rahmen der Siedlungsstruktur der frühmittelalterlichen Agglomeration Staré Mesto-Uherské Hradiště’, in Frühmittelalterliche Kirchen als archäologische und historische Quelle, ed. by Lumír Poláček and Jana Maříková-Kubková, Internationale Tagungen in Mikulčice, 8 (Brno: Archeologický ústav AVČR), pp. 161–87 Garipzanov, Ildar. 2014a. ‘Introduction: Networks of Conversion, Cultural Osmosis, and Identities in the Viking Age’, in Conversion and Identity in the Viking Age, ed. by Ildar Garipzanov (Turnhout: Brepols), pp. 1–20 Geake, Helen. 1997. The Use of Grave-Goods in Conversion-Period England, c. 600 – c. 850 (Oxford: British Archaeological Reports British Series 261) —— 2003. ‘The Control of Burial Practice in Middle Anglo-Saxon England’, in The Cross Goes North – Processes of Conversion in Northern Europe, ad 300–1300, ed. by Martin Carver (York: York Medieval Press), pp. 259–70 Gläser, Manfred. 2002. ‘Die Slawenmission in den schriftlichen Quellen’, in Heiden und Christen, Slawenmission im Mittelalter, ed. by Manfred Gläser, Hans-Joachim Hahn, and Ingrid Weibezahn, Ausstellungen zur Archäologie in Lübeck, 5 (Lübeck: Schmidt-Römhild), pp. 69–78 Goldberg, Eric J. 2004. ‘Ludwig der Deutsche und Mähren. Eine Studie zu karolingischen Grenzkriegen im Osten’, in Ludwig der Deutsche und seine Zeit, ed. by Wilfried Hartmann (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft), pp. 67–94 Górecki, Janusz. 1996. ‘Nekropola tzw. II kościoła na Ostrowie Lednickim’, Studia Lednickie 4: 137–56

1 .   chri st i ani zat i o n o f e ast-ce nt ral e u ro pe as a so ci al proces s

Górecki, Piotr. 1993. ‘Parishes, Tithes and Society in Earlier Medieval Poland c. 1100 – c. 1250’, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 83.2: 1–143 Grabowski, Mieczysław. 2010. ‘Alt Lübeck und die Steinkirche. Rekonstruktionsmodelle’, Mitteilungen der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Archäologie des Mittelalters und der Neuzeit, 22: 77–82 Gringmuth-Dallmer, Eike. 2010. ‘Pagane Kultplätze und frühe Kirchenorganisation im nordwestslawischen Gebiet – eine funktionale Kontinuität?’, in Frühmittelalterliche Kirchen als archäologische und historische Quelle, ed. by Lumír Poláček and Jana Maříková-Kubková, Internationale Tagungen in Mikulčice, 8 (Brno: Archeologický ústav AVČR), pp. 321–30 Hardt, Mathias. 2015. ‘Gentilreligion und christliche Mission bei den Sorben (10.–12. Jahrhundert)’, in Dying Gods – Religious Beliefs in Northern and Eastern Europe in the Time of Christianization, ed. by Christiane Ruhmann and Vera Brieske, Neue Studien zur Sachsenforschung, 5 (Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss Verlag), pp. 263–68 Hasil, Jan. 2011. ‘Les élites franques de l’ouest comme des chefs de clans dans l’environnement slave?’, Études Médiévales Université de Picardie Amiens, 50: 50–61 Hastings, Adrian. 1994. The Church in Africa: 1450–1950 (Oxford: Oxford University Press) Heather, Peter. 1997. ‘Frankish Imperialism and Slavic Society’, in Origins of Central Europe, ed. by Przemyslaw Urbańczyk (Warsaw: Scientific Society of Polish Archaeologists), pp. 171–90 Higham, Nicolas J. 1997. The Convert Kings. Power and Religious Affiliation in Early Anglo-Saxon England (Manchester: Manchester University Press) Insoll, Timothy. 2004. Archaeology, Ritual, Religion (Oxford: Routledge) Jurek, Tomasz. 2012. ‘Die Entstehung des polnischen Adels’, in Studien zum Adel im mittelalterlichen Polen, ed. by Eduard Mühle (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz), pp. 13–117 Iversen, Frode. 2019. ‘The Thing and the King: The Formation of the Norwegian Medieval Kingdom’, in Polity and Neighbourhood in Early Medieval Europe, ed. by Monge Escalona, Orri Vesteinsson, and Stuart Brookes (Turnhout: Brepols), pp. 147–72 Jan, Libor. 2008. ‘Die Anfänge der Pfarrorganisation in Böhmen und Mähren’, in Pfarreien im Mittelalter. Deutschland, Polen, Tschechien und Ungarn im Vergleich, ed. by Natalia Kruppa, Veröffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts für Geschichte. Studien zur Germania Sacra, 32 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht), pp. 183–200 Jón Viðar Sigurðsson. 2014. ‘Conversion and Identity in the Viking-Age North: Some Afterthoughts’, in Conversion and Identity in the Viking Age, ed. by Ildar Garipzanov (Turnhout: Brepols), pp. 225–43 Jørgensen, Lars. 2014. ‘Norse Religion and Ritual Sites in Scandinavia in the 6th–11th Century’, in Northern Worlds – Landscapes, Interactions and Dynamics, Proceedings of the Northern Worlds Conference Copenhagen 28–30 November 2012, ed. by Hans Christian Gulløv (Copenhagen: The National Museum of Denmark), pp. 129–50 Kahl, Hans-Dietrich. 2011. Heidenfrage und Slawenfrage im deutschen Mittelalter Ausgewählte Studien 1953–2008 (Leiden: Brill) Kalhous, David. 2012. Anatomy of a Duchy: The Political and Ecclesiastical Structures of Early Přemyslid Bohemia (Leiden: Brill) Kalhous, David. 2019. ‘Graves, Churches, Culture and Texts: The Processes of Christianisation in the Early Middle Ages and Their Social and Cultural Context’, in The Fall of Great Moravia: Who Was Buried in Grave H153 at Pohansko near Břeclav? (Leiden: Brill), pp. 110–29 Kara, Michał, and Zofia Kurnatowska. 2000. ʻChristliche Bestattungen’, in Europas Mitte um 1000, ed. by Alfried Wieczorek and Hanz-Martin Hinz, vol. 2 (Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss Verlag), pp. 527–30 Kara, Michał. 2010. ‘Medieval Historical Studies and Medieval Archaeology about the Origin of the Piast State. An Overview’, Archaeologia Polona, 48: 37–58 Klanica, Zdeněk, Blanka Kavánová, Pavel Kouřil, and Šimon Ungerman. 2019. Mikulčice – Die Nekropole an der dreischiffigen Basilika. Studien zum Burgwall Mikulčice 12 (Brno: Archeologický ústav Akademie věd České republiky) Klaniczay, Gábor. 2002. Holy Rulers and Blessed Princesses: Dynastic Cults in Medieval Central Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Klápště, Jan. 2012. The Czech Lands in Medieval Transformation (Leiden: Brill) —— 2022. ‘Helmold of Bosau and our Reading of his Chronica Slavorum’, in Historiography and Identity V: The Emergence of New Peoples and Polities in Europe, 1000–1300, ed. by Walter Pohl, Veronika Wieser, and Francesco Borri (Turnhout: Brepols), pp. 203–30 Košta, Jiří, and Michal Lutovský. 2014. Raně středověký knížecí hrob z Kolína (Prague: Národní muzeum) Koszta, Laszlo. 2010. ‘State Power and Ecclesiastical System in Eleventh Century Hungary (An Outline to the Dynamics of the Development of the Hungarian Christian Church)’, in In my Spirit and Thought I Remained a European of Hungarian Origin. Medieval Historical Studies in Memory of Zoltan J. Kosztolnyik, ed. by István Petrovics, Sándor László Tóth, and Eleanor A. Congdon (Szeged: JATE Press), pp. 67–78 Kovářík, Jan. 1991. Slovanské kostrové pohřebiště v Praze 5-Motole (Prague: Muzeum Hlavního města Prahy)

37

38

i vo š te fa n

Krumphanzlová, Zdeňka. 1966. ‘Der Ritus der slawischen Skelettfriedhöfe der mittleren und jüngeren Burgwallzeit in Böhmen’, Památky archeologické, 56: 161–88 Latowsky, Anne Austin. 2013. Emperor of the World: Charlemagne and the Construction of Imperial Authority, 800–1229 (New York: Cornell University Press) Lübke, Christian. 1997. ‘Forms of Political Organisation of the Polabian Slavs (Until 10th Century)’, in Origins of Central Europe, ed. by Przemysław Urbańczyk (Warsaw: Society of Polish Archaeologists), pp. 115–24 —— 2001. ‘Das “junge Europa” in der Krise: Gentilreligiöse Herausforderungen um 1000’, Zeitschrift für OstmitteleuropaForschung, 50: 475–96 —— 2008. ‘Christianity and Paganism as Elements of Gentile Identities to the East of the Elbe and Saale Rivers’, in Franks, Northmen, and Slavs: Identities and State Formation in Early Medieval Europe, ed. by Ildar H. Garipzanov, Patrick Joseph Geary, and Przemysław Urbanczyk (Turnhout: Brepols), pp. 189–204 —— 2014. ‘Von der Sclavinia zur Germania Slavica: Akkulturation und Transformation’, in Akkulturation im Mittelalter, ed. by Reinhard Härtel, Vorträge und Forschungen, Band 78. Herausgegeben vom Konstanzer Arbeitskreis für mittelalterliche Geschichte (Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke Verlag), pp. 207–33 Lutovský, Michal. 2014. ‘Der Verlauf der Zentralisierungsprozesse im frühmittelalterlichen Böhmen’, in Zentralisierungsprozesse und Herrschaftsbildung im frühmittelalterlichen Ostmitteleuropa, ed. by Przemysław Sikora (Bonn: Habelt), pp. 93–126 Macháček, Jiří. 2010. The Rise of Medieval Towns and States in East Central Europe: Early Medieval Centres as Social and Economic Systems (Leiden: Brill) —— 2017. ‘Bommelohrringe und Pressblechfibeln zu Beginn der frühmittelalterlichen Körperbestattung Ostmitteleuropas’, Archeologické rozhledy, 69: 476–92 —— 2019. ‘Conclusion: Who was the Man Buried in Grave H153 in Pohansko and What Happened to him and his Family at the End of Great Moravia’, in The Fall of Great Moravia: Who Was Buried in Grave H153 at Pohansko near Břeclav? (Leiden: Brill), pp. 187–202 Marosi, Ernő. 2018. ‘Pfarrkirchen im mittelalterlichen Ungarn im Spannungsfeld der beharrenden Kräfte der Gesellschaft und zunehmender Bildungsansprüche’, in Pfarreien im Mittelalter. Deutschland, Polen, Tschechien und Ungarn im Vergleich, ed. by Natalia Kruppa, Veröffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts für Geschichte. Studien zur Germania Sacra, 32 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht), pp. 201–22 Mason, Austin, and Tom Williamson. 2017. ‘Ritual Landscapes in Pagan and Early Christian England’, Fragments, 6: 80–109 Mazuch, Marian. 2012. ‘K údajné existenci tzv. kruhového pohanského kultovního objektu v podhradí velkomoravského mocenského centra Mikulčice-Valy’, Slavia Antiqua, 53: 15–36 Mencl, Václav. 1965. ‘Panské tribuny v naší románské architektuře’, Umění, 13: 29–62 Michałowski, Roman. 2016. The Gniezno Summit. The Religious Premises of the Founding of the Archbishopric of Gniezno (Leiden: Brill) Modzelewski. Karol. 2015. Barbarian Europe (Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang) Mordovin, Maxim. 2016. A várszervezet kialakulása a középkori Magyarországon, Csehországban és Lengyelországban a 10–12. században (Budapest: Archeololingua) Moździoch, Sławomir. 2014. ‘Oriens ex alto regnum Polonie visitavit? Christianisierung Polens unter denersten Piasten im Lichte archäologischer Quellen’, in Středověká Evropa v pohybu. K poctě Jana Klápště, ed. by Ivana Bohačová and Petr Sommer (Prague: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny), pp. 419–47 Musin, Aleksandr E. 2017. ‘Powstawanie cmentarzy: cechy rozwoju chrześcijańskiego obrządku pogrzebowego w Europie Wschodniej’, in Chrzest: przemiany religijne, kulturowe i sepulkralne, ed. by Wojciech Dzieduszycki and Jacek Wrzesiński (Poznań: Stowarzyszenie Naukowe Archeologów Polskich, 2017), pp. 84–102 von Padberg, Lutz. 1995. ‘Odin oder Christus? Loyalitäts- und Orientierungskonflikte in der frühmittelalterlichen Christianisierungsepoche’, Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, 77: 249–78 —— 2009. Die Christianisierung Europas im Mittelater (Stuttgart: Reclam) Pollex, Axel. 2004. ‘Der Übergang zur Körperbestattung bei den Nordwestslawen. Überlegungen zu Form und Verlauf der Christianisierung zwischen Elbe, Oder und Havelseenplatte’, Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters, 32: 97–118 Petráček, T. 2017. Power and Exploitation in the Czech Lands in the 10th –12th Centuries. A Central European Perspective (Leiden: Brill) Petts, David. 2011. Pagan and Christian. Religious change in Early Medieval Europe (Bristol: Bristol Classical Press) Poláček, Lumír (ed.). 2020. Great Moravian Elites from Mikulčice (Brno: Archeologický ústav AVČR) Rady, Martyn. 2000. Nobility, Land and Service in Medieval Hungary (New York: Palgrave) Reimitz, Helmut. 2001. ‘Conversion and Control: The Establishment of Liturgical Frontiers in Carolingian Pannonia’, in The Transformation of Frontiers from Late Antiquity to the Carolingians, ed. by Walter Pohl, Ian Wood, and Helmut Reimitz (Leiden: Brill), pp. 189–207

1 .   chri st i ani zat i o n o f e ast-ce nt ral e u ro pe as a so ci al proces s

Rambo, Lewis R. 1993. Understanding Religious Conversion (New Haven: Yale University Press) Rosik, Stanisław. 2020. The Slavic Religion in the Light of 11th- and 12th-Century German Chronicles (Thietmar of Merseburg, Adam of Bremen, Helmold of Bosau) (Leiden: Brill) Ruchhöft, Fred. 2011. ‘Sieben christliche Jahrzehnte? Spuren christlicher Kultur bei den nordwestlichen Slawen im 10. und 11. Jahrhundert’, Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters, 39: 173–87 Sanmark, Alexandra. 2003. ‘The Role of Secular Rulers in the Conversion of Sweden’, in The Cross Goes North – Processes of Conversion in Northern Europe, ad 300–1300, ed. by Martin Carver (York: York Medieval Press), pp. 551–58 Schülke, Almut. 1999. ‘On Christianization and Grave-Finds’, European Journal of Archaeology, 2.1: 77–106 Smith, J. 2008. ‘Fines imperii: The Marches’, in The New Cambridge Medieval History. Volume ii. c. 700 – c. 900, ed. by Rosamond McKitterick (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 169–89 Sommer, Petr, Dušan Třeštík, and Josef Žemlička. 2007. ‘Bohemia and Moravia’, in Christianization and the Rise of the Christian Monarchy: Scandinavia, Central Europe and Rus’ c. 900–1200, ed. by Nora Berend (Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 214–62 Sonne, Lasse C. A. 2014. ‘Kings, Chieftains and Public Cult in Pre-Christian Scandinavia’, Early Medieval Europe, 22: 53–68 Stark, Rodney. 1996. The Rise of Christianity. A Sociologist Reconsiders History (Princeton: Princeton University Press) Rappaport, Roy A. 1999. Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Rejholcová, Mária. 1995. Pohrebisko v Čakajovciach (9.-12. storočie). Katalóg (Nitra: Archeologický ústav Slovenskej akadémie vied) Słupecki, Leszek P. 1994. Slavonic pagan sanctuaries (Warsaw: PAN) Štefan, Ivo. 2007. ʻZměna pohřebního ritu v raném středověku jako archeologický a kulturně-antropologický problém’, Archeologické rozhledy, 59: 805–36 —— 2011. ‘Great Moravia, Statehood and Archeology. Decline and Fall of One Early Medieval Polity’, in Praktische Funktion, gesellschaftliche Bedeutung und symbolischer Sinn der frühgeschichtlichen Zentralorte in Mitteleuropa, ed. by Jiří Macháček and Šimon Ungerman (Bonn: Habelt), pp. 333–54 —— 2022. ‘Conversion and Christianization: Bohemia, Poland, Hungary and Rus’ (9th to 12th Centuries)’, in The Routledge Handbook of East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 500–1300, ed. by Florin Curta (Oxford: Routledge), pp. 101–20 Štefan, Ivo, and Ivana Boháčová. 2018. ‘Early Medieval Fortified Centres in Central Bohemia: Key Issues’, in Moravian and Silesian Strongholds of the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries in the Context of Central Europe, ed. by Pavel Kouřil and Rudolf Procházka (Brno: The Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Archaeology), pp. 247–60 Štefan, Ivo, and Ladislav Varadzin. 2014. ‘Super altare in ecclesia tua. Die Anfänge der Pfarrorganisation in den böhmischen Ländern aus archäologischer Sicht’, Praehistorica, 31.2: 357–72 Sutt, Cameron. 2015. Slavery in Árpád-Era Hungary in a Comparative Context (Leiden: Brill) Szőcs, Péter Levente. 2014. ‘Private Monasteries of Medieval Hungary (Eleventh to Fourteenth Centuries): A Case Study of the Ákos Kindred and its Monasteries’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Central European University) Szőke, Béla. M. 2010. ʻMosaburg/Zalavár und Pannonien in der Karolingerzeit’, Antaeus, 31–32: 9–52 Takács, Miklós. 2014. ‘Die Krise des ungarischen Königtums nach dem Tod König Stephans’, in Avars, Bulgars and Magyars on the Middle and Lower Danube. Proceedings of the Bulgarian-Hungarian Meeting, Sofia, May 27–28, 2009, ed. by Lyudmila Doncheva-Petkova, Csilla Balogh, and Attila Türk (Sofia: Archeolingua), pp. 149–63 Thurston, Tina L. 2010. ‘Bitter Arrows and Generous Gifts: What Was a “King” in the European Iron Age?’, in Pathways to Power: New Perspectives on the Emergence of Social Inequality, ed. by T. D. Price and Gary M. Feinman (Cham: Springer), pp. 193–254 Tomaszewski, Andrzej. 1974. Romańskie kościoly z emporami zachodnimi na obszarze Polski, Czech i Węgier (Wrocław: Ossolineum) Tomková, Kateřina. 1998. ‘Bernstein im frühmittelaterlichen Böhmen’, Památky archeologické, 99: 64–103 Třeštík, Dušan. 1997. Počátky Přemyslovců. Vstup Čechů do dějin (530–935) (Prague: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny) —— 2001. Vznik Velké Moravy: Moravané, Čechové a střední Evropa v letech 791–871 (Prague: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny) —— 2003. Mýty kmene Čechů. Tři studie ke ‘starým pověstem českým’ (Prague: Nakladatelství lidové noviny) Trigger, Bruce. 2003. Understanding Early Civilisations. A Comparative Study (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Trzeciecki, Maciej. 2016. ‘The Emergence of the Territorial State’, in The Past Societies. Polish Lands from the First Evidence of Human Presence to the Early Middle Ages 5: 500 ad – 1000 ad, ed. by Przemysław Urbańczyk (Warsaw: Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology), pp. 77–341 Türk, Attila. 2014. ‘Towards a Classification of Grave Types and Burial Rites in the 10th–11th Century Carpathian Basin (Some Remarks and Observations)’, in Avars, Bulgars and Magyars on the Middle and Lower Danube, ed. by Liudmila DonchevaPetkova, Csilla Balogh, and Attila Türk (Sofia: Archaeolingua), pp. 137–58

39

40

i vo š te fa n

Urbańczyk, Przemysław. 2003. ‘The Politics of Conversion in North Central Europe’, in The Cross Goes North – Processes of Conversion in Northern Europe, ad 300–1300, ed. by Martin Carver (York: York Medieval Press), pp. 15–28 Urbańczyk, Przemysław, and Stanisław Rosik. 2007. ‘The Kingdom of Poland, with an Appendix on Polabia and Pomerania between paganism and Christianity’, in Christianization and the Rise of the Christian Monarchy. Scandinavia, Central Europe and Rus’ c. 900–1200, ed. by Nora Berend (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 263–318 Valk, Heiki. 2001. Rural Cemeteries of Southern Estonia 1225–1800 ad (Tartu: University of Tartu) Varadzin, Ladislav. 2011. ‘The Development of Přemyslid Domain Strongholds in the Heart of Bohemia’, in Praktische Funktion, gesellschaftliche Bedeutung und symbolischer Sinn der frühgeschichtlichen Zentralorte in Mitteleuropa, ed. by Jiří Macháček and Šimon Ungerman (Bonn: Habelt), pp. 405–10 Vargha, Mária. 2022. Modelling Christianisation: A Geospatial Analysis of the Archaeological Data on the Rural Church Network of Hungary in the 11th–12th Centuries (Budapest: Archeolingua, Oxford: Archaeopress) Velímský, Tomáš. 2019. ‘Böhmen und die Eigenkirchen. Zu den Eliten des frühen Mittelalters bis die Mitte des 12. Jahrhunderts’, AUC Philosophica et Historica, 1: 137–57 Wichert, Sven. 2010. ‘Die politische Rolle der heidnischen Priester bei den Westslaven’, Studia mytologica Slavica, 13: 33–42 Wickham, Chris. 2005. Framing the Early Middle Ages: Europe and the Mediterranean 400–800 (Oxford: Oxford University Press) Wihoda, Martin. 2011. ‘Sněmy Čechů’, in Šlechta v proměnách věků, ed. by Tomáš Knoz and Jan Dvořák (Brno: Matice Moravská), pp. 17–37 —— 2022. ‘After Avars: The Beginning of the Ruling Power on the Eastern Fringe of Carolingian Empire’, in Rulership in Medieval East Central Europe: Power, Ritual and Legitimacy in Bohemia, Hungary and Poland, ed. by Grischa Vercamer and Dušan Zupka (Leiden: Brill), pp. 63–80 Wiszewski, Przemysław. 2010. Domus Bolezlai. Values and Social Identity in Dynastic Traditions of Medieval Poland (c. 966–1138) (Leiden: Brill) Wolfram, Herwig. 2002. ʻSlavic Princes in the Carolingian Marches of Bavaria’, Hortus Artium Medievalium, 8: 205–8 Wolfram, Herwig. 2021. ‘Christianisation of the Carantanian Slavs’, in The Benedictines and Central Europe, ed. by Dušan Foltýn, Pavlína Mašková, and Petr Sommer (Prague: Centre for Medieval Studies, NLN), pp. 95–103 Wood, Ian N. 1995. ‘Pagan Religions and Superstitions East of Rhine from the Fifth to the Ninth Century’, in After Empire. Towards an Ethnology of Europe’s Barbarians, ed. by Giorgio Ausenda (Woodbridge: Boydell Press), pp. 253–79 Wood, Susan. 2006. The Proprietary Church in the Medieval West (Oxford: Oxford University Press) Wormald, Patrick. 2006. ‘Bede, Beowulf and the Conversion of the Anglo-Saxon Aristocracy’, in The Times of Bede: Studies in Early English Christian Society and its Historian, ed. by Stephen Baxter (Malden: Blackwell), pp. 30–105 Wrzesiński, Jacek. 2019. Groby z biżuterią wczesnośredniowiecznego cmentarzyska w Dziekanowicach. Tom 1 (Lednica: Muzeum pierwszych Piastów na Lednicy) Zehetmayer, Roman. 2019. ‘The Austrian Danube Region in the Decades Around 900’, in The Fall of Great Moravia: Who was Buried in Grave H153 at Pohansko near Břeclav?, ed. by Jiří Macháček and Martin Wihoda (Leiden: Brill), pp. 39–61 Zernack, Klaus. 1967. Die burgstadtischen Volksversammlungen bei den Ost- und Westslawen: Studien zur verfassungsgeschichtlichen Bedeutung des Vece (Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz) Zupka, Dušan. 2016. Ritual and Symbolic Communication in Medieval Hungary under the Árpád Dynasty (1000–1301) (Leiden: Brill) Žemlička, Josef. 1993. ‘Te ducem, te iudicem, te rectorem (Sněmovní shromaždění v časně středověkých Čechách – kontinuita ci diskontinuita?)’, Český časopis historický, 91: 369–84 Zsoldos, Attila. 2020. The Árpáds and their People: An Introduction to the History of Hungary from ca. 900 to 1301 (Budapest: Research Centre for the Humanities)

Davi d Kalhous an d Jos ef Šráme k

2. The Establishment of an Ecclesiastical Organization in the Post–Carolingian Periphery Czech Lands: Networks – Structures – Sources

A bs t r act  In this paper, we intend to provide the audience with basic information about the establishment and development of the ecclesiastical organization in the Přemyslid principality and its structural patterns between the tenth and thirteenth centuries. Therefore, this paper will be split into four parts. First, the beginnings of the Prague and Olomouc bishoprics will be discussed. The analysis of the foundations of these bishoprics also enables us to demonstrate the importance of princely power, contacts with the papacy and, finally, the influence of the head of the Holy Roman Empire on the high medieval Bohemian and Moravian Church. Second, a short overview of the written evidence for the local churches in Bohemia and Moravia will follow. Third, we will focus on the analysis of the existing written evidence. This will be confronted with other sources of information to determine to what extent this evidence is representative. Additionally, we will briefly discuss the relationship between the patrons and their churches, the beginnings of territorialization of the local churches, and the possible impact of the local churches on rural communities. Finally, this paper will briefly examine the embeddedness of three Benedictine monasteries, Vilémov, Kladruby, and Opatovice, and the Benedictine priories of Police and Broumov, subject to Břevnov Monastery, into the local and wider regional structures. Our analysis, based primarily on contemporary deeds and charters, will focus primarily on three issues. First, the evidence will be examined to demonstrate how exactly the newly established ecclesiastical foundations could have become foci for local elites of the Přemyslid realm. Second, the analysis results will also be used as a basis for reflections on how these institutions could have helped to establish

T

David Kalhous • ([email protected]) is an associate professor of medieval history at Masaryk University, Brno, Department of Auxiliary Historical Sciences. His research concerns different aspects of the establishment of early principalities in East Central Europe between the ninth and twelfth centuries. Josef Šrámek • ([email protected]) graduated with a degree in history from Palacký University in Olomouc and now works as a historian and curator at the Museum of Eastern Bohemia in Hradec Králové. He deals with church and religious history, especially of the high Middle Ages, but also with the history of modern warfare and the cultural and social history of the nineteenth century, as well as with issues of historical memory. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 41–57. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138106

42

dav id k a l ho us an d j o s e f š r ám e k

the links between the local elites and princely power. Third, the proposed sample of ecclesiastical institutions will help us consider the dynamics of the integrating process.

K e y wo r d s  Christianization, church organization, medieval Bohemia, medieval Moravia, ecclesiastical history

T

Introducing Christianity and the Church in Bohemia and Moravia Conversions were fascinating social and religious processes that were closely related to the transformation of early European medieval polities. The historical regions of Bohemia and Moravia, now the Czech Republic, were no exception here.1 After a gap lasting centuries, with the renewed power of the Carolingians over the Frankish Kingdom and its renewed efforts at expansion, the area of today’s Czech Republic reappeared in historical narratives. By the end of the eighth century, Charlemagne’s armies had crushed the once-powerful Avar khaganate and started turmoil in the south-eastern frontiers of their empire (recently Pohl 2018). Following that, several ethnonyms that have survived to the present day — in 791/805 Bohemians and in 822 Moravians (Annales regni Francorum, 89, 120, 159) — were mentioned in the historical record. It seems that at that time, both aforementioned Slavic-speaking peoples came from Bohemia or the riverside of Morava. Soon after that, the Frankish and Bavarian sources also mention local warlords, who, as the archaeological evidence attests, had access to luxuries, including expensive weapons. Historical evidence of the time also attests to the transforming polities and the baptism of the local princes. While historical evidence claims that Moimir, the leader of the Moravians, was allegedly baptized ‘with all Moravians’ (‘Notae de episcopis

1 In the ninth and tenth centuries, the two regions developed separately — the Mojmirid dynasty dominated Moravia, and Bohemia was split among several local warlords. According to current scholarly discourse, the Přemyslid dynasty started gaining ground in the last third of the ninth century. For a short time, Bohemia was given by Emperor Arnulf (888–899) to Svatopluk of Moravia (871–894). After the defeat of the Mojmirids and the Bavarians, who came to their aid in 906, the Moravian regions most probably developed differently and had a different political relationship with the Magyars, the new hegemon in East Central Europe. Finally, after a short period of Polish dominance/leadership at the beginning of the eleventh century, in the 1020s, or 1030s, Moravia was subdued by the Přemyslids and remained part of the principality they built up even after they died out. For the most detailed survey of the medieval history of the Czech lands in the Přemyslid era, see Novotný 1912–1937. For the establishment of the ecclesiastical organization, see Hrubý 1916, 17–53, 257–87, 385–421; 1917, 38–73.

Pataviensibus’, 504) in 831, his fourteen Bohemian contemporaries, in 845, were most probably baptized only with their innermost circle, consisting of their families and retinues (Annales Fuldenses, 35; cf. Třeštík 1997). Parallel historical evidence suggests that the baptism of the Slavic princes resulted from a long-term process during which a powerful enough Christian minority was established to provide support for the newly baptized prince. Moimir’s successor, Rastislav, managed to gain a bishopric for the Moravians thanks to the skills and agility of Byzantine missionaries St Cyril and Methodius (Betti 2014; Vavřínek 2013). Although Methodius’ metropolitan seat did not outlive him (d. 885), it became an important lieu de mémoire (site of memory) for local bishoprics and principalities eastwards and southwards from the Carolingian Empire, often used for the legitimization of local ecclesiastical and political formations (recently Kalhous 2012, 193–208). This process can also be observed in Bohemia, where the memory of the baptism of the direct ancestor of the rulers of Bohemia, the Přemyslid Prince Bořivoj, in the Moravian court performed by Methodius can be traced back at least to the end of the tenth century. This tradition was also adopted by the influential chronicler Cosmas of Prague (Cosmas, Chronica, i. 14, 32). Following up on his work, more authors continued this tradition, such as the so-called Dalimil Chronicle (So-called Dalimil, Kronika, c. 25, 308) or the one by Přibík Pulkava of Radenín (Pulkava, Kronika, 15), and in their works this episode survived as a part of the main Bohemian historical narrative, up until the late Middle Ages. The tradition was revived by modern scholars — most recently by Třeštík (1986, 311–44). Surprisingly, however, until the end of the Přemyslid era (c. 890s–1306), St Cyril and Methodius do not play an important role in any narratives dealing with the beginnings of the bishoprics of Prague and Olomouc (cf. recently Kalhous 2018a, 159–85). In our text we will outline in three sections the establishment and development of the ecclesiastical organization in the Czech lands until 1300. First, we will focus on the bishoprics in Prague and Olomouc, which were the main pillars of the ecclesiastical organization. We will briefly discuss the narratives of their foundations and the processes of the territorialization, which are also related to the problem of incomes. The next

2.   t h e e s tab l i s h m e n t o f an eccle si ast i cal o rgani zat i o n i n t he po st–caro li ngi an perip h ery

chapter about local churches will enable us to analyse the social embeddedness of the Church in Bohemia and Moravia and the role of the bishops, princes, and local lords, which are closely related to the formation of medieval nobility in the Czech historiography. Finally, we will use rich monastic evidence to trace the social networks around the selected Bohemian and Moravian monasteries and then characterize their role in Přemyslid society.

Bishoprics, their Beginnings, Resources, and Power The establishment of the bishopric in Prague (968–976) marked the end of an era in the history of the Church in Bohemia. Traditionally, German scholars placed particular stress on the link between this event and Ottonian ecclesiastical politics, whereas Czech authors emphasized the Přemyslid initiative. However, the existing evidence indicates the higher complexity of this process. Its careful analysis promises to contribute to our understanding of the relationship between the local peripheral dynasties and Ottonians and to the comprehension of Ottonian governance strategies in general. Three main narrative traditions related to this foundation highlight different actors. The earliest, but also most disputable, tradition recorded in a charter issued in 1086 by Roman Emperor Henry IV (1056–1106) mentions Emperor Otto, Pope Benedict, and St Adalbert-Vojtěch, the second bishop of Prague (Diplomata Heinrici IV. 2, no. 390, 515–17; Granum catalogi, ad 971, 66).2 Although this tradition is documented in a late eleventh-century royal charter preserved in early twelfth-century copies, it claims it is based on a late tenth-century text also referring to St Adalbert. This might be true, as the description of the boundaries of the bishopric of Prague aligns with contemporary documents referring to the Saxon bishoprics in the tenth century and confirms what we know about the extent of the Přemyslid principality. Othloh, in the Vita Wolfgangi, from the 1020s, stresses the role of the bishops of Regensburg to whose see Bohemia was originally subordinated (Othloh, Vita, c. 29, 538). On one side, the need for their approval confirmed their former position as hegemons over the Bohemian Church; on the other side, it supported the image of St Wolfgang as a mild shepherd and holy man. Finally, a third version of the story of the foundation of the bishopric of Prague is recorded in the



2 Here, we are summarizing Kalhous 2012, 144–57, in which he attempts to revise the analysis of Třeštík 2004a, 179–96.

early twelfth-century chronicle of Cosmas of Prague (Cosmas, Chronica, i. 22, 43–44), which emphasizes the initiative of Prince Boleslav, who allegedly asked Pope John XIII through his sister and envoy to Rome Mlada for an agreement with the foundation of a bishopric. Cosmas even recorded the pope’s answer, an alleged papal letter, which is an evident forgery (cf. Nový 1993, 13–19; Veselský 1988, 76–82; Hrubý 1926, 144–47; Dvořák 1900). Using the supporting hand of contemporary canon law and comparative evidence of similar complex foundations helps to make sense of these local stories and compile them into one consistent narrative. It seems very probable that the initiative was local and came from Prague — the new bishopric was not only a source of prestige for the local ruler but also very practical from the perspective of pastoral practice; further, the See of Regensburg, together with Bohemia, became too large to be administered efficiently. Therefore, Cosmas’ story also sounds probable, especially when considering that Prince Boleslav I (935–972) and his son Boleslav II (972–992) were contemporaries of several popes named John ( John XII, 955–963; John XIII, 965–972; John XIV, 983–984; John XV, 985–996). According to Cosmas of Prague (c. 1050–1125), Boleslav II sent his envoys to the pope in 968; however, the ruler in that year was still his namesake father. Still, Cosmas might not have made this mistake unintentionally; he might have downplayed the role of Boleslav I, as he, being responsible for the murder of his own brother, the later St Wenceslas, is probably not someone that would have been consciously associated with the beginnings of the bishopric. Boleslav I, however, being only prince of Bohemia, could have hardly succeeded in his endeavours without the support of the emperor, in this case, either Otto I (936–973) or his son Otto II (973–983), but most probably both, who had a strong influence on the instalment of new bishops in the different parts of the ‘imperial church’. While at that time it was not strictly necessary, it was also easier to establish a new bishopric with papal support. The most crucial actor in any attempt to establish a new bishopric was, naturally, the reigning bishop of the territory in question. Although the establishment of a diocese as a territory was a complex process (Mazel 2016), because originally, bishops were focused on civitates, canon law clearly stressed the sovereignty of a bishop’s power over it (Hehl 1998, 295–344), as his approval was needed for anything happening within the borders of his diocese. According to the episcopal tradition of Regensburg, Bishop Michael strongly opposed the establishment of the new bishopric, which is probably why the plan had to wait until his death in 972. His successor Wolfgang gave his approval — sources emphasize his kindness. Nonetheless, his agreement

43

44

dav id k a l ho us an d j o s e f š r ám e k

to the foundation of the bishopric of Prague could have been a precondition to his instalment, similarly to the foundation of the East Saxon bishoprics and the approval of the bishop of Halberstadt (Hehl 1998, 295–344). However, just before a new bishop of Prague could have been installed and consecrated, Prince Boleslav II entangled himself in the struggles between Emperor Otto II (973–983) and Otto’s cousin Henry II of Bavaria (955–976, 985–995), which ended with the imprisonment of Henry in 974. Two years later, the first bishop of Prague, a Saxon monk named Thietmar, was consecrated.3 From that moment, Cosmas carefully followed the line of the bishops, which in his chronicles parallels the line of the ruling Přemyslid princes. Although the story of the origin of the bishopric of Prague is rich and complex, we lack nearly any sources that would explain its sources of income or enable us to follow-up the development of the local ecclesiastical organization systematically. Until 1200, only anecdotal evidence existed about the estates of the bishopric — e.g. Cosmas (Chronica, ii. 27, 120) mentions that Bishop Gebhard-Jaromír (1068–1090) left for the village of Žerčiněves on his estates to consecrate a local church (for landed properties of the bishopric of Prague cf. Boháč 1979, 165–97; Láník 1982, 113–25). The contemporary legends of St Adalbert-Vojtěch, the second bishop of Prague (983–987), also mention that he divided his income into four parts (as stated by canon law). The contemporary agreement between St Adalbert-Vojtěch, Prince Boleslav II, and Bohemian elites dated to 992 also confirms, among other things, the bishop’s right to collect the tithes (CDB I, no. 37, 43; for the authenticity of that agreement see Havel and Kalhous 2019).4 Cosmas of Prague describes in what form those tithes were collected, saying that Bishop Ekkehard (1017–1023) decided that: as a tithe, each person — whether powerful, rich, or poor, whether he possessed arable land from

his benefice or his allod — would pay the bishop two measures of five palms and two fingers, one of wheat and the other of oats. Previously, as had been established by the first bishop, Thietmar, they gave two stacks of the harvest as a tithe (a stack, we say, holds fifty handfuls). (Cosmas, Chronicle, 104)5 This form of the bishop’s share of the tithes later transformed into the so-called ‘(po)dýmné’ (fumales, payment from chimney/fireplace) (Nový 1960, 1–9; see also Bolina 2005, 828–60 and the discussion in Bolina 2016, 291–98; Kalhous 2016, 299–308). The reliability of Cosmas’ evidence for a specific form of episcopal tithes is supported by the parallel from Anglo-Saxon England, where, in the beginning, the Church was also not supported by a tenth share of the income but by the firmly stated fee represented as a share on crop called church-scot (‘ciric sceott’) from a fixed acreage, which, however, stood somewhere between tithes and leases.6 It indicates that developing polities were looking for logistically feasible ways to support the Church. Primarily, this final and remarkable piece of evidence suggests the extent to which the establishment of the ecclesiastical organization, and especially the need for its material sustenance, initiated the transformation of the relationship between the land, individuals, and communities and ignited the processes that led to the introduction of the concept of private property, more visible from the perspective of the local churches and monasteries (cf. for Bavaria Brown 2001; Kohl 2010, 204–70). These payments also helped define the borders of administrative units, at least theoretically, as the extraction of tithes was perceived as the condition for providing the local population with sacraments (Capitulare missorum, ad 832, c. 9, p. 64; Concilium Triburiense, ad 895, c. 14–15, pp. 221–22). The evidence of the early centuries of the bishopric in Moravia is structured differently. Even though there are traces of the continuity between the ninth-century ecclesiastical organization and later development, the texts that confirm it are relatively late. The only exception is a forgery of a placitum issued in 976, in which ‘a bishop from Moravia’ witnesses the sentence

3 Urkundenbuch Aschaffenburg, no. 8, 37. The charter was probably forged in the mid-twelfth century, indicated by numerous dissimilarities in terminology. Nonetheless, its narration is regarded as genuine, including the mention of the Moravian bishop, see Urkundenbuch Aschaffenburg, no. 8, 28–29, and see also Třeštík 2004b, 211–20. Another argument in favour of its originality may be the expression ‘moraviensis episcopus’, which 5 Cosmas, Chronica, i. 40, 75–76: ‘ut pro decimatione unusquisue, was not common in the fourteenth century but was often used sive potens, sive dives sive pauper, tantum de suo pheodo vel for the bishop of Olomouc, see Charouz 1987, 97–113. The term allodio araturam haberet, duos modios quinque palmarum et refers to an institution that may or may not have been vacant at duorum digitorum, unum tritici et alterum avene, episcopo that time and which probably survived from the Great Moravian solveret. Nam antea sicut primo episcopo Diethmaro period as a legal institution (not in a functional sense). Jan 2003, constitutum erat, pro decimacione duos messis acervos dabant; 7–20, in contrast, supposes that then there was a functional dicimus enum acervum quinquaqingta manipulos habentem.’ Moravian bishopric. 6 For more details, cf. Tinti 2005, 32–49. Cf. Sawyer, no. 1368 [accessed 4 For the new chronology of the manuscript, where this document 16 August 2022]. is preserved, see Havel and Kalhous 2019, 159–67.

2.   t h e e s tab l i s h m e n t o f an eccle si ast i cal o rgani zat i o n i n t he po st–caro li ngi an perip h ery

of the court of the archbishop of Mainz.7 Cosmas of vindicated by neighbouring co-bishops and kept his Prague (Chronica, i. 21, 113) also mentioned Bishop position as well, although he was not a member of the Vracen, who allegedly administered Moravia before ruling dynasty (Kanovník, Pokračování, 210–11, 213–14, Severus of Prague (1030–1067). Last but not least, 216, 217). His predecessor, Bishop Herrman also played even the tradition of the bishopric of Olomouc from an important and independent role in the dynastic struggles of the 1100s and 1110s (Cosmas, Chronica, the first half of the twelfth century includes two other iii. 13, 174; iii. 21, 187–88; iii. 28, 197; iii. 32, 202; iii. 37, anonymous bishops before the instalment of Bishop 209; iii. 29, 198). There are also traces of active pastoral John in 1063.8 A continuous line of Moravian bishops politics and politics of the administration of the diocese. (from the twelfth century, the bishops of Olomouc) Therefore, we must be careful in agreeing with the starts with John (1063–1085), but even the year of his alleged princely statement that bishops in Bohemia instalment is known only from a late chronicle of the Olomouc bishopric, dating from the fifteenth century. were just ‘princely chaplains’, as many historians have Nonetheless, thanks to the struggle between the bishops done, since this was just a statement of the prince in of Prague and Olomouc 1073–1075, Bishop John’s connection to his struggle with the bishop, which position is attested not only by Cosmas of Prague but should have helped to exclude the bishop from the also by a series of papal letters. These texts also confirm judicial process as a contesting party.10 that his instalment was perceived as legitimate even by Although it is incorrect to conceptualize the bishops John’s severe enemy, Gebhard-Jaromír of Prague — at of Prague and Olomouc primarily as solely subordinates least, there is no attempt to dispute the legitimacy of of the prince, it is important to question the role bishops of Prague or Olomouc played in the administration and the Moravian bishopric (e.g. Kalhous 2021, 35–44). the pastoral care of their bishoprics in the eleventh and We know nothing about the initial endowment of the bishopric. However, in the 1140s, Bishop Henry twelfth centuries. Closely related to this issue is also the Zdík (1126–1150) issued an extensive charter that problem of the growing density of local churches and carefully surveyed the estates of the bishoprics and their transformation into the parish network, which indicated its administrative structures naming important will be discussed in the next section. churches in several central places, whose heads were also members of the episcopal chapter in Olomouc.9 The twelfth-century charters and deeds also started to Local Churches and their Founders note archdeacons subordinated to the bishops of Prague (the first genuine evidence CDB I, no. 251, 223–24). Whereas the tenth- and eleventh-century evidence is Although the bishops of Prague and Olomouc were anecdotal and based primarily on Cosmas’ chronicle invested by the Holy Roman emperor and consecrated and other narrative sources, the richness of pragmatic by their Metropolitan in Mainz, the decision about the literacy grew from the twelfth century onwards. With instalment was usually made in Prague. It was rare for this, the spectrum of institutions documented by the the emperor to send charters to either bishopric — sources also rose, from bishoprics, monasteries, and after all, it is symptomatic that Henry Zdík, bishop of cathedral chapters to the level of the local churches. Until 1200, written evidence (c. 570 records) and Olomouc (1126–1150), asked Vladislav II (1140–1172) for confirmation of the estates and incomes already architectural remains help to identify more than 350 given to him by the theoretically higher authority of ecclesiastical institutions.11 For the early Přemyslid era Conrad III, the King of the Romans (1137–1152) (CDB (until 1200), however, due to the lack of substantial I, no. 157, 161–63). written evidence, there is great potential in archaeological evidence. As two regional studies attest, a large part of Despite the influence of the ruling Přemyslids on the instalment of new bishops, their position after the local churches that are documented only by late the consecration seems to have been very stable. In medieval written sources and preserved in their gothic the 1070s, Jaromír-Gebhard of Prague (1068–1090) or baroque form were preceded by an older building struggled with his brother, but kept his position; in 1130, Bishop Menhart (1122–1134) allegedly got involved in the plot against Prince Soběslav I (1126–1140), but was 10 Jarloch, Letopis, 480: ‘Cum sit, inquit, omnibus notum, 7 Cf. n. 5. 8 For the latest overview of the historiographical tradition of the bishopric in Moravia cf. Kalhous 2018a, 159–85. 9 Edited in CDB I, no. 115, 116–23, and Flodr 1960, no. 1, 228–34; for detailed analysis, cf. Flodr 1960, 45–57, 132–53; Bistřický 1980, 135–258.

Pragensem episcopum meum fore capellanum, sicut omnes praedecessores sui patrum et avorum meorum fuerunt capellani, decernite quaeso, si liceat ei agere contra domnum suum, vel si tenear ex aequo respondere capellano meo’; cf. Fiala 1967. 11 Preserved architecture: 138 (Bohemia, 52,000 km2) and 17 (Moravia, 26,000 km2, of which the inhabited area was, however, nearly the same as in Bohemia at that time!) Based primarily on Merhautová 1971; Procházka 2005.

45

46

dav id k a l ho us an d j o s e f š r ám e k

(cf. Čechura 2015, 5–28; Čechura 2005, 359–76, for Bohemian Church but were noticed by contemporary more details cf. his unpublished PhD thesis Čechura sources only in the 1130s.13 2019; see also Hasil 2020, 129–32). The assumption that Although the secular elites are usually named as only the tip of the iceberg is visible regarding the early the main driving force behind the establishment of the churches is further supported by the observation of parish network, the participation of the bishops should Štefan and Varadzin (2014, 357–72; see also Kalhous not be forgotten. In all of Europe, bishops attempted to 2015, 7–36), who made us aware of the great shift from strengthen their control over their diocese by founding field cemeteries to churchyards around 1100. churches of which they would be patrons. They also tried to persuade local lords to give up the patronage of In the thirteenth century, there is evidence for at least 650 ecclesiastical institutions with more than 3200 their churches to them — a process well documented records just in the contemporary charters, letters, and in ninth- and tenth-century Bavaria (cf. Brown 2001; deeds. From the 1350s, when the serial records of the Kohl 2010). archbishopric of Prague started, c. 3000 churches are Last but not least, local ecclesiastical elites should documented by written evidence (for an extensive be mentioned, whose members founded churches for project on their transformation into a database and themselves and members of their own families (see canon further analysis see recently Zilynská and SynovcováZbudko, who in 1098, however, made a donation to the Borovičková 2021). The evidence is, however, still Prague cathedral chapter and Stará Boleslav Collegiate unevenly distributed — whereas most of the institutions Chapter, see Pražák 1960). (Not to mention families are mentioned just once, powerful bishoprics (Olomouc where both careers, ecclesiastical and secular, were 52x; Prague 42x) and rich monasteries (Oslavany 40x; possible.) In all of Europe, it was customary at least Velehrad 40x) and canon chapters (Prague-Vyšehrad until the end of the twelfth century to inherit those 46x) might appear in dozens of charters. Nonetheless, churches and the position of the local priest — and the rise in the number of churches in the thirteenth possibly other ecclesiastical positions — within the century also reflects the expansion of the agriculturally family (Wood 2006, 659–80; Barrow 2015, 115–58). used and settled areas, not necessarily just the growing During this century, however, the pattern transformed density of the churches in the already used space, which under the pressure of Church reform;14 instead of the is evidenced by the disputes about tithes among the father, a young candidate for the ecclesiastical career was usually supported also by his uncle or older brother local churches, starting around the same time. The founders of many of these local churches were (Barrow 2015, 115–58). Several good examples from probably local elites.12 The secular patronage of local the Czech lands document this practice in different churches resulted in strong and negative narratives from layers of the Bohemian and Moravian Church. In the Church authorities, illustrated by metaphors such as the monastic milieu, the first abbots of the monastery of opposition of Roman ecclesiastical culture and lifestyle Sázava, who were related to St Prokop, the initiator and the — comparably unflattering — culture of the of the foundation, could be mentioned.15 Similarly, barbarian warriors (excellent example: Wormald 2006). Daniel (1148–1167), the bishop of Prague, was the son This narrative was a result of two opposing sources: of Magnus, the canon of the Prague cathedral chapter.16 heroic poetry and religious reform discourse (for a more Such examples of nepotism were not exceptional cases nuanced view cf. Wood 2006, 437–584; Hamilton 2013, (Fiala 1963, 7–19). Bishop John of Prague (1134–1139) 31–119). Nonetheless, the churches helped local lords to richly endowed Strahov Monastery with his family demonstrate their status and power. Furthermore, they estates in East Bohemia (CDB I, no. 156, 157). On the provided them with an attractive central stone building local level, this practice is attested at the beginning of the in their estate, which was often directly connected with thirteenth century, when it was widely considered illegal, a residential building (Klápště 2012; Velímský 2023). and even the local priests themselves were aware of that Finally, a career in the Church had become a useful channel into which to divert superfluous sons for generations and established links between the secular and ecclesiastical elites (cf. Zbyhněv, CDB I, no. 124, 13 The first explicit note in the Czech lands is, however, dated to 1136. Cf. Kanovník, Pokračování, 225–26, where a man is called 129–31; see also Velímský 2023, 94–97 and Smetánka ‘parrochianus’, which in this case means parish priest. 2009). These churches became the backbone of the 14 See the exhorts of papal legates Guido in 1140s: CDB I, no. 130 parish organization, which most probably slowly a 135, 135, 137–38; Mnich Sázavský, Pokračování, 261; Annales Gradicense et Opatovicenses, 398; and of Peter of Capua: Jarloch, developed from the beginning of the foundation of the

12 For the polemics about the traditional discourse of the great parishes founded by the Přemyslids, cf. Jan 2008, 183–99.

Chronicle, 511–12. 15 For the discussion about the role of St Prokop as a founder of the monastery, cf. the summary in Kalhous 2012, 224–25. 16 Necrologium Bohemicum, 803: ‘Obiit Magnus canonicus. Pater Danielis episcopi’.

2.   t h e e s tab l i s h m e n t o f an eccle si ast i cal o rgani zat i o n i n t he po st–caro li ngi an perip h ery

Figure 2.1. The number of monasteries founded in the Czech lands up to 1306.17

and, accordingly, asked the pope for permission (CDB II, no. 131–32, 121–23; cf. recently Antonín 2020 with an excellent analysis of the episcopacy of Bishop Andrew of Prague and the social roots of the contemporary conflicts in Bohemia in the 1210s and 1220s). However, how eleventh-century local foundations worked is unknown. Cosmas of Prague in the 1120s recorded one (!) example from 1061. The chronicler stated that Mstis, who was in that time ‘comes Urbis Biline’, founded his church in the suburb of the castle that he administered. He decided to invite not only the bishop of Prague, who had to come to consecrate the church, but also Prince Vratislav II (1061–1092). It seems probable that Mstis had the ulterior motive of finding his way to a ruler, who was hostile towards him, as he was responsible for the death of his first wife during the reign of Vratislav’s brother Spytihněv (Cosmas, Chronica, ii. 15, 106). Although Vratislav accepted the invitation, he (unlike the bishop) did not stay overnight in Mstis’ suburb court but left for his residence in the central area of Bílina. Cosmas informs us that Vratislav was already determined to remove

Mstis from his seat — and he did it the day after. Mstis allegedly accepted his decision, but also insisted that: He is the duke and the lord; let him do with his burg what he pleases. But what my church has today, the duke does not have the power to take away. (Cosmas, Chronicle, 139)18 Some scholars are convinced that this means Mstis only used property he received from his prince leased for the foundation of his church (e.g. Sommer 2007, 28); others insist that this must have been his allodial property (cf. e.g. Jan 2007, 45–46; Wihoda 2007, 22). In our opinion, this sentence does not enable us to take any of those explanations for granted (cf. Klápště 2012, 43–46, here esp. 45; Velímský 2009, 177–79). Its anecdotal character does not make it possible to discuss the extent of the contemporary elites’ estates or their possible dependence on princely power. Furthermore, in all of Europe, princes were allowed to confiscate the properties of traitors. Similarly, the general phenomenon of princely servants founding churches using originally princely property with their lord’s

17 Based on Fiala 1978, 397–404; data about the Cistercian monasteries were corrected and based on Charvátová 2013; 2014. 18 Cosmas, Chronica, ii. 19, 111.

47

48

dav id k a l ho us an d j o s e f š r ám e k

permission is observable in all of Europe. Therefore, both explanations are possible. The chronicle does not provide a clue for either of these hypotheses. And more importantly, the story of one man does not tell us, in this case, a lot about the complex structures and systems of the time. However, in the twelfth century the process of founding churches closely connected with an estate and manor house was only beginning to take shape, and archaeologists have documented several examples of this practice (see esp. Klápště 2012; Velímský 2023). It seems that the church and its endowment might have become a strong memorial centre of noble families and contributed to their stabilization and cohesion in time. We lack any details about the role these churches played in local communities, however, it is probable that apart from demonstrating the status of their founders, they were comparable to future parish churches.

Connecting People: Monasteries in Přemyslid Bohemia More details are known about the beginnings of monasteries, some of which founded their own historiographical tradition (see Table 2.1). Their institutional continuity also helped preserve documents related to their properties. Whereas in older historiography written from the perspective of enlightenment and anticlericalism, the monasteries were imagined as redundant, wasting the energy of medieval polities, later research revealed their importance for networking and strengthening social cohesion both locally and on the level of the realm (cf. Rosenwein 1989 and 1999; see also Innes 2006; Hummer 2006; Zeller 2022). In the following, the study will briefly examine the embeddedness of three Benedictine monasteries, Opatovice (late eleventh century), Kladruby (1115),19 and Vilémov (before 1160), and two Benedictine priories, Police and Broumov (after 1213 and 1258), in the local and wider regional structures. We will focus on three issues in our analysis based primarily on contemporary deeds and charters. Firstly, the evidence will be examined to demonstrate how exactly the newly established ecclesiastical foundations could have become foci for local elites of the Přemyslid regnum. Secondly, the evidence will also be used as a basis for reflections on how these institutions could have helped to establish the links between the local elites and the princely power. Thirdly, the dynamics of the integrating process will be considered based on the proposed sample of ecclesiastical institutions. In our

19 For more details about Opatovice and Kladruby, cf. Kalhous 2018b, 37–50.

paper, however, we will first discuss each monastery or priory separately, reflecting on their local role and their possible role in the realm. Opatovice

The former monastery in Opatovice (now the Pardubice region) is situated near an important central place, the later high medieval city of Hradec Králové, which Cosmas of Prague mentions as the head of four other castles (Cosmas, Chronica, iii. 41, 214; cf. Procházka 1993, 109–41). Its alleged foundation charter informs us about its beginnings; however, it is a twelfth-century forgery (CDB I, no. 386, pp. 368–71). The forged charter (twelfth century) names as its issuer Prince Vratislav II (1061–1092) but also insists that he did not found the monastery, but rather promoted an existing cella, which was formerly subjected to Břevnov Monastery and founded by a local man called Mikulec. The forgery is a patchwork, which includes not only two separate gifts from Vratislav but also donations from several other men. The abbot of Opatovice, Boleradus, donated the village of Libčany, from Tezlin, a provost in the neighbouring centre of Hradec (Králové), they received some estates in Plačice, the princely chaplain, Geco, donated Platěnice, a member of the local elites of Mikulec added a piece of land in Vraclav, and, last but not least, from Usebor, the monastery received the village of Lodín (for a map cf. Velímský 2023, 144). All the enumerated men seemed to have been endowed with properties in the surrounding region, and also all of them imitated their prince with their donations. Thus, Opatovice appeared to have become an important focal point of the local power networks, where the hierarchy of power and the relationship between the centre and periphery was renegotiated — after all, it is possible to point out a good example directly from the forgery mentioned above to illustrate this point. The fact that Mikulec subjected his cella to the oldest Benedictine monastery in Bohemia in Břevnov20 indicates that he tried to legitimize his foundation by establishing a link with the centre. Opatovice is also one of few examples of originally small monastic foundations that played an important role in the spread of Christianity over Europe (cf. e.g. Rembold 2017, 143–87). Consequently, the prince replaced Mikulec as a patron, but he helped to promote its status from a cella dependent on the princely foundation of Břevnov to an independent monastery, which signals a reconfiguration, where the relationship between Opatovice, its founder, and the

20 By tradition the monastery was founded in 993, but this date was recently debated. See Koutná-Karg 1993, 219–30; Píša 1993, 231–95; Sommer 2000, 418–19; Kubín 2021, 246–56.

2.   t h e e s tab l i s h m e n t o f an eccle si ast i cal o rgani zat i o n i n t he po st–caro li ngi an perip h ery

princely dynasty remained preserved. Even this limited evidence proves the importance of the monastery for stabilizing local power networks and providing a link to Prague and the ruling dynasty. Kladruby

Kladruby, positioned approximately 40 km westwards from Pilsen, was founded by Prince Vladislav I (1109–1117, 1120–1125). A set of forgeries naming Vladislav I as their issuer (CDB I, no. 390, pp. 393–403) are critical for understanding the local networks of the monastery and the development of its domain. The oldest layer is represented by versions B1 and B2, dated to the second half of the twelfth century, written by a hand previously active in the Benedictine monastery of Hradisko near Olomouc. Although the existing copy was made after 1150, the text must have been compiled in the 1130s, as it does not include the donation of the villa Bděněves. Similarly to the forged foundation charter for the monastery of Opatovice, the alleged foundation charter for Kladruby also includes several smaller donations from the surrounding elites besides the estates and incomes endowed by the prince. It contains a record number, altogether thirty-three donations, making it a Traditionsbuch, a book of deeds, rather than a simple foundation charter, signalling a solid embeddedness of the monastery into the local power networks (Nováček 2010, 127–42). Further evidence also suggests that it was most likely Kladruby that provided notaries and kept the records for the locals as well (Pražák 1958, 130–51). Therefore, all factors support the importance of Kladruby for local power networks. Vilémov

Vilémov was founded on the edge of the old settlement area, but this does not mean that it was placed in a deserted region. It was located near the intersection of two long-distance roads, not far from Čáslav, the main centre of the Čáslav district, and from the settlements of Habry and Běstvina, documented in written sources from the twelfth century (Hejhal 2012, 24–78). The Chronicle of Přibík Pulkava of Radenín from the 1370s dates the foundation of the monastery to 1121 (Havel 2020, 17–51), naming the brothers William and Heřman of Sulzbach as its founders (Pulkava, Kronika, 76). The brothers were mentioned in 1124, in addition to in the Chronicle of Cosmas of Prague, in the manuscript C1 dated from the second half of the fifteenth century, where it is claimed that the monastery was founded ‘by Prince Vladislav at the insistence of Counts William and Herman’ (Cosmas, Chronica, iii. 54, 227). From these reports, scholars further deduced that members of the Bavarian noble family probably came to the Přemyslid

principality as an escort of Princess Richenza of Berg, the wife of Prince Vladislav I (1109–1117, 1120–1125). However, both reports are very late and lack any clues to confirm these theories (Šrámek 2012, 7–73) — by 1278, the monastery was the subject of thirteen documents, only three of which show it as a recipient and four as a litigant. Both the Přemyslids and the bishop of Prague were listed as issuers. The earliest firmly documented date in the history of the Vilémov Abbey is, however, 1160, when the first known superior of this monastery appears as a witness in the princely charter for the Premonstratensian canonry of Hradisko near Olomouc (CDB I, no. 208, 196). The initial property endowment was probably spread out in the immediate vicinity of the monastery, and as analogies of other Bohemian and Moravian monasteries suggest, it was probably fragmented. The core of the monastery was not a very large area around Vilémov. The monastery had the Bojanovský district with numerous, but small, settlements in the east. The abbey held other properties in the south around Habry, towards the later Německý Brod, where several local mining centres were established before the middle of the thirteenth century (Somer 2012, 221–27; Somer and others 2015, 81–86, 96–113, 121–39). The monastery benefited from this boom, as evidenced by the mandate of Přemysl Ottokar II (1251/3–1278) from 1276, in which the king confirmed the right of the convent to take half of his income (urbura) from the silver mines located on the monastery’s estate, and exempted the monastery’s subjects from the obligation to exchange currency with the royal money changers during the so-called coinage renewal (CDB V/2, no. 811, 502–03). The monastery also benefited from its location — between 1204 and 1114, Prince Děpolt III, who administered the Čáslav, Chrudim, and Vraclav districts, granted the monastery a share of the revenue from the customs house in Habry on the Haberská road connecting Bohemia with Moravia via the Highlands, which grew in importance as colonization progressed. The increase in traffic was certainly reflected in the revenue from customs duties collected at the customs houses in Habry and Jihlava (CDB II, no. 112, 107). Apart from the ruling family, the monastery was supported by Sezema of Kostomlaty, from whom the monastery acquired the remote village of Opočnice near Poděbrady in 1223 (CDB II, no. 252, 241–42). More fundamental were the ties to the lords of Lichtenburk. Because of the unfortunate years after the death of Přemysl Ottokar II (1278), it is possible to interpret a deed from July 1288, in which the brothers Smil and Oldřich of Lichtenburk confirmed that they had accepted two deserted villages of the monastery, Opočnice and Bolice, from the abbot of Vilémov, Jaroslav, under the promise of protecting the monastery for their whole

49

50

dav id k a l ho us an d j o s e f š r ám e k

life (KLL I, no. 379, 149). The monks encountered the descendants of Smil of Lichtenburk as early as 1281, when they bought the villages of Heřmanice and Majolovice (today Malejov) from them, with the Kozojedy forest and the right to fish on the Doubravka River. The deal also included the patronage right to the church of St Benedict in Heřmanice (CDB VI/1, no. 149, 197–98). In 1288, Jistislav, son of Bleh of Chlum, also documented that he had accepted the deserted village of Rouzeň from the Vilém Monastery for the purpose of restoration (KLL I, no. 350, 138). A deed from June 1289 bears witness that Konrad of Rochov, probably a member of the Lichtenburk clientele, accepted the village of Pavlov, which belonged to the Vilémov Monastery and had previously been held by his father and mother, and undertook to cede the village back to the Benedictines after his death (KLL I, no. 433, 172). The monastery’s activity around Světlá nad Sázavou is also evidenced by a document from 1307, when a large property exchange took place between the Vilémov Convent and Rajmund of Lichtenburk (RBM 2, no. 2152, 929). This exchange was advantageous for both parties, as it further consolidated the land holdings of both Raimund of Lichtenburg and the Vilémov Monastery. However, the monastery was not always successful — it lost a dispute with Benedict, the parish priest of Německý Brod, over the patronage of several surrounding parish churches (Somer and others 2015, 82–83). In 1282, Vilémov Monastery exchanged the village of Sulice for the village of Markovice with the patronage of the local parish church with Tobias, bishop of Prague. This exchange proves the monastery’s will to round up its properties intentionally. The Benedictine monastery of Vilémov, in comparison with Opatovice, represents the opposite example. Although the foundation of this abbey may have been initiated by the nobles — the prince’s courtiers — the real driving force was probably the monarch himself. The foundation’s roots in the region on the border of the old settlement area, as well as its continuing relationship with the ruling family, are indicated by sources as early as the beginning of the thirteenth century. Sources from the end of the same century show that the monastery of Vilémov found a firm place in the regional network, where during the thirteenth century several other powerful entities crystallized as a result of the settlement process, both the town of Německý (now Havlíčkův) Brod and, above all, the noble family of Lichtenburg, a branch of the powerful Ronovec family. Police and Broumov

The last example is the priory in Police nad Metují, whose fate shows that settling into local structures

could also be a source of conflict. The origins of the local side-house of the Břevnov Monastery date back to 1213. At that time, King Přemysl Ottokar I (1197–1230), at the request of the abbot of Břevnov, Chunon, gave his monastery the Police nad Metují district, described in the charter as a ‘deserted place’. The charter contains an explicit decree that this precinct and all the people and estates belonging to it should be subject only to the abbot, both in spiritual and secular matters, CDB that they should be exempt from the existing jurisdiction of the royal officials (RBM II, no. 367, 399–401). Although it is this immunity passage that has enabled the document to be identified as a forgery, scholars assume that it contains plausible information (Hrubý 1920, 94–126; Šebánek and Dušková 1953, 261–85; Dušková 1988, 597–615; Bistřický 1991, 186–89; Šrámek 2013, xxxiii–xlv; Šrámek 2015, 13–42). The priory of Police, which was to grow around an older hermitage with a chapel, is documented in written sources between 1250 and 1267 (CDB V/1, no. 65, 127; no. 246, 377–79, cf. Novák 2005, 167–70). From here, further expansion was led beyond the Stěny massif into the Broumov region. In 1253, a market from the monastic village of Provodov was transferred to Police by a forged but trustworthy royal charter (CDB IV/1, no. 289, 483–84). This document attributed the confirmation of the endowment of Police to the abbot of Břevnov, Martin I, to King Přemysl Ottokar II. After 1250, Abbot Martin I encouraged the settlement of the area between the Stěny and the Stěnava rivers by calling colonists. Between 1255 and 1256, the villages of Hynčice, Křinice, Božanov, Velká Ves, Hejtmánkovice, and others were settled (CDB V/1, no. 51, 106; no. 52, 107; no. 72, 137; no. 73, 138; no. 98, 173). The beginnings of Broumov, which was founded independently of the Břevnov colonization enterprise, can also be placed in the first half of the thirteenth century. The Benedictines of Břevnov established themselves in Broumov at the end of the 1250s, when the local parish church was incorporated (CDB V/1, no. 162, 258–59). An important step towards controlling the region was the purchase of the Broumov vogtei from the Vogt Wicher in 1266, with all the rights and pensions belonging to it (CDB V/1, no. 477, 707–08; cf. Musil 2012, 317–31; RBM II, no. 91, 35; no. 191, 76–77; CDB V/1, no. 73, 138; no. 162, 258). A unique commemorative deed dating from around 1255 defined the boundaries of Police’s goods in relation to the estates of the lords Peter and Rubín, bearing the coat of arms of a stirrup (CDB V/1, no. 65, 127), attesting to the bond between the priory and its neighbours. Whereas the relationship between the priory and lords Peter and Rubín seemed to be friendly, by the end of the thirteenth century, the

2.   t h e e s tab l i s h m e n t o f an eccle si ast i cal o rgani zat i o n i n t he po st–caro li ngi an perip h ery

monks truly appreciated their decision to hire knights Konrad of Sulz (1296) and later Vyšemír of Nečtiny (1297?) as their burgraves in Broumov (Šrámek 2015, 13–42; Šrámek 2017a, 141–71). Knight Conrad had the task of providing this residence with a garrison and defending it adequately. Conrad promised to leave the mansion manned with a strong garrison if he departed. In the event of a war between the Bohemian king and the Polish princes, if he was unable to defend the monastery himself without help, he was not allowed to call in reinforcements without the approval of the abbot of Břevnov. Although the administrator of the seat was to be the protector of the law, he was not allowed to usurp judicial powers unless the abbot had instructed him to do so by his envoy or in his charter. In court disputes, he was supposed to take the side of the vogt/advocatus of Broumov (RBM II, no. 1732, 743–44). After him (i.e. probably from 1297), the same position was held by Vyšemír of Nečtin, brother of Abbot Bavor (RBM II, no. 2765, 1208–09). The justification for the existence of the Broumov castellan is well illustrated by an event from the beginning of the fourteenth century. In 1300, during the abbot’s absence, the Broumov vogts, Lev and Tyček, affiliated with the Pannewitz family ( Jurek 1996, 263–64), together with other companions, robbed the treasury of the church in Polička. Abbot Bavor had the two vogts/advocates summoned to his house in Polička after their return from Rome, and, upon their arrival, had them captured and imprisoned. But as the testimony of Abbot Bavor of Nečtiny suggests, in consequence of the carelessness, or perhaps the direct action, of the guards, the captives escaped and, together with others, waged a war of resistance against the monastery and harmed the Benedictine convent in various ways. The notary of the monastery, Jan, was severely injured, and his attackers stole seventy talents of silver, while the burgrave Vyšemír lost his horse and armour. The townspeople of Broumov were not spared from the damage, although they did not resist the attackers. The damage to granaries and yards amounted to 200 talents of silver. As a result, both bailiffs were declared outlaws. Nevertheless, they did not hesitate to plunder the area. However, when they sacked and burned the monastic village of Šonov at the head of a large retinue, the burgrave Vyšemír marched against the rebellious feudal lords and defeated them. The rebellious feudal lords and some of their companions were captured, but Lev managed to escape. By order of the burgrave Vyšemiř, his brother Tyček was dragged around the square of Broumov, tied to the tails of horses, and then, already half dead, thrown into a dungeon, where the recaptured Lev followed him. The properties of the culprits were

also confiscated (RBM II, no. 2765, 1207–9; cf. Musil 2016, 159–60; Šrámek 2017b, 79–103). The establishment of the Břevnov expositories in Police nad Metují and Broumov is also related to the settlement process in the Czech lands. Considering the fact that the oldest sources are forgeries, it can be judged that the initiative this time lay entirely with the Benedictines of Břevnov near Prague. Through the provostries of Police and then Broumov, the Benedictines in Břevnov substantially enriched their economic base, which was already hopelessly limited in the vicinity of Prague, while at the same time they had a major impact on the settlement of the border region, which had hitherto been more closely linked to Kladsko than to the Czech lands, by creating the opportunity for the arrival of new settlers and the establishment of new villages based on emphyteutic law. On the other hand, however, it appears that the rise and ambitions of the monks, as well as the new customs that came with them, probably caused strong tensions in the local society, which probably culminated in the resistance of the local elites against the Benedictines of Břevnov. However, their position in the region was already so strong that even this dramatic event did not reverse the development; on the contrary, the position of the monks was strengthened, which benefitted the town of Broumov in the following centuries.

Conclusions The development of the ecclesiastical organization in the Přemyslid realm seemed to follow a general pattern. After a relatively long period of Christianization, the first bishopric was established. In the case of Bohemia, the situation was complicated due to the competing interests of the Přemyslid princes, emperors, popes, and the bishop of Regensburg, who initially administered Bohemia. Therefore, it took at least eight years to install the first bishop of Prague. As the bishops were aware of the importance of material resources for maintaining the ecclesiastical organization and pastoral care, the first bishops tried to stabilize the incomes of the diocese and asked for at least some form of firmly established fees from their flock. Although the written evidence helps us to track especially the political activities of the bishops (mostly as the partners, rather than servants, of the princes), from time to time, we can also spot them providing pastoral care and acting as administrators in their see. Together with the elites, ecclesiastical or secular, they also contributed to the growing density of the network of local churches, which developed into the parish network. Whereas the local churches provided the faithful with pastoral care, monasteries

51

52

dav id k a l ho us an d j o s e f š r ám e k

were mostly founded by the princely family in order to create or strengthen local support, profiled as a foci of local power networks connecting the local players with Prague and the princely court. They not only attracted local donors, but also provided them with notarial services. As demonstrated by the case of the rebellion against Broumov Priory, those local connections also helped the priory to protect their rights and properties when the king was too far away.

Acknowledgements This study has been produced with the assistance of the database Czech Medieval Sources online, provided by the LINDAT/CLARIAH–CZ Research Infrastructure (), supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sports of the Czech Republic (Project No. LM2018101), and thanks to the project of the Czech Science Foundation GAČR 19–21654S.

2.   t h e e s tab l i s h m e n t o f an eccle si ast i cal o rgani zat i o n i n t he po st–caro li ngi an perip h ery

Works Cited Primary Sources Annales Fuldenses, ed. by Fridericus Kurze, Monumenta Germaniae historica Scriptores rerum Germanicarum, 7 (Hannover: Hahn, 1891) Annales Gradicense et Opatovicenses = Letopisy Hradištsko-Opatovické, ed. by Josef Emler, Fontes rerum Bohemicarum, 2 (Prague: Museum Království českého/Grégr a Dattel, 1874), pp. 385–400 Annales regni Francorum, ed. by Fridericus Kurze, Monumenta Germaniae historica Scriptores rerum Germanicarum, 6 (Hannover: Hahn, 1895) CDB I = Codex diplomaticus et epistolaris Regni Bohemiae, Vol. i, ed. by Gustav Friedrich (Prague: Comitiorum Regni Bohemiae, 1904–1907) CDB II = Codex diplomaticus et epistolaris Regni Bohemiae, Vol. ii, ed. by Gustav Friedrich (Prague: Comitiorum Regni Bohemiae, 1912) CDB IV/1 = Codex diplomaticus et epistolaris Regni Bohemiae, Vol. iv/1, ed. by Jindřich Šebánek and Sáša Dušková (Prague: Československá akademie věd, 1962) CDB V/2 = Codex diplomaticus et epistolaris Regni Bohemiae, Vol. v/2, ed. by Jindřich Šebánek and Sáša Dušková (Prague: Československá akademie věd, 1981) CDB VI/1 = Codex diplomaticus et epistolaris Regni Bohemiae, Vol. vi/1, ed. by Zbyněk Sviták, Helena Krmíčková, Jarmila Krejčíková, and Jana Nechutová (Prague: Akademie věd České republiky, 2006) ‘Capitulare missorum, ad 832’, in Monumenta Germaniae historica Capitularia regum francorum, 2, ed. by Alfred Boretius (Hanover: Hahn, 1897), no. 202, pp. 63–65 ‘Concilium Triburiense, ad 895’, in Monumenta Germaniae historica Capitularia regum francorum, 2, ed. by Alfred Boretius, no. 252 (Hanover: Hahn, 1897), pp. 196–249 Cosmas, Chronica = Cosmas Pragensis, Chronica Boemorum, ed. by Bertold Bretholz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores rerum Germanicarum, Nova series 2 (Berlin: Weidmann, 1923) Cosmas, Chronicle = Cosmas of Prague, The Chronicle of the Czechs, trans. by Lisa Wolverton (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2009) So-called Dalimil, Kronika = Tak řečený Dalimil, Staročeská kronika, 1, ed. by Jiří Daňhelka, Karel Hádek, Bohuslav Havránek, Naděžda Kvítková (Prague: Academia, 1988) Diplomata Heinrici IV., ed. by Dietrich von Gladiss and Alfred Gawlik, Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Diplomata, 6 (Böhlau: Weimar, 1959) Granum catalogi = Johann Loserth, ‘Das Granum Catalogi praesulum Moraviae nach der Handschrift des Olmützer Domkapitelarchivs’, Archiv für Österreichische Geschichte, 78 (1892): 41–98 Jarloch, Fiala = Jarloch, ‘Letopis’, ed. by Josef Emler, Fontes rerum Bohemicarum, 2 (Prague: Museum Království českého/ Grégr a Dattel, 1874), pp. 461–516 KLL 1 = Katalog listů a listin k VII. dílu Českého diplomatáře I: Zpracování diplomatického materiálu pro období květen 1283 až květen 1297, ed. by Dalibor Havel (Brno: Masarykova univerzita v Brně, 2011) Kanovník, Pokračování = Kanovník Vyšehradský, ‘Pokračování Kosmovo’, ed. by Josef Emler, Fontes rerum Bohemicarum, 2 (Prague: Museum Království českého/Grégr a Dattel, 1874), pp. 201–38 Mnich Sázavský, Pokračování = Mnich Sázavský, ‘Pokračování Kosmovo’, ed. by Josef Emler, Fontes rerum Bohemicarum, 2 (Prague: Museum Království českého/Grégr a Dattel, 1874), pp. 238–70 ‘Notae de episcopis Pataviensibus’, in Albert Behaim, ‘Descriptio gentium et diversarum nationum Europe’, in Albert Behaim und die Lorcher Tradition in der Passauer Geschichtsschreibung: die Descriptio gentium et diversarum nationum Europe, ed. by Johann Englberger, Monumenta Germaniae historica Schriften, 57 (Hannover: Hahn 2007), pp. 460–542 Pulkava, Kronika = Pulkava, ‘Kronika’, ed. by Josef Emler and Jan Gebauer, Fontes rerum Bohemicarum, V (Prague: Nadání Františka Palackého, 1893), pp. 3–207 Necrologium Bohemicum = Graus, František. 1967. ‘Necrologium Bohemicum – Martyrologium Pragense a stopy nekosmovského pojetí českých dějin’, Československý časopis historický, 15: 789–810 Othloh, Vita = Othloh, ‘Vita sancti Wolkangi episcopi’, ed. by Georg Waitz, Monumenta Germaniae historica Scriptores, 4 (Hannover: Hahn, 1841), pp. 521–42 RBM 2 = Regesta diplomatica nec non epistolaria Bohemiae et Moraviae, 2, ed. by Josef Emler (Prague: Wiesner, 1882) Sawyer = The Electronic Sawyer. Online Catalogue of Anglo–Saxon Charters [accessed 16 August 2022]

53

54

dav id k a l ho us an d j o s e f š r ám e k

Urkundenbuch Aschaffenburg = Urkundenbuch des Stifts St. Peter und Alexander zu Aschaffenburg, 1, 861–1325, ed. by Matthias Thiel (Aschaffenburg: Pattloch, 1986) Secondary Studies Antonín, Robert. 2020. ‘Bishop Andrew of Prague and Church in Medieval Czech Lands after the Fourth Lateran Council’, Zeitschrift für Ostmitteleuropa-Forschung, 69: 453–69 Barrow, Julia. 2015. The Clergy in the Medieval World, 800–1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Betti, Maddalena. 2014. The Making of Christian Moravia (858–882): Papal Power and Political Reality, East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 450–1450, 24 (Leiden: Brill) Bistřický, Jan. 1980. ‘Studien zum Urkunden–, Brief und Handschriftenwesen des Bischofs Heinrich Zdík von Olmütz’, Archiv für Diplomatik, 26: 135–258 —— 1991. ‘Über Falsifikate böhmischer Gründungsurkunden bis zum Ende des 12. Jahrhunderts’, Archiv Mitteilungen, 4: 186–89 Boháč, Zdeněk. 1979. ‘Pozemková držba pražského arcibiskupství v době předhusitské’, Historická geografie, 18: 165–97 Bolina, Pavel. 2005. ‘Příspěvek k interpretaci Kosmových desátkových údajů: K 880. výročí úmrtí kronikáře’, Český časopis historický, 103: 828–60 —— 2016. ‘Konec, nebo začátek diskuse o problematice desátků v českém středověkém státu?’, Studia Mediaevalia Bohemica, 8: 291–98 Brown, Warren. 2001. Unjust Seizure: Conflict, Interest, and Authority in an Early Medieval Society (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press) Charvátová, Kateřina. 22013. Dějiny cisterckého řádu v Čechách 1142–1420, 1, Fundace 12. století (Prague: Karolinum) —— 22014. Dějiny cisterckého řádu v Čechách 1142–1420, 2, Kláštery založené ve 13. a 14. století (Prague: Karolinum) Čechura, Martin. 2005. ‘Archeologický výzkum kostelů v západních Čechách’, Archaeologia historica, 30: 359–76 —— 2015. ‘Počátky církevní organizace v západních Čechách: výpovědní možnosti historických a archeologických pramenů’, in Historická dílna, 10: sborník příspěvků přednesených v roce 2015 (Plzeň: Západočeská univerzita), pp. 5–28 —— 2019. ‘Počátky sakrální architektury v západních Čechách. Kapitoly z církevní archeologie’ (Unpublished PhD dissertation, Prague: Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University) Charouz, Zdeněk. 1987. ‘“Morava, moravský” v písemných pramenech 9.–13. století’, Slovenská archivistika, 22: 97–113 Dvořák, Max. 1900. O listině papeže Jana XIII. v Kosmově kronice, Věstník Královské české společnosti nauk, třída filosoficko– hististoricko–jazykovědná 1899, no. 12 (Prague: Královská česká společnost nauk) Dušková, Sáša. 1988. ‘Fälschungen böhmischer Königsurkunden im 13. Jahrhundert’, in Fälschungen im Mittelalter, Band iv, ed. by Horst Fuhrmann (Hannover: Hahn), pp. 597–615 Fiala, Zdeněk. 1963. ‘Jindřich Zdík a Kosmas. O původu Jindřicha Zdíka’, Zápisky československých dějin a archivního studia, 7: 7–19 —— 1967. ‘Die Organisation der Kirche im Premyslidenstaat des 10.-13. Jahrhunderts’, in Siedlung und Verfassung Böhmens in der Frühzeit, ed. by František Graus and Herbert Ludat (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz), pp. 133–47 —— 21978. Předhusitské Čechy 1310–1419: český stát pod vládou Lucemburků 1310–1419 (Prague: Svoboda) Flodr, Miroslav. 1960. Skriptorium Olomoucké: k počátkům písařské tvorby v českých zemích, Opera Universitatis Brunensis, Facultas philosophica, 67 (Brno: SPN) Hamilton, Sarah. 2013. Church and the People in the Medieval West, 900–1200 (Edinburgh: Pearson) Hejhal, Petr. 2012. Počátky středověké kolonizace české části Českomoravské vrchoviny, Dissertationes archaeologicae Brunenses/Pragensesque, 14 (Brno: Masarykova univerzita v Brně) Hasil, Jan. 2020. ‘Archeologie a obraz počátků křesťanství v Čechách’, in Ludmila: kněžna a světice, ed. by Jakub Izdný and others (Prague: NLN), pp. 109–37 Havel, Dalibor. 2020. ‘Opomíjený pramen k okolnostem založení benediktinského kláštera ve Vilémově’, Archivní časopis, 70.1: 17–51 Havel, Dalibor, and David Kalhous. 2019. ‘Heiligenkreuz 217 und die Anfänge der Schriftkultur in Böhmen um 1000: die Prager Kirche im Zeitalter Bischofs Thiddag’, Acta Universitatis Carolinae Philosophica et Historica, 25: 159–67 Hehl, Ernst–Dieter. 1998. ‘Widerspenstige Bischof: Bischöfliche Zustimmung und bischöflicher Protest in der ottonischen Reichskirche’, in Herrschaftsrepräsentation im ottonischen Sachsen, ed. by Gerd Althoff and Ernst Schubert, Vorträge und Forschungen, 46 (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke), pp. 295–344 Hrubý, František. 1916–1917. ‘Církevní zřízení v Čechách a na Moravě od 10. do konce 13. století a jeho poměr ke státu’, Český časopis historický, 22: 17–53, 257–87, 385–421; 23: 38–73 Hrubý, Václav. 1920. ‘Falsa Břevnovská’, Český časopis historický, 26: 94–126

2.   t h e e s tab l i s h m e n t o f an eccle si ast i cal o rgani zat i o n i n t he po st–caro li ngi an perip h ery

—— 1926. ‘Původní hranice biskupství pražského a hranice říše české v 10. století’, Časopis Matice moravské, 50: 85–154 Hummer, Hans J. 2006. Politics and Power in Early Medieval Europe: Alsace and the Frankish Realm, 600–1000 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Innes, Matthew. 2006. State and Society in the Early Middle Ages: The Middle Rhine Valley, 400–1000 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Jan, Libor. 2003. ‘Počátky moravského křesťanství a církevní správa do doby husitské’, in Vývoj církevní správy na Moravě: 27. mikulovské sympozium, 9.–10. října 2002, ed. by Emil Kordiovský and Libor Jan (Brno: Moravský zemský archiv, Státní okresní archiv, and Muzejní a vlastivědná společnost), pp. 7–20 —— 2007. ‘K počátkům české šlechty. Družina, beneficium, pozemkové vlastnictví’, in Šlechta, moc a reprezentace ve středověku, ed. by Martin Nodl and Martin Wihoda (Prague: Filosofia), pp. 45–52 —— 2008. ‘Die Anfange der Pfarrorganisation in Böhmen und Mähren’, in Pfarreien im Mittelalter: Deutschland, Polen, Tschechien und Ungarn im Vergleich, ed. by Nathalie Kruppa and Leszek Zygner, Studien zur Germania Sacra, 32 (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 2008), pp. 183–99 Jurek, Tomasz. 1996. Obce rycerstwo na Śląsku do połowy XIV wieku, Prace Komisji Historycznej, 54 (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk) Kalhous, David. 2012. Anatomy of a Duchy: The Political and Ecclesiastical Structures of Early Přemyslid Bohemia, East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 450–1450, 19 (Leiden: Brill) —— 2015. ‘Problémy formování církevní správy v českých zemích v raném středověku’, Studia mediaevalia Bohemica, 7: 7–36 —— 2016. ‘K otázce desátků v českých zemích doby přemyslovské’, Studia mediaevalia Bohemica, 8: 299–308 —— 2018a. Bohemi: Prozesse der Identitätsbildung in frühpřemyslidischen Ländern (bis 1200), Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters, 24 (Vienna: Verlag ÖAW) —— 2018b. ‘Creating Bonds, Creating Memories: Monasteries Kladruby and Opatovice in Twelfth Century and their Forgeries’, Studia historica Brunensia, 65: 37–50 —— 2021. ‘Papežství a Morava v 10.–11. století: vzdálená autorita’, in Pod ochranou svatého Petra? Morava a papežství ve středověku a raném novověku, ed. by Petr Elbel, Lukáš Führer, and Ondřej Schmidt (Brno: Munipress), pp. 35–44 Kohl, Thomas. 2010. Lokale Gesellschaften: Formen der Gemeinschaft in Bayern vom 8. bis zum 10. Jahrhundert, MittelalterForschungen, 29 (Ostfildern: Jan Thorbecke) Koutná-Karg, Dana. 1993. ‘Die Anfänge des Klosters Břevnov’, in Tausend Jahre Benediktiner in den Klöstern Břevnov, Braunau und Rohr, ed. by Johannes Hofman (St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag), pp. 219–30 Kubín, Petr. 2021. ‘The Beginnings of the Earliest Benedictine Monasteries in Central Europe Seen Through the Eyes of Medieval Monastery Tradition’, in The Benedictines and Central Europe: Christianity, Culture, Society, 800–1300, ed. by Dušan Foltýn, Pavlína Mašková, and Petr Sommer (Prague: Nakladatelství Lidová noviny), pp. 246–56 Láník, Jaroslav. 1982. ‘Vývoj pozemkové držby pražského arcibiskupství od 10. do 14. století’, Historická geografie, 20: 113–25 Mazel, Florian. 2016. L’évêque et le territoire. L’invention médiévale de l’espace (ve – xiiie siècle), L’Univers Historique (Paris: Seuil) Merhautová, Anežka. 1971. Raně středověká architektura v Čechách (Prague: Academia) Musil, František. 2012. ‘Z dějin broumovského děkanátu’, Krkonoše – Podkrkonoší, 20: 317–31 —— 2016. ‘Kolonizace Policka a Broumovska a břevnovská klášterní falza’, Historická geografie, 42: 137–68 Nováček, Karel and others. 2010. Kladrubský klášter 1115–1421: osídlení – architektura – artefakty (Plzeň: Scriptorium) Novák, Miroslav. 2005. ‘Archeologické prameny k nejstarším dějinám polického újezdu’, Zpravodaj muzea v Hradci Králové, 31: 167–70 Novotný, Václav. 1912–1937. České dějiny I.1–4 (Prague: Laichter) Nový, Rostislav. 1960. ‘Dýmné’, Časopis Společnosti přátel starožitností, 68: 1–9 —— 1993. ‘K zakládací listině pražského biskupství’, in Traditio et cultus: Miscellanea Historica Bohemica Miloslao Vlk archiepiscopo Pragensi ab eius collegis amicisque ad annum sexagesimum dedicata, ed. by Zdeňka Hledíková (Prague: Karolinum), pp. 13–19 Píša, Vladimír. 1993. ‘Das frühmittelalterliche Břevnov – Zeugnis eines grossen Traumes’, in Tausend Jahre Benediktiner in den Klöstern Břevnov, Braunau und Rohr, ed. by Johannes Hofman (St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag), pp. 231–95 Pohl, Walter. 2018. The Avars: A Steppe Empire in Central Europe, 567–822 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press) Pražák, Jiří. 1958. ‘Ke kritice českých aktů XII. století’, Sborník archivních prací, 8: 130–51 —— 1960. ‘Nejstarší listina pražského kostela’, Sborník archivních prací, 10: 215–29 Procházka, Rudolf. 1993. ‘K vývoji a funkčnímu rozvrstvení hradů 11. a 12. století na Moravě’, in Lokalne ośrodki władzy państwowej w XI–XII wieku w Europie Środkowo–Wschodniej. Spotkania Bytomskie 1, ed. by Sławomir Moździoch (Wrocław: Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii PAN), pp. 109–41 —— 2005. ‘Der südmährische Kirchenbau im 11.–13. Jahrhundert. Ein Überblick’, in Die Kirche im mittelalterlichen Siedlungsraum: archäologische Aspekte zu Standort, Architektur und Kirchenorganisation, ed. by Sabine Felgenhauer-

55

56

dav id k a l ho us an d j o s e f š r ám e k

Schmiedt, Beiträge zur Mittelalterarchäologie in Österreich, 21 (Vienna: Österreichische Gesellschaft für Mittelalterarchäologie), pp. 205–42 Rembold, Ingrid. 2017. Conquest and Christianization. Saxony and the Carolingian World, 772–888, Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life and Thought: Fourth Series, 108 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Rosenwein, Barbara H. 1989. To Be the Neighbor of St Peter: The Social Meaning of Cluny’s Property, 909–1049 (New York: Cornell University Press) —— 1999. Negotiating Space: Power, Restraint, and Privileges of Immunity in Early Medieval Europe (New York: Cornell University Press) Šebánek, Jindřich, and Sáša Dušková. 1953. ‘Studie k českému diplomatáři: I. K otázce břevnovských fals’, Sborník prací Filosofické fakulty brněnské university, ii.2–4: 261–85 Smetánka, Zdenek. 2009. Die Geschichte vom Bauern Ostoj. Alltag im mittelalterlichen Böhmen, Archäologische Werkstücke, 1 (Rahden, Westf.: Leidorf) Somer, Tomáš. 2012. ‘Vliv těžby stříbrných rud na vývoj středověkého osídlení Havlíčkobrodska’, Acta rerum naturalium, 12: 221–27 Somer, Tomáš, Josef Šrámek, and Miroslav Kovář. 2015. Benediktinské opatství ve Vilémově: dějiny zapomenutého kláštera na česko–moravském pomezí (České Budějovice: Bohumír Němec – Veduta) Sommer, Petr. 2000. ‘Das Kloster Břevnov’, in Europas Mitte um 1000, Band 1, Beiträge zur Geschichte, Kunst und Archäologie, ed. by Alfried Wieczorek, Johannes Fried, and Michael Müller–Wille (Stuttgart: Theiss), pp. 418–19 —— 2007. Svatý Prokop. Z počátků českého státu a církve (Prague: Vyšehrad) Šrámek, Josef. 2012. ‘Několik poznámek k počátkům benediktinského kláštera ve Vilémově. Příspěvek k diskusi o fundační činnosti rané české šlechty ve 12. století’, Havlíčkobrodsko, 26: 7–73 —— 2013. ‘Břevnovská listinná falza a počátky osidlování Broumovska pohledem současného dějepisectví’, in Růžička, Jeroným. Dějepis kláštera břevnovského a broumovského, ed. by Ondřej Koupil (Prague: Benediktinské arciopatství sv. Vojtěcha a sv. Markéty), pp. xxxiii–xlv —— 2015. ‘Formování klášterní domény ve 13. a 14. století na příkladu benediktinských proboštství v Polici nad Metují a Broumově’, Historica Olomucensia, 48: 13–42 —— 2017a. ‘Benediktinské expozitury ve východních Čechách doby předhusitské: příspěvek k otázce geneze a významu klášterních dependencií’, Východočeský sborník historický, 32: 141–71 —— 2017b. ‘Opat Bavor z Nečtin a vývoj břevnovského klášterství v době posledních Přemyslovců se zřetelem k severovýchodním Čechám’, Východočeský sborník historický, 31: 79–103 Štefan, Ivo, and Ladislav Varadzin. 2014. ‘Super altare in ecclesia tua. Die Anfänge der Pfarrorganisation in den böhmischen Ländern aus archäologischer Sicht’, in Tradition – Umgestaltung – Innovation: Transformationsprozesse im hohen Mittelalter, ed. by Eike Gringmuth-Dallmer and Jan Klápšte, Praehistorica 32 (Prague: Karolinum), pp. 357–72 Tinti, Francesca. 2005. ‘The “Costs” of Pastoral Care: Church Dues in Late Anglo–Saxon England’, in Pastoral Care in Late Anglo–Saxon England, ed. by Francesca Tinti (Woodbridge: The Boydell Press), pp. 27–51 Třeštík, Dušan. 1986. ‘Bořivoj und Svatopluk. Die Entstehung des böhmischen Staates und Großmährens’, in Großmähren und die Anfänge der tschechoslowakischen Staatlichkeit, ed. by Josef Poulík and Bohuslav Chropovský (Prague: Akademie věd), pp. 311–44 —— 1997. ‘The Baptism of the Czech Princes in 845 and the Christianization of the Slavs’, Historica: Series Nova, 2: 7–59. —— 2004a. ‘K založení pražského biskupství v letech 968–976: pražská a řezenská tradice’, in Vlast a rodný kraj v díle historika: sborník prací žáků a přátel věnovaný profesoru Josefu Petráňovi, ed. by Josef Petráň (Prague: Historický ústav AV ČR), pp. 179–96 —— 2004b. ‘Moravský biskup roku 976’, in Ad vitam et honorem: Profesoru Jaroslavu Mezníkovi přátelé a žáci k pětasedmdesátým narozeninám, ed. by Tomáš Borovský, Libor Jan, and Martin Wihoda (Brno: Matice moravská), pp. 211–20 Vavřínek, Vladimír. 2013. Cyril a Metoděj: mezi Konstantinopolí a Římem (Prague: Vyšehrad) Velímský, Tomáš. 2009. ‘K problematice pozemkové držby českých velmožů a družiníků v období 11.–12. století’, Studia mediaevalia Bohemica, 1: 177–86 —— 2023. Jimi země česká stála: Soubor studií k českým elitám raného a vrcholného středověku (Prague: NLN) Veselský, Josef. 1988. ‘K pravosti listu Jana XIII. v Kosmově kronice’, Listy filologické, 111: 76–82 Wihoda, Martin. 2007. ‘Kníže a jeho věrní. Kosmas o světě předáků a urozených’, in Šlechta, moc a reprezentace ve středověku, ed. by Martin Nodl and Martin Wihoda (Prague: Filosofia), pp. 11–29 Wood, Susan. 2006. The Proprietary Church in the Medieval West (Oxford: Oxford University Press) Wormald, C. Patrick. 22006. ‘Bede, Beowulf and the Conversion of the Anglo-Saxon Aristocracy’, in The Times of Bede: Studies in Early English Christian Society and its Historian, ed. by Stephen Baxter (Malden, MA: Blackwell), pp. 30–105

2.   t h e e s tab l i s h m e n t o f an eccle si ast i cal o rgani zat i o n i n t he po st–caro li ngi an perip h ery

Zeller, Bernhard. 2022. Diplomatische Studien zu den St Galler Privaturkunden des frühen Mittelalters (ca. 720–980), Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung, Erg. Bd. 66 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften) Zilynská, Blanka, and Jana Synovcová-Borovičková. 2021. ‘Církevní topografie středověkých Čech. Projekt databázového zpracování: aktuální stav’, Studia historica Brunensia, 68: 227–43

57

Martin Čechura

3. The Relationship between Early Medieval Burial Grounds and Churchyardsin the Process of the Christianization of Bohemia

A bs t r act  This article aims to analyse medieval field cemeteries and churchyards and their relationship to the beginning and spread of Christianity in Bohemia, studying in particular the continuity and discontinuity of burial grounds in long-term perspective from the tenth to the thirteen centuries. Archaeological excavations in western Bohemia and other areas show a frequent phenomenon: in the twelfth or thirteenth century, a church was built on the edge of a field cemetery, functioning since the eleventh century or even earlier. The area of the old burial ground is reduced, defined by a clear boundary, and transformed into a churchyard. Changes in the burial ritual, including the location and internal structure of burial sites, depend on the cultural and political development of different regions. Therefore, these changes cannot always be directly linked to Christianization. Furthermore, changes in burial practices are clearly part of a broader settlement transformation, the foundations of which go far beyond mere religious changes. At the same time, these complex transformations also demonstrate that the reception of the new faith and the de facto Christianization of the rural population was a longue-durée process, which did not necessarily imply a straightforward and rapid break with old customs. At the same time, along with the growing density of the church network, the transformation and relocation of settlements resulted in the gradual repositioning of cemeteries around churches — when and where they were available; naturally, a sparser church network slowed down this process. Further results about the Christianization of Bohemia not only depend on new archaeological discoveries but, above all, on establishing a new paradigm, raising new questions, and revising historical concepts that determined our understanding of the process of Christianization until now.

T

K e y wo r ds  Christianization, transitional cemeteries, churches, field cemeteries, medieval Bohemia

T

Martin Čechura  •  ([email protected]) is an archaeologist at the Prague City Museum in Prague, Czech Republic. He holds a doctorate in Archaeology from Charles University, Prague. He is an expert in church archaeology, especially in the research of medieval church architecture, medieval and post-medieval cemeteries, and small finds. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 59–71. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138107

60

m a rtin č ec hu r a

Introduction The Christianization of early medieval Europe and its influence on the formation of states has been one of the key topics of European medieval research in recent years. While in the regions of Western, Southern, and partially Northern Europe, researchers can rely on a multitude of written sources, in Central Europe, due to the scarcity of written sources and their only occasional preservation, archaeology plays a major role. Archaeological sources that can be used in the analytical phase of the discovery process can be divided into three basic categories: sacred buildings, burial sites, and material culture — predominantly small finds (Quast 2001, 240; Rębkowski 2011, 14; Later 2012, 571–72). While all categories may have equal relevance, the study of burial sites clearly dominates the archaeological literature, and it is the field of study that has been elaborated on in the greatest detail (Schülke 1999; Hoggett 2007; Gáll 2013; Scull 2015). A synthetic study of the interrelationships between these categories and other types of archaeological sources combined with the results of further historical, natural, and social sciences gives us a more detailed image to help reconstruct these past processes. The following text analyses one aspect of the study of medieval burial sites, specifically the contextualization of those without a church and churchyards and their relationship to Christianity (Fig. 3.1). In general, three phenomena are considered to be manifestations of Christian burial: the abandonment of cremation and the beginning of inhumation, the west–east orientation of graves, and deposition without grave goods (Hoggett 2007, 28). However, most of these occurrences could have been influenced by a wide range of factors, with no direct connection to the reception of the new faith. Broad cultural relations may explain the onset of inhumation (Štefan 2007), and a thorough analysis of written sources has shown that no written regulations prohibited the deposition of objects in Christian graves (Mašková 2009, 78). A different point of view, which will be followed in this article, is aimed at studying the continuity and discontinuity of burial grounds in the long-term perspective from the tenth to the twelfth centuries. According to the general idea, constructed mainly based on written sources, this period includes the reception of the Christian religion by the elite of the society and its gradual spread to the rural environment, and thus the main section of the conversion of the majority of the population of the Bohemian lands.

Historical and Archaeological Context A synthesis of older ideas, based on sporadic written sources and historical and archaeological research

from the 1970s–1990s, was published by Sommer and others (2007). According to this traditional view, Christianization is perceived as a political, top-directed process headed by a ruler. The organization of the first ecclesiastical network was to be directed by the ruler, and the churches were founded primarily in the central fortifications. These churches had full rights to pastoral care, including the right of baptism and burial. In these churches, a choir of priests was headed by an archpriest. He was subordinated more to the castle governor than to the bishop, and, in addition to the clerical administration, had extensive judicial powers. From the eleventh century onwards, this network of castle churches was eroded by private foundations, no longer built by the prince but by members of the newly emerging nobility. In the ninth and tenth centuries, the earlier burial mounds were replaced by field cemeteries (Reihengräberfeld) with no clear spatial limitation. From the eleventh century onwards, these cemeteries were gradually replaced by Christian cemeteries on the consecrated ground adjacent to churches. This process followed the dynamics of the increase of proprietary churches in the landscape. Nonetheless, pre-Christian customs still commonly survived even until the twelfth century (Sommer and others 2007, 228–33), although serious objections have recently been raised to this concept (Čechura 2020). A main development in the understanding of medieval processes was brought about by the synthesis of the development of the landscape in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Klápště 2012). In terms of ecclesiastical history, most attention has been paid to the abandonment of field cemeteries, the transition to burials at churches, and the emergence and expansion of the (proto)parish network. From the tenth century onwards, burial grounds were a common part of the cultural landscape, usually located at a distance of 300–500 m from settlements. Based on coin finds, these burial grounds were abandoned by around 1100 at the latest, when burials moved to the cemeteries around the newly founded parish churches. However, this idea is not entirely complementary with other types of archaeological sources. While the dating of the abandonment of burial grounds is supported by coin finds with a relatively high probability, at the same time, sacral buildings were absent in the Czech landscape. More churches were founded in the landscape from the twelfth century onwards, even more so from the second half of the century, but especially during the thirteenth century. The definitive idea of the density of churches in the landscape is known only from mid-fourteenth-century written sources about the newly formed archepiscopal administrative system (Klápště 2012, 208). The state of archaeological research in Bohemia does not yet allow us to capture the process of burial site relocation to a greater extent. The situation

3 .   t h e r e l at i o n s h i p b e t w e e n e arly me d i e val b u ri al gro u nd s and chu rch yards

Figure 3.1. Map of the excavated medieval cemeteries mentioned in the text. 1. Albrechtice; 2. Myslív; 3. Planá; 4. PilsenDoubravka; 5. Přeštice; 6. Přívětice; 7. Sušice; 8. Žákava. (Drawing by Martin Čechura.)

is somewhat different in Moravia, where a much larger amount of archaeological data are available. Even here, however, the process cannot be followed as a whole; on the contrary, even in cases of well-studied burial grounds with a church nearby, there is a significant gap between the date of the end of burial at one site and the beginning of interment at the other. Another, equally significant and interesting phenomenon is that while the transformation of burial sites occurred around 1100, it was not until the thirteenth century that a more significant transformation of settlements took place (Klápště 2012, 197–209).

One of the most recent contributions to the discussion on the formation of the parish network was presented by Štefan and Varadzin (2014). The catalyst for their reflection was the rescue excavation of the church of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross in Vrbno. The authors noted a relatively quick end of burials in row burial grounds at the turn of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, in contrast to earlier views of the gradual abandonment of burial grounds during the twelfth century. The existing literature describes four possibilities as to how the old burials were replaced. The archaeological findings do not testify

61

62

m a rtin č ec hu r a

to the relocation of burial sites within the bounds of individual settlements nor to small necropolises directly on the boundaries of multiple villages, an example known from western Europe. Small burial sites may have been abandoned in favour of large, central necropolises, or burials may have been relocated to churchyards. These authors consider the last option to be the most probable (Štefan and Varadzin 2014, 365). They explain the observed hiatus between the disappearance of burial grounds and the spread of churches in the landscape by the existence of unpreserved precursors of standing churches, such as wooden buildings. Thus, they assume that a widely developed network of churches existed in the landscape already at the beginning of the twelfth century (Štefan and Varadzin 2014, 360). However, despite intensive archaeological and structural research, including dendrochronological dating of wooden elements in standing buildings, it is not possible to push the dating of standing buildings before the mid-twelfth century (cf. Čechura 2010).

Burial Grounds and the Beginnings of Churchyards in West Bohemia An interesting example of the transfer of burial grounds and the relationship between a burial ground and a churchyard comes from the archaeological findings in Sušice (Klatovy district) (Fig. 3.2). In 1881, a human skeleton was found while digging foundations for the expansion of a match factory, which was identified as a man aged between twenty to thirty years. The skeleton was lying in an inverted position, face down. There were no objects, no remains of a coffin, nor traces of any clothing; the skeleton was therefore identified as a probable murder victim. Two days later, another skeleton was found at the same site, and following that, a child’s skeleton was unearthed at a depth of 30 cm. Within a few weeks, several dozen graves were uncovered, oriented in a south–north to southwest–northeast direction. Some skeletons had a large stone placed behind the head, and bronze or silver S-shaped temple rings, 1 to 3 cm in diameter,

Figure 3.2. Sušice (Klatovy district). Map of the churches and the burial ground. (Drawing by Martin Čechura.)

3 .   t h e r e l at i o n s h i p b e t w e e n e arly me d i e val b u ri al gro u nd s and chu rch yards

were found in many graves. The stratigraphic situation of the burial site was documented during occasional visits by the archaeologist Jan Nepomuk Woldřich (1834–1906), identified as a layer of gravel, apparently weathered bedrock, a 30 cm thick layer of yellow-brown clay, and a 30 cm thick layer of sandy clay overlay the rocky subsoil. Woldřich himself examined two graves; the first, at a depth of about 25 cm, contained the skeleton of an immature individual, probably a boy. The skeleton’s height was about 130 cm, and Woldřich estimated the child’s age to be eight years old. The grave was oriented with the head to the south. The individual bones were repeatedly removed after being uncovered, during which an adult skeleton was found about three steps north of the child’s grave. This grave was oriented in the opposite direction, with its head to the north. There was no accompanying inventory for this burial (Woldřich 1884, 15). Other graves were found in the following weeks, but the documentation was minimal. In total, at least sixty graves were found, arranged in regular rows, about 1 m apart. Unique finds were turned up in 1900 when the grave of a young girl was discovered with a necklace made of silver rings and glass beads; in 1924, a grave with a ceramic vessel was uncovered. Unfortunately, the finds have not survived. The last grave was found when the factory was expanded in 1961. The burial was of an adult skeleton in a rectangular grave pit with slightly rounded corners, perpendicular walls, and a flat bottom. The deceased was lying in an extended supine position, with the grave oriented with the head to the northeast. The skeleton was placed on a wooden slab, preserved as a layer of dark charcoal. A ceramic vessel was placed in the southwest corner of the grave pit to the right of the lower right limb. A dark brown clay layer containing a number of large rubble stones had sunk into the surface of the backfill of the grave pit, and a stone wreath wrapped around its perimeter. Under the outer edge of the stone wreath, further ceramic fragments were found, reconstructed as a lower barrel-shaped vessel with a rounded and slightly raised rim. Under the outer edge of the stone wreath, more pottery shards of a lower barrel-shaped vessel with a rounded and slightly raised rim were discovered. The stone backfill was interpreted as the remains of a ninth-century barrow that had been disturbed by the excavation for a younger skeletal grave. The grave was located at the opposite end of the burial ground to the graves discovered in 1881; it can therefore be assumed that most of the burial ground had already been destroyed (Fridrich 1968, 87–89). Nineteen S-ended temple rings were preserved from the burial site, and a further five undiscovered pieces were published by Dinklage (1942). The oldest temple rings, with a diameter of 1 to 3 cm, are dated to the tenth or eleventh century,

63

Figure 3.3. Sušice (Klatovy district). Church of the Virgin Mary. Northwest corner of the Romanesque church. (Photo by Martin Čechura.)

Figure 3.4. Sušice (Klatovy district). Church of the Virgin Mary. Grave K 16, older than the Romanesque church. (Photo by Martin Čechura.)

Figure 3.5. Albrechtice (Klatovy district). Church of the Virgin Mary, St Peter, and Paul. (Photo by Martin Čechura.)

64

m a rtin č ec hu r a

the youngest ones to the twelfth century. The middle phase of the burial site is dated by the denarius of King Vratislaus II, type Cach 352 (1061–1092). A large skeletal burial ground in Sušice in the Otava basin is a decisive indicator of a contemporary settlement. However, the actual settlement finds are lacking; only isolated finds of pottery from the vicinity of the town are known. Probably at the end of the twelfth century or in the first half of the thirteenth century, the settlement structure changed; a church dedicated to the Virgin Mary was built on a promontory above the Otava River. Archaeological research in 2015 and 2016 uncovered the foundations of a Romanesque church with a rectangular nave and a rectangular presbytery (Fig. 3.3). The entire interior of the building had been destroyed by earlier interventions, mainly by structural alterations to the church and a multitude of burials. Consequently, the older floors could not be found. The discovery of grave K 16 (Fig. 3.4) is crucial for understanding the beginning of the burial activity. It was located in the interior part of the church, in the corner between the north and west walls. Only part of the skeleton was preserved — the spine, the right side of the ribs, and part of the right shoulder blade. The left half of the skeleton was damaged by the foundation wall of the church, clearly indicating that the grave is older than the church and proving the existence of the burial site before its construction. Only a comparative analysis with similar phenomena can provide a closer interpretation; tentatively, two working hypotheses can be drawn. It is either evidence of an older burial ground on which the church was only subsequently established, or it could be indirect evidence of an older sacral structure. The church is reliably documented by written sources in 1233, when Albrecht IV of Bogen granted the patronage of the Sušice church to the Premonstratensian monastery in Windberg (RBM 1, 379). It was not until the thirteenth century that a settlement developed around the church, but at the same time, another one was established on the opposite bank of the Otava River, which was replaced by a newly founded medieval town in the fourteenth century (Čechura 2020, 75–76). Archaeological evidence attests that the ground plan of the church is similar in size and layout to the church dedicated to the Virgin Mary, St Peter, and Paul in Albrechtice (Fig. 3.5), 5 km southeast of Sušice. Its existence is evidenced by a report in the Windberg Monastery Chronicle, recounting its consecration by Archbishop Adalbert of Salzburg, son of King Vladislav II of Bohemia, on 20 December 1178: ‘Anno dominicae incarnationis MCLXXIX Indict. Xima XIII Kal. Januarii dedicata est ecclesia nostra Albrechtsried sita in boemia a reverendo Salisburgensis ecclesie archiepo Alberto filio regis boemie’ (Braunmüller 1884, 156). However,

current assessments date the construction of the present church to the 1430s–40s. Furthermore, the archaeological research in 2009 did not uncover any remains of the older building. Still, at least two graves disturbed by the foundations of the present structure were discovered. Grave K 9 belonged to an adult individual. Only the right half of the body survived, as the left half had been removed during digging for the church wall’s foundation. In the northeast corner of the trench, just above the surface of the subsoil, a scatter of rubble overlapped the foundation wall of the presbytery, which, after a thorough cleaning, turned out to be the stone lining of a grave. Due to the position of the skeleton, only the skull could be cleaned, as the rest of the grave was partly under the eastern profile of the trench, under the foundation wall of the presbytery. Although difficult to interpret, the fact that the foundation wall did not disturb the grave but — in the observable part — respected or surrounded it is crucial for interpreting the origins of the church (Čechura 2020, 76). A somewhat similar situation was documented during research on the monastery basilica on Ostrov near Davle. A stone tomb containing the remains of an adult male was discovered under the north wall of the choir chapel. The tomb contained the end of a crosier, along with a fragment of a hen’s eggshell, and a firestone. Additionally, remnants of a textile stitched with gold thread were preserved from the deceased’s clothing. It is, therefore, likely that he was the abbot of this monastery. Spatial analysis shows that the tomb was originally located on the exterior of the old wooden church and adjoined the south side of its choir. Construction of the new monastic church began in the first third of the twelfth century. However, during the construction, the plan of the church collided with the stone tomb. The builders of the church, therefore, adapted the structure so that the tomb was preserved and directly incorporated into the new sanctuary, as the foundation in this area rested on the top of the tomb, indicating great respect from the monastic community for the buried individual (Břicháček and others 2006). Intensive building activities in the vicinity of medieval churches led to another set of archaeological discoveries testifying to the possible relationship between churchyards and preceding field cemeteries. In the following, such instances will be reviewed individually. In 1892, the churchyard of the medieval church of St Martin in Přívetice (Rokycany district) was expanded. During construction, graves with ‘rings’, probably S-shaped temple rings, were found. In 1907 the construction work continued, and the graves were disturbed again. Today, three S-shaped temple rings with diameters of approximately 24 mm, 25 mm, and 50 mm are kept in the museum in Radnice. The cadastral map

3 .   t h e r e l at i o n s h i p b e t w e e n e arly me d i e val b u ri al gro u nd s and chu rch yards

Figure 3.6. Přívětice (Rokycany district). The situation of St Martin’s church and the burial ground. (Drawing by Martin Čechura.)

of 1927 sheds some light on the circumstances of the discovery; it shows that the old cemetery was extended to the northeast in a way that the approximately triangular shape of this part of the cemetery was expanded into a rectangle (Fig. 3.6). The enlarged part affected both the adjacent field and the northern part of the road to the church, which led to the main access road to the village. The church is situated in a secluded, dominant position on a hill northwest of the settlement. Although the church is mentioned in written sources in 1352, in its present form, it is a simple baroque building with a rectangular nave and a polygonal chancel. It cannot be ruled out that parts of the original medieval structures are preserved in the mass of the masonry, but there is nothing to suggest the presence of a church earlier than the fourteenth century. In the fields to the northeast and east of the church, an intensive settlement has been recorded by a surface survey (Malina 2011). In 1905, a collection of archaeological finds was obtained during the expansion of the old churchyard at the St George church in Pilsen-Doubravka and

handed over to the museum in Pilsen. The assemblage consisted of three bronze S-shaped temple rings with diameters of 40, 42, and 56 mm, and a silver coin — a denarius of Duke Oldřich (1012–1033). According to the report of the find, about forty graves were uncovered. In addition to the described finds, five more silver coins were found at the burial site but retained by the finder. The discovery was made on the site of the old school, which was converted in 1839 to a gravedigger’s house northeast of the old churchyard. St George’s church is one of western Bohemia’s most mysterious and unexplored buildings. Many historians and art historians have dated the church to the Romanesque or even pre-Romanesque period. However, new research suggests it is probably a gothic building from the fourteenth century (Čechura 2020, 68–69). In 1932, the old road in the village of Planá (Pilsennorth district) was widened. Near the church, an older burial ground with an unknown number of graves was disturbed. Five S-shaped temple rings with a diameter of 17 to 21 mm, one S-shaped temple ring with a diameter

65

66

m a rtin č ec hu r a

of 70 mm, six glass beads and a silver coin — a denarius of King Vratislav II (1086–1092) — have been salvaged from the cemetery. The church in Planá, dedicated to the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, is a gothic building from the fourteenth century, without any apparent remains of an older predecessor. On the opposite bank of the Berounka River, there is a fortified stronghold dating back to the late Hallstatt and used again in the ninth century; however, it probably ceased to exist at the end of the eleventh century. The hillfort was an important administrative centre, but its relationship to the burial site is unclear (Čechura 2020, 69). In 1935, a new bank house was constructed in Myslív (Klatovy district). The building was situated on the site of the old garden southwest of the church of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary. A burial ground was disturbed during the construction; graves turned up at a depth of 150–200 cm. Unfortunately, no further details about the location and number of skeletons are known. Five S-shaped temple rings with a diameter of 51 to 59 mm and one thin S-shaped earring with a diameter of 25 mm were recovered from the graves (Schejbalová 2011, 64). The nearby church building is roughly oriented to the east, with a rectangular nave, a western tower, and a pentagonal presbytery with a sacristy on the northern side. The oldest, Romanesque phase can be traced on the masonry of the nave and the west tower. The origins of the church date back to the end of the twelfth century. The dating of the archaeological finds from 1935 is approximately the same as the estimated time of the church’s foundation, i.e. the end or perhaps the last third of the twelfth, or the beginning of the thirteenth, century. However, the relationship between the burial site and the church remains unclear. The place of discovery of the S-shaped temple rings is outside the later perimeter of the medieval churchyard; moreover, the abundance of artefacts from a limited area and the mention of skeletons suggests that this was probably not the edge of the burial ground, and the graves may have continued further afield. In 1978, a part of the burial site in Přeštice (Pilsensouth district) was excavated (Fig. 3.7). Grave No. 1 was heavily disturbed by a sewer trench, and the lower part of the grave pit was embedded in a clay gravel-sand subsoil. Of the skeletal remains, only parts of the left lower limb were recovered (according to the description, the left fibula; in reality, it is more likely to be the humerus and part of the ulna). Remains of wood, interpreted as a wooden slab, were found at the bottom of the grave pit. The grave has been almost entirely destroyed by drainage; yet, two S-shaped temple rings, 23 and 29 mm in diameter, were removed from the backfill of it. Grave 2 contained the remains of a two- to four-year-old child. The body was in an extended supine position, with arms stretched alongside the body. Of the legs, both femurs

and part of the left tibia were preserved; the other parts were missing. The upper half of the body was lying on a slightly oval daub layer, which reached the edge of the grave pit of grave No. 1. The grave did not contain any artefacts. Grave No. 3 was the best preserved; only the edge of the legs was damaged by drainage. The adult male, aged between forty and fifty years, was laid in an extended supine position, with his arms along the body and his head turned towards the north. The grave pit was lined with wooden boards, traces of which were preserved under the head, behind the head, and along the body. Under the right, turned-down palm, a silver denarius of Vratislaus II, dated from the duke’s period of reign (1061–1068/92) was found. Between the grave pits, diverse objects of a settlement were found, such as a stone crusher and pottery fragments, dated from the second half of the twelfth to the first half of the thirteenth centuries (Frýda 2000; Čechura 2020, 69). Přeštice first appears in written sources in the first third of the thirteenth century. From 1226, Svatobor of Přeštice appears as a witness in the documents of Bohemian kings Přemysl Otakar I (1198–1230) and Václav I (1230–1253). In 1238–1245, a complex property transaction took place, and at the end of it, the Benedictine monastery in Kladruby acquired Přeštice and the surrounding villages. The church was first mentioned in 1274. The original medieval church was placed on the edge of a slightly elevated area. After the new Baroque church was constructed, the old church was demolished and disappeared without a trace. The excavated burial site is approximately 100 m from the axis of the present church and 150–160 m from the presumed position of the medieval church. Approximately 800 m north of the church, another burial ground was recorded in the nineteenth century. Unfortunately, apart from a brief report in 1848, there is no information on the number of graves or any finds. In February 1998, a part of a burial site near the church of St Lawrence in Žákava (Pilsen-south district) was discovered (Fig. 3.8). The rescue excavation was needed due to unannounced digging for a telephone cable along the houses in the vicinity of the churchyard. Scattered human bones and their fragments were found along the entire length of the cut, but only four skeletons were in situ. The grave pits were not visible in the dark brown sandy layer. In two cases, remains of wood at the base of the grave layer were identified. Only a few finds were recovered during the excavation: three pottery fragments and one bronze S-shaped temple ring. All objects came from the layer of the graves, but none could be reliably identified with a specific burial. The pottery fragments and the S-shaped ring were dated to the eleventh and twelfth centuries. The village of Žákava was first mentioned in 1350 as the property of the lords of Litice. The church was first mentioned

3 .   t h e r e l at i o n s h i p b e t w e e n e arly me d i e val b u ri al gro u nd s and chu rch yards

Figure 3.7 Přeštice (Pilsen-south district). Map of the church of the Virgin Mary and the burial grounds. (Drawing by Martin Čechura.)

Figure 3.8. Žákava (Pilsen-south district). The situation of St Lawrence’s church and the burial ground. (Drawing by Martin Čechura.)

67

68

m a rtin č ec hu r a

in 1352. The present church consists of a rectangular nave and a polygonal presbytery, with an adjoining rectangular sacristy on the north side, and a square tower attached to the eastern side. The church dates back to the fourteenth century.

The Relationship between Field Cemeteries and Churchyards At the beginning of the eleventh century, the use of burial mounds ceased in Bohemia, and inhumation burial grounds with graves arranged in rows dominated the landscape. These field cemeteries were used until the very end of the eleventh century; however, the details of the subsequent development are not yet clear (Klápště 2012, 197–209; Štefan and Varadzin 2014). Still, a considerable number of archaeological findings prove the existence of eleventh-century burial grounds and their gradual transformation into church cemeteries (churchyards). Unfortunately, the origins of these burials are ambiguous. Their chronology is, however, refined by some well-dated artefacts, such as S-shaped temple rings and, most significantly, by coins. The occurrence of coins in graves is studied in depth in itself (Radoměrský 1955; Klápště 1999; Marethová 2008; Bartošková 2013). The above-presented West Bohemian sites show two basic common features: the existence of a burial ground is documented already during the eleventh century, and a younger sacral building exists in close connection with the cemetery. The oldest cemetery is Pilsen-Doubravka, dated by the denarius of Duke Oldřich (1012–1034) to the very beginning of the eleventh century; the other sites fall into the second half of the same century. Similar sites could be recognized from all over Bohemia; when considering those where graves appear outside the area of the later medieval cemetery but without accompanying finds, their number would reach the dozens. The relationship between the older burial ground and the younger church can be explained in two possible ways. The first way is the existence of a sizeable field cemetery, on which the church was built later. This variant was mainly identified by Nechvátal in his extensive research in Radomyšl (Strakonice district). The beginnings of burial in Radomyšl were dated by the denarii of Duke Soběslav I (1125–1140) and Vladislav II (1140–1173). The cemetery has been interpreted as unfenced and preceded the establishment of a churchyard around the St Martin church (Nechvátal 1999a, b). It should be noted, however, that the interpretation of the burial ground as a field cemetery is not accepted without reservations, and in other works, the cemetery is placed in connection with the foundation of the church (Klápště 2012, 203).

A pivotal study, stimulating a new discussion on the origins of churchyards and the establishment of the network of the (proto)parish churches, was carried out in Vrbno (Mělník district). Inhumation graves were found in the area of the village square as early as the nineteenth century, and in 1966 a grave containing at least 128 denarii from the second half of the twelfth century was unearthed. Between 2005 and 2007 a rescue excavation was carried out in the area of the village square, during which a total of 249 graves were excavated, dated between the end of eleventh and late thirteenth centuries. Here it was observed that the area of the extensive earlier burial ground was reduced at the time of the transformation of the village core at the end of the thirteenth century (Štefan and Varadzin 2014, 366–68). Preliminary results of the extensive research of the church and churchyard in Nesvětice (Most district) suggest a similar development. Since 2011, intensive rescue research has been conducted, following up on the earlier excavations of Brych from 1982 to 1988. The burial ground, estimated to contain up to 2000 graves, seems to be divided into two adjacent but not overlapping parts. The northern part of the surveyed area is occupied by the oldest part of the burial ground, which dates back to the eleventh century. Numerous graves contain small items of jewellery, mainly S-shaped earrings, and some graves feature tombstones. Sometime during the period from the second half of the twelfth to the first half of the thirteenth centuries, a church, probably wooden on a stone base, was built south of the burial ground. Burials subsequently moved to the church and continued there until its demise (Podhorský and Drnovský 2017; Podhorský 2022). A second possible interpretation presupposes that burials were concentrated around a church as early as the eleventh century, but the building either disappeared or has not been discovered yet (Vargha 2022, 59–69). Even though the examples above clearly demonstrate that the existence of churches in the eleventh-century landscape was, if not common, also not exceptional, accepting this hypothesis would have a major impact on existing theories about the development of the church network, as it would assume that a well-developed network of churches existed from the early eleventh century onwards, also outside the so-called central locations, where earlier theories restricted their existence. However, presupposing such a network, it is necessary to address the possible founder of these churches, and their relationship to other settlement components in the contemporary landscape, which leads to a completely unexpected path to an intense debate about the origins of the Bohemian nobility, which was so far based almost exclusively on differing interpretations of written sources (Sommer and others 2007; Kalhous 2012; 2018). Nonetheless, such early

3 .   t h e r e l at i o n s h i p b e t w e e n e arly me d i e val b u ri al gro u nd s and chu rch yards

churches remain unidentified despite the intensive research of church interiors; therefore, this model remains somewhat hypothetical. Still, a third and final type of site needs consideration: medieval cemeteries without churches. One of the few well-studied examples is the cemetery in Zdechovice (Pardubice district). There, an inhumation burial ground was uncovered in the courtyard of a Baroque castle, from which 105 graves were excavated. The graves were oriented in a west–east direction and had up to four layers above each other. One of the graves was dated by a coin of King Přemysl Otakar II (1253–1278). Other finds included four S-shaped earrings and two rings. The concentration of children’s graves in the southern part of the cemetery is unusual. The boundary of the cemetery was not identified, but its southern edge, where the graves gradually diminished, was detected. The cemetery dates back to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and the character of the cemetery and the arrangement of the graves correspond to medieval churchyard cemeteries. However, no traces of any ecclesiastical building nor any indirect indications of its existence were found. A Romanesque church (with churchyard), dedicated to St Peter and St Paul, is located about 500 m west of the cemetery, complicating this situation even more. Still, the distance clearly excludes the connection of the burial ground with this church; therefore, the site at Zdechovice is an example of a medieval cemetery without a sacral building (Horník and others 2018). At this point, it should be noted that written sources speak of burials in consecrated cemeteries; the presence of a church is not explicitly mentioned as a necessary condition. This alternative opens up further possibilities for interpreting the transformation of the burial ritual and points out the possibility of the existence of consecrated Christian cemeteries, in which — at least in the initial phase — no sacral building was present (Rębkowski 2014).

Conclusion The results of the archaeological and architectural research of the West Bohemian region have shown tendencies that can be tentatively generalized. These include the relationship of eleventh-century burial grounds to younger church buildings, the continuity of field cemeteries and churchyards, the question of the earliest form of churches, especially wooden structures, and the relationship of churches to residential buildings and the topographical distribution of church buildings. These preliminary results and hypotheses will need to be tested and verified by further regional investigations, taking into account the more general historical development of the region and the Czech lands as a whole. Some general

trends documented in western Bohemia are also often found in other areas. One of these phenomena is the establishment of a church — after a certain interval — on the edge of large field cemeteries. The chronology of these burial sites is determined mostly by coin finds and, less precisely, by small jewellery, especially S-shaped temple rings. This phenomenon is not exclusive to Bohemia; analogous situations can be observed (albeit slightly earlier or later) in neighbouring Bavaria, Poland, Hungary, Scandinavia, Estonia, and other areas (Heidenreich 1998; Valk 2001, 2017; Later 2012; Vargha 2022). Helena ZollAdamikowa (2000, 217) has pointed out an interesting phenomenon: during the transformation of medieval landscape, dominant, often elevated sites were chosen for newly established burial grounds, but in a different location from the older tumuli. These elevated sites could then be used for the construction of sacred buildings, as one manifestation of the control of the landscape by assertion and power. This pattern is well illustrated in the examples of the relocation of burial sites in Sušice and Přeštice. Naturally, the problem requires further detailed research nonetheless. Gradual changes in the burial ritual, including the location and internal structure of burial sites, occurred throughout Europe at different times, depending on the cultural and political development of different regions. Therefore, these changes cannot always be directly linked to Christianization. Moreover, the dichotomies, such as pagan or Christian and pre-conversion or post-conversion actions, are not suitable approaches, especially considering archaeological sources, as they suggest that Christianization took place as a gradual and non-linear process. Furthermore, changes in burial practices are clearly part of a broader settlement transformation, the foundations of which go far beyond mere religious changes. At the same time, these complex transformations also demonstrate that the reception of the new faith and the de facto Christianization of the rural population was a longue-durée process, which did not necessarily imply a straightforward and rapid break with old customs. The emerging church organization did not have the resources and personnel capacity to control and influence the burial ritual and, more importantly, probably also had no reason. At the same time, along with the growing density of the church network, the transformation and relocation of settlements resulted in the gradual repositioning of cemeteries around churches — when and where they were available; naturally, a sparser church network slowed down this process. Therefore, further conclusion about the Christianization of Bohemia not only depend on new archaeological discoveries but, above all, on establishing a new paradigm, raising new questions, and revising historical concepts that have determined our understanding of the process of Christianization until now.

69

70

m a rtin č ec hu r a

Works Cited Bartošková, Andrea. 2013. ‘Obolus mrtvých a jeho význam pro datování archeologických pramenů’, Archeologia historica, 38.1: 129–38 Braunmüller, Benedikt. 1884. ‘Monumenta Windbergensia. 1. Traditiones’, Verhandlungen des historischen Vereins für Niederbayern, 23: 137–82 Břicháček, Pavel, Anežka Merhautová, Miroslav Richter, and Petr Sommer. 2006. ‘Opatský hrob z doby počátků Ostrova u Davle’, Archaeologica Pragensia, 18: 45–64 Čechura, Martin. 2010. ‘Archäologische Forschungen der mittelalterlichen Kirchen im Westböhmen’, Archäologische Arbeitsgemeinschaft Ostbayern/West- und Südböhmen/ Oberösterreich, 19: 305–18 Čechura, Martin. 2020. ‘Christianization and Transformation of Religious Landscape in (West) Bohemia’, in Ecclesiastical Landscapes in Medieval Europe. An Archaeological Perspective, ed. by José Carlos Sánchez-Pardo, Emmet Marron, and Maria Cringaci Tiplic (Oxford: Archaeopress), pp. 66–78 Dinklage, Karl. 1942. ‘Der frühmittelalterliche Handelsweg von Böhmen ins bairische Isarthal’, Altböhmen und Altmähren, 2: 82–111 Fridrich, Jan. 1968. ‘Nález slovanského kostrového hrobu v Sušici, o. Klatovy’, Archeologické rozhledy, 20: 87–91 Frýda, František. 2000. ‘Přeštice v raném středověku’, in Popis a historický průvodce barokním chrámem Nanebevzetí Panny Marie v Přešticích, ed. by Jan Nepomuk Mrkvička (Přeštice: Hanzar), pp. 195–200 Gáll, Erwin. 2013. ‘The Analysis of Churchyard Cemeteries in Transylvania Basin from the 11th–First Half of the 13th Centuries. On the Beginning of Institutionalised Christianity’, Marisia, 33: 135–250 Heidenreich, Anja. 1998. Ein slawischer Friedhof mit Kirche auf dem Barbaraberg im Landkreis Neustadt/Waldnaab, Archäologische Zeugnisse zur Siedlungsgeschichte 1 (Pressath: Eckhard Bodner) Hoggett, Rik. 2007. ‘Charting Conversion: Burial as a Barometer of Belief?’, in Early Medieval Mortuary Practices, ed. by Sarah Semple and Howard Williams, Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History, 14 (Oxford: Oxbow), pp. 28–37 Horník, Pavel, Radek Bláha, Petra Sehnoutková, and Martin Mazáč. 2018. Zdechovice – středověké pohřebiště (Hradec Králové: Muzeum východních Čech) Kalhous, David. 2012. Anatomy of a Duchy. Political and Ecclesiastical Structures of Early Přemyslid Bohemia, East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 450–1450, 19 (Leiden: Brill) —— 2018. Bohemi: Prozesse der Identitätsbildung in frühpřemyslidischen Ländern bis 1200, Forschungen des Geschichte des Mittelalters, 23 (Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften) Klápště, Jan. 1999. ‘Příspěvek k archeologickému poznávání úlohy mince v přemyslovských Čechách’, Archeologické rozhledy, 51: 774–808 —— 2012. The Czech Land in Medieval Transformation, East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages 450–1450, 17 (Leiden: Brill) Later, Christian. 2012. ‘Zur archäologischen Nachweisbarkeit des Christentums im frühmittelalterlichen Baiern. Methodische und quellenkritische Anmerkungen’, in Die Anfänge Bayerns. Von Raetien und Noricum zur frühmittelalterlichen Baiovaria, ed. by Hubert Fehr and Irmtraut Heitmeier (St Ottilien: EOS), pp. 567–611 Malina, Ondřej. 2011. ‘Samostatně stojící kostel jako doklad transformace osídlení – možnosti archeologie a GIS’, in Sakrální architektura, ed. by Renata Kuprová and Kamil Podroužek, Svorník, 10 (Prague: Unicornis), pp. 33–43 Marethová, Barbara. 2008. ‘Příspěvek k poznání raně středověkých pohřebišť (zvyk vkládání mincí do hrobů)’, Studia mediaevalia Pragensia, 8: 7–44 Mašková, Pavlína. 2009. ‘K obrazu středověkého pohřebiště – církevní normy a výpověď archeologických pramenů’, in Kościół w monarchiach Przemyślidów i Piastów, ed. by Jozef Dobosz (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie), pp. 73–85 Nechvátal, Bořivoj. 1999a. Radomyšl. Raně středověké pohřebiště (Prague: Institute of Archaeology) —— 1999b. ‘Das mittelalterliche Gräberfeld in Radomyšl bei Strakonice’, Archäologische Arbeitsgemeinschaft Ostbayern/Westund Südböhmen, 8: 201–19 Podhorský, Jan. 2022. ‘Pohřebiště v Nesvěticích (okres Most). Výzkum z let 1984–1988 a 2013–2020’, Archaeologia historica, 47.1: 221–46 Podhorský, Jan, and Pavel Drnovský. 2017. ‘Raně středověké náhrobníky z Čech’, Archeologie ve středních Čechách, 21: 373–407 Quast, Dietr. 2001. ‘Christianisierung im Archäologischen Befund. Ein Vergleich unterschiedlicher Regionen Mittel-, Nordund Osteuropas’, in Zwischen den Zeiten. Archäologische Beiträge zur Geschichte des Mittelalters in Mitteleuropa. Festschrift für Barbara Scholkmann, ed. by Jochem Pfrommer and Rainer Schreg, Internationale Archäologie, Studia honoraria, 15 (Rahden: Marie Leidorf), pp. 233–49 Radoměrský, Pavel. 1955. ‘Obol mrtvých u Slovanů v Čechách a na Moravě’, Sborník Národního muzea v Praze, řada A – Historie, 9: 1–81

3 .   t h e r e l at i o n s h i p b e t w e e n e arly me d i e val b u ri al gro u nd s and chu rch yards

RBM 1 = Regesta diplomatica nec non epistolaria Bohemiae et Moraviae I (600–1253), ed. by Karel Jaromír Erben (Prague: Theophili Haase, 1855) Rębkowski, Marian. 2011. Die Christianisierung Pommerns. Eine archäologische studie, Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie, 197 (Bonn: Habelt) —— 2014. ‘Cmentarz w chrześcijańskiej przestrzeni średniowiecza’, in Grave in Space, Space in the Grave, ed. by Tomasz Kurasiński and Kalina Skóra, Acta archaeologica Lodziensia, 60 (Łódź: Łódź Scientific Society), pp. 191–96 Schejbalová, Zdeňka. 2011. Raně středověká řadová pohřebiště v Plzeňském kraji (Plzeň: Petr Mikota) Schülke, Almut. 1999. ‘On Christianization and Grave-Finds’, European Journal of Archaeology, 2: 77–106 Scull, Christopher. 2015. ‘Chronology, Burial and Conversion: The Case of England in the 7th Century’, in Dying Gods – Religious Beliefs in Northern and Eastern Europe in the Time of Christianization, ed. by Christiane Ruhmann and Vera Brieske (Hannover: Niedersächsisches Landesmuseum), pp. 73–83 Sommer, Petr, Dušan Třeštík, and Josef Žemlička. 2007. ‘Bohemia and Moravia’, in Christianization and the Rise of Christian Monarchy. Scandinavia, Central Europe and Rus’ c. 900–1200, ed. by Nora Berend (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 214–62 Štefan, Ivo. 2007. ‘Změna pohřebního ritu v raném středověku jako archeologický a kulturně-antropologický problém’, Archeologické rozhledy, 59: 805–36 Štefan, Ivo, and Ladislav Varadzin. 2014. ‘Super altare in ecclesia tua. Die Anfänge der Pfarrorganisation in den böhmischen Ländern aus archäologischer Sicht’, in Tradition – Umgestaltung – Innovation: Transformationsprozesse im hohen Mittelalter, ed. by Eike Gringmuth-Dallmer and Jan Klápště, Praehistorica, 32.2 (Prague: Karolinum), pp. 357–72 Valk, Heiki. 2001. Rural Cemeteries of Southern Estonia 1225–1800 (Tartu: Gotland University) —— 2017. ‘On the Origins of Churches and Churchyards of Southern Estonia: The Evidence of Early Grave Finds’, Baltic Journal of Art History, 13: 99–129 Vargha, Mária. 2022. Modelling Christianisation. A Geospatial Analysis of the Archaeological Data on the Rural Church Network of Hungary in the 11th–12th Centuries (Oxford: Archaeolingua-Archaeopress) Woldřich, Jan Nepomuk. 1884. ‘Dvě česká pohřebiště z XI. Století’, Památky archaeologické a místopisné, 12: 13–18 Zoll-Adamikowa, Helena. 2000. ‘Usytuowanie cmentarzy Słowian w środowisku (doba poganska i pierwsze wieki po przyjęciu chrzescijaństwa)’, in Człowiek, sacrum, srodowisko. Miejsca kultu we wczesnym średniowieczu, ed. by Sławomir Moździoch (Wrocław: Insytut Archeologii i Etnologii PAN), pp. 207–19

71

Przemysław Urbańczyk

4. Burial Practice in Transition — Sepulchral Evidence of Christianization in the Early Piast State

A bs t r act  A vision of a ‘revolutionary’ religious change in the early Piast state has been broadly accepted by modern historians who eagerly assumed the quick Christianization of the whole country. Recent criticism of this vision has referred to both written sources and archaeological evidence. This reinterpretation shows no factual foundation for using the Piast state as an example of effective conversion because there are only two early investments in the ecclesiastic infrastructure, and there are no small finds from that period that may be related to the liturgy or indicate individual devotion and no change of the burial rite. In light of the current knowledge, the extent of Christianity for most of Mieszko I’s rule was limited to the state elite. A visible acceleration of extensive Christianization in Poland is observable only from the rule of Bolesław Chrobry.

T

K e y wo r ds  Early Middle Ages, Poland, Christianization, burial rite

T

The conversion of the Piast state has been subject to continuous discussion, which was invigorated in 2016 during the state-ecclesiastical celebrations of the 1050th anniversary of the baptism of the first Polish historical ruler Mieszko I (before 963–992). The political dimension of the problem became magnified when on 22 February 2019, the Polish parliament passed a bill that appointed April 14th as the ‘National Day of the Baptism of Poland’. Thus, politicians imposed a precise date without any existing credible sources. For a thousand years, the traditional Polish vision of the conversion has referred to the early eleventh-century declaration by Bishop Thietmar of Merseburg, who

wrote in his Chronicle (iv, 56), that ‘… illisque subdita omnis familia gaudet se in Christo nupsisse’ (all who were subject to them [Mieszko I and his wife Dąbrówka] rejoiced at their marriage in Christ). Similarly, the twelfth-century Gallus Anonymus’s Chronicle (i, 6) clearly claimed that thanks to the baptism of Prince Mieszko I ‘the people of Poland were saved from the death in unbelief’. Polish historians have eagerly accepted this model of revolutionary religious change, and they assumed the quick, effective, and extensive conversion of the whole country. This drawing of a sharp division between the pagan and Christian periods spared scholars

Przemysław Urbańczyk • (www.urbanczyk.info.pl, [email protected]), is a professor at the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Archaeology, Cardinal Wyszynski University. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 73–80. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138108

74

p r ze m ys ł aw ur b ań c z y k

the tedious analysis of various aspects of the difficult confrontation of the two religions. Recent criticism of this deeply rooted vision has referred to both historical and archaeological information (e.g. Urbańczyk 2016). For, in fact, available written sources do not contain precise information regarding the chronology, extent, and effects of Mieszko I’s Christianization efforts. The material evidence is not much more helpful, as it does not provide a clear enough picture to firmly grasp the religious change in the earliest Piast state (cf. discussion in Urbańczyk 2020a and 2023a). Thus, there is no factual foundation for using the early Piast state as an example of an effective conversion. This criticism was initiated by archaeologists who showed that the available material evidence did not support the traditional vision. Just the opposite — no finds testify to Mieszko’s pursuit of extensive Christianization. Only two churches or chapels, annexed to ducal palaces (in Poznań and on the Ostrów Lednicki island), may be safely identified as the early elements of the ecclesiastic infrastructure. In addition, there are no small finds from that period that may be related to the liturgy or indicate individual devotion (e.g. small crosses). Finally, there are no archaeologically observable effects of the eschatological change, which should have been reflected in the radical change of the burial rite — namely, from the multi-millennial tradition of burning corpses to burying whole dead bodies in line with the Christian funerary principle. The chronology of the inhumation graves seems to be the only reliable indicator of the pace and extent of Christianization in the early Piast state. Not so long ago, archaeologists were certain that such a change occurred ‘immediately’ after the canonical year 966 when Mieszko I was baptized. This confidence stemmed from the prevailing tendency to match archaeological evidence with the traditional interpretation of historical sources. Consequently, the earliest Piast state was viewed as an example of an effective transition from the ‘pagan’ cremation to the ‘Christian’ inhumation burial rite (e.g. Zoll-Adamikowa 1966; 1967; 1971, 548–50; 1994, 137–39; 1998, 227; 2000, 103). Today this simplistic hypothesis can be easily questioned using the available chronological arguments. * The oldest inhumation burials in contemporary Polish lands significantly predate the symbolic year 966. They have all been discovered in the very southern and the very northern edges of the area (details in Urbańczyk 2023b). Although the interpretation of the 130-year-old discovery of inhumation burials at the Silesian ‘Niemcza I’ cemetery is problematic, these graves contained

ceramics whose ‘forms and technology clearly resembled the ninth-century pottery from Moravia’ ( Jaworski 2011, 46). The inhumation cemetery excavated half a century ago in Stěbořice (today in the Czech Republic) at the northern side of the Sudeten Mountains was undoubtedly Great Moravian (Parczewski 1979, 35; 1981, 154; 1982, 126–27). Further east, in Przemyśl, a dozen inhumation graves bear witness to the early presence of Magyar warriors (Koperski 1985 and 2010). In the far northwest, the investigation of two cemeteries in Świelubie and Kępsk produced five very early inhumation burials. Their analysis showed that Scandinavian immigrants from ‘the central Sweden area’ had been buried there in the second half of the ninth century (Rębkowski 2007, 101, 151, 155, 211). Those early episodes of the chronologically and geographically limited presence of Christian (Great Moravians) and pagan (Magyars and Scandinavians) immigrants who observed inhumation did not influence in any archaeologically observable way the autochthons who continued with their ages-old cremation burial tradition. Similarly uninfluential were some mysterious burial rites indicated by isolated finds of human bone fragments excavated at seventh- and eighth-century sites, interpreted as ‘cultic’ — e.g. Haćki in eastern Poland (Kobyliński and Szymański 2005). The so-called Alt Käbelich graves, discovered mainly in western Poland, are much later. These large pits, sometimes resembling sunken houses, contained burnt bones, fragments of skeletons, or even whole skeletons of children (e.g. Łosiński 1993). Some of them had partly burnt or fragmented skeletons (e.g. pits I and V in Gostyń, Silesia). Their — somewhat problematic — chronology placed the origins of this unusual burial rite in the ninth century and presumed its continuity into the tenth century. * Even the post-966 inhumation graves cannot be uncritically taken as an ‘obvious’ indication of the presence of Christians. Since, during the early Middle Ages, there were no clear instructions on how to bury Christians properly, every early case needs a thorough contextual analysis. At that time, the orientation of the body, the type of grave constructions, and the absence of grave goods were not strictly controlled by the Church (cf. Rębkowski 2006, 516; 2007, 90), and all decisions regarding details of the farewell ceremony were taken by the burying actors. Identifying the spread of Christian eschatology in the Piast state is difficult due to the lack of precise chronology — no early inhumation burial has any dendrochronological dating. This leaves us with rather

4 .   bur i a l p r act i c e i n t r an s i t i o n — s e p u lchral e vi d e nce o f chri st i ani zat i o n i n t he e arly pi a s t s tate

vague chronological information because radiocarbon dating offers probabilistic dates only. For the very few graves that contained coins, a terminus post quem is available. Thus, penetration of the inhumation rite in the early Piast state is still disputable. The Silesian inhumation cemetery ‘Niemcza II’, dated by coins to the ‘post-978 period’ (Suchodolski 1984, 92–94; 2012, 165, 185, 215, 252), most probably testifies to the presence of Czech inhabitants of the Bohemian outpost, which, according to the written sources, was lost to the Piasts as late as in 990: ‘Eodem anno Nemci perdita est’ (That year Niemcza was lost [to the Piasts] — Monk of Sázava). A man buried ‘after 990’ in a single inhumation grave, discovered in Kraków in St Thomas Street, was equipped with items indicating the Hungarian origin of the interred warrior (Myszka 2000, 366). Similarly problematic is the interpretation of a specific type of early inhumation burial, characterized by large wooden underground constructions, which are commonly called ‘chamber graves’ (Fig. 4.1). Their grave goods, along with the laboratory analyses of human bones, indicate that people buried in these specific constructions could have been immigrants from the east, or the north (for Bodzia cemetery see: Drozd-Lipińska and Kozłowski 2016, 422; Bohdanowicz and others 2016, 443–44; Price and Frei 2016). Their ethnic identity has been subject to a lively discussion, which, however, has brought no decisive conclusions (cf. Sikora 2013; cf. the broader discussion of the problems of ‘ethnic’ interpretation in medieval archaeology — Urbańczyk 2000; Curta 2011). Chamber graves in Poland are generally dated to the turn of the millennium. The oldest ones in Ciepłe near Tczew are radiocarbon-dated to the turn of the tenth and eleventh centuries (Goslar 2015, fig. 20.5). The first phase (1a) of the cemetery in Kałdus, near Chełmno, which included several chamber graves, is generally dated to the last quarter of the tenth century (Bojarski 2020, 62). Coins found in some chamber graves in Bodzia, near Włocławek, were issued ‘ca. 990–1030’ (Suchodolski 2016, 294, 302). Similarly, the beginning of the cemetery in Pień may be placed by coins in the period 990–1020 (Suchodolski 2016, 294, 302). A suggested chamber grave excavated in Sandomierz may be dated ‘at the earliest’ to the end of the tenth century (Bajka and Florek 2015). A probable chamber grave discovered in Kraków-Zakrzówek in southern Poland has been radiocarbon-dated to the end of the tenth or the beginning of the eleventh century. This burial (no. 19), however, is not the oldest at this cemetery, which, therefore, in theory ‘could have functioned already from the second half of the tenth century, or from the beginning of the eleventh century’ (Błaszczyk and others 2015, 227). In Dziekanowice (central Wielkopolska), a chamber grave (no. 62)

Figure 4.1. Chamber graves from Bodzia ( [accessed 14 May 2022]).

contained a Saxon coin dated between 882 and 1000 (Suchodolski 2015, 91). As mentioned above, it is generally assumed that the people interred in the chamber graves were immigrants from the north or east who brought their specific burial rite with them. A difference in orientation and the rich equipment of these graves presumably shows that despite the inhumation burial rite, they did not necessarily intend to manifest their Christian faith. Instead, it could have been a manifestation of the elite status of some, who wanted to be ostensibly different from the masses of people who observed traditional cremation. The prevailing majority of the chamber graves have been discovered along the valley of the Vistula River, making them a unique phenomenon not only chronologically but also geographically. This specific time-space concurrence allows a presumption that they are the remnants of some specific historical event, which is, however, difficult to identify (see a hypothesis in Urbańczyk 2017, 141–47). Apart from the chamber graves, there are only a few inhumation burials that may be dated to the tenth century, which is the suggested chronology for the beginnings of the inhumation cemeteries discovered in Central Poland: Lutomiersk, Sowinki, Dziekanowice, and Poznań (Sołacz and Śródka). The chronological conclusion for the recently published analysis of the cemetery in Giecz (site no. 10) states that the custom of burying corpses might have begun at the end of the tenth century (Miciak and Agnew 2021, 171–72). However, none of these dates is precise enough to ascertain their origin from the time of Mieszko I, i.e. before 992, when the prince died. Anyway, at the turn of the millennium, the inhumation ritual expanded along the network of the Piast

75

76

p r ze m ys ł aw ur b ań c z y k

state administration, as testified by the cemeteries located in the vicinity of the main strongholds — e.g. in Dziekanowice, Giecz, Poznań, and Kałdus. The large number of people buried there indicates that Bolesław Chrobry (992–1025) successfully imposed control of the burial rite. Whether this expansion of inhumation testifies to the voluntary spread of the new eschatology or the enforcement of Christian burial rules remains ambiguous. The latter alternative finds support in Bishop Thietmar’s Chronicle (viii, 2), where Bolesław’s cruel methods of imposing Christian morality are applauded. His success in enforcing the new burial rite should not be equalled with the internalization of the new faith, which must have been a difficult and prolonged process when two eschatologies, two burying traditions, and even two symbolic systems dialectically coexisted (Urbańczyk 2020b; 2022a; 2022b). Bi-ritual cemeteries with both cremation and inhumation burials — e.g. Bilczewo (Gorczyca 2002) and Ciepłe (Ratajczyk 2013) — offer an archaeological insight into that ‘syncretic’ period. In the peripheral zones of the nominally Christian state, some ‘pagan’ traditions lasted several centuries, as testified by the surprisingly late burials showing ‘mixed’ characteristics, such as inhumation burials covered with barrows, which were common in eastern Poland at least until the twelfth century (Fig. 4.2). Some areas show a mysterious gap between the last cremation burials and the first inhumation ones; for the Chełm land, this ‘void’ period lasted from the early eleventh to the twelfth centuries (Dzieńkowski 2021, 82/261, 134/312). In addition, there are numerous ‘suspicious’ burials where dead bodies were laid down in atypical ways (Fig. 4.3) — e.g. in ‘embryonic’ or prone positions (e.g. Miciak and Agnew 2021, figs 8, 9). They have been traditionally identified as ‘anti-vampire’ burials (e.g. Żydok 2004; Garas 2010), but modern interpretations, instead of suggesting some pagan practices, view such atypical burials as indications of the post-mortal punishment/humiliation of trespassers (Gardeła 2011; 2012; 2013; 2015; Koperkiewicz 2010; 2012; 2013; 2015; Kubicka 2014). * All things considered, the available chronologies allow some of the probable Christian inhumation graves to be dated at the earliest to the last decade of the tenth century. Such dating, however, is not precise enough

to decide whether the introduction of the new burial rite may be ascribed to the late phase of the rule of Mieszko I (before 992) or if they represent early effects of the extensive Christianization strategy imposed by his son, Bolesław Chrobry, who actively evangelized his subjects. Despite observing a larger number of inhumation burials dated to the end of the tenth century, we have to accept that the first historical Polish monarch had not succeeded in the — archaeologically observable — execution of burying dead bodies in the Christian way. Thus, no historical sources or archaeological evidence exist that would indicate any extensive missionary campaign that Mieszko I might have launched among the common inhabitants of his state. We do not know whether this ‘failure’ resulted from his low efficiency, from the lack of his determination in missionary actions, or perhaps from the strong opposition by his subjects who were stubbornly attached to their pagan tradition. Alternatively, we may suspect that he purposefully limited the scope of the new faith to his relatives and close collaborators. Such a self-limitation could have been treated as reinforcement of their elite position as followers of a distinctively different religion than what was worshipped by the masses of the rural population. Likewise, the possibility that Mieszko ‘was not strongly concerned about Christianity’ and, driven by political pragmatism, imposed upon his subjects ‘only as much as his people could bear’ (Zakrzewski 1921) is also perceivable. Poland experienced a visible acceleration of the Christianization process only during the reign of his son, Bolesław Chrobry. From the beginning of his rule, he promoted the imitatio imperii to the rank of the state strategy, which included strong support for the Church. His active propagation of Christianity is well confirmed by rich archaeological evidence, which includes impressive ecclesiastic architecture discovered in various places, such as Giecz, Gniezno, Kałdus, Kraków, Łekno, Ostrów Lednicki, Poznań, Przemyśl, and, probably, Wrocław. He also invited missionaries from Bohemia, Saxony, and even from Italy, and he compelled the observance of the basic requirements of Christianity, which was much applauded by Bishop Thietmar (VIII, 2). His coinage also strongly emphasized Christian symbolism. However, the progress in Christianization is best reflected by the change of the funeral rite from cremation to inhumation, which began only at the turn of the first millennium.

4 .   bur i a l p r act i c e i n t r an s i t i o n — s e p u lchral e vi d e nce o f chri st i ani zat i o n i n t he e arly pi a s t s tate

Figure 4.2. Eleventh-century barrow with inhumation burial encircled by boulders — Białowieża Forest in northeastern Poland. (Photo by J. Wawrzeniuk.)

Figure 4.3. Atypical burials excavated at the medieval cemetery in Giecz. (Miciak and Agnew 2021, figs 8, 9.)

77

78

p r ze m ys ł aw ur b ań c z y k

Works Cited Primary Sources Gallus Anonymus, Chronicle = Gallus Anonymus, Galli Anonymi Cronica et Gesta ducum sive principum Polonorum, ed. by Karol Maleczyński, Monumenta Poloniae Historica, nova series, vol. 2 (Kraków: Polska Akademia Umiejętności, 1952) —— English translation by Paul W. Knoll and Frank Schaer (Budapest: Central European University, 2003) Monk of Sázava = Monk of Sázava, Fontes rerum Bohemicarum, ed. by Josef Emler and Václav Vladivoj Tomek, vol. 2 (Prague: Musea Králoství Českého, 1875) Thietmar, Chronicle = Thietmar of Merseburg, Die Chronik des Bischofs Thietmar von Merseburg und ihre korveier Überarbeitung, ed. by Robert Holtzmann, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores rerum Germanicorum, nova series (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1935) —— English translation by David A. Warner (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2001) Secondary Studies Bajka, Monika, and Marek Florek. 2015. ‘Najstarszy cmentarz wczesnośredniowiecznego Sandomierza’, Zeszyty Sandomierskie, 39: 70–74 Błaszczyk, Dariusz, Tomasz Gosslar, Emil Zaitz, and Michał Zaitz. 2015. ‘Datowanie radiowęglowe grobu nr 19 z cmentarzyska w Krakowie na Zakrzówku’, Materiały Archeologiczne, 40: 221–36 Bohdanowicz, Wiesław, Tomasz Grzybowski, and Magdalena Buś. 2016. ‘Analiza genetyczna wybranych grobów z cmentarza z Bodzi’, in Bodzia. Elitarny cmentarz z początków państwa polskiego, ed. by Andrzej Buko (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk), pp. 437–45 Bojarski, Jacek. 2020. Obrzędowość pogrzebowa w strefie chełmińsko-dobrzyńskiej we wczesnym średniowieczu (Toruń: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK) Curta, Florin. 2011. ‘Medieval Archaeology and Ethnicity: Where are We?’, History Compass, 9.7: 537–48 Drozd-Lipińska, Alicja, and Tomasz Kozłowski. 2016. ‘Populacja z cmentarzyska w Bodzi w świetle danych antropologicznych’, in Bodzia. Elitarny cmentarz z początków państwa polskiego, ed. by Andrzej Buko (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk), pp. 412–24 Dzieńkowski, Tomasz. 2021. Early Medieval Settlement in the Chełm Land. Wczesnośredniowieczne osadnictwo ziemi chełmskiej (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk) Garas, Monika. 2010. ‘Pochówki atypowe na cmentarzyskach zachodniopomorskich w dobie chrystianizacji’, in Wymiary inności. Nietypowe zjawiska w obrzędowości pogrzebowej od pradziejów po czasy nowożytne, ed. by Kamila Skóra and Tomasz Kurasiński, Acta Archaeologica Lodziensia, 56 (Łódź: Łódzkie Towarzystwo Naukowe), pp. 51–64 Gardeła, Leszek. 2011. ‘Gryź ziemię! Pochówki na brzuchu we wczesnośredniowiecznej Polsce na tle porównawczym’, Pomniki Dawnego Prawa, 16: 38–59 —— 2012. ‘Pochówki na brzuchu we wczesnośredniowiecznej Polsce. Suplement’, Pomniki Dawnego Prawa, 20: 30–37 —— 2013. ‘Vampires, Criminals or Slaves? Rethinking “Deviant Burials” in Early Medieval Poland’, World Archaeology, 45.4: 780–96 —— 2015. ‘Vampires in Medieval Poland. An Overview of Past Controversies and Recent Revaluations’, Lund Archaeological Review, 21: 107–26 Gorczyca, Krzysztof. 2002. ‘Wczesnośredniowieczne cmentarzysko birytualne w Bilczewie, stan. 1, gm. Kramsk, pow. Konin, woj. Wielkopolskie’, in Popiół i kość. Funeralia Lednickie 4, ed. by Jacek Wrzesiński (Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Oddziału Wielkopolskiego SNAP), pp. 467–73 Goslar, Tomasz. 2015. ‘AMS Radiocarbon Dating of Samples from the Cemetery at Bodzia’, in Bodzia. A Late Viking-Age Elite Cemetery in Central Poland, ed. by Andrzej Buko (Leiden: Brill), pp. 437–40 Jaworski, Krzysztof. 2011. ‘Czy aby tylko “pogański książę silny wielce, siedzący na Wiślech”?’, in Swoi i obcy w kulturze średniowiecza, ed. by Michał Brzostowicz, Maciej Przybył, and Jacek Wrzesiński (Poznań: Muzeum Archeologiczne w Poznaniu), pp. 31–60 Kobyliński, Zbigniew, and Wojciech Szymański. 2005. ‘Pradziejowe i wczesnośredniowieczne osadnictwo w zespole kemów w Haćkach’, in Haćki. Zespół przyrodniczo-archeologiczny na Równinie Bielskiej, ed. by Janusz Faliński and Andrzej Ber (Białowieża: Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii PAN), pp. 43–74 Koperkiewicz, Arkadiusz. 2010. ‘Święci czy przeklęci? Kilka refleksji o anomaliach w pochówkach wczesnośredniowiecznych’, Acta Archaeologica Lodziensia, 56: 65–77

4 .   bur i a l p r act i c e i n t r an s i t i o n — s e p u lchral e vi d e nce o f chri st i ani zat i o n i n t he e arly pi a s t s tate

—— 2012. ‘Mowa umarłych – przekaz zawarty w sposobie ułożenia ciała na przykładzie cmentarzysk wczesnośredniowiecznych z Polski Północno-Wschodniej’, Gdańskie Studia Archeologiczne, 2: 151–80 —— 2013. ‘Gesty pokutne we wczesnośredniowiecznej obrzędowości pogrzebowej’, in Pierwszy Kongres Archeologii Polskiej: dedykowany pamięci profesor Zofii Hilczer-Kurnatowskiej (Warsaw: Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii PAN), pp. 19–21 —— 2015. ‘Holy or Cursed? Some Reflections on Anomalies in Early Medieval Burials’, Folia Archaeologica Balkanica, 3: 491–505 Koperski, Andrzej. 1985. ‘Cmentarzysko staromadziarskie w Przemyślu’, Prace i Materiały Muzeum ArcheologicznoEtnograficznego w Łodzi. Seria Archeologiczna, 29: 261–66 —— 2010. ‘Cmentarzysko staro madziarskie z X w. w Przemyślu’, in Przemyśl wczesnośredniowieczny, ed. by Ewa Sosnowska (Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego), pp. 365–88 Kubicka, Anna. 2014. ‘Czy nietypowe groby odkrywane na wczesnośredniowiecznych stanowiskach archeologicznych z terenu Polski to pochówki wampirów?’, Ogrody Nauk i Sztuk, 4.4: 157–60 Łosiński, Władysław. 1993. ‘Groby typu Alt Käbelch w świetle badań przeprowadzonych na cmentarzysku wczesnośredniowiecznym w Świelubiu’, Przegląd Archeologiczny, 41: 17–34 Miciak, Magda, and Amanda M. Agnew. 2021. ‘Cmentarzysko wczesnośredniowieczne w Gieczu, stan. 10, woj. Wielkopolskie’, Studia Lednickie, 20: 125–96 Myszka, Marian. 2000. ‘Wczesnośredniowieczny grób wojownika odkryty w Krakowie’, Sprawozdania Archeologiczne, 52: 357–72 Parczewski, Michał. 1979. ‘Kształtowanie się osadnictwa wczesnośredniowiecznego na Opolszczyźnie’, in Kształtowanie się kultury wczesnopolskiej na Opolszczyźnie, ed. by Bogusław Gediga (Opole), pp. 25–40 —— 1981. ‘Osadnictwo wczesnośredniowieczne na pograniczu śląsko-morawskim. Ze studiów nad lessowym Płaskowyżem Głubczyckim’, Przegląd Archeologiczny, 28: 123–75 —— 1982. Płaskowyż Głubczycki we wczesnym średniowieczu (Warsaw: Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii PAN) Price, Douglas T., and Karin M. Frei. 2016. ‘Badania izotopowe pochówków z Bodzi’, in Bodzia. Elitarny cmentarz z początków państwa polskiego, ed. by Andrzej Buko (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk), pp. 425–35 Ratajczyk, Zdzisława. 2013. ‘The Cemetery in Ciepłe – Current Research Results’, in Scandinavian Culture in Medieval Poland, ed. by Sławomir Moździoch, Błażej Stanisławski, and Przemysław Wiszewski (Wrocław: Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences), pp. 323–51 Ratajczyk, Zdzisława. 2013. ‘The Cemetery in Ciepłe – Current Research Results’, in Scandinavian Culture in Medieval Poland, ed. by Sławomir Moździoch, Błażej Stanisławski, and Przemysław Wiszewski (Wrocław: Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences), pp. 323–51 Rębkowski, Marian. 2006. ‘Kilka uwag w sprawie genezy orientacji pochówków szkieletowych we wczesnym średniowieczu’, in Świat Słowian wczesnego średniowiecza, ed. by Marek Dworaczyk, Anna B. Kowalska, Sławomir Moździoch, and Marian Rębkowski (Szczecin: Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk), pp. 515–20 —— 2007. Chrystianizacja Pomorza Zachodniego. Studium archeologiczne (Szczecin: Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk) Sikora, Jerzy. 2013. ‘Etnos or Ethos? Some Remarks on Interpretation of Early Medieval Elite Burials in Northern Poland’, in Scandinavian Culture in Medieval Poland, ed. by Sławomir Moździoch, Błażej Stanisławski, and Przemysław Wiszewski (Wrocław: Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences), pp. 395–409 Suchodolski, Stanisław. 1984. ‘Skarb monet i ozdób z X wieku oraz inne monety znalezione na cmentarzysku w Niemczy’, Wiadomości Numizmatyczne, 28.1–4: 1–2 and 92–105 —— 2012. Numizmatyka średniowieczna (Warsaw: Trio) —— 2015. ‘The Beginnings of Polish Coinage in the Light of Recent Research’, Wiadomości Numizmatyczne, 59.1–2: 67–94 —— 2016. ‘Obol zmarłych’, in Bodzia. Elitarny cmentarz z początków państwa polskiego, ed. by Andrzej Buko (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk), pp. 285–304 Urbańczyk, Przemysław. 2000. ‘Archeologia etniczności – fikcja czy nadzieja?’, in Archeologia w teorii i w praktyce, ed. by Andrzej Buko and Przemysław Urbańczyk (Warsaw: Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk), pp. 137–46 —— 2016. ‘Najstarsze materialne świadectwa chrystianizacji ziem polskich’, in Kościół, kultura, polityka w państwie pierwszych Piastów, ed. by Waldemar Graczyk, Jolanta M. Marszalska, Wojciech Fałkowski, and Leszek Zynger (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UKSW and Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa w Ciechanowie), pp. 99–118 —— 2017. Bolesław Chrobry – lew ryczący (Toruń: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK) —— 2020a. ‘Archaeology and the Beginnings of Christianity in Poland’, in The Dawning of Christianity in Poland and across Central-Eastern Europe: History and the Politics of Memory, ed. by Igor Kąkolewski, Christian Lűbke, and Przemysław Urbańczyk (Berlin: Peter Lang), pp. 65–76

79

80

p r ze m ys ł aw ur b ań c z y k

—— 2020b. ‘Przejawy synkretyzmu w sztuce wczesnopiastowskiej’, Saeculum Christianum, 26.1: 31–40 —— 2022a. ‘Trudności w chrystianizacji państwa wczesnopiastowskiego w świetle świadectw archeologicznych’, Historia Slavorum Occidens, 12.1(32): 13–30 —— 2022b. ‘Interreligious Dialog Expressed in the Earliest Polish Art’, Annali di Studi Religiosi, 23: 109–19 —— 2023a. ‘Who Converted the Poles?’, in Mass Conversions to Christianity and Islam, 800–1100, ed. by Tsvetelin Stepanov and Osman Karatay (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 101–12 DOI:10.1007/978-3-031-34429-9 —— 2023b. ‘Czy najstarsze cmentarze szkieletowe w państwie pierwszych Piastów można datować na wiek X?’, in Początki obrządku szkieletowego na ziemiach polskich w okresie średniowiecza, ed. by Dariusz Błaszczyk and Andrzej Buko (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo UW), pp. 144–53 Zakrzewski, Stanisław. 1921. Mieszko I jako budowniczy państwa polskiego (Warsaw: Polska składnica pomocy szkolnych) Zoll-Adamikowa, Helena. 1966. Wczesnośredniowieczne cmentarzyska szkieletowe Małopolski, cz. II: Analiza (Warsaw: Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk) —— 1967. ‘Małopolskie cmentarzyska z X–XII w. a kwestia recepcji chrześcijaństwa w Małopolsce’, Kwartalnik Historii Kultury Materialnej, 15: 41–54 —— 1971. ‘Próba periodyzacji wczesnośredniowiecznych praktyk pogrzebowych w Polsce’, Archaeologia Polona, 16: 541–56 —— 1988. ‘Przyczyny i formy recepcji rytuału szkieletowego u Słowian nadbałtyckich we wczesnym średniowieczu’, Przegląd Archeologiczny, 35: 183–221 —— 1994. ‘Formy konwersji Słowiańszczyzny wczesnośredniowiecznej a problem przedpiastowskiej chrystianizacji Małopolski’, in Chrystianizacja Polski południowej. Materiały sesji naukowej odbytej 29 czerwca 1993 roku (Kraków: Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk), pp. 131–40 —— 1998. ‘Zum Beginn der Köperbestattung bei den Westslawen’, in Rom und Byzanz im Norden. Mission und Glaubenswechsel im Ostseeraum während des 8.–14. Jahrhunderts, vol. i, ed. by Michael Müller-Wille (Mainz: Franz Steiner), pp. 227–38 —— 2000. ‘Postępy chrystianizacji Słowian przed rokiem 1000 (na podstawie źródeł nekropolicznych)’, in Święty Wojciech i jego czasy, ed. by Andrzej Żaki (Kraków: Polska Akademia Umiejętności), pp. 103–09 Żydok, Przemysław. 2004. ‘Wczesnośredniowieczne pochówki antywampiryczne’, in Hereditatem cognoscere. Studia i szkice dedykowane Profesor Marii Miśkiewicz, ed. by Zbigniew Kobyliński (Warsaw: Państwowe Muzeum Archeologiczne), pp. 38–66

Marcin Danielewski

5. On the Threshold of Christianity The Church in Kuyavia from the Tenth to the Twelfth Centuries

A bs t r act  The major goal of this article is to determine the rate of the Christianization of Kuyavia as a periphery of the earliest Piast dominion. Consequently, I analyse a number of issues related to the religious conversion of the local population and the development of church structures at the early stages of the emergence and operation of the Piast dominion. Kuyavia is also compared with neighbouring Wielkopolska, the ideological and political centre of the Piast dominion. This should lead to an indication of whether there are significant differences in the degree of the two regions’ Christianization. In the context of these considerations, of special interest and key importance seems to be the issue of grave fields and funerary rituals. Of significance are the elements that confirm the abandoning of pagan beliefs for the benefit of Christianity.

T

K e y wo r ds  Early Middle Ages, grave fields, burials, funeral rites, inhumation, funeral gifts, Kuyavia, the Piast realm, Christianization, religious syncretism

T

Introduction The issue of the Church and the origins of Christianity in Poland has stimulated great scholarly interest, as reflected in a number of studies published in recent years, including written sources and, above all, archaeological material. While it is impossible to discuss all these works in this article or even to summarize the main ideas, two major views can be identified concerning the pace of the Christianization of the Piast dominion and the success thereof. The first view is more sceptical than the second, emphasizing Mieszko I’s (960–992) rather weak commitment to the spread of Christianity and the poor effectiveness of the evangelization of his subjects, also during the reigns of his successors. This view has come

to prominence in recent years owing to Przemysław Urbańczyk (2012; 2016, 99–114; 2017a, 129–38; 2017b, 185–97; the author repeats these hypotheses in this volume), Marek Cetwiński (2016, 103–14), Marzena Matla (2017, 59–76), and Dariusz Andrzej Sikorski (2011, 103–05; 2012, 195–98; 2017, 214–17). To some extent, these findings correspond with the data presented by Stanisław Bylina on the late medieval Polish countryside where, even then, the Church had to work hard to reach out to the entire rural community (Bylina 2002). In opposition to this view, there is a group of scholars optimistic about the success of rapid Christianization, Mieszko I’s effectiveness in the religious transition, and the strong commitment of the ruler and his successors to the propagation of the new faith. They include primarily Andrzej Buko (2016a, 13–48; 2016b, 7–32), Wojciech

Marcin Danielewski • ([email protected]) is a professor of archaeology at the Faculty of Archaeology, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań. His main research focuses on early medieval archaeology, especially fortified centres and Christianization. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 81–95. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138109

82

m a rc i n da n i e le w s ki

Figure 5.1. Kuyavia and the Piast dominion in the tenth to twelfth centuries. (Sketch by M. Danielewski.)

Fałkowski (2016, 27–39), Roman Michałowski (2002, 38–39; 2008, 11–49; 2018, 65–71), and Jerzy Strzelczyk (2016a, 13–25; 2016b, 103–32). In this context, it seems that the rate of the Christianization of the Piast dominion requires further research. Fortunately, this issue has been dealt with by a fairly large group of scholars. So far, however, no detailed research has been conducted into the rate of Christianization of Kuyavia (Fig. 5.1),1 although the issues of the local church organization, sacral buildings, and early medieval grave



1 Kujawy, located in present-day central Poland on the periphery of Wielkopolska (Gniezno — the religious centre of Wielkopolska — is only 32 km from Kwieciszewo, the western border of the historic Kujawy region), is of interest to the considerations of the Christianization of the Piast dominion. This is especially true, as already in the second half of the tenth century this area must have been a part of the Piast state if a decision had been made to build a stronghold, crucial for this

fields have been at the centre of scholarly interest, as exemplified by the numerous works on the subject. Consequently, some of the topics concerning specific necropolises have been well researched. However, the overall recognition of all the grave fields already leaves much to be desired, and similar conclusions can be drawn with regard to religious buildings. In view of this, it seems only reasonable to consider all these topics together in order to discern the rate of the Christianization of Kuyavia between 966 and the late twelfth century. In 2014–2019, such detailed research was undertaken in relation to Kuyavia, and resulted in a monograph entitled Cuiavia Christiana. U progu chrześcijaństwa i Kościoła na Kujawach w X–XII wieku (Cuiavia Christiana. On the Threshold of Christianity

area, in Kruszwica and systematically weaken the settlement centre in Mietlica, which dates back to the tribal period (cf. Dzieduszycki 2012, 166–73).

5 .   o n t he t hre sho ld o f chris tianity Table 5.1. Medieval cemeteries from Kuyavia with well-established chronology. ‘AZP’ indicates Polish Archaeological record.2

Location

Site number Commune

AZP area

Stary Brześć Brześć Kujawski

4 5

Brześć Kujawski Brześć Kujawski

48–46 48–46

Bodzanowo Bodzia

12 1

Dobre Lubanie

46–44 46–46

Byczyna Dźwierzchno Krusza Zamkowa Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica

1 2 13 6 8 9 11 17

Dobre Złotniki Kujawskie Inowrocław Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica

47–44 43–38 45–39 47–41 47–41 47–41 47–41 47–41

Kruszwica Kruszwica Lubomin Markowice Morawy Parchanki Strzelno Wandynowo Zgłowiączka

18 19 7 12 1 25 1 10 4

Kruszwica Kruszwica Boniewo Strzelno Dobre Dąbrowa Biskupia Strzelno Bytoń Lubraniec

47–41 47–41 52–45 46–40 46–43 44–41 48–39 49–44 50–45

and the Church in the 10th–12th Centuries) (Danielewski 2019). Accordingly, this article is a result of the research carried out at that time.

Grave Fields and Burial Rites The research results lead to the conclusion that the oldest skeletal grave fields from Kuyavia (after Mieszko I’s baptism in 966) are necropolises from Bodzia (Table 5.1, site 1) and Markowice (Table 5.1, site 12). Bodzia is located on the border of the Vistula River forests, which form a boundary between two historical lands, Kuyavia and Mazovia (Danielewski 2016b, 49–50). This grave field



2 It should be noted that in the course of further considerations of the following issues, not all the grave fields listed in Table 5.1 will be analysed in detail. Some of the necropolises, even though their chronology is fairly well established, cannot be taken into account when presenting percentage analyses of the occurrence of personal equipment in graves due to the condition of the preserved archaeological documentation or the degree of examination of the site. Therefore, for each of the issues discussed, I select the necropolises that allow for the most meaningful consideration of the issue at hand.

Chronology Mid-12th century – mid-16th century Mid-11th century– the initial two decades of the 12th century Late 11th /early 12th century and the 12th century Fourth quarter of the 10th century – late first and early second quarter of the 11th century late 11th – first half of the 12th century 11th century – 13th century 11th century – modern and contemporary times Mid-12th century – early 13th century 12th century – modern times 11th century (possible later burials – modern times) 11th century, 12th century – 13th century Second half of the 12th century – modern times Battlefield in 1096, 12th century – first half of the 13th century 12th century – 13th century 12th century – 13th century 11th century – early 13th century Fourth quarter of the 10th century – early 13th century Second half of the 11th century Late 10th century or the first half of the 11th century The second half of the 12th century – 19th century The late 11th /12th century – early 13th century The early 12th century – fourth quarter of the 13th century

was used in two phases, the first in a period between the fourth quarter of the tenth century and the turn of the first and second quarters of the eleventh century. The second phase can be dated to the late eleventh and the first half of the twelfth centuries (Buko and Kara 2016, 449–51). On the other hand, the origins of the necropolis in Markowice, located near Strzelno in western Kuyavia, are traced to the fourth quarter of the tenth century. It was a large necropolis, covering an area of 2,500 m2 with 240 burial pits and 248 burials recorded (Błaszczyk and others 2016, 21, 22). Its chronology is broad as it spans from the fourth quarter of the tenth century to the early thirteenth century (Błaszczyk and others 2016, 194). The origins of the grave field were established on the basis of artefacts and absolute dating by means of the C14 method (Błaszczyk and others 2016, 188–94, 195). Unfortunately, only one coin was found in the graves (a denarius of Bolesław IV the Curly, issued in 1157–1164/1166), and there were few sensitive dating indicators among the artefacts (Błaszczyk and others 2016, 188–89). Both burial sites, i.e. Markowice and the previously mentioned Bodzia, were certainly functional during

83

84

m a rc i n da n i e le w s ki

Figure 5.2. Distribution of graves in the grave field in Morawy. (Collection of the State Archaeological Museum in Warsaw.)

the reign of Bolesław the Brave (992–1025). However, it is doubtful that they existed as early as the time of Mieszko I (963–992). Therefore, it can be concluded that no skeletal burial grounds from the earlier stage of the Christianization of the Piast dominion are known in Kuyavia. The remaining Kuyavia burial grounds of interest to me (Brześć Kujawski, Bodzanowo, Byczyna, Dźwierzchno, Krusza Zamkowa, Kruszwica (seven sites), Lubomin, Morawy, Parchanki, Stary Brześć, Strzelno, Wandynowo, Zgłowiączka), the chronology of which is fairly well recognized, can be dated to the younger phases of Piast rule (cf. Table 5.1). The data show that inhumation burials were still sparse at that time, and the situation only changed in the second half of the eleventh century when the number of newly located burial grounds started to grow. Another issue worth mentioning is the presence of cremation graves or burial grounds in the analysed area after 966. The issue of cremation burials has long been in the focus of Polish historiography (Rajewski 1958, 197–201; Zoll-Adamikowa 1979; Pawlak 2018, 221–35; Wrzesińska and Wrzesiński 2021, 171–89). Interestingly, the centre of the Piast domain from the period before

Mieszko I’s baptism lacks burials of cremated bodies. Most of the cremation rite graves of the time assumed a form that must have been poorly marked in the field, as archaeologists have difficulty in recording burials from this period (Zoll-Adamikowa 1979, 220–21, 227, fig. 58). However, this is not a major part of this discussion. From the point of view of these studies, the key question seems to be if bodies were also cremated in Kuyavia after the adoption of Christianity. It seems like there were such cremations, albeit few, since there are traces of cremation (Mietlica) and bi-ritual burials (Morawy, Brześć Kujawski) in Kuyavia. The most characteristic example of such a situation is the burial site in Morawy (Fig. 5.2), which, according to recent findings, can be dated to the second half of the eleventh century. The dating was based on an analysis of artefacts and absolute dating using the C14 method on bone material from cremation grave no. 2 (Fig. 5.3) (Danielewski 2017a, 37–38; 2017b, 132–33). On the other hand, the question of whether bodies buried in the Bodzanowo grave field were cremated must be left unanswered, although patches of ashy earth recorded between skeletal burials may be an indication (Zielonka 1954–1956, 381). Nevertheless, traces of

5 .   o n t he t hre sho ld o f chris tianity

Figure 5.3. Cremation grave no. 2 from the grave field in Morawy. (Collection of the State Archaeological Museum in Warsaw.)

cremation, specifically in Morawy and Brześć Kujawski, are evidence that bodies were cremated in Kuyavia over 100 years after Mieszko’s baptism. I believe that this is a clear testimony to the persistence of pre-Christian beliefs reflected in funeral rites. There were no church cemeteries in Kuyavia in the tenth and eleventh centuries. The first necropolises of this type did not appear until the twelfth century, the oldest of which is located in the area of the Kruszwica collegiate church built in the second quarter of the twelfth century (Świechowski 2000, 144; 2009, 270). This was the first churchyard cemetery in Kuyavia. More of them were established in Krusza Zamkowa and Strzelno, where churches were built (Krusza Zamkowa) or, at least, their construction began (Strzelno) in the second half of the twelfth century (Cofta-Broniewska 1989, 197–202; Świechowski 2000, 239; SulkowskaTuszyńska 2006, 44–45, 66–68). In the case of Stary Brześć, it is impossible to determine whether a church/chapel already existed in the necropolis in the second half of the twelfth century, but it seems highly doubtful. On the basis of the available materials, attempts have been made to prove that the church building was accompanied by a cemetery, although it was probably established

slightly later than the burial site itself. According to its researchers, the earliest church must have already existed during the middle phase of the cemetery (fourteenth century), and it was rebuilt in the sixteenth century (Byrska-Kaszewska 1957, 256). No traces were recorded at the site of the operating cemetery to indicate the existence of, say, an older wooden church. The Brześć necropolis was, therefore, probably a classical churchyard cemetery, but, interestingly, not from the beginning of its operation (this can be concluded at least on the basis of the existing archaeological sources). In light of these examples, the emergence of the first churchyard cemeteries coincided with the establishment of bishoprics in Kuyavia in 1123–1124 (Kumlien 1962, 249–50; Labuda 1968, 39, 51). It can therefore be assumed that it was only then that the Church assumed more control over the burial customs of the common people. Still, numerous (inhumation) burial grounds without churches continued to co-exist with the churchyard cemeteries. In the burial grounds of Kuyavia there were no traces of triznas (Slavic rituals involving sumptuous feasts, remembrance of the deceased, and games to bring the deceased to the afterlife) described in sources on Ruthenia (Powieść 2005, 12). Only the necropolis in Bodzanowo (Fig. 5.4) could have held this form of ritual (Zielonka 1954–1956, 381), although the issue remains debatable. On the site, squares of ashy soil were uncovered between the skeletal graves, which can be interpreted as the remains of trysts and bonfires or traces of pre-Christian burial rites. Unfortunately, almost seventy years after the survey these ash pits and verification thereof are not possible. However, grave goods in the form of pottery vessels, buckets, and remains of food have been found in the burial grounds from the tenth to twelfth centuries (Table 5.2). In the oldest burial grounds (Bodzia, Markowice), more than 16 per cent of the graves contained grave goods. However, in the second half of the eleventh century and especially from the twelfth century, I have recorded a regular decrease in grave goods. Among all these cemeteries, the burial place in Morawy, where perhaps more than 27 per cent of the graves were equipped with goods, is quite exceptional. Apparently, the pre-Christian custom of furnishing the dead with artefacts was still strong in the second half of the eleventh century. Grave goods in the graves on churchyards were either very rare (Krusza Zamkowa, Kruszwica [site no. 6]), or altogether non-existent (Stary Brześć, Strzelno). It seems, however, that the regular drop in the number of grave goods in the form of pots, buckets, and food should be attributed to the Church’s growing control of funerary rites and the progressing Christianization.

85

86

m a rc i n da n i e le w s ki

Figure 5.4. Distribution of graves in the grave field in Bodzanów. (Collection of the Regional Museum in Toruń.)

5 .   o n t he t hre sho ld o f chris tianity Table 5.2. Grave goods in the cemeteries of Kuyavia. ‘AZP’ indicates Polish Archaeological Record.

Location Stary Brześć Brześć Kujawski Bodzanowo Bodzia Byczyna Dźwierzchno Krusza Zamkowa Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Lubomin Markowice Morawy Parchanki Strzelno Wandynowo Zgłowiączka

Site no. Commune 4 5 12 1 1 2 13 6 8 9 11 17 18 19 7 12 1 25 1 10 4

Brześć Kujawski Brześć Kujawski Dobre Lubanie Dobre Złotniki Kujawskie Inowrocław Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Boniewo Strzelno Dobre Dąbrowa Biskupia Strzelno Bytoń Lubraniec

AZP area 48–46 48–46 46–44 46–46 47–44 43–38 45–39 47–41 47–41 47–41 47–41 47–41 47–41 47–41 52–45 46–40 46–43 44–41 48–39 49–44 50–45

Only five of the analysed cemeteries (Bodzia, Brześć Kujawski, Kruszwica site no. 6, Markowice, burial from Parchanki) contained graves with objects that could be associated with pagan or Christian worship (Table 5.3). Placing these types of artefacts in graves was a rather rare phenomenon in Kuyavia, as best illustrated by a grave field in Markowice where only 1.2 per cent of the burials were accompanied by religious objects. It also seems noteworthy that, apart from the graves from the Kruszwica collegiate church where clergymen were buried with liturgical objects (chalice and paten) (Dąbrowska 2016, 21–28), it is impossible to determine if burials with objects of Christian or pre-Christian worship were an expression of the actual beliefs of the people buried there. Very often the division into pagans and Christians is purely conventional and we can assume that there was religious syncretism, as evidenced by archaeological excavations from other areas of Poland (Urbańczyk 2017b, 194). While certain items interpreted as pagan have been found in graves from the tenth to twelfth centuries, they were most commonly deposited between the second half of the tenth and the early twelfth centuries. During the tenth to the twelfth centuries, the occurrence of personal items and grave goods in burials was a general phenomenon in Kuyavia, which is in contrast with the general assumptions of research that presupposed that the custom of equipping the dead

Grave goods Earthen-ware

Buckets

Ceramics

Food

x x x x x x

x x x x x x x -

x x x x x x -

x x -

with objects disappeared approximately 150 years after Christianization (Leciejewicz 1997, 53–55; Dąbrowska 2008, 103–06). Personal objects were present in graves during the twelfth century, even after the establishment of bishoprics in Kuyavia, and continued to be in the thirteenth century, even in graves in churchyards. Nevertheless, the number of grave goods at that time was far less than in the cemeteries of the tenth and eleventh centuries. However, I believe that the decreasing number of objects deposited at burial sites does not indicate the complete Christianization of the local population. Considering the orientation of graves, in the vast majority of the tenth- and eleventh-century cemeteries of Kuyavia, eastern orientation almost never exceeded 50 per cent of the excavated burials. A major change occurred in the twelfth century, when the number of east-oriented burials increased significantly. The largest number of them has been identified in churchyard cemeteries (usually more than 90 per cent). This leads to an assumption that special importance was attached to the orientation of the dead in church necropolises. I believe that this phenomenon was a result of the establishment of Christianity in the area and the related expansion of church structures, including the emergence of bishoprics in Kuyavia. Another often-debated phenomenon in connection with Christianization is the position of the arms in

87

88

m a rc i n da n i e le w s ki Table 5.3. Cult-related personal belongings excavated in the cemeteries of Kuyavia. ‘AZP’ indicates Polish Archaeological Record.

Location

Site no. Commune

Stary Brześć

4

Brześć Kujawski Bodzanowo Bodzia Byczyna Dźwierzchno

5 12 1 1 2

Krusza Zamkowa Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Lubomin Markowice Morawy Parchanki

13 6 8 9 11 17 18 19 7 12 1 25

Strzelno Wandynowo Zgłowiączka

1 10 4

Brześć Kujawski Brześć Kujawski Dobre Lubanie Dobre Złotniki Kujawskie Inowrocław Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Kruszwica Boniewo Strzelno Dobre Dąbrowa Biskupia Strzelno Bytoń Lubraniec

AZP area

Cult-related personal belongings Kaptorga

Amulet

Ring

Cross

Other (counterdie, chalice, paten)

48–46

-

-

-

-

-

48–46

-

x

x

-

x

46–44 46–46 47–44 43–38

x -

-

-

x -

-

45–39

-

-

-

-

-

47–41 47–41 47–41 47–41 47–41 47–41 47–41 52–45 46–40 46–43 44–41

x

x -

x -

x x -

x -

48–39 49–44 50–45

-

-

-

-

-

burials. Burials of individuals with their arms crossed on the pelvis have not been uncovered in the oldest Kuyavia grave fields from the late tenth and early eleventh centuries. The necropolis in Markowice is an exception to this observation (Blaszczyk and others 2016, 25–26) but presumably only because it was used for a long time. The first single graves of this type discovered in other cemeteries can be traced back to as late as the second half of the eleventh century, a case in point being the necropolis in Brześć Kujawski (Kaszewska and Kaszewski 1971, 420, fig. 123, 422, fig. 130). There were more of such graves in Bodzanowo in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries (Zielonka 1954–1956, 377–80). Nonetheless, burials with arms crossed on the pelvis did not become a general custom during the twelfth century in Kuyavia. Therefore, it is difficult to associate this feature with the progressing Christianization of the local population.

The findings above suggest that Kuyavia, a close periphery of Wielkopolska, the ideological centre of the Piast domain, is an excellent area for investigating the funerary changes of everyday people and for attempting to reconstruct the course of Christianization. One could assume that the process was carried out in stages. In the first phase, during the reign of Mieszko I, no changes can be observed in funerary rites in Kuyavia. Significant changes occurred first during the reign of Bolesław the Brave, when the first inhumation cemeteries appeared in the area (Bodzia and Markowice). The next important phase started around the second half of the eleventh century when the number of inhumation necropolises increased significantly. This period was characterized by the last confirmed cremations, the presence of numerous grave goods and personal items in graves, and the varied orientation of the deceased. The next major change in funerary rites can be traced back to the twelfth century when many of

5 .   o n t he t hre sho ld o f chris tianity

the typical features of the tenth- and eleventh-century burials disappeared, and some of the previously rare ones became prominent. This was also the time of the emergence of the first churchyard cemeteries, leading to the assumption that the transformation was related to the consolidation of Christianity in this immediate periphery of the Piast dominion and the establishment of the Church, including its local networks, in Kuyavia. It seems that Bolesław III the Wrymouth and his initiative to establish bishoprics in Kuyavia deserve special appreciation at this stage of Christianization of the region.

The First Churches and Monastic Communities Current evidence undoubtedly indicates that no church was built in the tenth century in Kuyavia. The oldest Christian temple, the church of St Vitus in Kruszwica, was founded in the last quarter of the eleventh century (Kaczmarek 2004, 320; Dzieduszycka and Dzieduszycki 2005, 102; Dzieduszycki 2008, 408, 410), probably by Bolesław II the Generous (Kaczmarek 2004, 320). It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that the in-depth Christianization of the local population and the establishment of an extended local church network did not happen in Kuyavia during the course of the tenth and eleventh centuries. Notably, the area in question was not a source of special interest on the part of the Church, which corresponds well with the observations made earlier about the field cemeteries of Kuyavia. In the twelfth century, the number of churches in Kuyavia increased as new religious buildings were founded in Gniewkowo, Inowrocław, Kościelec, Kowal, Kruszwica (Fig. 5.5), Krusza Zamkowa, Ostrowąs, Włocławek, and Strzelno (Frycz 1982, 437–38; CoftaBroniewska 1989, 199; Świechowski 2000, 110, 144; Sulkowska-Tuszyńska 2006, 44–45, 66–68; Danielewski 2019, 208–32). However, only two or three of them (St Peter’s Collegiate Church in Kruszwica, St John’s Church in Włocławek, and probably the local cathedral) date back to the first half of the twelfth century (Świechowski 2000, 144; Danielewski 2019, 209, 224–29). According to the sources, the remaining eight churches can only be attributed to the second half of the twelfth century. A common characteristic of the above-mentioned twelfth-century churches is that, generally, they were located further away from strongholds (Gniewkowo, Inowrocław, Kościelec, Kowal, Ostrowąs, Strzelno). Only some of them (Kruszwica, Włocławek, Krusza Zamkowa) were situated near important strongholds. Nonetheless, churches further away from fortifications

were not erected in empty spaces but in nearby open settlement clusters. An increase in the number of churches in Kuyavia coincided with the establishment of the Kruszwica and Włocławek dioceses in the 1120s, which gave impetus to the development of the local ecclesiastical organization. Duke Bolesław III (1002–1038) the Wrymouth made significant contributions to the establishment of the diocese. At the same time, the further expansion of the church network should probably be attributed to his successors — first of all, Bolesław IV the Curly (1138–1173), Leszek Bolesławowic (1173–1186), Casimir II the Just (1166/1167–1194), Bolesław of Kuyavia (1186 or 1194–1195), and Mieszko III Old (1138–1202), who ruled in Kuyavia (Danielewski 2016b, 75–76) — the hierarchs of the Church, and some of the more affluent magnate families (Fig. 5.7).3 Nonetheless, churches were concentrated in a limited area within Kuyavia during the eleventh and twelfth centuries, indicating that the evangelization of the society was not very widespread, and the process of Christianization of the local communities was rather slow. Notably, during the entire period in question, only one monastery was founded in Kuyavia, namely, belonging to the Norbertines in Strzelno (Figs. 5.6 and 5.7). The number of churches did not increase again until the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, marking the beginnings of a parish organization in the thirteenth century. Religious buildings founded at that time in Barcin, Bydgoszcz, Chalno, Choceń, Dźwierzchno, Izbica, Kłóbka, Kościelna Wieś, Lisewo Kościelne, Lubanie, Lubotyń, Lubraniec, Ludzisko, Łabiszyn, Ostrowo nad Gopłem, Parchanie, Piotrków, Płonkowo, Raciążek, Radziejów and Stary Brześć (more on the sources used to date these churches in: Danielewski 2019, 204–07, 211–12, 233–47) are evidence of a second wave of development and the development of a denser network of local churches. The growing number of churches in Kuyavia in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries was probably an expression of the development of the ecclesiastical organization and the Church’s increasing outreach to local society. It seems that it was only at this time that a fully-fledged process of religious conversion took place.

3 One of the first such magnate foundations in Kuyavia may have been the church of St Margaret in Kościelec, built in the late twelfth and the early thirteenth centuries, cf. Tomaszewski 1974, 155, 168, 173; Świechowski, 2005, 109; Danielewski 2009, 17.

89

90

m a rc i n da n i e le w s ki

Figure 5.5. Saint Peter’s church in Kruszwica. (Photo by P. Namiota.)

Figure 5.6. Saint Procopius’s church in Strzelno. (Photo by P. Namiota.)

5 .   o n t he t hre sho ld o f chris tianity

Figure 5.7. Distribution of graves and grave fields in Kuyavia in the tenth through twelfth centuries. (Sketch by M. Danielewski.)

Summary The research results conclude that in the second half of the tenth century, no significant changes happened in Kuyavia that would indicate the Christianization of the local population. Notably, not even one church or monastic community operated in the area at that time. No separate diocese was established in Kuyavia at the time in question, so the area remained without organized

Church structures during the reign of Mieszko I and his eldest son. The nearest religious centre was in Gniezno, more than 50 km away from Kruszwica, the most important centre of Kuyavia in the late tenth century.4 The distance could not have been covered on foot in one

4 This is the straight-line distance.

91

92

m a rc i n da n i e le w s ki

day,5 so the local Kuyavia communities had practically no contact with the Church. Settlements located even further to the east (e.g. one near Kowal) were more than 100 km from the nearest Christian temple. These data clearly show that during the reign of Mieszko I and Bolesław the Brave, the local population probably did not have any contact with the new religion, let alone access to churches and evangelization. It can only be assumed that, since the Piasts’ dominion hosted the dux ambulans/rex ambulans system, whereby the ruler supervised the country by making tours, during which he exercised, among other things, judicial authority, looked after castles and local administration officials (a concept explained in detail by Urbańczyk 2001, 237; Dobosz 2011, 133–34), then the clergy could also travel together with the monarch and the court.



5 Let me refer the readers to observations on historical re-enactment of hiking in Wrzesiński and Danielewski 2018, 88–89 n. 7.

If that was the case, it was the only opportunity for contact with the new religion for the local population. However, it must also be assumed that the ruler tended to stay in large strongholds that were economically able to support him and his entourage as these visits imposed a heavy economic burden on the local population (Modzelewski 1987, 86, 89–91; Danielewski 2016a, 48–49). In view of this, people who did not frequent the strongholds visited by the ruler and clergy did not have even very loose contacts with the representatives of the new religion. Clearly, the constraints resulting from non-existent churches and the emergence of a local ecclesiastical structure in Kuyavia in the second half of the tenth century basically ruled out wide-range Christianization and thus evangelization of the local population.

5 .   o n t he t hre sho ld o f chris tianity

Works Cited Primary Sources Powieść 2005 = Powieść minionych lat, ed. by Franciszek Sielicki (Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich) Secondary Studies Błaszczyk, Krzysztof, Anna Nierychlewska, and Paweł Zawilski. 2016. ‘Opracowanie wyników ratowniczych badań archeologicznych przeprowadzonych na stanowisku nr 12 w Markowicach (gm. Strzelno, pow. Mogileński, AZP 46–40/168), Łódź’ (unpublished excavation report) Buko, Andrzej. 2016a. ‘Chrześcijanie i poganie. O problemach interpretacji odkryć archeologicznych związanych z początkami chrześcijaństwa na ziemiach polskich’, Slavia Antiqua, 57: 13–51 —— 2016b. ‘1050-lecie chrześcijaństwa na ziemiach polskich. Państwo Mieszka I i problem wczesnej chrystianizacji Polski w perspektywie badań archeologicznych’, Nauka, 2: 7–38 Buko, Andrzej, and Michał Kara. 2016. ‘Chronologia cmentarzyska’, in Bodzia. Elitarny cmentarz z początków państwa polskiego, ed. by Andrzej Buko (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Archeologii i Etnologii PAN), pp. 447–52 Bylina, Stanisław. 2002. Chrystianizacja wsi polskiej u schyłku średniowiecza (Warsaw: Instytut Historii PAN) Byrska-Kaszewska, Eleonora. 1957. ‘Cmentarzysko średniowieczne w Starym Brześciu, pow. Włocławek’, Z Otchłani Wieków, 23: 255–58 Cetwiński, Marek. 2016. ‘Kościół i blade widmo pogaństwa. Średniowieczna historiografia o chrystianizacji ziem polskich’, in Kościoły w dobie chrystianizacji, ed. by Marian Rębkowski, Wolińskie Spotkania Mediewistyczne, 3 (Szczecin: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Archeologii i Etnologii PAN), pp. 103–14 Cofta-Broniewska, Aleksandra. 1989. ‘Wczesnośredniowieczny obiekt sakralny (?)’, in Miejsce pradziejowych i średniowiecznych praktyk kultowych w Kruszy Zamkowej, ed. by Aleksandra Cofta-Broniewska, Seria Archeologia, 35 (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM), pp. 197–202 Danielewski, Marcin. 2009. ‘Wczesnośredniowieczne osadnictwo z terenu Kościelca Kujawskiego’, Ziemia Kujawska, 22: 5–20 —— 2016a. ‘Dzieje polityczne we wczesnym średniowieczu’, in Dzieje Gniezna pierwszej stolicy Polski, ed. by Józef Dobosz (Gniezno: Miasto Gniezno and Powiat Gnieźnieński), pp. 22–51 —— 2016b. Sieć grodowa na Kujawach oraz jej funkcje od połowy X do końca XIII wieku, Publikacje Instytutu Historii, 130 (Poznań: Instytut Historii UAM) —— 2017a. ‘Jedenastowieczne cmentarzysko w Morawach’, Historia Slavorum Occidentis, 3.14: 23–42 —— 2017b. ‘The Early Medieval Village of Morawy: A Grave Field from the 11th Century’, Slavia Antiqua, 58: 115–36 —— 2019. Cuiavia Christiana. U progu chrześcijaństwa i Kościoła na Kujawach w X–XII wieku, Seria Archeologia, 59 (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM) Dąbrowska, Elżbieta. 2008. Groby, relikwie i insygnia. Studia z dziejów mentalności średniowiecznej (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Archeologii i Etnologii PAN) —— 2016. ‘Nieznane groby średniowiecznych duchownych z kolegiaty pw. św. św. Piotra i Pawła w Kruszwicy’, Studia Źródłoznawcze, 54: 21–29 Dobosz, Józef. 2011. Kazimierz II Sprawiedliwy (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie) Dzieduszycka, Bożena, and Wojciech Dzieduszycki. 2005. ‘Dzieje piastowskiego ośrodka w Kruszwicy we wczesnym średniowieczu’, in Europa Środkowo-Wschodnia. Ideologia, historia a społeczeństwo, ed. by Jarosław Dudek, Daria Janiszewska, and Urszula Świderska-Włodarczyk (Zielona Góra: Oficyna Wydawnicza Uniwersytetu Zielonogórskiego), pp. 457–63 Dzieduszycki, Wojciech. 2008. ‘Kruszwica – piastowska domena nad Gopłem’, in Pradzieje Wielkopolski. Od epoki kamienia po średniowiecze, ed. by Michał Kobusiewicz (Poznań: Instytutu Archeologii i Etnologii PAN), pp. 397–29 —— 2012. ‘Przemiany społeczno-organizacyjne wczesnośredniowiecznych Kujaw – możliwości interpretacyjne archeologii’, in Archaeologia versus historiam – historia versus archaeologiam czyli jak wspólnie poznawać średniowiecze, ed. by Michał Brzostowicz, Maciej Przybył, and Dariusz A. Sikorski (Poznań: Poznańskie Towarzystwo Przyjaciół Nauk and Muzeum Archeologiczne w Poznaniu), pp. 165–74 Fałkowski, Wojciech. 2016. ‘Senior bonus – Bolesław Chrobry jako wzór chrześcijańskiego władcy’, in Kościół, kultura, polityka w państwie pierwszych Piastów, ed. by Waldemar Graczyk, Jolanta M. Marszalska, Wojciech Fałkowski, and Leszek Zynger (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UKSW and Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa w Ciechanowie), pp. 27–39 Frycz, Jerzy. 1982. ‘Architektura i sztuka Inowrocławia’, in Dzieje Inowrocławia, vol. 2, ed. by Marian Biskup (Warsaw: Towarzystwo Naukowe w Toruniu), pp. 417–501

93

94

m a rc i n da n i e le w s ki

Kaczmarek, Jarmila. 2004. ‘Początki architektury sakralnej w Kruszwicy’, in Początki architektury monumentalnej w Polsce, ed. by Tomasz Janiak and Dariusz Stryniak (Gniezno: Muzeum Początków Państwa Polskiego), pp. 311–22 Kaszewska, Eleonora, and Zdzisław Kaszewski. 1971, ‘Wczesnośredniowieczne cmentarzysko w Brześciu Kujawskim, pow. Włocławek’, Materiały Starożytne i Wczesnośredniowieczne, 1: 365–434 Kumlien, Kjell. 1962. ‘Sverigeskristnande i slutskedet-spörsmål om vittnesbörd och verkighet’, Historisk Tidskrift, 82: 249–97 Labuda, Gerard. 1968. ‘Początki diecezjalnej organizacji na Pomorzu i Kujawach w XI i XII wieku’, Zapiski Historyczne, 33.3: 19–60 Leciejewicz, Lech. 1997. ‘Wyznacznik pozycji społecznej w rytuale pogrzebowym wcześniejszego średniowiecza’, in Człowiek w społeczeństwie średniowiecznym, ed. by Roman Michałowski (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo DiG), pp. 45–55 Michałowski, Roman. 2002. ‘Post dziewięciotygodniowy w Polsce Chrobrego. Studium zdziejów polityki religijnej pierwszych Piastów’, Kwartalnik Historyczny, 109.1: 5–40 —— 2008. ‘Chrystianizacja monarchii piastowskiej w X–XI wieku’, in Animarum Cultura. Studia nad kulturą religijną na ziemiach polskich w średniowieczu, vol. 1, ed. by Halina Manikowska and Wojciech Brojer, Colloquia Mediaevalia Varsoviensia, 4 (Warsaw: Instytut Historii PAN), pp. 11–49 —— 2018. ‘Rygoryzm religijny w Czechach i Polsce w początkowym okresie chrystianizacji’, in Animos labor nutrit. Studia ofiarowane Profesorowi Andrzejowi Buko w siedemdziesiątą rocznicę urodzin, ed. by Tomasz Nowakiewicz, Maciej Trzeciecki, and Dariusz Błaszczyk (Warsaw: Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii PAN and Instytut Archeologii UW), pp. 65–72 Matla, Marzena. 2017. Czeskie wpływy w życiu religijnym i piśmiennictwie państwa piastowskiego w X–XI wieku, Publikacje Instytutu Historii, 148 (Poznań: Instytut Historii UAM) Modzelewski, Karol. 1987. Chłopi w monarchii wczesnopiastowskiej, Chłopi w społeczeństwie polskim (Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich) Pawlak, Paweł. 2018. ‘Przejawy słowiańskiej i skandynawskiej obrzędowości pogrzebowej doby “plemiennej” na cmentarzysku w Myszęcinie na ziemi lubuskiej’, Slavia Antiqua, 59: 221–37 Rajewski, Zdzisław. 1958. ‘O wczesnośredniowiecznych grobach popielnicowych w Wielkopolsce i na Kujawach’, Wiadomości Archeologiczne, 25.3: 197–201 Sikorski, Dariusz A. 2011. Kościół w Polsce za Mieszka I i Bolesława Chrobrego. Rozważania nad granicami poznania historycznego, Seria Historia, 216 (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM) —— 2012. Wczesnopiastowska architektura sakralna (jako źródło historyczne do dziejów Kościoła w Polsce), Prace Komisji Historycznej, 72 (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk) —— 2017. ‘Organizacja wczesnego polskiego Kościoła w pierwszej monarchii piastowskiej – niektóre problemy badawcze’, in Chrzest Mieszka I i chrystianizacja państwa Piastów, ed. by Józef Dobosz, Marzena Matla, and Jerzy Strzelczyk, Seria Historia, 231 (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM), pp. 199–220 Strzelczyk, Jerzy. 2016a. ‘Chrzest Polski – zmiana cywilizacyjna i polityczna’, in Kościół, kultura, polityka w państwie pierwszych Piastów, ed. by Waldemar Graczyk, Jolanta M. Marszalska, Wojciech Fałkowski, and Leszek Zynger (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UKSW and Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa w Ciechanowie), pp. 13–25 —— 2016b. Mieszko Pierwszy. Chrzest i początki Polski (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie) Sulkowska-Tuszyńska, Krystyna. 2006. Klasztor Norbertanek w Strzelnie (XII–XVI wiek). Sacrum i profanum (Toruń: Wydawnictwo UMK) Świechowski, Zygmunt. 2000. Architektura romańska w Polsce (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo DiG) —— 2005. Sztuka polska. Romanizm (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Arkady) —— 2009. Katalog architektury romańskiej w Polsce (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo DiG) Tomaszewski, Andrzej. 1974. Romańskie kościoły z emporami zachodnimi na obszarze Polski, Czech i Węgier (Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich) Urbańczyk, Przemysław. 2001. ‘Najdawniejsze stolice państwa piastowskiego’, in Polska na przełomie I i II tysiąclecia, ed. by Szczęsny Skibiński (Poznań: Stowarzyszenie Historyków Sztuki), pp. 237–47 —— 2012. Mieszko Pierwszy tajemniczy, Monografie Fundacji na Rzecz Nauki Polskiej (Toruń: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK) —— 2016. ‘Najstarsze materialne świadectwa chrystianizacji ziem polskich’, in Kościół, kultura, polityka w państwie pierwszych Piastów, ed. by Waldemar Graczyk, Jolanta M. Marszalska, Wojciech Fałkowski, and Leszek Zynger (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UKSW and Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa w Ciechanowie), pp. 99–118 —— 2017a. ‘Jak (s)chowano pierwszych polskich chrześcijan?’, in Cmentarzyska – relacje społeczne i międzykulturowe, ed. by Wojciech Dzieduszycki and Jacek Wrzesiński, Funeralia Lednickie, 17 (Poznań: Stowarzyszenie Naukowe Archeologów Polskich Oddział w Poznaniu), pp. 129–42

5 .   o n t he t hre sho ld o f chris tianity

—— 2017b, ‘Tempo początków chrystianizacji ziem piastowskich’, in Chrzest Mieszka I i chrystianizacja państwa Piastów, ed. by Józef Dobosz, Marzena Matla, and Jerzy Strzelczyk, Seria Historia, 231 (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM), pp. 185–97 Wrzesińska, Anna, and Jacek Wrzesiński. 2021. ‘Antropologia grobów ciałopalnych cmentarzyska Dziekanowice 22’, Slavia Antiqua, 62: 171–91 Wrzesiński, Jacek, and Marcin Danielewski. 2018. ‘Zaplecze osadnicze grodu w Grzybowie’, Historia Slavorum Occidentis, 2.17: 86–104 Zielonka, Bonifacy. 1954–1956. ‘Cmentarzysko w Bodzanowie w powiecie aleksandrowskim’, Przegląd Archeologiczny, 10: 331–82 Zoll-Adamikowa, Helena. 1979. Wczesnośredniowieczne cmentarzyska ciałopalne Słowian na terenie Polski. Cz. II. Analiza. Wnioski (Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich)

95

Katalin Szende

6. Fair Relations Marketplaces and the Formation of Cathedral Cities in East Central Europe*

A bs t r act  This paper discusses the interdependence of Christianization and early urbanization through a survey of markets and marketplaces in cathedral cities in East Central Europe between the eleventh and the thirteenth centuries. It considers the following questions: What roles did markets and fairs play in developing the urban character of cathedral cities in East Central Europe? What difference did the presence of cathedrals, other ecclesiastic institutions, and the practice of religion (liturgy) make for the promotion of commercial activities? And finally, how was the interplay of bishops’ seats and markets reflected in the spatial setup of the cathedral cities? The paper approaches these questions through a spatial lens, by reconstructing the topography of the early marketplaces and identifying patterns behind the choice of their locations. By following up the long-term developments, I found that the siting of marketplaces can indeed be used as a proxy to understand the changing relations between ecclesiastic centres and the secular society coexisting with them. At the time of adopting Christianity, the East Central European type of strongholds with their initial role in fostering trade could be successfully blended with the concept of cathedral cities that emerged in the Christian West. In this period marketplaces were tied via their access routes and location to the seats of power. Over time, however, with a set of decisive changes in the thirteenth century, marketplaces were typically moved away from the cathedral and became part and parcel of a transition from a castle–suburbium relationship to a city–cathedral connection.

T

K e y wo r ds  Urbanization, Christianization, topography, cathedral cities, marketplaces

T



* Research for this paper and the preparation of the maps as part of the project ‘Cathedral Cities in Context. Bishops’ Seats in Medieval East Central Europe as Urban and Religious Centres’ was funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) – FOR 2779: Religion and Urbanity: Reciprocal Formations hosted by the Max-Weber-Kolleg, Erfurt. Katalin Szende • ([email protected]) is a Professor of Medieval Studies at the Central European University, Budapest and Vienna. Her research concentrates on medieval towns in the Carpathian Basin and Central Europe, with regard to society, demography, literacy, everyday life, and topography. She is a board member of the International Commission for the History of Towns, one of the convenors of the European Atlas of Historic Towns, and a board member of the International Committee of Historical Sciences (CISH). She is a founding member and the current president of the Medieval Central Europe Research Network (MECERN). Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 97–115. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138110

98

k ata l in s ze n d e

By the time the Christianization of the rural countryside in East Central Europe became part of the agenda of the local sovereigns, Christianity was a structurally organized religion with a hierarchy of archdioceses and dioceses. Therefore, the rulers had to adopt and adapt this system to the local circumstances if their polities were to become acknowledged members of the ecclesia Christiana and to extend the new religion to the masses. They could best regulate this process by choosing the locations of the first diocesan seats in strongholds of strategic importance, where the ruling dynasty had already settled, or which they were just about to seize in the process of centralization. These combined secular and ecclesiastical centres became the first cathedral cities, which also played key roles in protecting, controlling, and benefiting from trade. This connection between Christianization and early urbanization informs and underpins the agenda of the following inquiry on the markets and marketplaces in cathedral cities in East Central Europe between the eleventh and the thirteenth centuries, while acknowledging that markets constitute a necessary but not sufficient condition of urbanity. The study takes a primarily spatial approach, as part of an established as well as a more recent ‘turn’ in urban studies and historical geography, the spatial and the infrastructural turns. Within this broad framework, the concept of co-spatiality developed by Jacques Lévy to denote and explain ‘mutually productive interactions’ (Lévy 2018), or in a historical perspective, ‘places or spaces […] used, imagined or interpreted by different groups, simultaneously or consecutively, for both sacred and profane purposes’ will have a prominent role (Wagner 2020).1 More specifically, the paper addresses the following questions: What roles did markets and fairs play in developing the urban character of cathedral cities in East Central Europe? (Fig. 6.1)2 What difference did the presence of cathedrals, other ecclesiastic institutions, and the practice of religion (liturgy) make for the promotion of commercial activities? And finally, how was the interplay of bishops’ seats and markets reflected in the spatial setup of the cathedral cities? This set of questions also alludes to heterarchy, a concept coined to explain the juxtaposed relationships among elements in a system that are unranked or changing in their temporal, spatial, or cognitive dimensions (Crumley 2015). Using the conceptual



1 Conference announcement ‘Co-spatiality: Changing Rules of Double Use, Excluding, Inviting, Imagining’ in: H-Soz-Kult, 21 October 2020, and conference repost by Simone Wagner: [last accessed 09 October 2023]. 2 See the list of cities considered for this study in the Appendix.

framework of heterarchy will help in noticing and explaining the cooperation or conflicting interests between the Church, the secular authorities, and the civic community controlling certain aspects of urban life and segments of urban space. The focus of this paper on spatial issues makes a virtue of necessity, due to the uneven availability of sources for the area and period covered by this research. Traditional objects in the medievalists’ toolkit, such as narrative sources, items of legislation, and administrative documents cover important aspects of the theme but were only infrequently produced and sporadically preserved. They will be used as anecdotal evidence for highlighting individual details but would be insufficient for a comprehensive comparative overview. Therefore, the primary focus of my study is the diachronic reconstruction of the main topographical elements of the cathedral cities: their ecclesiastical and secular public buildings, defences, and street pattern or settlement units. In the course of the topographic reconstruction, besides still-standing buildings and streets that have preserved their medieval course, wherever available, archaeological evidence and data from historical maps and town views were also considered. Historical reconstructions created by previous scholarship were consulted and critically reviewed. The collected features were mapped in the QGIS framework, using the digital elevation model provided by the Copernicus Land Service, combined with the approximately reconstructed hydrography of each site, considering chronological changes as far as the available cartographic material allowed. These maps became the basis of comparative analysis within the region. Comparison is all the more necessary since East Central Europe was not a homogenous entity, but rather a region with significant differences between its constituent polities, and also within each kingdom (Berend and others 2013, 1–39). Besides the spatial aspects, the current paper also extends to the temporal, economic, and legal. Before doing so, it seems to be helpful to summarize a few points on siting that are relevant in the market context.

In the Right Place When assessing the role of trade in the making of cathedral cities and, conversely, the role of bishops’ seats in promoting and coordinating trade, the first step is to examine the pre-episcopal and often pre-Christian past of their sites. The choice of a site for founding a bishopric determined the possibility for and the location of a range of concomitant activities.

6.   fai r relations

Figure 6.1. Overview of the examined sites.3



3 The maps appearing in the study were prepared by Mária Vargha.

99

100 k ata l in s ze n d e

The most important common point was a preference for sites enabling the control of a broad area from an accessible elevation or vantage point. It was rather the relative height that mattered — sometimes, as in Poznań, Włocławek, Cenad, Kalocsa, or Bač, already a few meters made a decisive difference. The second main feature was the control of an important river-crossing or hydrographic node, often including islands or a confluence of rivers. These sites were conductive to the formation of strongholds, as well as trade route junctions or transhipment ports between overland to riverine transport. The most successful sites, notably Prague, Kraków, Wrocław, and Esztergom, had all these features present. The chosen sites were often at the meeting point of diverse landscapes, in a ‘gateway-position’, where a river leaves the mountains (for instance, at Olomouc, Oradea, and Zagreb). As human geographers have pointed out long ago, different landscapes produced different commodities, shaping the contact zones of these landscapes as ‘market lines’. At the same time, selecting already well-known and frequented sites was ideal for the forceful introduction of ideological innovations such as Christianity for the newly baptized lands of East Central Europe around the turn of the first millennium ce (Berend 2007). While most of the points summarized above applied to all three main polities, there are also major differences following from their disparate histories. As the frequent occurrence of imported objects (precious stones, iron or silver ingots, jewellery, and weapons) and coins testify (Adamczyk 2014), the tribes living in the territory of Bohemia and Poland had already developed consolidated long-distance and regional trade networks before the advent of Christianity. These networks were centred on and reinforced by well-equipped strongholds, so the question was rather which of these strongholds to choose as a diocesan see instead of developing new sites. The choice was closely tied to the expansion or division between the branches of the ruling Piast and Přemyslid dynasties (Berend and others 2013, 111–37). Conversely, in Hungary, the major population movements leading to the settling of the Hungarian tribes in the Carpathian Basin disrupted and rearranged the previously existing trading networks that had been controlled by the Avars and subsequently the Carolingian and first Bulgarian empires (Szőke 2021). Combined with the obstacle that the range of the Carpathians presented by diverting the major east–west trade routes northwards and pushing the north–south axis of the Amber Route to its western edge, this disruption necessitated the creation of new centres for the consolidation of the dynastic rule of the Árpáds as well as promoting internal and later long-distance trade (Mesterházy1993; Romhányi 2017). All in all, the settling features that prompted the location of cathedrals, chapters, and bishops’ seats were

equally conducive to the potential of these places as trading sites.

Commercial and Economic Aspects: Demand and Supply Cathedral cities were specific centres of consumption, fulfilling the criteria of a consumer city (Glaeser and others 2001; Igel 2018) in their own time. They were characterized by a combination of quotidian demand resulting from the population concentration that needed to be provisioned with subsistence commodities and services, as well as specialized demand conditioned by its high-status inhabitants. A specific segment of conspicuous consumption can be encountered by visiting a cathedral treasury, consisting primarily of items belonging to the performance of liturgy; this was, however, just the tip of the iceberg. Consumption was backed up by above-average purchasing power arising from the revenues of entire dioceses, well beyond the boundaries of the cathedral city. These incomes were concentrated at the outset, in the eleventh–twelfth centuries, in episcopal hands. This was the period of the vita communis of the bishop and his chapter (Koszta 1999; cf. Barrow 2018 on Western Europe) that lasted longer in East Central Europe than further west, also preceding the formation of separate archdeaconries and their independent financial administration in the late twelfth century (Koszta 2007; Hledíková 2011; Romhányi 2018, 310). From the thirteenth century onwards, cathedral chapters took a more active and independent part in managing the diocesan revenues. With the canons and prebendary priests building their own curias and setting up separate households, the demand for prestigious commodities multiplied. A further important factor in the thirteenth century was the increasing monetary demands of the papacy put in effect on the ground by papal collectors who used the bishops’ seats as their bases. As Roman Zaoral has shown, ‘the concentration of papal collections at the court of Bruno of Schauenburg, Bishop of Olomouc in the 1260s stimulated long-distance trade’ (Zaoral 2015). This is a factor that needs to be followed up for other dioceses as well. The regal or ducal revenues flowed to many of the cathedral cities as seats of secular power. For instance, in Árpád-age Hungary, all royal taxes and the coins that had to be collected yearly and re-minted were due to be transported to Esztergom where the only mint of the realm was operating (Weisz 2018). Archaeological evidence for the centralized collection of in-kind revenues has been identified in the form of storage space connected to the wooden structure of the rampart surrounding the central hilltop in Győr (Tomka 1976)

6.   fai r relations

and in Olomouc in the form of large storage pits in the area where the early ducal palace may have stood (Šlézár 2015). Such areas were, however, the most likely to be upgraded and are therefore difficult to locate. Bishops’ seats also fostered the marketing of a range of products. A significant part of the Church revenues up to the thirteenth century was collected in kind in the form of tithes, i.e. one-tenth of the products, be they grain, wine, sheep, or beehives. Some of these revenues were used for the upkeep of the local estates, as well as sustaining priests and maintaining church buildings, but much of it had to be put into circulation, since perishable goods could not be hoarded, and the surplus livestock, in its turn, would have needed fodder and sheds (Dodds 2005, 125). The practice of tithe farming, i.e. selling the expected produce before collection and thus commuting it to cash payment, developed only from the late thirteenth century (Romhányi 2018, 313–14). Another key product distributed with the help of bishoprics and monasteries was salt, where the bishops’ seats provided strategic infrastructure for putting royal monopoly into practice (Romhányi 2016, 270, 295–97). In Poland, salt markets were set up for trading in this commodity not only in Wrocław as a major commercial hub, but also in Gniezno. The fame of early markets reached far: the Arab geographer Idrisi wrote about Bač in his compendium in 1154, noting for instance, that ‘here there are markets, fairs, craftsmen and Greek scholars. […] Wheat is very cheap here because they have it in great abundance’ (Elter 1985, 59). The presence of craftsmen, especially those engaged in various branches of metallurgy, from blacksmiths to goldsmiths, is confirmed by the archaeological as well as documentary evidence for the majority of sites (Kóčka-Krenz 2005, 88; Mordovin 2016, 167). The economy of cathedral cities can only be understood in conjunction with other markets, but their prominence concerning demand and, to some extent, also supply should be apparent. To them came a range of goods that were neither locally produced nor consumed but were mediated and redistributed in their markets.

Marketplaces: Physical and Legal Infrastructure Market Rights and Topography in the Early Period (Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries)

Holding markets was both an opportunity and a responsibility: securing a safe place, peace, and honest dealings were the duty of the owner of the marketplace, who was also entitled to collect tolls. Establishing markets in all Central European polities was a seigniorial prerogative:

ultimately the king or duke held responsibility for the peace of the market, and it was his decision as to whom from among the clerical or secular landowners he entrusted with this task on the ground. Much of this followed customary oral arrangements (Weisz 2020, 7–8). It is only from Hungary that early references in the laws of the realm from the eleventh and early twelfth centuries have come down to us; these, however, only deal with markets in general. The laws of St Ladislas (1077–1095) strictly prescribe that no one shall buy or sell except in the market. […] But if the deal was made in the market, an agreement shall be concluded in front of a judge, a toll-gatherer, and witnesses, and if the purchased goods later appear to be stolen, the buyer shall escape penalty on the testimony of the judge and the toll-gatherer; the witnesses, however, shall produce the seller (DRMH I, Ladislas I, Book ii, 7). The strictness of the law intended to prevent the circulation of stolen goods, especially livestock and horses that were considered strategic commodities, crucial for securing the efficient defence of the realm. The quoted passage also refers to several actors, or in other words, the ‘human infrastructure’ of the trade: the judge, the toll-gatherer, and witnesses. The bishops’ seats had a considerable advantage in this respect: the spiritual authority of the church was easy to invoke when the fairness of trade was at stake and oaths had to be performed. The most crucial physical infrastructures for markets were the marketplaces themselves. When analysing their placement and relation to other key features of the terrain and the built environment, I follow the approach of two strands of empirical urban theory, space syntax and urban morphology (Smith 2011, 176–77). The former enquires about the relationship between buildings, movements, and social relations, and particularly ‘the importance of movement within built environments and the significance of access (restricted vs. open) for social interaction’ (Smith 2011, 176). The latter is a historical study of urban form that seeks to describe settlement development over time by identifying smaller coherent units of the town plan and arranging them in a chronological sequence and integrating this hypothesis with other historical and archaeological evidence (Lilley 2000). Both approaches provide useful inspiration, although the lack of clearly defined street patterns, particularly for the early period of cathedral cities, sets limits to their comprehensive application. In the settlements surrounding the bishops’ seats included here, no written evidence describes the exact location of the early marketplaces, which have thus to

101

102 k ata l in s ze n d e

Figure 6.2. Hilltop cathedrals with marketplaces at the foothill, eleventh and twelfth centuries, a) Eger, b) Nitra, c) Veszprém, d) Kraków-Okól, e) Prague: Malá Strana, f) Płock.

6.   fai r relations 103

be identified based on the archaeological evidence and topographical conjectures assisted by the digital terrain models of each site. One must look for a sufficiently broad and flat open space away from the danger of flooding, a place that allowed for the regular gathering of persons and their vehicles, and for the safe exposure of their products. To establish the inner settlement dynamics, the identified or conjectured sites will be examined in their relation to watercourses and elevation; to the reconstructed regional road network; to the cathedral and the bishop’s seat and (if applicable) the ducal or princely stronghold; and to other key built features of the settlement or agglomeration. Based on the survey of the early marketplaces, the following patterns can be identified: When the cathedral was built on a hilltop site with a limited area, the marketplace was at the bottom of the hill, where the terrain already flattens out to offer sufficient space and good accessibility for the market. This is the case in Eger, Nitra, Veszprém, Esztergom, Prague, Kraków, and Płock (Fig. 6.2, a–f). There was usually a minor river or brook collecting the surface waters at the foothill, in the latter four cases combined with a major river. The crossing of this minor watercourse was a secondary factor in determining the location of the marketplace in Eger, Nitra, and later the second marketplace in Veszprém. By default, the marketplace had to be easily accessible, close to the main thoroughfares of long-distance trade, but usually slightly off the main road or by a branch road instead of being in the main course of traffic. In Kraków, a road ‘in part coincident with the present-day Kanonicza, connected the north entrance into the settlement with the stronghold on Wawel Hill and the ferry across the Vistula’ (Niewalda and Rójkowska 2007, 67). Nitra is the only place where the market was directly by the main thoroughfare, where the terrain offers little alternative. The marketplaces in this group were clearly outside the fortified area, which contained beside the cathedral also a ducal or royal palace (in Veszprém the palace belonged to the queen and in Eger there was only a royal mansion). The market could be easily reached from the stronghold albeit not directly, since the height difference had to be surmounted and the main entrance of the stronghold did not point exactly towards the market, prioritizing defensive considerations. The marketplaces were integrated into a suburban settlement with its own church or churches, which, however, did not stand directly on the marketplace but at a distance from it. The only exception is Esztergom where there was a fair distance between the cathedral hill and the commercial centre of the settlement, and the churches were directly by the market. Over time, however, the marketplace could attract the building of churches or chapels, like Mary Magdalen’s in Kraków’s Okół

suburb, the Virgin Mary collegiate chapter in Płock, or St Nicholas’s in the suburbium of Prague castle (later Malá Strana); Our Lady before Tyn in Prague’s Old Town also fits in this pattern but developed independently from the cathedral. In several other cases, such as Cenad, Győr, Oradea, Pécs, and Vác, the cathedral was on a slight elevation, usually by a riverbank (except for Pécs), surrounded by a rampart (Fig. 6.3, a–e). Here the early marketplace was situated in the continuation of the slope as it blends into the surrounding flat land. Trading took place right in front of the entrance to the stronghold, which besides the ecclesiastic building only housed the residences of ispáns (royal officials in charge of the administration of a county) or no secular seat at all. These marketplaces were also close to suburbs but less integrated into them, rather on the edge between two elements of a settlement cluster. Accordingly, no churches can be found in or near any of these places. A special case is Olomouc where the fortified princely seat-cum-cathedral complex occupied a hilltop that was divided by a narrowing in the middle, with a suburban part on the western side of the plateau. The early marketplace was in the middle of this suburban agglomeration, by a road leading to the entrance of the stronghold, combining the features of the above-described two arrangements (Fig. 6.3f). Yet another case is when the cathedral and the princely residence were erected on a fortified island of a river or a lake, as in Gniezno, Poznań, and Wrocław. Here the market was separated from the stronghold not only by the defensive structures but also by branches of water. In Gniezno an early trade site was formed on the neighbouring hilltop next to the early princely and cult site already prior to the Christianization period, fostered both by the existence of a high-status power centre and the crossing (first by ferry and then by a wooden bridge) to the western side of the lake and allowing the routes to connect to major trans-European routes to the west and northwest ( Janiak and Kaczmarek 2018, 116) (Fig. 6.4a). In Poznań and Wrocław the situation was more complex, with marketplaces arising on both riverbanks: Śródka and the settlement around St Gothard’s opposite Poznań’s cathedral island; and the marketplace at Ołbin on the right and another one on the left bank of the Odera at Wrocław, respectively. Ownership and control over the market and its revenues became an issue in both cases: Ołbin was on the estates of the aristocratic Włostowic kindred, while the Śródka market of Poznań grew up on ducal ground (Piekalski 2014, 32–38). The greater physical distance and the separation from the cathedral and the episcopal headquarters justified the building of churches that developed into separate parishes in the settlements surrounding each of these places from the early twelfth century (Fig. 6.4, b–c).

104 k ata l in s ze n d e

Figure 6.3. Cathedral cities with marketplaces on the adjoining slope, eleventh and twelfth centuries, a) Cenad (conjectured), b) Győr, c) Oradea, d) Pécs, e) Vác, f) Olomouc.

6.   fai r relations 105

Figure 6.4. Cathedrals on an island with marketplaces across the water, eleventh and twelfth centuries, a) Gniezno, b) Poznań, c) Wrocław, d) Prague: marketplaces on both sides of the river, twelfth century.

106 k ata l in s ze n d e

Figure 6.5. Cathedral cities with marketplaces outside the fortified area, eleventh and twelfth centuries, a) Kalocsa (conjectured), b) Bács (conjectured), c) Włocławek, d) Zagreb, e) Alba Iulia.

6.   fai r relations 107

In Wrocław a small marketplace used from the late eleventh to the end of the twelfth centuries was identified on the basis of archaeological finds on the Cathedral Island (Ostrow Tumski) as well. According to the distribution of finds such as coins, jewels, parts of scales, lead and iron weights, and pieces of lead, commercial activity was going on both on an open square as well as in buildings surrounding it. The square was relatively small, only 63 m2, located in the eastern half of the stronghold, just north-west of the cathedral, and served besides purposes of commercial activities also as a public thoroughfare. Compared to the ducal stronghold on the northwestern tip of the island, it may be considered a ‘suburban’ site (Kaźmierczyk and others 1976, 189–91; Pankiewicz 2019, 146–51). The finds and the limited area indicate that this space was used for the exchange of valuable goods, while the marketplaces across the riverbanks were better suited for trade in bulky commodities. Although with a different position of the bishop’s seat, Prague was also an example of marketplaces set up on both sides of a riverbank, in this case, the Vltava (Fig. 6.4d). Before the regulation of the Danube, Kalocsa was also on an island, surrounded by two branches of the river, but this island was much more extensive and thus did not separate the marketplace from the cathedral. Finally, there was a group of (arch)bishops’ seats, namely, Kalocsa, Bács, and Włocławek, where the cathedral was built outside the fortified part of the settlement; in the latter two cases, the cathedral was clearly a secondary foundation compared to the fort, in the 1080s and in 1148, respectively. Here the marketplace, as far as it can be conjectured, shared the suburban space with the cathedral and both could be approached by the same roads (Fig. 6.5, a–c). In Zagreb, also a relatively late foundation (c. 1091), markets were probably held from the outset in front of the cathedral, although presumably with St Emeric’s parish church in between. Both churches as well as the bishop’ palace and, until 1287, the seat of the ban of Slavonia (the region between the Drava and Sava rivers), stood on the same plateau along a secondary road leading from the main route running parallel to the Medveščak Stream into the hilly hinterland (Dobronić 1991) (Fig. 6.5d). A similar close coexistence arose in Alba Iulia against a different background: here the southwestern corner of a former Roman legionary camp was reused for housing the county seat, the cathedral, and the bishop’s seat alike, and the marketplace was northeast of the cathedral by the main east–west thoroughfare across the camp. However, when in the later Middle Ages the cathedral precinct was walled off from the rest of the city, the market remained outside this area, reproducing the situation typical elsewhere (Marcu Istrate 2010, 22–27) (Fig. 6.5e).

It appears that the common feature of most early marketplaces was that they were, apart from the few irregular examples discussed above, physically separated from the cathedral precinct, situated between the cathedral and the settlement agglomeration, playing a mediatory role. This role was, however, conditioned by them being in a castle–suburbium relationship with the stronghold and the cathedral. Since the development of the suburbium is always determined by the needs of the castle, it was the needs of the bishopric and the secular authority, if applicable, that defined the existence of the marketplace. The physical relationship differed significantly depending on the location of the cathedral vis-à-vis the market and the suburbs, but the role of trade as an interface between religious and profane uses of space was always a decisive factor. The possibility for movement and communication between the two spheres was open, but in most cases, it required crossing a threshold and gaining admission. The cathedral and its clergy were prime stakeholders in each of the cases surveyed above, just as the cathedral must have visually dominated the cityscape and the view from the marketplace. Besides revenue collection and control, trading on the ‘bishop’s threshold’ also meant protection and opportunity for urban growth. Market Rights and Topography in the Period of Diversification (Thirteenth Century)

The thirteenth century brought along fundamental social and spatial transformations in East Central Europe: cathedral cities included (Berend and others 2013, 408–91). The number of actors with competing interests in benefitting from the markets and their revenues steadily increased: besides the bishops, the cathedral chapters emancipated from the vita communis as independent legal entities from the early thirteenth century, who claimed a share in the incomes of the diocese, among others those arising from tithes and trade (Koszta 2007; Pátrová 2011). This led to frequent conflicts between the canons and the bishops, and both of them with the communities of merchants and the emerging civic authorities. Chapters did not even refrain from preparing forgeries to support their claims: for instance, the Esztergom chapter forged around 1288 a deed ascribed to King Andrew II in 1217, donating, besides other revenues, the full market toll of Esztergom to the community of canons (EFHU III/2, 24–25). As the shrewd canons were fully aware, from the thirteenth century, grants for holding weekly or yearly markets needed to be issued in writing instead of the old customary arrangements. Royal deeds governed ‘fair relations’ in many ways. Besides granting the right to hold weekly markets and annual fairs and pledging or farming out market-related revenues, sovereigns

108 k ata l in s ze n d e

also started issuing charters of privilege for creating new settlements or reconfiguring existing ones to attract more manpower to their lands, including their share in cathedral cities. These settling charters or Lokationsurkunden — the name deriving from locatio, the technical term for transforming legal conditions by settlement — included, among other stipulations, the right to hold a ‘free market’. In Poznań, for instance, the ducal charter stated: In that city we found an annual fair on the ground owned by ourselves in our liberty, stating that nobody should be held back from that market. We also confer on the advocate [Vogt, settling agent] as free possession two chambers in the building that we shall have built for the merchants, and from which, apart from the two said chambers, we and our successor wish to receive usufruct. (KDW I, no. 321; Jurek 2011, 223) The introduction of new stakeholders, the settling agents, and new forms of trading infrastructure, the market halls, were accompanied by limiting the rights of the bishop over trade. In exchange for land owned in the territory of the new civitas, ‘in 1288, the Poznań bishops received Śródka from Prince Przemysł II. The duke allowed craftsmen to settle in Śródka and practice their professions, as well as petty trade, but he did not allow fairs and markets to take place and forbade the inhabitants to trade in cut cloth’ (Dembiński 2017, 310). The process played out somewhat differently on the ground in each place, but the main pattern of the reinforcement of ducal/royal and municipal agency was common for cathedral cities in Poland, Silesia, and the Czech Lands. In Hungary, on the contrary, charters granting autonomy and economic privileges to the royally owned parts of bishops’ cities, which would have corresponded to the above-mentioned Lokationsurkunden, were very few and far between. Instead, by the end of the fourteenth century, the (arch) bishops and cathedral chapters became overlords of practically all cathedral cities apart from the royal town of Gradec in Zagreb, and exercised control over settling and markets as overlords. This short summary of the changing legal conditions of market foundations raises the question of if and how the spatial arrangements followed the new emphasis on legally regulated trade. This time my primary consideration behind identifying patterns is not the physical geography of the marketplaces, but the level of change to be observed in their shape, location within the settlement, and relationship to the cathedral complex and the other churches in the city. In a few cases no major change can be observed; the early marketplace continued to function, presumably in

the same place and form. In Bač, Cenad, and Kalocsa, all on the Hungarian plain (Fig. 6.5, a–b), we have so little evidence that this statement is rather based on argumentum ex silentio. In Nitra (Fig. 6.2b) the swamps surrounding the city did not allow for any major growth. In a couple of Polish cathedral cities, Płock (Fig. 6.2f) and Gniezno (Fig. 6.4a), the marketplace remained on the same location in the thirteenth century as before, but its shape became more regular, usually rectangular, surrounded by four streets divided into plots. These sites preserved their suburban relationship to the cathedral, but also became connected to newly established parish churches in the suburb, further away from these old markets. Yet this stability only represented an intermediary stage before further steps in the following period. It was far more usual overall that in the course of the thirteenth century new marketplaces were marked out in course of the extension of the built-up area on the initiative of the city’s overlord. The involvement of bishops in this process is attested primarily from Hungary, starting with the archbishop of Esztergom who obtained a royal grant in 1239 to establish a civitas, including weekly and daily markets. The deed clearly marks out the spatial proximity of the archbishop and his new civitas with the phrase ‘under the castle of Esztergom and the archbishop’s palace’ (EFHU III/2, 32–34), although the terrain made the approach road more indirect. In other instances, such as in Vác, Alba Iulia, and Pécs, the bishops apparently relied on their own authority when establishing a new settlement, complete with market and parish church, in their territories, but at a distance from their headquarters (Fig. 6.6, a–c). In Alba Iulia an already existing suburb was upgraded, with its market in a road-crossing(Gálfi 2018), while in Pécs the new market was established at the meeting point of several early settlement nuclei. In Oradea, a second marketplace developed in Olaszi or Villa Latinorum, a village on the bishop’s estate on the right bank of the Criș, populated by Romance-speaking settlers already before 1215 (Fig. 6.6d). In Vác, a new civitas Theutonicalis was established in the 1280s with a triangular marketplace, a shape relatively rare in the Hungarian context, but with parallels in Upper- and Lower Austria and in Moravia from where the new settlers may have originated (Kubinyi 1983, 63–64) (Fig. 6.6e). In all these new episcopal foundations, parish churches played a prominent role in shaping the space, being in the open area of the marketplace, with an adjoining cemetery besides, or if the space was more limited, on one side of the square. A few times the intention of the cathedral chapter to become emancipated financially was expressed by not only gaining separate market rights, but also designating a new marketplace for it. This happened at Veszprém

6.   fai r relations 109

Figure 6.6. Cathedral cities in Hungary with new marketplaces developed on the initiative of the bishop or the cathedral chapter, thirteenth century (red ring: old marketplace, blue ring: new marketplace), a) Vác, b) Alba Iulia, c) Pécs, d) Oradea, e) Veszprém, f) Győr.

110

k ata l in s ze n d e

Figure 6.7. Cathedral cities with new marketplaces developed on the initiative of the secular overlord in new settlement units, thirteenth century, a) Zagreb, b) Wrocław, c) Poznań, d) Kraków, e) Olomouc.

6.   fai r relations

where a second marketplace called ‘Beszédkő’ (‘stone of speech’) was marked out at the crossing of the Séd River at the other, steeper end of the castle hill compared to the first one (Solymosi 2000) (Fig. 6.6f). In Oradea, besides the city (civitas), the village of Vadkert or St Lawrence was also owned by the chapter and had its own marketplace and weekly market. Finally, the chapter was one of the stakeholders in the complex system of markets and marketplaces at Győr as well, described in the royal charter of privilege in 1271 (EFHU III/2, 61–63), the new main marketplace being laid out in the middle of its former suburb (Fig. 6.6f). By far the most frequent and largest-scale transformations emerged because of royal or ducal interventions that established new settlements with marketplaces apart from the cathedral and its suburbium, and empowered their inhabitants, and not the bishop or the chapter, with the control over the market. The founding charters of these places were expressions of seigniorial development policy that built on the potentials of the cathedral cities, but at the same time, sowed the seeds of tension between the ecclesiastical and secular stakeholders. This was the case in Zagreb (the only Hungarian example of this type), where King Béla IV founded the royal town of Gradec on a higher hilltop opposite the cathedral and gave it market rights and a decade later the right to hold an annual fair (Fig. 6.7a). The three most prominent examples of this type were Wrocław, Poznań, and Kraków, chartered under Magdeburg law in close sequence in 1242, 1253, and 1257, respectively (Fig. 6.7, b–d). The first two were very similar in terms of how one of the riverbank trading settlements — both in Wrocław and in Poznań, the left bank (in the latter: St Gothard) — was embraced and marked out for chartering and planned redevelopment (Piekalski 2014, 54–63). These sites were the most favourably networked in the regional and long-distance road matrix. In Kraków the old trading suburb of Okół was complemented by a new marketplace (Rynek) laid out as the central square of the newly chartered town, in an area that had been sparsely settled after the closure of a previous burial ground for the inhabitants of the northern periphery of Okół (Buśko and Komorowski 2007; Piekalski 2014, 63–71). The most apparent similarity between the members of this group is that unlike the early bishops’ seats or the thirteenth-century ground plans of the other cathedral cities, they all follow the grid plan. This was a master plan widely used in East Central Europe in this period for both revamping old centres, such as the cities discussed here, or for green-field development of new foundations. The focus of the grid and the starting point for the planning was exactly the marketplace, as has been shown particularly for Wrocław and Kraków (Piekalski 2014, 54–67). This plan focused the attention

on trade and communal life and, almost by definition, excluded the cathedral and left it in a different realm altogether. Consequently, the small marketplace in Wrocław’s Ostrów Tumski also ceased to function from the thirteenth century (Pankiewicz 2019, 151). The new arrangement allowed for the creation of a more commercially oriented marketplace, where over time semi-permanent and permanent infrastructural developments — market halls, cloth halls, town halls, and scales — complemented the open-air facilities. The two bishoprics of the Kingdom of Bohemia followed a mixture of the above-described models. In Olomouc, the smaller of the two, the location of the marketplace was modified from one of the approach roads leading to the castle gate to two other spaces at the meeting points of the elements of the early agglomeration (Fig. 6.7e). In Prague, which developed into a city in a class of its own in Central Europe, the number and functional differentiation of marketplaces was just as varied as in the major cities of the Holy Roman Empire: each of the autonomous parts of Malá Strana (the former suburb below the Castle Hill), Hradčany (the settlement in continuation of the Castle Hill plateau), and the Old Town on the right bank had their own marketplaces and butchers’ stalls. The former two were inhabited, besides merchants and the court nobility, by a high number of prebendary priests and canons. Conversely, the right-bank Old Town was independent of the bishop’s control and attracted colonies of professional traders, Germans and Jews being the most prominent. The former found lodging in the royally controlled and physical separated Tyn Court by the main marketplace, with the Our Lady before Tyn as their parish (cf. Fig. 6.4d). Foreign merchants had to stay in that court under the control of the king’s officer and have their goods weighed and taxed there; thus, the term for the tax (Ungelt) was used for the court as well (Klápště 2016, 110–12). Between the Judith Bridge and the Old Town marketplace, a series of specialized small markets for fruit, vegetables, and poultry were formed. When the Old Town was surrounded by walls in the 1220–30s, it already included a regularly planned extension, the St Gall-quarter (Havelská), with a large oblong New Market plus poultry and fruit markets. This massive civic overweight dwarfed the bishop’s impact on the control of trade, although revenues from the Tyn court were disputed between the Prague cathedral chapter and the Vyšehrad chapter until the end of the fourteenth century. Seen together, the developments of the thirteenth century show a strong diversification, both regarding the number and significance of marketplaces within the cathedral cities, and the authority of the bishop and the chapter over them. A common trend in this period in all those cities where any change could be

111

112

k ata l in s ze n d e

observed was that the new marketplaces were laid out further away from the cathedral precinct than the previous ones were, with less direct access routes and visual contact, implying a diminishing or more indirect episcopal involvement with these sites. Canons’ rows and curias, a feature that there was no room to discuss in this paper, usually occupied an in-between position; their movement out of the immediate cathedral precinct increased the urbanized, but not the civic, parts of the cities. The new marketplaces were more directly attached to the main thoroughfares and commercial arteries, having a more central position within the town or settlement part in which they were situated than the older ones, but were as a rule further away from the rivers and brooks surrounding the cities.

Conclusions This paper has followed the genesis and development of markets and marketplaces in East Central European cathedral cities. Building on the broad assumption that people and their communities are reflected in their physical surroundings, I found that these places can indeed be used as proxies to understand the changing relations between ecclesiastic centres and the secular society coexisting with them. Flexible and versatile at the outset and populated in an ephemeral form, marketplaces were in a way an antithesis to the solid and everlasting stone architecture of the cathedrals. Together, as a synthesis, they had the potential to develop into prime urban centres and urbanize the countryside around them. This general statement should be nuanced in view of the circumstances on the ground. The East Central European type of strongholds with their initial role in fostering trade could be successfully blended with the concept of cathedral cities developed in the Christian West. The location of the marketplaces within this ensemble, even if it was largely determined by the physical geography of the site, reveals much about the interplay of religious and secular actors and their considerations. The stronghold gave an impetus to the development of markets by offering an extremely favourable location and a certain degree of protection. The high clergy and its institutions, in a heterarchical relationship with the secular elite, made a difference compared to the former tribal arrangements by increasing the demand for high-quality products, bringing new surplus commodities to the market, and securing authority and administration conductive to honest dealings. In the early period, approximately until the first decades of the thirteenth century, market activity

was more closely connected to in-kind collection and redistribution of products, much of which was concentrated in the hands of the overlords of the strongholds. In this period multiple forms of religious and judicial activities were also connected to the markets and marketplaces, which were tied in their access routes and location to the seats of power. This co-spatiality of commercial and ritual dealings imbued the marketplaces with multiple meanings and carried the potential of urban growth around them. Over time, with a set of decisive changes happening in the thirteenth century followed by more incremental growth in the next hundred years, marketplaces became part and parcel of a transition from a castle–suburbium relationship to a city–cathedral connection. Their location often changed and became more ‘urbanized’, turning in the functional sense from temporary stopovers of mobile traders to the homes of local merchants settled by conscious development policy. In the course of this professionalization, the marketplace was typically moved away from the cathedral. Already the initial separation of the cathedral on a hilltop or an island prefigured the disjunction of the most important commercial activities from its precinct. This trend was stronger in those cases where a new town was founded under a distinct legal scheme, another specificity of East Central European urbanization. Access patterns also changed, the marketplace becoming the central axis of movement as well as civic governance, while access to the cathedral and its precinct became indirect and usually walled off by modernized defensive structures. Due to differences in the legal system of town foundations, and in the ownership rights of the bishops and chapters as opposed to secular landowners, the social and topographic transformations were more manifest in the Bohemian and Polish realms, while most Hungarian bishops’ seats remained closer to the initial setup. In religious terms, in this later period the city parishes and friaries, and the forms of piety associated with them, determined the everyday practices of most inhabitants. Many of the early practices tied to the cathedrals, such as the judicial ordeals and the monopoly of the cathedral canons in written administration, became obsolete. However, cathedrals with their elegant buildings, precious relics, dynastic burials, representative gatherings, and festive processions retained their prominent image also for the city dwellers. The multitude of canons and prebendary priests with their curias enriching the urban fabric and their demands boosting the — more regulated and regularly shaped — markets made cathedral cities a distinct urban type also when civic governance became the real beacon of urbanity.

6.   fai r relations

Appendix: The Basic Data of the Cities Included in this Study (Archbishoprics in Bold) Name

Bishopric date Founder

Archdioc.

Prague

973 abp. 1344

Boleslav II

Mainz Prague

Olomouc Poznań

1063 968 / 1000

Vratislav II Mieszko I

Gniezno Krakow Wrocław

1000 1000 1000

Bolesław I Bolesław I Bolesław I

Płock Włocławek

1075/76 c. 1148

Veszprém Esztergom

b. 1009 1000

Bolesław II Bolesław IV Kędzierzawy Prince Géza Stephen I

Kalocsa Bács (Bač) Győr

c. 1009

Stephen I

Kalocsa

b. 1009

Stephen I

Esztergom

Pécs Eger Alba Iulia (Gyulafehérvár) Cenad (Csanád) Vác Oradea (Várad) Zágráb (Zagreb) Nyitra (Nitra)

1009 early 11th c. 1009?

Stephen I Stephen I. Stephen I

Esztergom Esztergom Kalocsa

1030 c. 1030 (?) c. 1090 c. 1091 (1095–1116)

Stephen I Stephen I (?) Ladislas I Ladislas I Coloman

Kalocsa Esztergom Kalocsa Esztergom Esztergom

Town charter

old town 1234 Malá Strana 1257 new town 1346 Prague 1239–1246 Indep. > Magdeburg 1253 > Gniezno Gniezno 1235 (Panienski hill) Gniezno 1257 Gniezno 1220s; 1242 renewed 1261 Gniezno 1237, early 14th century Gniezno 1255, 1339 Esztergom Esztergom

--1239 archbishop 1243 Armenians --

Issuer Venceslas I Ottokar II Charles IV Ottokar I Przemysł I and Bolesław the Pious Władysław Odonic Bolesław the Chaste Henry the Bearded Konrad I. Kazimierz I of Kuyavia --Béla IV -

1271 1390s to chapter ----

Stephen V ----

---1242 1248 1288 back to bishop

---Béla IV Béla IV Ladislas IV

113

114

k ata l in s ze n d e

Works Cited Primary Sources DRMH I = Decreta Regni Medievalis Hungariae, trans. and ed. by János M. Bak, György Bónis, and James Ross Sweeney, vol. 1 (1000–1301), 2nd edn (Idyllwild: C. Schlacks, 1999) EFHU III/2 = Elenchus Fontium Historiae Urbanae, ed. by András Kubinyi, vol. 3.2 (Budapest: Balassi, 1997) KDW = Kodeks dyplomatyczny Wielkopolski, ed. by Antoni Gąsiorowski and Tomasz Jasiński, vols 1–11 (Poznań: Państwowe Wydawn. Nauk., 1877–1999) Secondary Studies Adamczyk, Dariusz. 2014. Silber und Macht: Fernhandel, Tribute und die piastische Herrschaftsbildung in nordosteuropäischer Perspektive (800–1100), Quellen und Studien. Deutsches Historisches Institut Warschau, 28 (Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz) Barrow, Julia. 2018. ‘Vita Communis or Separate Houses? Where did Canons Live in the 10th and 11th Centuries?’, in Klöster und ihre Ressourcen: Räume und Reformen monastischer Gemeinschaften im Mittelalter, ed. by Marco Krätschmer, Katja Thode, and Christina Vossler-Wolf (Tübingen: Eberhard Karls Universität), pp. 89–98 Berend, Nora (ed.). 2007. Christianization and the Rise of Christian Monarchy. Scandinavia, Central Europe, Rus’ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Berend, Nora, Przemysław Urbańczyk, and Przemysław Wiszewski (eds). 2013. Central Europe in the High Middle Ages: Bohemia, Hungary and Poland c. 900 – c. 1300 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Buśko, Cezary, and Waldemar Komorowski. 2007. ‘The Market Square’, in Kraków. Historical Atlas of Polish towns, ed. by Zdzisław Noga, vol. 5 Małopolska / Lesser Poland, fascicle 1 (Kraków: Towarzystwo Miłośników Historii) Crumley, Carole L. 2015. ‘Heterarchy’, in Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, ed. by Robert A. Scott, Stephen Michael Kosslyn, and Marlis Buchmann (Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons), pp. 1–14, Wiley Online Library [accessed 9 October 2023] Dembiński, Paweł. 2017. ‘Poznański zespół osadniczy’, in Atlas Historiczny Polski. Wielkopolska w drugiej połowie XVI wieku. Część II. Komentarz, ed. by Krzysztof Chłapowski and Marek Słoń (Warsaw: Polskiej Akademii Nauk, Instytut Historii), pp. 292–311 Dobronić, Lelja. 1991. Biskupski i kaptolski Zagreb (Zagreb: Skolska knjiga) Dodds, Ben. 2005. ‘Managing Tithes in the Late Middle Ages’, The Agricultural History Review, 53.2: 125–40 Elter, István. 1985. ‘Magyarország Idrisi földrajzi művében’, Acta Universitatis Szegediensis: Acta Historica, 82: 53–63 Gálfi, Emőke. 2018. 'Gyulafehérvár falakon kívüli főtere’, Történelmi Szemle, 60: 3–16 Glaeser, Edward, Jed Kolko, and Albert Saiz. 2001. ‘Consumer City’, Journal of Economic Geography, 1: 27–50 Hledíková, Zdeňka. 2011. ‘Několik úvah o kapitulách v českém středověkém státě’, in Die Kapitel in den Ländern der böhmischen Krone und in Ungarn im Mittelalter, ed. by Jan Hrdina and Martina Maříková, Documenta Pragensia Supplementum, 2 (Prague: Archiv hlavního města Prahy: Scriptorium), pp. 9–44 Igel, Karsten. 2018. ‘Die Kirche auf dem Markt. Geistliche Institutionen als Konsumenten in mittelalterlichen Städten’, in Die Konsumentenstadt: Konsumenten in der Stadt des Mittelalters, ed. by Stephan Selzer, Städteforschung, 98 (Cologne: Böhlau), pp. 155–78 Janiak, Tomasz, and Łukasz Kaczmarek. 2018. ‘Osadnictwo wczesnośredniowieczne na terenie Gniezna i w jego regionie’, in Gniezno – wczesnosredniowieczny zespól grodowy, ed. by Tomasz Sawicki and Magdalena Bis (Warsaw: Instytut Archeologii i Etnologii PAN), pp. 105–18 Jurek, Tomasz. 2011. ‘Der Posener Lokationsprozess’, in Rechtsstadtgründungen im Mittelalterlichen Polen, ed. by Eduard Mühle, Städteforschung A/81 (Cologne: Böhlau), pp. 223–44 Kaźmierczyk, Józef, Janusz Kramarek, and Czesław Lasota. 1976. ‘Badania na Ostrowie Tumskim we Wrocławiu w 1974 roku’, Silesia Antiqua, 18: 177–225 Klápště, Ján. 2016. The Archaeology of Prague and the Medieval Czech Lands, 1100–1600 (Bristol: Equinox) Kóčka-Krenz, Hanna. 2005. ‘Rezydencja pierwszych piastowskich władców na poznańskim grodzie’, Nauka, 2005.2: 83–92 Koszta, László. 1999. ‘Die Domkapitel und ihre Domherren bis Anfang des 12. Jahrhunderts in Ungarn’, in “The Man of Many Devices who Wandered Full Many Ways”. Festschrift in Honor of János M. Bak, ed. by Balázs Nagy and Marcell Sebők (Budapest: CEU Press), pp. 478–91 —— 2007. ‘Conclusions Drawn from the Prosopographic Analysis of the Canons Belonging to the Cathedral Chapters of Medieval Hungary’, in Carreiras Eclesiásticas no Ocidente Cristão (séculos XII–XIV), ed. by Ana Maria Jorge, Herminia Vilar, and Maria João Branco (Lisbon: CEHR-UCP), pp. 13–28

6.   fai r relations

Kubinyi, András. 1983. 'A középkori Vác 1526-ig', in Vác története I, ed. by Vilmos Sápi, Studia Comitatensia 13 (Szentendre: Pest megyei Múzeumok Igazgatósága), pp. 49–76 Lévy, Jacques. 2018. ‘Introduction – Des espaces du droit’, Revue Géographique de l’Est, 58.1–2: 1–10 [accessed: 09 October 2023] Lilley, Keith D. 2000. ‘Mapping the Medieval City: Plan Analysis and Urban History’, Urban History, 27: 5–30 Marcu Istrate, Daniela. 2010. Thousand Years of the Diocese of Transylvania. The Archaeological Investigations of the St Michael Cathedral and of the Archepiscopal Palace of Alba Iulia (Budapest: Teleki László Alapítvány) Mesterházy, Károly. 1993. ‘Régészeti adatok Magyarország 10–11. századi kereskedelméhez’, Századok, 127: 450–68 Mordovin, Maxim. 2016. A várszervezet kialakulása a középkori Magyarországon, Csehországban és Lengyelországban a 10–12. században (Budapest: Archaeolingua, PPKE BTK Régészeti Tanszék) Niewalda, Waldemar, and Halina Rójkowska. 2007. ‘The Urban Layouts of Okół to the Mid-14th Century’, in Kraków. Historical Atlas of Polish towns, V: Małopolska / Lesser Poland, ed. by Zdzisław Noga, fascicle 1 (Kraków: Towarzystwo Miłośników Historii), pp. 67–69 Pankiewicz, Aleksandra. 2019. ‘An Attempt to Identify Places Associated with Trade and Exchange in Early Medieval Strongholds in the Example of Ostrów Tumski in Wrocław’, in Přehled výzkumů, 60.2 (Brno: Archeologický ústav Akademie věd České republiky v Brně), pp. 146–60 Pátrová, Karin. 2011. ‘Od servicií k denním podílům. Vývoj podělování kanovníků v českých středověkých kolegiátních kapitulách’, in Die Kapitel in den Ländern der böhmischen Krone und in Ungarn im Mittelalter, ed. by Jan Hrdina and Martina Maříková, Documenta Pragensia Supplementum, 2 (Prague: Archiv hlavního města Prahy: Scriptorium), pp. 75–100 Piekalski, Jerzy. 2014. Prague, Wrocław and Kraków: Public and Private Space at the Time of the Medieval Transition, Wratislavia Antiqua, 19 (Wrocław: University of Wrocław) Romhányi, Beatrix F. 2016. ‘A beregi egyezmény és a magyarországi sókereskedelem az Árpád-korban’, Magyar Gazdaságtörténeti Évkönyv, 1: 265–302 —— 2017. ‘Changes of the Spatial Organisation of the Carpathian Basin (5th–14th Century)’, Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters, 45: 1–32 —— 2018. ‘The Ecclesiastic Economy in Medieval Hungary’, in The Economy of Medieval Hungary, ed. by József Laszlovszky, Balázs Nagy, Péter Szabó, and András Vadas (Leiden: Brill), pp. 309–34 Šlézár, Pavel. 2015. ‘Olomouc’, in Great Moravia and the Beginnings of Christianity, ed. by Pavel Kouřil (Brno: The Institute of Archaeology of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic), pp. 214–21 Smith, Michael E. 2011. ‘Empirical Urban Theory for Archaeologists’, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 18: 167–92 Solymosi, László. 2000. 'Veszprém korai történetének néhány kérdése’, in Válaszúton. Pogányság – kereszténység, kelet – nyugat, ed. by László Kredics (Veszprém: MTA Veszprémi Területi Bizottsága), pp. 129–57 Szőke, Béla Miklós. 2021. Die Karolingerzeit in Pannonien (Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums) Tomka, Péter. 1976. ‘Erforschung der Gespanschaftsburgen im Komitat Győr-Sopron’, Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 28: 391–410 Wagner, Simone. 2020. Conference announcement ‘Co-spatiality: Changing Rules of Double Use, Excluding, Inviting, Imagining’, in H-Soz-Kult, 21 October 2020, , and conference repost by Simone Wagner, [accessed: 9 October 2023] Weisz, Boglárka. 2018. ‘Royal Revenues in the Árpádian Age’, in The Economy of Medieval Hungary, ed. by József Laszlovszky, Balázs Nagy, Péter Szabó, and András Vadas (Leiden: Brill), pp. 255–64 —— 2020. Markets and Staples in the Medieval Hungarian Kingdom (Budapest: Research Centre for the Humanities) Zaoral, Roman. 2015. ‘The Management of Papal Collections and Long-Distance Trade in the Thirteenth-Century Czech Lands’, Les Mélanges de l’École française de Rome – Moyen Âge, 127.2 [accessed: 9 October 2023]

115

Tibor Ákos Rácz and Ágnes Füredi

7. Pectorals and Amulets Data on the Spiritual Life of the Hungarian Rural Population in the Period of Christianization

A bs t r act  The foundation of the early state of Hungary around the year 1000 assumed the adoption of Christianity, a long and complex process itself. It is difficult to apprehend any aspect of the spiritual life of the rural population, as contemporary written sources relate mostly to the history of the elite and the ruling dynasty. Archaeology, however, has the means to research the material traces of the adoption and practice of the new religion. The emergence of the political and social systems of the Christian state can be understood only from a wide perspective, including the archaeological material of the tenth-century, presumably non-Christian, population. Research focusing on the development of Christianity is a fashionable topic these days; however, it has resulted primarily in theoretical foundations and overviews. The elaboration of details and the evaluation of regional archaeological material can bring us closer to the way of thinking of the masses. The present paper focuses on the central part of medieval Hungary, today’s Pest County, in the tenth to twelfth centuries, analysing new discoveries from field and churchyard cemeteries. The cognitive antecedents of the use of amulet-like objects in popular belief that are clearly identifiable in the post-eleventh-century period must be related to the concept of the ‘pagan’ ancestors, as the population was clearly continuous in the tenth to eleventh centuries. The spread of non-Christian amulets and Christian liturgical objects will be contextualized in the network of field cemeteries, as well as church sites.

T

K e y wo r ds  Christianization, spiritual life, pectoral and reliquary crosses, amulets

T

Tibor Ákos Rácz • ([email protected]) primarily researches the birth of the Hungarian village system in the high Middle Ages. He has dedicated several studies to analysing the effects of crucial political events (conquest of the Carpathian Basin, Hungarian state foundation, Mongol invasion) on contemporary life and material culture. He is an Associate Professor at the Pázmány Péter Catholic University in Budapest, an archaeologist of the Ferenczy Museum Centre and the head of the Community Archaeology Association. Ágnes Füredi • ([email protected]) is currently employed by the National Archaeological Institute of the Hungarian National Museum. Her primary field of research is the archaeology of the period of the Hungarian conquest (ninth through eleventh centuries) and the Eastern contacts of the early Hungarians. Her main publications reflect on tenth-century burials and material culture. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 117–127. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138111

118

ti bo r á ko s r ác z an d ág n e s fü r e d i

Introduction The adoption of the Christian faith started as a topdown process in medieval Hungary. It was the task and intention of the central power as the Church was its main support in establishing a Christian monarchy. The development of the church as an institution took place in several successive stages. It was a conscious and centrally controlled process adjusted to political boundaries with a unified structure and liturgy within the realm (Berend 2007). The Hungarian conquest of Transdanubia erased the Carolingian administration, and along with it the freshly established ninth-century churches and evangelization process. One century later, however, the official Christianization, this time by the newly converted Hungarian elite, began. King Stephen I (r. 1000–1038) carried out a consistent programme: according to his greater legend (1083) he founded ten bishoprics. Dioceses were established in parallel with the development of the county system and, thus, the secular administration. His laws illustrate extremely well the first steps taken by central power to introduce the practice and ethics of the new religion: mass on Sunday; payment of the tithe; regular fasting and confession; the obligation to keep oaths; the prohibition of levirate marriage, abduction of maidens, and recourse to witches and wizards. We are, however, uncertain about the will of the everyday people. Due to the continuity of the population, we must assume, at least to a certain degree, the survival of the beliefs and superstitions of the pagan ancestors even in the eleventh century. Pagan revolts of the eleventh century might be considered political acts (Vargha 2022, 104), but also testify to the controversy surrounding new religious concepts among the population and the difficulties of conversion. A note of the fourteenth-century Chronicon Pictum relating to the funeral of Duke Levente around 1046, after the suppression of the pagan rebellions of Vata, confirms the memory of the pagan way of life still practised at that time: ‘Levente died just in these days; if he had lived longer and gained power in the country, he would undoubtedly have corrupted all of Hungary with pagan idolatry; because Levente did not live in a Catholic way, he was buried across the Danube at the village of Taksony; they say that his ancestor, Taksony, is also buried there in a pagan way’ (SRH i, 344). Our written sources conceived in the Christian spirit branded the previous era as simply pagan, and its worldview is not conveyed but rather condemned as a negative precedent, so from this point of view, they are one-sided sources (Vargha 2022, 12). At the same time, the pagan faith had neither a written tradition nor a well-established institutional system. Even though there are reports on the baptism of several members of the elite, contemporary sources explicitly describe

ninth- and tenth-century Hungarians as pagans (Bollók 2012, 131–32). However, we have no exact knowledge of the nature of the ‘pagan’ beliefs of ancient Hungarians. Hints from written sources and ornamental elements of their material culture point to shamanistic concepts. What means do we have to trace religious growth? As archaeologists, first of all, we may consider material evidence. The most relevant proof of the spread of Christianity is the appearance of religious buildings. The spread of churches was far from being even, and it gradually became a network by the twelfth century. We cannot tell the exact number of early churches. Most of the eleventh- and twelfth-century buildings have long been destroyed, and while some of them are preserved in small details of still-standing buildings, most of them can only be identified by archaeological research. Starting from the reign of King Stephen I, building churches was the express purpose of the central power, aiming to lay the foundations of the parish network. His laws stated that every ten villages ought to build a church, and decrees were stated about their income and equipment. However, besides the intention, the right conditions were also needed for this. Building churches is an indicator of several ongoing processes. It not only expressed the Christian faith of a community or of their lord, but their financial capacities too. For example, stone buildings were expensive investments and local communities were not sufficiently endowed with enough resources to construct them. Once built, a sufficient number of households was needed to maintain the church. The earliest, eleventh-century churches might have been mostly wooden buildings and vanished without a trace. There is hardly any data in written sources on villages or village buildings. A rare preserved moment is the girding of King Géza II (r. 1141–1162) with a sword when going into battle against Henry II Jasomirgott, Margrave of Austria, at the age of sixteen in 1146. The event took place in a small wooden church near the western border (Aradi 2005, 195). The cemeteries of the tenth to twelfth centuries — when regarded from a sufficiently broad perspective — reflect the process of the appearance, spread, and consolidation of Christianity. Cemetery types followed the regulations conceived in a Christian spirit with a certain delay. A third way to get an insight into the subtle process of the transmission of new ideas is the examination of objects. We can use artefacts as instruments for tracing social, cultural, or economic transformations. Great political and cultural changes may be observed on the level of objects too, though changes were not happening from one day to another. Objects found in an archaeological context carry complex layers of information. However, it is difficult to evaluate the religious affiliation of the owner, or any aspect of his/

7.   pecto rals and amulets

her spiritual life, based solely on them. Elements of material culture represent only the externalities and formalities of belief; therefore, they are only indicative and not unambiguous signs. We can never interpret an object by itself, only in its context or with other formally related objects, as well as with the human mediators and influences, as an element of the current cognitive, social, and technological network (Lane and others 2009). With regard to artefacts that seem to be related to the world of beliefs, it must be emphasized that their meaning, the method and time of their use, and their symbolic narrative can change even within a given cultural environment, and this change inevitably occurs to some extent as time progresses (Knappett 2012, 89–105). Archaeological information is continuously growing. New data on the spread and use of high medieval (c. 1000–1300) amulets and pectoral crosses are now available that call for more sophisticated narratives than previously conceived.

Notes on the Use of Amulets and Meaning of the Cross Research considers burial customs and grave goods to be a reflection of contemporary beliefs, yet it is difficult to clearly separate the individual elements relating to the spiritual life of the population. The archaeologically identifiable signs of the pagan faith in the tenth-century Carpathian Basin are burials with horses or harnesses, food placed in graves, and smaller tools, weapons, or insignia of status in burials. Clothed burials did not cease after conversion. Rich clothing accessories, which, according to our current knowledge, expressed social status, may not be regarded as direct proof of pagan faith, but very often they are associated with the above markers of paganism. Clearly, the display of identity had more emphasis in pagan rituals. From the period before the conversion to Christianity, burials included various finds with apotropaic functions. Their interpretation is difficult since the same object could serve as an amulet or a simple jewel in different cultural regions, or even within a smaller community or family. Both in everyday use and in an archaeological context, the word amulet has a rather broad meaning. According to the general definition, independent of cultures and beliefs, the amulet is a kind of ‘active symbol’ used in social and personal contexts for various purposes and life strategies. It carries supernatural power and is connected to its owner. Simply possessing and wearing it provides magical protection, and no further action, like swallowing, burning, etc. is needed (Zeitzen 1997, 3–5; Vida 2002, 179–80). Various pierced animal bones worn as pendants were usually found in tenth-century women’s or children’s

Figure 7.1. Animal bones worn as pendants from tenthcentury women’s or children’s graves (found in Kiszombor, Tiszaroff, Csongrád). (After Dienes 1972, fig. 17.)

graves around the neck and on the belt, mainly among commoners. It is considered a phenomenon that originated from the steppe (Fig. 7.1). Pierced bones of wild and domestic animals or fish were widespread in the Carpathian Basin already in the Avar period, as well as among the Danube and Volga Bulgarians and the nomadic elements of the Saltovo cultural-historical assemblage (Dienes 1972, 49–55). In the tenth-century pagan cemeteries of the Carpathian Basin, saw-teeth pendants are quite rare. Spectacular examples were found in a grave in SzobKiserdő (Pest County): on a twisted wire necklace of a five- to six-year-old girl, where together with a blue glass bead, three saw-teeth pendants ending in imitation animal heads were fastened (Fig. 7.2.1) (Bakay 1978, 44–47). Although their appearance is sporadic, similar small pendants were found also in the cemeteries of Szakony, Csongrád-Vendelhalom, and Bugyi-Felsővány (Fig. 7.2.2–4) (Horváth 2021, 292, 308, fig. 2/2; Bakay 1978, 140, fig. 182; Füredi 2012, 209). Lunulas (crescent pendants), which were widespread throughout Central and Eastern Europe from the fifth century onwards, can be clearly classified as amulets. Research initially dated their use in the Carpathian Basin from the end of the tenth to the end of the eleventh centuries, but since then, more examples have been found, including items turned up in twelfth-century

119

120 ti bo r á ko s r ác z an d ág n e s fü r e d i

Figure 7.2. Saw-teeth pendants from the Carpathian Basin. 1: Szob-Kiserdő (Pest County), grave 73. Photo by the authors. 2: Szakony (Győr-MosonSopron County), grave 2. After Horváth 2021, fig. 2/2. 3: Bugyi-Felsővány (Pest County), stray find in the cemetery. Photo by the authors. 4: Csongrád-Vendelhalom (Csongrád-Csanád County). (After Bakay 1978, fig. 182.)

Figure 7.3. Crescent pendant from Gödöllő (Pest County), grave 2. (Photo by Balázs Deim.)

Figure 7.4. The cross and pendants of grave 60, in Szob-Kiserdő (Pest County). After Bakay 1978, fig. 11–12. (Photo by László Szabó.)

churchyard cemeteries. In cases where it was possible to record, they were found in graves of women and children, in a mixed, rather low, social environment. The type of jewellery most probably has Byzantine and Roman origins and appeared in what are today southern Russian territories as prestige objects with filigree and granulation. Their cast versions were widely distributed as trade goods in the eighth to thirteenth centuries in Central and Eastern Europe in areas associated with the Rus’ (Kralovánszky 1959; Khamayko 2012). Some casting moulds turned up in Hungary also presume local production (Kralovánszky 1959, Petkes 2013, 212–14). Similar amulets were often found in the territory of the Rus until the late Middle Ages, but in the Carpathian Basin, these amulets disappeared from graves by the twelfth century (Fig. 7.3). In the Szob-Kiserdő cemetery (Pest County), a pectoral cross was found, along with various amulets: a boar tooth, beads, pierced nummulite, a ball button, and a replica of a gold Byzantine solidus around the neck of a six-year-old girl (Fig. 7.4). She was buried according to a pagan ritual, with provisions for the afterlife in a pot, sometime in the second half of the tenth century (Bakay 1978, 29–33, 37, figs XVI, XVII, XXI). Several more cases are known of pectoral crosses placed similarly, as part of ornaments with amulet-like finds in the graves of children or women. A good example is grave 197 of Ibrány-Esbóhalom (Szabolcs-SzatmárBereg County), in which a young girl aged between sixteen and eighteen years was buried in a pagan way with a torques, a long string of beads around the neck, a gilded silver clothing ornament used secondarily (perhaps as an amulet), a fox tooth, together with a simple lead cross (Istvánovits 2003, 99, 596–97, tab. 94–95). A small Latin pectoral cross with the image of Christ was found in grave 95 in Püspökladány-Eperjesvölgy (Hajdú-Bihar County), together with beads and pendants of clothing ornaments and an iron rattle in the grave of a five-year-old child (Fig. 7.5.1) (M. Nepper 2002, i. 145, ii. 163, tab. 157). Another burial in Püspökladány is particularly noteworthy regarding our topic; the four- to five-year-old child resting in grave 107 had a bronze lunula along with a small Latin corpus cross very similar to the previous one, and on the top of her hand (perhaps once hidden in her palm) a denarius of King Stephen was found, cut around its edges (Fig. 7.5.2) (M. Nepper 2002, i. 146–47, ii. 167, tab. 161). A recent overview of the problem of Christianization stated that similar grave assemblages could be dated to the eleventh century too (Bollók 2012, 134). Similarly to the above cases, we have found a pectoral cross around the neck of a child in the Gödöllő cemetery (Pest County) with amulet-like objects: a fragment of a cast earring worn in a broken state, a lead bead, a canine tooth, and a bronze leaf-shaped

7.   pecto rals and amulets

12 1

Figure 7.5. The pendants and the reconstructions of the graves of Püspökladány-Eperjesvölgy (Hajdú-Bihar County). 1: Bronze cross, clothing ornaments as pendants, and an iron rattle in grave 95. (After M. Nepper 2002, i. 145, ii. tab. 157. 2): Bronze cross and crescent pendant in grave 107. (After M. Nepper 2002, i. 147, ii. tab. 161.)

pendant (Fig. 7.6.1–6). The small group of burials in the Gödöllő cemetery can be dated to the last third of the tenth century or the beginning of the eleventh century. Heart-shaped or leaf-shaped pendants and plaques can be regarded as typical finds from the tenth century and appear all over Eastern Europe, mainly on harnesses found in men’s graves. Nevertheless, in some cases, they were identified as women’s jewellery or occasionally as amulets (Horváth 2014, 278–300). An excellent analogy of the bronze ornament is the leaf-shaped pendant from Győr-Víztorony (GyőrMoson-Sopron County) (Fig. 7.6.7), found as a stray find in the cemetery (Takács and Paszternák 2000, 259, 297, fig. 4/2). Similar gilded silver and iron pendants with analogous ornaments, most probably used as amulets, were found in a tenth-century burial of a three- to four-year-old child buried with a horse harness at Szeged-Öthalom (Csongrád-Csanád County) (Türk and others 2015, 80–84, 273–75, figs 131–32). Another child in the Gödöllő cemetery was buried with a crescent pendant (Fig. 7.3). One of the most interesting examples of a Christian allusion appearing in a definitely pagan environment is a Byzantine (?) niello-decorated silver pendant known from grave 2 of the cemetery at Piliny-Leshegy (Nógrád County), excavated in the nineteenth century. The pendant features an inscription, precisely a Christian prayer, that reads in Greek letters: ‘Lord, help Jonah, Amen’ (Fig. 7.7). The young woman in an ornate dress was clearly buried according to a pagan rite: a partial horse burial with horse equipment and a dog skeleton were also found in the grave (Nyáry 1873, 22; Horváth 2019, 60, 287, tab. 16; Révész 2011).

Figure 7.6. The pendants of grave 8 in the Gödöllő cemetery (Pest County) placed around the neck of a child. 1: The finds in the grave. Photo by Tibor Ákos Rácz. 2: The bronze pectoral cross. 3: Canine tooth. 4: Lead bead. 5: Bronze cast leaf-shaped pendant. 2–6: Photos by Balázs Deim. 7: Bronze cast leaf-shaped pendant from GyőrVíztorony (Győr-Moson-Sopron County). (After Takács and Paszternák 2005, fig. 4/2.)

122 ti bo r á ko s r ác z an d ág n e s fü r e d i

The Spiritual Life of the Everyday People — Data from the Dabas Churchyard Cemetery

Figure 7.7. Silver pendant from grave 2 in Piliny-Leshegy (Nógrád County). (After Révész 2011, 111–12, tab. I/1.)

Crosses appear most frequently in the second half of the tenth century and the beginning of the eleventh century. When found in an archaeological context, they seem to be amulets or simply ornaments. They were usually associated with small children, of whom one can hardly assume deep Christian faith. It is more likely that their relatives wanted to protect them by every means in the afterlife. It shows that in the beginning, the Christian God and the saints were only regarded as some of the numerous potent supernatural powers affecting human life and conditions. This concept is closer to a superstitious or syncretistic way of thinking than religious devotion. Therefore, crosses do not testify to a Christian faith, only a casual familiarity. While burial habits were slowly changing, magical thinking or magical practices, the use of objects with apotropaic functions lasted throughout the Middle Ages, even after the Christianization period. The appearance of pectoral and reliquary crosses is no proof of missionary work (Bollók 2012, 140); they indicate the existence of transmitters and/or manufacturers of foreign origin, who were capable, to a certain extent, of interpreting the meaning of the objects, and elements of the local population were receptive to these ideas already before the official start of evangelization, and in this way these communities took a step forward on the long road of building up a Christian identity. It was only in the late Middle Ages, when, as a consequence of many factors, such as the missions of the Franciscans and Dominicans, that the Christian faith became substantive among everyday people (Romhányi 2009).

The first wave of building churches was presumably accomplished by the state and, somewhat indirectly, by the larger ecclesiastical institutions. From the twelfth century, secular landowners became more involved in church construction, and in the thirteenth century, the role of the emerging lower nobility should be emphasized. According to our archaeological data, church building and the extension of the parish network had a major effect on the formation of stable villages (Rácz 2019, 158). Since the churches were made of more durable materials, they attracted dwelling structures around them, thus contributing to the nucleation of villages and, thereby — indirectly — to the stability of the state. Churchyard cemeteries were established around the buildings, which also played very important roles in the life of the communities as places of remembrance and otherworldly connection. We have been excavating the medieval church and churchyard of the town of Dabas (Pest County) for years, and the emerging picture is a pretty good illustration of the processes taking place throughout the country. Archaeological evidence from the Dabas churchyard cemetery (Rácz and Németh 2021) relates to several aspects of the process of Christianization. Although the community most likely buried their dead in a Christian way from the beginning, objects found within the churchyard demonstrate that Christian faith was soaked with ancient beliefs and superstitions. The field cemetery was opened at the time of the state foundation, as evidenced by the coins of Stephen I, Peter (r. 1038–1041, 1044–1046), and Andrew I (r. 1046–1060). The orientation of the graves was uniformly west–east, and there was nothing to suggest a pagan rite. The habit of obolus deposition — a custom that continued in later medieval churchyards — was observed; we found a Ladislaus (r. 1077–1095) coin in the mouth of one of the deceased. The community built its first stone church in the twelfth century; the remnants of the wall and the twelfth-century surface layer could be well documented (Rácz 2014, 109–10). The field cemetery was then replaced by the churchyard cemetery and the orientation of graves changed. There are many other examples of former field cemeteries used further on in accordance with the regulation of the new religion (Vargha 2022, 101–02; see also the chapter by Martin Čechura in the present volume). Not far from Dabas, at the Cegléd-Nyúlfüleholom site (Pest County), the foundations of the high medieval church cut several earlier graves, one of those dated by a coin of King Peter (r. 1038–1041) (Tari 2000, 50–51). A small nucleus of the

7.   pecto rals and amulets 12 3

village shortly appeared near the church, while earlier, scattered dwelling structures could be documented several hundred metres from the church hill. The eleventh- and twelfth-century population was buried with simple jewellery and clothing accessories — lock rings and buckles — like everywhere else in the country. However, in a pit unearthed within the graveyard, a solid gold band ring with a Latin inscription was found in a secondary context (Fig. 7.8.1). Multiple letters were worn away, but they still make up distinguishable word fragments. The solution ANTI is certain, while DOLOR is probable, and then a fragment, UDE can be read. Based on the inscription, the ring was meant to protect its owner from pain, sorrow, and suffering. According to its parallels made of silver (Langó 2021, 214), the ring can be dated to the second half of the eleventh, or possibly the first half of the twelfth century. In the grave-fill of a high medieval burial, a bronze pendant with a depiction of an angel was found (Fig. 7.8.2). These small, round pendants were widespread from Byzantium through Bulgaria to the Kievan Rus’ in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries; however, there are only a few known examples from Hungary. They have a uniform design (round-shaped pendant with a suspension loop), but their iconography is rather diverse, expressing both ‘pagan’ ideologies and clear Christian motifs. The zoomorphic and tendril motifs of the pendant’s rear side are well-known from the figurines of the era: they depict the victory of Christianity, and the struggle between Good and Evil on bronze objects of various functions. However, as we were searching for a forerunner of the Dabas imagery, we came across a unique type of object: snake amulets from Russia (Nikolaeva and Csernyecov 1991). Its find circumstances in the cemetery confirm its use as a clothing element; still, its iconography presumes that the owner could have attributed apotropaic functions to the pendant. At the very same site, a stray axe-shaped amulet (Fig. 7.8.3) was also found (Füredi and others 2017, 418–19, fig. 16). The spread of these originally Scandinavian objects in Eastern Europe is clearly the result of the connections with the Rus. Previous interpretations suggested tenth-century Slavic or Viking pagan expression of belief. We now consider them to be amulet-like objects already spread in the Christian era through commerce. Scandinavian — and Rus — Magyar trading connections and communication were vivid in the ninth and especially throughout the tenth centuries (Katona 2023, 80–93). The symmetrical, ship-shaped type of the axe amulets has been specifically linked — albeit with reservations — by some researchers (Kucypera and Wadyl 2011, 128; Füredi and others 2017, 424) to the spread of the cult of St Olaf in the north in the eleventh century, so it is also considered a ‘permitted

Figure 7.8. Dabas, churchyard cemetery. 1: Gold band ring with a Latin inscription. 2: Round bronze pendant. 3: Axe-shaped amulet. (1–2: Photos by Balázs Deim. 3. After Füredi and others 2012, fig. 16.)

superstitious’ aspect of the Christian faith. In general, concerning amulet-like objects, Leszek Gardeła drew attention to the fact that the same amulet — reaching several different places through trade — could find its own, independent meaning in different cultural environments, either as a simple piece of jewellery or as a magical object (Gardeła 2014, 127). In our case, it could be both a pagan and Christian symbol among the same population. The population may have been superstitious, still, somewhat later, there is also evidence of deep-rooted faith: in one of the deceased’s hands, we found a thirteenth-century bronze corpus, most likely a sign of devotion. We do not know whether it was attached to a wooden cross, or whether it belonged to a priest.

General Remarks It seems that the cognitive continuity between the ‘pagan’ tenth century and ‘Christian’ eleventh through twelfth centuries can be identified archaeologically in small finds, specifically in the use of objects placed in graves as amulets. The types of objects may have changed (e.g. the disappearance of animal bone amulets, and the

124 ti bo r á ko s r ác z an d ág n e s fü r e d i

appearance of carved rings), but the main idea lying behind the act remained the same. The occurrence of amulets in the graves of the conversion period is a well-known phenomenon also in western and northern Europe. Roberta Gilchrist argued ‘that the tradition of amulet use was adopted and developed as a Christian strategy to transform the body in readiness for the resurrection’ (2014, 389). The strategy applied by the central power to introduce Christianity proved to be highly effective. It definitely differed from the processes taking place in the ninth century when church organization and Christian communities already existed within the Carpathian Basin. The Carolingian rule also established churches in Transdanubia (Szőke 2014), but the central secular administration and clerks withdrew from Pannonia after the Hungarian conquest. However, smaller Christian communities remained undisturbed, and they must have contributed to the spread of the religion among the newcomers. Earlier, during the Avar period, we find numerous analogies regarding the attitudes towards the Christian religion among the romanized groups in Transdanubia: a mixture of beliefs evidenced by the appearance of Christian symbols as elements of fashion, the use of the cross as jewellery, and the use of personal accessories, strap-ends, and brooches with Christian symbols among the barbarian peoples and also the appearance of the cross in graves with pagan rituals attributed to the population from the steppe (Vida 2016, 101–05). These are all proofs of a certain transitional phase of Christianity to which we might also count the tenth and eleventh centuries. Material culture proved to be an uncertain basis to rely on regarding the adoption of Christianity. Even in the tenth century, everyday people were buried without grave goods, and consequently, we have no idea about the performed ritual or the faith of the individual. Pagan elite burials ceased to exist in the eleventh century, so we may assume the gradual shift to Christian burial habits. It is important to add that there is no sharp period boundary in the rite either: some of the cemeteries, e.g. Dabas-Gyón-Paphegy, which include graves with horse equipment, may even have functioned up to the eleventh century (Kovács 1985). Archaeological research has not yet found a set of criteria to identify Christian burials in the eleventh century other than churchyard burials, since the performance of the ritual was not yet strictly regulated by the church (Bollók 2012, 139). The

situation can be further complicated by the fact that the wealth of the tenth-century cemeteries, which can clearly be considered pagan, was not constant either, but also seems to correlate with the plundering raids. Thus, the seemingly poor graves from the end of the tenth century, without grave goods or precious metal clothing ornaments, may also be connected to the change in the economic situation and not to the changes in rituals or beliefs. We might build more or less plausible concepts on the adoption of Christianity in general and on a large scale, but we will never be able to reconstruct the exact way of thinking of the countless individuals buried in field and churchyard cemeteries in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. There might well have been Christians buried in row cemeteries without a church, and we cannot take for certain the faith of those buried in a churchyard. It is almost impossible to define who should be considered a Christian. Perhaps there were many who received no baptism, but knew the meaning of the cross, heard about redemption and love, and put the cross around their children’s necks with confidence. And there must have been many converts who went to church, prayed, and received the sacraments in a regulated manner, controlled by the church as well as required by secular law, but were not earnest Christians. The advancement of Christianity can be detected on a different scale: that of the institutions, the network of buildings, the slow change in the landscape, and the spread of new cemetery types (Vargha 2022, 14, 103). The tenth and eleventh centuries were an important transitional period for the Hungarian population in many respects. Settling and adapting to the new conditions in the Carpathian Basin was accompanied by cultural transformations. The embrace of Christianity in the new geopolitical environment was a natural consequence for the Hungarians. Prior to the decisions and actions of political leaders, Christian doctrines and their material expressions had already been present among the population. Elements of material culture, and in particular funerary objects, often became a way of communicating identity, whether ethnic (Curta 2011, 542) or religious. However, the Christian symbols appearing among the tenth-century population represent the first phase of the Hungarians’ acquaintance with Christianity, and based on our present data, they are not elements of religious piety, but rather of syncretism and superstitious thinking.

7.   pecto rals and amulets 12 5

Works Cited Primary Sources SRH i = Szentpétery, Emericus (ed.), Scriptores Rerum Hungaricarum Tempore Ducum Regumque Stirpis Arpadianae Gestarum Vol. i (Budapest: Academia Litterarum, 1937) Secondary Studies Aradi, Csilla. 2005. ‘Some Aspects of Parish Organization in Medieval Hungary’, Beiträge zur Mittelalterarchäologie in Österreich, 21: 195–204 Bakay, Kornél. 1978. Honfoglalás- és államalapításkori temetők az Ipoly mentén. Gräberfelder an der Eipel aus der Zeit der ungarischen Landnahme und Staatsgründung, Studia Comitatensia 6 (Szentendre: Directorate of Pest County Museums)

Berend, Nora. 2007. Christianization and the Rise of the Christian Monarchy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Bollók, Ádám. 2012. ‘Byzantine Missions among the Magyars during the Later 10th Century?’, in Rome, Constantinople and Newly-Converted Europe. Archaeological and Historical Evidence, ii, ed. by Maciej Salamon, Marcin Wołoszyn, Alexander Musin, and Perica Špehar (Leipzig: Geisteswissenschaftliches Zentrum Geschichte und Kultur Ostmitteleuropas e.V.), pp. 131–44 Curta, Florin. 2011. ‘Medieval Archaeology and Ethnicity: Where are We?’, History Compass, 9.7: 537–48 Dienes, István. 1972. A honfoglaló magyarok (Budapest: Hereditas) Füredi, Ágnes. 2012. ‘Honfoglalás kori tarsolylemez Pest megyében. A Bugyi-Felsőványi 2. sír. Eine landnahmezeitliche Taschenplatte im Kom. Pest. Das Grab 2 von Bugyi-Felsővány’, Archaeologiai Értesítő, 137: 207–34 Füredi, Ágnes, Ágnes Király, Dániel Pópity, Szabolcs Rosta, Attila Türk, and Bertalan Zágorhidi Czigány. 2017. ‘Balta alakú amulettek a Kárpát-medence 11–12. századi hagyatékában. Régészeti megfigyelések a miniatürizált tárgyakról, valamint a kora Árpád-kori Rusz–magyar kapcsolatok kérdéséről. [Axe-Shaped Amulets among the 11th- and 12th-Century Finds in the Carpathian Basin. Archaeological Observations on Miniature Objects and on the Issue of Early Árpád-Era Rus–Hungarian Relations]’, in Hadak útján XXIV. A népvándorláskor fiatal kutatóinak XXIV. konferenciája, Esztergom 2014. november 4–6. II., ed. by Attila Türk, Csilla Balogh, and Balázs Major, Studia ad Archaeologiam Pazmaniensia, 3.2 (Budapest: Department of Archaeology of Pázmány Péter Catholic University – Research Centre for the Humanities of HAS), pp. 403–48, Gardeła, Leszek. 2014. Scandinavian Amulets in Viking Age Poland, Collectio Archaeologica Ressoviensis, 33 (Rzeszów: Fundacja Rzeszowskiego Ośrodka Archeologicznego, Instytut Archeologii Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego) Gilchrist, Roberta. 2014. ‘Transforming Medieval Beliefs: The Significance of Bodily Resurrection to Medieval Burial Rituals’, in Ritual Changes and Changing Rituals. Function and Meaning in Ancient Funerary Practices, ed. by J. Rasmus Brandt, Marina Prusac, and Hakon Roland (Oxford: Oxbow Books), pp. 379–96 Khamayko, Natalia. 2012. ‘Crescent Pendants (lunnitsa) in 11th–13th Century Rus’: Pagan Amulet or Christian Ornament?’, in Rome, Constantinople and Newly-Converted Europe. Archaeological and Historical Evidence, ed. by Maciej Salamon, Marcin Wołoszyn, Alexander Musin, and Perica Špehar, U źródeł Europy środkowo-wschodniej/Frühzeit Otmitteleuropas 1.2, vol. ii (Leipzig: Geisteswissenschaftliches Zentrum Geschichte und Kultur Ostmitteleuropas e.V.), pp. 503–25 Horváth, Ciprián. 2014. Győr és Moson megyék honfoglalás és kora Árpád-kori temetői és sírleletei [Cemeteries and Grave Findings from the Age of the Hungarian Landtaking and the Early Arpadians of County Győr and County Moson], Magyarország honfoglalás kori és kora Árpád-kori sírleletei, 11 (Szeged: University of Szeged, Department of Archaeology) —— 2019. Nógrád megye honfoglalás és kora Árpád-kori temetői és sírleletei [Cemeteries and Grave Goods of Nógrád County from the Age of the Hungarian Conquest and Early Árpádians], Magyarország honfoglalás kori és kora Árpád-kori sírleletei, 11 (Szeged: Martin Opitz) —— 2021. ‘Szakony-Kavicsbánya Cemetery from the Age of the Hungarian Conquest’, Ephemeris Hungarologica, 1.2: 289–314

Istvánovits, Eszter. 2003. A Rétköz honfoglalás és Árpád-kori emlékanyaga. Das landnahme-und arpadenzeitliche Nachlassmaterial des Rétköz, Régészeti gyűjtemények Nyíregyházán 2, Magyarország honfoglalás és kora Árpád-kori sírleletei 4 (Nyíregyháza: Jósa András Museum) Katona, Csete. 2023. Vikings of the Steppe. Scandinavians, Rus’, and the Turkic World (c. 750–1050) (New York: Routledge)

126 ti bo r á ko s r ác z an d ág n e s fü r e d i

Knappett, Carl. 2012. ‘Meaning in Miniature: Semiotic Networks in Material Culture’, in Excavating the Mind: Cross Sections through Culture, Cognition and Materiality, ed. by Mads Dengsø Jessen, Niels Nørkjær Johanssen, and Helle Juel Jensen (Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag), pp. 87–109 Kralovánszky, Alán. 1959. ‘Adatok a Kárpát-medencei X–XI. századi félhold alakú csüngők kérdéséhez. Beitrag zur Problematik der halbmondförmigen Anhänger aus dem 10.–11. Jh. im Karpathenbecken’, Archaeologiai Értesítő, 87: 76–82, tables XII–XVIII Kovács, László. 1985. ‘Kora Árpád-kori temetőrészlet Dabas(Gyón)-Paphegyen. Früharpadenzeitlicher Gräberfeldteil in Dabas/Gyón/-Paphegy’, Studia Comitatensia, 17: 369–86 Kucypera, Paweł, and Sławomir Wadyl. 2011. ‘Early Medieval Miniature Axes of Makarov’s Type 2 in the Baltic Sea Region. Ankstyvųjų viduramžių Makarovo 2 tipo miniatiūriniai kirviai Baltijos jūros regione’, Archaeologia Lituana, 12: 122–30

Lane, David, Denise Pumain, Sander Ernst van der Leeuw, and Geoffrey West (eds). 2009. ‘Complexity Perspectives on Innovation and Social Change’, Methodos Series, 7 (New York: Springer) Langó, Péter. 2021. ‘11. századi jelekkel díszített gyűrűk Pest megyéből. 11th Century Finger Rings Decorated with Symbols from Pest County’, in Kincskeresés, kaland, tudomány. Közösségi régészeti projektek Pest megyében. Kiállítási katalógus. Treasure Hunt, Adventure and Science. Community Archaeology Projects in Pest County, ed. by Tibor Ákos Rácz (Szentendre: Ferenczy Museum Center), pp. 214–21 Nikolaeva, Tatʹjana Vasilʹevna, and Černecov, Aleksej Vladimirovič. 1991. Drevnerusskie amulety-zmeeveki (Moscow: Nauka) / Николаева, Татьяна Васильевна, and Чернецов, Алексей Владимирович. 1991. Древнерусские амулетызмеевеки (Москва: Наука) M. Nepper, Ibolya. 2002. Hajdú-Bihar megye 10–11. századi sírleletei I–II. [Grave Goods of Hajdú-Bihar County from the 10th–11th Centuries I–II.], Magyarország honfoglalás kori és kora Árpád-kori sírleletei, 3 (Budapest–Debrecen: Déri Museum – Hungarian National Museum – Institute of Archaeology of the HAS), Nyáry, Jenő. 1873. ‘A pilini Leshegyen talált csontvázakról’ [Remarks on the skeletons found at Piliny-Leshegy], Archaeologiai Közlemények, 9: 16–24 Petkes, Zsolt. 2013. ‘Sárszentágota kora Árpád-kori temetője. Das Frühárpádenzeitliche Gräberfeld von Sárszentágota’, in A honfoglalás kor kutatásának legújabb eredményei. Tanulmányok Kovács László 70. születésnapjára, ed. by Mária Wolf and László Révész, Monográfiák a Szegedi Tudományegyetem Régészeti Tanszékéről, 3 (Szeged: University of Szeged, Department of Archaeology – Research group of Early Hungarian History of the HAS – Martin Opitz), pp. 203–22 Rácz, Tibor Ákos. 2014. ‘Dabas középkori temploma és temetője. The Medieval Church and Churchyard of Dabas’, in Múltunk a föld alatt. Újabb régészeti kutatások Pest megyében. Our Past under the Earth. Recent Archaeological Investigations in Pest County, ed. by András Rajna (Szentendre: Ferenczy Museum), pp. 107–17, 176–77, 234–57 Rácz, Tibor Ákos. 2019. A Pesti-síkság falvai a magyar honfoglalástól a 14. századig. Kerámiaművesség, lakóépítmények, települési formák [Villages of the Pest Plain from the Hungarian Conquest until the Fourteenth Century. Pottery, Residential Buildings, Settlement Forms], Studia ad Archaeologiam Pazmaniensia, 13 (Budapest: Arhaeolingua) Rácz, Tibor Ákos, and Veronika Németh. 2021. ‘Tervásatás civil segítséggel Dabas középkori temetőjében [Research Excavation with Civilian Help in the Medieval Cemetery of Dabas]’, in Kincskeresés, kaland, tudomány. Közösségi régészeti projektek Pest megyében. Kiállítási katalógus [Treasure Hunt, Adventure and Science. Community Archaeology Projects in Pest County], ed. by Tibor Ákos Rácz (Szentendre: Ferenczy Museum Center), pp. 144–59 Révész, Éva. 2011. ‘A piliny-leshegyi csüngő párhuzamai’, Antik Tanulmányok, 55.1: 111–17 Romhányi, Beatrix. 2009. ‘A koldulóbarátok szerepe a XV–XVI. századi vallási megújulásban’, in Szentírás – hagyomány – reformáció. Teológia- és egyháztörténeti tanulmányok, ed. by Beatrix F. Romhányi and Gábor Kendeffy (Budapest: Gondolat), pp. 144–55 Szőke, Béla Miklós. 2014. The Carolingian Age in the Carpathian Basin: Permanent Exhibition of the Hungarian National Museum (Budapest: Hungarian National Museum) Takács, Miklós, and István Paszternák. 2000. ‘A Győr-homokgödröki 10–11. századi temetőrészlet és középkori település [Fragments of Cemeteries from the 10–11th Centuries and Medieval Settlement at Győr-Homokgödrök]’, in A népvándorláskor kutatóinak kilencedik konferenciája, ed. by Tivadar Petercsák and Adél Váradi, Heves Megyei Régészeti Közlemények, 1 (Eger: Museum Organisation of Heves County), pp. 253–309 [accessed 29 May 2024] Tari, Edit. 2000. Pest megye középkori templomai. Medieval Churches in Pest County, Studia Comitatensia, 27 (Szentendre: Directorate of Pest County Museums)

7.   pecto rals and amulets 12 7

Türk, Attila, Gábor Lőrinczy, and Antónia Marcsik. 2015. Régészeti és természettudományi adatok a Maros-torkolat nyugati oldalának 10. Századi történetéhez. Archäologische Daten und naturwissenschaftliche Ergebnisse zur Geschichte des 10. Jahrhunderts des westlichen Ufers der Muresch-Mündung, Studia ad Archaeologiam Pazmaniensia 4, MTA BTK Magyar Őstörténeti Témacsoport – Kiadványok 4 (Budapest: Department of Archaeology of Pázmány Péter Catholic University – Research Centre for the Humanities of HAS) Vargha, Mária. 2022. Modelling Christianisation. A Geospatial Analysis of the Archaeological Data on the Rural Church Network of Hungary in the 11th-12th Centuries, Archaeolingua Central European Archaeological Heritage Series, 11 (Oxford: Archaeopress) Vida, Tivadar. 2002. ‘Heidnische und christliche elemente der awarenzeitlichen Glaubenswelt, Amulette in der Awarenzeit. Pogány és keresztény elemek az avarkori hitvilágban, avarkori amulettek’, Zalai Múzeum, 11: 179–209 —— 2016. ‘Christianity in the Carpathian Basin during Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages in Saint Martin and Pannonia’, in Christianity on the Frontiers of the Roman World. Exhibition Catalogue, ed. by Endre Tóth, Tivadar Vida, and Imre Takács (Pannonhalma – Szombathely: Abbey Museum – Iseum Savariense), pp. 93–106 Zeitzen, Miriam Koktvedgaard. 1997. ‘Amulets and Amulet Use in Viking Age Denmark’, Acta Archaeologica (København), 68: 1–74

Ni n a Glińska

8. Wiślica as an Example of a Christian Town in the State of the First Piasts

A bs t r act  The paper presents a part of the project ‘Pagans and Christians. Christianization in the Bohemian and Polish Kingdoms in the Middle Ages’, which is conducted at the Centre for Medieval Studies in Prague and at Jan Kochanowski University of Kielce (Poland). The archaeological part of the project, realized in Poland, is based on the investigation of the finds from Wiślica (Lesser Poland), and is divided into three parts: (1) the fortified settlement on the so-called Regia in Wiślica with a Romanesque residential and sacral complex composed of two palaces and two rotundas; (2) the analysis and interpretation of Wiślica’s funeral rite with particular emphasis on the initial stage of the reception of Christianity; (3) a comparative analysis of the spatial arrangement of Wiślica and other important centres of Lesser Poland.

T

K e y wo r ds  Archaeology, high Middle Ages, funeral rite, Romanesque architecture, urban studies

T

Introduction

Therefore, the present paper will only introduce the assumptions and research goals of our investigation.2 The project intends to produce a multifaceted study of the Christianization of the Polish and Czech lands in the Middle Ages, based on selected collections of written sources, but also including material evidence, particularly archaeological finds of early sacred objects from Wiślica/Lesser Poland. All the researched sources offer good insights into the longterm process of Christianization and its primary and secondary phases, such as systematic evangelization and catechization, mentality change, and the grounding

The project ‘Pagans and Christians. Christianization in the Bohemian and Polish Kingdoms in the Middle Ages’, presented here, is carried out at the Centre for Medieval Studies in Prague (under the guidance of Martin Nodl) and at Jan Kochanowski University of Kielce (under the guidance of Krzysztof Bracha).1 The project started in 2022 and will run for three years.



1 Project number 2021/03/Y/HS3/00052: ‘Pagans and Christians. Christianization in the Bohemian and Polish Kingdoms in the Middle Ages’, financed by the National Science Center (Poland) in the Weave UNISONO competition.



2 This text was written in 2022.

Nina Glińska • ([email protected]) is an archaeologist, working at the Uniwersytet Jana Kochanowskiego w Kielcach. She is a PhD graduate of the Jagiellonian University in Cracow and the University of Rzeszów. Her main interest is the archaeology of the early Middle Ages, especially pottery. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 129–142. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138112

13 0 n i n a gl i ń s k a

Figure 8.1. Location of Wiślica. (Prepared by J. Rek.)

of Christian faith and morality. A key objective of the project is to capture the analogies and differences in religious developments taking place in the Kingdom of Poland and the Kingdom of Bohemia between the tenth and the fifteenth centuries: from the baptism of Duke Mieszko I, to the Czech devotio moderna and the spread of the fifteenth-century Bohemian Reform, in particular the circulation of Hussite ideas, including the following topics: Catholic orthodoxy, heresies, superstitions, folklore and abuses in cults, and pagan relics. The archaeological part of the project, realized in Poland, is divided into three parts, related to topics such as the beginnings of sacral Romanesque architecture in Wiślica; comparative analysis of the medieval funeral rites using the example of five necropolises in Wiślica; and the spatial arrangement of Wiślica compared to other important centres of Lesser Poland.

Archaeological Research The archaeological part of the project will be based on the aforementioned archaeological evidence from Wiślica. Wiślica is a small town in southern Poland (Fig. 8.1), situated on the lower course of the Nida River on its left bank, where gypsum rocks rise above the marshy plain of the river valley, creating ‘islands’ that offer favourable settlement conditions. The town is located on one such gypsum elevation (300 × 700 m) commonly referred to as the ‘town island’. To the north, the gypsum rock forms a peninsula — the location of the contemporary village of Gorysławice. Situated in the southeast, around 150 m from the built-up area of modern Wiślica, in the oxbow lake of the Nida River, is a small gypsum hillock — the location of the so-called fortified settlement ‘on the meadows’ (Fig. 8.2). In Wiślica, six archaeological sites can be associated with the early and high Middle Ages (Fig. 8.3). These

8.   w i ś l i c a as an e xample o f a chri st i an tow n i n t he stat e o f t he f i rst p ias ts

Figure 8.2. Three-dimensional projection of the city area together with the stronghold ‘on the meadows’. (Prepared by P. Woroniecki (the Archives of the Voivodeship Monuments Protection Office in Kielce).)

include two fortified settlements: 1) the site ‘on the meadows’, located outside of the perimeter of the town on a gypsum rock outcrop, surrounded by the woodland that overgrows the oxbow lake of the Nida River, and 2) the so-called Regia — situated in the north-western part of the modern-day town, where, in addition to the remains of two phases of fortifications and timber buildings, archaeologists discovered a Romanesque residential and sacral complex composed of two palaces (Fig. 8.5, buildings A and C) and two rotundas (buildings B and D), which are accompanied by a two-phase graveyard. Located close to them is a Gothic collegiate church, underneath which archaeologists discovered the relics of two churches — the so-called Romanesque church I and Romanesque church II. Another graveyard is associated with these two Romanesque churches, whose origins date back to the high Middle Ages. Next to them is the ‘Batalionów Chłopskich Street’ site, which contains the remains of the small single-nave church of St Nicholas, the surrounding graveyard, and the remains of a high medieval and medieval open settlement, which functioned as a suburb for the ‘Regia’ stronghold. Near the stronghold ‘on the meadow’ archaeologists discovered the remains of St Martin’s Church and the graveyard around it. The last archaeological site in Wiślica is the site commonly referred to as the ‘Town walls’ site, which consists of materials obtained from excavation trenches located in different parts of the chartered town,

in which archaeologists searched for the remains of the town walls from the times of Kazimierz the Great (Kazimierz Wielki, r. 1333–1370). The high medieval settlement complex in Wiślica is complemented by the cemetery discovered in the nearby Gorysławice village. To sum up, in Wiślica the remains of two strongholds, five cemeteries, and the remains of six churches dated to the high Middle Ages were discovered. The first research in Wiślica was led in the years 1949–1978 by Zofia Wartołowska and Włodzimierz Antoniewicz (Antoniewicz 1962, 1968; Antoniewicz and Wartołowska 1951, 1952, 1955, 1956; Wartołowska 1959, 1960, 1962, 1963a, 1963b, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1970, 1993; Wartołowska and others 1959, 1965, 1970; Wartołowska and Woźnicka 1966, 1967/1968) and near the gothic collegiate church by Andrzej Tomaszewski (1965). The second round of archaeological investigations was carried out between 1994 and 1998 by Waldemar Gliński (Gliński 1998, 2000a, 2000b, 2009; Gliński and Koj 1998). However, the first studies were of the greatest importance for Wiślica. Their results reinforced the already strong conviction that the origins of that settlement centre should be dated back to the ‘pre-state’ period. Already in the second half of the ninth century, Wiślica was supposed to have been the seat of a duke of the Vistula (Wiślanie) tribe, who built the fortifications on ‘Regia’ (Antoniewicz 1968, 106; Wartołowska 1993, 280), and was baptized on the spot where later the

131

13 2 n i n a gl i ń s k a

Figure 8.3. Wiślica. 1. stronghold ‘on the meadows’; 2. ‘Regia’highest point of the ‘town island’, ‘Regia’ fortified settlement; 3. ‘Batalionów Chłopskich Street’ site and St Nicholas’s Church; 4. collegiate church; 5. ‘St Martin’s Church’ site; 6. cemetery in Gorysławice; 7. reconstructed river crossing; 8. market square of the chartered town; 9. town walls; 10. ‘Church of the Holy Spirit’ site; dots mark the area of the Nida River ice-marginal valley flood plain (according to A. Tomaszewski 1974, tab. 29; supplemented).

Figure 8.4. ‘Batalionów Chłopskich Street’ site. So-called ‘baptismal font’. View from the west, 2018. (Photo by N. Glińska.)

8.   w i ś l i c a as an e xample o f a chri st i an tow n i n t he stat e o f t he f i rst p ias ts

St Nicolas Church was erected. On the ‘Batalionów Chłopskich Street site’ archaeologists found so-called piscinae or circular lime basins (Fig. 8.4), which were interpreted as tangible proof of mass Christianization (Antoniewicz 1962, 22; Wartołowska 1960, 82; 1962, 15). However, it has to be pointed out that at that time, archaeological excavations were conducted as part of the preparations for the celebration of the Millennium of the Polish State celebrated in the 1950s and 1960s, and the political agenda forced a specific interpretation of this monument. Later on, the basins were regularly mentioned in pertinent literature and used for ‘evidencing’ the acceptance of Christianity by the inhabitants of the early Piast state (see: Urbańczyk 1995, 1996; Rodzińska-Chorąży 1996a, 1996b, 1997). To sum up, according to the theories of Zofia Wartołowska and Włodzimierz Antoniewicz, Wiślica was, first of all, the site of the first baptism in Poland, which took place in the ninth century. And this is how it has been perceived up to now. However, the recent investigations and the reinterpretation of the finds suggest that the foundation of Wiślica happened only in the tenth century and that the theories about a ninth-century Christianization were simply wrong. Nonetheless, Wiślica, with its five high medieval cemeteries and the remains of six stone churches, holds the same rank within Lesser Poland as centres such as Kraków or Sandomierz and is undoubtedly an ideal place to study the early stage of Christianization.

Regia — A Fortified Settlement and a Romanesque Residential and Sacral Complex The first issue of the project is related to one of the strongholds in Wiślica — the fortified settlement on the so-called Regia, where two residential and religious complexes were discovered, consisting of a palatium and a rotunda (Fig. 8.5). As already mentioned, in light of the surviving archaeological records, Wiślica was founded in the tenth century, as the construction of both fortified settlements (in the northwestern part of the modern town, on the highest point of the ‘town island’ — ‘Regia’ — and at the site of the oxbow lake of the Nida River — ‘on the meadows’) probably took place in that century (Glińska 2020, 239–43). In my opinion, it seems more probable that the settlement on the ‘Regia’ was the oldest in Wiślica, and the new fortified stronghold ‘on the meadows’ was built only after it burned down. The settlement on the ‘Regia’ can be divided into three phases (Glińska 2020, 234–39). Determining the time of the construction of the oldest stronghold (the first phase), is still impossible due to the lack of suitable materials with adequate

dating properties; however, the conducted analysis did facilitate a successful attempt to establish the moment that destroyed this structure. The settlement complex ceased to exist in its oldest shape in the second half of the tenth century (Glińska 2020, 240–41), not in the first half of the twelfth century, as previously suggested (Gliński and Koj 1998; Gliński 1999, 212). At the turn of the tenth century, a second settlement arose at the ‘Regia’, on the site where the first fortified settlement burned down. Characterizing this settlement is, however, problematic. It is not possible to date the younger phase of the rampart, and thus, it is difficult to state whether it was initially an open settlement that was subsequently surrounded by the new rampart or if the reoccupation of the site was the result of the rebuilding of the fortification system. The present state of research suggests that the construction of the new rampart fortifications was part of the transformation of the ‘Regia’ into a residential and sacral complex associated with the third phase of the stronghold. The most important research problem that remains unresolved is the dating of the Romanesque building complex, the third phase of the settlement on the ‘Regia’ and the highest part of contemporary Wiślica. Two residential and religious complexes were discovered, consisting of a palatium and a rotunda (palatium A with rotunda B and palatium C with rotunda D). Archaeological dates the time of its construction seems to be no earlier than the end of the eleventh century (Glińska 2020, 241). Architectural investigations placed it a few decades earlier — to the second half of the eleventh century. This earlier dating is supported by the works of Aneta Bukowska (2020), who identified two construction phases that differ in building techniques, primarily in the use of lime mortar in the older phase and gypsum mortar in the newer phase. Therefore, it seems probable that palatium A at the ‘Regia’, the Romanesque church I located under the still-standing Gothic collegiate church, and the extension of St Nicholas’s Church all belong to the second phase of the sacral and residential architecture and can most likely be dated to the second half of the twelfth century. This conclusion is supported by the use of gypsum mortar in each and the similarity of the masonry techniques of the three structures. Historically, this aligns with the period when Henry of Sandomierz (Henryk Sandomierski, r. 1146–1166) and Casimir II the Just (Kazimierz Sprawiedliwy, r. 1166–1194) resided in Wiślica. According to Bukowska, several representative stone buildings were built at the ‘Regia’ during that period; palatium A was completed or rebuilt, the single-apse rotunda (building D) was redeveloped, the conch rotunda (building B) was adapted, palatium C was probably built, and, in addition, the area between the buildings was partly paved with gypsum mortar.

133

13 4 n i n a gl i ń s k a

Figure 8.5. Wiślica — ‘Regia’. Remains of stone architecture. (Prepared by N. Glińska.)

The ‘lime’ horizon, present in palatium A and both rotundas, must be earlier. In my opinion, however, it is not possible to establish its precise chronology on the basis of the archaeological analysis, but only to generally date it to the period between the end of the eleventh century and the mid-twelfth century, especially as it is ambiguous whether buildings discovered at the ‘Regia’ were simultaneously created as parts of the same large-scale construction project or represent separate smaller endeavours. Some stratigraphic relations may suggest, particularly in the case of the single-apse rotunda (building D), that the churches are older than the palatia. Nonetheless, there is no sufficient data to define chronological relations between the buildings constituting the residential complex. The lack of complete

records, the later destruction and damage, and the limited amount of archaeological material that could be indisputably linked to specific stratigraphic units do not permit definitive conclusions. According to Bukowska (2020, 337), the single-apse rotunda (building D) was created in a time horizon similar to that of the small church discovered on Batalionów Chłopskich Street, but earlier than this church because, in her opinion, the construction of the sacral building at the ‘Regia’, so within the stronghold, must have been earlier than the construction of the church in the suburbium area. At the same time, she assumes that the conch rotunda (building B) next to palatium A is probably older (although only slightly) than the single-apse rotunda (building D), or, alternately, that the conch rotunda

8.   w i ś l i c a as an e xample o f a chri st i an tow n i n t he stat e o f t he f i rst p ias ts

and the single-apse rotunda were built at the same time, and earlier than St Nicholas’s Church. Many hypotheses associated with the Romanesque architecture of the ‘Regia’ and, most of all, the beginning of sacred architecture in Wiślica can be explained only through new archaeological excavations and obtaining samples for dendrochronological analyses or a suitable series of samples for radiocarbon dating from all phases of the fortifications, as the key problem is creating a more precise chronology of the construction and destruction of older and younger ramparts and explaining their relations with successive settlement phases and monumental architecture. In our project, new, invasive archaeological works are not planned. Instead, radiocarbon dating of soil samples from various settlement phases (anthropogenic layers) and mortar samples from a Romanesque building will be conducted. Additionally, analysis of bone samples from the medieval cemetery, which functioned around the conch rotunda (building B), is planned. Chemical composition tests of the Romanesque mortars are also planned to better define the construction phases. All the enumerated analyses will be carried out on samples collected from the excavations carried out in Wiślica in the 1990s. Conceivably, the new chronological data compared with the relative chronology of the site will allow for a more accurate absolute dating, which is so far mostly based on the analysis of pottery, and will perhaps indicate which church in Wiślica is the oldest — the one in the stronghold or the one in the borough.

Analysis and Interpretation of Wiślica’s Funeral Rite with Particular Emphasis on the Initial Stage of the Reception of Christianity In Wiślica, there are five cemeteries from the Middle Ages, one of them located outside the town — in the nearby Gorysławice. The oldest necropolis in Wiślica is the cemetery in Gorysławice, the only necropolis in Wiślica not situated next to a church, dated to the second half of the eleventh century (Szymański 1963). Its location away from inhabited areas and the presence of richly furnished burials, including many coins and other tangible manifestations of funerary customs typical for the phase of the reception of Christianity, indicate that it is the oldest Christian cemetery of the described settlement complex. Most probably, it served mainly as the burial ground for the inhabitants of the stronghold located ‘on the meadows’ and its associated open settlements. Nonetheless, observations made to date suggest that this necropolis may be at least several decades older than its current dating. The establishment of the Wiślica settlement at the turn of

the tenth century must be associated with the presence of Christian elites. Therefore, it can be assumed that at least several of the inhumation graves are dated to the first half of the eleventh century. Considering that the chronology of the cemetery is based predominantly on the coins discovered next to the bodies, it must be underlined that those provide a terminus post quem date only. Furthermore, the site suffered severe damage, particularly during the Second World War, but the 1960s excavations observed that damaging activities continued in the post-war period also. The oldest churchyard of Wiślica, customarily referred to as the ‘Batalionów Chłopskich Street’ site (Kalaga 1986), dated to the period after the mid-eleventh century but more likely to the turn of the eleventh century, may have either simultaneously functioned with the ‘Gorysławice’ necropolis or gradually took over its functions. This chronology was based on two coins minted during the reign of Bolesław II the Bold (Bolesław Śmiały, r. 1058–1079) and Władysław I Herman (r. 1079–1102), discovered in the burials of the site. This cemetery was associated with a small single-nave church identified as St Nicholas’s church, dated to around the end of the eleventh century or the beginning of the twelfth century. The oldest graves of another churchyard, located next to the road that in the high Middle Ages led towards the stronghold ‘on the meadows’ (contemporary Kilińskiego Street), are dated to the same period, the second half or the turn of the eleventh century. This cemetery most probably belonged to the oldest phase of St Martin’s Church, which was likely situated at the place of the sixteenth-century church under the same invocation. However, archaeological research found no remains of that oldest Romanesque church, but only the younger one (Twarowska 1982). Another coterminous cemetery existed in the ‘Regia’ (Fig. 8.6), located around the conch rotunda (building B), dated to the end of the eleventh or to the twelfth centuries. The establishment of the churchyard — lacking grave goods — is linked to the dating of the church. This cemetery has unique characteristics within Wiślica, such as its unusual layout — a concentric arrangement of burials around the church — the presence of stone grave structures, and the lack of grave furnishings (Glińska 2020, 226–29). The churchyards located next to the church of St Nicholas and next to Romanesque church I (ZollAdamikowa 1965, 72; Glińska 2020, 262–64) undeniably had an elite character, as evidenced by the presence of in ecclesiam graves, sarcophagi, and gravestones. The best example is the tomb in Romanesque church I (Tomaszewski 1961, 147). This church was built in the area of the modern-day collegiate church complex, with a western gallery, a double-storey chancel, and a

135

136 n i n a gl i ń s k a

Figure 8.6. Wiślica — ‘Regia’. Phase I of the graveyard, located around the conch rotunda (building B). (Prepared by N. Glińska.)

crypt, where, in the 1170s, the engraved gypsum Slab of Orants (Płyta Orantów) was created. The church was most probably a ducal foundation, visibly manifested through the gallery for the duke and his family members, and the crypt, which could serve as their burial place. When entering that crypt, people stepped over the tomb hidden under the stairs and then over the images depicted on the floor. The images were certainly representing an intended ideological theme, presenting the insignificance of the privileges of earthly life compared to death and eternity. It is suspected that the patron who commissioned the slab was either Bolesław IV the Curly (Bolesław Kędzierzawy, r. 1146–1177) or, more probably, Casimir II the Just (r. 1166–1194) (Kalinowski 1963). Finally, a further graveyard was in use on the ‘Regia’ after the destruction of the residential complex, dated broadly from the twelfth century to the fourteenth century (Glińska 2020, 229–34). The time of its establishment is unknown.

In conclusion, various forms of burials can be observed in Wiślica: burials inside the temple, stone sarcophagi, graves under a stone slab or with incomplete stone frames, and burials with grave goods, in churchyards, and in contemporaneous field cemeteries alike. The variety of burial places and burial customs provides a good basis for comparing funerary customs in Wiślica with other burials from this period in Lesser Poland.

Comparative Analysis of the Spatial Arrangement of Wiślica and Other Important Centres of Lesser Poland The last archaeological part of our project will be a comparative analysis of the spatial arrangement of Wiślica with other important centres of Lesser Poland, such as Kraków, Sandomierz, and Lublin, taking into account such issues as the location of the stronghold/

8.   w i ś l i c a as an e xample o f a chri st i an tow n i n t he stat e o f t he f i rst p ias ts

strongholds, the development of open settlements, the location and the number of cemeteries, as well as residential and sacred architecture. The overall view of the development of Wiślica shows its importance in the Middle Ages. As mentioned, in consequence of lacking pertinent data that would allow us to narrow down the dating of archaeological material from the oldest phases of both fortified settlements, determining which of them was established earlier, or whether they functioned simultaneously, is, unfortunately, impossible. In my opinion, it seems more probable that the settlement on the ‘Regia’ is the oldest in Wiślica, and the new fortified stronghold ‘on the meadows’ was built only after the one on the ‘Regia’ burned down. Nonetheless, the reconstruction of the appearance of Wiślica in the tenth century is impossible. In the eleventh century, Wiślica consisted of the fortified settlement located ‘on the meadows’ and other settlements that were developing in at least three more areas of the later town: the open settlement directly connected to the mentioned fortification (‘Kilińskiego Street’ site), another slightly further away (‘Batalionów Chłopskich Street’ site), and one on the ‘Regia’, in the place of the older stronghold destroyed by fire (the rampart of phase I). The form of the reoccupation of the latter site is uncertain; it may have temporarily been an open settlement, but it could also be directly associated with the rebuilding of the fortifications. This settlement is dated to the eleventh century. The initial phase of the settlement on Batalionów Chłopskich Street is dated to the end of the tenth century to the mid-eleventh century. The beginnings of the settlement located in the area of contemporary Kilińskiego Street are ambiguous. Currently, it is only broadly dated to the period between the second half of the tenth century and the mid-thirteenth century. Originally, residents of that settlement complex were probably buried at the cemetery located outside the inhabited zone — on the river headland, situated approximately 1 km away (‘Gorysławice’ cemetery). At the turn of the eleventh century (possibly as early as the middle of the eleventh century), changes started to take place in Wiślica, confirming its increasing role in the administrative and political structure of the Piast state. Gradually, stone churches with associated graveyards were founded in all three above-mentioned settlement zones (Batalionów Chłopskich Street site, Kilińskiego Street site, and the ‘Regia’). The youngest of them was possibly St Martin’s Church (Kilińskiego Street site). The residues of gypsum mortar discovered in situ indicate that it was built in the twelfth century. In the twelfth century, the ‘town island’ with the ‘Regia’ centre had a dominant role in the spatial organization of the Wiślica settlement complex. The stronghold ‘on the meadows’ was burnt down either

at the end of the eleventh century, at the beginning of the twelfth century, or — which seems to be the most probable — sometime during the first half of the twelfth century, perhaps in connection with the invasion of the Ruthenians and Polovtsy in 1135 (Benyskiewicz 2020; Kardyś 2006, 53–54; MPH sn. xi, 111; MPH sn. v, 57, 236; MPH ii, 832; MPH iii, 152–53; MPH sn. xv, 47–48; MPH sn. viii, 45; MPH sn. xii, 22; MPH sn. x, t. 2, 87; MPH ii, 875; RKSKP, 551, 554; Długosz, 506–08). At the same time, around the beginning of the twelfth century, the cemetery in Gorysławice probably fell out of use. It is difficult to determine the impact of the invasion of 1135 on the further development of the entire settlement complex. Archaeological data suggests that only the fortified settlement ‘on the meadows’ was destroyed at that time. However, regardless of the extent of the damage, it seems that Bolesław III the Wrymouth (Bolesław Krzywousty, r. 1107–1138) did not have time to rebuild Wiślica. After his death and the division of the country into districts, it had been a part of the Seniorate Province, constituting part of its border. In view of the fight for the throne of Kraków between the senior and the juniors, it was also not a favourable time for investments. That stagnation was most probably overcome only during the reign of Henry of Sandomierz, who, after the new division of the country in 1146, received the lands of Sandomierz and Wiślica. He can be linked to the construction of the Romanesque church I (currently under the Gothic collegiate church) next to the earlier, tiny St Nicholas’s Church. The ducal seat and stronghold mentioned in written records from the second half of the twelfth century probably referred to the ‘Regia’. At the current stage of research, however, it seems that the initial phase of the construction project on the ‘Regia’, resulting in the development of the ‘town island’ (the construction of the rampart of phase II, the levelling of the settlement area, and the construction of stone buildings), can be placed in the period preceding the invasion of 1135. In light of the archaeological sources, it is not possible to determine whether, before 1135, both fortified settlements in Wiślica existed at the same time, serving different functions, like in Prague and Vysehrad (Pleszczyński 2000), or if the development of the fortified settlement on the ‘Regia’ took place only after the destruction of the stronghold located ‘on the meadows’, like in Lesser Poland in Naszacowice and Podgrodzie (Poleski 2004, 184) or Lublin (Rozwałka and others 2006), where successive strongholds were built one after another. In the second half of the twelfth century, during the reign of Henry of Sandomierz (Henryk Sandomierski, r. 1146–1166) and Casimir II the Just (Kazimierz Sprawiedliwy, r. 1166–1194), Wiślica experienced the height of its prosperity. In addition to a church with a crypt (Romanesque church I), around

137

13 8 n i n a gl i ń s k a

Figure 8.7. Reconstruction of the urban development phases of Wiślica; I. c. 950–1350; II. 1350–1400; III. after 1550. (According to Michno 1970.)

25 m to the east, there was a single-nave church with an extension in the form of a burial chapel (St Nicholas’s Church). In that phase St Martin’s Church and, above all, at least some, if not all, of the residential buildings at the ‘Regia’ also functioned. Thus, Wiślica, at that time, was a proto-town with numerous masonry buildings. In Lesser Poland, the only similar settlements were Kraków and Sandomierz. In the second quarter of the thirteenth century, a three-nave basilica (Romanesque church II) was built on the site of Romanesque church I. The surviving details suggest that it was built either with the participation of or directly by a Cistercian workshop. The founder of the basilica (Romanesque church II) was probably one of the bishops of Kraków — Iwo Odrowąż, Wisław, or Jan Prandota. That church was demolished around the mid-fourteenth century in connection with the construction of the Gothic collegiate church. The Mongol

invasion of 1241 destroyed Wiślica. The second attack at the turn of 1259 and 1260 possibly also impacted Wiślica, as it was located on its path, based on the known places affected at that time, such as Koprzywnica, Jędrzejów, and Miechów. In the second half of the thirteenth century, Wiślica was granted a privilege charter by Bolesław V the Chaste (Bolesław Wstydliwy, r. 1243–1279) or Leszek II the Black (Leszek Czarny, r. 1279–1288), or possibly Wenceslas II (Wacław II, r. 1291–1305), which was either compensation for the damage caused by the Mongols or an attempt to restore its previous rank. However, until the end of the thirteenth century, no documents were issued in Wiślica. The favourite seat of Bolesław V the Chaste and his wife Kinga (Cunegunda) of Poland was Nowy Korczyn. Leszek II the Black also probably did not stay in Wiślica, which may indicate that there was no suitable base to host the duke’s party. The work undertaken by Bishop Jan Muskata at the

8.   w i ś l i c a as an e xample o f a chri st i an tow n i n t he stat e o f t he f i rst p ias ts 139

end of the thirteenth century led to the fortification of the town, by strengthening the defensive functions of the collegiate church and the construction of a wall on the stronghold in the meadows. Wiślica played an important role during Ladislaus the Short’s (Władysław I Łokietek, r. 1306–1333) fight for the throne of Kraków. He captured the town in 1291 but probably only for a short time. He recaptured Wiślica at the turn of 1304 and 1305, making it a strategic outpost to conquer Sandomierz and Kraków territory. Kazimierz the Great (r. 1333–1370) redeveloped the town and built the Gothic collegiate church. Before that, the remains of the religious building discovered on the ‘Batalionów Chłopskich Street’ site had ceased to exist and was replaced by a graveyard, most probably at the end of the thirteenth century. Archaeological sources remain silent about the rest of the history of the town. Urban studies conducted by Bogusław Krasnowolski (2004, 270–75) showed that the settlement stretched along Kilińskiego Street

(Fig. 8.7.I), preceding the issue of the mentioned charter. Kazimierz the Great refounded the city and surrounded it with walls. The market square was probably founded in a place that thus far was without buildings. Initially, during the time when Romanesque church II functioned, the main street ran near the church. At that time the quarters had similar dimensions (Fig. 8.7.II). Following that, Kazimierz the Great built the Gothic collegiate church. After some time, the neighbourhood where St Nicholas’s Church once stood was rebuilt, and a new street was constructed, which made this part of the city less regular in shape (Fig. 8.7.III). This road led from the Kraków Gate to the Busko Gate. The third gate was probably near the ‘Regia’ site, so presumably, the second road led from that gate to the Cracow Gate to the south. In the fifteenth century, a collegiate church complex was built by Jan Długosz, creating a large, compact quarter of church buildings in the southeastern corner of the market square. In this way, Wiślica obtained a shape that, to a large extent, has survived to our times.

140 n i n a gl i ń s k a

Works Cited Primary Sources Długosz = Joannis Dlugossi seu Longini canonici cracoviensis Historiae Polonicae libri XII, ed. by Karol Mecherzyński and Aleksander Przezdziecki, vols 1–2 (Kraków, 1867–1868: Drukarnia ‘Czas’ W. Kirchmayera) MPH = Monumenta Poloniae Historica, ed. by August Bielowski, vols 1–6, Lwów 1864–1893 (Kraków, 1960–1961: Akademia Umiejętności) MPH sn. = Monumenta Poloniae Historica, nova series (Kraków, 1946: Polska Akademia Umiejętności) RKSKP = Ioannis Dlugossi Annales seu Cronicae incliti Regni Poloniae, Lib. VI, vol. 3 (Warsaw, 1973: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe) Secondary Studies Antoniewicz, Włodzimierz. 1962. ‘Uwagi na marginesie zabytków wiślickich’, in Sprawozdania Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego I Politechniki Warszawskiej. I Konferencja Naukowa w Warszawie 23 i 24 marca 1960. Referaty i dyskusje, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 21–27 —— 1968. ‘Znaczenie odkryć w Wiślicy’, Slavia Antiqua, 10: 105–15 Antoniewicz, Włodzimierz, and Zofia Wartołowska. 1951. Badania grodziska w Wiślicy, pow. Pińczów w r. 1949, Materiały Wczesnośredniowieczne, 1 (Warsaw: Państwowe Muzeum Archeologiczne), pp. 73–81 —— 1952. Badania grodziska w Wiślicy (pow. Pińczów) w r. 1950, Materiały Wczesnośredniowieczne, 2 (Warsaw: Państwowe Muzeum Archeologiczne), pp. 45–57 —— 1955. Prace wykopaliskowe w Wiślicy w latach 1953 i 1954, Sprawozdania Archeologiczne, 1 (Warsaw: Państwowa Akademia Nauk), pp. 235–50 —— 1956. Sprawozdanie z prac wykopaliskowych na grodzisku w Wiślicy pow. Pińczów za lata 1951 i 1952, Materiały Wczesnośredniowieczne, 4 (Warsaw: Państwowe Muzeum Archeologiczne), pp. 149–59 Benyskiewicz, Krzysztof. 2020. ‘Zniszczenie Wiślicy w 1135 roku w świetle przekazów źródłowych i literatury historycznej (część I: Źródła)’, Gremium, 14: 39–67 Bukowska, Aneta. 2020. Nowe badania nad wczesnośredniowieczną architekturą kamienną w Wiślicy, Origines Polonorum, 14 (Warsaw: Państwowa Akademia Nauk), pp. 299–342 Glińska, Nina. 2020. Wczesnośredniowieczna Wiślica. Urbs famosissima in regno Lechitarum, Origines Polonorum, 14 (Warsaw: Państwowa Akademia Nauk), pp. 11–298 Gliński, Waldemar. 1998. ‘Wiślica plemienna czy wczesnopaństwowa?’, in Civitas Principales. Wybrane ośrodki władzy w Polsce średniowiecznej. Katalog wystawy, ed. by Tomasz Janiak and Dariusz Stryniak (Gniezno: Muzeum Początków Państwa Polskiego), pp. 77–91 —— 1999. Wczesnośredniowieczne zausznice z czterema paciorkami z Wiślicy, stan. Regia, Sprawozdania Archeologiczne, 51 (Warsaw: Państwowa Akademia Nauk), pp. 211–23 —— 2000a. ‘Zespół palatialny w Wiślicy w świetle badań archeologicznych’, in Osadnictwo i architektura ziem polskich w dobie zjazdu gnieźnieńskiego, ed. by Andrzej Buko and Zygmunt Świechowski (Warsaw: Państwowa Akademia Nauk), pp. 257–67 —— 2000b. Wiślica – Regia w świetle badań archeologicznych i architektonicznych. Sprawozdanie z badań archeologicznych przeprowadzonych w latach 1994–1998, Między Wisłą a Pilicą, 1 (Kielce: University of Jan Kochanowski), pp. 63–102 —— 2009. ‘Kulminacja tzw. wyspy miejskiej (st. Regia) w Wiślicy w świetle badań archeologicznych’, in Architektura romańska w Polsce. Nowe odkrycia i interpretacje, ed. by Tomasz Janiak (Gniezno: Muzeum Początków Państwa Polskiego), pp. 389–418 Gliński, Waldemar, and Jacek Koj. 1998. ‘Z nowszych badań nad wczesnośredniowieczną Wiślicą’, Slavia Antiqua 40: 119–49 Kalaga, Joanna. 1986. Wczesnośredniowieczne osadnictwo przy ul. Batalionów Chłopskich w Wiślicy, Światowit, 36 (Warsaw: University of Warsaw), pp. 131–74 Kalinowski, Lech. 1963. ‘Romańska posadzka z rytami figuralnymi w krypcie kolegiaty wiślickiej’, in Rozprawy Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej. T. 1: Odkrycia w Wiślicy, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 85–132 Kardyś, Piotr. 2006. Wiślica w średniowieczu i w okresie nowożytnym (Kielce: Kieleckie Towarzystwo Naukowe) Krasnowolski, Bogusław. 2004. Lokacyjne układy urbanistyczne na obszarze ziemi krakowskiej w XIII i XIV wieku, Part II: Katalog lokacyjnych układów urbanistycznych (Kraków: Pedagogic University), pp. 270–75

8.   w i ś l i c a as an e xample o f a chri st i an tow n i n t he stat e o f t he f i rst p ias ts

Michno, Stanisław. 1970. ‘Place targowe w Wiślicy od XIV do połowy XVI wieku’, in Rozprawy Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej. T. 5: Studia związane z badaniami wiślickimi, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 121–43 Pleszczyński, Andrzej. 2000. Przestrzeń i polityka. Studium rezydencji władcy wcześniejszego średniowiecza. Przykład czeskiego Wyszehradu (Lublin: University of Marie Skłodowska-Curie) Poleski, Jacek. 2004. Wczesnośredniowieczne grody w dorzeczu Dunajca (Kraków: Jagiellonian University) Rodzińska-Chorąży, Teresa. 1996a. Kilka uwag w sprawie sporu o funkcję domniemanych mis chrzcielnych w Poznaniu i Wiślicy (w odpowiedzi Przemysławowi Urbańczykowi), Kwartalnik Historyczny, 103/1 (Warsaw: Państwowa Akademia Nauk), pp. 61–63 —— 1996b. Tak zwane misy chrzcielne w Poznaniu i Wiślicy. Fakty, hipotezy, interpretacje, Sprawozdania z posiedzeń Komisji Naukowych PAN Oddział Kraków, za styczeń–czerwiec 1995, 39/1 (Kraków: Państwowa Akademia Nauk), pp. 11–14 —— 1997. ‘Koliste struktury w Poznaniu i Wiślicy – misy chrzcielne czy urządzenia do mieszania zaprawy?’, in Wiślica. Nowe badania i interpretacje, ed. by Andrzej Grzybkowski (Warsaw: Ministerstwo Kultury i Sztuki), pp. 61–81 Rozwałka, Andrzej, Rafał Niedźwiadek, and Marek Stasiak. 2006. Lublin wczesnośredniowieczny. Studium rozwoju przestrzennego, Origines Polonorum, 1 (Warsaw: Państwowa Akademia Nauk) Szymański, Wojciech. 1963. ‘Cmentarzysko wczesnośredniowieczne w Gorysławicach, powiat Busko’, in Rozprawy Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej. T. 2: Badania archeologiczne w okolicy Wiślicy, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 137–97 Tomaszewski, Andrzej. 1961. Wyniki badań w kolegiacie wiślickiej w 1961 r., Małopolskie Studia Historyczne, 4/2 (Kraków: Polskie Towarzystwo Historyczne), pp. 146–49 —— 1965. Kolegiata wiślicka. Konferencja zamykająca badania wykopaliskowe (Kielce: Muzeum Świętokrzyskie) —— 1974. Romańskie kościoły z emporami zachodnimi na obszarze Polski, Czech i Węgier (Wrocław: Ossolineum) Twarowska, Ewa. 1982. Cmentarzysko i kościół św. Marcina w Wiślicy, Światowit, 35 (Warsaw: University of Warsaw), pp. 195– 254 Urbańczyk, Przemysław. 1995. Czy istnieją archeologiczne ślady masowych chrztów ludności wczesnopolskiej?, Kwartalnik Historyczny, 102/1 (Warsaw: Państwowa Akademia Nauk), pp. 3–18 —— 1996. Jeszcze o funkcji wczesnośredniowiecznych “mis” wapiennych, Kwartalnik Historyczny, 103/1 (Warsaw: Państwowa Akademia Nauk), pp. 65–68 Wartołowska, Zofia. 1959. Sprawozdanie z prac wykopaliskowych w Wiślicy, pow. Pińczów, w r. 1955, Sprawozdania Archeologiczne, 5 (Warsaw: Państwowa Akademia Nauk), pp. 237–50 —— 1960. Wyniki badań archeologicznych w Wiślicy, Ochrona Zabytków 13/1–4 (Warsaw: Narodowy Instytut Dziedzictwa), pp. 82–86 —— 1962. ‘Wyniki dotychczasowych badań w Wiślicy’, in Sprawozdania Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej. I Konferencja Naukowa w Warszawie 23 i 24 marca 1960. Referaty i dyskusje, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 15–20 —— 1963a. ‘Wiślica w IX, X i XI wieku’, in Sprawozdania Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej. II Konferencja Naukowa w Warszawie 28 i 29 kwietnia 1961. Referaty i dyskusje, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 21–22 —— 1963b. ‘Osada i gród w Wiślicy w świetle dotychczasowych badań wykopaliskowych do 1962 r.’, in Rozprawy Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej, 1: Odkrycia w Wiślicy, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 33–45 —— 1965. ‘Odkrycia na terenie miasta Wiślicy w roku 1962’, in Sprawozdania Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej. IV Konferencja Naukowa w Kielcach 5 kwietnia 1963. Referaty i dyskusje, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 25–28 —— 1966. ‘Dzieje Wiślicy w świetle odkryć archeologicznych’, in Sprawozdania Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej. V Konferencja Naukowa w Busku Zdroju i Wiślicy 19–20 maja 1966. Referaty, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), p. 37 —— 1968. Wiślica – urbs famosissima in regno Lechitarum, Z otchłani wieków, 34/3 (Warsaw: Stowarzyszenie Naukowe Archeologów Polskich), pp. 184–87

141

142 n i n a gl i ń s k a

—— 1970. ‘Sprawozdanie z archeologicznych prac badawczych prowadzonych w Wiślicy w roku 1968’, in Sprawozdania Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej. VI Konferencja Naukowa w Warszawie 10–11 lutego 1969, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 101–04 —— 1993. ‘Dzieje Wiślicy’, in Dzieje archeologii na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim, ed. by Stefan Karol Kozłowski and Janusz Kolendo (Warsaw: University of Warsaw), pp. 273–88 Wartołowska, Zofia, Irena Górska, Ludmiła Graba-Łęcka, and Łucja Okulicz. 1959. Badania grodziska w Wiślicy w 1956 r., Sprawozdania Archeologiczne, 7 (Warsaw: Państwowa Akademia Nauk), pp. 49–56 Wartołowska, Zofia, and Zofia Woźnicka. 1966. ‘Sprawozdanie z badań wykopaliskowych na stanowisku “Zamek” w Wiślicy w 1966 roku’, in Sprawozdania Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej. V Konferencja Naukowa w Busku Zdroju i Wiślicy 19–20 maja 1966. Referaty, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 264–66 —— 1967/1968. ‘Sprawozdanie z badań wykopaliskowych na stanowisku “Zamek” w Wiślicy w roku 1966’, in Studia Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 9–12 Wartołowska, Zofia, Zofia Woźnicka, and Hanna Karasińska. 1965. ‘Badania wykopaliskowe na terenie Wiślicy w 1963 r.’, in Sprawozdania Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej. IV Konferencja Naukowa w Kielcach 5 kwietnia 1963. Referaty i dyskusje, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 67–68 Wartołowska, Zofia, Zofia Woźnicka, and Stanisław Michno. 1970. ‘Sprawozdanie z badań archeologicznych w roku 1967 w Wiślicy’, in Sprawozdania Zespołu Badań nad Polskim Średniowieczem Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego i Politechniki Warszawskiej. VI Konferencja Naukowa w Warszawie 10–11 lutego 1969, ed. by Włodzimierz Antoniewicz and Piotr Biegański (Warsaw: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of Technology), pp. 99–100 Zoll-Adamikowa, Helena. 1965. ‘Recenzja badań archeologicznych w kolegiacie wiślickiej’, in Kolegiata wiślicka. Konferencja zamykająca badania wykopaliskowe, ed. by Andrzej Tomaszewski (Kielce: Muzeum Świętokrzyskei), pp. 67–74

Florin Mărginean

9. Between the Local Power Centre and the Ecclesiastical Network Living in castrum Orod in the High Middle Ages

A bs t r act  The present paper discusses aspects related to the organization of living inside the fortification of castrum Orod researched by archaeological excavations, most of which have either never or only partially been published before. The importance of these discoveries lies in the political and administrative role played by earthwork fortifications in the Árpadian Age (1000–1301). These centres of power, together with the major ecclesiastical institutions (such as the bishopric, chapter or provostry, or monasteries), which also appeared in the Lower Mureș area in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, made a major contribution to the administrative organization of the territory and, consequently, the birth of the network of local churches.

T

K e y wo r ds  Local power centre, earth fortification, castrum Orod, Lower Mureş Basin, high Middle Ages

T

Debated in specialized works for over three decades, the rampart fortification in Vladimirescu (old Orod) still raises historiographic polemics, but mainly as a consequence of the lack of a comprehensive publication of the results of the archaeological excavations. The present paper aims to fill this gap by collecting and analysing all of the material discovered during the archaeological investigations of Vladimirescu ‘Cetate’ between 1975 and 1980, kept in the archive of the Museum of Arad. The establishment of power centres in the area under discussion was probably determined by the strategic, political, and, most of all, economic significance of the Lower Mureş Basin. As is well known from preserved written sources, the control of salt transportation caused the first major conflict of the early Middle Ages in the

area (Suciu and Constantinescu 1980, 45). The conquest of the city of Vidin in 1002 or 1004 by the Byzantines allowed the rise of the local leader Ahtum, who was baptized in the rite of the Orthodox Church. The clash between the rebel and unbeliever Ahtum1 (end of the tenth to the beginning of eleventh centuries) and King Stephen I (r. 1000–1038) ended with the former’s defeat; the king occupied Ahtum’s most important centre and turned it into one of the most flourishing settlements 1 More information related to Ahtum’s life and work appears in chapter 10th of the Great Legend of Saint Gerard. Here Ahtum appears as ruler in the fortress of Mureș (princeps in urbe Morisena). He was also the one who built here a monastery of Greek monks dedicated to St John the Baptist (Iambor 2005, 252–53).

Florin Mărginean • ([email protected]) is an archaeologist at the National History Museum of Transylvania, str. C. Daicoviciu 2, Cluj-Napoca, 400020 Romania. His main areas of research are the material culture of the high Middle Ages, funerary archaeology, and church and monastic archaeology. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 143–153. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138113

144 f lo r in m ă rgi n e an

of the area. Some historians place this event closely after the year 1000 (c. 1004), while others believe it took place later (1028), before the foundation of the bishopric in Cenad (Madgearu 1993, 7; Benkő 1998). The old settlement of Morisena became the centre of the county called Csanád (Cenad) henceforth and the see of the diocese under the same name. Even if the existence and attribution of this centre to Ahtum are accepted, the dating of other similar centres along the Lower Mureş Basin (Vladimirescu or Bulci, for example) is still debated, placing their origins either to an earlier period in the ninth or tenth centuries, or to a later time following the foundation of the state, after the year 1000. Unfortunately, the comprehensive analysis of the few remaining written sources and the archaeological discoveries have not yet sufficiently clarified the chronology of these centres. In the case of Vladimirescu, there is no written evidence connecting the fortification to Ahtum, even less to Glad (Madgearu 1998, 196).2 In general, the earthwork fortifications of the end of tenth and eleventh centuries were regarded as political and economic power centres, which in this area were strengthened by the fact that the important commercial route along the Mureş Valley required the creation of control points, mainly aimed at controlling salt transport. However, this seems not to have been the only reason in the present case, as suggested by the investigations of castrum Orod. The limited written records (in fact, two sources: the eleventh-century legend of St Gerard and the twelfth-century chronicle of the Anonymous Notary) that corroborated (in a more or less far-fetched manner) the archaeological discoveries resulted in a vast amount of literature dedicated to the topic (Rusu 1971; Pascu 1972, ii, 40–60; Rusu 1980; Bóna 1998; Rusu and Hurezan 1999; Iambor 2005; Rusu 2005). In most cases, the analysis of the ramparts followed a general, outdated methodology. Maxim Mordovin presented a new approach in a recently published volume, which analyses these fortifications from the perspective of the approximately synchronous emergence and evolution of the three neighbouring medieval kingdoms of Bohemia, Poland, and Hungary (Mordovin 2016). For the area under discussion, there are two, contradictory historiographical trends: one Romanian and the other Hungarian. Nonetheless, a closer analysis reveals that there is no solid database focused on the architecture and the inner organization of the fortifications yet. Furthermore, no major change occurred in the approach to these issues after the 1990s.

Radu Popa’s appeal to the pressing need to reconsider the research of earthwork fortifications, printed in 1991, seems not to have triggered significant changes in their analysis (Popa 1991, 167–71). While a pertinent reaction to the questions formulated by researchers of the Hungarian historiography, such as István Bóna, regarding the dating of ‘pre-Hungarian’ fortifications and its related issues (Bóna 1998, 198), is still awaited, in their recently published volumes, Adrian A. Rusu (Rusu 2005, 80–89) and Ioan M. Tiplic (Ţiplic 2006, 203–32) took a stand on the matter, and nobody can deny their merits in re-opening the discussions. The delay in the debate perhaps could be accounted for by the need for a new generation of archaeologists who could continue the discussion without fear of their texts being censored, and who are free of subjectivity born of patriotism, either Hungarian or Romanian. An example of this is the analysis of Maxim Mordovin (Mordovin 2016), which compares the appearance and evolution of these fortifications and, especially, the role they played in the politics and economy of the Hungarian kingdom. The first investigation of rampart fortifications in the studied area was conducted during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries when, during the works of the first Austrian military maps, they were localized and surveyed topographically. Such an investigation took place in the case of Vladimirescu as well (Fig. 9.1). Nevertheless, the research of that period was not systematic, and no significant progress was made during the nineteenth century. Consequently, their chronology remained to this day connected to the interpretation of the chronicle by the Anonymous Notary. While this is contested by Hungarian researchers, this source became the argumentative basis for some of the Romanian historiography that presumed the existence of such fortified centres before the arrival of the Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin.3 Despite the extensive — if not systematic — excavations of the twentieth century, the attempt to confirm written sources through archaeology did not lead to the expected results, mainly due to the way in which each excavation was published. Despite the fact that the fortification in Vladimirescu was well-researched archaeologically, the exhaustive results have still not been published. In order to provide an unbiased narrative, the present paper will synthesize the main discoveries connected to life inside the fortification of Vladimirescu, based



2 The Anonymous Notary mentions Ahtum in passing in chapters 11 and 44 of the chronicle, noting that he is a descendant of Glad.

3 Despite the fact that the bibliography referring to Anonymous’s chronicle has enlarged considerably, it would have stood a higher chance of credibility if it were corroborated by other written sources.

9.   b e t we e n t he lo cal pow e r ce nt re and t he eccle si ast i cal network 145

Figure 9.1. 1) The location of old Orod on a map from the eighteenth century; 2) Satellite image and fortification planimetry detail after Lidar scanning.

146 f lo r in m ă rgi n e an

on the documentation preserved in the archive of the museum in Arad, compiled during the six archaeological campaigns performed there between 1975 and 1980. Such an approach is crucial; the partial publication of the results only supported the perpetuation of the two historiographical trends about the monument’s dating. Representatives of the first trend date the fortification to the ninth to eleventh centuries (Glück 1976, 78; Barbu and Zdroba 1979; Barbu 1980; Rusu 1980, 166–67; Mărghitan 1985, iii, 143; Bejan 1995, 119–20; Cosma 2002, 47–48, 52; Iambor 2005, 79; Crişan 2006, 44) and link it to the pre-state formations existing there before the arrival of the Hungarians, while members of the second trend identified it as the centre of the medieval county of Arad, existing between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries (Bóna 1998, 98–99; Benkő 1998; Rusu and Hurezan 1999, 31; Rusu 2005, 95; Mordovin 2016). According to István Bóna, most earth fortifications were built only from the eleventh century onwards (Bóna 1998), as it was the time when the need to establish power centres all around the kingdom became justifiable (Nováki and Sándorfi 1981, 154–55). Supporting or rejecting any of the two suggested datings without solid arguments would only perpetuate the uncertainty. For this reason, the present study only reviews data about living inside and outside the fortification that might subsequently aid in clearing up the chronological frames and stages of the monument. In order to achieve this, the correlation with funerary evidence from inside the fortification is also critical. Built in the middle of the plain, the fortification in Vladimirescu is placed westwards from the eponymous settlement (previously called Glogovăţ), now almost a suburb of the city of Arad, 1000 m south of the Arad−Deva road, on an alluvium deposit between two former, yet still visible branches of the Mureş River, flowing towards the south. Micro-toponymically, the place is called Şanţuri (Hu: Öthalom; Ge: Die Schanzen – Ditches), while the toponym Cetate or La Cetate (‘Fortification’ or ‘at the Fortification’) is preserved in the specialized literature. The ramparts came into the focus of research relatively late; the first non-intrusive investigation only started in the beginning of the 1970s. On that occasion, pottery fragments were collected from the soil surface, and they were dated to the eleventh–thirteenth centuries. The fortification has a slightly trapezoidal shape, well discernible in recent satellite images, with its small side located westwards and having rounded corners. It measures 150 m in length, 130 m along the eastern side and 85 m along the western side. Different versions of both the planimetry of the fortification and partly of the archaeological excavations have appeared in the specialized literature (Mărghitan 1985, iii, 143; Bóna

1998, 98–99, fig. 51; Rusu and Hurezan 1999, 32 fig. 4; Iambor 2005, 346, pl. XVIII/1), but no accurate plan of the excavations performed during the six archaeological campaigns has been published.4 The present paper includes an up-to-date ground plan (Fig. 9.2), only missing the exact location of Trench 8, excavated during the last campaign in 1980, in the southwestern corner of the fortification. Historically, no sources mentioned the fortification in Vladimirescu in connection with the events during the time of Ahtum and even less during the time of Glad; still, the former is known to have controlled and ruled over these territories. To ensure such control, Ahtum supposedly had some sort of fortifications in this area, which angered King Stephen I. Nevertheless, lacking conclusive evidence, all scenarios remain irrelevant. The six archaeological campaigns of the fortification in Vladimirescu enabled the delineation of the defence system, the area with dwellings, a cemetery, and an area of pottery workshops. Regarding their chronology, the argumentation for dating the fortification prior to the beginning of the eleventh century based on some pottery fragments discovered in the filling of the first rampart alone seems insufficient. Similarly, the theory of a pre-existing settlement cannot be accepted when based on a few pot shards and certain contexts that lack clear documentation, such as conclusive stratigraphical drawings and photographs. Even if accepting the anteriority of the cemetery inside the fortification and the dwellings identified both inside and outside the stronghold, based on the current evidence, their dating cannot be earlier than the beginning of the eleventh century (Rusu 1980, 165–71). As mentioned, despite the lack of evidence, research is still divided; while (predominantly the older) Romanian scholarship dates the castle between the ninth and eleventh centuries, the other branch of the scholarship identifies the site as the castrum of the medieval county of Arad. Regardless of its dating, the fortification’s role as a power centre in the area cannot be denied. Such an object, however, could have only been built and used in the framework of a well-established state entity or of one in the course of becoming established. An obvious example of that would be the establishment of the county of Arad, which, however, cannot be dated accurately, as it was later split from the larger and previously founded county of Cenad (Rusu and Hurezan 1999, 34).

4 This was due to the authors of the excavations not publishing the general ground plan; besides the annual reports, they were unable to valorize their archaeological research later on in a monograph. This led to the perpetuation of a falsely rendered or more likely an incomplete ground plan.

9.   b e t we e n t he lo cal pow e r ce nt re and t he eccle si ast i cal network 147

Figure 9.2. The general plan of the archaeological excavation and some photos from the excavation. (After M. Zdroba and M. Barbu.)

148 f lo r in m ă rgi n e an

A document dated to 1131 mentions fifteen households inside the fortification (in castro Orodiensi sunt 15 mans-es) (Györffy 1966, 170), which might be connected to the archaeological discoveries made on the northern and western sides of the fortification, where dwellings were identified, dated to the period between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries based on their shape and the objects found in them (Fig. 9.2). A closer analysis of the material could likely reveal slightly more focused chronologies for some of the dwellings. A preliminary examination suggests an earlier dating for those discovered in squares C, E, D, and F, perhaps the end of the tenth century, certainly the eleventh century, and for the house discovered in square F and trench S 2, possibly the eleventh or twelfth century, maybe even the first half of the thirteenth century. An account about one of the most important early events of the Hungarian kingdom (SRH 1937, i, 447) mentioned the fortification; somewhere near the castle of Orod, Queen Helen, King Béla II’s wife (r. 1131–1141), ordered the trial and execution of the nobles guilty of having blinded her husband during the time of King Coloman (r. 1095–1116). Later written evidence, dated from 1177, confirmed the fortification’s possessions (Györffy 1966, 170–72). The iobagiones of the castrum of Arad were mentioned in 1213 (iobagiones castri Orod): Basu hotnog, Nuhu, Bayr, Belche, Kelemin, soldiers, and other servants (DIR 1951, i, 57). Further mentions of villages belonging to the fortification date to 1214 and 1222, while the last mentions are from 1232 (DIR 1951, i, 63, 131, 262). Despite the relatively rich written evidence, the number of villages and possessions belonging to the fortification was certainly larger than the documents reveal (Rusu 1980, 170–71). While the settlement inside the fortification is well documented by both written and archaeological sources, the same cannot be said about the cemetery on the eastern half of the castle or the potter’s workshop on the exterior of the northern side. The authors of the archaeological excavations attributed the perimeter to the north of the fortification to a settlement contemporary with the cemetery and, therefore, the castle. In the eastern half of the site, inside the ramparts, part of a cemetery was discovered. Although only a small part of the area was excavated, 250 graves were uncovered, dated, based on dress accessories and grave goods, to the period from the eleventh to the thirteenth centuries (Fig. 9.2). As graves turned up everywhere in the eastern half of the inner area of the ramparts, at its largest, the cemetery seems to have occupied more than half of the fortification enclosure. The orientation of the graves was west–east, with some variations, probably depending on the season of the burial. The bodies were generally laid in a supine position, with the arms resting along the sides of the body, placed

upon the abdomen or pelvis. The graves were found at a depth varying between 0.80 and 0.90 m. There were no traces of coffins, but graves enclosed with bricks were found. No traces of a church have been reported either, although bricks and remains of building materials were discovered. The number of grave goods was generally meagre, consisting of temple rings, either simple or with an ‘S’ ending (Fig. 9.3), earrings, rings, glass beads, and pottery. The most important finds, also allowing a finer dating, were numismatic. Coins were deposited in several tombs at Vladimirescu Cetate. Coins belonging to the following kings have been discovered: Peter (1038–1041; 1044–1046), Andrew I (1046–1060), and Béla I (1060–1063). The coins found in the eastern and central areas of the fortification suggest the direction of the expansion of the cemetery from the east to the west. The earliest burials can be dated from around the mid-eleventh century in the eastern part of the fortification, where the highest concentration of graves could be documented. The results of the investigations, primarily in trench S 2, suggest that the burials were laid in rows, in a north-south direction. Towards the west, the burials gradually become scarce, the last grave being recorded in section 3, at c. 30 m from the last row of graves (Mărginean 2016, 94–95). In a short report about the investigations of 1976, the archaeologists of the Museum of Arad, Mircea Zdroba and Mircea Barbu, briefly mention that, outside of the defensive ditch, on the northern side, there are traces of a settlement, dated to the eleventh and twelfth centuries (Fig. 9.2). In section S2 and unit B, two pottery kilns and a dwelling were reported, from around and inside of which several pottery fragments were recovered, including pieces of cauldrons, as well fragments of bricks datable to the Árpadian period (Barbu and Zdroba 1977, 28). Considering their position, it is worth noting that the workshop with the two kilns was erected in the immediate vicinity of the northern side of the fortification, built of soil and wood (Mărginean 2021, 243–44). In 2022, a magnetometric survey was carried out on the entire surface of the fortification, allowing us to observe anomalies linked mainly to the fortification system of the wooden enclosure. Unfortunately, the results concerning the built structures, both residential and ecclesiastical, are not clear, and thus, neither are the internal organization and settled area of the castle (Fig. 9.4.1).5 Besides the castle, two further places should be considered that add to the landscape as an administrative

5 The measurements were made by Adrian-Cristian Ardelean and Adriana Sărăşan (National Museum of the Banat, Timișoara), to whom I would like to express my thanks.

9.   b e t we e n t he lo cal pow e r ce nt re and t he eccle si ast i cal network 149

Figure 9.3. Simple and S-shaped temple rings found in the graves of the cemetery of the fortification.

and ecclesiastical configuration of the kingdom, located in the immediate vicinity of old Orod: Vladimirescu Basilica, the former Catholic chapter and provostry, and the site named ‘Pădurea Vrăbiilor’ (Fig. 9.4.2). The Catholic chapter and provostry of Orod (today Glogovatz/Vladimirescu) has been intensively researched and documented from the nineteenth century onwards. Still, conclusions are difficult to draw due to the following main causes: firstly, when the activity of the provostry stopped in the sixteenth century, the building slowly became dilapidated. Secondly, the modern expansion of the village now overlaps its area, and finally, the local administration shows little interest in reusing the ruins. E. Dörner was the first archaeologist from Arad to analyse the ruins of the provostry in Vladimirescu both from a historical and archaeological perspective (Dörner 1967). His research was continued between 1969 and 1970 and again between 1983 and 1984 by M. Barbu, M. Zdroba, and G. P. Hurezan, although they all concentrated on the interior space of the former basilica, with the primary aim of reconstructing its building phases. The archaeological investigations, in addition to defining the two major construction phases of the monument, uncovered about sixty graves, dated mainly on the basis of coins from the twelfth to the fourteenth centuries, with the earliest coins attributed to kings Stefan II (r. 1116–1131) and Béla II (r. 1131–1141). Near the apse of the first church and the transept of

the second church, there were graves in cists, dated between the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. A wall found during the investigations in 2012 could also suggest the western limit of the cemetery (Bica and others 2014, 106–09). Not very far from the earth fortification, about 500 m to the northwest, near the C. F. R. (railway) canton, at the Pădurea Vrăbiilor point, a verification survey carried out by M. Rusu in 1971 captured traces of an early medieval habitation. Furthermore, thirteen graves were also discovered in the investigated area, some of which were disturbed. The deceased were laid in the grave pit in a supine position, facing west–east, with their arms placed along the sides of their bodies and generally without any inventory pieces. Only five graves were undisturbed, the remainder being reburials or perhaps later disturbances. In one of the burials, a coin issued by King Stephen III (r. 1162–1172) was discovered (Rusu 1980, 167). M. Barbu continued the excavations, but no further graves have been found, only some material evidence, predominantly ceramics (Barbu 1980, 158). The pottery fragments and coins date the cemetery and probably the settlement to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. It seems that the presence of the provostry and its rising importance was the exact opposite to the position of the fortification located in its close proximity (Rusu and Hurezan 1999, 35). This might be just one of the causes, probably not the most important, leading to

150 f lo r in m ă rgi n e an

Figure 9.4. 1. The plan of the fortification after the magnetometric survey; 2. Location of the archaeological features in Vladimirescu after a Lidar scan.

9.   b e t we e n t he lo cal pow e r ce nt re and t he eccle si ast i cal network

the latter’s decline and eventual abandonment. It is very likely that by the time of the Mongol invasion in 1241, the fortification had lost its initial function and had been abandoned, which would explain why the most important contemporary narrative source, Rogerius’s Carmen Miserabile, does not mention it. The archaeological evidence confirms this theory; the settlement inside and around the fortification did not continue beyond the thirteenth century. The loss of importance, abandonment, or a change of function is not unique, but common to other similar fortifications. Similar processes were also observed, for example, in the castles in Biharea and Cluj Mănăștur. A significant number of medieval monasteries functioned in the current territory of the Mureș Basin, which have been collected and analysed in several smaller or larger studies (Karácsony 1905; Juhász 1927; Lupşa 1929; Dávid 1974; Romhányi 2000; Koszta 2000; Rusu and Hurezan 2000; Rusu and others 2000; Heitelné 2001; Hervay 2001; Ţeicu 2007; Heitel 2010). From a historiographic perspective, the data that has been progressively collected ended up forming well-structured databases, but the stage reached by the archaeological research of these monasteries cannot be considered

satisfactory (Mărginean 2018). However, it is noteworthy that apart from the known monasteries on the lower course of the Mureș, no traces of contemporary parish churches are known in the vicinity of Orod. The organization of the Diocese of Cenad was followed by the emergence of monasteries that made a major contribution to the establishment of the Western Church in these parts of the kingdom. This subsequently led to the creation of a network of parish churches, which had a major role in the Christianization of the rural population. Although the number of early parish churches discovered is not large, the presence of a bishopric in the Lower Mureș Basin, along with the chapter and provostry and the network of monasteries, suggests a high level of Church infrastructure, which also indicates the installation of churches in rural areas, especially from the late eleventh century onwards.

Acknowledgements I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to Victor Sava for the Lidar scan processing, and Daniel Preda for the graphic processing of the drawings.

151

152 f lo r in m ă rgi n e an

Works Cited Primary Sources DIR C: xiv, iii = Mihail Roller (ed.)Documente privind istoria României, C/Transilvania, xiv, iii (Bucharest: Academia Republicii Populare Române, 1951) SRH i = Scriptores Rerum Hungaricarum tempore ducum regumque stirpis Arpadianae gestarum, ed. by Imre Szentpétery, I (Budapest: Academia Litter, 1937) Rogerius. 2006. Carmen miserabile (Cântecul de jale) (Oradea: Editura Arca) Secondary Studies Barbu, Mircea. 1980. ‘Săpăturile arheologice de la Arad-Vladimirescu. Campania 1979’, Ziridava, 12: 156–58 Barbu, Mircea, and Mircea Zdroba. 1977. ‘Noi cercetări privind cetatea de pământ de la Vladimirescu’, Ziridava, 8: 17–28 —— 1978. ‘Şantierul arheologic Arad-Vladimirescu. Campania 1977’, Ziridava, 10: 101–21 —— 1979. ‘Cercetările arheologice de la Arad-Vladimirescu. Campania 1978’, Ziridava, 11: 181–93 Bejan, Adrian. 1995. Banatul în secolele IV–XII (Timişoara: Editura de Vest) Benkő, Elek, Tamás Csikány, István Csikány, Dan Demșea, and György Domokos. 1998. Az Aradi vár története (Budapest: Zrinyi Kiadó) Bica, Smaranda M., Maria Tămășan, and Florin Mărginean. 2014. ‘Musealization of the Ruins in Vladimirescu – Placemaking in the Outskirts of Arad’, Acta Technica Napocensis: Civil Engineering & Architecture, 57.3: 101–13 Bóna, Istvan. 1998. Az Árpádok korai várairól (Debrecen: Ethnica) Cosma, Călin. 2002. Vestul şi nord-vestul României în secolele VIII–X d.H. (Cluj-Napoca: Nereamia Napocae) Crişan, Ioan. 2006. Aşezări rurale medievale din Crişana (secolele X–XIII) (Oradea: Editura Muzeului Țării Crișurilor) Dávid, Katalin. 1974. Az Árpád-kori Csanád vármegye művészeti topográfiája (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) Dörner, Egon. 1967. ‘Cu privire la ruinele unei biserici lîngă Arad din feudalismul timpuriu’, Ziridava, 1: 9–30 Glück, Eugen. 1976. ‘Unele informatii provenite din cronicile medievale referitoare la zona Aradului (sec. VIII–X)’, Ziridava, 6: 73–78 Glück, Eugen. 1980. ‘Contribuţii privind părţile arădene în secolele ix–x’, in Studii privind istoria Aradului, ed. by Eugen Glück (Bucharest: Editura Politică), pp. 82–100 Györffy, György. 1966. Az Árpád-kori Magyarország történeti földrajza, i (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) Heitelné Móré, Zsuzsa. 2001. ‘Monostorok a Maros mentén’, in Paradisum plantavit. Bencés monostorok a középkori Magyarországon, ed. by Imre Takács (Pannonhalma: Pannonhalmi Bencés Főapátság), pp. 267–74 Heitel, Suzana More. 2010. Începuturile artei medievale în bazinul inferior al Mureşului (Timişoara: Excelsior Art) Hervay, F. Levente. 2001. ‘A Bencések és apátságaik története a középkori Magyarországon’, in Paradisum plantavit. Bencés monostorok a középkori Magyarországon, ed. by Imre Takács (Pannonhalma: Pannonhalmi Bencés Főapátság), pp. 461– 548 Iambor, Petru. 2005. Aşezări fortificate din Transilvania (Cluj-Napoca: Argonaut) Juhász, Kálmán. 1927. Die Stifte der Tschanader Diözese im Mittelalter: ein Beitrag zur Frühgeschichte und Kulturgeschichte des Banats (Münster: Aschendorff) Koloman, Juhász. 1927. Die Stifte der tscanader Diözese im Mittelalter (Münster in Westfalen: Aschendorff) Karácsony, János. 1905. ‘Ismeretlen délmagyarországi monostorok’, Történelmi és Régészeti Értesítő, 21: 76–88 Koszta, Laszló. 2000. ‘Dél – Magyarország egyházi topográfiája a középkorban’, in A középkori Dél-Alföld és Szer, ed. by Tibor Kollár (Szeged), pp. 41–80 Lupşa, Ștefan. 1929. Catolicismul şi românii din Ardeal şi Ungaria până la anul 1556 (Cernăuţi: Faculty of Theology in Cernăuți) Madgearu, Alexandru. 1993. ‘Contribuţii privind datarea conflictului dintre ducele bănăţean Ahtum şi regele Ştefan I al Ungariei’, Banatica, 12.2: 5–12 —— 1998. ‘Geneza și evoluția voievodatului bănățean din secolul al X-lea’, Studii și Materiale de Istorie Medie, 16: 191–207 Mărghitan, Liviu. 1985. Banatul în lumina arheologiei, iii (Timişoara: Editura Facla) Mărginean, Florin. 2016. ‘The Lower Mureş Valley, a Link between Central Europe and Transylvania in the Early Middle Ages (Archaeological Evidence)’, Studia Universitatis Cibiniensis. Series Historica, 13: 81–120 —— 2018. ‘Contributions to the Medieval Ecclesiastic Geography of Arad County. State of Research’, Ziridava Studia Archaeologica, 32: 195–220 —— 2021. ‘Árpád Age Pottery Kiln Workshops in the Light of Archaeological Finds from the Lower Mureș Basin’, in Exploring Dwellings and Manufacturing Spaces in Medieval Context (7th–14th Centuries). Proceedings of the International

9.   b e t we e n t he lo cal pow e r ce nt re and t he eccle si ast i cal network

Conference Exploring Dwellings and Manufacturing Spaces in Medieval Context (7th–14th Centuries), ed. by Keve László, Dan Băcueț-Crișan, Ioan Stanciu, and Florin Mărginean (Cluj-Napoca: Mega), pp. 241–59 Mordovin, Maxim. 2016. A várszervezet kialakulása a középkori Magyarországon, Csehországban és Lengyelországban a 10–12. században (Budapest: Pázmány Péter Katolikus Egyetem Bölcsészet és Társadalomtudományi Kar Régészeti Tanszék) Nováki, Gyula, and György Sándorfi. 1981. ‘Untersuchung der Struktur und des Ursprungs der Schanzen der frühen ungarischen’, Burgen Acta Archaeologica Budapest, 33, 1–4: 133–60 Pascu, Ștefan. 1972. Voievodatul Transilvaniei (Cluj: Dacia) Popa, Radu. 1991. ‘Observaţii şi îndreptări la istoria României din jurul anului O Mie’, Studii și Cercetări de Istorie Veche și Arheologie, 41.3–4: 153–88 Romhányi, Beatrix F. 2000. Kolostorok és társaskáptalanok a középkori Magyarországon (Budapest: Pytheas) Rusu, Adrian Andrei. 2005. Castelarea Carpatică (Cluj-Napoca: Mega) Rusu, Adrian Andrei, and George P. Hurezan. 1999. Cetăţi medievale din judeţul Arad (Arad: Trinom) —— 2000. Biserici medievale din judeţul Arad (Arad: Trinom) Rusu, Adrian A., Nicolae Sabău, Ileana Burnichioiu, Ioan V. Leb, and Maria Makó Lupescu (eds). 2000. Dicționarul mănăstirilor din Transilvania, Banat, Crișana și Maramureș (Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană) Rusu, Mircea. 1971. ‘Castrum, Urbs, Civitas (Cetăţi şi “Oraşe” transilvănene din secolele ix–xiii)’, Acta Musei Napocensis, 8: 197–203 —— 1978. ‘Cetăţile transilvănene din secolele ix–xi şi importanţa lor istorică’, Ziridava, 10: 159–71 —— 1980. ‘Cetăţile Aradului’, Ziridava, 12: 165–78 Suciu, Ioan Dimitrie, and Radu Constantinescu. 1980. Documente privitoare la istoria Mitropoliei Banatului (Timişoara: Editura Mitropoliei Banatului) Țiplic, Ioan Marian. 2006. Organizarea defensivă a Transilvaniei în Evul Mediu (sec. X–XIV) (Bucharest: Editura Militară) Ţeicu, Dumitru. 2007. Geografia ecleziastică a Banatului medieval (Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană)

153

Jerne j R ihter

10. Chronological Remarks on Early Medieval Jewellery and Evidence for Pilgrimage The Case Study of the Župna Cerkev Cemetery in Kranj (Slovenia)*

A bs t r act  This paper gives an example of how typochronology can still be a useful tool when discussing archaeological phenomena often connected to Christianization, such as the disappearance of grave goods and the shift from field cemeteries to churchyards. The site of Župna cerkev, a churchyard cemetery dated between the eighth and eighteenth centuries, allows two critical possibilities: firstly, the comparison of grave goods with contemporaneous field cemeteries, and secondly, the analysis of sequences of graves, leading to a more precise chronology of the artefacts. Accordingly, the present study deals with the stratigraphy of early medieval graves with two-horned forged crescent head circlets,1 especially those with late specimens (as a new typological variant), and the first high medieval (and later) ‘pilgrim’ graves with scallop shells (Pecten sp.). According to current knowledge, the new variant of the two-horned forged crescent head circlets appeared around the time after 960 and remained in use at least until the beginning of the eleventh century. The stratigraphy shows a period of graves without artefacts between the last early medieval graves and the first high medieval graves with artefacts. Among the latter, the earliest graves include scallop shells and parts of ‘pilgrim’ staffs. Such graves may be found in Europe as early as the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries and even later, as confirmed by archaeological and historical evidence. T





* The author acknowledges the financial support from the Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency as part of the Z6–4608 project titled ‘Analysis of the Cemetery Župna Cerkev in Kranj (Slovenia)’ . This paper is a short excerpt from a paper entitled ‘The Last Early Medieval and First High Medieval Burials with Grave Goods from the Župna Cerkev in Kranj Cemetery (Slovenia) in the Light of Stratigraphy and Material Culture’, which was presented at the conference ‘Power in Numbers: The Role of the Rural Population in Christianization and State Formation II’, Prague, 11–13 May 2022 . 1 In this paper, we use the term head circlets instead of earrings because of the possibility of wearing them as part of a headdress set. On the different ways of wearing them: Pleterski 2013a, 302; Pleterski 2013b, 48. Jernej Rihter • ([email protected]) is a post-doctoral researcher at the Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Institute of Archaeology. His main research interest is early medieval archaeology; in particular, he specializes in the analysis of cemeteries and related cemetery structures, such as churches. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 155–175. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138114

156 j e r n e j r ihte r

K e y wo r d s  Crescent-shaped forged head circlets, scallop shells (Pecten sp.), cemetery, stratigraphy, relative chronology, early Middle Ages, high Middle Ages, Eastern Alps, archaeology

T

General Information about the Cemetery and the Basis for the Research

Štular 2005, 2008, 2009, 2020a; 2020b). Due to the poor visibility of the burial pits in non-stratigraphic excavations (e.g. Štular and Belak 2013, 13, 15), they were documented in only a few dozen cases; the backfills were rarely documented, but skeletons almost always were registered (cf. Pleterski and others 2016; 2017; 2019; Rihter 2020, 48–55). Methodologically, graves are documented as stratigraphic groups in the documentation of non-stratigraphic excavations (cf. Herzog 2004, 10; Štular 2020a, 110–11). The field drawings of the non-stratigraphic excavations were transferred to a modern absolute coordinate system in a Geographic Information System (GIS) environment, which allowed for the comparison of archaeological data from different excavations and their analysis (Rihter 2016a; 2016b; 2017; 2018; 2020; 2023). The surface area of the documented skeletons represents the smallest possible surface of the former burial pit. The reproduced outline of the skeletons as a polygon allowed for the analysis of the stratigraphic relationships according to the principles of archaeological stratigraphy (Harris 1997). The stratigraphic relations were analysed using the computer programme Stratify (see Herzog 2004) and visualized in the form of a Harris matrix. During the analysis, redundant stratigraphic relationships were kept, primarily to trace later vertical disturbances between graves (for details, see Gerrard 1993, 233–34, fig. 15.1; Rihter 2020, 55–70), and — additionally — to break the Harris matrix into individual, unique stratigraphic chains or sequences of graves (Rihter 2020, 121–23). There are 16,098 unique sequences of graves that make up the Harris matrix (Rihter 2020, xi, appendix 3). These provide an accurate view of the ‘thickness’ of the stratigraphy of graves in each part of the cemetery (Rihter 2020, xi, appendices 3 and 7). These sequences form the basis for the analysis of artefacts and other phenomena, including the present one.4 The continuous use of the same limited burial space created numerous and clear stratigraphic relations between the graves (Pleterski 2013b, 40; Rihter 2020, 12, 15, 56, appendix 3). Consequently, the cemetery shows considerable vertical spatiotemporal growth.

The cemetery of Župna Cerkev in Kranj (Slovenia) is one of the largest early medieval cemeteries in the south-eastern Alps and most of Central Europe (Fig. 10.1). Between 1953 and 2013, the entire area of the cemetery that is accessible today was excavated (Pleterski and others 2016; Pleterski and others 2017; Pleterski and others 2019;2 Urankar and Bešter 2014). The cemetery has 2943 archaeologically excavated and catalogued graves (OIAS 35, 36, and 37). Current estimates suggest that at least one-third of the graves date to the early Middle Ages (eighth to tenth/eleventh centuries). The stratigraphy (Rihter 2020) and material finds (Pleterski 2013b, 40), as well as historical sources (Žontar 1982, 280), provide evidence of continuous burial activity between the eighth and eighteenth centuries in the same, relatively limited area (Rihter 2020), next to church buildings from different periods (Sagadin 1991; 2017). In the last decade, an intensive analysis of archival documents, archaeological finds, anthropological remains, and archaeological contexts have been carried out (Štular and Belak 2012a; Štular and Belak 2012b; Osmuk and others 2013; Sagadin 2014; Urankar and Bešter 2014; Belak 2014; Šlaus and others 2014; Šlaus and others 2015; Belak 2021). Critical, scientific catalogues of the graves were prepared (OIAS 35, 37, and 38). The stratigraphy of the graves and some other elements of the cemetery was prepared, as well as a typochronology of the early medieval head circlets and finger rings (Rihter 2020). A comprehensive archaeological analysis and interpretation of the cemetery have not yet been undertaken.3

Stratigraphy of the Cemetery of Župna Cerkev Since stratigraphy was only recorded for less than a quarter of the excavated graves, a stratigraphic analysis of the archive of non-stratigraphic excavations was carried out (see Clark 1993), using the method of retrograde analysis of archaeological data at medieval sites (sensu



2 Hereafter: OIAS 35, OIAS 37, and OIAS 38 (and bibliography). 3 The analysis is in progress by the author.



4 The sections of the Harris matrix published in this paper already correct possible errors of stratigraphic sequences published or preprinted in previous works (e.g. Rihter 2020, appendices 3 and 7; Rihter 2022). Any differences between this and previous work are due to these corrections.

1 0.   c h ro n o lo g i c al r e m ark s o n e arly me d i e val je w e lle ry and e vi d e nce fo r pi lgrimage

Figure 10.1. Plan of the Župna Cerkev cemetery in Kranj (Slovenia). (By J. Rihter.)

The longest stratigraphic sequences of graves come from the areas where the highest burial densities were found, i.e. along the western, northern, and eastern sides of the present church building (Achino and others 2019, 301, 304–07, figs 4–7). North of the church (see Achino and others 2019, 300, fig. 2), the density in some places averaged 5.25 burials/m3 (Rihter 2018, 12). Thus, a sequence of graves up to fourteen ‘levels’ high is recorded here (Rihter 2020, appendix 3;5 Rihter 2023). The longest stratigraphic sequence of graves with early medieval artefacts is formed by nine graves, followed by even younger graves (Rihter 2020, appendix 3).6 Most stratigraphic sequences of graves with early medieval artefacts included between two to five subsequent graves (Rihter 2020, 164–65, appendices, 3, 6, and 7).



5 See Seq. Nr. 5248–37, 6026–32, 6102–12. 6 See Seq. Nr. 14343–14829.

With the help of the currently valid typochronologies of early medieval head jewellery in the Eastern Alps (Eichert 2010; Pleterski 2013a) and the relative chronology of graves and jewellery from Župna Cerkev (Rihter 2020, 186–98) as well as C14 dating (Rihter 2023, 305–08; Rihter 2020, 186–98, fig. 74), the beginning (Rihter 2023) and end of the addition of early medieval artefacts to graves can be determined. This period can be narrowed down to the middle of the eighth century and the beginning of the eleventh century. Stratigraphically, the last early medieval graves are followed first by graves without grave goods and then, above them, graves of the high and late Middle Ages in which artefacts appear again: in particular, occasional graves with round iron buckles and graves with scallop shells. These graves are followed stratigraphically by the post-medieval graves with devotional artefacts and clothing items, dated until the end of the eighteenth century (e.g. Rihter 2023, 280–98, figs 7–11). The relative chronology of the graves and artefacts confirms (Rihter

157

158 j e r n e j r ihte r

2020, appendix 7) current typochronological systems and observations from the field of early medieval female head jewellery and finger rings in the Eastern Alps (Eichert 2010; Pleterski 2013a). Due to the immense diversity and quantity of jewellery variants (head circlets and finger rings), and especially owing to the continuous burial activity during the transition to the high Middle Ages, it is possible to make new typochronological observations for some jewellery forms using stratigraphy, which will be demonstrated in detail with the examples of two-horned forged crescent head circlets and graves with scallop shells.

Crescent-shaped Two-horned Head Circlets Crescent-shaped, two-horned forged, cast, and enamelled head circlets are one of the characteristic forms of early medieval women’s clothing accessories in the present-day Austrian and Slovene areas of the Eastern Alps (Eichert 2010, 65, 74). Since the beginnings of research on the early medieval material culture of the Eastern Alps (for an overview of the history of research, see Pleterski 2001; Ungerman 2016), they have been the subject of various studies and typological classifications (Korošec, J. 1950, 63–89; Korošec, J. 1952, 268–87; Korošec, P. 1950; Šribar and Stare 1974a; for an overview, see Ornik-Turk 2013; Eichert 2010, 65–75, fig. 18). They are found almost exclusively in the archaeological material of cemeteries (Štular and Pleterski 2018; Štular and Pleterski 2013, 40–41; Bitenc and Knific 2020a, 57, 59–66, figs 2.8–2.12). They have no local antecedents in the Eastern Alps, but their origin is undoubtedly Byzantine (Pleterski 2013b, 50), with roots in the Mediterranean dating back to the mid-second millennium bc (e.g. Albani 2010, 193–95; cf. Langó 2010). The Eastern Alpine crescent forms are thought to have developed indirectly from the original Byzantine models/types as more or less high-quality imitations, as found in seventh-century Bavarian and Avar archaeological contexts (Eichert 2010, 74–75; cf. Garam 2001, 15–33, 254 pl. 3). Their later distribution in the Eastern Alpine region is associated with Carolingian influence in connection with missions from Aquileia and Salzburg after the first third of the ninth century (Eichert 2010, 74–75). From the mid- or late ninth century (cf. Pleterski 2013a, 319 fig. 16) and the early tenth century onwards, this type of jewellery became very fashionable and spread widely, especially in the Slavic regions (Eichert 2010, 75). Although it appeared in graves for a relatively long time (e.g. Sagadin 1988, 48), it cannot be traced archaeologically in this area from the eleventh century onwards (Eichert 2010, 75, 170–73, fig. 46; Pleterski 2013a, 319 fig. 16).

Paola Korošec (1979a; 1979b) classified the crescent-shaped head circlets among the younger early medieval material of the Eastern Alps, in the group formerly known as the Köttlach group, generally dating them from the middle of the ninth century until the end of the tenth century, but with sporadic appearances in the eleventh century. The space-time correlation of the Eastern Alpine material was also demonstrated by the spatial arrangement of the cemeteries (the younger next to the older group), first shown by Timotej Knific (1974) with a topographical-chronological analysis of the cemetery of Bled-Pristava II. Jochen Giesler classified the crescent types of head circlets in the Kötlach II group, i.e. dated from the second half of the tenth to the first half of the eleventh centuries (Giesler 1980; 2002), which is now considered to be too late (Eichert 2010, 169–71). According to Stefan Eichert’s classification in Austrian Carinthia, they most commonly belong to group C3 (900 to eleventh century), but their appearance is possible already at the end of group C2, dated between 830 and 900 (Eichert 2010, 167, 170–73, fig. 46). Andrej Pleterski classified the occurrence of two-horned forged crescent head circlets in the cemeteries of the Bled microregion (as type NO0500_0610) between the middle of the ninth century and the beginning of the eleventh century, and cast, enamelled ones (as type NO0600_0610) from the last quarter of the ninth century to the middle of the tenth century, when most of the local cemeteries without churches ceased to exist (Pleterski 2013a, 319–20, fig. 16). In the cemetery of Župna Cerkev, three types of Eastern Alpine crescent-shaped head circlets7 are represented in larger numbers: two-horned forged head circlets (fifty pieces, see Table 10.1), two-horned cast, enamelled head circlets (thirty-two pieces),8 and three-horned cast, enamelled head circlets (twenty-six pieces).9 Two further types are less common in this 7 Please note that each of the listed specimens from the graves is spatially located and freely accessible to researchers via the ZBIVA (see Literature) web application (see Štular 2019). They are also available in print and digital form in the catalogues of the graves (see Literature, OIAS 35, 37, and 38). 8 There are twenty-eight specimens in fourteen graves; four pieces are scattered finds. See in graves: 1953_z0001, 1953_z0049, 1953_ z0132, 1953_z0171, 1953_z0182 (OIAS 38), 1965_z0146 (OIAS 35), 1972_z0162, 1984_z0013, 1984_z0042 (OIAS 37), 2012_x0232, 2012_x0256, 2012_x0344, 2012_x0355, 2012_x0383 (OIAS 38). Or find in ZBIVA web application (type ‘NO0600_’): [accessed 7 July 2023]. See scattered finds: GM KFC 8237 (OIAS 38, 367 (7)); GM KFC 8240 (OIAS 38, 371 (1)); GM KFC 8238 (OIAS 38, 371 (2)); GM KFC 319 (OIAS 35, 44, Kvadrant VIII (1)). 9 There are eighteen specimens in twelve graves; eight specimens are scattered finds. See in graves: 1953_z0090, 1953_z0049, 1953_z0159 (OIAS 38); 1964_z0017, 1965_z0117, 1965_z0193

1 0.   c h ro n o lo g i c al r e m ark s o n e arly me d i e val je w e lle ry and e vi d e nce fo r pi lgrimage 159

Figure 10.2. Section of a plan of the Župna Cerkev in Kranj cemetery. Distribution of two-horned forged crescent head circlets (marked in red) in graves and among scattered finds. (By J. Rihter.)

cemetery: cast granulated crescent head circlets (decoration imitates filigree) (six pieces)10 and cast crescent head circlets with star-shaped pendants (three pieces).11 Among the forged crescent forms, two unique shapes are also known, namely the head circlet with two eyes on a crescent (Fig. 10.6), which will be discussed in more detail below, and the threehorned crescent head circlet (e.g. OIAS 38, 243: 3), which to our knowledge (in terms of quality and production) does not belong to the Eastern Alpine production context. Perhaps a Byzantine origin can be suspected, with careful comparisons (e.g. Anamali 1971, 197: 36, 38).

(OIAS 35); 1972_z0224, 1984_z0013 (OIAS 37); 2012_x0416, 2012_x0418, 2012_x0461, 2012_x0506 (OIAS 38). Or find in ZBIVA web application (type ‘NO1700_’): [accessed 07 July 2023]. See scattered finds: GM KFC 8235 (OIAS 38, 371 (3)); GM KFC 1528 (OIAS 38, 144 (1–2)); GM KFC 1529 (OIAS 38, 144 (1–2)); GM KFC 1003b (OIAS 37, 220, KV XX (3)); GM KFC 553 (OIAS 37, 272: Neznana lega / Unknown location (1)); GM KFC 552 (OIAS 37, 272: Neznana lega / Unknown location (2)); GM KFC 238a (OIAS 37, 341, Inventarizirano kot grobna celota / Inventoried as grave assembly(2)); GM KFC 2054 (OIAS 37, 355 (9)). 10 See in graves: 2012_x0326 (OIAS 38, 274 (1, 4)); 2012_x0390 (OIAS 38, 303 (1, 2)); 1995_x0001 (OIAS 37, 325 (1, 2)). 11 See in graves: 1972_z0098 (OIAS 37, 161 (1)); 1965_z0193 (OIAS 35, 91–92 (1, 2)).

Two-horned Forged Crescent Head Circlets in the Cemetery of Župna Cerkev

Fifty two-horned forged crescent head circlets were discovered in the cemetery (Fig. 10.2, Table 10.1: II). Forty-five of them came from twenty-five graves (Table 10.1: Ia–II). A further five head circlets were discovered among the stray finds (Table 10.1: Ib). One of them is possibly a semifinished product (Table 10.1: Ib: GM KFC 2684; see also: Pleterski 2013b, 60). Generally, two head circlets were placed in one grave, which was observed in seventeen cases. One grave contained four of them, and in seven cases, only a single circlet was recovered from each grave. In three cases, the grave goods were partially or completely unreliable (Table 10.1: VIII). Stratigraphic sequences are known for fourteen graves (Table 10.1: VII). Two-thirds of the graves (sixteen out of twenty-five) contained additional finds other than two-horned forged crescent head circlets. This characteristic has been confirmed in other cemeteries as well (e.g. Sagadin 1988, 47; Sagadin 2001, 375 tab. 3.7–9; Sagadin 2013, 296 tab. 9.1–9), but this cemetery also clearly shows a small group of graves where head circlets are almost the only grave goods (Table 10.1: Ia and III). Among them, ten head circlets in five graves (Table 10.1: marked in grey) and potentially one stray find stand out (Table 10.1:

160 j e r n e j r ihte r Table 10.1. Two-horned forged crescent head circlets in graves and among the scattered finds in Župna Cerkev in Kranj cemetery (by J. Rihter).

Ia: Grave

VII: Stratigraphy VI: II: Forged III: Other IV: ButtonVIII: IX: V: (Rihter Anthropology Catalogue crescent grave Composition Classification shaped (sex, age) (OIAS Nr., 2020-Appendicestype (two of the grave type goods thickening page: Sequence Nr.) assemblage page) horned) / in grave at end of Nr. (yes-1/ crescent (yesno-0) 1/no-0)

1953_z0127 1953_z0028

1 2

1 1

no data 1

1 1 1 1 1 1

Male?, adultus Female, adultus Female, adultus Female, maturus Female, 18−23 Female, 20−25 Female, 18−20 Female, 50−55 Male, 40–55 no data

1953_z0117

2

1

1

1965_z0271

2

1

1

2011_x0027 2011_x0053 2012_x0251 2012_x0272 2012_x0502 1953_z0001

2 2 2 2 1 2

1 1 1 1 1 1

1953_z0012

2

1953_z0026

38, 83 38, 47–48

no data 31: 6

OK OK

NO0500_0610 NO0500_0610

38, 78–79

no data

OK

NO0500_0610

35, 116–117

32–33: 151–153

OK

NO0500_0610

38, 166–167 38, 177–178 38, 243–244 38, 251–252 38, 342–343 38, 39–40

no relation no relation 297: 15910 297: 15912 298: 15990 no data

NO0500_0610 NO0500_0199 NO0500_0610 NO0500_0610 NO0500_0610 NO0500_0610

no data

38, 42

31: 2

Female, iuvenis Female, adultus Unknown, adultus Female, adultus Female, maturus Child, infans II Child, infans I Female, 30−40 Female, 30−35 Unknown, iuvenis

38, 46–47

31: 5

OK OK OK OK OK very problematic partly problematic OK

1

1

2

1

1

1953_z0035

1

0

1

38, 50

no data

OK

NO0500_0610

1953_z0076

1

1

1

38, 66–67

no relation

NO0500_0610

35, 36

no data

partly problematic OK

1964_z0031

1

0

1

NO0500_0610

1965_z0171

4

0

1

35, 82–83

no relation

OK

NO0500_0610

1965_z0181 1965_z0251 2012_x0293 2012_x0384 1965_z0165

2 2 1 1 2

1 1 0 1 0

1 1 1 1 0

OK OK OK OK OK

NO0500_0610 NO0500_0610 NO0500_0610 NO0500_0610 NO2000_0610

1965_z0167

2

0

0

OK

NO2000_0610

1972_z0106

2

0

0

OK

NO2000_0610

1972_z0129 1973_z0267

2 2

0 1

0 0

OK OK

NO2000_0610 NO2000_0610

35, 86–87 35, 109 38, 259 38, 300 35, 80

32: 108–09, 112 no relation 297: 15918 no relation 32: 101, 103. See also: 32: 80, 86–90, 93: 100 Female, more 35, 80–81 32: 100. See also than 55 32: 80, 86–90, 93–101, 103 Child, infans I 37, 163 235: 12105. See also 234–35: 12037– 12089–115 238: 12300 Child, 7–8 37, 172 Female, 30–35 37, 259–260 243: 12676

NO0500_0610 NO0500_0610

1 0.   c h ro n o lo g i c al r e m ark s o n e arly me d i e val je w e lle ry and e vi d e nce fo r pi lgrimage

161

Ib: Scattered find

 

 

 

 

 

VI: Location of scattered find

 

 

GM KFC 8241

1

 

1

 

38, 366: 6

 

NO0500_0610

GM KFC 8239 GM KFC 8236

1 1

   

1 0

   

38, 367: 8 38, 372: 17

location of quadrant exact location exact location

   

GM KFC 298

1

 

no data

 

35, 127

 

GM KFC 2684

1

 

no data

 

37, 322

centroid of 1965 excavated area range of 1984 excavated area/ inside of the church

NO0500_0610 NO2000_0610 (?) NO0500_0610

 

NO0500_0610

IX: type NO2000_0610),12 differing from the others (Table 10.1: IX: type NO0500_0610, after Pleterski 2013a) both in shape and style as well as in the stratigraphic position of the graves. This smaller group of ten finds is referred to as the second group hereafter, while all others belong to the first group. The design features of the first and second groups are summarized in Table10. 2. The head circlets of the second group are most clearly distinguished from the first group by the absence of double-sided or single-sided button-like thickenings at the crescent ends (see Table 10.2). Moreover, there is no indication of thickening, so the transition from crescent to hoop is completely flat. The cross-section of the hoop is almost exclusively rectangular or oval-rectangular, unlike the first group where it is mostly circular or oval-shaped. The basic shape of the head circlets of the second group is more conical or skittle-shaped and not always symmetrical, unlike most of the first group. The decoration of the crescent is strictly geometric and less elaborate. In the first group, the decoration is more diverse, intricate, and symmetrical (Table 10.2). In defining the second group, the absence of any thickening of the crescent, the asymmetry of the decoration, and, in some cases, the shape of the head circlets seem to be the main distinguishing features. The Stratigraphy of Two-horned Forged Crescent Head Circlets in the Cemetery of Župna Cerkev

The stratigraphy of the graves also confirmed the design and stylistic distinction (Table 10.2) of these two groups of head circlets (Table 10.1). Graves with head circlets of the first group (Table 10.1: IX: NO0500_0610) occur in a stratigraphic sequence

(Table 10.1: VII), positioned below graves with other types of early medieval jewellery (Fig. 10.3a and b), including late forms of head circlets (Fig. 10.3b) from the tenth century (cf. Pleterski 2013a, 319 fig. 16; Eichert 2010, 40–45 fig. 10). There is no known stratigraphic example in this cemetery where a head circlet of the first group appears above the late jewellery forms in the stratigraphic sequence of graves, but rather the opposite (Fig. 10.3). The head circlets of the second group (Table 10.1: IX: NO2000_0610), however, are consistently found in the last graves in the stratigraphic sequence that still contains early medieval finds (Table 10.1: VII) (Figs 10.4–10.5). They are usually followed by burials without grave goods, aside from one case in which a presumably high/late medieval grave with scallop shells was placed above them (Fig. 10.5). In contrast to the first group, the head circlets of the second group occurred twice in sequences above graves with late forms of early medieval jewellery (cf. Figs 10.4 and 10.5a). These are graves 1972_z0106 and 1972_z0129 (Figs 10.4 and 10.5a), which come from an area with a ‘thick’ stratigraphy of early medieval graves (Rihter 2020, appendix 3).13 This is an area excavated in 1972 (OIAS 37, 8 fig. 2), where one of the highest density of graves has been documented (Achino and others 2019, 298–300 figs 1–2). The head circlets of the second group appeared in three graves (1973_z0267, 1965_z0165, and 1965_z0167), all from areas with a ‘shallow’ stratigraphy (Fig. 10.5b–c) of early medieval burials (Rihter 2020, appendix 3).14 They were located on the west side, in front of the present church, and were excavated in 1965 and 1973 (OIAS 35, 9 fig. 5). These three graves belong to an area where burials containing early medieval grave goods have only

12 From now on, the type will be referred to as NO2000_0610. The type NO2000_0610 had the provisional code NO0500_0610a at 13 See Seq. Nr. 12101–12401. the time of the survey, cf. Rihter 2020, 325, 481–84. 14 Seq. Nr. 12445–12939; Seq. Nr. 54–164.

162 j e r n e j r ihte r

Table 10.2. The design features of the first and second groups of two-horned forged crescent head circlets. (By J. Rihter, technical elaboration: D. Valoh.)

1 0.   c h ro n o lo g i c al r e m ark s o n e arly me d i e val je w e lle ry and e vi d e nce fo r pi lgrimage 163

Figure 10.3. Examples of graves with head circlets of the first group in stratigraphic sequences. (By J. Rihter, technical elaboration: D. Valoh.)

164 j e r n e j r ihte r

Figure 10.4. Grave 1972_z0106, as part of an area with a ‘thick’ stratigraphy of graves and selected stratigraphic sequences in the immediate vicinity. Only early medieval artefacts in the graves and selected sections of the sequences are shown. Each rectangle with a code represents a grave. (By J. Rihter, technical elaboration: D. Valoh.)

1 0.   c h ro n o lo g i c al r e m ark s o n e arly me d i e val je w e lle ry and e vi d e nce fo r pi lgrimage 165

Figure 10.5. Grave 1972_z0129, as part of an area with a ‘thick’ stratigraphy of graves (a). Graves 1965_z0165 and 1973_z0267 (b-c) as part of an area of "shallow" stratigraphy. Only early medieval artefacts are shown in the graves and selected sections of the sequences. Each rectangle with a code represents a grave. (By J. Rihter, technical elaboration: D. Valoh.)

one or two superpositions,15 and while they contain head circlets younger than the last third of the ninth century,16 several of them also had other typological forms that are typical for the post-920 period17 and even around and after 100018 (cf. Pleterski 2013a, 319 fig. 16, 331). However, it should be considered that some of the short sequences here end19 under the western wall of the late Gothic church (Fig. 10.5c), built around 1430 (cf. Peskar 2017, 119).

15 For example, graves: 1965_z0163 and 1965_z0137 (OIAS 35); 1973_z0274, 1973_z0256, 1973_z0264, 1973_z0286 (OIAS 37). For visualization of the stratigraphy and relative chronology of the jewellery see: Rihter 2022, slides 40–58. 16 For example, graves: 1973_z0264, 1973_z0286 (OIAS 37). 17 For example, graves: 1965_z0163 (OIAS 35); 1965_z0137, 1973_z0274, 1973_z0256 (OIAS 37). 18 See, e.g., grave: 1973_z0289 (OIAS 37). 19 For visualization of the stratigraphy and relative chronology of the jewellery see: Rihter 2022, slides 49 and 51.

A unique form among the two-horned forged crescent head circlets turned up in grave 1972_z0113 (Pleterski 2013b, 52), showcasing two ‘eyes’ on a crescent, and decorated with a coloured inlay (OIAS 37, 166 Štular 2013, 25 fig. 6, 28 fig. 9). Based on the closure technique of the hooks, it could be considered an older form of jewellery (e.g. Korošec 1961), but the stratigraphic sequence does not confirm this (see Rihter 2020, appendix 7, diag. 34). The item was found in a sequence of graves where it was in the second grave above a grave containing a head circlet with multiple thicknesses (Fig. 10.6), which belongs to the late forms of early medieval jewellery (Pleterski 1982, 141), appearing in the cemeteries of the Bled microregion after 920 (Pleterski 2013a, 319 fig. 16). No further forged crescent-shaped head circlets with two ‘eyes’ are known from other early medieval cemeteries and settlement contexts. Considering this and, especially, the stratigraphic situation, it probably represents one of the latest pieces of early medieval grave goods in

166 j e r n e j r ihte r

this cemetery. However, the possibility that it was an exception of the high Middle Ages, when the practice of adding jewellery to graves was otherwise no longer common, cannot be excluded. Although this is only a single example, it confirms that crescent-shaped, forged head circlets may be among the last forms of jewellery to appear in early medieval graves, which is also well supported by the circlets of the second group. Head circlets similar to the second group found elsewhere are not numerous. In this review, only those parallel objects — in terms of design and style — that come from the better-studied cemeteries of the microregion are studied; a larger number of graves were analysed archaeologically. In the immediate vicinity, these are the cemetery of Križišče-Iskra in Kranj with an almost identical artefact (Sagadin 1988, gr. 272: 2), the cemetery of Bled Island with two items (Bitenc and Knific 2020b, 288, 357 tab. 1.27: 9), and the cemetery of Mali grad in Kamnik with one specimen (Sagadin 2001, 375 gr. 27: 9). The latter three finds are similar in their decoration to two head circlets found in Spodnje Duplje (Valič 1969b, 102–03: cf. Korošec 1979a, 132). In particular, one artefact with a completely flat crescent (see Bitenc and Knific 2020a, 60, fig. 2.8: 10) could be the actual type of the second group. Unfortunately, we do not have more detailed information about this cemetery. The Dating of the Head Circlets of the Second Group

Figure 10.6. Grave 1972_z0113 in the stratigraphic sequence. Only selected sections of the sequences are shown. Each rectangle with a code represents a grave. (By J. Rihter, technical elaboration: D. Valoh.)

As can be seen, at the moment, the key to dating the second group of head circlets is the duration of use of each comparable cemetery and the period of the placement of grave goods in the graves, as well as whether the burials were placed next to churches or in field cemeteries. In this particular case, the comparison of analogous finds from well-studied cemeteries in the nearby microregion of Bled could prove to be helpful. In these field cemeteries, only circlets of the first group are present: e.g. the cemetery of Žale near Zasip (e.g. Knific and Pleterski 1993, 158, tab. 6.32/1, 260, tab. 8.36/1 and 4), the cemetery of Dlesc near Bodešče (e.g. Knific and Pleterski 1981, 490, 517, tab. 9.30/1 and 2), the cemetery of Sedlo (Bled Castle) (e.g. Pleterski 1982, 140 fig. 5, 146; Pleterski 2013a, 311 fig. 10; cf. Valič 1964, 36–40, 47 tab. XXIII.13; Valič 1969a, 236–37, tab. 2.31–32), and the Bled-Pristava cemetery (e.g. Šribar and Stare 1974b, 302 fig. 6.1–2). All field cemeteries in the Bled microregion end around the same time. The end of the use of these cemeteries can be placed between 955 and 973, with the help of archaeological and historical sources (Pleterski 2013a, 319). This is also consistent with the end of the settlement of Bled-Pristava (Pleterski 2010,

1 0.   c h ro n o lo g i c al r e m ark s o n e arly me d i e val je w e lle ry and e vi d e nce fo r pi lgrimage 167 Table 10.3. Scallop shells (Pecten sp.) and iron parts of wooden staffs in graves and among the scattered finds in the Župna Cerkev cemetery in Kranj (by J. Rihter). (By J. Rihter.)

Ia: Grave

II: Scallop (Nr.)

III: Parts of staff (yes-1/ no-0)

IV: Antropology V: Catalogue VI: Stratigraphy (Rihter 2020 — Appendices (sex, age) (OIAS Nr., pag.) — page: Sequence Nr./Diagram)

2011_x0118 1972_p0810 1972_p0897 1965_z0147 1969_p0059 1969_p0094 1969_p0171 1969_p0216 1969_p0227 1970_p0454 1970_p0463 1970_p0537 1970_p0563

1 3 1 7 3 3 2 1 1 3 1 3 3

0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

male, 45–55 male, undefined male, adultus male, 45–55 male, 50–55 male, maturus male, maturus male, maturus male, maturus male, adultus male, senilis male, 40+ male, maturus

38, 200 37, 65–67 37, 90 35, 72 35, 144–145 35, 150–151 35, 167 35, 174 35, 176 35, 230 35, 232 35, 243–244 35, 248

285: 15108 133: 6403–4; 136: 6495–96 105: 4579; 107: 4727, 4765–66; 111: 4991–95 377: Diag. 7 387: Diag. 17 384: Diag. 14 386: Diag. 16 388: Diag. 18 38: 474–76 50: 1369–72; 57: 1811–19, 1845; 58: 1866–78 50: 1368–74; 51: 1427–28; 1811–45; 58: 1866–78 390: Diag. 20 389: Diag. 19

Ib: Scattered find

 

 

 

 

VIb: Location of scattered find

GM KFC 2074a-c GM KFC 702 GM KFC 698 GM KFC (no data) GM KFC 2148 GM KFC 2696

3 0 0 1 1 1

0 1 1 0 0 0

           

35, 216 35, 233 35, 269 37, 219 37, 271 37, 320

Centroid of quad. Nr. 37 (excavat. 1969) In fill of gr. 1970_p0468 Centroid of quad. Nr. 30 (excavat. 1970) Near at gr. 1972_p0644 Centroid of quad. Nr. 4 (excavat. 1973) Centroid of quad. Nr. 18 (excavat. 1984)

164), probably around 960 (Pleterski 2013a, 319). An exception is the cemetery on Bled Island (Pleterski 2013b, 318), where the first pre-Romanesque church was built probably in the first decade of the eleventh century (Štular 2020c, 180; Štular 2022, 86). Its erection coincides with the end of an earlier phase of burying (late ninth and predominantly tenth centuries), which otherwise continued in several younger phases up to the post-medieval period (Štular 2020b). It can be presumed that the second group of head circlets should therefore be found in cemeteries (with or without churches) that are younger than the field cemeteries of the Bled microregion, i.e. younger than c. 960. The comparison of the head circlets of the second group from Mali grad in Kamnik mentioned above corresponds to this dating. The use of this briefly existing cemetery did not begin before 950, lasting until the early eleventh century (Sagadin 2001, 368–71). The upper limit of the dating of the other comparable cemeteries does not contradict this chronology. Burials in the Bled Island cemetery next to the church took place throughout the tenth century and continued until the first decade of the eleventh century (Štular 2020c, 174–75; Bitenc and Knific 2020a). Burials in the long-standing Križišče-Iskra cemetery also continued into the eleventh century and beyond (Sagadin 2020, 19–22), as did burials in the Župna Cerkev cemetery in Kranj.

The relatively small number of artefacts both in the cemetery of Župna Cerkev and in the other relevant cemeteries in the vicinity, as well as the stratigraphic position of the graves, suggest that the circlets of the second group belong to the last early medieval grave goods found in graves in general.

Graves with Scallop Shells (Pecten sp.) At the Župna Cerkev site, thirty-two more or less well-preserved scallop shells (Pecten sp.) were found. The majority of them were recovered from thirteen graves (Fig. 10.7; Table 10.3: IA–II), but six were recorded as stray finds (Table 10.3: Ib–II). Parts of the iron fittings of ‘pilgrims’ staffs’ were also found in five graves (Table 10.3:III), and two further pieces were among stray finds (Table 10.3: IIb). All the shells that have been sufficiently preserved have pierced holes for attachment. The occurrence of graves with scallop shells is very well traced in the stratigraphy. In the sequences containing early medieval graves, those with shells were always located above the early medieval graves (Figs 10.8–10.9). In the sequences with post-medieval burials, which were characterized by containing devotional artefacts and items of clothing, the graves with scallops were always below them (Fig. 10.8). None of

168 j e r n e j r ihte r

Figure 10.7. Section of a plan of the Župna Cerkev cemetery in Kranj. Distribution (marked in red) of graves with scallop shells (Pecten sp.) and scattered finds. (By J. Rihter.)

the sequences had graves with shells in the uppermost position (Rihter 2020, appendix 7, diag. 14, 16–17). Furthermore, scallop shells were found only in men’s graves, mostly of older individuals (Table 10.3: IV). Scallop shells (Pecten sp.) as part of pilgrim clothing can be expected in the graves of medieval Europe (and other contexts, e.g. Baier and Kühtreiber 2008, 310–11) from the end of the eleventh (Roffey and others 2017; Rębkówski and Simiński 2010, 16; Slivka 1998, 314; Stopford 1994) but especially in the twelfth centuries (e.g. Almazán 1996, 132; Korošec 1974, 330–31) and onwards (cf. Gilchrist 2008, 129; Gryc and Wyrwa 2010, 447 tab. 1). Similarly, such finds in the same context appeared in the Near East, especially from the mid-twelfth century onwards (Ktalav 2016). Between the graves with early medieval grave goods and the graves with shells in Župna Cerkev,

there is a period without artefacts, confirmed in the sequences. These gaps are not very long, as can be seen in the following examples (Fig. 10.8a–b), where graves 1970_z0021 and 1970_z0024 with early medieval knives (Fig. 10.8b) are first followed by a grave without grave goods. A similar situation can be partially seen in Figure 10.5. The stratigraphic position of some of the graves with shells shows that they are relatively closer in stratigraphic sequence to the last early medieval graves than to the later burials with artefacts. Otherwise, the relative chronology of most of the graves with shells placed them after the early medieval graves and before the post-medieval burials in the stratigraphic sequence. This also fits well with the otherwise 1000-year time frame of continuous burials between the eighth and eighteenth centuries (Rihter 2023), as it shows a relative

1 0.   c h ro n o lo g i c al r e m ark s o n e arly me d i e val je w e lle ry and e vi d e nce fo r pi lgrimage 169

Figure 10.8. Extended stratigraphic sequence of grave 1969_p0171 with scallop shells. Each rectangle with a code represents a grave. (By J. Rihter, technical elaboration: D. Valoh.)

170 j e r n e j r ihte r

Figure 10.9. Stratigraphic sequence of graves 1970_p0537 and 1970_p0563 with scallop shells. Each rectangle with a code represents a grave. (By J. Rihter, technical elaboration: D. Valoh.)

chronology of graves and artefacts (Figs 10.8–10.9, see also other examples: Rihter 2020, appendix 7, diag. 14, 16–17; Rihter 2022, slides 67–69). The Dating of the Graves with Scallop Shells (Pecten sp.) in the Župna Cerkev Cemetery

At this stage of research, a more precise dating of the graves with shells (Pecten sp.) on the Župna Cerkev cemetery is not yet possible. At present, there is a lack of analysis of the high and late medieval as well as post-medieval stratigraphic sequence of burials and their material culture and, of course, an analysis of the cemetery as a whole. The absence of skeletons of medieval and post-medieval burials excavated during older excavation campaigns is also a major weakness. Nevertheless, the relative chronology of the cemetery and the dating of the early medieval part, as well as the dating of the graves with shells from other sites (see above), confirm the possible occurrence of these graves in Župna Cerkev from the end of the eleventh century. The end of their occurrence is defined by younger graves

without grave goods in the same sequences. As can still be seen in the sequences, these (latter graves without grave goods) occur well before the mass appearance of the first graves with typical post-medieval devotional artefacts. Therefore, most of the graves with shells in Župna Cerkev, with possible exceptions, are currently believed to be older than the sixteenth century. More precise chronological relations will, of course, be provided by an analysis of the entire cemetery.

Conclusion In the Župna Cerkev cemetery in Kranj, burials took place continuously between the eighth and eighteenth centuries in a relatively limited space next to church buildings from different periods. The cemetery expanded vertically rather than in horizontal directions over time and space. This means that the graves very often overlapped or intersected, creating a series of stratigraphic relations. These were analysed and a Harris matrix was created. The stratigraphy thus gives us insight into

1 0.   c h ro n o lo g i c al r e m ark s o n e arly me d i e val je w e lle ry and e vi d e nce fo r pi lgrimage

different parts of the relative chronology of the graves and artefacts. The stratigraphic sequences of the graves clearly show the beginning and end of the appearance of early medieval artefacts in the graves (from about the middle of the eighth century to the middle of the eleventh century), and the reappearance of artefacts in the graves of the high and late Middle Ages. The stratigraphy and design characteristics of the early medieval graves with two-horned forged crescent head circlets show that the initially homogeneous group of such circlets (first group) contains an even younger design variant of the forged circlet (second group), which is probably no older than c. 960. One of the basic characteristics of the first or older group is that the horns of the crescent have well-defined or only indicated button-like thickenings on one or both sides. The specimens of the second or younger group have a completely flat crescent, and they generally occur in the stratigraphically latest graves with early medieval grave goods. At this stage of research, we do not know exactly how far back into the first half of the eleventh century the finds of jewellery and other early medieval artefacts in this cemetery go. The combination of archaeological (stratigraphy, typochronology) and natural science dating methods (C14) could therefore provide useful results in establishing the upper chronological limit of the occurrence of early medieval grave goods.

To determine a more precise chronological upper limit for the occurrence of early medieval grave goods, the chronologies of graves with high and late medieval artefacts must be included. Graves with scallop shells (Pecten sp.) should provide useful support. The stratigraphy of these graves suggests that in some stratigraphic sequences, they were deposited immediately above or soon after the graves with early medieval artefacts. In between, however, is a period of burials characterized by graves without grave goods. The relative chronology of the graves and the dating from other sites do not exclude that some of such graves were already present in Župna Cerkev cemetery at the end of the eleventh or, at the latest, in the twelfth century. On the other hand, the graves with shells in sequences are followed by graves without grave goods, evidently before the mass appearance of burials with typical post-mediaeval devotional artefacts. Therefore, most of the graves with shells, with possible exceptions, are currently believed to be older than the sixteenth century. Nonetheless, the analysis of these two humble finds demonstrates that the application of traditional archaeological methods, such as typochronology, and the comparative analysis of different cemetery types to the critical examination of the shift of field cemeteries to churchyards and the overall closer understanding of the process of Christianization among the general population still has a lot to offer.

171

172 j e r n e j r ihte r

Works Cited Achino, Katia Francesca, Benjamin Štular, Jernej Rihter, and Janja Rihter. 2019. ‘Assessing the Intentionality of Spatial Organization: Cemetery of Župna Cerkev (Kranj, Slovenia) Case Study’, Arheološki vestnik, 70: 297–313 Albani, Jenny. 2010. ‘Elegance Over the Borders: The Evidence of Middle Byzantine Earrings’, in “Intelligible Beauty”: Recent Research on Byzantine Jewellery, ed. by Christopher Entwistle and Noël Adams, British Museum Research Publication, 178 (London: British Museum), pp. 193–202 Almazán, Vincente. 1996. ‘The Pilgrim Shell in Denmark’, in The Pilgrimage to Compostela in the Middle Ages: A Book of Essays, ed. by M. Dunn, in L. Kay Davidson, Garland Medieval Casebooks, vol. 17, Garland Reference Library of the Humanities, vol. 1829 (New York: Garland), pp. 131–42 Anamali, Skënder. 1971. ‘De la civilisation haute-médiévale Albanaise’, in Les Illyriens et la genèse des Albanais. Travaux de la session du 3–4 mars 1969, ed. by Muzafer Korkuti, Skender Anamali, and Jorgji Gjinari (Tirana: Université, Institut d’histoire et de linguistique), pp. 183–99 Baier, Robert, and Thomas Kühtreiber. 2008. ‘Pilgerzeichen aus Österreich – Pilgerzeichen aus österreichischen Wallfahrtsstätten Anmerkungen zum Forschungsstand’, Beiträge zur Mittelalterarchäologie in Österreich, 29: 308–15 Belak, Mateja (ed.). 2014. Grobišče Župna cerkev v Kranju. Grobni zapisniki, E-Monographiae Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 7 (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti, Založba ZRC) [accessed 21 June 2022] —— (ed.). 2021. Grobišče Župna cerkev v Kranju, Bloki, terenske risbe 1969–1973, E-Monographiae Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 12 (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC) Bitenc, Polona, and Timotej Knific. 2020a. ‘Interpretacija grobišča in najdb = Interpretation of Burial Ground and Finds’, in Srednjeveški Blejski otok v arheoloških virih = Medieval Archaeology of Bled Island, ed. by Benjamin Štular, Opera Instituti archaeologici Sloveniae, 42 (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC), pp. 45–91 —— 2020b. ‘Katalog grobov in najdb’, in Srednjeveški Blejski otok v arheoloških virih, ed. by Benjamin Štular, Opera Instituti archaeologici Sloveniae, 42 (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC), pp. 287–342 Clark, Peter R. 1993. ‘Sites without Principles: Post-Excavation Analysis of “Pre-Matrix” Sites’, in Practices of Archaeological Stratigraphy, ed. by Edward C. Harris, Marley R. Brown III, and Gregory J. Brown (London: Academic Press), pp. 276– 92 Eichert, Stefan. 2010. Die Frühmittelalterlichen Grabfunde Kärntens: die materielle Kultur Karantaniens anhand der Grabfunde vom Ende der Spätantike bis ins 11. Jahrhundert, Aus Forschung und Kunst, 37 (Klagenfurt am Wörthersee: Geschichtsverein für Kärnten) Garam, Éva. 2001. Funde byzantinischer Herkunft in der Awarenzeit vom Ende des 6. bis zum Ende des 7. Jahrhunderts: mit 24 Abbildungen, 139 Tafeln, I–XL Farbtafeln und 1 Beilage, Monumenta Avarorum archaeologica, 5 (Budapest: Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum) Gerrard, Richard H. 1993. ‘Beyond Crossmends: Stratigraphic Analysis and the Content of Historic Artefact Assemblages on Urban Sites’, in Practices of Archaeological Stratigraphy, ed. by Edward C. Harris, Marley R. Brown III, and Gregory J. Brown (London: Academic Press), pp. 229–49 Giesler, Jochen. 1980. ‘Zur Archäologie des Ostalpenraumes vom 8. bis 11. Jahrhundert’, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, 10.1: 85–98 —— 2002. ‘An der Südostgrenze des Reiches – der Ostalpenraum im 10. Jahrhundert’, in Europa im 10. Jahrhundert, Archäologie einer Aufbruchszeit, ed. by Joachim Henning (Mainz am Rhein: Verlag Philipp von Zabern), pp. 397–409 Gilchrist, Roberta. 2008. ‘Magic for the Dead? The Archaeology of Magic in Later Medieval Burials’, Medieval Archaeology, 52: 119–59 Gryc, Jana, and Andrzej M. Wyrwa. 2010. ‘Muszla pielgrzymia z Góry Zamkowej w Cieszynie – nowy punkt na mapie dróg do grobu św. Jakuba w Composteli’, Archaeologia historica, 35: 443–49 Harris, Edvard C. 1997. Principles of Archaeological Stratigraphy, 2nd edn (London: Academic Press) Herzog, Irmela. 2004. Stratify, 1. 5. [accessed 21 June 2022] Knific, Timotej. 1974. ‘Horizontalna stratigrafija grobišča Bled–Pristava II = Die horizontale Stratigraphie des Gräberfeldes Bled-Pristava II’, Situla, 14/15: 315–26 Knific, Timotej, and Andrej Pleterski. 1981. ‘Staroslovansko grobišče Dlesc pri Bodeščah’, Arheološki vestnik, 32: 482–523 —— 1993. ‘Staroslovanski grobišči v Spodnjih Gorjah in Zasipu’, Arheološki Vestnik, 44: 235–67 Korošec, Josip. 1950. Staroslovansko grobišče na ptujskem Gradu (Ljubljana: Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti) —— 1952. Uvod v materialno kulturo Slovanov zgodnjega srednjega veka (Ljubljana: Univerza v Ljubljani) Korošec, Paola. 1950. ‘Staroslovansko grobišče na Ptujskem gradu. Emajl v nakitnih predmetih v Ptuju’, in Staroslovansko grobišče na Ptujskem gradu, ed. by Josip Korošec (Ljubljana: SAZU), pp. 315–33

1 0.   c h ro n o lo g i c al r e m ark s o n e arly me d i e val je w e lle ry and e vi d e nce fo r pi lgrimage

—— 1961. ‘Poskus delitve slovanske materialne kulture na področju Karantanije’, Zgodovinski časopis, 15: 157–94 —— 1974. ‘Pomen školjk pectunculus v srednjeveških grobovih Gorenjske’, in Opuscula Iosepho Kastelic sexagenario dicata, ed. by Aleksander Jeločnik, Situla: razprave Narodnega muzeja v Ljubljani = dissertationes Musei nationalis Labacensis, 14/15 (Ljubljana: Narodni muzej), pp. 327–31 —— 1979a. Zgodnjesrednjeveška arheološka slika karantanskih Slovanov, Dela / Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti, Razred za zgodovinske in družbene vede, 22/1 (Ljubljana: Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti) —— 1979b. Zgodnjesrednjeveška arheološka slika karantanskih Slovanov, Dela / Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti, Razred za zgodovinske in družbene vede, 22/2 (Ljubljana: Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti) Ktalav, Inbar. 2016. ‘There and Back Again: A Tale of a Pilgrim Badge during the Crusader Period’, in Bones and Identity: Zooarchaeological Approaches to Reconstructing Social and Cultural Landscapes in Southwest Asia, ed. by Nimrod Marom, Reuven Yeshurun, Lior Weissbrod, and Guy Bar-Oz (Oxford: Oxbow Books), pp. 323–38 Langó, Péter. 2010. ‘Crescent–Shaped Earrings with Lower Ornamental Band’, in Byzanz – das Römerreich im Mittelalter = Byzantium – The Roman Empire in the Middle Ages, ed. by Falko Daim and Jörg Drauschke, Monographien des RömischGermanischen Zentralmuseums, 84 (Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums), pp. 369–410 Mario Šlaus, Mario Novak, Vlasta Vyroubal, Željka Bedić, Jozo Perić Peručić, and Marijana Kljajić. 2014. Rezultati antropološke analize človeškega osteološkega gradiva z najdišča Župna cerkev v Kranju 2011−2013, končno poročilo (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU) Ornik-Turk, Ana. 2013. ‘Polmesečasti uhani’, in Dotik dediščine: trirazsežni prikaz zgodnjesrednjeveškega naglavnega nakita iz najdišča župna cerkev v Kranju, ed. by Benjamin Štular (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC), pp. 64–83 Osmuk, Nada, Andrej Valič, and Mateja Belak. 2013. Grobišče Župna cerkev v Kranju. Dnevniki izkopavanj 1969 do 1973, E-Monographiae Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 5 (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC) [accessed 13 June 2024] Peskar, Robert. 2017. ‘Poznogotska cerkev sv. Kancijana’, in Župnijska cerkev sv. Kancijana v Kranju. Njeno obličje in pomen, ed. by Robert Peskar, Milan Sagadin, and Andrej Šebalj (Ljubljana: Slovensko konservatorsko društvo), pp. 59–112 OIAS 35 = Pleterski, Andrej, Benjamin Štular, and Mateja Belak. 2016. Izkopavanja srednjeveškega in zgodnjenovoveškega grobišča pri Župni cerkvi v Kranju v letih 1964–1970, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 35 (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC) OIAS 37 = Pleterski, Andrej, Benjamin Štular, and Mateja Belak. 2017. Arheološka raziskovanja grobov najdišča Župna cerkev v Kranju med letoma 1972 in 2010, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 37 (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC) OIAS 38 = Pleterski, Andrej, Benjamin Štular, Mateja Belak, and Helena Bešter. 2019. Začetek in konec raziskovanj grobišča pri Župni cerkvi v Kranju (1953 in 2011−2013), Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 38 (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC) Pleterski, Andrej. 1982. ‘Časovna izpovednost plastovitosti staroslovanskega grobišča Sedlo na Blejskem gradu’, Arheološki vestnik, 33.1983: 134–50 —— 2001. ‘Staroslovansko obdobje na vzhodnoalpskem ozemlju. Zgodovina raziskav do prve svetovne vojne’, Arheo, 21: 73–77 —— 2010. Zgodnjesrednjeveška naselbina na blejski Pristavi: tafonomija, predmeti in čas, Opera Instituti archaeologici Sloveniae, 19 (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC) —— 2013a. ‘Korak v kronologijo zgodnjesrednjeveškega naglavnega nakita vzhodnih Alp’, Arheološki vestnik, 64: 299–334 —— 2013b. ‘Nekatere redke oblike kranjskih uhanov’, in Dotik dediščine: trirazsežni prikaz zgodnjesrednjeveškega naglavnega nakita iz najdišča župna cerkev v Kranju, ed. by Benjamin Štular (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC), pp. 47–63 Rębkówski, Marian, and Rafał Simiński. 2010. ‘West Pomeranians’ Medieval Pilgrimages to St Theobald’s Sanctuary in Thann’, Studia Maritima, 23: 113–26 Rihter, Jernej. 2016a. ‘Digitalna arheologija? Primer uporabe digitalnih orodij za analizo arheološkega najdišča’, in Zbornik konference Jezikovne tehnologije in digitalna humanistika, 29. september – 1. oktober 2016, Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani, Ljubljana, Slovenija, ed. by Tomaž Erjavec and Darja Fišer (Ljubljana: Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete), pp. 259–60 —— 2016b. ‘Uporaba digitalnih orodij pri izdelavi relativne kronologije grobišča: (primer Župna cerkev v Kranju) = The Use of Digital Tools in Establishing Relative Chronology of a Burial Ground: (Example of the Kranj Parish Church Site)’, in Zbornik povzetkov = Book of Abstracts / Simpozij Slovani, naša dediščina, Kranj, Slovenija, 28.-30. September 2016 =

173

174

j e r n e j r ihte r

Symposium Our Heritage: The Slavs, Kranj, Slovenia, September 28–30, 2016, ed. by Judita Lux, Benjamin Štular, and Katharina Zanier (Ljubljana: Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije), pp. 41–42 —— 2017. ‘Dolgoletna izkopavanja ob kranjski župni cerkvi in urejanje arheoloških podatkov’, in Povzetki predavanj: v spomin začetnikoma slovenske povojne arheologije, raziskovalcema in učiteljema prof. dr. Josipu Korošcu in dr. Paoli Korošec. 7. Valičev arheološki dan, Kranj, 4. december 2017, ed. by Verena Perko (Kranj: Gorenjski muzej), pp. 38–45 —— 2018. ‘Managing the Archaeological Data. Cemetery Župna cerkev v Kranju (Slovenia)’, in Life and Death in Mediaeval and Early Modern Times: Book of Abstracts = Život i smrt u srednjem i ranom novom vijeku: knjiga sažetaka / 5th International Conference of Mediaeval Archaeology, Zagreb, 6th – 7th June 2018 = 5. međunarodni znanstveni skup srednjovjekovne arheologije, Zagreb, 6. – 7. lipnja 2018, ed. by Siniša Krznar (Zagreb: Institute of Archaeology = Institut za arheologiju), pp. 12–13 —— 2020. ‘Stratigrafija grobišča Župna cerkev v Kranju in tipokronologija zgodnjesrednjeveškega nakita: doktorska disertacija’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Ljubljana). Available from: Zenodo. —— 2022. ‘The Last Early Medieval and First High Medieval Burials with Grave Goods from the Župna Cerkev in Kranj Cemetery (Slovenia) in the Light of Stratigraphy and Material Culture’, The Role of the Rural Population in Christianization and State Formation II, Prague, lecture, 11–13 May 2022 —— 2023. ‘Stratigrafsko najstarejši zgodnjesrednjeveški grobovi in začetek pokopavanja na grobišču Župna cerkev v Kranju’, Arheološki vestnik, 74: 263–308 Roffey Simon, Katie Tucker, Kori Filipek-Ogden, Janet Montgomery, Jamie Cameron, Tamsin O’Connell, Jane Evans, Phil Marter, and G. Michael Taylor. 2017. ‘Investigation of a Medieval Pilgrim Burial Excavated from the Leprosarium of St Mary Magdalen Winchester, UK’, PLoS Negl Trop Dis, 11.1: e0005186 Sagadin, Milan. 1988. Kranj Križišče Iskra. Nekropola iz časa preseljevanja ljudstev in staroslovanskega obdobja (Ljubljana: Narodni muzej Slovenije) —— 1991. ‘Najstarejša cerkvena stavba v Kranju’, in Pod zvonom Sv. Kancijana, ed. by Stanislav Zidar, Stanislav Istenič, Janez Šparovec, and Urška Snedic (Kranj: Župnijski urad), pp. 31–44 —— 2001. ‘Staroslovansko grobišče na Malem gradu v Kamniku’, Arheološki vestnik, 62: 359–75 —— 2013. ‘Zgodnjesrednjeveški grobišči v Komendi in na Zgornjem Brniku’, Arheološki vestnik, 64: 249–98 —— 2014. Grobišče Župna cerkev v Kranju, Dnevnik izkopavanj 1984, E-Monographiae Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 6 (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC) —— 2017. ‘Prva cerkev v luči arheoloških raziskav’, in Župnijska cerkev sv. Kancijana v Kranju. Njeno obličje in pomen, ed. by Robert Peskar, Milan Sagadin, and Andrej Šebalj (Ljubljana: Slovensko konservatorsko društvo), pp. 35–57 —— 2020. ‘Kranjska grobišča in problem kontinuitete med pozno antiko in zgodnjim srednjim vekom’, Kranjski zbornik, 2020: 13–24 Slivka, Michal. 1998. ‘Stredoveký homo viator (Slovensko vo vzťahu k medzinárodným pútnym miestam)’, Archaeologia historica, 23: 303–20 Stopford, J. 1994. ‘Some Approaches to the Archaeology of Christian Pilgrimage’, World Archaeology, 26.1: 57–72 Šlaus, Mario, Vlasta Vyroubal, Željka Bedić, Jozo Perić Peručić, and Marijana Kljajić. 2014. ‘Rezultati antropološke analize ljudskog osteološkog materijala s nalazišta Kranj. Stručni izvještaj EP – 227’, Antropološki centar Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti Zagreb, Šlaus, Mario, Mario Novak, Vlasta Vyroubal, Željka Bedić, Jozo Perić Peručić, Marijana Kljajić, and Mateja Belak. 2015. Rezultati antropološke analize človeškega osteološkega gradiva z najdišča Župna cerkev v Kranju 1953–1984. EP – 232–05/14 (končno poročilo/ Final Report) (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC) Šribar, Vinko, and Vida Stare (eds). 1974a. Karantansko-ketlaški kulturni krog: k zametkom slovenske kulture: razstava v Narodnem muzeju, Razstavišče Arkade (Ljubljana: Narodni muzej) —— 1974b. ‘H kronologiji blejskih grobišč’, Situla, 14/15: 275–314 Štular, Benjamin. 2005. ‘Lončenina s kamniškega Malega gradu. Izkopavanja leta 1992’, Arheološki vestnik, 56: 435–52 —— 2008. ‘Analiza dokumentacije nestratigrafskih izkopavanj: primer Mali grad v Kamniku’, Arheo, 25: 43–50 —— 2009. Mali grad: Visokosrednjeveški grad v Kamniku (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC) —— 2013. ‘Trirazsežno skeniranje v arheologiji’, in Dotik dediščine: trirazsežni prikaz zgodnjesrednjeveškega naglavnega nakita iz najdišča župna cerkev v Kranju, ed. by Benjamin Štular (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC), pp. 13–32

1 0.   c h ro n o lo g i c al r e m ark s o n e arly me d i e val je w e lle ry and e vi d e nce fo r pi lgrimage

—— (ed.). 2013. Dotik dediščine: trirazsežni prikaz zgodnjesrednjeveškega naglavnega nakita iz najdišča župna cerkev v Kranju (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC) —— 2019. ‘The Zbiva Web Application: A Tool for Early Medieval Archaeology of the Eastern Alps’, in The Ariadne Impact, ed. by Julian Richards and Franco Niccolucci (Budapest: ARIADNEplus Consortium), pp. 69–82 —— 2020a. ‘Stratigrafska analiza in analiza nestoječih stavbnih ostankov’, in Srednjeveški Blejski otok v arheoloških virih, ed. by Benjamin Štular, Opera Instituti archaeologici Sloveniae, 42 (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC), pp. 93–114 —— 2020b. ‘Stratigrafija najdišča’, in Srednjeveški Blejski otok v arheoloških virih, ed. by Benjamin Štular, Opera Instituti archaeologici Sloveniae, 42 (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC), pp. 115–28 —— 2020c. ‘Kronologija’, in Srednjeveški Blejski otok v arheoloških virih, ed. by Benjamin Štular, Opera Instituti archaeologici Sloveniae, 42 (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC), pp. 171–82 —— (ed.). 2020. Srednjeveški Blejski otok v arheoloških virih, Opera Instituti archaeologici Sloveniae, 42 (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC) —— 2022. Grave Orientation in the Middle Ages: A Case Study from Bled Island, E-Monographiae Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 14 (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti, Založba ZRC)

Štular, Benjamin, and Mateja Belak (eds). 2012a. Grobišče Župna cerkev v Kranju. Dokumentacija o izkopavanjih v letu 1953, E-Monographiae Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 1 (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC) —— (eds). 2012b. Grobišče Župna cerkev v Kranju. Kartoteka najdb iz leta 1953, E-Monographiae Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 2 (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC) —— 2013. Grobišče Župna cerkev v Kranju, Dokumentacija o izkopavanjih v letih 1964, 1965 in 1966, E-Monographiae Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae, 4 (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC) Štular, Benjamin, and Andrej Pleterski. 2018. ‘Prolog. Zgodnjesrednjeveška arheologija jugovzhodnoalpskega prostora: nekoč, danes, jutri = Prologue. Early Medieval archaeology in the South eastern Alpine area: past, present, future’, in Slovani, naša dediščina = Our Heritage: the Slavs, ed. by Judita Lux, Benjamin Štular, and Katharina Zanier (Ljubljana: Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije; 27), pp. 8–15 Štular, Benjamin, and Andrej Pleterski. 2013. ‘Grobišče župna cerkev v Kranju’, in Dotik dediščine: trirazsežni prikaz zgodnjesrednjeveškega naglavnega nakita iz najdišča župna cerkev v Kranju, ed. by Benjamin Štular (Ljubljana: Inštitut za arheologijo ZRC SAZU, Založba ZRC), pp. 33–46 Ungerman, Šimon. 2016. ‘Tzv. karantánské náušnice ve středním Podunají’, Památky archeologické, 107: 181–236 Urankar, Rafko, and Helena Bešter. 2014. Arheološka izkopavanja v Kranju, mestno jedro Kranja, Trubarjev trg s Pungertom, Cankarjeva, Vodopivčeva ulica, Glavni trg, Poštna ulica in vrt Kieselsteina, prvo strokovno poročilo o raziskavi (Kranj: PJP d.o.o.). Valič, Andrej. 1964. Staroslovansko grobišče na blejskem gradu: (izkopavanje 1960), Situla, 7 (Ljubljana: Narodni muzej Slovenije) —— 1969a. ‘Staroslovansko grobišče “Na sedlu” pod blejskim gradom: (zaščitno izkopavanje leta 1968)’, Arheološki Vestnik, 20: 218–38 —— 1969b. ‘Spodnje Duplje’, Varstvo spomenikov, 12: 102–03 ZBIVA = Belak, Pleterski, and Štular Rihter. 2023. Zbiva v4.1 Žontar, Jože. 1982. Zgodovina mesta Kranja (Kranj: Skupščina občine Kranj)

175

Péter Langó and András Patay-Horvát h

11. From Blessing (Hand) Cross to Hanging Cross An Early Árpádian Cross from Tiszakeszi-Szódadomb

A bs t r act  There is a cross pendant in the collection of the Herman Ottó Museum of Miskolc, which was discovered in 1900 at Tiszakeszi–Szódadomb, in a grave of an early Árpádian cemetery. This cross was probably created from another object; on its base, there is a spike, which was intended to fasten it to some piece of wood. After reviewing the possibilities, we concluded that the original object was most probably a so-called blessing cross. This kind of object is still used in the orthodox liturgy but was certainly more widespread during the early Middle Ages, as many pieces are known from Langobard, Merovingian, and Carolingian contexts. The object can be only vaguely dated to the tenth and eleventh centuries, as it was secondarily altered and is not a common type of grave good. Nonetheless, it hardly reflects the beliefs of the buried person (it is not certain that the faith of the person buried with it is expressed because, both in Rus and the Carpathian Basin in the tenth century, similar crosses might have just emerged as jewellery or representational objects in many cases), and, unfortunately, the circumstances of its transformation cannot be determined with any certainty. Converting a blessing cross into a pectoral cross is, however, a unique phenomenon; there are no parallels in the Carpathian Basin or anywhere else. This observation may encourage some further thoughts. First of all, the cross from Tiszakeszi can be seen — irrespective of its imprecise dating — as a document of the proselytization of the local population.

T

K e y wo r ds  Christianization, liturgical equipment, hand cross, processional cross, blessing cross

T

Péter Langó • ([email protected]) is an Assistant Professor and Head of Department, at the Institute of Archaeological Sciences, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Pázmány Péter Catholic University, Hungary – Research Associate, Institute of Archaeology, Centre for the Humanities, Eötvös Loránd Research Network, Hungary. His main areas of research are Christian and Byzantine archaeology, and the material culture of the early Middle Ages. András Patay-Horváth • ([email protected]) is an Associate Professor and Head of Department at the Department of Ancient History, Faculty of Humanities, Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary. His main areas of research are Ancient Greek religious history and archaeology, and Byzantine archaeology. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 177–188. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138115

178 p é te r l a n gó a n d an d r ás patay- h o rvát h

The Process of Conversion of the Hungarians The conversion of the Hungarian people arriving from the steppe to the Carpathian Basin at the end of the ninth century was a long process consisting of several, obviously not clearly distinguishable, phases. Written sources attest that Hungarian tribes were already undoubtedly aware of Christianity and were also approached by missionaries before arriving in the Carpathian Basin. There, the Hungarian newcomers found people who were partially Christianized, and in certain regions of the Carpathian Basin, Christianity may have even been dominant already at the end of the ninth century (Váczy 1938; Veszprémy 2004; Berend and others 2007, 325–26; Heinrich-Tamáska 2012, 232–36; Betti 2014). Individual prisoners or entire groups of Christian people captured by the Hungarians during their raids in western Europe may have been settled permanently, and they are likely to have retained their faith (Marsina 1971, 41–43). The proselytization had, therefore, started already before the arrival of the Hungarians during the ninth century, and was continued by some political decisions during the first half of the tenth (Moravcsik 1938). Christian groups were settled in the new home of the Hungarians; some of them returned from Christian countries (mainly the Byzantine Empire) where they were employed as mercenary soldiers (Prohászka 2012). As Fedir Androhschuk (2011) has shown, in the case of similar soldiers coming from the north, Hungarian mercenaries may have been baptized into Christianity, even if not necessarily permanently. The second phase of proselytization started immediately after the establishment of the Hungarian state at the beginning of the tenth century (Szabados 2011, 229–39), when due to various diplomatic, commercial, and military interactions, contacts with Christian groups became more frequent and intensive.1 It is important



1 Cf. Legatio 45 (p. 199); and the Chronicle of Ioannes Skylitzes: ‘μέχρις οΰ Βουλοσουδής ο τούτων αρχηγός την των Χριστιανών πίστιν άσπάζεσϑαι υποκρίϑεις κατειλήφει την Κωνσταντίνου. Καί βαπτισϑείς υπό του βασιλέως άναδέχεται Κωνσταντίνου, τη των πατρικίων άξία τιμήϑεις καί πλείστων χρημάτων ΰπάρξας κύριος, εϊτ’ αύϑις οϊκαδε ύποστρέφας. Μετ’ ου πολύ δέ καί Γυλάς, αρχών ών και αυτός των Τούρκων, εϊσεισιν εις την βασιλίδα και βαπτίζεται, των ίσων αξιωϑείς και αυτός ευεργεσιών και τιμών. Άνελάβετο δέ μεϑ’ εαυτού καί τινα μοναχόν Ιερόϑεον τούνομα, δόξαν ευλαβείας εχοντα, επίσκοπον Τουρκίας παρά τού Θεοψυλάκτου χειροτονηϑέντα, ος έκεΐσε γενόμενος πολλούς από τής βαρβαρικής πλάνης είς τον χριστιανισμόν έπανήγαγεν, άλλ’ ο μέν Γυλάς ένέμεινε τή πίστει, μητ αυτός έφοδόν ποτε κατά ‘Ρωμαίων πεποιηκώς, μήτε τούς άλισκομένους Χριστιανούς ατημέλητους έών, αλλ’ εξωνούμενος καί έπιμελείας άξιων και ελεύϑερων.’ Moravcsik 1988, 85–86; Tsamakada 2002, 173. Translation after Skylitzes

to note that the interactions took place at all levels of society, from the elite to the middle and the lowest classes, such as soldiers, or slaves. The most prominent events of this second phase were the diplomatic missions to Byzantium, where influential leaders such as Gyula and Bulcsu were converted (Bóna 2000, 63). Such visits already signalled the third phase, in which political leaders actively sought the possibilities of conversion and encouraged the proselytization of larger groups (Moravcsik 1988, 85). This process started around the middle of the tenth century and lasted until the beginning of the eleventh when the Hungarian state came under Christian leadership. A new phase of Christianization began, initiated by King Stephen (r. 1000–1038), which involved the foundation of official ecclesiastic institutions and accelerated the process of conversion, which, however, was by no means completed during Stephen’s reign (Takács 2018, 4–5, 21). This partial success is clearly demonstrated by the fact that even after the death of King Stephen, there was still an important person related to the royal family (Levente, the brother of two later kings, András and Béla) who was buried ‘more paganico’ (Chronica Hungarorum c. 86). Pagan rebellions also showed that considerable portions of the Hungarian people were still resisting Christianity, and the law codes of kings László and Kálmán imply that the problems lingered at least until the end of the eleventh century (Chronica Hungarorum c. 82–83). According to this periodization, the cross from Tiszakeszi most probably belongs to the third phase of proselytization.

The Cross Found at Tiszakeszi The finds from the early Árpádian cemetery at Tiszakeszi‒ Szódadomb were unearthed in 1900 and are now kept in the Ottó Herman Museum, Miskolc.2 The excavator was Ignác Gállfy, a teacher who came from Transylvania and settled in Miskolc. Among the finds published later

2010, 231: ‘until their chieftain, Boulosoudes, came to the city of Constantine under pretence of embracing the Christian faith. He was baptized and received [from the font] by the emperor Constantine who honoured him with the title of patrician and put him in possession of great riches; then he went back to his homeland. Not long afterwards, Gylas who was also a chieftain of the Turks came to the capital where he too was baptized and where he too was accorded the same honours and benefits. He took back with him a monk with a reputation for piety named Hierotheos who had been ordained bishop of Turkey by Theophylact. When he got there, he converted many from the barbaric fallacy to Christianity. And Gylas remained faithful to Christianity; he made no inroad against the Romans, nor did he leave Christian prisoners untended.’ 2 Concerning the date of the excavation, K. Végh 1970, 85–86, has indicated both 1900 and 1901. Cf. Horváth 2020, 318–20.

11.   f ro m b le ssi ng ( hand) cro ss to hangi ng cros s 179

on by Katalin K. Végh there was also an unpretentious pendant/pectoral cross (Végh 1970, 86, 100; Horváth 2020, 319). The present study will discuss this object in detail. Originally, it was not a pectoral cross, but it was remodelled into one sometime before being placed in the tomb. A refabrication and a changing function appears to be unique among the objects related to Christianity in the early Árpádian age, and thus, it deserves to be investigated in detail. The parameters of the bronze cross are as follows: total height: 7.72 cm (7 cm without the ornament), total width: 4.78 cm (4.27 cm without the ornament). The vertical bars are 2.7 and 3.3 cm long, and the horizontal bars measure 1.5 and 1.4 cm. The cross is c. 0.15 cm thick. The protruding ornament measures about 0.75 cm with a diameter of 0.7 × 0.6 cm. The holes on the lower part have a diameter of 0.22 and 0.25 cm. The length of the broken central spike next to these holes is 1.4 cm. The thickness is c. 0.28 cm. The object weighs 11.31 g (Fig. 11.1). The bronze cross is poorly preserved and broken; it had to be restored from at least four pieces. Originally, some oval ornaments were attached by small (c. 0.4 cm long) rods to all of the bars, but they broke away except for those on the upper and right bars. The oval ornament on the upper bar is intact, but the other is rather worn and only partially preserved. The front surface is decorated; a cast grid pattern with some dots in the middle can be observed on the upper bar. Additionally, the horizontal bars are decorated only by small circles; on the left bar, they are clearly visible in the corners, but on the right bar, the surface is worn, and the remains of the decoration are barely discernible. The design was not enhanced by further engraving after the cross was removed from the casting mould. Circles decorate the lower bar, the lower edge of which is clearly broken; the two holes here were made secondarily. The holes were intended to hold some revetments, and since the edges of the holes are worn, it is uncertain whether the holes were drilled from the front or the rear side. There is a reinforcement on the central axis of the lower bar, and as seen from below, there is a rectangle of c. 0.4 × 0.3 cm in the middle of the broken surface. In all probability, this hole was created for a spike intended to fit the cross to some other object. The cross, therefore, was not produced as a pendant. The two holes are placed almost symmetrically on both sides of the central spike. The broken surface preserved the faint outline of yet another such hole, with a diameter of 0.28 cm. Presumably, this might have been produced earlier than the two preserved ones, which were created because the lower/earlier one(s) did not work (Fig. 11.2). On the object’s rear side, there are casting traces, and at the junction of the horizontal bars, there is some punched circular decoration similar to the circle placed centrally on the outer part of the left bar.

Figure 11.1. Front and rear sides of the cross found at Tiszakeszi. (Photo by Péter Langó.)

Figure 11.2. The broken part from below. (Photo by Péter Langó.)

The Original Function of the Tiszakeszi Cross — Some Possibilities In sum, the object found in the grave is quite fragmentary and worn; its condition indicates that it was used for a considerable time. Based on the secondary holes, it was likely used as a pectoral cross for an extensive period, as the wear patterns around the mounting holes clearly indicate extensive use. Nonetheless, the central part suggests that, originally, the cross had another function. The bold central line most likely belonged to a spike and was created to attach the cross to another object. The cross itself is smaller than contemporary medium-sized crosses; therefore, it is unlikely to have

180 p é te r l a n gó a n d an d r ás patay- h o rvát h

been used as a processional cross.3 Its use on a stone monument or a gravestone is also unlikely, even though some crosses, occasionally made of bronze, were made for stone monuments. However, these were usually larger and fabricated of iron (Noll, 1974, 34‒35; Schmidt 2004, 125). Similarly sized crosses to the discussed object can occur in graves, as crosses used to be nailed to coffins, but these were made of a thin metal foil and did not have a heavy central spine on a splaying bar (Hübener 1975; Gut and others 2018). Those crosses that were discovered in the coffins were made of iron and were usually larger (Giostra 2007, 324; Valenti 2017, 130‒31) and more robust4 than the piece found at Tiszakeszi. A possible interpretation for this particular cross could be that it was fastened to a base and served as an altar cross. Written sources, however, suggest that altar crosses were not common at this time. Synodal decrees often contain regulations concerning objects that were allowed on altars as early as the sixth century,5 but no written or iconographic sources would attest to the existence of altar crosses in the ninth and tenth centuries.6 Evidence suggests that altar crosses first appeared during the time of Innocent III (1198–1216) (Thurston 1908, 535–36; cf. Braun 1937, 500). Considering the unlikely fit for any of the above uses, it can be presupposed that the cross found at Tiszakeszi had a different function. In our opinion, it belonged to the group of hand crosses or blessing crosses (Segenskreuz) (Hahn 2005, 185).

Blessing Crosses — Liturgical Use and History of Research Crosses used for blessing people were already present in early Christian liturgical practices during late antiquity (Dinkler and Dinkler von Schubert 1991, 148; Pettis 2011,





3 Sandin 1992, 4–5 has defined the group of medium-sized processional crosses as measuring from 10 cm to 1 m. For the size of these crosses see also Cotsonis 1994 with further parallels. In some cases, it was impossible to determine whether the cross functioned as a processional or blessing one. See. Steiner 2005, 188. 4 Fabbri and Virtuoso 2007, 225. For crosses marking graves in the late Middle Ages see Baur-Heinhold 1984, 7‒8. 5 The second council of Tour in 567 passed the following regulation: ‘De compositione corporis dominici super altario. Ut corpus domini in altari non in imaginario ordine sed sub crucis titulo componatur’. Bruns 1839, 226. 6 Thurston 1908, 536. He suggested that Leo III used such a cross. This suggestion is based on the following words of the Liber Pontificalis: ‘quae stat juxta altare majus’. Cf. Liber Pontificalis, 98, 86. Pierobon-Benoit 2007, 311–12 supposes that altar crosses already existed in the sixth and seventh centuries, and Petsopoulos 1987, 42–43, no. 40 suggests that they were used by Nestorians during the ninth century.

75). Earlier researchers supposed that such small-sized crosses of this type were already depicted during the third century in Egypt (Klauser 1959, 29 n. 78; Hermann 1964, 165–66; Nussbaum 1964, 259–62). The theory was based on some early gravestones published by Klaus Wessel, which were dispersed in various public and private collections (Klauser 1959, 29 n. 78; Wessel 1963, 100–01; Müller 1960, 270; Hermann 1964, 165–66; Nussbaum 1964, 259–62). The depictions were considered at that time to be genuine Coptic works of art, and the crosses were thought to resemble or to replace the ankh-symbols, frequently used in pagan Egyptian art. This idea seemed to be logical, since it was and is still well-known that Coptic art incorporated and finally absorbed this pagan symbol (Török 2005, 18–19; Barocas 2012; Frankfurter 2018, 155–60; Westerfeld 2019, 135–42). Nonetheless, most recently, it has been demonstrated that the stelai were in fact forgeries, specifically produced for the antiquities markets (Török 2005, 24–31), and are therefore irrelevant for determining the early usage of crosses as symbolic objects (Dinker and Dinkler von Schubert 1970; Spier 2007, 233–36). After settling this controversy, one can safely return to the communis opinio that small-sized blessing crosses first became widespread — similarly to other types of crosses — during the fourth century. This object type is attested in the Byzantine Empire already during late antiquity, and art historical depictions (Muñoz 1906, 101–03; Wace 2011, no. 67, Tsakalos 2012; Frankfurter 2018, 175) and written sources alike (Moschos 87; Nussbaum 1964, 258, 263; Hahn 2005, 185–86) show its widespread usage. According to some researchers, these crosses were not only used in liturgy, but also appeared in the imperial court, handled by the emperor or by high-standing officers (Nussbaum 1964, 264). The theory was based on data provided by ceremonial handbooks edited during the reign of Constantine Porphyrogenitus (r. 913–959) and afterwards. However, these handbooks do not provide details concerning the exact type of crosses.7 Depictions and relevant

7 Woodrow 2001, 63–67. De cerem. 1.1. (25.20–22): ‘they [i.e. the rulers] take in their right hand the akakia and in their left the gold crosses decorated with precious stones and pearls’ (οὺς ἐκ λίθων καὶ μαργάρων ἠμφιεσμένους χρυσοῦς σταυρούς); 1. 32 (175.11–13 ed. Reiske) The patricians stand on the left-hand side of the said Chrysotriklinos and they stand in front of the throne, carrying their processional candles and crosses (βαστάζοντες τά τε λιτανίκια αὐτῶν κηρία καὶ τοὺς σταυρούς); 1. 33 (177.1–2 ed. Reiske) ‘the augousta also receives the groups in the same ways the emperor, and so in her case, too, she receives the crosses’ (καὶ τοὺς σταυροὺς λαμβάνει) ‘from those going in, as prescribed in the case of the emperor’; 2.52 (766.8–10 ed. Reiske) ‘they hold in their right hands the victory trophy of the cross’ (ἐν ταῖς δεξιαῖς χερσὶν αὐτῶν τὸ νικητικὸν τοῦ σταυροῦ κατέχοντες τρόπαιον), ‘and they hold in their left hand [the symbol] of the resurrection of

11.   f ro m b le ssi ng ( hand) cro ss to hangi ng cros s

studies undoubtedly suggest that instead of a proper cross, a cross-topped sceptre was intended.8 Coins also depict the emperor with a cross-topped globe (Grierson 1982, 30–36; Somogyi 2016, 148–49) instead of a miniature cross.9 Nowadays, crosses are usually differentiated not only according to their size, but also into smaller groups based on their function. This approach is well illustrated by the enkolpia or the group of the so-called votive crosses (Elbner 1964, 30–38; Cotsonis 1994, 14, 56–58; Schmidt 2002, 202–03; Feissel and others 2001, 10; Kambanis 2002, 43, no. 54; Witt 2005, 145–46), which were discussed previously among many other objects as hand crosses (Carbol, Leclercq, 3/2, cols 3107–15; Nussbaum 1964, 263). It became quite clear that small-sized crosses, as defined by Karl Sandin, can be differentiated according to their function or usage, and it is fully justified to distinguish between pectoral crosses, handheld crosses or cross-shaped badges (Steckkreuze) (Will 2005), and various kinds of solid-cast ornamental crosses adorning other objects, such as polykandela (Petsopoulos 1987, 26–27, no. 11; Steiner 2005, 188, no. II. 14) or incense burners (Schmidt 2004, 122; Steiner 2005, 188, no. II. 13). Blessing crosses played an important role in Orthodox liturgy and are used in multiple ways even today (King 1947, 86, 111, 132, 150, 253, 278–79, 293, 310, 380, 424, 437–40, 454, 480, 562; Atalla 1986, 89; Beyene 2007, 187–89). Bishops usually bless their own assistants or people gathered for a ceremony with such a cross. Faithful people customarily kiss these crosses after communion. During the celebration of the holy mass, the blessing cross is placed on the altar to the right of the book of the gospel. At the end of the mass, the priest takes it in his right hand and gives the final blessing to the departing people. Blessing crosses still continue to be used in this way in orthodox liturgy today.10 As shown by many Langobard (De Marchi 2017, 71) and Frankish sources of the Merovingian and Carolingian

ages (Skubiszewski 2006, 105; Treffort 1996, 24–25), blessing crosses were used in early medieval western Europe as well. They were popular in the age of the crusades when pilgrims were carrying such crosses as tokens or badges (Curzi 2007, 128, 130). Occasionally, they were also used in Catholic liturgy (as shown by some narratives of the ninth century), but it was not as important as in the east, and it certainly did not become so widespread and prominent (Nussbaum 1964, 266).

The Cross from Tiszakeszi and Blessing Crosses of the Crux Gemmata Type Although it is quite fragmentary, the protruding ornaments attached to the corners of the Tiszakeszi cross clearly show that it belongs to the crux gemmata type. Researchers agree that the corner ornaments of this type imitate the reliquary of the Holy Cross in Jerusalem, which was covered with metal and many precious stones. In this way, the prototype of the humble cross found at Tiszakeszi was the most venerated Christian object of that period (Lipinsky 1960a; 1960b; Pitarakis 2000, 29–31; Hahn 2005, 185, no. II. 13. 2). From a technical point of view, blessing crosses can be divided into two groups. The first group is characterized by the fact that the cross and the handle were cast together or were cut out from the same sheet of metal (Strzygowski 1904, 305, no. 9178; Bénazhet 1992, 175–77), or they were hammered or welded into each other (Wulf 1909, 221, no. 1075; Bénazhet 1992, 174; Kakovkin 1998, 164, no. 224; Steiner 2005, 186–87, no. II. 13. 10; Roll 2005, 264, no. 41. 1–3). In the second group, to which the cross found at Tiszakeszi also seems to belong, the handle was made of wood, and the cross was applied to this part with a spike or hole.11 Both types may have been equally widespread, and modern orthodox examples suggest that there could have been some pieces made entirely of wood, either carved from the same piece of timber or from different ones joined together secondarily (Roll 2005, 263–64, no. IV. 40. 2–5; Beyene 2007). Due to the length of the study and the multiple variations of blessing crosses, only the crux gemmata type will be discussed in detail.12 The closest parallels to the cross found at Tiszakeszi are known from Egypt (Fig. 11.3.1). There is a piece with an unknown provenance and uncertain date in the Coptic Museum in Cairo (Gayet 1902, 311; Strzygowski 1904,

our earthly nature’. Pseudo-Kodinos 4 (p. 200.4–5) The emperor wears whichever of these headdresses and garments he might wish. However, he always carries the cross in his right hand (τὸν δέ γε σταυρὸν ἐν δεξιᾷ φέρει ἀεί). and (p. 224.22–24) But on this feast day he wears nothing other than his crown and sakkos, carrying a cross in his right hand (φέρων ἐν μὲν τῇ δεξιᾷ σταυρόν). 8 Ross 1960; Parani 2001; Parani 2003, 31–33. This is suggested by Pseudo-Kodinos 5, p. 262.5–9 as well: ‘If this takes place as we have described, after the new emperor crowns his own wife, the empress, and after she makes proskynesis, both of them mount the platform and sit again on their thrones, the emperor holding a cross (ὁ μὲν βασιλεὺς κατέχων σταυρόν) and the new empress holding a baion, as has been said.’ For the size of the baion see Parani 2003, 32. 9 An exceptional case is a solidus of Iustinianus II, on which the 11 Spike: Petsopoulos 1987, 34–35, no. 30; hole: Roll 2005, 268, emperor holds in his right hand a small cross mounted on a base. no. IV. 47.1. Klein 2004, 52; Hahn 1981, 354. 26. B3. 12 For the different types see e.g. Bénazhet 1992, 175–77; Kakovkin 10 For the late parallels see Roll 2005, 263–64. 1998, 164; Roll 2005, 264, no. IV. 41. 1–5; Beyene 2007, 187–89.

181

1 82 p é te r l a n gó a n d an d r ás patay- h o rvát h

Figure 11.3. Early Byzantine blessing crosses of the crux gemmata type: 1. Coptic Museum in Cairo; 2. Bode Museum; 3. Tiszakeszi – Szódadomb; 4. Louvre; 5. Cardinal Friedrich Wetter’s collection; 6. unnamed private collection in Great Britain; 7. private collection in Munich. (Drawing by Krisztián Balla.)

305, no. 9178; Nussbaum 1964, 259, 264). It was cast of bronze13 and consisted of a most probably undecorated cross (4 cm) and a conical handle (6 cm). The handle is divided by ridges and has a globular finial. Another piece is found in the collection of the Bode Museum (Fig. 11.3.2). It was purchased in 1905 allegedly from Egypt, and Oskar Wulf, a pupil of Kondakov, dated it to the sixth or seventh century (Wulf 1909, 221, no. 1075). This piece is larger than the one in Cairo (17 cm) but is also made of bronze and fitted together from multiple pieces. The cross has an engraved decoration on its front side, depicting the crucified Christ and a Greek cross above him. The nails are clearly indicated on the hands and the feet of Christ by additional engraving. The cross was fitted to the handle in the usual way. On the rear side, in the middle, there is some octagonal decoration, and the bars may have been inscribed, according to Oskar Wulf (1909), with some Arabic characters. The bronze handle has a cylindrical form, and the spike connecting the two parts was — similarly to other Egyptian pieces — concealed by the handle covering the lower bar of the cross.14 The handle is divided by some ridges, and its lower end is decorated by a dodecahedron bead and an indented disc. Another comparable bronze piece reached the Louvre in 1925 (Fig. 11.3.4). It also allegedly comes from Egypt, but nothing is known about its finding place or circumstances. The publication by Bénazhet (1992, 174) does not suggest any exact dating. Based on its size, this

piece can be grouped with other medium-sized blessing crosses; its height measures 20.3 cm, its maximum width is 8.8 cm, and it is c. 1.2 cm thick. As a unique feature, the protruding ornaments at the corners of the horizontal bars are connected by arches. The arches are fastened with revetments, and their front sides are decorated with incised weaving lines intersecting each other. There are no analogies for arches on blessing crosses, but this form resembles lines that connect the globular ornaments of the horizontal and the upper bars, representing the sky on some Egyptian hanging and processional crosses of the crux gemmata type, dated to the sixth and seventh centuries (Steiner 2005, 185–86, no. II. 13. 3; no. II. 13. 5). The front side of this cross is also decorated, but it was — contrary to the one in Berlin — applied after casting, but before fitting the cross and the handle. In the central part of the cross there is an orans figure, identified according to the characters above her (MP XC) as Mary.15 The letters were incised in the upper bar of the cross, shaped quite irregularly. The figure of Mary also suggests an inexperienced or careless engraver, who might have been illiterate as the M is engraved upside down. Similarly to this provincial decoration, the application to the handle is also inadequate, as it partly covers one of the feet of Mary. The cross-section of the handle has a rectangular form and was decorated on its upper part by a biconical ornament aligned with the lower end of the cross.

15 Bénazhet 1992, 174 suggests that the mural painting found at d’Esna could be regarded as a good parallel for this depiction, cf. Sauneron 1972, 79–81. However, it is worth stressing that the 13 Alfred Gayet (1902, 311) mentioned the piece — erroneously — decoration of hanging crosses of the eight to eleventh centuries among the ivories. Cf. Strzygowski 1904, 305, no. 9178. also closely resembles this piece. In general, see: Pitarakis 2006, 14 For a similar spearheaded handle ending see: Kakovkin 1998, 164, 87–91; Dončeva-Petkova 2011, 296–303. no. 224.

11.   f ro m b le ssi ng ( hand) cro ss to hangi ng cros s 183

Cardinal Friedrich Wetter received a similar cross when he visited Jerusalem (Fig. 11.3.5) (Hahn 2005, 185–86, no. II: 13.2). It was cast from bronze and measures 14.2 cm with its handle partially missing, belonging to the group of large-sized blessing crosses. Sylvia Hahn dated it to the sixth or seventh century (Hahn 2005). The front side is decorated but, similarly to the one found at Tiszakeszi, only with a simple incised, geometric design along its edges, and a cross rotated by 45 degrees (X) at the intersection of the bars. The handle is cylindrical, and it partly covers the part where decoration was applied. The pattern of the decoration of the handle shows that it was created prior to the application of the handle. Unfortunately, the current evidence is ambivalent concerning whether the handle was originally made entirely of metal or whether the bronze shaft was just a cap for a wooden handle. The next piece comes from an unnamed private collection in Great Britain (Fig. 11.3.6). It was most probably a large blessing cross applied with a spike. It measures 13.4 cm in length and is 10.5 cm wide (Petsopoulos 1987, 34–35, no. 30). It has been dated to the fifth to sixth centuries. The broken spike suggests that it was attached to a wooden handle. The cross is decorated similarly on its front side to the cross from the Cardinal Wetter collection, featuring an incised border decoration. On the bars and in the middle, there are incised rosettes with six leaves in a circle. As the spike does not interrupt the decoration, it was most probably cast together with the cross. A final parallel object is from a private collection in Munich, which could have been either a processional cross or a blessing cross (Fig. 11.3.7). The measurements of the piece (18 × 8.2 cm) would allow both possibilities, and the piece is dated to the middle-byzantine period (Steiner 2005, 186–87, no. II. 13. 10). Although its handle is most probably broken, it does not necessarily end in a spike that would allow an attachment to a rod; therefore, it is more likely to belong to the group of blessing crosses. Similarly to the piece kept in the Louvre, the front side has an engraved decoration. However, there is no indication of whom the orans figure represents. On the rim, there is a double wavy line, similar to the decoration of the piece from the Cardinal Wetter collection, which overlaps with the lower part of the figure’s dress. The cylindrical handle is attached to the front side and is decorated by some ridges. The lower end of the handle is rounded, akin to the artefacts from the Louvre and from the Cardinal Wetter collection. Based on its measurements (7.72 cm long), the piece found at Tiszakeszi clearly belongs to the group of medium-sized blessing crosses (Fig. 11.3.3). There are smaller ones, like the piece in Cairo, which is 10–11 cm long, and the cross itself is 4 cm. Medium-sized pieces are 10 to 20 cm long; including a presupposed handle,

the cross found at Tiszakeszi probably reached this size originally. Another parallel object, an Egyptian blessing cross, not belonging to the crux gemmata group, dated to the sixth century, strengthens this conclusion. In this case, the cross is 7.8 cm long, but together with the handle, it measures 19.8 cm (Kakovkin 1998, 164, no. 224). Similar measurements can be observed on several other crosses kept in the Louvre, including the already mentioned piece, but also including further objects that do not belong to the crux gemmata type (Bénazhet 1992, 176–77). The piece from the private collection in London presumably also belongs to this group, and notably, its decoration is also similar to the one found at Tiszakeszi. Larger blessing crosses could also have existed, but quite often, due to the damage of the handle, it cannot be determined with certainty whether they were blessing crosses or small-sized processional crosses. There are several examples for both (Zalesskaya 1998, 40, no. 47; Kakovkin 1998, 164, no. 223). Early modern blessing crosses in Ethiopia may have even reached 30–40 cm, including their handles (Roll 2005, 263–64, no. IV. 40. 2–5, no. IV. 41. 1–3; Beyene 2007, 187–89). Blessing crosses feature a variety of decorations. Some pieces are undecorated, such as the one in the Coptic Museum in Cairo; others, like the one found at Tiszakeszi, the cross from the Cardinal Wetter collection, and the privately owned cross from London, are moderately decorated. However, some artefacts have elaborated figural decoration, for example, Christ on the cross from the Bode Museum, the Virgin Mary on the piece kept at the Louvre, and an unidentified figure on a cross kept in Munich. Concerning the chronology of blessing crosses, the object found at Tiszakeszi is of paramount importance. In many cases, no date has been established, which is quite understandable as this type of object type has not been studied systematically. Some researchers proposed to date them to the sixth and seventh centuries, but without clear argumentation. The cross found at Tiszakeszi is the only artefact where the context and the finding circumstances are known, which dates the interment of the cross to the tenth and eleventh centuries. In our opinion, the crosses kept in the Louvre and in Munich should also be dated to around this time, from the ninth to the eleventh centuries. This dating is corroborated by the style and iconography of the figural decorations as well, as both of them clearly belong to the period following iconoclasm (Pitarakis 2006, 87–91; Dončeva-Petkova 2011, 296–303).

Summary One can conclude, therefore, that the cross found at Tiszakeszi was most probably originally a blessing

1 84 p é te r l a n gó a n d an d r ás patay- h o rvát h

cross of the crux gemmata type. It was attached to its wooden handle by a spike, which is only partially preserved. The object was presumably of Byzantine origin, based on the crux gemmate-type decoration, which was quite widespread in the Mediterranean world and South-Eastern Europe from the eighth to the tenth centuries, essentially derived from the Holy Cross in Jerusalem (Lipinsky 1960a; 1960b; Pitarakis 2000, 29–31; Hahn 2005, 185). In western Europe, its presence was much less dominant, and appeared mainly due to Byzantine influence (Harris 2003, 90). It cannot be determined whether the object found at Tiszakeszi is somehow related to the Christianization of Hungary in the tenth and eleventh centuries. It is likely that the cemetery itself was already in use during the tenth century, based on arrowheads, the remains of an iron bit with jointed mouthpiece and iron sidebars, and some recently found metal stray finds (Horváth 2020, 319). Burials most probably continued in the eleventh century as well. There is no decisive evidence for this, but an S-ended lock ring and bracelets fashioned from bronze rods (rectangular or oval in cross-section) with pointed terminals all seem to belong to c. 1000 (K. Végh 1970, 85‒86, 99‒100; cf. Révész 2020, 262, 300). Therefore, the meagre material remains suggest that the cemetery was opened during the tenth century and was still used in the eleventh, similarly to many other cemeteries in the Carpathian Basin (Kovács 2013, 532–42).

The burial that contained the cross cannot be dated more closely (Langó and Türk 2004, 397‒402). It belonged to either the tenth or the eleventh century. It is equally unclear if the deceased person wore the cross because he/she had already converted to Christianity or just as a piece of jewellery (Langó and Türk 2004, 397‒99). Moreover, there is absolutely no evidence to date the alteration of the cross. The blessing cross may have been converted to a hanging cross at any time and at any place. The only fact that seems to be certain is that the blessing cross was in use for a considerable time and was quite worn when it was turned upside-down and received some holes in its more robust lower part in order to be worn as a hanging pectoral cross (Horváth 2020, 405). Another important aspect deserves to be mentioned here. As the discussion has shown, the cross from Tiszakeszi is unique because even if it was found in a grave, originally, it was not a pectoral cross. Such a combination is undocumented both in Byzantium (where huge enkolpia were used, which could have served as processional crosses as well)16 and in Central and Northern Europe. Finally, it has to be pointed out that while some special objects17 seem to have been fabricated in a similar ad hoc manner, they belong to the earliest phases of proselytization, while in later periods, custom-made pectoral crosses became dominant everywhere.

16 See the permanent exhibition of the Byzantine and Christian Museum in Athens. 17 See e.g. the cut-out pectoral cross from Otto–Adelheid Pfennig: Price 2014, 189.

11.   f ro m b le ssi ng ( hand) cro ss to hangi ng cros s 185

Works Cited Primary Sources Chronica Hungarorum = ‘Chronici Hungarici compositio saeculi XIV’, in Scriptores rerum Hungaricarum tempore ducum regumque stirpis Arpadianae gestarum, ed. by Emericus Szentpétery (Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia, 1937) pp. 217–505 De Cerimoniis = Constantine Porphyrogennetos: The Book of Ceremonies, trans. by Ann Moffatt and Maxeme Tall, Byzantina Australiensia, 18 (Leiden: Brill, 2012) Legatio = ‘Liudprandi Relatio de legatione Constantiopolitan’, in Die Werke Liudprands von Cremona, ed. by Jospeh Becker (Hannover: Hahnsche Buchandlung, 1915) Liber Pontificalis = The Lives of the Eighth-Century Popes (Liber Pontificalis) The Ancient Biographies of Nine Popes from ad 715 to ad 817, trans. by Raymond Davis, Translated Texts for Historians, 13 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2007) Moschos = Johannes Moschos, The Spiritual Meadow, trans. by John Wortley, Cistercian Studies, 139 (Kalamzoo: Cistercian Publications, 1992) Pseudo-Kodinos = Pseudo-Kodinos and the Constantinopolitan Court: Offices and Ceremonies, ed. and trans. by Ruth Macrides, J. A. Munitiz, and Dimiter Angelov, Birmingham Byzantine and Ottoman Studies, 15 (Burlington: Ashgate, 2013) Scylitzes, John. 2011. A Synopsis of Byzantine History, 811–1057, trans. by John Wortley, 1st paperback edn (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Secondary Studies Androhschuk, Fedir. 2011. ‘Symbols of Faith or Symbols of Status? Christian Objects in Tenth-Century Rus’, in Early Christianity on the Way from the Varangians to the Greeks. Ruthenica. Supplementum 4, ed. by Ildar Garipzanov and Oleksiy Tolochko (Kiev: Institute of History of Ukraine), pp. 70–89 Atalla, Nabil Selim. 1986. Coptic Icons (Cairo: Lehnert & Landrock) Barocas, Loretta Del Francia. 2012. ‘L’immagine della croce nell’Egitto cristiano’, Rivista degli studi orientali, 85: 165–211 Baur-Heinhold, Margarete. 1984. Schmiedeeisen Grabkreuze (Munich: Callwey) Bénazhet, Dominique. 1992. L’art du métal au début de l’ère chrétienne (Paris: Musée du Louvre) Berend, Nora, József Laszlovszky, and Béla Zsolt Szakács. 2007. ‘The Kingdom of Hungary’, in Christianization and the Rise of Christian Monarchy: Scandinavia, Central Europe and Rus’ c. 900–1200, ed. by Nora Berend (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 319–68 Betti, Maddalena. 2014. The Making of Christian Moravia (858–882): Papal Power and Political Reality (Leiden: Brill) Beyene, Yaqob. 2007. ‘La croce nella tradizione culturale etiopica’, in La croce. Iconografia e interpretazione, ed. by Boris Ulianich, 1 (Naples: Elio de Rosa), pp. 183–206 Bóna, István 2000. A magyarok és Európa a 9–10. században (Budapest: História – MTA Történettudományi Intézet) Braun, Joseph S. J. 1937. ‘Altarkreuz’, in Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte, ed. by Otto Schmitt, 1 (Stuttgart: J. B. Metzlersche), pp. 500–06 Bruns, Hermann Theodor (ed.). 1839. Canones apostolorum et conciliorum saeculorum IV, V, VI, VII (Berlin: Riemeri) Carbol, Fernand, and Henri Leclercq (eds). 1907–1953. Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie (Paris: Letuzey) Cotsonis, John A. 1994. Byzantine Figural Processional Crosses, Dumbarton Oaks Byzantine Collection Publications, 10 (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks) Curzi, Gaetano. 2007. ‘La croce dei crociati: Segno e memoria’, in La croce. Iconografia e interpretazione, ed. by Boris Ulianich, 2 (Naples: Elio de Rosa), pp. 127–47 De Marchi, Paola Marina. 2017. ‘Altri popoli in Italia’, in I Longobardi. Un popolo che cambia la storia, ed. by Gian Pietro Brogiolo, Federico Marazzi, and Caterina Giostra (Milan: Skira), pp. 69–71 Dinker, Erich, and Erika Dinkler von Schubert. 1970. ‘Kreuz’, in Lexikon der christlichen Ikonographie, ed. by Oskar Holl, 2 (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder), cols 562–90 —— 1991. ‘Kreuz I vor ikonoklastisch’, in Reallexikon zur byzantinischen Kunst 5, ed. by Marcell Restle (Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann), pp. 1–219 Dončeva-Petkova, Lydmila. 2011. Medieval Crosses – Encolpia from Bulgaria (9th–14th Century) (Sofia: Academic Publishing House) Elbner, Victor H. 1964. ‘Zum Justinuskreuz im Schatz von Sankt Peter zu Rom’, Jahrbuch der Berliner Museen, 6: 24–38 Fabbri, Marco and Teresa. 2007. ‘No. 4. 12bis Tomba 8, Lucera, localita Castello’, in I Longobardi. Dalla caduta dell’Impero all’alba dell’Italia, ed. by Brogiolo Gian Pietro and Chavarría Arnau Alexandra (Milan: Silvana Editoriale), pp. 224–25

186 p é te r l a n gó a n d an d r ás patay- h o rvát h

Feissel, Denis, Cécile Morrisson, Jean-Claude Cheynet, and Brigitte Pitarakis. 2001. Trois donations byzantines au Cabinet des Médailles: Froehner (1925), Schlumberger (1929), Zacos (1998) (Paris: Bibliothèque nationale de France) Frankfurter, David. 2018. Christianizing Egypt: Syncretism and Local Worlds in Late Antiquity (Princeton: Princeton University Press) Gayet, Albert. 1902. L’art copte: école d’Alexandrie, architecture monastique, sculpture, peinture, art somptuaire (Paris: Ernest Leroux) Giostra, Caterina. 2007. ‘Luoghi e segni della morte in età in età longobarda: tradizione e transizione nelle pratiche dell’aristocrazia’, in Archeologia e Società tra Tardo Antico e Alto Medioevo, ed. by Gian Pietro Brogiolo and Alexandra Chavarría (Mantova: SAP Societá Archeologica S.R.L.), pp. 311–44 Grierson, Philip. 1982. Byzantine Coinage (Berkeley: University of California Press) Gut, Andreas, Martina Terp-Schunter, and Barbara Theune-Großkopf. 2018. Goldblattkreuze – Glaubenszeichen der Alamannen (Ellwangen: Alamannenmuseum) Hahn, Wolfgang. 1981. Moneta Imperii Byzantini: Rekonstruktion des Prägeaufbaues auf synoptisch-tabellarischer Grundlage, 3 Von Heraclius bis Leo III. Alleinregierung (610–720) (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften) Hahn, Sylvia. 2005. ‘No. II. 13. 2. Segenskreuz’, in Kreuz und Kruzifix: Zeichen und Bild, ed. by Sylvia Hahn, Carmen Roll, and Peter B. Steiner (Freising: Kunstverlag Josef Fink), pp. 185–86 Harris, Anthea. 2003. Byzantium, Britain and the West: The Archaeology of Cultural Identity (Charleston, SC: Tempus) Heinrich-Tamáska, Orsolya. 2012. ‘Fortleben, Abbruch und Neuanfang: Spuren des Christentums in Pannonien im 4.-9. Jahrhundert’, in Christianisierung Europas: Entstehung, Entwicklung und Konsolidierung im archäologischen Befund: Internationale Tagung im Dezember 2010 in Bergisch-Gladbach, ed. by Orsolya Heinrich-Tamáska, Niklot Krohn, and Sebastian Ristow (Regensburg: Schnell and Steiner), pp. 213–38 Hermann, Alfred. 1964. ‘Antinous infelix: zur Typologie des Heiligen-Unheiligen in der Spätantike’, in Mullus: Festschrift Theodor Klauser Stuiber, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum Ergänzungsband, 1 (Münster: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung), pp. 155–67 Horváth, Ciprián. 2020. Borsod, Abaúj és Zemplén megyék honfoglalás és kora Árpád-kori temetői és sírleletei, Magyarország honfoglalás kori és kora Árpád-kori sírleletei, 14 (Szeged, Budapest: Szegedi Tudományegyetem Régészeti Tanszék and Bölcsészettudományi Kutatóközpont and Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum and Martin Opitz Kiadó) Hübener, Wolfgang (ed.). 1975. Die Goldblattkreuze des frühen Mittelalters (Bühl/Baden: Konkordia) Kakovkin, Alexandr, Yakovlevich. 1998. ‘Christian (Coptic) Egypt’, in Christians in the Holy Land. The Art of the Melchites and Other Denominations of the Orthodox Church, ed. by Mikhail Borisovich Piotrovsky (St Petersburg: Slaviya), pp. 136–78 Kambanis, Panagiotis. 2002. ‘No. 54. Croce votiva’, in L’ approccio all’ uomo bizantino attraverso l’ occhio di un collezionista, ed. by Diana Zafiropoulou (Athens: Cassa Fondi Archeologici ed Espropi), p. 45 King, Archdale Arthur. 1947. The Rites of Eastern Christendom, 1 (Rome: Catholic Book Agency) Klauser, Theodor. 1959. ‘Closing Note for Franz-Joseph Dölger: Beiträge zur Geschichte des Kreuzzeichens II’, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, 2: 29 Klein, Holger A. 2004. Byzanz, der Westen und das ‘wahre’ Kreuz: Die Geschichte einer Reliquie und ihrer künstlerischen Fassung in Byzanz und im Abendland (Wiesbaden: Reichert) Kovács, László. 2013. ‘A Kárpát-medence honfoglalás és kora Árpád-kori szállási és falusi temetői: Kitekintéssel az előzményekre: Vázlat’, in A honfoglalás kor kutatásának újabb eredményei. Tanulmányok Kovács László 70. Születésnapjára, ed. by László Révész and Mária Wolf (Szeged: Szegedi Tudományegyetem Régészeti Tanszék), pp. 511–604 Langó, Péter, and Attila Türk. 2004. ‘Honfoglalás kori sírok Mindszent-Koszorús-dűlőn (Adatok a szíjbefűzős bizánci csatok és a délkelet-európai kapcsolatú egyszerű mellkeresztek tipológiájához)’, A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve: Studia Archaeologica, 10: 397–402 Lipinsky, Angelo. 1960a. ʽLa “Crux gemmata” e il culto della Santa Croce nei monumenti superstiti e nelle raffigurazioni monumentali’, Felix Ravenna, 30: 5–62 —— 1960b. ‘La “Crux Gemmata” e il culto della Santa Croce nei monumenti superstiti e nelle raffigurazioni monumentali’, Corso di Cultura sull’Arte Ravennate e Bizantina, 2: 139–89 Marsina, Richard. 1971. Codex diplomaticus et epistolaris Slovaciae. Slovenský diplomatár, 1 (Bratislava: Slovenská akadémia vied) Moravcsik, Gyula. 1938. ‘A honfoglalás előtt magyarság és a kereszténység’, in Emlékkönyv Szent István király halálának kilencszázadik évfordulójára, ed. by Jusztinián Serédi (Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia), pp. 173–212 —— 1988. Az Árpád-kori magyar történet bizánci forrásai (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) Muñoz, Antonio. 1905. L’art byzantin à l’exposition de Grottaferrata (Rome: Danesi) Müller, Hans Wolfgang. 1960. ʽGrabstele eines Isismysten aus Antinoe’, Pantheon, 18: 267–71 Noll, Rudolf. 1974. Vom Altertum zum Mittelalter. Spätantike, altchristliche, völkerwanderungszeitliche und frühmittelalterliche Denkmäler der Antikensammlung, i (Vienna: Kunsthistorisches Museum)

11.   f ro m b le ssi ng ( hand) cro ss to hangi ng cros s 187

Nussbaum, Otto. 1964. ‘Zur Bedeutung des Handkreuzes’, in Mullus: Festschrift Theodor Klauser Stuiber, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum Ergänzungsband, 1 (Münster: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung), pp. 259–67 Parani, Maria. 2001. ‘The Romanos Ivory and the New Tokalı Kilise: Imperial Costume as a Tool for Dating Byzantine Art’, Cahiers Archéologiques, 49: 15–28 —— 2003. Byzantine Material Culture and Religious Iconography (11th – 15th Centuries), The Medieval Mediterranean, 41 (Leiden: Brill) Petsopoulos, Yanni. 1987. East Christian Art (London: AXIA Art Consultants) Pettis, Jeffrey B. 2011. ‘Blessing Rituals’, in The Encyclopedia of Eastern Orthodox Christianity, ed. by John Anthony McGuckin, 1 (Oxford: Blackwell), pp. 74–75 Pierobon-Benoit, Raffaella. 2007. ‘La croce come elemento decorativo o simbolo cristiano negli oggetti di uso commune in Oriente (secc. I–VIII)’, in La croce. Iconografia e interpretazione, ed. by Boris Ulianich, 1 (Naples: Elio de Rosa), pp. 307–74 Pitarakis, Brigitte. 2000. ‘Eπιστήθιος Σταυρός’[Faithful Cross], in Eγκόλπια Άγιον Όρος, Iερά Mεγίστη Mονή Bατοπεδίου [Egolpia Mount Athos, Holy Monastery of Batopedi], ed. by Yiota Oikonomaki-Papadopoulou, Brigitte Pitarakis, and Katia Loverdou-Tsigarida (Vatopedi: Holy Monastery of Vatopedi), pp. 29–31 —— 2006. Les croix-reliquaires pectorales byzantines en bronze, Bibliothèque des Cahiers archéologiques, 16 (Paris: Picard) Price, Neil. 2014. ‘Glaube und Ritual’, in Die Wikinger, ed. by Gareth Williams, Peter Pentz, and Matthias Wemhoff (Berlin: Hirmer), pp. 162–95 Prohászka, Péter. 2012. ‘Bemerkungen zum byzantinischen Münzverkehr der ungarischen Landnahmezeit und der Staatsgründung im Karpatenbecken’, in Die Archäologie der frühen Ungarn, ed. by Bendegut Tobias (Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums), pp. 67–87 Révész, László. 2020. A 10–11. századi temetők regionális jellemzői a Keleti-Kárpátoktól a Dunáig, Magyarország honfoglalás kori és kora Árpád-kori sírleletei, 13 (Szeged and Budapest: Szegedi Tudományegyetem Régészeti Tanszék and Bölcsészettudományi Kutatóközpont and Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum and Martin Opitz Kiadó) Roll, Carmen. 2005. ‘No. IV. 40. 2–5. Segenskreuz aus Holz, No. IV. 41. 1–3. Segenskreuz aus Metall, No. IV. 47. 1–2. Segenskreuz’, in Kreuz und Kruzifix: Zeichen und Bild, ed. by Sylvia Hahn, Carmen Roll, and Peter B. Steiner (Freising: Kunstverlag Josef Fink), pp. 263–64, 268 Ross, Marvin Chauncey. 1960. ‘A Byzantine Imperial Scepter for Easter and a Pectoral Cross’, Jahrbuch der österreichischen byzantinischen Gesellschaft, 9: 91–96 Sandin, Karl. 1992. ‘Middle Byzantine Bronze Crosses of Intermediate Size: Form Use and Meaning’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey: UMI Ann Arbor. Mich.) Sauneron, Serge. 1972. Les ermitages chrétiens du Désert d’Esna, 2: Descriptions et plans (Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale du Caire) Schmidt, Christian. 2002. ‘No. I. 79. Votivkreuz – No. I.82: Votivkreuz’, in Byzanz – Das Licht aus dem Osten: Kult und Alltag im Byzantinischen Reich vom 4. Bis 15. Jahrhundert, ed. by Christoph Stiegemann (Mainz: Philipp von Zabern), pp. 202–03 —— 2004. ‘No. 157. Räuchergefäss mit Gehänge; No. 162. Prozessionkreuz ‒ No. 168. Prozessionkreuz’, in Die Welt von Byzanz – Europas östliches Erbe. Glanz, Krisen und Fortleben einer tausendjährigen Kultur, ed. by Ludwig Wamser (Munich: Theiss), pp. 122, 124–30 Skubiszewski, Piotr. 2006. ‘Die Darstellung der Ordensfrau und der Heiligen um 1100: Die Miniaturen der “Vita Beatae Radegundis”’, in Radegunde ‒ ein Frauenschicksal zwischen Mord und Askese, ed. by Hardy Eidam and Gudrun Noll (Erfurt: Druck und Repro Verl.), pp. 96–113 Spier, Jeffrey. 2007. Picturing the Bible: The Earliest Christian Art (New Haven: Yale University Press) Somogyi, Péter. 2016. ‘Christian Symbols on Byzantine Coins from the 5th–7th Centuries’, in Saint Martin and Pannonia. Christianity on the Frontiers of the Roman World, ed. by Endre Tóth, Tivadar Vida, and Imre Takács (Pannonhalma: Pannonhalmi Főapátság), pp. 145–51 Steiner, Peter B. 2005. ‘No. II. 13. Prozessionskreuze, No. II. 13. 3. Hängkreuz, No. II. 13. 4. Silberkreuz, No. II. 13. 5. Kreuz im Himmelsbogen, No. II. 13. 10. Segenskreuz (?), No. II. 14. Polykandelon’, in Kreuz und Kruzifix: Zeichen und Bild, ed. by Sylvia Hahn, Carmen Roll, and Peter B. Steiner (Freising: Kunstverlag Josef Fink), pp. 185–88 Strzygowski, Josef. 1904. Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire: 7001/7394 et 8742/9200. Koptische Kunst (Vienna: Adolf Holzhausen) Szabados, György. 2011. Magyar államalapítások a IX–XI. században. Előtanulmányok a korai magyar állam történelmének fordulópontjairól, Szegedi Középkortörténeti Könyvtár, 26 (Szeged: Szegedi Középkorász Műhely) Takács, Miklós. 2018. Byzantinische oder byzantinisierende Raumgestaltungen kirchlicher Architektur im frühárpádenzeitlichen Ungarn (Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums) Thurston, Herbert. 1908. ‘The Cross and Crucifix in Liturgy’, in The Catholic Encyclopedia, 4: Clandestinity-Diocesan, ed. by Charles G. Herbermann (New York: Robert Appleton), pp. 533–39

188 p é te r l a n gó a n d an d r ás patay- h o rvát h

Török, László. 2005. Transfigurations of Hellenism: Aspects of Late Antique Art in Egypt ad 250–700, Probleme der Ägyptologie, 23 (Leiden: Brill) Treffort, Cécile. 1996. L’Église carolingienne et la mort: christianisme, rites funéraires et pratiques commémoratives (Lyon: Presses universitaires de Lyon) Tsakalos, Antonis. 2012. ‘No. III. 17. Figürliches Waagengewicht’, in Das goldene Byzanz und der Orient (Mainz: RömischGermanischen Zentralmuseum), p. 235 Tsamakada, Vasiliki. 2002. The Illustrated Chronicles of Ioannes Skylitzes in Madrid (Leiden: Alexandros Press) Váczy, Péter. 1938. ‘Magyarország kereszténysége a honfoglalás korában’, in Emlékkönyv Szent István király halálának kilencszázadik évfordulójára, ed. by Jusztinián Serédi (Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia), pp. 215–65 Valenti, Marco. 2017. ‘Le cittá del centro-nod’, in I Longobardi. Un popolo che cambia la storia I Longobardi. Un popolo che cambia la storia, ed. by Gian Pietro Brogiolo, Federico Marazzi, and Caterina Giostra (Milan: Skira), pp. 130–31 Végh, Katalin K. 1970. ‘Honfoglalás- és kora Árpád-kori sírleletek a miskolci múzeumban’, Herman Ottó Múzeum Évkönyvei, 9: 79–107 Veszprémy, László. 2004. ‘Mint békák a mocsárban. Püspökök gyűlése a Duna mellett 796-ban’, Aetas, 19: 53–71 Wace, Rupert. 2011. Ancien Art, 12 (London: Rupert Wace) Wessel, Kurt. 1963. Koptische Kunst: Die Spätantike in Ägypten (Recklinghausen: Aurel Bongers) Westerfeld, Jennifer Taylor. 2019. Egyptian Hieroglyphs in the Late Antique Imagination (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press) Will, Mathias. 2005. ‘No. II. 17. Steckkreuze, No. II. 17.1. Kreuz, No. II. 17. 2. + 3. Eisenkreuz’, in Kreuz und Kruzifix: Zeichen und Bild, ed. by Sylvia Hahn and Carmen Roll and Peter B. Steiner (Freising: Kunstverlag Josef Fink), pp. 190–91 Witt, Janette. 2005. ‘No. 186. Votivkreuz mit Bein, No. 188: Votivkreuz’, in Die Welt von Byzanz – Europas östliches Erbe. Glanz, Krisen und Fortleben einer tausendjährigen Kultur, ed. by Ludwig Wamser (Munich: Theiss), pp. 145–46 Woodrow, Zoe Antonia. 2001. ‘Imperial Ideology in Middle Byzantine Court Culture: The Evidence of Constantine Porphyrogenitus’s de Ceremoniis’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Durham University) Wulf, Oskar. 1909. Altchristliche und Mittelalterliche Byzantinische und Italienische Bildwerke, 3 (Berlin: Georg Reimer) Zalesskaya, Vera Nikolaevna. 1998. ‘Christians in the East: Melkites. Monophysites. Nestorians’, in Christians in the Holy Land. The Art of the Melchites and Other Denominations of the Orthodox Church, ed. by Mikhail Borisovich Piotrovsky (St Petersburg: Slaviya), pp. 12–59

Petar Parvanov

12. Turning in Their Graves Prone Burials in the Early Medieval Northern Balkans

A bs t r act  The practice of placing the deceased face-down appears persistently in the burial customs of various cultures around the globe. Yet, medieval archaeology in Europe gives the most attention to this phenomenon, probably due to its increased frequency in the available archaeological record. Interpretations of prone burials vary, but ultimately focus on their exceptionality in the mortuary context and ambiguous religious meaning. The present paper will use data from the Middle and Lower Danube region to establish a diachronic picture of developing mortuary variability between the seventh and eleventh centuries. Despite the relatively low numbers, the group represents significant internal diversity in its characteristics over a period of ongoing religious transformation. Prone burials appear in both pagan and Christian contexts, and some distinctive geographical and chronological patterns of distribution emerge in the analysis. As elsewhere in Europe, prone burials demonstrate a close association with other forms of deviant burial rites, especially decapitations.

T

K e y wo r ds  Prone burial, Middle and Lower Danube, early medieval religion, death and burial, social status

T

Numbers are indeed powerful, if even the gods stay silent when they are speaking. Quantitative and statistical methods are the backbone of research dealing with Big Data and reconstructing the bigger picture of the human past. This is, however, not the case with prone or face-down burials. Such a rare form of deliberate funerary disposal is hard to fit in the traditional summaries of archaeological data and has often been marginalized as a mere curiosity of human mortuary behaviour. But is this an encoded error in the communal code of conduct or more of a standard deviation epitomizing

individualized solutions to specific social situations? In other words, prone burials, much like other deviant burial practices in the extra-normative funerary spectrum, are silenced witnesses of the various large-scale processes we are trying to grasp.1 By searching for patterns in their irregular, scattered appearance, an alternative point of view can emerge and reveal the deeply buried currents

1 I intend to elaborate on the terminological issues surrounding extra-normative burials in a separate study.

Petar Parvanov • ([email protected]), is an Assistant Professor at the National Archaeological Institute with Museum, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. He holds degrees in archaeology and medieval studies from the University of Sheffield and the Central European University. His main research interests lie in funerary archaeology, the study of violence and conflicts in the past, and public archaeology. Recently, he has been teaching on these subjects at the Eötvös Loránd University (Hungary) and contributes to the archaeological excavations in Pliska (Bulgaria). Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 189–201. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138116

190 p e ta r pa rva n ov

of socio-political development. These local occurrences manifest the real extent and interconnected nature of religious transformations. Here, prone burials from the northern Balkan region prior to the eleventh century will be included in the current discussion on the significance and possible meanings of this peculiar rite in medieval Europe.

Lost and Found in the Crowd: Prone Burials from Communal Burial Grounds Prone burials are fairly easy to recognize in contrast to the vastly prevailing supine position of the deceased, although less so with the lateral placement of the cadaver, especially in situations of neglectful or hasty disposal. Prone burials have always been considered different in comparison to the usual way of internment, yet they have been present in many cultures from different ages. Caroline Arcini (2009) counted about 600 cases from 215 sites around the world, a number that has only grown. In the area of the Balkans, where the Danube River flows, approximately twenty-five such graves from twenty sites, dating between the seventh and eleventh centuries, have been studied so far. All these examples come from communal burial grounds. The majority

of them are best classified as open or field cemeteries. However, two analogous cases from Pliska (PGB.13, Bulgaria) and Radun (SJR.12, Croatia) are found in churchyard cemeteries. The sample can be expanded and compared with the old but still most comprehensive collection of prone burials in the Carpathian Basin made by János Győző Szabó (1976, 40–66). This number should not be considered final, as new findings like the prone burial near Gradishte (Bulgaria) are to be expected (Fig. 12.1). Unfortunately, its proper analysis is not yet complete, and it cannot be included in the present study. Further application of absolute dating techniques may lead to the reinterpretation of other burials, especially in the case of isolated graves or those where the stratigraphic situation can be inconclusive. One possible example for the latter situation may be found in the double prone burial in grave 37 in Isaccea (Romania). The grave cuts the pit of another stratigraphically earlier burial belonging to a Roman necropolis. Naturally, all human disposals were dated to the Roman period. However, the dating of grave 37 is somewhat ambivalent. The grave is clearly later in the relative chronology of the site. Furthermore, the necropolis is repeatedly disturbed by medieval pits, while the cemetery organization is strictly followed by all other burial contexts. The insertion of the double prone burial seems slightly suspicious, although the

Figure 12.1. Grave 11 from Gradishte (Bulgaria). (Photo by the author.)

12.   t u rni ng i n t he i r grav es

Figure 12.2. Grave 40 from Aradac (Serbia). (Nađ 1959, tab. IX, 4–9.)

practice is well known during the Roman and medieval periods alike. Obviously, this is only circumstantial speculation; still, when datable artefacts are lacking from a grave, scientific methods are the only way to establish a conclusive chronology. The ultimate marker of the prone burial is the anterior position of the skeleton, but there is notable variation among body parts. Typically, prone burials are manifested in two main groups: complete or rather ventral prone position of the skeleton (Table 12.1) and truly face-down burials where only the skull is turned towards the ground (Table 12.2). The second type is far less common during the early medieval period and practically disappears in the eleventh century (Table 12.4). Another interesting aspect is the apparent connection to decapitation, either peri mortem or post mortem. In the burials of the second type, the severed head is in juxtaposition to the rest of the body, placed in the normative supine position. The two cases where the postcranial skeleton lies in a lateral position do not show signs of decapitation, but the correlation is confirmed in Kyulevcha (Bulgaria). The male from grave 81 was beheaded, and the rest of his body was cut in two, with the torso placed prone over the skull. An interesting reversal of the face-down placement is discovered in Devnya-3 (Bulgaria). The body from

grave 93 was placed prone inside a shallow pit with a N–S orientation, but the skull was lying on its posterior over the back, in exact opposition to the body in terms of position and orientation. Unfortunately, there is no analysis of the cervical vertebrae that may prove possible beheading. However, given the size of the pit, it is even more plausible that this peculiar deposit was further shaped by extra-funerary formation processes and soil pressure. The last example also demonstrates the challenges posed by some deviant burials, even to routine archaeological practice. For instance, the description of skeletal orientation usually relies on the natural anatomical order and accepts the head as the top. Of course, cases like Dv3.93 are exceptional, even among prone burials. Nonetheless, differing orientation has been used to emphasize the special treatment of these individuals from the rest of the community. Even if we exclude smaller deviations from the dominant orientation on a given site, the correlation is quite evident. At least half of the prone burials from cemeteries where the W–E is prevalent in inhumations deviate from the pattern. These are examples from Aradac (Ar.40, Fig. 12.2), Bogojevo (Bog.1) in Serbia and Capuil Viilor (CpV.48), and Izvoru (Izv.234) in Romania. The dominant orientation was different during the pagan period south of the Danube, in the hinterland of the

191

192 p e ta r pa rva n ov

Figure 12.3. Grave 1 from Site 2 on the Hemus Highway near Shumen (Bulgaria). (Photo by Stanimir Stoychev.)

Black Sea coast. The inhumation graves from the bi-ritual cemeteries there tend to be oriented according to the N-S axis. Accordingly, the prone burials from Balchik (Blc.162), Nozharevo (Nzh), Hitovo-2 (Hit.32), and, to a lesser extent, Dibich (Dbc) and Hemus-2 (HHW.1) break the pattern. This inclination still persisted after the conversion to Christianity in the ninth century when the preferred orientation changed to W–E, as testified by two examples from Pliska (PGB.13) and Batin-1 (Bat.20). The face-down placement of a severed head or the entire body suggests a deliberate choice in the funerary treatment. This impression can be strengthened by the position of other body parts too. Ironically, even rather contemptuous gestures, such as tying the limbs or certain negligence in following the extended prone position of the body, can reveal an intentional effort in this direction. In fact, legs bent backwards as in Vrbas (Vrb.139) and Dibich (Dbc) or the tightly crouched body of the female from Hemus-2 (HHW.1, Fig. 12.3) involved an additional effort to secure this position. Tied hands can be inferred in several cases where they are beneath the body, but the most interesting example is the young male from Izvoru (Izv.234), where both the hands and the knees were bent to the eastern side.

The demographic profile of the individuals shows that males were about twice as likely to receive prone burial as females. In fact, most female prone burials are concentrated in the eighth century and exhibit some similarities. Although nominally different, the female grave from Balchik (Blc.162) shares the crouched leg position with the burial from Hemus-2 (HHW1). It will not be surprising if the contemporary and geographically close grave from Topola (Top.83) turns out to be a woman as well. Elsewhere, the female skeleton from Bogojevo (Bog.1) also shows a difference in the orientation of her torso and legs. In her case, however, this is due to the uneven grave pit. Her upper body lies on a nicely shaped niche while the legs fall extended to a deeper level. The prone burial from Aradac (Ar.40) is also female. To compare, among Avar burials, the extra-normative position and the sex ratio is more equally distributed (Szabó 1976, 62). Thus, according to the limited available data, at least, prone burials in the early medieval Balkans appear to be quite gendered forms of disposal with increasing regularity among males and a specific female model in the ‘non-Christian’ seventh–eighth centuries.

12.   t u rni ng i n t he i r grav es 193

Regarding age, adult individuals are undoubtedly the most common group in the sample. Rarely are these more mature or juvenile people, but unusual targeting of infants is recorded in Čik (Čik.39 and Čik.104, Serbia). Other graves in this Avar cemetery were also subject to deviant burial practices, but apparently the prone position there was a ‘lighter’ treatment reserved for deceased children and aimed at the group (family, class, or other) they belonged to. Generally, prone burials are usually quite poor and use simple, often shallow and peripheral, grave pits. The finds in the Lower Danube region follow this characterization to a large extent. Only the grave from Capuil Viilor near Histria (CpV.48) contains pottery. The potsherds found by the legs in the grave by the Great Basilica in Pliska most likely were introduced in the grave fill as soil inclusions from this heavily inhabited area. Another very interesting funerary deposit was discovered in Hitovo-2 (Hit. 2), where a complete sheep skeleton was found in the grave with a large stone on top of it. This manner of fixing an animal in place resembles a similar practice well known from human burials, including in one prone burial from Devnya-3 (Dv3.72). In the Middle Danube region, prone burials contained grave inventory far more regularly. This usually

Figure 12.4. Distribution of complete (ventral) prone burials.

includes ceramic vessels (Čik) accompanied by an iron knife (Bog.1 and Vrb.139) or simply small personal adornments like bronze earrings and belt accessories (Ar.40). More remarkable are perhaps only the pearls found in the infant graves from Čik. One bronze earring with twin filigree-ornament beads was also discovered in Sveti Juraj from Radun (SJR.12), suggesting the grave dates to the tenth century (Sokol 2016, 187). The chronological sequencing of the prone burials (Table 12.3) demonstrates a very clear picture. The entirely prone burials show a consistent presence in the funerary record, with a peak observed in the eighth and ninth centuries. There are two main clusters in this period. The slightly earlier concentration in present-day Vojvodina on the Middle Danube is eventually surpassed by the more numerous and long-lasting cluster taking shape in the Lower Danube (Fig. 12.4). More or less the same development is visible with the face-down burials from the second type (Table 12.4 and Fig. 12.5). Additionally, the picture can be refined with the engendering of the rite commented above. Conspicuously, the immediate effects of Christianization on prone burials are minimal and fall in line with the general cycle of funerary behaviour. However, the recorded cases of the practice decreased noticeably in the eleventh century: complete prone

194 p e ta r pa rva n ov

Figure 12.5. Distribution of face-down burials.

burials experienced a restricted peak in Pliska, and prone decapitations disappeared from the archaeological record for the time being. Curiously enough, Pliska is also the findspot of maybe the last of these burials.

Counting Bodies: Prone Burials and Mass Graves Mass mortality blurs the usual societal mechanisms for coping with death and intensifies the experience of surviving individuals and groups altogether. Thus, any funerary variations in such extraordinary situations are inevitably an ongoing negotiation between the customary treatment of the dead and the pressure from the immediate circumstances of the death event. There can be multiple causes of mass mortality, but here the focus will be on the impact of warfare on the (probably) non-combatant population. Prone burials prove to be relevant in this respect. Sometimes their connection with mass graves is not too explicit. For instance, the mutilation-and-prone burial (Kyu.81) from Kyulevcha is in the immediate vicinity of a post-battle mass grave. More importantly, the prone position is practised in two other mass graves from the early medieval Balkans.

The first one is found in the periphery of a site where prone burials are recorded in individual interments, namely, the bi-ritual cemetery Devnya-3. The mass grave is in the northeastern periphery and has a most unusual shape. The pit is ring-shaped and contains the remains of seventy-six individuals, nearly all young females with a very common artificial skull deformation (Dimitrov and Marinov 1974; Yordanov 1976). The mass grave dates probably from the early to mid-ninth century. Their mode of killing and disposal seems chaotic but is rather informative. They all suffered violent deaths with differing levels of maltreatment reflected in the deviant burial practices: decapitations, mutilations, and signs of restraint are visible in almost all cases. The mass grave has been interpreted as the result of a mass execution of captives, probably during warfare (Melamed 2007, 147–52; Parvanov 2019, 289–92). Prone burials comprise 15 per cent (n = 12) of all interments inside the mass grave. The situation gets more interesting when the physical relationship between the human remains is observed, and the distinctive disposal types are analysed (Parvanov 2019, 287–89). The difference between the bottom of the pit and the upper layers of human remains is remarkable. At the bottom are placed eight skeletons, more than half of them in a

12.   t u rni ng i n t he i r grav es 195

prone position (n = 5), while the space above them is filled with carelessly thrown severed bodies and body parts. The very fact of their literally lowest position has to be accounted for. On the other hand, these are the only skeletons found complete. Especially interesting is one body, No. 74, a thirty- to thirty-five-year-old woman with plagiocephaly and distinctive artificial skull deformation. She was placed in a prone position at the bottom of the grave with her right hand under her body and the left one next to the head. Her body was tightly covered with forty-nine flat stones except for her head and left hand. Another arrangement, or rather the lack of it, is found in a smaller mass grave from Capidava (Florescu and others 1962, 699–703). The eight individuals, including one subadult, were disposed of in a large, round pit. There is evidence for beheading and mutilation of the bodies, including the infant. Most of the bodies appear in a lateral position; only one body resembles a supine position, and on top is skeleton No. 3 placed prone over a large stone and the remaining bodies (Fig. 12.6). The grave is generally dated to the ninth to tenth centuries. This find is also explained in a military context, and Petru Diaconu (1967, 470) insists on a later dating in the eleventh century, connecting it to the pagan Pecheneg invasions at the time.

Figure 12.6. The mass grave from Capidava. Plan of the second level. (Florescu and others 1962, fig. 2.)

Towards a Discussion At the beginning of this study, prone burials were imagined as silenced witnesses that would testify about the invisible aspects of social interactions in the Middle Ages. And truly, they delivered, albeit in the form of quantified variables and their comparative reading

and contextualization. These insights are valuable for many reasons. On the very basic level, they cover a blank spot in the archaeological data from the overall mortuary record in the northern Balkans, and for the development of this phenomenon in medieval Europe as a whole. This is a great opportunity to add power to the numbers, improve the potential for cross-cultural analysis, and add nuance to our inherently incomplete knowledge of the past. Moreover, such summaries should be merely a foundation for a more integrated approach to future discoveries combining the awareness of wider funerary practices and the available scientific methods for in-depth analysis. However, this is not all. Prone burials shall be included in the general discussion of deviant burials and their related phenomena, e.g. mortuary variability, ritual behaviour, judicial culture, etc. The interconnectedness of the face-down position with beheading, mutilation, or mass graves corroborates the parallel examination of these practices. In this way, the issue expands thematically and inevitably, geographically and chronologically. Fortunately, this approach is no longer a virgin academic territory. Here I will not delve too much into a comprehensive interpretation, which is underway, but briefly outline some major and fascinating aspects of prone burials. Universally, the face-down position never received widespread popularity among funerary customs (for the single known exception so far, see Usai and others 2010) and has been largely associated with shame and submission. A classical example comes from the Homeric iconography on pottery reflecting depictions in the Iliad and various funerary deposits beginning in the late Bronze Age (Kefalidou 2010, 18–21). To cite just the most prominent example from this context, Hector’s corpse was abused while placed face-down until Priam reclaimed his body and buried him properly (Kefalidou 2010, 11–18). The symbolism of the body position can be found in different contexts, even in later periods. The proskynesis practised in Byzantine ceremonies included lying face-down before the emperor, among other bodily expressions of devotion and social status (Brubaker 2009, 41–50). Against this Aegean background, the overview of prone burials around the world (Arcini 2009) indicated that the Roman and early medieval period saw the peak of this practice. From this time, the burial of the Frankish king Pepin the Short in Saint-Denis is the most historically established manifestation of the prone position. According to Abbot Suger, who reopened the grave in the twelfth century, the king wanted to atone for the sins of Charles Martel, his father. Additional information is found in the French Grandes Chroniques, saying that beneath his head was placed a cross, and his face was looking eastwards (Dierkens 1996, 44).

196 p e ta r pa rva n ov

As often happens with these high-status graves, they nicely exemplify the juxtaposition of certain elements in the funerary rite, and consequently, the conflicting archaeological interpretations. In this case, the explanatory opposition is between the choice to focus on exemplary Christian piety or the punishment of sins. The remains of around fifty individuals in the Viking age cemetery in Kopparsvik were plausibly connected to unbaptized Christian devotees based on their archaeological characteristics and hints in the Old Norse literature (Toplak 2015, 81–82). The high frequency of prone burials in Kopervik and the accumulated data for multiple similar graves around Central Europe (Alterauge and others 2020, 20) support restraining from any structuralist oppositions, and conceptualize this practice as a valid variation within the mortuary spectrum. However, as those studies also exemplify, interpretative preferences are very much open to discussion. The academic tradition for simplistic explanations drawn from early modern anti-vampirism around Central-Eastern Europe (Štefan 2009, 152–53; Gardeła 2015, 101–02; Gardeła 2017, 100–10) tends to expand the gap between the differing opinions even further. In all fairness, the Balkan prone burials from the pre-Christian period were not exclusively explained through vampirism. Although still insufficient, an alternative commentary was given, usually stressing their connection to lateral burials and are explained by a certain social status (Kovačević 1977, 192; КоматароваБалинова [Komatarova-Balinova] 2013, 85) or even physical appearance (Karmanski 1976, 20). When it comes to deviant burials, Christianity is still very much perceived in a monolithic form, as something incompatible with such a manipulation of the deceased. This has been solved through an emphasis on the pagan (Kaznakov 2013, 187) and sometimes even the deep prehistoric heritage (Захариев 1979, 135). However, this cannot be further away from the reality presented by our evidence. Prone burials from the Balkans and beyond demonstrate that Christian funerary behaviour can adapt and reinterpret customs with well-established functionality. In this sense, the existence of local meanings closer to religious devotion, fear of the dead, or the negation of wrong-doers or enemies must be acknowledged. Fundamentally, however, they all rely on a similar set of messages devaluating the individual through the choice of placement in a prone position.

Amidst the plethora of narratives, the prone burials from the northern Balkans follow a trajectory of geographical concentrations that are connected to a range of linked phenomena, reflecting the overall socio-political developments (Reynolds 2013, 708–10). This impression is further stressed by the fact that prone burials appear uninterrupted during the ninth century when the mass conversion of pagan polities and people was happening in the region. Although never truly popular, prone burials are present in late Avar Pannonia and on the Lower Danube. The latter cluster is particularly resilient, as evidenced by the tenth- to eleventh-century decline of the practice. Despite the overall disappearance from known communal cemeteries virtually everywhere, the stagnation highlights the local group of such finds in Pliska. However, by this time Pliska was no longer the capital of the Bulgar polity where the political and administrative power was focussed. These functions were transferred to Preslav during the rule of Symeon I (893–927) and maintained there during the establishment of the Byzantine province Paristrion. Actually, this post-capital continuity is even more interesting as this is a localized manifestation of the custom now limited to the former core territories of the Bulgar polity (Parvanov forthcoming). Thus, prone burials are probably entangled in a complex negotiation of regional identities and central power that needs to be explored more. To conclude, prone burials may be a rare form of funerary disposal, but they are inherently interconnected to a wide set of symbols, practices, and concepts in the symbolic interaction of past social groups. To illustrate this correlation, the present study took over the task of collecting and analysing the known prone burials from the northern Balkans between the seventh and eleventh centuries. Their funerary evidence is neither new nor numerous, yet it provides the starting point for a more systematic and integrated study of the phenomenon on multiple levels. Perhaps the most fascinating of them is the possibility of examining the large-scale dynamics manifested in local communities embodied in these graves. The two-way adaptation of habitual social practices in the extended Christianization process endured the rapidness and even some cultural shock from the deeply transformative conversion or death events. Not just power, but knowledge also can come in numbers, and in that sense, although prone burials are usually few and far between, they are significant.

Table 12.1. Complete (ventral) prone burials.

Appendix

12.   t u rni ng i n t he i r grav es 197

Table 12.2. Face-down burials.

198 p e ta r pa rva n ov

Table 12.4. Chronological sequence of face-down burials.

Table 12.3. Chronological sequence of ventral prone burials.

12.   t u rni ng i n t he i r grav es 199

200 p e ta r pa rva n ov

Works Cited Alterauge, Amelie, Thomas Meier, Bettina Jungklaus, Marco Milella, and Sandra Lösch. 2020. ‘Between Belief and Fear – Reinterpreting Prone Burials during the Middle Ages and Early Modern Period in German Speaking Europe’, PLoS ONE, 15: 8 Arcini, Caroline. 2009. ‘Losing Face: The Worldwide Phenomenon of Ancient Prone Burial’, in Döda Personers Sällskap: Gravmaterialens Identiteter och Kulturella Uttryck, ed. by I. M. Back Danielsson (Stockholm: Stockholm University), pp. 187–202 Brubaker, Leslie. 2009. ‘Gesture in Byzantium’, Past & Present, 203: 4 Bugarski, Ivan. 2009. Cemeteries from Antiquity and Early Middle Ages at Čik (Belgrade: Archaeological Institute) Diaconu, Petru. 1967. ‘Despre pecenegi la Dunărea de Jos în prima jumătate a secolului al XIlea’, Studii şi cercetări de istorie veche, 18.3: 463–76 Dierkens, Alain. 1996. ‘La mort, les funérailles et la tombe du roi Pépin le Bref (768)’, Médiévales, 31: 37–51 Fiedler, Uwe. 1992. Studien zu Gräberfeldern des 6. Bis 9. Jahrhunderts an der unteren Donau (Bonn: Dr Rudoplph Habelt GmbH) Florescu, Grigore, Florescu Radu, and Ceacalopol Gloria. 1962. ‘Săpăturile arheologice de la Capidava’, Materiale şi cercetări arheologice, 8: 693–704 Gardeła, Leszek. 2015. ‘Face Down: The Phenomenon of Prone Burial in Early Medieval Poland’, Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia, 10: 99–136 —— 2017. Bad Death in the Early Middle Ages. Atypical Burials from Poland in a Comparative Perspective (Rzeszów: Instytut Archeologii UR) Karmanski, Sergej. 1976. Nalazi iz perioda seobe narode na teritoriji jugozapadne Bačke (Odžaci: Amaterska Museološka sekcija Jugozapadne Baške) Kaznakov, Vladimir. 2013. ‘Treatment of the “Special” Dead in the Early Middle Ages: Anglo-Saxon and Slavic Perspectives’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Glasgow) Kefalidou, Eurydice. 2010. ‘Dead Men Face Down: Homer, Art and Archaeology’, in Myths, Texts, Images: Homeric Epics and Ancient Greek Art, ed. by Helen Walter-Karidi (Ithaca: Centre for Odyssean Studies, Ithaca), pp. 121–51 Kovačević, Jovan. 1977. Avarski kaganat (Belgrade: Srpska književna zadruga) Mitrea, Bucur. 1973. ‘Necropola feudală timpurie de la Izvoru-Giurgiu, Judeţul llfov (1970)’, Materiale şi cercetări arheologice, 10: 209–19 Nađ, Sandor. 1959. ‘Некропола код Арадца из раног средњег века’ [Nekropola kod Aradca iz ranog srednjeg veka], Рад војвођанских музеја [Rad vojvodzhanskih muzeja], 8: 45–102 —— 1971. ‘Некропола из раног средњег века у циглани Полет у Врбасу’ [Nekropola iz ranog srednjeg veka u tsiglani Polet u Vrbasu], Рад војвођанских музеја [Rad vojvodzhanskih muzeja], 20: 187–268 Oreb, Franko. 1983. ‘Srednjovekovno groblje oko crkve Sv. Jurja od Raduna kod Kaštel-Starom’, Starohrvatska prosvjeta, 13: 185–201 Parvanov, Petar. 2019. ‘The Mass Grave from Devnya and Judicial Culture in Medieval Bulgaria’, in (Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne, ed. by Matthieu Vivas (Bordeaux: Ausonius), pp. 279–94 —— Forthcoming. ‘Medieval Deviant Burials from Pliska’, Плиcкa-Пpecлaв [Pliska Preslav], 14: 335–46 Reynolds, Andrew. 2013. ‘Judicial Culture and Social Complexity: A General Model from Anglo-Saxon England’, World Archaeology, 45.5: 699–713 Sokol, Vladimir. 2016. Medieval Jewelry and Burial Assemblages in Croatia. A Study of Graves and Grave Goods ca. 800 to ca. 1450 (Leiden: Brill) Štefan, Ivo. 2009. ‘Frühmittelalterliche Sonderbestattungen in Böhmen und Mähren: Archäologie der Randgruppen?’, Ethnographisch-archäologische Zeitschrift, 50: 139–62 Szabó, János Győző. 1976. ‘Árpád-kori telep és temetője Sarud határában III. A temető leírása és rendellenes temetkezéseink párhuzamai’, Az Egri Múzeum Évkönyve, 14: 17–90 Tadin, Liljana. 1995. ‘Rannosrednjovekovna nekropola kod Manđelosa’, in Arheološka istraživanja duž auto puta kroz Srem, ed. by Zoran Vapa (Novi Sad: Pokrajinski zavod za zaštitu spomenike culture), pp. 257–86 Toplak, Matthias. 2015. ‘Prone Burials and Modified Teeth at the Viking Age Cemetery of Kopparsvik. The Changing of Social Identities at the Threshold of the Christian Middle Ages’, Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia, 10: 77–98 Usai, Donatella, Sandro Salvatori, Paola Iacumin, Antonietta Di Matteo, Tina Jacob, and Andrea Zerboni. 2010. ‘Excavating a Unique Pre-Mesolithic Cemetery in Central Sudan’, Antiquity, 84.323: project gallery Zirra, Vlad. 1963. ‘Biritual Cemetery of the Early Feudal Age in Capuil Viilor – Histria’, Dacia NS, 7: 355–412 Веленрајтер, Павле [Velenrajter, Pavle]. 1952. ‘Словенска некропола из VII–VIII века у Богојеву (Претходни извештај о ископавањима у Богојеву од 28 маја до 10 јуна 1951 године)’ [Slovenska nekropola iz VII–VIII veka u Bogojevu

12.   t u rni ng i n t he i r grav es 2 01

(Prethodni izveshtaj o iskopavanjima u Bogojevu od 28 maja do 10 juna 1951 godine], Рад војвођанских музеја [Rad vojvodzhanskih muzeja], 1: 135–43 Въжарова, Живка [Vazharova, Zhivka]. 1976. Славяни и прабългари: по данни на некрополите от VI–XI в. на територията на България [Slavyani i prabalgari: po danni na nekropolite ot VI–IX w. na teritoriyata na Balgariya] (Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences) —— 1979. ‘Некрополът до Голямата базилика’ [Nekropolat do Golyamata bazilika], Плиска-Преслав [Pliska Preslav], 1: 69–80 Димитров, Димитър [Dimitrov, Dimitar]. 1972. ‘Раннобългарски некропол Nº 3 при Девня’ [Rannobalgarski nekropol N3 pri Devnya, Early Bulgar Necropolis No. 3 near Devnya], Известия на Народния Музей Варна [Izvetiya na Narodniya Muzey Varna], 8: 45–65 Димитров, Димитър, Георги Маринов [Dimitrov, Dimitar, and Georgi Marinov]. 1974. ‘Раннобългарски масов гроб при град Девня’ [Rannobalgarski masov grob pri grad Devnya], Известия на Народния Музей Варна [Izvestiya na Narodniya Muzey Varna], 10.25: 109–43 Дончева-Петкова, Людмила, Кирчо Апостолов, Виктория Русева [Doncheva-Petkova, Lyudmila, Kircho Apostolov, and Viktoria Ruseva]. 2016. Прабългарският некропол при Балчик [Prabalgarskiyat nekropol pri Balchik] (Sofia: Marin Drinov) Захариев, Иван [Zahariev, Ivan]. 1979. ‘Южната крепостна стена на Плиска и некрополът до нея’ [Yuzhnata krepostna stena na Pliska i nekropolat do neya], Плиска-Преслав [Pliska Preslav], 1: 108–38 Йорданов, Йордан [Yordanov, Yordan]. 1976. ‘Антропологическо Изследване на костения материал от раннобългарски масов гроб при град Девня’ [Antropologichesko izsledvane na kosteniya material ot rannobalgarski masov grob pri grad Devnya], Известия на Народния Музей Варна [Izvestiya na Narodniya Muzey Varna], 12: 171–273 Йотов, Валери [Yotov, Valeri]. 1989. ‘Раннобългарски некропол при с. Хитово, Толбухински окръг’ [Rannobalgarski nekropol pri s. Hitovo, Tolbuhinski okrag], Проблеми на прабългарската история и култура [Problemi na prabalgarskata istoriya i kultura], 1: 221–30 Коматарова-Балинова, Евгения [Komatarova-Balinova, Evgeniya]. 2013. ‘Хокери и псевдохокери от биритуалните некрополи в Североизточна България: Възможности за интерпретация’ [Hokeri i psevdohokeri ot biritualnite nekropoli v Severoiztochna Balgariya: Vazmozhnosti za interpretatsiya,], in Салтово-маяцька археологічна культура: проблеми та дослідження. [Saltovo-mayats’ka arkheologichna kul’tura: problemi ta doslidzhennya,], ed. by G. Svistun (Kharkiv: Vidavets Savchuk), pp. 82–87; 169–77 Меламед, Катя [Melamed, Katya]. 2007. ‘Към тълкуването на масовия гроб от некропола Девня 3’ [Kam talkuvaneto na masoviya grob ot nekropola Devnya 3], Проблеми на прабългарската история и култура [Problemi na prabalgarskata istoriya i kultura], 4: 147–52 Рашев, Рашо, и Станислав Станилов [Rashev, Rasho, and Stanislav Stanilov]. 1988. ‘Старобългарски езически некропол при Ножарево, Разградска област’ [Starobalgarski ezicheski nekropol pri Nozharevo, Razgradska oblast], Археологически Открития и Разкопки [Arkheologicheski Otrkritiya i Razkopki], 1988: 159–60 —— 1993. ‘Старобългарски некропол при с. Дибич, общ. Шумен’ [Starobalgarski nekropol pri s. Dibich, obsht. Shumen], Археологически Открития и Разкопки [Arkheologicheski Otkritiya i Razkopki], 1992–1993: 121 Станчев, Димитър [Stanchev, Dimitar]. 1989. ‘Прабългарски компоненти в погребалния обряд и инвентара на ранносредновековните некрополи в Русенско’ [Pabalgarski komponenti v pogrebalniya obryad i inventara na rannosrednovekovnite nekropoli v Rusensko], Проблеми на прабългарската история и култура [Problemi na prabalgarskata istoriya i kultura], 1: 241–54

Ni n a Richa r ds

13. ‘Oh, Come Little Children’ Burial Customs in the Eleventh-Century Burial Ground of Oberleiserberg (Austria)

A bs t r act  Cemeteries form the most important data basis for the archaeological research of the period between the seventh and eleventh centuries in the present territory of Austria. Settlements from this period are almost completely missing — with some exceptions to the rule. The archaeological evaluation of cemeteries can provide insight into the beliefs of the burial community. In combination with anthropological investigations and scientific analyses, statements about the day-to-day life of the buried can be made. Through the interdisciplinary processing of these finds and findings, it becomes possible to detect and record transformation processes, also in relation to religious changes. Oberleiserberg, a limestone cliff overlooking the surrounding countryside in northern Lower Austria, has been settled throughout history. In the contact region between the Hungarian Kingdom, the territory of the Přemyslid dynasty, and the expanding Babenberg March, a community used the plateau as a burial site in the first half of the eleventh century. Where the corresponding settlement(s) was/were situated is unknown. The grave goods of the necropolis and the scattered stray finds of the mountain plateau indicate contacts of the burying community to different spheres of power in and beyond the region. The supra-regional importance of the site is also supported by evidence that the plateau was used as a marketplace until the twelfth century and later as a pilgrimage site. Furthermore, the reuse of a late antique stone building south of the cemetery is attested to the eleventh century. Due to the interdisciplinary examination of the site, statements beyond the archaeological interpretation of the finds and features are possible. Furthermore, the cemetery on the Oberleiserberg served as one of the first interdisciplinary case studies included in the THANADOS project () and showed how interdisciplinary data could be presented online in a modern way. In this article, the cemetery, especially its uncharacteristically high proportion of child burials, will be discussed and compared with contemporary cemeteries in the region, examining whether

T

Nina Richards • (née Brundke; [email protected]) is an archaeologist and anthropologist at the Austrian Centre for Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage as well as the Austrian Archaeological Institute of the Austrian Academy of Sciences. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 203–218. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138117

2 04 n i n a r i c ha r ds

this is related to a change of beliefs, as it is postulated for other regions of Europe.

K e y wo r d s  Early medieval archaeology, anthropology, osteoarchaeology, Árpádian Age, mortuary archaeology, isotopic analyses, Digital Humanities, early medieval child deficit, cultural change

T

Introduction — Oberleiserberg and its Location in the Northern Weinviertel The hill named Oberleiserberg — a 457 m high limestone cliff — is located in the north of the Weinviertel region in north-eastern Lower Austria, close to the Czech border. The mountain is crowned by a plateau of c. 7.5 hectares. Due to its location in the hilly countryside (Hellerschmid and others 2010, 283; Kern 2012, 34), the plateau offers a particularly good distant view. Thus — under good weather conditions — the Vienna Gate and the foothills of the Alps (Riedl 1958, 4), the Small Carpathians, and the Pálava Mountains (Mitscha-Märheim and NischerFalkenhof 1929, 393) are visible. In addition to the view, the plateau offers a naturally protected location due to the steep slopes of the mountain (Stuppner 2006, 25). Both aspects are thereby possible explanations for the repeated habitation of the plateau in different periods of human history (Brundke 2016; Brundke and others 2017; Kern 1987; Kern 2012; Karwowski 2012; Much 1872; Mitscha-Märheim 1937; Mitscha-Märheim 1956; Mitscha-Märheim and Nischer-Falkenhof 1929; Nischer-Falkenhof and Mitscha-Märheim 1931; Pollak 1999; Stuppner 2008; Stuppner 2012; Stuppner 2014).

The Site from an Archaeological Point of View Excavations

The first finds on the irregular plateau of the Oberleiserberg were reported in the nineteenth century (Hoernes 1889, 70; Kudernatsch 1930–1934, 56; Much 1872; Nowotny 1918; Nowotny 1924). They describe the prehistoric rampart still visible above ground, as well as various surface finds. The site was excavated first from 1925 to 1930 and in 1933 under the direction of Herbert Mitscha-Mährheim and Ernst Nischer-Falkenhof (Mitscha-Märheim 1937, 5; Kern 2012, 34). The area, known to contain high concentrations of Roman bricks, was investigated in several survey trenches (Kern 2012, 34). In the process, seven burials (graves A to F) dating to the eleventh century were uncovered (Nischer-Falkenhof

and Mitscha-Mährheim 1931, 458, 463–64). They are part of the larger burial ground, discussed in this article, but the human remains and finds, as well as the documentation of the early campaigns, are lost today, and interdisciplinary analyses on these graves are, therefore, impossible. Between 1976 and 1990, excavations were carried out on the plateau of the Oberleiserberg again (see Fig. 13.1), conducted under the direction of Herwig Friesinger by the University of Vienna (Stuppner 2006, 9; Kern 2012, 34). Further investigations by Alois Stuppner were carried out starting in 1996 (Stuppner 2006, 9). These campaigns aimed to verify the old findings, examine the prehistoric rampart and its predecessor buildings, and date any settlement phases and structures on the mountain plateau more precisely (Stuppner 2006, 9; Kern 2012, 34). Between 1976 and 1990, sixty-two trenches were excavated (Kern 2012, 34), and settlement traces of the Lengyel (Mitscha-Märheim and Nischer-Falkenhof 1929, 429; Kern 2012, 34), Aunjetitz, and Věteřov culture (Friesinger 1978, 423; Hellerschmid and others 2010, 283–84; Kern 2012, 36; Stuppner 2006, 14) as well as of the Middle Danubian Urnfield Culture (Friesinger 1978, 423; Hellerschmid and others 2010, 284; Kern 2012, 36; Stuppner 1999, 833; Stuppner 2006, 16), Latène Period (Karwowski 2012), and late antiquity/ Migration period (Stuppner 2006; Stuppner 2012) were found. In addition, seventy-one inhumation graves were uncovered, representing the source material for the investigations published here.1 The burial ground, dating to the first half of the eleventh century, extended around the late antique stone building II and up to the prehistoric rampart still preserved above ground today 1 Since 2015, the author has been working on the cemetery of the Árpádian period as part of a dissertation at the University of Vienna (Institute for Prehistory and Historical Archaeology). It is an interdisciplinary investigation that combines archaeological, anthropological, and natural scientific research results. The work was made possible by the international project ‘Border, Contact Zone, No Man’s Land – The March-Thaya Region from the Early to the High Middle Ages’ (I 1911 G21), funded by FWF and GAČR. In addition, the Oberleiserberg cemetery is part of the Austrian Academy of Sciences funded project ‘THANADOS – The Anthropological and Archaeological Database of Sepultures’ (GDND 2018_039). See .

13 .   ‘o h, co me li t t le ch ildren’ 2 05

Figure 13.1. Plan of the cemetery on the Oberleiserberg. (Prepared by R. Lampl based on the excavation records of the years 1977–1990.)

206 n i n a r i c ha r ds

(Mitscha-Märheim and Nischer-Falkenhof 1929, 424). Most of it has been excavated. However, it cannot be ruled out that some graves were not recorded and are still in situ. Mortuary Features and Finds

The dead were buried in simple earth pits, some of them cut slightly into the bedrock. In some cases, charcoal and wood remains indicate the presence of wooden grave constructions, coffins, or mortuary boards. Graves superimposing other burials were not observed in any case, so a marking of the graves in any form — even though no longer detectable today — cannot be ruled out. As such, the burial site does not differ from other contemporary necropolises in the region (Obenaus 2010). The graves are regularly laid out in a west–east orientation, with the deceased buried in a supine position. In a few cases, however, deviations from this rite can be observed. While older individuals show a different orientation, babies and toddlers were more often buried in a deviating position, such as the juvenile individual in grave 30, oriented east–west, while the twenty- to twenty-five-year-old female buried in grave 50 shows a south–north orientation. The children in graves 31, 33, and 61, on the other hand, were buried in a slightly crouched position, while the children in graves 32 and 53 were buried with their arms and legs splayed (so-called ‘frog position’; see Fig. 13.2). All of the mentioned children died before their third birthday (31: three to six months old, 32 and 33: birth to three months old, 53: one to two years old, 61: one and a half to two and a half years old).

The ensemble of grave goods consists primarily of elements of women’s jewellery and is thus significantly reduced. Only eighteen of the seventy-one graves excavated at the site under the direction of Herwig Friesinger contained grave goods. Temple rings with an S-loop and without hooks made of silver and copper alloy dominate. For these, in combination with the anthropological determination of age at death (see below), an age-differentiated burial custom (Brather 2008, 261–70; Stauch 2008, 284–85) can be grasped, in which sub-adult individuals were primarily buried with pieces of copper alloy, adult women (aged between twenty and forty years) were buried with specimens of both copper alloy and silver, while pieces made only of silver were found with mature women (forty to sixty years of age). In addition, rings with button ends or blunt ends were also found, some with glass beads attached. Furthermore, finger rings of various types and glass beads were observed in the graves, but remain — to conclude from the anthropological analysis — limited to the burials of women and children. Only a few grave goods cannot be categorized as female jewellery, such as an arrowhead from the grave of a child and the rarely observed knives. Only one male individual was given grave goods — the man in grave 34 was buried with a simple knife and a Hungarian denarius made of silver, minted during the reign of King Stephen I (r. 1000–1038) of Hungary. The so-called type H1 (Huszár 1963, 6; Huszár 1979, 31) in its light variant ( Jonsson 1988, 95; Kovács 2000, 198) was issued from 1018/1020 to the end of Stephen’s reign (Gyöngyössy 2007, 15; Hahn 1991, 51; Jonsson 1988, 100; Militký and Emmerig 2016, 215).

Figure 13.2. Drawing of burials in grave 31 in a squat position and grave 32 in the so-called ‘frog position’. (Prepared by R. Lampl based on the excavation records of 1977–1990.)

13 .   ‘o h, co me li t t le ch ildren’ 2 07

Figure 13.3. Results of radiocarbon dating for the Oberleiserberg: The analyses support the dating of the necropolis on the basis of the archaeological finds and features to the first half of the eleventh century. (Via .)

208 n i n a r i c ha r ds

Based on the grave goods, the plateau was used as a burial ground in the first half of the eleventh century. Finds compellingly dated to the late tenth century or the period after 1050 (Obenaus 2010) were not observed. The archaeological dating of the site to the first half of the eleventh century — and thus to the so-called Árpádian period — is also confirmed by seven radiocarbon dates (see Fig. 13.3). These, as well as all information on graves, burials, finds, and anthropological analysis results have been published freely accessible on THANADOS and are available at . However, a continuation of the cemetery beyond the middle of the eleventh century or an earlier onset of occupation cannot be completely excluded due to the large number of graves without grave goods. In addition, several stray finds, such as enamelled jewellery (Mitscha-Märheim and Nischer-Falkenhof 1929, 407, 409, plate VIII, XI; Mitscha-Märheim 1956, 32, 41, plate 2), forty-eight Hungarian denarii (Militký 2012, 54; Militký and Emmerig 2016), a Bavarian coin minted under Emperor Henry IV (r. 1084–1105) (Militký and Emmerig 2016, 212), and a spherical zone weight (type B2 after Steuer (1997, 45, 48)) turned up. These findings suggest that the plateau was used in the Middle Ages beyond its pure function as a burial ground. The site is comparable in its find composition to the so-called ‘productive sites’ in Great Britain. These sites are characterized by a high find density of coins and other metal objects, while a context is lacking, as they are regularly from detector surveys (for example, Jørgensen 2003, 176; Ulmschneider 2000, 62; Ulmschneider 2002, 334). Thus, a use as a marketplace cannot be discounted either. Later on, the site developed into a place of pilgrimage with its Romanesque and subsequent Gothic church (Militký and Emmerig 2016, 217) but was no longer used as a burial ground. The finds suggest that the community/communities buried here had contact with all political-cultural spheres of influence in the region. Thus, enamelled jewellery and temple rings with button ends are found primarily in the Eastern Alpine region (Eichert 2010, 40–45; Giesler 1978, 57; Horváth 2015, 409; Obenaus 2010, 366–67, 372) and the spheres of influence of the Salian dynasty (Frick 1992/93, 260, 262; Obenaus 2008, 199; Spiong 2000, 54; Spiong 2001, 328; Ulriksen 2005, 152; Wamers 1994, 58), such as the Babenberg March. Árpádian coins (Militký and Emmerig 2016) show contacts with the establishing Hungarian Kingdom under the first Árpádian kings. S-shaped temple rings made of thin copper alloy or silver wire show the best parallels in Árpádian age contexts (Giesler 1981, 104; Mesterházy 1983, 148; Obenaus 2010, 186; Štefan 2009, 203). Type B2 weights (Steuer 1997, 45, 48), on the

other hand, are found primarily in the southern Baltic region and perhaps indicate contact with the northern European economic zone through the territory of today’s Moravia (Macháček 2013, 369; Macháček and Videman 2013, 192; Steuer 1997, 48).

Anthropological Analysis of the Human Remains Material and Methods

Altogether eighty wholly or partially preserved skeletons are included in the analysis of the present study, excavated partially in the context of the sixty-two uncovered graves, and partially recovered as stray finds; thus, the latter could not be assigned to any of the documented graves with certainty. Despite their age, the human remains were in pristine condition due to the high proportion of lime in the soil of Oberleiserberg. Concerning the methods of the anthropological analyses, age-at-death assessment for subadult individuals was performed using the following methods: mineralization and dentition, according to Ubelaker (1978), epiphyseal closure, according to Ferembach and others (1979), diaphyseal lengths of long bones according to Stloukal and Hanáková (1978) and Schaefer and others (2008). Age-at-death determination in foetuses and neonates was performed according to Hunger and Leopold (1978). The estimation of age-at-death for grown-ups followed the following recommendations: assessment of the facies symphysialis ossis pubis, according to Nemeskéri and others (1960), assessment of the facies articularis sternalis of the clavicle, according to Szilvássy (1977), assessment of the abrasion of the molars, according to Miles (1963) and Lovejoy (1985), assessment of the degree of obliteration of the endocranial cranial sutures, according to Neméskeri and others (1960), assessment of ectocranial suture closure, according to Rösing (1977), and the assessment of degenerative joint changes, according to Schultz (1988). Anthropological sex estimation was performed macroscopically and according to the ‘Recommendations of Age and Sex Determination’ by Ferembach and others (1979). In addition, the sacrum and the robustness of the humerus and femur were assessed. The fifty-five subadult individuals were excluded from the analysis due to the large uncertainties in sexing minors (Sjøvold 1988). Results

Age determination revealed a clear dominance of subadult individuals in the burial ground — of eighty individuals examined, twenty-five were adults and fifty-five were subadults. Infants and very young

13 .   ‘o h, co me li t t le ch ildren’ 2 09

Figure 13.4. Age distribution according to anthropological analysis. (Via .)

children under the age of three are particularly well represented in the sample. Thus, the group of foetuses and neonates (prenatal to three months) includes six individuals. Thirty-three individuals died before their seventh birthday (infans I). Twenty-five of them died before the age of three. Nine children died between the ages of seven and fourteen years (infans 2). One individual was placed in the general age class ‘child’ (aged up to fourteen years). In addition, six juvenile individuals (fourteen to twenty years) were buried in the cemetery. Grown-ups were subdivided into fourteen adults (twenty to forty years) and seven mature individuals (forty to sixty years). Individuals over sixty years of age (class senile) were not found at Oberleiserberg. Due to poor preservation, four individuals had to be placed into the general age class ‘grown-up’ (see Fig. 13.4). The overrepresentation of children also results in a particularly low mean age at death of thirteen and a half years (calculated according to Bach and Bach 1971, 144). Twenty-five individuals were examined with respect to their sex. Ten of them showed female features, and eleven individuals were identified as male. For four adults, the sex could not be determined based on qualitative and quantitative bone preservation. The results of the anthropological-paleopathological analysis show a community whose life was characterized by physical labour, with no significant difference demonstrated between males and females in terms of degenerative changes. Consequently, both sexes were exposed to physical stress. The somewhat above-average body size seems to suggest a sufficient supply of food compared to other burial communities of the time and region (Heinrich 2001; Leeb 2013; Velemínský and others

2005; or compare data sets on ). Nonetheless, non-specific stress indicators, which are comparable in their frequency of occurrence with contemporaneous cemeteries (such as Heinrich 2001; Leeb 2013; Stadlmayr and others 2016; Stadlmayr and others 2017; Velemínský and others 2005; or compare data sets on ), point to at least temporary shortages or deficiencies of nutrition. In all considerations, however, the small sample size of only twenty-five adults must be kept in mind. The risk of misinterpretation due to sampling artefacts is particularly high here; thus, the anthropological investigation results of the cemetery on the Oberleiserberg must be understood accordingly as tendencies.

The Children of Oberleiserberg Comprising altogether 68.8 per cent of all burials, subadult individuals — combining the age at death classes infans I (birth to seven years), infans II (seven to fourteen years), ‘child’ (birth to fourteen years), and juvenile (fourteen to twenty years of age) — are clearly overrepresented in the cemetery. A closer look at the sample reveals that children of the age class infans I dominate the sample, counting thirty-three individuals, equalling 48.8 per cent of all anthropologically assessable burials. Within the group of children under six years, those under the age of two are particularly prevalent (55.6 per cent of the age group, 22.5 per cent of all assessable individuals or eighteen individuals). Consequently, a lack of appearance of small and very small children — often observed in other early medieval cemeteries — cannot be observed in the case of Oberleiserberg.

210 n i n a r i c ha r ds

infants buried here were fully breastfed until they reached their first birthday. Thereafter, as the age of the children increases, a slow decline in δ15N value can be observed (for the significance of δ15N value in relation to breastfeeding, compare Burt 2013; Fogel and others 1989; Haydock and others 2013; Henderson and others 2014; Herring and others 1998; Richards and others 2002; Tsutaya and Yoneda 2013; Tsutaya and others 2015). This can be interpreted as evidence of the gradual weaning of children. In the present community, gradual weaning was completed no later than the third birthday. Subsequently, the δ15N- values of the children fall below the mean value of the adults, suggesting a (mainly) plant-based diet and a lack of meat and dairy products in comparison to the grown-ups’ diet (Brundke and others 2017). However, other reasons for high infant mortality might have played a role as well — at least for some of the children buried here. For example, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) or infectious diseases could be mentioned, which, however, did not leave any traces on the bones and therefore cannot be grasped by an anthropological examination. Weaning as an important reason, especially in light of the analysis results, will be discussed further in the ‘Signs of cultural change’ section of the article. Contemporaneous Cemeteries

Figure 13.5. Distribution of δ15N values in the Oberleiserberg burial ground. (Via .)

Results of the Analyses of Stable Nitrogen Isotopes

A possible reason for the overrepresentation of the under-two-year-olds can be grasped by evaluating the stable isotope ratios for nitrogen2 (Brundke and others 2017) (for results, see Fig. 13.5), which revealed a correlation between the high mortality in this age class and the age of weaning in the burial ground. The



2 All isotope values related to the burial ground can also be accessed via . The extensive isotope analysis was made possible by a cooperation with Michael P. Richards from Simon Fraser University in Burnaby (British Columbia, Canada).

This becomes even clearer in comparison with other contemporaneous cemeteries in the region; individuals who died under the age of seven years (infans I) forming the largest group of burials were observed only on the Oberleiserberg and in Zwentendorf (Heinrich 2001), with 48.8 per cent and 36.4 per cent, respectively (Fig 13.6). Comparatively, at the Székesfehérvár-Szárazrét necropolis, the age class ‘child’ (35 per cent) is particularly common, followed by infans I (15.4 per cent) (Bakay 1967–1968). Infants are strongly underrepresented in the cemetery of Baja-Pető (7.2 per cent), while grown-up individuals dominate here (adult: 31.1 per cent, mature: 25.8 per cent, and infans II: 13.9 per cent) (Lotterhof 1968). In other comparable cemeteries — Gattendorf (Leeb 2013), Kál (Éry 1970), Nagytarcsa (Lotterhof 1973), Székesfehérvár-Rádiótelep, SzékesfehérvárSárkeresztúri út (Bakay 1965–1966), Szabolcs-Petőfi utca (Pap 1981), Cegléd-Nyúlfülehalom (Ferencz 1992), Mikulčice Kostelisko (Velemínský and others 2005), Nitra-Šindolka (Thurzo and others 2013), and Árpádian burial grounds from Slovenia (Bedić 2014) — the proportion of children in this age group varies from 14.8 per cent in Slovenia (Bedić 2014) to 26.7 per cent in the Székesfehérvár-Rádiótelep cemetery (Bakay 1965–1966). The site of Michelsberg, situated only 17 km from Oberleiserberg as the crow flies, paints a different picture. Here, from phase two onwards — which can be dated

13 .   ‘o h, co me li t t le ch ildren’

Figure 13.6. Age distribution on the Oberleiserberg necropolis in comparison with other contemporary cemeteries. (Graph based on the data provided in Bakay 1965–1966; Bakay 1967–1968; Bedić 2014; Éry 1970; Ferencz 1992; Heinrich 2001; Leeb 2013; Lotterhof 1968; Lotterhof 1973; Pap 1981; Stadlmayr and others 2017; Thurzo and others 2013; Velemínský and others 2005.)

to the tenth and eleventh centuries (Lauermann and Lindinger 2017) — primarily foetuses (39 per cent), neonates (16.9 per cent), and children of infans I stage (18.2 per cent) were buried (Stadlmayr and others 2016; Stadlmayr and others 2017). In contrast, burials of adults can only be observed as an exception to the rule in the cemetery (Stadlmayr and others 2017, 283, fig. 202). Therefore, interpreting the place as a special burial place for babies and toddlers seems reasonable. Signs of Cultural Change?

The high mortality of babies and toddlers at Oberleiserberg seems most likely to be related to the weaning process. The period of weaning is associated with high risks for the child’s life, especially in pre-industrial communities (Afifi and others 1998, 335). During this period, children are introduced to pathogens via their foods and the consumption of water (Brown 1978, 2066; Ghuliani and Kaul 1995, 539; Grupe and others 2015, 441; Henderson and others 2014, 586; Hühne-Osterloh 1989; Hühne-Osterloh and Grupe 1989; Imong and others 1989), while the passive immunization through their mother ends with breastfeeding (Brown 1978, 2066; Grupe and others 2015, 441; Henderson and others 2014, 586; Katzenberg and others 1996, 178). This often leads to the occurrence of diarrheal illness (Afifi and others 1998, 335; Ghuliani and Kaul 1995; Grupe and others 2015, 441; Lutter 1992, 7, 53), which can be life-threatening to the child. Causes of high infant

mortality in pre-industrial societies are multicausal (Alt 2002, 223) — high prevalence of diseases, insufficient food supply, and malnutrition (Carli-Thiele and Schultz 2001, 273; Hühne-Osterloh 1989; Gangl and others 2015, 153; Lewis and Gowland 2007, 117; Nitschke 1989, 53; Schultz 2001, 287; Teschler-Nicola and Gerold 2001, 252), poor hygiene conditions (Hühne-Osterloh 1989; Lewis and Gowland 2007, 117; Schultz 2001, 287), and lack of medical care (Lewis and Gowland 2007, 117–19), as well as the socioeconomic position of the child and the family (Alt 2002, 223, 240; Gangl and others 2015, 153; Nitschke 1989, 53). Nevertheless, it can be assumed that roughly comparable conditions prevailed for the children on Oberleiserberg and in contemporary cemeteries. Still, children are underrepresented in the contemporary burial grounds and, more generally, in the burial grounds of the seventh to eleventh centuries (Atzbach 2009, 14–15; Cooper and others 2018, 11–12; Gangl and others 2015, 151; Kölbl 2004, 17; Ulrich-Bochsler 1997). Various considerations are put forward to explain the absence of this age group. Firstly, children could have been buried in another, uninvestigated area in the cemetery (Ulrich-Bochsler 1997; Gangl and others 2015, 153) or even in a separate burial ground dedicated to children (Atzbach 2009, 15; Cooper and others 2018, 22; Gangl and others 2015, 153). An example of the latter in the region of Oberleiserberg was recognized at Michelsberg (Stadlmayr and others 2016; Stadlmayr and others 2017). Still, it has to be noted that only a selection of children were buried separately from the rest of the

2 11

212 n i n a r i c ha r ds

community, based on various criteria — such as age, sex (Gangl and others 2015, 153), or socioeconomic aspects (Lewis and Gowland 2007, 118), as not all small children are missing from the burial grounds. Secondly, natural causes could cause the deficit of young children — such as the destruction of infant burials due to shallow grave depths (Alt 2003, 457; Atzbach 2009, 15; Cooper and others 2018, 22; Gangl and others 2015, 153; Kölbl 2004, 9–18; Strott 2006, 5, 68), poorer findability of the smaller bones in archaeological investigations (Alt 2003, 457; Kölbl 2004, 9–18; Lewis and Gowland 2007, 118; Cooper and others 2018, 22), or faster decomposition of the smaller infant bones in the soil (Alt 2003, 457; Atzbach 2009, 15; Cooper and others 2018, 22; Gangl and others 2015, 153; Kölbl 2004, 9–18; Strott 2006, 68). Some scholars reject the existence of an early medieval child deficit altogether and explain the absence in the cemeteries by a lower than assumed infant mortality (Atzbach 2009, 16; Czarnetzki 1995) and/or birth rate (Atzbach 2009, 26; Kölbl 2004, 16). Nonetheless, as mentioned above, the first example of a special burial place was identified in the surrounding region of Oberleiserberg, in Michelsberg, a burial place mainly reserved for foetuses, infants, and toddlers (Stadlmayr and others 2016; Stadlmayr and others 2017). In the tenth and eleventh centuries, children were consequently treated differently here than the rest of the burial community — at least in the group(s) that buried their children here. However, interpreting Oberleiserberg also as a special burial place for children would go too far. In contrast to the Michelsberg, at least twenty-five grown-up individuals were found here. Still, discoveries in other contemporary regions could give important information about the developments at Oberleiserberg. By the end of the early Middle Ages, in the tenth and eleventh centuries, an increase in child burials in community cemeteries can be observed and interpreted as an expression of changing beliefs and burial customs (Cooper and others 2018, 22; Ulrich-Bochsler 1997). Curta and Koval (2018) come to similar conclusions. In Central Europe — with the increasing Christianization of the population — more and more children are buried in communal cemeteries. This development is also reflected in the increasing devotion to the saintly child, such as Elisabeth of Hungary and the infant Jesus from the late eleventh century onwards (Curta and Koval 2018, 108). The present burial ground also fits into this general trend of including children at burial sites. However, it seems that this development is still in its early stages here. While their burial pits and grave goods do not differ from older children or grown-up individuals, their position in the grave deviates more frequently from the general burial pattern. Instead of being buried in a supine position, they are more often in a crouched position

or frog pose. Thus, although they were buried with the community, they continued to receive special treatment.

Conclusion The cemetery on the Oberleiserberg is the first major necropolis of the Árpádian age in Austria, for which archaeological and anthropological results can be presented in an interdisciplinary study. According to the archaeological findings, the burial community had contacts with all power-political spheres of the region — the Hungarian Kingdom, the Eastern Alpine region, and the expanding Babenberg March, as well as the Slavic-inhabited areas. The high number of Hungarian coins shows the supra-regional importance of the site, which, in addition to its use as a necropolis, probably also served as a marketplace. The place is also characterized by the particularly high number of children who were buried here in the eleventh century. By combining different branches of research, it was possible to determine the age of weaning as one of the causes of high infant mortality. The inclusion of children in the communal burial ground indicates a change in burial customs at the end of the early Middle Ages, as can also be demonstrated in other regions. Since signs of the religious self-understanding of the population buried here are missing in the graves, the change to the inclusion of children in the cemetery can be seen as a possible sign of an increasing Christianization of the rural population and/or the increasing influence of the Babenberg Mark on the region in general. In this context, although children are buried in the communal cemetery, they still occupy a special position here, comparable to Hungary, the Czech Republic, or Poland (Curta and Koval 2018). This development also foreshadows the further development of the Oberleiserberg after the abandonment of the Árpádian cemetery. Oberleis is mentioned as a Babenberg parish in 1135 (Csendes 1969, 93). However, it is assumed that the parish of Leiß is a particularly old foundation (Mitscha-Märheim and Nischer-Falkenhof 1929, 433; Much 1872, 126). Thus, the Mauritius Church on the foot of the hill could have been built as a royal foundation as early as around 1050 (Kühtreiber and Obenaus 2017, 107). The plateau with the Romanesque and Gothic church has been used as a pilgrimage site since the thirteenth century (Militký and Emmerig 2016, 217). These statements are possible solely through the comprehensive interdisciplinary study of the site and its material and demonstrate the potential of such an approach. The interdisciplinary approach thus enables the uncovering of changes within communities. Thus, cemetery data are an important source for researching transformation processes, also with regard to the change of religious ideas.

13 .   ‘o h, co me li t t le ch ildren’ 2 13

Works Cited Afifi, Zeinab E. M., Shafika S. Nasser, Sayad Shalaby, and Samir A. E. Atlam. 1998. ‘Contamination of Weaning Foods: Organism, Channels, and Sequelae’, Journal of Tropical Pediatrics, 44.6: 335–37 Alt, Kurt W. 2002. ‘Die Übersterblichkeit der Säuglinge und Kleinkinder in der frühen Neuzeit – Unberechenbares Schicksal oder menschliches Versagen?’, in Kinderwelten. Anthropologie – Geschichte – Kulturvergleich, ed. by Kurt W. Alt and Ariane Kemkes-Grottenthaler (Cologne: Böhlau) pp. 223–45 Atzbach, Rainer. 2009. ‘Das sogenannte “Kinderdefizit” als Phänomen der Archäologie des Mittelalters’, in Aufblühen und Verwelken. Mediävistische Forschungen zu Kindheit und Alter, ed. by Ines Heiser and Andreas Mayer (Leipzig: EudoraVerlag), pp. 11–26 Bach, Herbert, and Adelheit Bach. 1971. ‘Anthropologische Untersuchungen’, in Slawen in Thüringen. Geschichte, Kultur und Anthropologie im 10. bis 12. Jahrhundert. Band 2, ed. by Herbert Bach and Sigrid Dusek, Veröffentlichungen des Museums für Ur- und Frühgeschichte Thüringens (Weimar: Böhlau), pp. 131–265 Bakay, Kornél. 1965–1966. ‘Gräberfelder aus den 10.–11. Jahrhunderten in der Umgebung von Székesfehérvár und die Frage der fürstlichen Residenz: Archäologische Studien zu der Frage der ungarischen Staatsgründung’, Alba Regia – Annales Musei Stephani Regis, 6/7: 43–88 —— 1967–1968. ‘Gräberfelder aus den 10.–11. Jahrhunderten in der Umgebung von Székesfehérvár und die Frage der fürstlichen Residenz: Archäologische Studien zu der Frage der ungarischen Staatsgründung’, Alba Regia – Annales Musei Stephani Regis, 8/9: 57–85 Bedić, Željka. 2014. ‘Antropološka Analiza Osteološke Građe Bjelobrdskih Populacija u Međurječju Save, Dunava i Drave’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Zadar) Brather, Sebastian. 2008. ‘Kleidung, Bestattung, Identität. Die Präsentation sozialer Rollen im Frühmittelalter’, in Zwischen Spätantike und Frühmittelalter: Archäologie des 4. bis 7. Jahrhunderts im Westen, ed. by Sebastian Brather, Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde, 57 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter), pp. 237–74 Brown, Roy E. 1978. ‘Weaning Foods in Developing Countries’, The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 31: 2066–72 Brundke, Nina. 2016. ‘Ein Gräberfeld des Frühmittelalters auf dem Oberleiserberg’, in Beiträge zum Tag der Niederösterreichischen Landesarchäologie 2016, ed. by Ernst Lauermann and Peter Trebsche (Asparn/Zaya: MAMUZ), pp. 69–76 Brundke, Nina, Stefan Eichert, Christina Cheung, and Michael Richards. 2017. ‘Die Arpadenzeitlichen Bestattungen des Oberleiserbergs (Niederösterreich). Erste Ergebnisse einer interdisziplinären Analyse’, Acta Archaeologica Carpathica, 52: 111–49 Burt, Nicole M. 2013. ‘Stable Isotope Ratio Analysis of Breastfeeding and Weaning Practices of Children from Medieval Fishergate House York, UK’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 152: 407–16 Carli-Thiele, Petra, and Michael Schultz. 2001. ‘Wechselwirkungen zwischen Mangel- und Infektionskrankheiten des Kindesalters bei neolithischen Populationen’, in Mensch und Umwelt während des Neolithikums und der frühen Bronzezeit in Mitteleuropa. Ergebnisse interdisziplinärer Zusammenarbeit zwischen Archäologie, Klimatologie, Biologie und Medizin. Internationale Archäologie – Arbeitsgemeinschaft, Symposium, Tagung, Kongress 2, ed. by Andreas Lippert, Michael Schultz, Stephan Shennan, and Maria Teschler-Nicola (Rahden/Westfahlen: Leidorf), pp. 273–85 Cooper, Christine, Ulrike Mayr, and Sarah Lieb. 2018. ‘Das früh- und hochmittelalterliche Gräberfeld auf dem “Runda Böchel” in Balzers, Fürstentum Liechtenstein – eine vergleichende anthropologische Untersuchung’, Bulletin der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, 24.1: 3–37 Csendes, Peter. 1969. Die Straßen Niederösterreichs im Früh- und Hochmittelalter, Dissertationen der Universität Wien, 33 (Vienna: Notring) Curta, Florin, and Matthew Koval. 2018. ‘Children in Eleventh- and Twelfth Century Hungary and Poland. An Archaeological Comparison’, in The Medieval Networks in East Central Europe. Commerce, Contact, Communication, ed. by Balázs Nagy, András Vadas, and Felicitas Schmieder (London: Routledge), pp. 87–122 Czarnetzki, Alfred. 1995. ‘Das Kleinkinderdefizit der Merowingerzeit in Südwestdeutschland im Spiegel medizinischer Ergebnisse’, Bulletin der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, 1.2: 89–103 Dollhopf, Klaus-Dieter. 2002. ‘Erwachsenenrepräsentanz oder Erosionsverlust? Gedanken zu einem Dogma der Paläodemographie des frühen Mittelalters’, Germania, 80: 295–304 Eichert, Stefan. 2010. Die frühmittelalterlichen Grabfunde Kärntens. Die materielle Kultur Karantaniens anhand der Grabfunde vom Ende der Spätantike bis ins 11. Jahrhundert, Aus Forschung und Kunst, 37 (Klagenfurt: Geschichtsverein für Kärnten) Éry, Kinga. K. 1970. ‘Anthropological Studies on a Tenth Century Population at Kál, Hungary’, Anthropologia Hungarica, 9.1–2: 9–62 Ferembach, Denise, Ilse Schwidetzky, and Milan Stloukal. 1979. ‘Empfehlungen für die Alters- und Geschlechtsdiagnose am Skelett’, Homo, 30: Anhang 1–32

214 n i n a r i c ha r ds

Ferencz, Márta. 1992. ‘Medieval Cemetery at Cegléd-Nyúlfülehalom’, Anthropologia Hungarica, 22: 41–56 Fogel, Marilyn L., Noreen Tuross, and Douglas L. Owsley. 1989. ‘Nitrogen Isotope Tracer of Human Lactation in Modern and Archaeological Populations’, Carnegie Institution of Washington Yearbook, 1989: 111–17 Frick, Hans-Jörg. 1992–1993. ‘Karolingisch-ottonische Scheibenfibeln des nördlichen Formenkreises’, Offa, 49/50: 243–464 Friesinger, Herwig. 1978. ‘KG Oberleis’, Fundberichte aus Österreich, 16 (1977): 423–24 Gangl, Nathalie, Petra Held, Veit Dresly, and Kurt W. Alt. 2015. ‘Kurze Kindheit – Früher Tod: Leben und Sterben von Kindern im Mittelalter und in der frühen Neuzeit’, in Lebenswelten von Kindern und Frauen in der Vormoderne. Archäologische und anthropologische Forschungen in memoriam Brigitte Lohrke, ed. by Raimar W. Kory, PAST – Paläowissenschaftliche Studien, 4 (Berlin: curach bhán publications), pp. 147–57 Ghuliani, A., and M. Kaul. 1995. ‘Contamination of Weaning Foods and Transmission of E. Coli in Causation of Infantile Diarrhea in Low Income Group in Chandigarh’, Indian Pediatrics, 32.5: 539–42 Giesler, Jochen. 1978. ‘Zu einer Gruppe mittelalterlicher Emailscheibenfibeln’, Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters, 6: 57–72 —— 1981. ‘Untersuchungen zur Chronologie der Bijelo-Brdo-Kultur. Ein Beitrag zur Archäologie des 10. und 11. Jahrhunderts im Karpatenbecken’, Prähistorische Zeitschrift, 56: 3–168 Grupe, Gisela, Michaela Harbeck, and George C. McGlynn. 2015. Prähistorische Anthropologie (Berlin: Springer) Guy, Hervé, Claude Masset, and Charles-Albert Baud. 1997. ‘Infant Taphonomy’, International Journal of Osteology, 7: 221–29 Gyöngyössy, Márton. 2007. ‘Die ungarische Münz- und Geldgeschichte von 1000 bis 1526’, in Münzen und Medaillen des ungarischen Mittelalters 1000–1526, ed. by Márton Gyöngyössy und Heinz Winter (Vienna: Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien), pp. 15–36 Hahn, Wolfgang. 1991. ‘Fundmünzen des 10. und 11. Jahrhunderts aus Ostösterreich’, Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Numismatischen Gesellschaft, 31: 50–59 Haydock, Hannah, Leon Clarke, Elizabeth Craig-Atkins, Rachel Howcroft, and Jo Buckberry. 2013. ‘Weaning at Anglo-Saxon Raunds: Implications for Changing Breastfeeding Practice in Britain Over Two Millennia’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 151: 604–12 Heinrich, Wolfgang. 2001. Zwentendorf – Ein Gräberfeld aus dem 10. und 11. Jahrhundert. Anthropologische Auswertung, Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommission, 42 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften) Hellerschmid, Irmtraud, Daniela Kern, and Michaela Lochner. 2010. ‘Oberleiserberg – Stillfried – Thunau. Drei Höhensiedlungen der mittelländischen Urnenfelderkultur im Vergleich’, in Rola Głównych Centrów Kulturowych. W Kształtowaniu Oblicza Kulturowego Europy Środkowej We Wczesnych Okresach Epoki Żelaza, ed. by Bogusław Gediga and Wojciech Piotrowski, Polnische Akademie der Wissenschaften Abteilung Wrocław – Arbeiten der archäologischen Kommission, 18, Archäologisches Museum in Biskupin – Biskupiner Archäologische Arbeiten, 8 (Biskupin: Muzeum Archeologiczne), pp. 283–97 Henderson, Rowena C., Julia Lee-Thorp, and Louise Loe. 2014. ‘Early Life Histories of London Poor Using δ13C and δ15N Stable Isotope Incremental Dentine Sampling’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 154: 585–93 Herring, D. Ann Shelley. R. Saunders, and Mary A. Katzenberg. 1998. ‘Investigating the Weaning Process in Past Populations’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 105: 425–39 Hoernes, Moriz. 1889. ‘La Tène-Funde in Niederösterreich’, Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 19(NF9): 65–70 Horváth, Ciprián. 2015. ‘Archäologische Angaben zum Beziehungssystem des Karpatenbeckens und des Ostalpenraumes im 10. und 11. Jahrhundert – von West nach Ost’, Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 66: 387–452 Hühne-Osterloh, Gudrun. 1989. ‘Ursachen von Kindersterblichkeit in einer hochmittelalterlichen Skelettserie’, Anthropologischer Anzeiger, 47.1: 11–25 Hühne-Osterloh, Gudrun, and Gisela Gruppe. 1989. ‘Causes of Infant Mortality in the Middle Ages Revealed by Chemical and Palaeopathological Analyses of Skeletal Remains’, Zeitschrift für Morphologie und Anthropologie, 77: 247–58 Hunger, Horst, and Dieter Leopold. 1978. Identifikation (Berlin: Springer) Huszár, Lajos. 1963. Münzkunst in Ungarn (Budapest: Corvina Verlag) —— 1979. Münzkatalog Ungarn von 1000 bis heute (Munich: Battenberg) Imong, Stella M., Kittipong Rungruengthanakit, Cholticha Ruangyuttikarn, Lumduan Wongsawasdii, Dorothy A. Jackson, and R. F. Drewett. 1989. ‘The Bacterial Content of Infant Weaning Foods and Water in Rural Northern Thailand’, Journal of Tropical Pediatrics, 35.1: 14–18 Jonsson, Kenneth. 1988. ‘The Earliest Hungarian Coinage’, in Commentationes numismaticae 1988. Festgabe für Gert und Vera Hatz zum 4. Jan. 1988 dargebracht, ed. by Peter Berghaus, Jörgen Bracker, Jørgen Steen Jensen, and Lars O. Lagerqvist (Hamburg: Auktionshaus Tietjen), pp. 95–102 Karwowski, Maciej. 2012. ‘Der keltische Oberleiserberg’, in Beiträge zum Tag der Niederösterreichischen Landesarchäologie 2012, ed. by Ernst Lauermann and Peter Trebsche (Asparn/Zaya: MAMUZ), pp. 40–47

13 .   ‘o h, co me li t t le ch ildren’ 2 15

Jørgensen, Lars. 2003. ‘Manor and Market at Lake Tissø in the Sixth to Eleventh Centuries: The Danish “Productive” Site’, in Markets in Early Medieval Europe. Trading and ‘Productive Sites’, 650–850, ed. by Tim Pestell and Katherina Umlschneider (Macclesfield: Windgather), pp. 175–207 Katzenberg, M. Anne, D. Ann Herring, and Shelley R. Saunders. 1996. ‘Weaning and Infant Mortality: Evaluating the Skeletal Evidence’, Yearbook of Physical Anthropology, 39: 177–99 Kern, Anton. 1987. ‘Die urgeschichtlichen Funde vom Oberleiserberg, MG. Ernstbrunn. Die unstratifizierten Bestände aus Privatsammlungen, Bundes-, Landes- und Heimatmuseen’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Vienna) Kern, Daniela. 2012. ‘Der Oberleiserberg in der Bronzezeit’, in Beiträge zum Tag der Niederösterreichischen Landesarchäologie 2012, ed. by Ernst Lauermann and Peter Trebsche (Asparn/Zaya: MAMUZ), pp. 34–39 Kölbl, Stefanie. 2004. ‘Das Kinderdefizit im frühen Mittelalter – Realität oder Hypothese? Zur Deutung demographischer Strukturen in Gräberfeldern’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Eberhard-Karls University Tübingen) Kovács, László. 2000. ‘Das Münzwesen und andere Formen der Währung in Ungarn’, in Europas Mitte um 1000. Beiträge zur Geschichte, Kunst und Archäologie – Band 1, ed. by Alfred Wieczorek and Hans-Martin Hinz (Stuttgart: Theiss), pp. 197–98 Kudernatsch, Vinzenz. 1930–1934. ‘Oberleiserberg’, Fundberichte aus Österreich, 1(1920–33): 56 Kühtreiber, Karin, and Martin Obenaus. 2017. Burgen des 9. bis zur Mitte des 11. Jahrhunderts in Niederösterreich – Eine Bestandsaufnahme, Monographien des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums, 132 (Mainz: RGZM) Lauermann, Ernst, and Volker Lindinger (eds). 2017. Der Michelberg und seine Kirchen. Eine archäologisch-historische Analyse. Ein interdisziplinäres Forschungsprojekt der Landesarchäologie Niederösterreich (Rahden/Westfahlen: Verlag Marie Leidorf) Leeb, Antonia. 2013. ‘Das magyarenzeitliche Gräberfeld von Gattendorf: Demographie und Paläopathologie’ (unpublished master’s thesis, University of Vienna) Lewis, Mary E., and Rebecca Gowland. 2007. ‘Brief and Precarious Lives: Infant Mortality in Contrasting Sites from Medieval and Post-Medieval England (ad 850–1859)’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 134: 117–29 Lotterhof, Edith. 1968. ‘Anthropological Investigation of the Skeletal Material of a Cemetery at Baja-Pető from the XI–XVI Centuries’, Acta Biologica Tomus, 14.1–4: 81–90 —— 1973. ‘The Anthropological Investigation of the Tenth Century Population Excavated at Nagytarcsa’, Anthropologia Hungarica, 12: 41–61 Lovejoy, Claude O. 1985. ‘Dental Wear in the Libben Population: Its Functional Pattern and Role in the Determination of Adult Skeletal Age at Death’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 68: 47–56 Lutter, Chessa. 1992. Recommended Length of Exclusive Breast-Feeding, Age of Introduction of Complementary Foods and the Weanling Dilemma (Washington, DC: WHO) Macháček, Jiří. 2013. ‘Klappwaagen, Gewichte und Münzen. Eine Studie zum mährischen-niederösterreichischen Grenzraum im frühen Mittelalter’, in Stadt – Land – Burg. Festschrift für Sabine Felgenhauer-Schmiedt zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. by Claudia Theune, Gabriele Scharrer-Liška, Elfriede H. Huber, and Thomas Kühtreiber, Studia Honoraria, 34 (Rahden/Westfalen: Verlag Marie Leidorf), pp. 365–76 Macháček, Jiří, and Jan Videman. 2013. ‘Monetisation of Early Medieval Moravia in the Light of New Archaeological Discoveries in the Lower Dyje Region (Czech Republic)’, in Economies, Monetisation and Society in the West Slavic Lands 800–1200 ad, ed. by Mateusz Bogucki and Marian Rębkowski, Wolińskie Spotkania Mediewistyczne, ii (Szczecin: Archaeobooks), pp. 177–201 Mesterházy, Károly. 1983. ‘Köznépi ékszerek nemesfém változatai: arany S-végű hajkarikák’, Alba Regia – Annales Musei Stephani Regis, 20: 143–51 Miles, Albert E. W. 1963. ‘The Dentition in the Assessment of Individual Age in Skeletal Material’, in Dental Anthropology, ed. by Don R. Brothwell (Oxford: Elsevier), pp. 191–209 Militký, Jiří. 2012. ‘Die Fundmünzen vom Oberleiserberg’, in Beiträge zum Tag der Niederösterreichischen Landesarchäologie 2012, ed. by Ernst Lauermann and Peter Trebsche (Asparn an der Zaya: MAMUZ), pp. 49–55 Militký, Jiří, and Hubert Emmerig. 2016. ‘Funde frühmittelalterlicher Münzen vom Oberleiserberg (Niederösterreich)’, Numismatický sborník, 28: 205–21 Mitscha-Märheim, Herbert. 1937. Der Oberleiserberg und seine Bedeutung als Siedlungsplatz im Laufe der Jahrtausende. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen (Ebendorf: Selbstverlag) —— 1956. ‘Oberleis, Niederleis, von der Urzeit zum Mittelalter’, Jahrbuch für Landeskunde von Niederösterreich, 32: 25–47 Mitscha-Märheim, Herbert, and Ernst Nischer-Falkenhof. 1929. Der Oberleiserberg. Ein Zentrum vor- und frühgeschichtlicher Besiedlung, Mitteilungen der prähistorischen Kommission der Akademie der Wissenschaften Band, 2.5 (Vienna: HölderPichler-Tempsky) Much, Matthäus. 1872. ‘Zweiter Bericht über die urgeschichtlichen Ansiedlungen in Niederösterreich’, Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 2: 105–30

216 n i n a r i c ha r ds

Nemeskéri, János, László Harsányi, and György Acsádi. 1960. ‘Methoden zur Diagnose des Lebensalters von Skelettfunden’, Anthropologischer Anzeiger, 24: 70–95 Nischer-Falkenhof, Ernst, and Herbert Mitscha-Märheim. 1931. Die römische Station bei Niederleis und abschließende Untersuchungen auf dem Oberleiserberge, Mitteilungen der prähistorischen Kommission der Akademie der Wissenschaften, 6.2 (Vienna: Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky) Nitschke, August. 1989. ‘Beobachtungen zur Kindersterblichkeit im Mittelalter. Schwierigkeiten und Möglichkeiten der historischen Forschung’, Anthropologischer Anzeiger, 47: 51–55 Nowotny, Eduard. 1918. Römerspuren nördlich der Donau. Bericht über eine im Auftrage der Limes-Kommission der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften im Jahre 1914 bei Stillfried an der March vorgenommene Versuchsgrabung, Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien – Philosophisch-historische Klasse, 187.2 (Vienna: Hölder in Kommission) —— 1924. ‘Römische Forschungen in Österreich. I: Die Donaugegend’, Bericht der römisch-germanischen Kommission, 15: 122–78 Obenaus, Martin. 2008. Österreich – Ein Grenzraum im 9. und 10. Jahrhundert aus archäologischer Sicht’, in Im Schnittpunkt frühmittelalterlicher Kulturen – Niederösterreich an der Wende vom 9. bis 10. Jahrhundert. Die Vorträge des 27. Symposiums des Niederösterreichischen Instituts für Landeskunde, Hainburg 3. bis 6. Juli 2007, ed. by Roman Zehetmayer, NÖLA – Mitteilungen aus dem Niederösterreichischen Landesarchiv (St Pölten: Niederösterreichisches Institut für Landeskunde), pp. 194–218 —— 2010. Arpadenzeitliche Gräberfelder und Grabfunde des 10. bis 12. Jahrhunderts in Ostösterreich, Fundmaterialien des Burgenländischen und Niederösterreichischen Landesmuseums, Wissenschaftliche Arbeiten aus dem Burgenland, 135 (Eisenstadt: Amt der Burgenländischen Landesregierung) Pap, Ildikó. 1981. ‘Anthropological Investigation of the Arpadian Age Population of Szabolcs-Petőfi utca’, Anthropologia Hungarica, 17 (1980/81): 65–107 Pollak, Marianne. 1999. ‘Die germanischen Funde vom Oberleiserberg’, in Germanen beiderseits des spätantiken Limes, ed. by Thomas Fischer, Gundolf Precht, and Jaroslav Terjal, Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno, 14 (Cologne: Archäologisches Institut der Universität zu Köln, Abteilung Archäologie römischen Provinzen; Brno: Archeologický ústav AVČR), pp. 207–16 Riedl, Helmut. 1958. ‘Beiträge zur Morphologie des Gebietes der Waschbergzone’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Vienna) Richards, Michael P., Simon Mays, and Benjamin T. Fuller. 2002. ‘Stable Carbon and Nitrogen Isotope Values of Bone and Teeth Reflect Weaning Age at the Medieval Wharram Percy Site, York, UK’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 119: 205–10 Rösing, Friedrich W. 1977. ‘Methoden der Aussagemöglichkeit der anthropologischen Leichenbrandbearbeitung’, Archäologie und Naturwissenschaften, 1: 53–80 Schaefer, Maureen, Sue Black, and Louise Scheuer. 2008. Juvenile Osteology: A Laboratory and Field Manual (Amsterdam: ScienceDirect) Schultz, Michael. 1988. ‘Paläopathologische Diagnostik’, in Anthropologie. Handbuch der vergleichenden Biologie des Menschen. Band I: Wesen und Methoden der Anthropologie, Band 1, Vierte Auflage, ed. by Rainer Knußmann (Stuttgart: G. Fischer), pp. 480–96 —— 2001. ‘Krankheit und Tod im Kindesalter bei bronzezeitliche Populationen’, in Mensch und Umwelt während des Neolithikums und der frühen Bronzezeit in Mitteleuropa, ed. by Andreas Lippert, Michael Schultz, Stephan Shennan, and Maria Teschler-Nicola, Internationale Archäologie. Arbeitsgemeinschaft, Symposium, Tagung, Kongress Band, 2 (Rahden/Westfahlen: Verlag Marie Leidorf), pp. 287–305 Sjøvold, Torstein. 1988. ‘Geschlechtsdiagnose am Skelett’, in Anthropologie. Handbuch der vergleichenden Biologie des Menschen. Band I: Wesen und Methoden der Anthropologie, Band 1, Vierte Auflage, ed. by Rainer Knußmann (Stuttgart: G. Fischer) pp. 444–80 Spiong, Sven. 2000. Fibeln und Gewandnadeln des 8. bis 12. Jahrhunderts in Zentraleuropa, Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters – Beiheft, 12 (Bonn: Habelt) —— 2001. ‘Art. Kreuzemailscheibenfibel’, in Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 17, ed. by Johannes Hoops (Berlin: De Gruyter), pp. 328–29 Stadlmayr, Andrea, Margit Berner, and Doris Pany-Kucera. 2016. ‘Die mittelalterlichen und frühneuzeitlichen Kindergräber vom Michelberg bei Haselbach – Eine methodisch – anthropologische Herausforderung’, in Beiträge zum Tag der Niederösterreichischen Landesarchäologie 2016, ed. by Ernst Lauermann and Peter Trebsche (Asparn an der Zaya: MAMUZ), pp. 77–84 —— 2017. ‘Von Kindern und Kirchen – Der vergessene Friedhof am Michelberg’, in Der Michelberg und seine Kirchen. Eine archäologisch-historische Analyse, ed. by Ernst Lauermann and Volker Lindinger (Rahden/Westfalen: Verlag Marie Leidorf), pp. 231–97

13 .   ‘o h, co me li t t le ch ildren’ 2 17

Stauch, Eva. 2008. ‘Alter ist Silber, Jugend ist Gold! Zur Altersdifferenzierten Analyse frühgeschichtlicher Bestattungen’, in Zwischen Spätantike und Frühmittelalter: Archäologie des 4. bis 7. Jahrhunderts im Westen, ed. by Sebastian Brather, Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde, 57 (Berlin: De Gruyter), pp. 275–95 Štefan, Ivo. 2009. ‘Příspĕvek k chronologii a výpovĕdním možnostem esovitých záušnic’, Studia Mediaevalia Pragensia, 9: 171–205 Steuer, Heiko. 1997. Waagen und Gewichte aus dem mittelalterlichen Schleswig. Funde des 11. bis 13. Jahrhunderts aus Europa als Quellen zur Handels- und Währungsgeschichte, Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters – Beiheft, 10 (Cologne: Habelt) Stloukal, Milan, and Hana Hanáková. 1978. ‘Die Längen der Langknochen altslawischer Bevölkerungen – Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Wachstumsfragen’, Homo, 29: 53–69 Strott, Nadja. 2006. ‘Paläodemographie frühmittelalterlicher Bevölkerungen Altbaierns – Diachrone und allopatrische Trends’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich) Stuppner, Alois. 1999. ‘KG Oberleis’, Fundberichte aus Österreich, 37 (1998): 833–36 —— 2006. Rund um den Oberleiserberg. Archäologische Denkmale der Gemeinden Ernstbrunn und Niederleis (Ernstbrunn: Marktgemeinde) —— 2008. ‘Der Oberleiserberg bei Ernstbrunn – eine Höhensiedlung des 4. und 5. Jahrhunderts n. Chr.’, in Höhensiedlungen zwischen Antike und Mittelalter von den Ardennen bis zur Adria, ed. by Heiko Steuer and Volker Bierbrauer, Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde, 58 (Berlin: De Gruyter), pp. 427–56 —— 2012. ‘Die spätantike Höhensiedlung des 4. und 5. Jahrhunderts nach Christus auf dem Oberleiserberg’, in Beiträge zum Tag der Niederösterreichischen Landesarchäologie 2012, ed. by Ernst Lauermann and Peter Trebsche (Asparn an der Zaya: MAMUZ), pp. 57–61 —— 2014. ‘Der Oberleiserberg bei Ernstbrunn am Übergang vom Frühmittelalter zum Hochmittelalter’, in Die Babenbergermark um die Jahrtausendwende. Zum Millennium des heiligen Koloman, ed. by Roman Zehetmayer (St Pölten: Amt der Niederösterreichischen Landesregierung), pp. 266–87 Szilvássy, Johann. 1977. ‘Altersschätzungen an den sternalen Gelenksflächen der Schlüsselbeine’, Beiträge zur gerichtlichen Medizin, 35: 343–45 Teschler-Nicola, Maria, and Friederike Gerold. 2001. ‘Ergebnisse intra- und interserieller paläodemographische und paläoepidemiologischer Analysen. Zur Erfassung von Lebensraum-Konstituenten in der Frühbronzezeit am Beispiel der Traisentalserie’, in Mensch und Umwelt während des Neolithikums und der frühen Bronzezeit in Mitteleuropa. Ergebnisse interdisziplinärer Zusammenarbeit zwischen Archäologe, Klimatologie, Biologie und Medizin. Internationale Archäologie – Arbeitsgemeinschaft, Symposium, Tagung, Kongress 2, ed. by Andreas Lippert, Michael Schultz, Stephen Shennan, and Maria Teschler-Nicola (Rahden/Westfahlen: Verlag Maria Leidorf), pp. 245–56 Tsutaya, Takumi, and Minoru Yoneda. 2013. ‘Quantitative Reconstruction of Weaning Ages in Archaeological Human Populations Using Bone Collagen Nitrogen Isotope Ratios and Approximate Bayesian Computation’, PLOS One, 8: 1–10 Tsutaya, Takumi, Akina Shimomi, Tomohito Nagaoka, Junmei Sawada, Kazuaki Hirata, and Minoru Yoneda. 2015. ‘Infant Feeding Practice in Medieval Japan: Stable Carbon and Nitrogen Isotope Analysis of Human Skeletons from YuigahamaMinami’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 156: 241–51 Thurzo, Milan, Alena Šefčáková, Terézia Šimková, and Gabriel Fusek. 2013. ‘Nitra-Šindolka (Slovakia) – Pohrebisko Belobrdskej Kultúry (10.-11. Stor. n. l.): Základná Antropologicko-demografická charakteristika’, Acta rerum naturalium Musei Notionalis Slovaci (Zborník Slovenského Národného Múzea), 59: 101–21 Ubelaker, Douglas H. 1978. Human Skeletal Remains. Excavation, Analysis, Interpretation (Chicago: Taraxacum) Ulmschneider, Katharina. 2000. ‘Settlement, Economy and the “Productive” Site: Middle Anglo-Saxon Lincolnshire A.D. 650–780’, Medieval Archaeology, 44: 53–79 —— 2002. ‘Central Places and Metal Detector Finds: What Are the English “Productive Sites”?’, in Central Places in the Migration and the Merovingian Periods, ed. by Brigitta Hårdh and Lars Larsson, Acta Archaeologica Lundensia, 39, Uppåkrastudier 6 (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell), pp. 333–39 Ulrich-Bochsler, Susi. 1997. Anthropologische Befunde zur Stellung von Frau und Kind im Mittelalter und Neuzeit. Sozialbiologische und soziokulturelle Aspekte im Lichte von Archäologie, Geschichte, Volkskunde und Medizingeschichte, Schriftenreihe der Erziehungsdirektion des Kantons Bern (Bern: Berner Lehrmittel- und Medienverlag) Ulriksen, Jens. 2005. ‘Scheibenförmige Kreuzemailfibeln des 9. bis 12. Jahrhunderts in Dänemark und Schonen’, Offa (Festgabe für Joachim Reichstein), 59/60(2002/2003): 145–65 Velemínský, Petr, Jakub Likovský, Pavel Trefný, Miluše Dobisíková, Jana Velemínská, Lumír Poláček, and Hana Hanáková. 2005. ‘Anthropologische Analyse des großmährischen Gräberfeldes Kostelisko im Suburbium des Burgwalls von Mikulčice. Demographie, Spuren nicht spezifischer physiologischer und physischer Belastungen an den Skeletten, Gesundheitszustand’, in Studien zum Burgwall von Mikulčice VI, ed. by Torsten Kempke, Pavel Kouřil, and Lumir Poláček,

218 n i n a r i c ha r ds

Spisy Archeologického Ústavu a V ČR Brno, 23 (Brno: Archäologisches Institut der Akademie der Wissenschaften der Tschechischen Republik Brno), pp. 539–633 Wamers, Egon. 1994. Die frühmittelalterlichen Lesefunde aus der Löhrstrasse (Baustelle Hilton II) in Mainz, Mainzer Archäologische Schriften, 1 (Mainz: Archäologische Denkmalpflege, Amt Mainz)

Online Resources THANADOS: The Anthropological and Archaeological Database of Sepultures ‘Oberleiserberg’, THANADOS: The Anthropological and Archaeological Database of Sepultures

Karen Star k

14. The Formation of the Regnum Marianum Exploring the Church Network of Early Árpádian Hungary and the Place of Marian Patrocinia

A bs t r act  The figure of the Virgin Mary had strong connections to royal power in early medieval Hungary. In addition to her prominence in Hungarian royal hagiography and art, many if not the majority of the most important royal churches were dedicated to the Blessed Virgin. The extent to which this trend was imitated by local nobility and penetrated the church network more widely is more difficult to determine; however, a trend concerning the patrocinia of medieval Hungary’s early county seats noted by archaeologist Péter Németh could point to an answer. Németh observed that very often in the historical record a decanal church dedicated to the Virgin Mary was noted to have been located in or very near the castle of the count. While Németh — and, later, other scholars as well — applied this observation to some sites without sufficient evidence, careful analysis of both historical and archaeological data reveals that, while not universal, the presence of Marian churches in or near the castles of early county seats is significant and indicative of the Virgin’s connection to power centres of various kinds in medieval Hungary.

T

K e y wo r ds  Virgin Mary, church dedications, medieval Hungary, cult of saints, religious history

T

The Virgin Mary’s role as patron of the Hungarian Kingdom and symbol of royal power and independence began in the first century of the kingdom’s existence as a Christian state. According to the Legenda maior (or Vita maior) of Hungary’s first Christian king, Stephen I (r. 1000–1038), composed c. 1083: [Stephen] placed himself with his kingdom under the protection of the everlasting Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, whose honour and glory are so famous amongst the Hungarians, that even the feast of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, without the

addition of her proper name, is called the Day of the Queen in the Hungarian language.1

1 ‘Erat vir iste fidelis, in omnibus actibus suis deo perfecte deditus, per votum et oblationem semet cum regno suo sub tutela perpetue virginis dei genitricis Marie precibus assiduis conferens, cuius honor et gloria tam celebris inter Ungaros habetur, quod etiam festivitas assumptionis eiusdem virginis sine additamento propria nominis ipsorum lingua regine dies vocitetur’ (SRH ii, 385). This account was repeated in the later legend composed by Bishop Hartvic (SRH ii, 417). The consensus in the relevant research is that the Legenda maior was

Karen Stark • ([email protected]) received her PhD in Medieval Studies at Central European University. Her research explores medieval religious history, especially the cult of saints, pilgrimage, and the concept of ‘sacred space’. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 219–228. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138118

220 k a r e n s ta r k

Figure 14.1. Marian parish churches, (non-parish) churches, and chapels in medieval Hungary mentioned in the historical record before 1300. (Map by author.2)

It has been argued that this dedication of the country to Mary, along with later reiterations of — and emphasis on — this legend, were produced to assert Hungary’s independence from the papacy, in light of letters like that of Pope Gregory VII to King Solomon (r. 1063–1074), which claimed that Rome had suzerainty over Hungary since ‘Hungary, which King Stephen of old offered and handed over to St Peter with all right and power, belongs to the Holy Church of Rome’.3 Regardless of the paucity of the legend, the entrustment of Hungary to the Virgin



composed shortly before or in 1083, the date of the canonization of King Stephen. Nora Berend puts its composition between 1077 and 1083 (2000, 375). On the legend and its dating, see, most recently: Kristó 2000; Thoroczkay 2013, 28. 2 For a list of these churches and chapels and the relevant historical data see Stark 2022, 332–97. 3 28 October, 1074, see Makkai and Mezey 1960, 88. In 1096 Pope Urban II made similar claims to King Coloman, whom he urged to obey and honour SS. Peter and Paul, the apexes of divine authority, just as Stephen, he insisted, had done (Györffy 1992, 317–18). On this argument see Stark 2024.

and King Stephen I’s devotion to Mary had lasting effects; the vast network of churches dedicated to the Blessed Virgin that were founded during Stephen’s reign and in the centuries following it are a testament to this. Stephen I founded several Marian churches, namely, the Greek nunnery of Veszprémvölgy, the Benedictine monastery of Pécsvárad, and the most important church founded by Stephen, which he called ‘his own chapel’, the collegiate church of Székesfehérvár.4 It was here where both he and his son, Prince Emeric, would be buried, later leading it to becoming one of the most important pilgrimage places in the kingdom, and it would also serve as the coronation church of the kingdom. Notably, the Virgin Mary also became the patron or co-patron of four of the kingdom’s twelve cathedrals — at Esztergom (with St Adalbert), Vác,

4 ‘Tanta predicta venustate supradescriptam ecclesiam in propriam capellam rex retinens, tali eam libertate dotavit, ut nullus Episcoporum in ea cuiusvis iuris quidquam haberet’ (SRH ii, 431–32).

14.   t he fo rmat i o n o f t he regnu m ma rianum 2 2 1

Figure 14.2. Churches dedicated to the Virgin Mary, St Michael, or both in early Árpádian seats according to Németh (Németh 1981, 54). (Map by author.5)

Várad, and Győr; all of these cathedrals were founded within c. the first century of Hungary’s inception as a Christian kingdom.6 By the end of the Árpádian Age, about eighty chapels, parish churches, and churches of other statuses (excluding monastic) dedicated to Mary can be identified in the historical record (Fig. 14.1), the most of any patrocinium. These cathedrals, churches, and chapels would have been among the earliest in Hungary, bringing with them many Hungarians’ first



5 Vác is also included because it fits Németh’s model. While Németh includes Vasvár amongst the sites with a church dedicated to St Michael, it is marked here as having also a Marian church according to the research of Kiss and Zágorhidi 2001. Note that Németh also includes a map of sites he had identified in his study, however, there are a few discrepancies between the sites included on the map and those mentioned in the text (1981, 57–58). 6 It has also been suggested that the cathedral of the bishopric of Zagreb, which was dedicated to King Stephen in the Middle Ages, was originally dedicated to the Virgin. On this debate see Šimunić and Buršić 2015, 346 n. 1. See also: Ivandija 1948, 29; Stošić 1994, 104; Šourek 2017, 47.

immersive exposure to Christian belief and ritual, and at sites dedicated to the Virgin, Mary’s cult would be especially emphasized for church-goers. The connection between the Virgin Mary and King Stephen was not the only factor in the spread of Mary’s cult — and churches dedicated to her — in Hungary. The Marian devotion of early important religious figures of the kingdom — namely, St Adalbert and St Gerard — have also been cited as influential in the spread of Mary’s cult (Klaniczay 2002, 140). The monastic orders would have also been instrumental in bringing the Marian cult to the Hungarian masses. The Cistercians are especially known for their veneration of Mary and use of her patrocinia for their houses, so their presence would certainly have been influential, though they did not appear in Hungary until the midtwelfth century, when the first Cistercian foundation was made by King Géza II (r. 1141–1162). Overall, about 31 per cent of monastic houses founded in the Árpádian period were dedicated to the Virgin (Stark 2022, 96). It is more difficult to ascertain the percentage of other churches dedicated to Mary in the kingdom,

222 k a r e n s ta r k

especially for the Árpádian period, since historical records are much sparser for this era than for later periods.7 However, by also combining archaeological evidence, we can start to fill in these gaps. This paper aims to take a step in this direction, more specifically, by re-examining a theory presented by archaeologist Péter Németh concerning the connection between Marian patrocinia, the castles of the ispáns (comes; counts), and decanal churches (Németh 1981, 50–58). In the words of János Gömöri, ‘the creation of the castle-bishoprics and the castle-counties went hand in hand with the ecclesiastical organization, and all of these were mostly linked to the castle of the ispán in terms of infrastructure’ (Gömöri 2002, 96); thus, assessing the presence of Marian patrocinia in ecclesiastical and secular power centres allows us to further understand the relationship between the formation of the state and the ecclesiastical network of Hungary, and the role that certain saints could have had in those interconnected processes. Péter Németh’s theory about the patrocinia of early county seats in Hungary is intriguing. In essence, he notes that in the early county seats of Hungary, two patrocinia were usually mentioned in the historical record: the Virgin Mary, in connection to a church in — or near to — the castle of the ispán, and St Michael, connected to a church located below the castle in the settlement (suburbium) (Németh 1981, 54–55). According to Németh, the churches of St Michael served the local population and developed into parish churches, while the Marian churches were typically decanal churches — or possibly ecclesia cathedralis — which continued to thrive only if they remained in an episcopal seat, were converted into a provostry or collegiate church, or if they remained under royal patronage (Németh 1981, 56). He lists six early Árpádian sites where he had identified the patrocinia of both the Virgin and St Michael that could fit this topographical model — in Bihar (Biharia), Nyitra (Nitra), Sopron, Szabolcs, and Torda (Turda) — and a further ten sites where only Marian patrocinia could be identified — in Békés, Csanád (Cenad), Doboka (Dăbâca), Esztergom, Fehérvár (Székesfehérvár), Gömör (Sajógömör; Gemer), Győr, Nógrád, Trencsén (Trenčín), and Visegrád (Fig. 14.2) (Németh 1981, 54, 56). This theory has largely not been questioned; however, Maxim Mordovin made an important amend-

ment to it. He noted that at the time the castles of the ispán were constructed, deaconries did not yet exist in Hungary. Thus, the Marian churches built in conjunction with the castles could not have functioned as decanal churches but were rather castle chapels, though some could have become decanal churches when the deaconry network began to be established (Mordovin 2016, 782).8 We could, therefore, see the foundations of these Marian castle chapels as an attempt on the part of the ruling nobility to imitate the devotional behaviour of King Stephen and the Árpádian dynasty more widely. Beyond Mordovin’s correction, the topographical model suggested by Németh — and the sites he had identified as possibly following the model — have largely been repeated without further analysis.9 If his model can be broadly applied, it has significant implications for the role of the Virgin’s cult in the development of the secular and ecclesiastical system of Hungary, therefore, the examples of Marian patrocinia in early Árpádian seats noted by Németh need to be critically examined. The presence of churches dedicated to St Michael in county seats and their development into parish churches are also worthy of further investigation but are outside the scope of this study and so will not be considered in detail here. At several of the sites, the accuracy of Németh’s theory is well supported by both historical and archaeological data. This is especially true in the cases of Sopron and Szabolcs. At Sopron the church of the archdeacon, referred to in later medieval sources as the Church of Our Lady by the Castle-Trench, was located just outside the castle of the ispán, and the parish church of St Michael was located further north of the castle; both are believed to probably date to the eleventh century (Fig. 14.3) ( Jankó and others 2010, 15, 67).10 Németh convincingly argues that the early Árpádian topography of Szabolcs fits the same pattern. Indeed, according to a document from 1357 both a monasterium dedicated to the Virgin Mary and a church dedicated to St Michael existed at the site (Kállay 1943, 42). Excavation and architectural analysis of the Marian church, which lies near the castle, led Németh to believe it was an eleventh-century building (Németh 1981, 52). It should also be noted that despite the monasterium moniker, it is possible and perhaps

7 Several patrocinia studies have been completed for medieval Hungary, namely: Guzsik 1979; Valter 1985; Kovács 1989/90; Tari 2000; Éder 2010; Aradi 2016. However, the chronological, geographical, and other variables affecting the results of these studies are quite disparate making them difficult to aggregate.

8 Mordovin’s assessment is also referenced in Thoroczkay 2019, 6. 9 Mária Wolf, however, did raise an objection (2019, 272). Her assessment will be discussed in more detail below. 10 It should be noted, though, that neither church is mentioned in the historical record until 1278, when the parish priest of St Michael’s church and the priest of the church of the Virgin Mary are mentioned in a will (Házi 1943, 1; Lindeck-Pozza 1965, 110–11).

14.   t he fo rmat i o n o f t he regnu m ma rianum 2 2 3

Figure 14.3. Topography of the ispán’s castle of Sopron and immediate surroundings up to 1240 (Adapted from Jankó, Kücsán, and Szende 2010, Plate A.3.2.11)

probable that the Marian institution was not a proper monastery, since I am not aware of any other historical evidence that a monastic house existed in Szabolcs during this period, and further the term monasterium had a looser meaning in Hungary before the thirteenth century. 12 For both Sopron and Szabolcs, Németh’s model only fits if the Marian patrocinium known from later sources also applied to the churches in the eleventh century. While it is possible for a structure’s patrocinium to change after reconstruction, in Hungary any examples of this known from the historical record typically only involved the addition of another saint to the patrocinium, rather than an outright substitution, so it is very likely 11 The original map ( Jankó and others 2010, Plate A.3.2) depicts more of the surrounding region and contains more details concerning other topographical features. These were removed, and the church icons and names enlarged for readability and clarity purposes. 12 On the term see Koszta 2008, 339–57.

that the Marian churches of Sopron and Szabolcs were already consecrated as such in the eleventh century. At several other of the sites Németh lists there is historical evidence of the existence of a Marian church, but again far after the construction of the ispán’s castle, and with little or no archaeological evidence to connect them to an earlier period: the first reference to a Marian church in Gömör was made in 1253,13 in Nyitra a Marian church (as well as a church of St Michael) are mentioned in a fourteenth-century transcription of a charter from 1247 (MonVat. 1/1, 200, 222),14 and a fifteenth-century transcription of a manuscript from 1299 notes that a Marian church is located below the castle of Nógrád.15 In the cases of the Marian church of Trencsén and chapel

13 In 1433 it was referred to as the parish church (Ila 1969, 16; MonVat i/1, 193; Lukcsics ii, 101). 14 Both are also mentioned in the same charter in 1332, see CDES ii, 191; MonVat i/1, 200, 222. 15 ‘sub castro Neugrad prope eccl-m V. Glor’ (Kubínyi 1867, 176).

224 k a r e n s ta r k

of Békés, the earliest historical references to Marian patrocinia are even later, in 1476 and 1516, respectively (Karácsonyi 1896, 30).16 Thus, further archaeological research or the discovery of new historical data would be needed to be able to connect these churches to an earlier period. Based on the available historical and archaeological evidence that is currently available, Németh’s topographical model cannot quite apply to Visegrád and Doboka. As evidence for the existence of a Marian church in Visegrád, Németh cites a historical reference to the Marian parish church of Visegrád from 1338–1342 (Vilmos and Lukcsics 1899, 90).17 Archaeological excavations have revealed the existence of an Árpádian-era church — referred to in the modern literature as a parish church or church of the archdiocese — which was built at the same time as and next to the ispán’s castle; however, this church was abandoned in the mid-twelfth century (Buzás and Mészáros 2008, 71; Kodolányi 2019, 10). While fresco fragments recovered during the excavation have been interpreted as possibly representing scenes from the life of the Virgin (Kiss 2019, 268), this does not necessarily indicate the patrocinium of the church, and the parish church of the Virgin Mary of the fourteenth-century — situated in the Hungarian part of the town — was located in quite a different location than the Árpádian-era church, so there does not appear to be any relationship between the two (Buzás and Mészáros 2008, 87). For Doboka, Németh cites the work of Károly Tagányi, László Réthy, and József Kádár, who state that two ‘pre-reformation churches’ existed in the settlement, one dedicated to the Virgin Mary and the other to St Elizabeth, though they do not include any historical evidence for this claim (Tagányi and others 1900, 338). There is archaeological evidence of three early Árpádian churches in Doboka, the latest of which — dated to the twelfth century, though a wooden church could have existed earlier — is referred to as the ‘Boldogasszony/Boldâgă church’ in modern studies (Gáll 2016, 292).18 However, I have not been able to identify any medieval references to a Marian patrocinium in Doboka, and further, the ‘Boldogasszony/Boldâgă church’ would have been located in the suburbium, not near the castle of the ispán. I am not aware of any archaeological or historical evidence that would indicate the existence of Árpádian- 19

era churches dedicated to the Virgin at two of the settlements included by Németh — Torda and Bihar. For Torda, Németh cites Balázs Orbán’s Torda város és környéke as evidence, in which Orbán claims that a Marian church existed in the settlement (Orbán 1889, 105 n. 1). However, no primary source is given, and there is no evidence of the foundation of a Marian church at the site before the Angevin period. In the case of Bihar, it appears that Németh is actually referring to the cathedral of Várad (Oradea), a little over 10 km south of Bihar and where the bishopric of Bihar was moved to in the late eleventh century, which indeed was dedicated to the Virgin Mary.19 No medieval churches or chapels dedicated to the Virgin existed in Bihar, at least according to the extant historical record. Two Árpádian-era churches have been excavated in the area of the ispán’s castle, but a particular patrocinium cannot be assigned to either (Buzás 2020, 14). Németh includes several other cathedrals amongst the churches that fit into his model. The cathedral of Győr was dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, as was the cathedral of Vác, the latter of which Németh curiously does not include in his study (ÁÚO xi, 174; CDES i, 56). Németh does include the cathedrals of Esztergom and Csanád, neither of which can strictly fit into his model. While the cathedral of Esztergom was dedicated to St Adalbert and the Virgin Mary, the Marian patrocinium was not included until the mid-fifteenth century (DL-DF 249010). A charter from 1156 records the foundation of an altar in honour of the Blessed Virgin Mary by Archbishop Martyrius (Horváth and others 1979, 101, 101 n. 14), however, the first incarnation of the cathedral was constructed far earlier, during the reign of King Stephen. The Marian patrocinium that Németh refers to for Csanád is not the actual patrocinium of the cathedral — which was St George — but an altar in the cathedral supposedly founded by St Gerard in honour of the Virgin Mary according to the legenda minor of the saint, composed in the late eleventh or early twelfth century.20 While I have raised doubts about the presence of Marian churches/chapels in or near the ispán’s castle of many of the county seats that Németh had suggested, I do not do so with the intention of discounting his theory outright. Sopron and Szabolcs adhere to his

Németh does not include a page number with his reference for Bihar, but I am assuming he is referring to Pauler 1899, 43. Pauler does indeed seem to insinuate that the bishopric of Bihar was dedicated to the Virgin Mary, but this is not supported by the 16 See also Szatmári 2005, 99; Fekete 1941, 81, 147, 388. current state of research. 17 There is actually evidence of the Marian parish church in the historical record earlier, in a charter from 1337 (Bossányi 1918, 20 Németh cites Györffy, 1966, 852. It should also be noted that 380). St Gerard is said to have founded a Benedictine abbey dedicated to the Virgin Mary here, and there is also a reference to a Marian 18 Much of this article was published earlier in Hungarian, see: Gáll chapel in Csanád from 1389 in MonVat I/3, 26. and Laczkó 2013, 96.

14.   t he fo rmat i o n o f t he regnu m ma rianum 2 2 5

Figure 14.4. Vasvár in the eleventh century. 1: ‘Roman rampart’; 2: valley of the swollen stream (later the site of fishponds); 3: palisade gate (later the town gate); 4: ispán’s castle; 5: church of the Virgin Mary of the archdiocese; 6: suburbium; 7: marketplace of the suburbium; 8: St Michael parish church. (Adapted from Zágorhidi and Kiss, 2007, 164.)

2 26 k a r e n s ta r k

topographical model completely. At Fehérvár, Győr, Várad, and Vác Marian churches were founded and associated with important ecclesiastical and secular power centres of the Árpádian Age.21 Notably, since the publication of Németh’s article, research on the settlement of Vasvár has aligned it completely with Németh’s model. Németh remarks on the presence of a church dedicated to St Michael at the site (Németh 1981, 54),22 but makes no mention of a Marian church. A Marian church indeed existed in medieval Vasvár and was first mentioned in the historical record in 1342 (Házi 1968, 270). By reassessing the site of the ispán’s castle in the settlement, Gábor Kiss and Czigány Balázs Zágorhidi were able to determine that the Marian church was located next to the castle on the highest point in the settlement and the church of St Michael in the suburbium below (Kiss and Zágorhidi 2001, 355–60; Zágorhidi and Kiss 2007, 159) (Fig. 14.4). Zágorhidi was able to determine that the Marian church was ‘verifiably’ the parish church of the village at least from the end of the thirteenth century (Kiss and Zágorhidi 2001, 356),23 but was likely originally constructed at the same time as the ispán’s castle and operated as a decanal church before the destruction of the castle in 1118 (Zágorhidi and Kiss 2007, 180). Other later research, however, has raised doubts about Németh’s topographical model. Commenting on this model, archaeologist Mária Wolf remarked that the popularity of the Virgin Mary and St Michael as patrocinia in Árpádian county seats was simply due to the fact that their patrocinia were popular in general and that there is ‘no direct correlation between the functions

21 Concerning Fehérvár, it should be noted that a parish church dedicated to St Michael is recorded to have existed in the settlement in 1429 (Lukcsics I, 231). It is believed to have been located in one of the suburbia of Székesfehérvár known as nova civitas, see Kralovánszky 1990, 89; Siklósi 2013, 54. 22 1217/1412: ‘omnes populos et hospites Ecclesie Sancti Michaelis de Castro Ferreo’ (ÁÚO vi, 383). 23 The argumentation for this assertion is given in Zágorhidi 1994, 62–64.

of the churches and their patronage’ (2019, 273). It is true that it was not only at Árpádian county seats that Marian churches were founded. In fact, other than the churches of the bishoprics, the earliest references to Marian patrocinia in the historical record are connected to local village churches. The earliest explicit reference to a Marian parish church was to a church in Zsitvakenéz (Kňažice, Slovakia), according to a 1217 transcription of a deed from 1075, which also remarked that the parish church was previously a wooden royal chapel (MES I, 53, 59). A charter from 1102 mentions the Marian churches of three separate villages: Füzitő, Tepenye, and Kápolna (Kicsanak) (PRT 1, 593). While it is true that Árpádian-period Marian patrocinia can be identified in all varieties of settlements, there is undoubtedly a very strong connection between Marian patrocinia and people and places of power. The Marian church of Zsitvakenéz cited above was originally a royal chapel, and the Marian churches of Füzitő, Tepenye, and Kápolna were all the property of the abbey of Pannonhalma — the first and pre-eminent Benedictine house in the kingdom. Still, in order to comprehensively determine the relationship between patrocinia and settlement type and the significance of Marian patrocinia in Hungary’s burgeoning church network, more research still needs to be done. Németh’s proposed topographical model cannot be applied universally and without sufficient evidence, but it is still useful and could provide possible avenues of research for future analyses of Hungarian patrocinia that will help to further elucidate the image of Hungary’s early Árpádian church network.

14.   t he fo rmat i o n o f t he regnu m ma rianum 2 2 7

Works Cited Primary Sources ÁÚO = Wenzel, Gustáv (ed.). Árpádkori új okmánytár, 12 vols (Budapest: Eggenberger Ferdinánd Akademiai, 1860–1874) Bossányi, Árpád (ed.). 1918. Regesta supplicationum. A pápai kérvénykönyvek magyar vonatkozású okmányai. Avignoni korszak. ii. VI. Ince pápa 1352–1362., V. Orbán pápa 1362–1370., VII. Kelemen ellenpápa 1378–1394 (Budapest: Stephaneum Nyomda) CDES = Marsina, Richard (ed.). Codex diplomaticus et epistolaris Slovaciae, vols i–ii (Bratislava: Academiae Scientiarum Slovacae, 1971–1987) DL-DF = Magyar Országos Levéltár. Diplomatikai Levéltár; Diplomatikai Fényképgyűjtemény. Budapest Györffy, György (ed.). 1992. Diplomata Hungariae Antiquissima, vol. i (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) Kállay = A nagykállói Kállay-család levéltára II. kötet (Budapest: Franklin-Társulat Nyomdája, 1943) Kubinyi, Ferencz (ed.). 1867. Árpádkori oklevelek 1095–1301 (Budapest: [n. pub.]) Lindeck-Pozza, Irmtraut (ed.). 1965. Urkundenbuch des Burgenlandes und der angrenzenden Gebiete der Komitate Wieselburg, Ödenburg und Eisenburg. Bd. 2: Die Urkunden von 1271 bis 1301 (Graz: Böhlau) Lukcsics = Lukcsics, Pál. XV. századi pápák oklevelei, 2 vols (Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia, 1931–1938) Makkai, László, and László Mezey (eds). 1960. Árpád-kori és Anjou-kori levelek XI–XIV. század (Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó) MES = Ferdinandus Knauz. Monumenta Ecclesiae Strigoniensis, vol. i (Esztergom, 1874) MonVat i/1 = Ipolyi, Arnold (ed.). Rationes collectorum pontificorum in Hungaria. Pápai tizedszedők számadásai. 1281–1375 (Budapest: Franklin, 1887) MonVat i/3 = Fraknói, Vilmos (ed.). Bullae Bonicacii IX. P. M. IX. Bonifác pápa bullái. 1389–1396 (Budapest: Franklin, 1889) SRH ii = Szentpétery, Emericus. 1938. Scriptores rerum Hungaricarum tempore ducum regumque stirpis Arpadianae gestarum, vol. ii (Budapest: Academie Litterarum Typographia Universitatis) Vilmos, Fraknó, and József Lukcsics (eds). 1899. Monumenta Romana Episcopatus Vesprimiensis – A veszprémi püspökség római oklevéltára, vol. ii (Budapest: Római Magyar Történeti Intézet) Secondary Studies Aradi, Csilla M. 2016. Somogy megye Árpád-kori és középkori egyházszervezetének rekonstrukciója. Somogy megye középkori templomainak adattára (Kaposvár: Rippl-Rónai Múzeum) Berend, Nora. 2000. ‘Hartvic, Life of King Stephen’, in Medieval Hagiography: An Anthology, ed. by Thomas Head (New York: Routledge), pp. 375–98 Buzás, Gergely, and Orsolya Mészáros. 2008. ‘A középkori Visegrád egyházainak régészeti kutatásai’, Magyar Sion, 44.2: 71–103 Buzás, Gergely. 2020. ‘Magyarország korai székesegyházairól’, in Arhitectura religioasă medievală din Transilvania. Középkori egyházi építészet Erdélyben. Medieval Ecclesiastical Architecture in Transylvania VI, ed. by Péter Levente Szőcs (Satu Mare: Editura Muzeului Sătmărean), pp. 7–38 Éder, Katalin. 2010. ‘Mezővárosi plébániatemplomok középkori városmentes tájakon’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Eötvös Loránd University) Fekete, Antal Nagy. 1941. Trencsén vármegye (Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia) Gáll, Erwin. 2016. ‘Archaeology and Nationalism. The Endless Struggle for Dăbâca (G.: Dobeschdorf; H.: Doboka) Thoughts on Research Development and Archeological Realties’, Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae, 2015–2016: 257–323 Gáll, Erwin, and Nándor Laczkó, 2013. ‘Doboka várkomplexuma. Tudomány – Tudománypolitika és régészet a ’60-as évektől napjainkig’, in A honfoglalás kor kutatásának legújabb eredményei. Tanulmányok Kovács László 70. születésnapjára, ed. by László Révész and Mária Wolf (Budapest: Martin Opitz Kiadó), pp. 83–126 Gömöri, János. 2002. Castrum Supron. Sopron vára és környéke az Árpád-korban (Sopron: Scarbantia Társaság) Guzsik, Tamás. 1979. ‘Veszprém megye középkori templomépítészetének kutatási kérdései’, VMMK, 14: 163–202 Györffy, György. 1966. Az Árpád-kori Magyarország történelmi földrajza, vol. i (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) Házi, Jenő. 1943. Sopron szabad királyi város története. II. rész, 6. kötet, Pótkötet a I. rész 1–7, és a II. rész 1–5. köteteihez az 1278–1526. évekből (Sopron: Székely és Társa Könyvnyomdája) —— 1968. ‘Vas megyei középkori oklevelek’, Vasi Szemle, 22.2: 270–73 Horváth, István, Márta H. Kelemen, and István Torma. 1979. Komárom megye régészeti topográfiája. Esztergom és a Dorogi Járas (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) Ila, Bálint. 1969. Gömör megye, vol. iv (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) Ivandija, Antun. 1948. Stara zagrebačka katedrala. Historijsko-umjetnička rasprava, I dio: Arhitektura (Zagreb: [n. pub.])

228 k a r e n s ta r k

Jankó, Ferenc, József Kücsán, and Katalin Szende. 2010. Sopron. Magyar Várostörténeti Atlasz, i (Sopron: Sopron Archives of Győr-Moson-Sopron County) Karácsonyi, János. 1896. Békésvármegye története, vol. ii (Gyula: Békesvármegye Közönsége) Kiss, Etele. 2019. ‘Piroska-Eirene and the Holy Theotokos’, in Piroska and the Pantokrator: Dynastic Memory, Healing and Salvation in Komnenian Constantinople, ed. by Marianne Sághy and Robert G. Ousterhout (Budapest: CEU Press), pp. 261–90 Kiss, Gábor, and Czigány Balázs Zágorhidi. 2001. ‘Topográfiai megfigyelések és történeti adatok az Árpád-kori Vasvárról’, Soproni Szemle, 55.4: 355–60 Klaniczay, Gábor. 2002. Holy Rulers and Blessed Princesses: Dynastic Cults in Medieval Central Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Kodolányi, Judit. 2019. ‘Templomok és temetők a visegrádi Sibrik-dombon’, Magyar Régészet, 2019.2: 10–17 Koszta, László. 2008. ‘11. századi bencés monostor a Szepességben?’, Századok, 142: 339–57 Kovács, Béla. 1989/90. ‘Magyarország középkori patrocíniumai’, Agria. Annales Musei Agriensis, 25/26: 407–20 Kralovánszky, Alán. 1990. ‘The Settlement History of Veszprém and Székesfehérvár in the Middle Ages’, in Towns in Medieval Hungary, ed. by László Gerevich (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó), pp. 51–95 Kristó, Gyula. 2000. Írások Szent Istvánról és koráról (Szeged: Szegedi Középkorász Műhely) Mordovin, Maxim. 2016. ‘Templomok az ispánsági várakban – Churches in the Early Royal Centres (Hungary)’, in Népek és kultúrák a kárpát-medencében: tanulmányok Mesterházy Károly tiszteletére (Budapest: Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum), pp. 777–94 Németh, Péter. 1981. ‘Civitatis et suburbium (Adatok Sopron korai várostörténetéhez)’, Soproni Szemle, 35: 50–58. Orbán, Balázs. 1889. Torda város és környéke (Budapest: Helikon Kiadó) Pauler, Gyula. 1899. A magyar nemzet története az Árpádházi királyok alatt, vol. i (Budapest: Athenaeum) PRT i = Erdélyi, László (ed.). 1902. A pannonhalmi Szent-Benedek-rend története, vol. i (Budapest: Stephaneum, A SzentIstván-Társalut Nyomdája) Siklósi, Gyula. 2013. A törökkori Székesfehérvár (Székesfehérvár: MH Összhaderőnemi Parancsnokság Tudományos Tanács) Šimunić, Ivana, and Marina Šimunić Buršić. 2015. ‘Svod sakristije zagrebaèke katedrale’, Prostor, 23.2: 345–52 Šourek, Danko. 2017. ‘Arpadian Royal Cult in the Zagreb Cathedral: From Gothic to Baroque’, Rad. Inst. povij. umjet., 41: 47–58 Stark, Karen. 2022. ‘The Garden Watered by the Virgin Mary: The Marian Landscape of Medieval Hungary (1301–1437)’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Central European University) —— 2024. ‘The Authority of the Virgin: The Use of the Marian Cult in the Legitimization of Power in the Kingdom of Hungary before 1300’, in The Cult of Saints and Legitimization of Elite Power in East Central Europe and Scandinavia until 1300, ed. by Grzegorz Pac, Steffen Hope, and Jón Viðar Sigurðsson (Turnhout: Brepols), pp. 57–80 Stošić, Josip. 1994. ‘Srednjovjekovna umjetnička svjedočanstva o zagrebačkoj biskupiji’, in Sveti trag: devetsto godina umjetnosti Zagrebačke nadbiskupije 1094–1994, ed. by Tugomir Lukšić and Ivanka Reberski (Zagreb: Zagrebačka nadbiskupija, Institut za povijest umjetnosti, Muzejsko-galerijski centar) Szatmári, Imre. 2005. Békés megye középkori templomai (Békéscsaba: Békés Megyei Múzeumok Igazgatósága) Tagányi, Károly, László Réthy, and József Kádár. 1900. Szolnok-Doboka vármegye monographiája, vol. iii (Dés: Nyomatott Demeter és Kiss Könyvnyomdájában) Tari, Edit. 2000. Pest megye középkori templomai, Studia Comitatensia, 27 (Szentendre: Museums of Pest County) Thoroczkay, Gábor. 2013. ‘Szent István legendái’, in István, a szent király, ed. by Terézia Kerny and András Smohay (Székesfehérvár: Székesfehérvári Egyházmegyei Múzeum), pp. 28–35 —— 2019. ‘A középkori Magyar Királyság egyházigazgatásának néhány kérdése’, Egyháztörténeti Szemle, 20.4: 3–10 Valter, Ilona. 1985. Romanische Sakralbauten Westpannoniens (Eisenstadt: Ed. Roetzer) Wolf, Mária. 2019. A borsodi földvár. Egy államalapítás kori megyeszékhelyünk kutatása, Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén megye régészeti emlékei, 10 (Budapest; Miskolc; Szeged: Martin Opitz; Herman Ottó Múzeum; Szegedi Tudományegyetem Régészeti Tanszék) Zágorhidi, Czigány Balázs. 1994. ‘A vasvári Nagyboldogasszony-templom építéstörténetéhez’, Vasi honismereti és helytörténeti közlemények, 1994/2: 62–64 Zágorhidi, Czigány Balázs, and Gábor Kiss. 2007. ‘A vasvári ispáni sáncvár’, Savaria – A Vas Megyei Múzeumok értesítője, 31.2: 157–86

Sławomir Moździoch, Ewa Moździoch, and M onica  C hiovaro

15. Between Palermo and Cefalú The Role of the First Norman Monastic Foundations in the (Re) Christianization of the Island’s Rural Population in the Light of Archaeological Research in the Altavilla Milicia Region

A bs t r act  The Norman rulers conquering Sicily at the end of the eleventh century found a significant cultural mosaic. From a religious point of view, they had to deal with an Islamic (mainly Arab) population, a Christian (mostly Greek) population, and a Jewish community. The first efforts of the Norman conquerors of Sicily to Christianize the island’s population included the establishment of Italo-Greek monasteries (monks living under

T

Sławomir Moździoch • ([email protected]) is a Polish medieval archaeologist. He is a professor at the Centre for Late Antique and Early Medieval Studies in Wrocław (Poland), a department of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences. From 1999–2014, he also gave lectures and courses in archaeology at the Institute of History of the University of Opole. He is the author of books on the beginnings of the first Polish state in the light of archaeological research on its economic organization. He has managed several research projects on the functions of the central places in early medieval states. Recently, he conducted a project on an atlas of medieval castles in Poland and a research project on the history of the medieval monastery of Santa Maria di Campogrosso in Sicily. He has also researched the medieval castle Castello dei Tre Cantoni in Scicli (Sicily). His research interests focus on issues connected to social and economic relations in early medieval central Europe, the history of early medieval Silesia, the functioning of central places in medieval central Europe, funerary rites and religion of the Slavs, medieval castles in central and eastern Europe, origins of medieval cities in central Europe, origins and functioning of early medieval states, economic archaeology of the Middle Ages, and archaeology of medieval Sicily, in particular the Norman period. Ewa Moździoch • ([email protected]) is an archaeology graduate from the University of Wrocław, Poland (graduation year 2019). She is currently a PhD student in History at the University of Opole. The scientific aim of her future PhD thesis is to trace and explain the changes in the organization of the economic activities of the inhabitants of Sicily, from the perspective of historical and archaeological sources, after the Norman Conquest (second half of the twelfth century) until the reign of Frederick II (first half of the thirteenth century). Her main research interests are the archaeology of medieval Sicily, the Norman period, the coinage of Norman Sicily, and the economic organization of medieval Sicily. Monica Chiovaro • ([email protected]) was born in Palermo in 1963. She graduated there in 1987 and obtained a diploma in Classical Archaeology at the Postgraduate School of the University of Catania in 1995. She has worked at the Segesta Archaeological Park (TP) and since 2005 has been an archaeological officer at the Soprintendenza BB.CC. AA. of Palermo; she is responsible for the protection of the Archaeological Park of Himera and various municipalities in the province (Altavilla Milicia, Alia, Castronovo di Sicilia, etc.). She is the author of various scientific articles on Segesta, Himera, Palermo, Termini Imerese, etc. Since 2010 she has been part of the scientific editorial staff of the Notiziario Archeologico della Soprintendenza di Palermo and has edited several volumes. Since 2020 she has been the point of contact for the work in the convention between the Superintendence BB.CC.AA. of Palermo, the University of Tor Vergata-Roma 3, and the University of York (UK), for works in the territory of Castronovo di Sicilia, as well as with the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences, for research in the territory of Altavilla Milicia. She is also responsible for excavations carried out at the Royal Palace in Palermo, at the Cornelio Aqueduct in Termini Imerese, and for research arising from archaeological protection in various municipalities in the province. Her primary research interests are classical archaeology, Greek Sicily, material culture studies, and landscape archaeology. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 229–239. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138119

23 0 s ł awo m i r m oź dz i o c h , e wa m oź dz i o c h , and mo ni ca chi ovaro

the rule of St Basil). In addition to their missionary role, these monasteries held an important economic and military position. The Research Centre for Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages in Wrocław of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences has begun excavations at the monastery of Santa Maria di Campogrosso in connection with a broader research programme on the role of the Normans in shaping the cultural image of medieval Europe, carried out under a scientific cooperation agreement with Soprintendenza per i Beni Culturali ed Ambientali di Palermo (also as part of a Polish National Science Centre project, 2017/25/B/HS3/01699). Thanks to the results of the excavations, including isotopic and radiocarbon analyses, we can conclude that the origins of the monastery of Santa Maria di Campogrosso are linked to a small church of wood and lime construction, built in the second half of the eleventh century for a community of monks of the Greek rite. New endowments by rulers preferring the Latin rite made it possible to build a large masonry church in the second half of the twelfth century. It was probably linked to the Latinization of the monastery. Burials discovered in the church cemetery provided valuable information. Strontium and C14 isotope analyses of the skeletal remains indicate that those buried in the eastern part of the cemetery, probably in the late eleventh or early twelfth century, came from outside Sicily. The younger graves in the western section contained the remains of people born locally. The style of architecture of the stone church and some of the coins found in the graves attest to the cultural links of those buried in the churchyard and the church builders with the French and northern Italian territories. Also, the absence of artefacts indicating Greek (Byzantine) or Arab influence allows us to assume that the Christianization of the island in the Latin rite, favoured by the reigning Normans, was faster and more rapid than historians’ texts portray, especially in their popular-scientific versions.

K e y wo r d s  Medieval Sicily, medieval churches, Christianization, religious history, Muslim–Christian relations

T

The Norman rulers who conquered Sicily at the end of the eleventh century found a significant cultural mosaic in the area. From a religious point of view, they had to deal with Islamic (mainly Arab), Christian (mostly Greek), and Jewish populations (Falkenhausen 1979; 2002; Matthew 1992; Loud 2000; 2016; Bresc 2001; Tramontana 2002; Metcalfe 2003; Abulafia 2004; Enzensberger 2009; Nef 2011). The Greek Christians, who had kept their faith during the 200-year period of Arab domination of the island, became a support of the Norman dynasty’s rule in the early period of its endeavours of re-Christianization. The initial efforts of the Norman rulers included the founding or restitution of Italo-Greek monasteries formerly in ruins, bringing together monks somewhat erroneously referred

to in historical literature as Basilians (Falkenhausen 1977; 1983; Scaduto 1982, 16). The extent of the preference of Italo-Greek monasteries could be measured by the fact that of the twenty-one monasteries founded by Roger the Count, only four were Latin (White 1984, 42). However, it is worth considering the extent to which these statistics and the testimonies of earlier historians reflect the real Greek–Latin relations of the time. Monasteries located in rural areas were of great importance in Christianizing the rural population (Falkenhausen 1986). In addition to their missionary role, they also played an important economic and military role. Monasteries were founded in places dominating the immediate surroundings; locations that also made it possible to control transportation

15 .   b e t w e e n pale rmo and cefalú 2 31

Figure 15.1. Location of the remains of the monastery of Santa Maria di Campogrosso. (Image by Piotr Wroniecki.)

routes. This manifestation of the conquerors’ power in the landscape, declaring themselves Christians, strengthened the image of their God in the eyes of the dissenters and undoubtedly played an essential role in the Christianization of the isle. Castles were the second element of the Christianization of the landscape; they became the seats of Norman barons enforcing tributes from the conquered population (Bresc 1984; Maurici 1992; 1994; Bresc and Maurici 2009).

The literature on the problem of Christianization holds the view of a religiously tolerant Norman dynasty, which respected the multicultural face of Sicilian society and the unique role of the Italo-Greek monks in the process of Christianization. It was thought to be reflected, among other things, in the ecclesiastical architecture of the Norman period, where Arab and Byzantine influences were believed to play a substantial part. Such a belief among architectural historians influenced the way former religious buildings were

23 2 s ł awo m i r m oź dz i o c h , e wa m oź dz i o c h , and mo ni ca chi ovaro

Figure 15.2. Traces of a timber and lime construction discovered in the nave of the convent church. (Image by Sławomir Moździoch.)

15 .   b e t w e e n pale rmo and cefalú 2 33

reconstructed.1 One example of such a centre of ItaloGreek Christianization was the monastery Santa Maria di Campogrosso. The archaeology of medieval Sicily has only recently joined the discussion about the process of the Christianization of the island during the Norman period. Excavations have made it possible to determine the chronology of castles and monasteries, which can lead to corrections in the image of their chronology and the extent of their influence as elements of the network of central places created by the Norman rulers. Archaeological research can also contribute to understanding the dynamics and extent of Christianity’s influence on the material culture and customs of the inhabitants of Norman Sicily. It is done, among other things, through the analysis of pottery and all kinds of physical and chemical studies to determine the diet of the time (Lundy and others 2021; Castrorao Barba and others 2021). One of the most frequently observed archaeological indicators of conversion (in our case to Christianity) is changes in funerary rites, such as the arrangement of the corpse on an east–west axis with the head on the western side, facing toward the east, and the lack of grave furnishings (Gilchrist 2022). The Research Centre for Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages in Wrocław of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology of the Polish Academy of Sciences began excavations at the monastery of Santa Maria di Campogrosso in 2015, in connection with a broader research programme on the role of the Normans in shaping the cultural image of medieval Europe, carried out under a scientific cooperation agreement with Soprintendenza per i Beni Culturali ed Ambientali di Palermo. The defined defensive position of the monastery, allowing it to control one of the essential Sicilian communication routes linking the east and west of the island (the former Roman Via Valeria), and to observe Solanto Bay, points to its crucial economic and political role (Fig. 15.1). The presumption of the Italo-Greek character of the monastery is based on the information of modern historians. The few known documents related to the church and the monastery’s history mention a predominantly Arabic and Latin-speaking population. The several years of excavations also failed to uncover any material evidence indicating a connection between the church and the Byzantine rite. Archaeological observations opposing the Greek character of the



1 (Guiotto 1956). The overwhelming influence of the vision of a multicultural Sicilian Norman state on the theories formulated by modern historians has been accurately written about by Donald Matthew (1992).

monastery do not entirely contradict the information of historians. Rocco Pirri, the primary informant on church organization in medieval Sicily, writing about the monastery of Santa Maria di Campogrosso, used the words ‘ordo, ut creditur, sancti Basilii’ (the order, as it is believed, of St Basil) (Pirri 1638, 211). Archaeological excavations, including radiocarbon analyses, yielded the discovery that the first predecessor of the monastery of Santa Maria di Campogrosso was a small church of wood and lime construction built in the late eleventh or first half of the twelfth century (Fig. 15.2). It has been rebuilt several times, making the reconstruction of its original form much more difficult. The closest analogy to this type of construction is known from the areas of Western, Central, and Northern Europe (Fronza and Valenti 1996). The new grants of Norman rulers allowed the construction of a large masonry church in the second half of the twelfth century. Such a date is indicated by the results of the C14 dating of the mortar, the coin finds, and the site’s stratigraphy (Krąpiec and others 2020). The architectural style of the building indicates that the builders of the church had strong ties with Normandy. A close analogy is the church of St Ceneri le Gerei, indirectly linked to the family of Grandmesnil, from which descended the builder of Benedictine churches in Calabria, Robert, a relative of the rulers of the Altavilla family. Due to a specific passage between the nave and transept, both churches can be included in the so-called Passagenkirchen (French: église à passages) found throughout the eleventh and twelfth centuries in central and southern France (Fig. 15.3).2 Even if our monastery was initially a congregation of Italo-Greek monks, the second half of the twelfth century witnessed a phenomenon described by White as the ‘Benedictinization of the Basilians’ (White 1984), which can be equated with Latinization (Vitolo 1982). Geophysical surveys conducted in the area south of the church indicate the structure of the walls of the monastery shows the characteristics of Benedictine monasteries (Fig. 15.4). It has a close parallel, for example, in the excavated monastery of St Michele di Verruca (Francovich and Sauro 2003; Gelichi and others 2003). Several dozen burials discovered in the church cemetery provided valuable information. Following the Christian rite, most preserved skeletons were placed in an east–west orientation, with the head on the western side. The few burials with a north–south direction could be associated with a Muslim population,



2 Konerding believed that this form of communication between the nave and transept was mainly associated with monastery churches (Konerding 1976). Compare also the work on churches of this type from the Anjou region (Mallet 1982).

23 4 s ł awo m i r m oź dz i o c h , e wa m oź dz i o c h , and mo ni ca chi ovaro

Figure 15.3. The church of St Ceneri le Gerei. (Photo from Wikimedia Commons.)

15 .   b e t w e e n pale rmo and cefalú 2 35

Figure 15.4. Traces of the walls of the monastery buildings discovered to the south of the church during GPR surveys. (Image by Piotr Wroniecki.)

2 36 s ł awo m i r m oź dz i o c h , e wa m oź dz i o c h , and mo ni ca chi ovaro

Figure 15.5. Fragment of a Norman period gravestone with Kufic inscription. (Photo by Anna Kubicka.)

although this type of grave orientation was not unusual in contemporary Christian cemeteries. Nonetheless, archaeological finds, such as characteristic pottery and a fragment of a tomb stele with a Kufic inscription, confirm the presence of an Arab population in the settlement hinterland, also appearing in written sources (Fig. 15.5). The strontium isotope analyses of the bone remains of these burials indicate that people buried in the eastern part of the cemetery could have come from outside Sicily.3 These individuals are dated by the C14 method to the eleventh and twelfth centuries and were buried in simple earthen pits. The results of the isotopic analyses also demonstrated that younger, twelfth- to thirteenth-century graves contained the remains of



3 The strontium isotope tests were performed in a laboratory in Poznań headed by Professor Zdzisław Bełka. Strontium isotope studies, due to the considerable variation in the geological structure of Sicily and the impact of various external factors, do not allow the exact origin of the specimens studied to be determined. They can only be read in the context of other archaeological facts. An additional difficulty is the impossibility of comparative analysis, for there is no such study of Sicilian communities of the medieval period. The few come only from recent years and concern the ancient period (Reinberger and others 2021).

people born on the island. These graves generally had a stone construction and were located mainly in the western part of the cemetery. The strontium isotope values in the teeth of these individuals and the teeth of animals found at the site were similar. Further research, including genetic analysis, will answer whether these were the descendants of the newcomers buried here from outside Sicily or whether they were local people. Some indication that these were descendants of newcomers is provided by the finding of two coins from Northern Italy and Provence in grave No. 7 on the chest of a child, who, according to the isotopic values, was born in Sicily. C14 dating confirms that the masonry church was built at the end of the reign of William II (r. 1166–1189) when the confrontation between Christians and Muslims became more intense. The defensive nature of the building and its unambiguously Latin form indicate a rapidly progressing Latinization process associated with the influx of Latin-speaking settlers from the Continent. Therefore, the following data contradicts the image of a mild Christianization in a spirit of tolerance and the claims of consensual cooperation between the Norman rulers and the Arab and Greek populations. The consensus was not so much intentional as forced by the balance of power until the number of Latin settlers from the Continent began to constitute a real force in negotiations with the local people (Loud 2000, 2016). The surveyed site is an example of a place where the Christianization of the landscape occurred after the Norman Conquest by bringing Christian colonists from outside the island. The church, along with the churchyard cemetery, ceased to exist around the beginning of the fourteenth century, probably related to the depopulation of the hinterland surrounding the former monastery. The church’s interior was later used for secular purposes, perhaps as an observation and defence point (Librino 1928, 208). It is not without reason that Tomaso Fazello linked the foundation of the Santa Maria di Campogrosso monastery to Roger I’s (r. 1071–1101) victorious battle against the Arabs at nearby Misilmeri (Fazello 1558, 192–93). Since the Norman Conquest, the identity of the Sicilian population has been shaped not so much in a spirit of tolerance as of confrontation with Islam. In this process, the cult of Saint Mary played a significant role. Its development even during the decline of the monastery is confirmed by an appliqué with Marian symbolism dated to the fourteenth to fifteenth centuries, found in the nave of the church (Fig. 15.6). The contemporary confrontation with the world of Islam, manifested in the region of the Mediterranean Sea by the constant attacks of Islamic corsairs, caused the emergence of numerous Marian places of worship. The legends connected with them referred to the

15 .   b e t w e e n pale rmo and cefalú 2 37

Norman period and victorious battles against the Muslims (Zito 2016, 196). After the establishment of the town of Altavilla Milicia in the early seventeenth century, the centre of Marian devotion was moved there. The importance of the Marian site in the town of Altavilla Milicia increased with the appearance of a miraculous image and the legend associated with it. The pilgrimage site associated with the Madonna della Milicia assisting Christians to confront Islam continues to function today. In the case of Sicily, perhaps also because of its insularity that created a natural border to the settled territory, the process of Christianization occurred less through conversion and more through population exchange, facilitated by bringing in and settling dense colonies of Christian Latin settlers from the Continent, generally referred to as Lombards (White 1984, 97). The first mention of a colonization in which homines linguae latine were brought in dates between 1094 and 1101, thus soon after the island’s conquest (White 1984, 97, 132–33). The consistent Christianization of the island’s population eventually resulted in the displacement of the non-Christian population of the isle, which occurred during the thirteenth (Muslims) and fifteenth ( Jews) centuries (Abulafia 2004). The study of the remains of the monastery of Santa Maria di Campogrosso allows a partial reconstruction of the social and economic life of the micro-region during the so-called Norman and Hohenstaufen periods, which ended with the complete expulsion of the Muslim population from the island. It also indicates a more vigorous and faster Latinization process in the material culture of religion and daily life. History teaches that rulers generally seek to maintain power at all costs, and they consider the best mechanism for achieving this goal to be securing subjects who adhere to the same ideology as themselves. In their view, the state’s welfare in the case of a disagreement between the ruler and subjects is best achieved by replacing

Figure 15.6. Bronze appliqué with the symbols of Saint Mary. (Photo by S. Moździoch.)

the subjects with more compliant ones rather than by replacing the ruler. It is fortunate if this exchange is carried out relatively peacefully, for example, through resettlement. Sometimes, the rulers even go as far as physically eliminating the unruly. In the face of today’s war in Ukraine, this mechanism of action finds another frightening confirmation.

Acknowledgements This article was written thanks to funding from the National Science Centre project ‘Transformations of intercultural relations in local communities in Medieval Sicily after Norman Conquest in the light of archaeological research (on the example of the Altavilla Milicia region)’ 2017/25/B/HS3/01699.

23 8 s ł awo m i r m oź dz i o c h , e wa m oź dz i o c h , and mo ni ca chi ovaro

Works Cited Primary Sources Fazello, Tommaso. 1558. De rebus Siculis decades duae, nunc primum in lucem editae. His accessit totius operis index locupletissimus (Palermo: Ioannem Matthaeum Maidam and Franciscum Carraram) Pirri, Rocco. 1638. Sicilia sacra, in qua episcopatuum nunc florentium, ac eorum dioceseon notitiae traduntur, liber tertius (Panormi: Hieronymum de Rossellis) Secondary Studies Abulafia, David. 2004. ‘The Italian Other: Greeks, Muslims and Jews’, in Italy in the Central Middle Ages, 1000–1300, ed. by Daivd Abulafia (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 215–36 Amari, Michele. 1854–1872. Storia dei Musulmani di Sicilia, 3 vols (Florence: Successori Le Monnier) Bresc, Henri. 1984. ‘Terre e castelli: le fortificazioni della Sicilia araba e normanna’, in Castelli. Storia ed archeologia, Relazioni e comunicazioni al Convegno tenuto a Cuneo (6–8 dic. 1981), ed. by Rinaldo Comba and Aldo A. Settia (Turin: Comune di Cuneo, Regione Piemonte, Assessorato alla cultura), pp. 73–87 —— 2001. Arabes de langue, Juifs de religion: L’évolution du judaïsme sicilien dans l’environnement latin, xiie–xve siècles (Paris: Éditions Bouchène) Bresc, Henri, and Maurici Ferdinando. 2009. ‘I castelli demaniali della Sicilia (secoli xiii–xv)’, in Castelli e fortezze nella città e nei centri minori italiani, secoli XIII–XV, ed. by Francesco Panero and Giuliano Pinto (Cherasco: Centro Internazionale di Studi sugli Insediamenti Medievali), pp. 271–317 Castrorao Barba, Angelo, Claudia Speciale, Roberto Miccichè, Filippo Pisciotta, Carla Aleo Nero, Pasquale Marino, and Giuseppe Bazan. 2021. ‘The Sicilian Countryside in the Early Middle Ages: Human–Environment Interactions at Contrada Castro’, Environmental Archaeology, 28.4: pp. 1–15 Enzensberger, Horst. 2009, ‘Tecniche di governo in un paese multietnico’, in Giorgio di Antiochia: l’arte della politica in Sicilia nel XII secolo tra Bisanzio e l’Islam. Atti del convegno internazionale (Palermo, 19–20 aprile 2007), ed. by Mario Re and Cristina Rognoni, Byzantino-sicula, 5 (Palermo: Istituto Siciliano di Studi Bizantini e Neoellenici Bruno Lavagnini), pp. 3–46 Falkenhausen, Vera von. 1977. ‘I monasteri greci dell’Italia meridionale e della Sicilia dopo l’avvento dei Normanni: continuità e mutamenti’, in Il passaggio dal dominio bizantino allo Stato normanno nell’Italia meridionale, ed. by Cosimo Damiano Fonseca, Atti del II Convegno internazionale di studio sulla civiltà rupestre medioevale nel Mezzogiorno d’Italia (Taranto-Mottola, 31 ottobre – 4 novembre 1973) (Taranto: [n. pub.]), pp. 197–219 —— 1979. ‘I gruppi etnici nel regno di Ruggero II e la loro participazione al potere’, in Società, potere e popolo nell’età di Ruggero II, Atti delle terze giornate normanno-sveve (Bari, 23–25 maggio, 1977), Centro di studi normanno-svevi. Atti, 3 (Bari: Centro di studi normanno-svevi), pp. 133–56 —— 1983. ‘Il monachesimo italo-greco e i suoi rapporti con il monachesimo benedittino’, in L’esperienza monastica benedittina e la Puglia (Bari-Noci-Lecce-Picciano: Atti del Convegno di studio organizzato in occasione del XV centenario della nascita di san Benedetto), pp. 119–36 —— 1986. ‘Il monachesimo greco in Sicilia’, in La Sicilia rupestre nel contesto delle civiltà mediterranee: atti del sesto Convegno internazionale di studio sulla civiltà rupestre medioevale nel Mezzogiorno d’Italia: Catania- Pantalica- Ispica, 7–12 settembre 1981, ed. by Cosimo Damiano Fonesca (Galatina: Congedo), pp. 135–74 —— 2002. ‘The Greek Presence in Norman Sicily: The Contribution of Archival Material in Greek’, in The Society of Norman Sicily, ed. by Graham A. Loud and Alex Metcalfe (Leiden: Brill), pp. 253–84 Francovich, Riccardo, and Sauro Gelichi (eds). 2003. Monasteri e castelli fra X e XII secolo. Il caso di San Michele alla Verruca e le altre ricerche storico--archeologiche nella Tuscia occidentale (Uliveto Terme 2000) (Florence: All’Insegna del Giglio) Fronza, Vittorio, and Marco Valenti. 1996. ‘Un archivio per l’edilizia in materiale deperibile nell’alto medioevo’, in Poggio Imperiale a Poggibonsi (Siena). Dal villaggio di capanne al castello di pietra. I. Diagnostica archeologica e campagne di scavo 1991–1994, ed. by Marco Valenti (Florence: Biblioteca del Dipartimento di Archeologia e Storia delle Arti. Sezione Archeologica. Università di Siena), pp. 159–217 Gelichi, Sauro, Antonio Alberti, Francesca Bertoldi, Francesca Sbarra. 2003. ‘San Michele alla Verruca: la sequenza, lo scavo della chiesa e delle aree cimiteriali’, in Monasteri e castelli fra X e XII secolo. Il caso di San Michele alla Verruca (Uliveto Terme 2000), ed. by Riccardo Francovich and Sauro Gelichi (Florence: All’Insegna del Giglio), pp. 11–38 Gilchrist, Roberta. 2022. ‘Voices from the Cemetery: The Social Archaeology of Late-Medieval Burial’, Medieval Archaeology, 66.1: 120–50

15 .   b e t w e e n pale rmo and cefalú 239

Guiotto, Mario. 1955. ‘La chiesa di S. Michele in territorio di Altavilla Milicia, in Atti del VII Congresso Nazionale di Storia dell’ Architettura (Palermo, 24–30 settembre 1950), Roma (1956) (Palermo: Comitato presso la Soprintendenza ai monumenti), pp. 267–74 Konerding, Volker. 1976. Die Passagenkirche. Ein Bautyp der romanischen Baukunst in Frankreich (Berlin: De Gruyter) Krąpiec, Marek, Sławomir Moździoch, Ewa Moździoch. 2020. ‘Dating of Remains of the Medieval Church Santa Maria di Campogrosso in Sicily in the Light of Multidisciplinary Studies’, Radiocarbon, 62: 1625–36 Librino, Emanuele. 1928. ‘Rapporti tra Pisani e Siciliani a proposito di una causa di rappresaglie nel secolo XIV. Note e appunti’, Archivo storico siciliano, ser. NS, 49: 179–213 Loud, Graham A. 2000. ‘Montecassino and Benevento in the Middle Ages. Essays in South Italian Church History’, in Variorum Collected Studies Series, 673 (Aldershot: Ashgate) —— 2016. ‘Communities, Cultures and Conflict in Southern Italy, from the Byzantines to the Angevins’, Al-Masāq, 28.2: 132–52 Lundy, Jasmine, and others. 2021. ‘New Insights into Early Medieval Islamic Cuisine: Organic Residue Analysis of Pottery from Rural and Urban Sicily’, PLoS ONE, 16.6 Mallet, Jacques. 1982. ‘Le type d’églises à passages en Anjou (Essai d’interprétation)’, Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, 25–97: 49–62 Matthew, Donald. 1992. ‘Modern Study of Norman Kingdom of Sicily’, Reading Medieval Studies, 18: 33–56 Maurici, Ferdinando. 1992. Castelli medievali in Sicilia. Dai bizantini ai normanni (Palermo: Sellerio Editore) —— 1994. ‘L’incastellamento in Sicilia’, in I Normanni popolo d’Europa 1030–1200, ed. by Mario D’Onofrio (Venice: Marsilio), pp. 217–20 Metcalfe, Alex. 2003. Muslims and Christians in Norman Sicily. Arabic-Speakers and the End of Islam (Oxford: Routledge) Nef, Annliese. 2011. Conquérir et gouverner: La Sicile islamique aux xie et xiie siècles (Rome: École française de Rome) Reinberger, Katherine L., Laurie J. Reitsema, Britney Kyle, Stefano Vassallo, George Kamenov, and John Krigbaum. 2021. ‘Isotopic Evidence for Geographic Heterogeneity in Ancient Greek Military Forces’, PLoS ONE, 16.5 Scaduto, Mario. 1982. Il monachesimo basiliano nella Sicilia medievale. Rinascita e decadenza. Secoli xi–xiv (Rome: Storia e Letteratura) Tramontana, Salvatore. 2002. ‘Ruggero I e la Sicilia musulmana’, in Il Mezzogiorno normanno-svevo e le crociate, ed. by Giosuè Musca (Bari: Edizioni Dedalo), pp. 49–64 Vitolo, Giovanni. 1982. ‘La latinizzazione dei monasteri italo-greci del Mezzogiorno medievale. L’esempio di S. Nicola di Gallocanta presso Salerno’, Benedictina, 29: 437–50 White Jr., Lynn Townsend. 1984. Il monachesimo latino nella Sicilia normanna (Catania: Dafni) Zito, Gaetano. 2016. ‘Prospettiva ecclesiologica “normanna” nella Sicilia del sec. XI’, in Ut sementem feceris, ita metes. Studi in onore di Biagio Saitta, ed. by Pietro Dalena and Carmelina Urso (Acireale: Bonanno editore), pp. 171–203

Andrey Al adzhov and Rola nd Filzwieser*

16. The Pliska-Type Churches, the Great Basilica, and their Relation to the Settlements in the Outer City of Pliska

A bs t r act  Pliska, the first early medieval Bulgarian capital, was comprised of a 50 ha large centre, the so-called Inner City, and its 23 km2 large surroundings known as the Outer City, enclosed by an earthen rampart. From 2016 to 2018, motorized geophysical surveys were conducted in both areas to document unknown archaeological structures and to achieve a better understanding of the urban layout of Pliska. This paper aims to examine the problem of the impact of Christianity on the urban plan of the city. The idea of transforming churches into urban structural cores is not new, but it has been somewhat neglected at the expense of a purely architectural analysis of temple constructions. The conclusions of scholars dealing with this problem ranged from the insignificant impact of Christianization on urban planning to the undertaking of large-scale construction. The application of one of the new models for shaping the urban space in the early Middle Ages is found in the capital’s urban planning scheme. A central part of this model is the churches, around which small, detached communities are grouped, located at a distance from each other, within fortified settlements. After the adoption of Christianity, the main urban emphasis fell on the churches, which are among the few buildings with solid construction in the Outer City. In its territory, a second city centre — the architectural complex of the Great Basilica and the Archbishop’s Palace — was established. T

K e y wo r ds  Pliska, early medieval Churches, archaeological geophysical prospection, Christianization, urban landscapes, settlement, Bulgaria

T



* These authors contributed equally to this work. Andrey Aladzhov • ([email protected]) is an Associate Professor at the National Archaeological Institute with Museum, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. His main research focuses on the continuity and hiatus between the late antique and early medieval cultures on the Balkan Peninsula. Roland Filzwieser • ([email protected]) is a researcher at the Vienna Institute for Archaeological Service (VIAS) of the University of Vienna. His main areas of research are archaeological prospection, landscape archaeology, historical archaeology, and medieval history. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 241–251. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138120

242 a n d r e y a l a dzh ov an d ro l an d fi l z w i e s e r*

Introduction Pliska is one of the few early medieval capital centres untouched by later construction. Probably also because of this, the city has been subject to archaeological research for more than a hundred years (Škorpil 1905). As a result, its cultural landscape has been largely clarified. The urban area is divided into two main parts — external and internal. The Outer City is surrounded by an earthen fortification, which encloses a total area of 23 km2. The Inner City is located in the centre, covering about 50 ha, protected by a massive stone fortress built in opus emplectum (Fig. 16.1a). A brick citadel was built in the very centre of the fortress, separating the residential part of the Palace Centre from the administrative one. The historical periodization of Pliska is divided into two main stages, a capital phase and a post-capital phase. The period from the end of the seventh century to 864 is referred to as the pagan phase of the capital. In 864, Bulgarian ruler Boris I was baptized, accepting the Christian name of his godfather, the Byzantine Emperor Michael III (842–867). Until 893, Pliska was the Christian capital of Bulgaria, after which the throne moved to Preslav. The post-capital phase also had two sub-phases, a post-capital Bulgarian phase (893–970) and a post-capital Byzantine phase, from 970 to the middle of the eleventh century, when the city ceased

to exist. During the three and a half centuries of its use, the settlement agglomeration constantly changed due to various factors. Christianization was one of the most important, which required fundamentally new urban space planning. Churches were essential in this new planning (Aladzhov 2010; Dimitrov 2007). Renewed interest in the churches came up in 2016 when a large-scale non-destructive study of Pliska was undertaken (Fig. 16.1b) in collaboration between NAIM–BAS, the RGZM, and the LBI ArchPro (Filzwieser, Aladzhov, and others 2019; Filzwieser, Neubauer, and others 2019). A previously unknown cross-domed church was discovered during the magnetic measurements, located north of the Great Basilica in the Outer City. In 2021, a geophysical survey of part of the southern half of the Outer City was launched in cooperation with Masaryk University, Brno (Milo and others 2022. As a result of the archaeological map of Pliska, several more building complexes were listed, most of which include churches.

Background Church architecture became an object of study during the first excavations in Pliska when the Sarai eri, the Grand Palace (also known as Throne Palace) and the Clissé eri or Great Basilica (Uspensky 1905,

Figure 16.1. Pliska with the extent of its Outer City marked with a red line and its Inner City with a blue line (a) Larger areas of the Outer City were surveyed in 2016 by the LBI ArchPro (b) mainly using motorized magnetics (red). (Images by Roland Filzwieser and Andrey Aladzhov.)

16.  the pliska-type churches, the great basilica, and their relation to the settlements in the outer city of pliska 2 43

9; Škorpil 1905, 91–148) (Fig. 16.1b) were excavated. The latter is one of the best-preserved stone buildings in the Outer City. The excavation of the churches accumulated a large amount of data, allowing a comprehensive study. Karel Škorpil began the archaeological excavations in Pliska in 1899. He organized a joint archaeological expedition with the director of the Russian Archaeological Institute in Constantinople, Feodor Uspensky (Uspensky 1905, 1–15). The results were published six years later in the most extensive study to date about Pliska (IRAIK 1905). Škorpil prepared the first archaeological map of Pliska (Škorpil 1905, tab. I) and carried out the first field surveys, resulting in several dozen church buildings being registered. Information about the construction of the Great Basilica was supplemented until the mid-1940s by the excavations of Krastyu Miyatev at the site (Miyatev 1940–1942, 75–88). After completing the phase of major discoveries such as the stone fortress in the early 1980s, the interest in the Outer City was renewed. In addition to the ongoing excavations of the Great Basilica (Mihaylov 1983; 1993; 1995; Georgiev 1993; 1995; 2007; Georgiev and Smyadovski 1982; Totev 1984; Totev and Georgiev 1980; Georgiev and Vitlyanov 2001; Vasilev 2007), studies of architectural complexes within the Outer City began. It is particularly noteworthy that almost each of these complexes included a church in its plan (Petrova and Aladzhov 1986; Vitlyanov 2000).

Typology of the Churches in Pliska One of the main problems of the urban planning of Pliska is the church architecture — the types of religious buildings (Fig. 16.2), periods of functioning, territorial distribution, and connection of the churches with other settlement elements. Over the years, more than forty churches have been registered, most of which have been studied through regular excavations (Škorpil 1905, 62–152; Mihaylov 1949, 1955; Mavrodinov 1949). According to their architectural type, the churches can be divided into one-nave and one-apse, three-nave and one-apse with a shortened plan called the ‘Pliska type’, three-nave basilicas, and cruciform churches. There is also one triconch building (Mihaylov 1949, 173–204). In terms of technology, churches are divided into two groups — those built more primitively, with lower quality material, and those made more precisely and with better quality building material. The first group includes three-nave and one-apse churches called ‘Pliska basilicas’. So far, a total of nine of these have been discovered. All have the exact same dimensions and the same plan — three naves, one apse with shortened proportions, and without architectural decoration. They were built of stones on mud solder, and probably had wooden columns and wooden (or straw) roofs. They are distributed relatively evenly throughout the Outer City. Their uniformity and similar manner of construction are the main arguments for most scholars to see in these

Figure 16.2. Three examples of the different types of churches discovered in the Outer City. Churches (a) and (b) (8 and 5 respectively in Škorpil’s numbering), show very similar dimensions and a similar ground plan. Church c is one of the so-called ‘Pliska type’ basilicas (after Mihaylov 1949, a: fig. 19b, b: fig. 23–24, c: fig. 2a).

244 a n d r e y a l a dzh ov an d ro l an d fi l z w i e s e r*

buildings churches for the ordinary people built in the numerous settlements (or neighbourhoods) within the Outer City’s earthen rampart. It is assumed that since this type of basilica always has the same ground plan and was built similarly, it was created by a team of craftsmen at the same time (Mavrodinov 1949, 161; Mihaylov 1949, 184). Their ground plan resembles a simplified Hellenistic basilica (Mihaylov 1949, 183) or is attributed to its architectural development, the beginning of which was borrowed from Byzantine church constructions of the ninth century (Vaklinov 1977, 172, 190, 191). Their dating, however, varies widely from the end of the ninth to the fourteenth centuries. The earliest date — the end of the ninth to the first half of the tenth centuries — is indicated by Vaklinov (Vaklinov 1977, 187), arguing that the construction of these churches coincides with the adoption of Christianity in Bulgaria and, accordingly, the need for religious buildings for ordinary residents. According to Mihaylov (Mihaylov 1949, 183), the new churches are a consequence of the Byzantine cultural revival and, as such, should be dated to the beginning of the eleventh century. On the contrary, Mavrodinov claims that ‘Pliska’ churches were built before the end of the tenth century because the Byzantines (Mavrodinov 1949, 161) would not have made an effort to build churches for Bulgarians. Naturally, this is not enough to support such a claim. The periodization of church construction is primarily supported by the relative stratigraphy of the site. According to Mavrodinov, of the fifty churches known so far in the territory of Pliska, there is not even one that can be dated to after the middle of the tenth century. The second technological group includes all other types of churches. They are built of stone blocks and bricks with mortar solder, with stone columns or pilasters,

and with brick or stone floors; their external facades are decorated with arcs and blind niches; fragments of frescoes and marble mosaics have been found in some of them. The most numerous are the three-nave basilicas with one or three apses. This type of church is naturally associated with the population’s upper classes. They often belong to the architectural complexes defined as aristocratic boyar mansions (Mihaylov 1949, 205–11; 1955, 118–39; 1963, 5–46; Mihaylov and Milchev 1959, 263–91).

The Great Basilica Naturally, the Great Basilica enjoyed the greatest scientific interest among the churches in the Outer City. It has impressive dimensions of 99 × 30 m, three naves, three apses with a three-part narthex, and a large atrium with open porticos. The complex also includes a baptistery on the southern side of the building and a chapel on the northern side. The Great Basilica, as the first Christian building in Pliska, dates back to the second half of the ninth century (Miyatev 1940–1942, 75–85; Vaklinov 1977, 169–71; Mihaylov 1993; 1995; Georgiev 1993; 1995; Georgiev and Smyadovski 1982; Totev 1984; Totev and Georgiev 1980; Georgiev and Vitlyanov 2001). Opinions about the architectural model are unanimous. ‘Its size and structure remind of early Christian prototypes’ (Vaklinov 1977, 171). Elements typical for early Byzantine basilicas can be found in the church (Georgiev and Vitlyanov 2001, 27). Its functionality is also rather uncontroversial. This monumental religious construction in Pliska was inspired by the official palace architecture (Mihaylov 1949, 183), and the Great Basilica was the face of the princely church policy (Vaklinov 1977, 179).

Figure 16.3. Magnetic survey of the Outer City using a motorized system with eight Förster FEREX CON650 probes and 25 cm cross-line spacing on 8 November 2016. (Photo by Roland Filzwieser.)

16.  the pliska-type churches, the great basilica, and their relation to the settlements in the outer city of pliska 2 45

An integral part of this architectural complex is the stone road — the only road in the whole city that connects the Great Basilica with the Palace Centre (Miyatev 1940–1942, 85–86). For a short time between 864 and 893 (the capital’s Christian phase), the Great Basilica became a second crucial city centre beside the Palace Centre. The church is fortified with its stone wall. The archbishop’s palace, along with a bath, chain buildings with monastic cells, a dining room, and an extensive scriptorium, were built on the territory. The complex of the Great Basilica established a new urban area in which all other settlement elements were located around the Christian centre of the city.

Materials and Methods The surveys in the Outer City of Pliska were conducted between 4 November and 10 November 2016, and a total of 67 ha of magnetics were surveyed. The fieldwork conditions were rather challenging due to wet soil and the deep ploughing of some of the agricultural fields covering the Outer City. A Fluxgate magnetometer system was applied with eight Förster FEREX CON650 probes mounted with 25 cm cross-line spacing on a non-magnetic cart. A small SUV towed the bespoke cart with a 6 m long drawbar

Figure 16.4. Enclosed building complex in the Outer City, including a so-called boyar church in the southeast. (After Mihaylov 1963, fig. 1.)

246 a n d r e y a l a dzh ov an d ro l an d fi l z w i e s e r*

(Fig. 16.3). Data acquisition was realized through a ten-channel Eastern Atlas analogue/digital converter, a ruggedized notebook, as well as the LoggerVis software developed by the LBI ArchPro. The LoggerVis software was used for navigation and real-time data visualization as well. Data positioning was achieved with a Javad Realtime Kinematic Global Navigation Satellite System (RTKGNSS) in base and rover configuration. They were processed on site immediately after the fieldwork to detect corrupted or missing data at an early stage. Data processing and visualization were conducted using the software ApMag. Several automatic and semi-automatic processing algorithms were applied to derive optimized georeferenced greyscale images with a clip-off range between -4 nT (white) and +6 nT (black). The resulting magnetic data images were subsequently imported into a geographical information system (GIS) and interpreted separately for further integrated archaeological interpretation and analysis.

Results and Discussion The geophysical survey data show that the area around the Great Basilica had become one of the most densely populated zones of the Outer City, settled with hundreds of pit houses, usually associated with the general population. The neighbourhoods are subdivided into large yards surrounded by wooden fences. Undoubtedly, these were agricultural farms established to serve the needs of the archbishop and the rest of the clergy. Directly to the east of the fortress wall of the basilica, the largest yet discovered metal processing workshop was built, which also must have benefited mainly the archbishop’s complex. The exceptional position occupied by the Great Basilica in the urban space is best illustrated by the stone road that connects the temple with the Throne Palace in the Inner City (Fig. 16.1b). The road is massive, built of enormous limestone blocks, and has been completely preserved to this day. Churches of the Second Technological Type

There are, in total, forty-three building complexes in the Outer City. They occupy an area of 1–1.2 ha, fenced with stone walls. Their structures include residential and farm facilities. In some there are religious buildings — so-called boyar churches (Fig. 16.4). The most ordinary buildings are the chain rooms enclosing a courtyard. The churches are of the second technological type — three-nave basilicas with architectural decoration. The building complexes’ time of origin is related to their functionality and, generally, to the periodical differences in urban planning in Pliska. According to the pottery,

coins, and other finds, these complexes appeared at the end of the ninth century. Their concentrated appearance is connected to the change in the status of Pliska when the capital moved to Preslav. The post-capital period of Pliska is characterized by the settlement of the Inner City by the ordinary population and the relocation of the social elite in their fenced estates in the territory of the Outer City (Dimitrov 1992, 66; Rashev and Dimitrov 1999, 28). The complexes always include at least one massive building — the boyar’s home (Filzwieser, Aladzhov, and others 2019, 250), built more elaborately, unlike the chain buildings, which were probably the servants’ homes. But the most prominent buildings in these mansions are the churches. Some of them have rich architectural decoration. During a field survey in 2017 in the surroundings of one of these churches, many tesserae of marble mosaics in the opus sectile technique were found (Aladzhov and others 2018, fig. 8). Therefore, it is not difficult to assume that the temples were the most essential in these urban areas. Churches of the First Technological Type

Nine of the so-called ‘Pliska type’ basilicas have been excavated. Several dozen more have been located during field surveys, aerial observations, and geophysical surveys (Fig. 16.5d). The collected database testifies that there was a church in every major district of Pliska. It could be assumed that the construction programme must have been implemented with the central government’s resources to build so many temples so quickly, especially since these are the only massive stone buildings within these neighbourhoods. The question of what came first, settlement or church, is not unambiguous because there are churches in the settlements of the early construction phase of the Outer City from the pagan period. As for the settlements from the late construction phase, it becomes clear that some of them arose around churches. The temple and dwellings were most likely built together, but first, the church was built in the envisaged centre. The Great Basilica and its Surrounding Settlements

In the autumn of 2016, an area of 61 ha was surveyed north of the Great Basilica using magnetics. The data revealed hundreds of pit houses besides many other archaeological, geological, and modern structures. There are also two types of pit houses based on excavation results, both belonging to the typical Eastern European type, those with a stone oven in the north-western corner and those with a stone hearth in one of its corners (Henning 2007). Pit houses were the most popular residential buildings in the Outer City, which: ‘would

16.  the pliska-type churches, the great basilica, and their relation to the settlements in the outer city of pliska 2 47

Figure 16.5. The area around the Great Basilica was one of the most densely populated zones of the Outer City comprising hundreds of pit houses, large yards, and wooden fences (a, c) In the northern part of the survey area (b) the measurements had to bypass three already known churches whose remains are still visible on the surface. They lie on a perfect east–west axis (dashed line) with another church (d) further west, newly discovered by the measurements in 2016.

have been covered by loosely scattered rural settlement complexes of modest lodge dwellings of the sunken soil type’ (Henning 2007, 213). Earlier geophysical surveys conducted by the University of Frankfurt am Main and subsequent field surveys showed these agglomerations of structures all around the Outer City that could then

be documented in greater detail in 2016 (Aladzhov and others 2013; Filzwieser, Aladzhov, and others 2019; Schleifer 2007). As mentioned above, the buildings that form distinct clusters are not randomly scattered. They are not only spatially separated from each other but also

2 48 a n d r e y a l a dzh ov an d ro l an d fi l z w i e s e r*

by wooden fences, the remaining ditches of which can still be observed in the magnetic data (Fig. 16.5c). The two main roads are also visible in the data; one leads from the Inner City directly to the north and passes the western part of the surveyed area (Fig. 16.5a1). The other road continued the stone road further east from the Great Basilica to the north (Fig. 16.5a2). Several smaller paths are connected to this road, running in a north-western direction; however, they also could be interpreted as further enclosing ditches and thus the remains of wooden fences. Three churches (Fig. 16.5b3–5; churches no. 6, 7, and 26 in Škorpil’s numbering) were also located between these two roads, according to field surveys and their still-standing remains. As discussed above, the

churches were usually built in the centre of settlement accumulations. However, these three seem to have been located along the southern edge of a densely settled area, which is only partially visible in the surveyed field and probably continued to the north. Moreover, they are aligned on a perfect east-west axis with a 160 m and 220 m distance between each other. Following this axis another 170 m to the west, another 9.5 m wide and 10 m long building was discovered in the magnetic data, strongly reminiscent of a ‘Pliska type’ church (Fig. 16.6a, b). It shows indications of three apses and many similarities with, for example, church number 5 in Škorpil’s numbering, both in its orientation and dimensions. A direct comparison with the Great Basilica (Fig. 16.6c), however, also shows how

Figure 16.6. A comparison between the magnetic data (a) of the newly discovered church and its respective interpretation (b), and another comparison with the Great Basilica (c). (1: after Georgiev and Vitlyanov 2001, fig. 9; 2, 3: after Mihaylov 1949, 2: fig. 19b, 3: fig. 23–24.)

16.  the pliska-type churches, the great basilica, and their relation to the settlements in the outer city of pliska 249

striking the visual demarcation of such a monumental building must have been, in the shadow of which the four churches were erected. Thus, the conceptualization of the settlement, comprising also this newly discovered church, together with the three other churches in the immediate vicinity, might have been different than in the rest of the Outer City. All four churches are located at a comparable distance from each other, are oriented and aligned in an east–west direction, and might originally have been connected by a road and one continuous large settlement agglomeration to the north. This automatically leads to the question of whether these are distinct settlement structures directly connected to the Great Basilica, in contrast to the otherwise secluded settlements arranged around a single church. The area to the south of the churches is largely empty of denser settlement traces; only several smaller roads can be observed (Fig. 16.5b6), seemingly coming from the Great Basilica and leading to different parts of the settlement or maybe even the churches directly, as their continuation cannot be followed further north.

Conclusions In summary, the changes that took place in the urban planning of Pliska after the adoption of Christianity are related to the inclusion of Christian religious

buildings in all areas of urban space. The architectural appearance of the new buildings corresponds to the hierarchy in the urban space. We assume that the construction undertaken after the conversion was carried out at will and with the central government’s funds in the Inner City — the centre of the city and the settlements of the ordinary population. In the case of the Inner City this scenario is the most probable, yet it is more ambiguous for the Outer City. What we know for sure is that churches are the only massive buildings in the settlements. If we speculate on this fact, it is much more likely that the churches were not built spontaneously and almost simultaneously in all the neighbourhoods but were the product of a general construction programme for the entire city. The capital’s urban planning scheme established the application of one of the new models for shaping the urban space in the early Middle Ages. The main component of this model is the churches, around which small, detached communities are grouped, located at a distance from each other within individual fortifications. Necropolises, memorials, workshops, and other areas are also found in this urban area. The central focus of urban planning is represented in the erection of the main settlement cores — representative residences of secular and ecclesiastical power — the centre of urban life. Very soon after the adoption of Christianity, the main urban emphasis fell on the churches, which represent some of the few solidly constructed buildings in the Outer City.

250 a n d r e y a l a dzh ov an d ro l an d fi l z w i e s e r*

Works Cited Aladzhov, Andrey. 2010. ‘The Byzantine Empire and the Establishment of the Early Medieval City in Bulgaria’, in Byzanz – das Römerreich im Mittelalter. Teil 3 Peripherie und Nachbarschaft, ed. by Falko Daim and Jörg Drauschke (Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums), pp. 113–58 Aladzhov, Andrey, Yanko Dimitrov, Stefan, Stamenov, Vanya, Stamenova, Hrisitna, Stoyanova, Stanislav, Ivanov, and Stanimir, Soichev. 2013. Arheologicheska karta na Pliska (Sofia: NAIM–BAS) Aladzhov, Andrey, Yanko Dimitrov, Stanislav Ivanov, Stanimir Soichev, and Hrisitna Stoyanova. 2018. ‘Archaeological Map of Pliska. Field Survey on the Territory of Pliska in 2017’, Bulgarian e-Journal of Archaeology, 8: 213–32 Dimitrov, Yanko. 1992. ‘Novi danni za arheologicheskata karta na Pliska’, in Prinosi kam balgarskata arheologiya, 1, ed. by Dimitar Ovcharov (Sofia: Arges), pp. 58–67 —— 2007. ‘Zur historischen Topographie Pliskas einhundert Jahre nach den ersten Ausgrabungen’, in Post-Roman Towns, Trade and Settlement in Europe and Byzantium. Vol. 2: Byzantium, Pliska and the Balkans, ed. by Joachim Henning (Berlin: De Gruyter), pp. 253–71 Filzwieser, Roland, Andrey Aladzhov, Jona Schlegel, Alois Hinterleitner, Nives Doneus, Hannes Schiel, Janko Dimitrov, Martin Gamon, Falko Daim, and Wolfgang Neubauer. 2019. ‘Pliska — Integrated Geophysical Prospection of the First Early Medieval Bulgarian Capital’, Bulgarian e-Journal of Archaeology, 9.2: 229–61 Filzwieser, Roland, Wolfgang Neubauer, Andrey Aladzhov, Jona Schlegel, Alois Hinterleitner, Nives Doneus, Hannes Schiel, and Martin Gamon. 2019. ‘Geophysical Archaeological Prospection of the Inner City of Pliska’, in Archaeological Discoveries and Excavations in 2018, ed. by Hristo Popov (Sofia: NAIM–BAS), pp. 462–64 Georgiev, Pavel. 1993. ‘Razkopki v Golyamata bazilika v Pliska prez 1978 i 1979 g’, in Pliska-Preslav, 6, ed. by Rasho Rashev (Sofia: NAIM–BAS), pp. 49–68 —— 1995. ‘Manastirat pri Golyamata bazilika v Pliska – sredishte na knizhovna i duhovna deynost prez X v’, in Preslavska knizhovna shkola, 1, ed. by Maria Tihova and Peyo Dimitrov (Sofia: Sv. Kliment Ohridski), pp. 332–37 —— 2007. ‘Periodisierung und Chronologie der Besiedlung und des Baugeschehens im Gebiet um die Große Basilika von Pliska’, in Post-Roman Towns, Trade and Settlement in Europe and Byzantium. Vol. 2: Byzantium, Pliska and the Balkans, ed. by Joachim Henning (Berlin: De Gruyter), pp. 361–72 Georgiev, Pavel, and Teodor Smyadovski. 1982. ‘Paraklisat pri Golyamata bazilika v Pliska’, Arheologiya, 2: 13–27 Georgiev, Pavel, and Stoyan Vitlyanov. 2001. Arhiepiskopiyata-manastir v Pliska (Sofia: Prof. Marin Drinov) Henning, Joachim. 2007. ‘Catalogue of Archaeological Finds from Pliska’, in Post-Roman Towns, Trade and Settlement in Europe and Byzantium. Vol. 2: Byzantium, Pliska and the Balkans, ed. by Joachim Henning (Berlin: De Gruyter), pp. 661– 704 IRAIK. 1905. Izvestiya russkago arkheologicheskago instituta v Konstantinopole, 10 (Sofia: Darzhavna Pechatnica) Mavrodinov, Nikola. 1949. ‘Razkopki i prouchvaniya v Pliska’, Razkopki i prouchvaniya, 3: 159–70 Mihaylov, Stamen. 1949. ‘Razkopki v Pliska prez 1945–1947 g’, Razkopki i prouchvaniya, 3: 171–225 —— 1955. ‘Arheologicheski materiali ot Pliska (1948–1951 g.)’, Izvestiya na Arheologicheskiya institut, 20: 49–181 —— 1963. ‘Razkopki v Pliska prez 1959–1961 g’, Izvestiya na Arheologicheskiya institut, 22: 5–46 —— 1983. ‘Za nyakoi harakterni cherti na balgarskiya srednovekoven grad’, in Preslav, ed. by Totiu Totev, 3 (Varna: Georgi Bakalov), pp. 188–98 —— 1993. ‘Novi danni za Golyamata bazilika v Pliska’, in Pliska-Preslav, ed. by Rasho Rashev, 6 (Sofia: Ral Colobar), pp. 22–32 —— 1995. ‘Dvortsovata carkva v Pliska’, Izvestia na arheologicheskia institut 20: 229–64 Mihaylov, Stamen, and Atanas Milchev. 1959. ‘Razkopki v Pliska prez 1955 g’, Izvestiya na arheologicheskiya institut, 22: 263–91 Milo, Peter, Andrey Aladzhov, and Tomáš Tencer. 2022. ‘Geophysical Prospection in the Outer City of Pliska’, in Archaeological Discoveries and Excavations in 2021, ed. by Hristo Popov. Miyatev, Krastyu. 1940–1942. ‘Krumoviat dvorets I drugi novootkriti postroyki v Pliska’, Izvestia na bulgarskia arheologicheski institut, 14: 73–135 Petrova, Pavlina, and Zhivko Aladzhov. 1986. ‘Arheologicheski prouchvaniya na Kompleks “A” (Obekt 40) vav Vanshniya grad na Pliska’, Godishnik na muzeite ot Severna Balgariya, 12: 37–48 Rashev, Rašo, and Yanko Dimitrov. 1999. Pliska. 100 godini arheologicheski razkopki (Shumen: Balgarska starina) Schleifer, Norbert. 2007. ‘Geophysical Prospecting in Pliska (Bulgaria): Applied Methods and Results’, in Post-Roman Towns, Trade and Settlement in Europe and Byzantium. Vol. 2: Byzantium, Pliska and the Balkans, ed. by Joachim Henning (Berlin: De Gruyter), pp. 341–50 Škorpil, Karel. 1905. ‘Postroiki v Abobskom ukreplenii’, in Izvestiya russkago arkheologicheskago instituta v Konstantinopole, ed. by Feodor Uspensky, 10 (Sofia: Darzhavna Pechatnica), pp. 62–152

16.  the pliska-type churches, the great basilica, and their relation to the settlements in the outer city of pliska

Totev, Totyu. 1984. ‘Krastovidna tsarkva pod Golyamata bazilika v Pliska’, in Sbornik v pamet na prof. Stancho Vaklinov, ed. by Vasil Gyuzelev (Sofia: NAIM–BAS), pp. 160–69 Totev, Totyu, and Pavel Georgiev. 1980. ‘Novi danni za oblika na nyakoi manastiri v Pliska i Preslav’, in Balgarsko srednovekovie. Sbornik v chest na 70-godishninata na prof. Ivan Duychev, ed. by Vasil Gyuzelev (Sofia: Nauka i izkustvo), pp. 130–36 Uspensky, Feodor. 1905. ‘Istoriko-arkheologicheskoye znacheniie Aboby i yeya okrestnostey. Raskopki. Naimenovanie drevnyago poseleniya’, in Izvestiya russkago arkheologicheskago instituta v Konstantinopole, ed. by Feodor Uspensky, 10 (Sofia: Darzhavna Pechatnica), pp. 1–15 Vaklinov, Stancho. 1977. Formirane na starobalgarskata kultura (Sofia–Nauka i izkustvo) Vasilev, Radoslav. 2007. ‘Ergänzende Angaben zur frühmittelalterlichen Siedlung auf dem Gebiet der Großen Basilika’, in Post-Roman Towns, Trade and Settlement in Europe and Byzantium. Vol. 2: Byzantium, Pliska and the Balkans, ed. by Joachim Henning (Berlin: De Gruyter), pp. 373–82 Vitlyanov, Stoyan. 2000. ‘Novootkrit stopanski kompleks v Pliska (predvaritelno saobshtenie)’, Izvestiya na Natsionalniya istoricheski muzey, 11: 283–91

2 51

Lász ló Ferenczi and Mária Vargha

17. Spatial Patterns as Historical Proxies A Case Study on the Development of the Early Church Network in Veszprém County (Hungary)

A bs t r act  Veszprém, the centre of the first diocese of Hungary (founded in c. 997) and an important royal centre throughout the high Middle Ages, played a significant role in the Christianization process and doubtless also in the development of the network of rural churches. Both as a diocese and as an early county, Veszprém has been the focus of historical research, yet little is known about its lowest ecclesiastical network, particularly in the earliest period. Previous analysis of large-scale archaeological data has suggested that the earliest phase of the rural church network could be tied to royal estates. In this paper, we propose a hybrid approach to investigate and contextualize the development of the church network. The eleventh- and twelfth-century situation is mostly approachable through archaeological data. However, the thirteenth century brought significant changes: the legal formation of parishes, the colonization of the peripheries, and a boom in church foundations. These processes can be traced in historical documents. It is also to be noted that the Mongol Invasion of Hungary in 1241– 1242 resulted in major changes in rural settlement and ecclesiastical networks; however, in Veszprém County, its effects were less dramatic. Thus, we may presume that due to the more organic development of the rural settlement network in the Middle Ages, it is feasible to implement a retrogressive historical analysis to study the rural church network of Veszprém County in the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries, contextualizing archaeological evidence with historical data from later periods, with a particular focus on the land ownership patterns and the church foundations in different periods.

T

K e y wo r ds  Church organization, GIS, retrogressive analysis, medieval Hungary, ecclesiastical history

T

László Ferenczi • ([email protected]) is a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Prague. He is the principal investigator of the project ‘Monastic manors and the landscape impact of Cistercian estate management: A landscape archaeological and historical ecological study on Plasy Abbey’ funded by the Czech Science Foundation (GAČR). He is also the recipient of a PRIMUS grant, supporting his currently running project on “Fluvial anthropospheres in the medieval and early modern periods - case studies from the Czech Republic and Hungary. Mária Vargha • ([email protected]) was the PI of the project ‘Empowering the Voiceless. The Role of the Rural Population in State Building and Christianization in East-Central Europe’, conducted within the PRIMUS scheme, and the Lead Agency WEAVE tri-lateral project REPLICO conducted at Charles University, Prague, and in cooperation with the Naturhistorisches Museum Vienna and the Slovenian Academy of Sciences. She has also obtained an ERC StG grant titled ‘RELIC – Religiopolitics – The Imperium Christianum and its Commoners’, with which she returned to the University of Vienna. Her research is mainly focused on the material culture, social and landscape archaeology of the high Middle Ages, as well as on digital humanities, with a particular focus on GIS and network analysis of diverse archaeological and historical data. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 253–269. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138121

254 l á s zló f e r e n c z i an d m ár i a varg h a

Introduction The county of Veszprém was most probably the earliest unit of state administration organized within the territory of the Hungarian Kingdom (Fig. 17.1); however, the precise date of its creation is not known. Székesfehérvér, Esztergom, and Veszprém were the early centres, with royal castles where members of the Árpád dynasty resided.1 Veszprém was also the seat of the earliest established diocese, and the historical context of its foundation is better known than that of the county. On the coronation mantle of King St Stephen, the portrayal of his wife, Gisella, hints at the role of the Queen as fundator ecclesiae, and the cathedral church of Veszprém, dedicated to Saint Michael, was mentioned as early as 1002, in the foundation charter of the Abbey of Pannonhalma. This connection inspired — partly questionable — assumptions in church historical tradition concerning both Veszprém’s role as the residential, coronation, and burial site of the Hungarian queens and the role of the Veszprém bishops as the queens’ chancellors (cf. Zsoldos 2019; Zsoldos 2020, 72, 99–101). Regarding these assumptions, an important indication of its importance is the fact that Margaret, King Béla IV’s daughter, spent her early childhood in Veszprém, in the Dominican nunnery dedicated to St Catherine, which had been founded in 1240 by the bishop of Veszprém, Bartholomeus. Despite the importance of Veszprém in the early secular and ecclesiastical administration, there is little material evidence of its beginnings; archaeological finds and phenomena are minute from both the time preceding the foundation of the kingdom and its first century alike, even though excavations have uncovered a tenth-century church, preceding the building of the cathedral (H. Gyürky 1960, Hegyi and others 2022, 40–42). Thus, this discrepancy makes Veszprém an interesting case study for analysing the development of the local church network and attempting to reconstruct the missing early phases.2 The history and archaeology of the county and of the diocese have generated a lot of interest and the





1 Current research argues that the power centres of the seminomadic state shifted from the regions in the Great Hungarian Plain (Nyírség, Nagykunság, Borsod) to the aforementioned Transdanubian centres sometime around the mid-tenth century. Cf. Gáll 2013; Gáll 2015; Gáll and Szenthe 2022; see also F. Romhányi 2019b on the spatial organization and infrastructural network of the Carpathian Basin (roads, ferries, monasteries, centres, etc.) and on how the earlier existing structures influenced the later situation. 2 On the establishment of the early Church in Hungary, see Koszta 2010, 2012; on secular administration see Zsoldos 2010a, 2010b, 2020. On the beginnings of Veszprém, see Solymosi 2000; Zsoldos 2000; F. Romhányi 2021; on the early cathedrals see Buzás 2020.

present study is in a favourable position to draw on a rich collection of secondary literature. As a matter of fact, comprehensive archaeological topographical surveys in Hungary began in Veszprém County3 — coordinated and published by the Institute of Archaeology of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Upon the publication of the various volumes (Bakay 1966; Éri 1969b; Bakay 1970; Éri and Mithay 1972), the need for summative assessments and more comprehensive analysis (with regard to geological, hydrological, botanical information) was noted immediately (Éri 1966). Some of these aspirations were realized later, by different scholars. Firstly, Koppány discussed medieval church sites and churches (1967), while Éri (1969a) outlined the medieval settlement historical context. Shortly thereafter, Guzsik (1979) revisited archaeological and architectural data, drawing attention to church historical and social historical contexts as well (the dedications of the churches and the social background of their foundation, i.e. royal, private, ecclesiastical ownership). It was one of the first attempts to present a complex database, however — similarly to the other above-mentioned studies — the poor-quality illustrations presented here had little informative value. Later on, Kralovánszky (1984) studied the church network in the vicinity of Veszprém, and more recently, Zsoldos (2011) discussed some aspects of the territorial organization of the county. In sum, the available studies have identified only a handful of local churches, which could be securely dated to the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Apart from the inherent problems of data taphonomy, the most discussed aspect in the literature regarding the spatial distribution of parish churches was the role of the historical road network (Stibrányi 2008, K. Németh 2014). In Northern Transdanubia and the Diocese of Veszprém, the role of two major roads was highlighted: one along the north coast of Lake Balaton, going through the Bakony Hills to the northeast, and a second, starting further to the south, from the Danube (the ford at the monastery of Pentele) and heading to Székesfehérvár, another religious centre of the country (F. Romhányi 2021). Another, northwest–southeast oriented road connected Veszprém and the centre of the Diocese of Győr. Apparently, much of the road network was in place already in Roman times (Szilágyi 2014). The concentration of eleventh-century churches were observed along these roads (particularly along the road on the north coast of the Balaton Lake), as well as around the royal centres in the Medium Regni region, northeast from Veszprém County, roughly in present-day Pest County. All in all, research generally

3 The area of the modern-day county incorporates not only the historic county of Veszprém, but also some parts of Zala County.

17.   spat i al pat t e rns as hi sto ri cal p roxies 2 55

Figure 17.1. The extent of Veszprém County and its position within the Kingdom of Hungary.4

credited the visibly lower density of eleventh- and twelfth-century churches in the northern parts of the county to the missing infrastructure and to the landscape character, i.e. the dense woodland of the Bakony Hills, which was managed in the medieval period as a royal forest. Considering the current state of scholarship, the compilation of regional topographical data is desirable to facilitate future comparative work, and the spatial frames of such compilations should ideally be the medieval counties, as noted elsewhere (K. Németh 2010). The aim of the present paper is: a.) to comprehensively review historical, archaeological, and architectural data presented in the aforementioned studies on the county of Veszprém; b.) to reconstruct the topography and chronology of medieval churches and settlements; c.) to explore spatial patterns of the early church

4 All illustrations in this chapter were created by the authors.

network, taking advantage of GIS-based methods and databases; d.) and to re-assess the aforementioned church historical and social historical aspects that influenced the development of the network. Our approach is twofold: firstly, we identify churches confidently dated to the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries, in order to observe their distribution patterns in relation to the earliest known layer of the local settlement network, traditionally interpreted as service villages, and dated to the first two centuries of the kingdom. The thirteenth century brought fundamental changes to both the settlement network and to the legal and spatial organization of the parish network and the county; nonetheless, we have included the thirteenth-century churches in the spatial analysis, as one may presume that many of them could be dated to earlier than the available historical, or art historical, evidence suggests. Secondly, we implement a retrogressive approach, contextualizing this reconstruction of the early medieval situation by drawing on data from the late medieval

2 56 l á s zló f e r e n c z i an d m ár i a varg h a

period (fourteenth to early sixteenth centuries), to see if there is any pattern or correlation emerging from this spatial comparison, which could have explanatory value from the point of view of the long-term historical development of the church network.

Materials and Methods Data on the Church Network — Chronology and Data Taphonomy

Our compilation of data is based on the revision of the aforementioned studies (Koppány 1967, Éri 1969a; Guzsik 1979; Vargha 2022), as well as on primary data retrieved from the Hungarian National Museum’s digital inventory of archaeological sites (). We considered only those sites that could be precisely located and reliably dated. Three chronological categories or groups were established, representing the a) eleventh–twelfth, b) thirteenth, and c) fourteenth–fifteenth centuries (terminus post quem). Ideally, the dating of churches is based on a synthesis of historical, archaeological, building archaeological, and art historical data, whose combination is of key importance, as all data types were significantly influenced by taphonomy, albeit in different ways. Generally, written sources are very unevenly distributed both in space and time (cf. e.g. Szabó 2005, 135), and historical references on churches do not accurately reflect their real chronologies. Archaeological excavations only yield chronologically relevant results when large-scale investigations are possible, i.e. covering larger parts of the churchyards, including graves, which can potentially yield material finds suitable for more precise dating (Vargha 2022, 40–42). As many of the churches were rebuilt, art historical evidence alone may provide a distorted view, and the overall number of known sites dating from the early period of Christianization (thus the eleventh and twelfth centuries) might seem surprisingly low. This can be observed particularly in more peripheral areas of the historical counties (Vargha 2022, 59–61). In conclusion, the combination of different types of evidence is essential to provide the best possible/most accurate reconstruction of spatial patterns and processes. Additional Data on the Church Network

In addition to the chronological classification of the churches, data from the papal tithe registers (1332–37) have also been processed. The lists of respective settlements in Békefi’s (1907), Koppány’s (1967), and Engel’s (2001) works have been double-checked, using the original source (Lukcsics 1899) and placenames, as

identified by Ortvay (Ortvay 1892, 276–415). Some places in the list were not considered, due to their outlying location or uncertain identification.5 Additionally, the filiation network of the parishes (filial relation/ subordination) has also been mapped, based on the eighteenth-century Pfarr Topographie.6 Despite the radical discontinuity between the medieval and early-modern structures of the ecclesiastical organization (the network of parishes and deaconries) (Hermann 2015, 19; Molnár 1998, 70–90), we consider this as a useful experiment to illuminate how exactly later data relate to the medieval situation. Furthermore, the relational data from the Pfarr Topographie may also be interpreted as a proxy, hinting at relative chronologies. Such assumptions certainly need to be checked against the available historical and archaeological data, where available. Data on Settlements

Due to the mosaic nature of both archaeological and historical evidence, it is similarly difficult to reconstruct the early settlement network (cf. Szabó 2005). In order to minimize the error of data ‘taphonomy’, we focused only on one type of settlement and source type: the network of service settlements, identified by their distinctive placenames, which inform us about the nature of the services these local communities were once obliged to perform, as members of the castle estates (Engel 2005). In the thirteenth century, changes in this ‘archaic’ system of settlements occurred, resulting from a ‘modernizing’ process, which began to unfold already before the Mongol Invasion: the administrative roles of royal centres stabilized, the itinerant character of the court diminished, and new communities of foreign settlers (hospes) were established on royal, ecclesiastical, or noble lands. With regard to the county of Veszprém, this latter process has been illustrated and discussed in detail by the example of the royal estates of Pápa and Ugod (Solymosi 1996).

5 Parishes of the Veszprém archdeaconry situated in the counties of Fejér and Tolna are: File [Füle], Egres [Sár-Egres], filial of Czecze; Hotican [Hatvan puszta], filial of Kálóz; S. Margaretha de circa Marcha [Simontornya, in Tolna Co.]. In the case of Chich, the placename has been transcribed/interpreted by Békefi as Ecsi, a farmstead within the boundary of Dég, as well as its filial church, within the district of Várpalota. He also attributed a late fifteenth-century reference to this: in 1484, the altar foundation of a canon of Veszprém is mentioned in connection to a church dedicated to BMV de Ehy (Ecsi). This identification is most probably false, and the topographic location of 1332–37 reference to Chich remains uncertain. 6 MOL Helytartótanácsi Levéltár Acta Regulationis Parochiarum (C 104) – Pfarrtopographie. For the publication of the data, see: Szaszkóné Sín 1994.

17.   spat i al pat t e rns as hi sto ri cal p roxies 2 57

Since historical research has dated the service settlements to the first two centuries of the kingdom (Heckenast 1970; Györffy 1972), the spatial analysis of their relations to early churches is apparently an intriguing possibility, particularly in a comparative perspective, covering the whole area of the medieval kingdom (Vargha 2022, 93–98). Although — generally speaking — these settlements made up only a fragment of the total network of rural settlements, in the county of Veszprém they appear to have formed a relatively dense network, which provides a good number of reference points to conduct cost-distance modelling on the location of churches relative to them. As for the reconstruction of the settlement network as a whole, we relied on Engel’s digital database and map of late medieval Hungary (2001). This consists of both point- and polygon-type data (i.e. the locations and boundaries of identified settlements) and integrates topographical information from historical topographical works and primary sources, including cartographical materials and written documents, particularly the fifteenth- and early sixteenth-century tax records produced by the Habsburg and Ottoman administration. This database provides a comprehensive reconstruction of the settlement network. However, its spatial data layers needed to be replicated — due to some inaccuracies — correctly georeferenced, the settlements accurately geocoded, and their polygon boundaries rectified and substituted with data available from other databases. To this purpose, we have used the spatial databases of the GISta Hungarorum (), and also the respective volumes of the archaeological topography of Hungary were consulted to check or correct possible localizations of the settlements and their boundaries. For example, where two or more adjoint settlements were part of the same domain, Engel’s reconstruction ignored the internal boundaries, which apparently resulted in a loss of information. In our maps, all such boundaries are shown, derived from the aforementioned GISta Hungarorum. Since the local settlement network remained fairly stable throughout the course of centuries, the relevance of nineteenth-century cartographical data does not need much explanation: topographical research often observes that settlement boundaries documented in nineteenth-century maps correspond to the medieval situation, and even the boundaries of deserted settlements (dating from the medieval period or later) can be still recognized sometimes in modern cartographical records, for example, as field boundaries or dirt roads (Éri 1969a, 207). In the process of digitization, such boundaries were added only in some instances, when, for example, deserted sites and historical settlement names could be more precisely localized, on the basis of surviving geographical names

in cartographical records or using archaeological topographical data. Furthermore, our rendition of the polygon (settlement boundary) data has kept Engel’s interpretive colouring (according to the types of noble/ecclesiastical/ royal lands), albeit with some modifications, to better reflect the earlier (thirteenth-century) situation. For example, in the thirteenth century, the territory of the royal forest (erdőispánság) also contained the lands of Ugod castle (cf. Solymosi 1996), the nearby Noszlop, as well as the lands of some service settlements, where udvarnici (service people of the court) resided (e.g. in Uzsal). In later centuries, as presented by Engel, these lands appear to have been owned already by the local nobility.

Discussion As mentioned in the introduction, archaeological knowledge is very limited in the early period of the kingdom concerning both the town and the county, despite the historical prominence of Veszprém. It is important to underline that these problems do not concern the churches solely, and that — in order to deal with the loss of information — the spatial reconstruction and analysis should ideally also involve other types of sites and phenomena, which can be related to the early church network: first and foremost the field cemeteries, whose distribution is perhaps the most directly connected to the later development of the ecclesiastical organization. Unfortunately, this is not a viable approach in this case, since — apart from the city of Veszprém and its immediate surroundings — only a couple of field cemeteries are known in this region dating from the tenth or eleventh centuries. Another possibility is the comparative examination of the relation of the church network to the contemporary settlement network (as reflected by written or archaeological records). However, this could be problematic again, as the archaeological traces of early settlements are only fragmentarily known, and their chronology is biased. Therefore, we decided to focus only on the service villages, a special type of settlement, mostly known from toponymic data, concerning which the uneven ‘distribution’, or the problem of data taphonomy, is probably less pronounced. These communities — traditionally seen as one of the earliest layers of the settlement network — were connected to royal estate centres and the itinerant court. As such, they could have played a critical role in the formation and stabilization of the rural church network, although this relationship has not been widely investigated. The country-level, general analysis of the spatial distribution of service villages in comparison with the reconstructed church network of

258 l á s zló f e r e n c z i an d m ár i a varg h a

Figure 17.2. The high medieval church network, and its correlation to service villages.

17.   spat i al pat t e rns as hi sto ri cal p roxies 259

the eleventh and twelfth centuries demonstrated that the early churches, as potential centres of the estates, were often surrounded by such settlements (for an overview of this phenomenon, along with the summary of research, see Vargha 2022, 91–100). Similarly to this large-scale analysis, the present paper approaches the problem in two ways. Firstly, Thiessen polygons have been generated around the identified eleventh- and twelfth-century churches (Fig. 17.2.c).7 Considering the small number and the significant taphonomical loss of early churches, the thirteenth-century churches have also been added as a separate group. Secondly, a cost-distance analysis was carried out for the network of service villages,8 putting the church network in a comparative spatial context. The results of these two comparative models (of church networks and service villages) complemented each other. In the case of the early churches, the analysis shows that the service villages tend to be situated primarily along the edges of the Thiessen polygons generated by the algorithm around the churches — just as observed earlier, in the large-scale analysis — although this pattern is somewhat vague due to the small number of churches as nodes. In the thirteenth century, there was a significant increase in the number of churches, which also explains their more even distribution. Furthermore, they could sometimes be found in close proximity to one another, which may reflect a ‘new’ phenomenon: the division of settlements and land ownership, starting in the thirteenth century. Interestingly, the relationship of their Thiessen polygons to the service villages shows a pattern similar to that observed in the case of the earlier church sites, reflecting the trend even more clearly that many of the settlements are situated right at the boundaries/margins generated by the model — an indication of accessibility. In reality, of course, the settlement network was presumably denser, with many more — unfortunately unidentified/unknown — settlements. It is likely, therefore, that some churches were serving multiple communities. Most importantly, however, the tentative presumption deduced from this positioning, is that some of the churches, for which the earliest available evidence is from the thirteenth century, could be of earlier origins. This reveals an interesting



7 The analysis was conducted in QGIS 3.24.3, with the SAGA NextGen Thiessen Polygon algorithm. 8 The analysis was conducted in QGIS 3.24.3, where the friction surface was created based on elevation and slopes, using the Copernicus Land Monitoring Service’s EU-DEM v1.1. For the cost-distance model, we used the GRASS algorithm r.walk. points, resulting in an anisotropic cumulative cost raster between the respective service villages, expressing the walking time in hourly sequences, showing also the ‘time borders’ between the service villages.

internal dynamic development and suggests that the chronological layers of the church network could be further segmented/refined according to spatial criteria. Finally, one additional remark concerning the relations between the road network and the churches is that there is an alignment of the Thiessen boundaries and the major road leading to Székesfehérvár. This pattern appears already in the model based on the earlier data, especially in the eastern parts, but becomes even better observable in the thirteenth-century network, reflecting the long-term historical importance of this trade route (Fig. 17.2.c–d). The cost-distance model created using the service villages also confirms the above observations. A concentration of churches could be found often along the ‘time borders’, i.e. at equal distance from two or more neighbouring points (settlements) (Fig. 17.3). Apart from a few examples where churches were situated in the immediate neighbourhood of one another, their approximate distance in most cases was one hour of walking (or about 3 km). Churches located in between the villages follow that pattern, with a maximum distance of about two hours or around 6 km from the respective settlements. Interestingly, many of the thirteenth-century churches show a similar alignment in distance, and it is also worth mentioning that along the north coast of Lake Balaton, where the respective historical documents provide a more accurate picture of the local settlement network, the average distance between the early, eleventh- and twelfth-century churches is approximately 3 km. While it is difficult to draw exact conclusions without the possibility of including the entire settlement network in this investigation, it is perhaps not a coincidence that a significant number of churches dated to the thirteenth century are situated around the one-hour borderline of the service settlements, and many have a similar distance between one another. Needless to say, not all of these churches are necessarily earlier, nonetheless, this is perhaps the group of sites that would deserve a closer examination. This pattern becomes even more pronounced when putting the settlement boundaries (thirteenth–fifteenth centuries) on the map (Fig. 17.4). Some churches were located exactly at the converging boundaries of neighbouring settlements, and in the case of these examples, their topographical position could be interpreted perhaps as an indirect proof of their earlier origin — despite the lack of written or material evidence. The relevance of this topographical situation for dating has also been noted elsewhere (Stibrányi 2017). Demographic data should be evidently considered as a proxy to the density of the church/parish networks (Romhányi 2019a). The earliest systematic tax record for Veszprém County dates from 1488, and the

Figure 17.3. The cost-distance model of service settlements and its correlation to the high medieval church network.

26 0 l á s zló f e r e n c z i an d m ár i a varg h a

Figure 17.4. The church network compared with late medieval settlement boundaries. (After Engel 2001.)

17.   spat i al pat t e rns as hi sto ri cal p roxies 261

262 l á s zló f e r e n c z i an d m ár i a varg h a

Figure 17.5. Kernel Density analysis of population data (1488).

17.   spat i al pat t e rns as hi sto ri cal p roxies 263

Figure 17.6. Choropleth map of population data (1488); with churches recorded in 1332/37; and filiation data documented in the late eighteenth century.

264 l á s zló f e r e n c z i an d m ár i a varg h a

Figure 17.7. Ecclesiastical, royal, and noble estates in the late medieval period; references on churches sorted according to chronology: 1) before the early fourteenth century; 2) early fourteenth century — roughly contemporary with the papal registers; 3) late fourteenth to early sixteenth centuries (after Engel 2001).

17.   spat i al pat t e rns as hi sto ri cal p roxies 265

Figure 17.8. Ecclesiastical, royal, and noble estates in the late medieval period (after Engel 2001) and the chronological groups of churches according to our database.

26 6 l á s zló f e r e n c z i an d m ár i a varg h a

number of tax-paying households of each settlement conscribed there is the closest we can get to medieval demographics. Although this late medieval record has been already cartographically interpreted by Éri (1969a) and critically edited by Solymosi (1984), the data have not been included in Engel’s database. As has been noted by Guzsik (1979, 165), the function of this conscription — similarly to the early fourteenth-century papal tithe conscriptions — was primarily economic (tax collection) and not demographic, thus, its demographic value is only approximate. Despite such concerns, the late medieval demographic situation of the county as reflected by these conscriptions may be illustrative of a few important patterns. In addition to a simple kernel density analysis, a choropleth map has been produced and approximate population density values (N/km2) were calculated for each settlement, based on the ratio of household numbers in 1488 (N) and the size of settlement areas. Household numbers were aggregated for each settlement area within the reconstructed boundaries as the sum of household numbers available for the respective medieval settlements located there. For better approximation, the area of present-day woodlands (CORINE/OSM) has been deduced from each settlement area. As an overlay, the churches referred to in 1332/1337 and relational-hierarchical data documented in the Pfarr Topographie (1785–1786) have been mapped (Fig. 17.5 and Fig. 17.6). On the one hand, the topology of these late medieval data illustrates a basic principle of church network organization, namely, the reasonable distancing of filial churches from the parishes. The radius of such links averages around 7 km (two hours walking distance), which reflects a spatiality similar to what has been observed above, in regard to eleventh- to thirteenth-century data. In spite of the discrepancies between the late and early eighteenth-century (mid 1730s) church networks and parishes in Veszprém County (for the early eighteenth century period, see: Hermann 2015, tab. 1 4), one cannot but notice the central role of parish churches mentioned in the early fourteenth-century papal tithe registers, as many of them still appear as nodes in the late eighteenth-century filiation system as well. This might emphasize both their long-term stability and their stabilizing role. On the other hand, the density of this network is particularly visible in the more northern parts of the county, which clearly connects to medieval population density. The concentration of the population was already more significant here before the devastation of the Ottoman rule in Hungary (1541–1699), which heavily impacted this region situated right in the frontier zone. A roughly evenly high population density and an even distribution of churches with relatively shorter distance links to filial churches characterize the northern part of Veszprém County (north of the Bakony Hills),

whereas in the southern part, the church network tends to be concentrated around major centres. The problem of social topography has been discussed already by Éri (1969a, 209–10), who emphasized the tripartite ‘division’ of the territory of the county: the northwest (the region around Pápa and Somlóvásárhely, with the deaconry of Pápa) was predominantly inhabited by small noble landholders, whereas most of the northeast was covered by the royal forest, and in the southeast (Veszprém and the deaconry of Veszprém) there were mixed royal and ecclesiastical lands. Our less detailed digital rendition of the previous cartographical reconstruction (Éri 1969a) was based on three basic categories of landholders (royal, ecclesiastical, noble), as also applied by Engel (2001). This map, overlaid by a chronological-categorical mapping of references on churches (as compiled by Engel) indicates that churches mentioned before the early fourteenth century are predominantly the ones on royal and ecclesiastical lands; on the other hand, references later than the fourteenth century — especially in the north-western and southern parts — are in connection to private noble lands (Fig. 17.7). The two complementary patterns jointly suggest that there is, indeed, a chronological-historical dynamic in the development of the church network, and in the case of the landholdings of the lesser nobility the creation of local churches occurred significantly later than in the case of royal and ecclesiastical estates. Based on our compilation of data (i.e. including archaeological evidence), the same differences appear even more explicitly (Fig. 17.8).

Conclusions The difficulties of reconstructing the early church network have been emphasized and some exploratory methods have been proposed in the literature already to balance the shortage of data (K. Németh 2010; Vargha 2022). A long-term view and a retrogressive approach — a rather established way of analysis in archaeological topographical works, although unusual from the perspective of historical research — and the use of spatial patterns as chronological proxies connect the above-discussed illustrations of our study, aiming to find out more about the factors influencing the distribution and network of local churches in the county of Veszprém. The historical relevance of spatial phenomena needs to be further investigated, with more scrutiny, as interpreting this type of indirect evidence and the assumption of any continuity implied by long-durée perspectives could lead to problematic/questionable conclusions (cf. Szatlóczky 2019; Szatlóczky 2020). The applied cost-distance model should be improved, incorporating a possibly

17.   spat i al pat t e rns as hi sto ri cal p roxies 267

complete reconstruction of the early settlement network, with settlements, whose early dating can be attested on the basis of the available written sources, and/or archaeological evidence to see whether the peripheral areas determined by the current model would remain as such. Despite the obvious limitations of the presented models, they seem to have grasped the dynamic spatial development or transformation of the church network from the eleventh/twelfth to the thirteenth centuries and later on. The network of service settlements represents the earliest phase and — presumably — a stable group of settlements, around which the network of local churches became denser. Among the churches dating from the thirteenth century, there could have been some for which an earlier dating seems likely, taking into account their peculiar topographical positions. With regard to the later situation, the papal tithe registers and the filiation data together with late medieval population

density and land ownership may indicate a strong correlation between such networks and the size of the local population.

Acknowledgements This study was supported by the project ‘Monastic manors and the landscape impact of Cistercian estate management: A landscape archaeological and historical ecological study on Plasy Abbey’ financed by the Czech Science Foundation (GAČR), grant No. 21–25061S (László Ferenczi), and with the financial support of the grant provided by the Faculty of Arts of Charles University, no. PRIMUS/21/HUM/019, entitled ‘Empowering the Voiceless. The Role of the Rural Population in State Building and Christianization in East-Central Europe’, implemented at the Faculty of Arts of Charles University (Mária Vargha).

26 8 l á s zló f e r e n c z i an d m ár i a varg h a

Works Cited Bakay, Kornél. 1966. Veszprém megye régészeti topográfiája. A keszthelyi és tapolcai járás, Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája, 1 (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) —— 1970. Veszprém megye régészeti topográfiája: a devecseri és sümegi járás, Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája, 3 (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) Békefi, Remig. 1907. A Balaton környékének egyházai és várai a középkorban (Budapest: Hornyánszky V.) Buzás, Gergely. 2020. ‘Magyarország korai székesegyházairól’, in Arhitectura religioasă medievală din Transilvania (Medieval Ecclesiastical Architecture in Transylvania) ix, ed. by Péter Levente Szőcs (Satu Mare: Editura Muzeului Satmarean), pp. 7–38 Engel, Pál. 2001. Magyarország a középkor végén: digitális térkép és adatbázis a középkori Magyar Királyság településeiről (Budapest: Térinfo Bt – Magyar Tudományos Akadémia) —— 2005. The Realm of St Stephen: A History of Medieval Hungary, 895–1526 (London: I.B. Tauris) Éri, István. 1966. ‘“Veszprém megye régészeti topográfiája, keszthelyi és tapolcai járás” c. munka vitája’, Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei, 5: 381–91 —— 1969a. ‘Veszprém megye középkori településtörténeti vázlata’, A Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei, 8: 199–216 —— 1969b. Veszprém megye régészeti topográfiája. A veszprémi járás, Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája, 2 (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) Éri, István, and Sándor Mithay. 1972. Veszprém megye régészeti topográfiája. A pápai és zirci járás, Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája, 4 (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) F. Romhányi, Beatrix. 2019a. ‘A középkori magyar plébániák és a 14. századi pápai tizedjegyzék’, Történelmi szemle, 61.3 (Bölcsészettudományi Kutatóközpont Történettudományi Intézet): 339–60 —— 2019b. ‘Szempontok a Kárpát-medence térszervezésének változásaihoz (5–14. század)’, in Hatalmi központok az Avar Kaganátusban, ed. by Csilla Balogh, József Szentpéteri, and Erika Wicker (Kecskemét: Kecskeméti Katona József Múzeum), pp. 399–421 ——. 2021. ‘A veszprémi egyházmegye 11. századi templomhálózata’, in ‘Capella Reginalis’. A veszprémi püspökség a középkorban, ed. by Balázs Karlinszky and Tibor László Varga (Veszprém: Veszprémi Főegyházmegyei Levéltár), pp. 241–52 Gáll, Erwin. 2013. ‘The Question of the Centres of Power in the Light of the Necropolises from the 10th Century in Transylvanian Basin. The Case of the Cluj’s Necropolises’, in 23. Internationales Symposium Grundprobleme Der Frühgeschichtlichen Entwicklung im Mittleren Donauraum. Macht Des Goldes, Gold Der Macht Herrschafts- Und Jenseitsrepräsentationen Zwischen Antike Und Frühmittelalter Im Mittleren Donauraum, ed. by Matthias Hardt and Orsolya Heinrich-Tamáska, Forschungen Zu Spätantike Und Mittelalter, ii (Weinstadt: Verlag Bernhard Albert Greiner), pp. 461‒81 —— 2015. ‘An Attempt to Classify the Stirrups Dating from the 10th Century and the First Quarter of the 11th Century in the Transylvanian Basin, the Crișana/Partium and the Banat with an Outlook to the Carpathian Basin’, in Warriors, Weapons, and Harness from the 5th–10th Centuries in the Carpathian Basin, ed. by Cosma Călin, Interferenţe Etnice Şi Culturale În Mileniile, xxii (Cluj-Napoca: Editura Mega), pp. 355–406 Gáll, Erwin, and Gergely Szenthe. 2022. Hortobágy-Árkus kora középkori temetője. Egy elit csoport hagyatéka a 8–10. századi Észak-Tiszántúlról, Archaeologica Hungarica, iii (Budapest: Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum) Guzsik, Tamás. 1979. ‘Veszprém megye középkori templomépítészetének kutatási kérdései’, A Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei, 14: 163–202 Györffy, György. 1972. ‘Az Árpád-kori szolgálónépek kérdéséhez’, Történelmi szemle, 15: 261–342 Heckenast, Gusztáv. 1970. Fejedelmi (királyi) szolgálónépek a korai Árpád-korban (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó) Hegyi, Dóra, Márk Kékesi, Virág Kristóf, and Gergely Szoboszlay. 2022. ‘The First Results of the Excavation in the Surroundings of St George’s Chapel in Veszprém in 2022’, Hungarian Archaeology, 2022.2: 38–47 Hermann, István. 2015. A Veszprémi Egyházmegye igazgatása a 18. században (1700–1777) (Veszprém: MNL Veszprém Megyei Levéltár) H. Gyürky, Katalin. 1960. ‘A veszprémi Szent György egyház és konzerválása’, Műemlékvédelem, 4.3: 136–43 K. Németh, András. 2010. ‘A középkori Magyarország egyházi topográfiai kutatása. Kutatástörténeti áttekintés’, in A középkor és kora újkor régészete Magyarországon I, ed. by Elek Benkő and Gyöngyi Kovács (Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Régészeti Intézete), pp. 271–88 —— 2014. ‘Adatok Tolna megye középkori útjainak kutatásához’, in A múltnak kútja. Fiatal középkoros régészek V. konferenciájának tanulmánykötete, ed. by Tibor Ákos Rácz, Ferenczy Múzeum Kiadványai, A. sorozat. Monográfiák, iii (Budapest: Ferenczy Múzeum), pp. 177–88

17.   spat i al pat t e rns as hi sto ri cal p roxies 269

Koppány, Tibor. 1967. ‘Középkori templomok és egyházas helyek Veszprém megyében’, A Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei, 6: 117–50 Koszta, László. 2010. ‘State Power and Ecclesiastical System in Eleventh Century Hungary’, in ‘In My Spirit and Thought I Remained a European of Hungarian Origin’ Medieval Historical Studies in Memory of Zoltán J. Kosztolnyik, ed. by István Petrovics, Sándor László Tóth, and Eleanor A. Congdon (Szeged: JATEPress), pp. 67–78 —— 2012. ‘Fejezetek a korai magyar egyházszervezet történetéből’ (DSc dissertation, University of Szeged) [accessed 8 August 2023] Kralovánszky, Alán. 1984. ‘Újabb adatok Veszprém és Székesfehérvár településtörténetéhez’, Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei, 17: 189–207 Lukcsics, József. 1899. Monumenta Romana Episcopatus Vesprimiensis, ii (Budapest: Franklin) Molnár, Antal. 1998. ‘A Veszprémi Egyházmegye a török hódoltság idején’, in Veszprém a török korban, ed. by Péter Tóth G., Veszprémi múzeumi konferenciák, ix (Veszprém: Veszprém Megyei Múzeumi Igazgatóság), pp. 70–90 Ortvay, Tivadar. 1892. Magyarország egyházi földleírása a XIV. század elején: a paṕai tizedjegyzékek alapján feltüntetve, i–ii (Budapest: Franklin) Solymosi, László. 1984. ‘Veszprém megye 1488. évi adólajstroma és az Ernuszt-féle megyei adószámadások’, in Tanulmányok Veszprém megye múltjából, – A Veszprém Megyei Levéltár Kiadványai, ed. by László Kredics, 3 (Veszprém: Veszprém megyei Levéltár), pp. 121–239 —— 1996. ‘Adatok Pápa város középkori történetéhez’, in Tanulmányok Pápa város történetéből, ed. by István Hermann (Pápa: Pápa Város Önkormányzata), pp. 31–54 Stibrányi, Máté. 2008. ‘A Sárvíz középkori településhálózatának vázlata, avagy a templom és a hozzá vezető út’, Alba Regia, 37: 189–96 —— 2017. ‘A határon álló templomok. A középkori templomos helyek és a településhálózat vizsgálata Fejér megyében’, in Magyarország Régészeti Topográfiája – Múlt, Jelen, Jövő, ed. by Elek Benkő, Mária Bondár, and Ágnes Kolláth (Budapest: Archaeolingua), pp. 369–86 Szabó, Péter. 2005. Woodland and Forests in Medieval Hungary, BAR International Series (Oxford: Archaeopress) Szaszkóné Sín, Aranka (ed.). 1994. Veszprém megye, 1773–1808, Magyarország történeti helységnévtára (Budapest: Központi Statisztikai Hivatal) Szatlóczki, Gábor. 2019. ‘A honfoglalás kori gyepű : az egyházhelyes nemesek és nyugat-dunántúli településterületük’, in ‘…ugy irhassak mint volt’ : ünnepi tanulmányok a 65 esztendős Tóth Sándor László tiszteletére, ed. by Zoltán Péter Bagi (Szeged: Szegedi Tudományegyetem Középkori és Kora Újkori Magyar Történeti Tanszék), pp. 68–93 —— 2020. ‘A nemzetségi szállásoktól a vármegyékig. Adalékok és párhuzamok Somogy megye 10–11. századi településtörténetéhez’, A Kaposvári Rippl-Rónai Múzeum Közleményei, 7 (Rippl-Rónai Megyei Hatókörű Városi Múzeum): 135–50 Szilágyi, Magdolna. 2014. On the Road: The History and Archaeology of Medieval Communication Networks in East-Central Europe, Archaeolingua (Budapest: Archaeolingua Alapítvány) Vargha, Mária. 2022. Modelling Christianisation: A Geospatial Analysis of the Archaeological Data on the Rural Church Network of Hungary in the 11th-12th Centuries (Oxford: Archaeopress Publishing) Zsoldos, Attila. 2010a. ‘A megyeszervezés kezdetei a magyar királyságban (Az “óriás” és az “átlagos” nagyságú megyék kérdése)’, in Megyetörténet. Egyház- és igazgatástörteneti tanulmányok a Veszprémi Püspökseg 1009. évi adomanylevele tiszteletére, Veszprém Megyei Levéltár kiadvanyai xxii, ed. by Istvan Hermann (Veszprém: Veszprém megyei Levéltár), pp. 299–318 —— 2010b. ‘Korai vármegyéink az újabb történeti kutatások fényében’, A Castrum Bene Egyesület Hírlevele, 11.1: 5–13 —— 2011. ‘Vár, város, ispánság és megye – Veszprém az Árpád-korban’, A Veszprém Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei, 26: 11–23 —— 2019. The Arpads and Their Wives. Queenship in Early Medieval Hungary 1000–1301 (Rome: Viella) —— 2020. The Árpáds and Their People, Arpadiana, 4 (Budapest: Research Centre for the Humanities)

Mária Vargha, Martin Janovský, and Martin Fajta

18. Empowering the Voiceless: The Role of the Rural Population in State Building and Christianization in East-Central Europe Preliminary Results about Bohemia

A bs t r act  The present paper introduces the preliminary results of the project named in the title, conducted within the Primus grant scheme at the Department of Archaeology, Charles University, Prague. The main aim of the project is the investigation and comparative analysis of the process of institutionalized Christianization in the region, thus, focusing predominantly on the establishment and contextualization of the early network of local churches. The project introduces a novel approach in which the narrative of Christianization is not constructed based on the limited written evidence, focusing predominantly on the elite, but uses primarily archaeological material that offers a much larger pool of evidence and an insight into the process among the general population. The present paper will showcase some preliminary results of this work in Bohemia and introduces the primary methodological approach — a comparative geospatial analysis that contextualizes the locations of the churches with field cemeteries and local power centres.

T

K e y wo r ds  Christianization; medieval Bohemia; proximity analysis; local churches; field cemeteries

T

Mária Vargha • ([email protected]) was the PI of the project ‘Empowering the Voiceless. The Role of the Rural Population in State Building and Christianization in East-Central Europe’, conducted within the PRIMUS scheme, and the Lead Agency WEAVE tri-lateral project REPLICO conducted at Charles University, Prague and in cooperation with the Naturhistorisches Museum Vienna and the Slovenian Academy of Sciences. She has also obtained an ERC StG grant titled ‘RELIC – Religiopolitics – The Imperium Christianum and its Commoners’, with which she returned to the University of Vienna. Her research is mainly focused on the material culture, social and landscape archaeology of the high Middle Ages, as well as on digital humanities, with a particular focus on GIS and network analysis of diverse archaeological and historical data. Martin Janovský • ([email protected]) is a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Prague. His main areas of research are anthropogenic soils, compositional data analysis, and soil micromorphology Martin Fajta • ([email protected]) is a PhD student at the Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Prague. His main areas of research are non-destructive archaeology, archaeological geophysics, and early medieval Bohemia. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 271–283. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138122

272 m á r ia va rgha , m art i n j an ovs ký, an d m art i n fajta

Introduction Around the turn of the first millennium, on the fringes of the Ottonian Empire, the political and religious landscape changed dramatically. With the Christianization of the pagan societies on its borders, the Ottonian, or later Holy Roman, Empire had significantly expanded according to the principles of the Imperium Christianum — an idea of Charlemagne that Emperor Otto I (912–973) and his predecessors had consciously revived, providing a model for the newly forming Slav and Magyar kingdoms on its eastern peripheries. However, the relations between the newly forming domains and the Holy Roman Empire and their ecclesiastical independence were quite different. The kingdoms of Poland and Hungary both gained independence politically and ecclesiastically; the latter was marked by the foundations of the Archbishopric of Gniezno in 1000 and the Archbishopric of Esztergom in 1001. The Archbishopric of Prague was only founded in 1344, and while the Kingdom of Bohemia formed as an independent kingdom along with its mentioned neighbours, it arose as part of the Holy Roman Empire (Schutz 2010; Berend and others 2013; Phelan 2014; Štefan 2022). Thus, despite the similarities in the circumstances of the process of Christianization, the history of Christianity and the political-administrative organization were fairly different in these regions. Nonetheless, the expansion of the power of the Holy Roman Empire and the institutional establishment of the lower ecclesiastical network started from the eleventh century onwards in all studied domains, which makes them excellent comparative areas for this study. Outstanding edited works are available on the second expansion of the process following the first millennium (Sanmark 2004; Berend 2007; Berend and others 2013), but synthetic works on the newly emerging Christian kingdoms on the eastern periphery of the Holy Roman Empire mainly remained within the confines of modern state borders. Additionally, no synthetic study exists that directly compares the eastern peripheries of the Empire and examines the process from the point of view of the everyday people. Furthermore, in reconstructing these developments, archaeological material has been rarely considered (for an exception, see Geary 1994; Carver 2003). Even though recent attempts have shown archaeology’s future potential in the subject (Thomas and others 2017), interpretations of Christianization and state formation are still primarily dominated by historical narratives. However, chronicles, law books, and legends contain little information about the structural development of institutionalized Christianization. Nonetheless, the process generally has been reconstructed using almost exclusively written sources.

Written evidence, though, deals typically only with the topmost echelon of the institutions, such as the foundation of bishoprics, archbishoprics, or certain monasteries. Local churches, the smallest but most numerous elements of the church system, seldom appear in written sources; thus, theories about the development of the Church as an institution often lack direct evidence about the local church network. Consequently, reconstructions of the early church system failed to consider the part that directly affected the majority of society — the masses of commoners in contact with them, whose conversion was vital for providing income for the Church and creating the ‘body’ of the Christian community, which, ultimately, secured the ruler’s power. The potential in analysing Christianization, focusing on the local church network of the general population in its context, has been demonstrated in the example of Hungary (Vargha 2022). Following that model, our current project aims to take one step further and create a comparative study by applying the same methodology to medieval Bohemia. The present paper showcases some preliminary results of the analysis of the historical region of Bohemia and discusses the benefits and drawbacks of the applied methodology.

Christianization in Czech lands and its Historiography When discussing the events of the Christianization of Bohemia, first of all, it is imperative to differentiate between Bohemia and Moravia, as while the events in the two territories are connected, their courses ran separately. The Moravian princes were baptized in 831 by the bishop of Passau, and in 845, fourteen Bohemian princes followed their example. Not surprisingly, a political agenda stood behind their conversions; both the Moravian and the Bohemian rulers were seeking peace with the Frankish Empire. Nonetheless, according to the current view of research, their baptism probably had negligible effects on their subjects. Although an archpresbytery of the Bishopric of Passau is known to have existed in Moravia, there was no actual church infrastructure in the region. The conversion of the Moravian population can be dated from the 860s, when, on the ruler’s request, the missionaries Constantine and Methodius arrived to convert people, using Slavic language and liturgy. During the last third of the century, Svatopluk, the ruler of Moravia, made several attempts to establish an independent Church of Great Moravia. This organization, however, never became stable. Not much later, the churches — and the state — were crushed by the attacks of the Hungarians in 906/907.

18.   e mpow e ri ng t he voiceles s 2 73

Bohemia, however, survived. In 873, to strengthen the ties with Svatopluk, the ruler of Bohemia at the time, Prince Bořivoj (later the first Přemysl ruler), was baptized, and Svatopluk became his godfather. The Bohemian Church formally belonged to the bishopric of Methodius, and even though churches were built in the main centres of Bohemia, the network of churches was loosely scattered. The first attempt to create an institutionalized Church was by Spytihňev I (r. 889–915), who created a system of administration in Central Bohemia, based on strongholds, each with a church. In 895, submitting to King Arnulf, the Church officially fell under the jurisdiction of the Bishopric of Regensburg. Differences in religious agenda entered into the sphere of dynastic conflict, as the infamous example of Queen Ludmila, Drahomira, and the dukes Václav and Boleslav shows, ending with the murder of Duke Václav by his brother. Ironically, the rest of Bohemia was integrated into the system only around the mid-tenth century by no other than Boleslav I (c. 935–972), who overcame the other princes and united the country. The full implementation of institutionalized Christianity and the creation of the church network is thus considered to be Boleslav’s individual operation, with the addition of the sardonic act of promoting his deceased brother, Václav, as a saint, doubtlessly strengthening the position of the dynasty in the Christian world. However, the foundation of the first bishopric in Prague, with the diocese belonging under the Archdiocese of Mainz, was delayed until 973–976 due to the lack of permission from the bishop of Regensburg and the emperor. Besides this long delay, the fact that the first archbishopric was established only in 1344, as mentioned above, also shows the dependent status of the Bohemian Church. The report of Cosmas from the beginning of the twelfth century, saying that Czechs villagers are more half pagan than Christian, was often quoted along with the struggles of Adalbert as bishop of Prague when discussing the development of the church network, and the general state of conversion, based on which it was suggested that a more serious Christianization should be expected from 1039 by Duke Břetislav (r. 1034–1055). The number and general distribution of churches is debated; the minimal written evidence has been interpreted in different ways (for a synthetic overview of the events of the Christianization of Moravia and Bohemia, see Sommer and others 2007; Berend and others 2013, 110–17; Štefan 2022). Christianization, having a critical importance in the formation of the states in the region, has been the focus of — predominantly historical — studies for decades and has been investigated in great detail in Bohemia and the entire region. However, studies

mostly remained in national contexts. (Concerning Bohemia, see, for example: Třeštík 1991; Boháčová 2009; Sommer 2009; Třeštík and Sommer 2009; Hanuš 2011; Sommer 2012; Žemlicka 2014; Štefan and Varadzin 2014; Kalhous 2015). The main themes of research aligned with the focus of similar studies in the region, and here they will be referenced only briefly. Such investigation included chronicle evidence (see, for example: Kožiak 2007; Bak 2011; Kalhous 2018), hagiographic literature, with a specific focus on dynastic saints of the age of Christianization (see some comparative works: Wood 2001; Klaniczay 2002; 2013), church networks and architecture (Merhautová 1971; Kuthan 1972; Líbal and Merhautová 1974; Fejtová and Jíšová 2015; Sommer 2017), and the problem of pagan-Christian shift (Nodl and Šmahel 2019). Comprehensive and regional studies of Christianization have also started to appear (such as Sommer 2012; Štefan and Varadzin 2014; Hardt 2018; Kalhous 2019; Štefan 2022), and some also considered archaeological material (Sommer 1996; Štefan and Varadzin 2007; 2014). With some exceptions, however, these studies do not explore the rural churches and their geospatial relations to ecclesiastical and secular centres comprehensively, nor do they include large datasets. Works contextualizing patterns of conversion in larger structures are generally scarce. Therefore, the conclusions of these works are based on limited source materials.

Study Area While the project covers the area of the whole Czech Republic, thus, historically the territories of Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia, the current pilot study will present three subregions of Bohemia: Prague, Pilsen, and Ústí nad Labem (Fig. 18.1). The three regions were chosen as each of them represents a different geomorphological unit with a different settlement structure. Prague, the historical centre and also the centre of Christianization, is conveniently located in the central part of Bohemia. Pilsen is a larger, more peripheral region of the medieval state, through which, however, passes a vital trade route linking Prague and Bavaria. Pilsen has a lot of hilly areas but also includes valleys connected mostly to its main river, the Berounka. The third studied region, Ústí, is located on the north-western edge of Bohemia. Northwest Bohemia is a fertile area with lowlands and hills. All three parts are directly connected to the old settlement area that was continuously inhabited since prehistoric times, especially Region A – Prague and Region C – Northwest Bohemia.

2 74 m á r ia va rgha , m art i n j an ovs ký, an d m art i n fajta

Figure 18.1. Map of the Czech Republic showing the historical regions of Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia, and the areas of the pilot study as follows: A) Prague, B) Pilsen, C) Ústí and Labem. Terrain data was created with the water cover and DEM from the Copernicus Land Service. (Map by Mária Vargha.)

Methodology and Aims As mentioned above, the current project aims to investigate the Christianization of common people, predominantly based on archaeological material. The methodology follows that of a preceding study on the Christianization of Hungary (for a full discussion on methodology, see Vargha 2022). In short, traces of field cemeteries, churches, and secular power centres are collected primarily from archaeological data but also historical and art historical, the former including not only published material but also recorded sites by various archaeological activities, in the present case, based on data recorded in the Digital Archive of the Archaeological Map of the Czech Republic (). The basic idea of the research is rather simple; where people lived, they should have been buried as well. As there is no evidence for a general discontinuity in the landscape, it is assumed that the field cemeteries (be they pagan, semi-pagan, or Christian) were eventually replaced by churchyards. Therefore, the churches represent the first unambiguous trace of (institutionalized) Christianization, one that can also be compared and contextualized in the physical

and social landscape. Thus, the various data layers are incorporated into a GIS system, where the positioning of the different chronological layers of churches is analysed compared to the most important power centres and field cemeteries to discover any discrepancies in the continuity of the landscape. In the present case, we decided to conduct a simple analysis by drawing a buffer with a 2 km radius around the churches, to examine their relations to field cemeteries. The reason for choosing this particular distance was twofold; while in the case of Prague, the density of churches requires a smaller measurement, this cannot be said of the remaining two study regions. Nonetheless, the high density of field cemeteries in Northwest Bohemia, and the generally loose distribution of sites in the Pilsen region, makes this distance applicable as well, particularly to interpret the connection of field cemeteries in the immediate or close proximity of churches, highlighting the issue of transitional cemeteries. In order to contrast this artificial distance, the ‘territoriality’ of the churches was examined by calculating Thiessen polygons around them, this time, without chronological differences. This algorithm reveals proximal areas delineated by polygonal boundaries where each line shows an equal

18.   e mpow e ri ng t he voiceles s 2 75

distance between the two nearest churches, recreating a version, even if it is one that is doubtlessly distorted by taphonomical loss and differences in research intensity, of the local church network (cf. Vargha 2022). At this point, it is essential to mention that as the project is still ongoing, our data is incomplete. While the data on field cemeteries is complete in the presented case studies, the list of churches is compiled only from published sources and, therefore, aligns with the data on which most historical theories were built about the formation of the early church network. Still, this comparative perspective also provides an excellent opportunity to investigate and discuss the different taphonomical aspects and the various shortcomings of the data. Finally, regarding the chronological framework of the study, we aim to look for the clearest signs possible. As tracing conversion based on church source material is highly ambiguous, the starting point of our investigation is the foundation of the bishoprics and the beginnings of institutionalized Christianization; therefore, we focus on the material primarily from the eleventh and twelfth centuries. However, due to the dating issues of churches, the thirteenth-century churches are also considered. Churches are a relatively complex source of data, and most of them are difficult to date, principally as both archaeological, but especially art historical, studies focus on standing churches, which, however, went through several building phases. The taphonomy of the earliest phase is always the greatest, and it is especially difficult to recover transitional cemeteries or the earlier, less structurally sound predecessors of these buildings (for an extensive discussion about this issue, see the chapter by Martin Čechura in the present volume). The data presented in this study shows the most probable dating of the oldest building phase by

comparing several art-historical and archaeological views (Merhautová 1971; Kuthan 1972; Líbal and Merhautová 1974; Sommer 2001). Those churches were included that were dated between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries and had architectural elements in Romanesque style. For the three study areas, a total of 154 churches were collected. Nonetheless, the data presented on churches rely mostly on still-standing monuments and, therefore, lack the pool of evidence that was not considered by the historical theories and interpretations about the Christianization of Bohemia. Considering this, comparing the distribution of churches to field cemeteries is especially crucial, as it is expected that — based on the evidence of coins in graves — by the very beginning of the twelfth century at the latest, burials would have shifted from field cemeteries to churchyards. In Bohemia and Moravia, the youngest coins in field cemeteries were minted at the end of the eleventh century, quite exceptionally from the first decades of the twelfth century (Štefan and Varadzin 2014, 362–64). Therefore, it is expected that by the beginning of the twelfth century, a basic network of churches should have existed, not only in the central hillforts but also among the general population, providing them with a place not only for worship but also for burial. In the present study, field cemeteries were collected both from published material and the mentioned online archive of the AMČR, restricting the sites to those that fell within the RS4 chronological category (1000–1200 ad), and, therefore, contemporaneous with the period of institutionalized Christianization. For the three study regions, altogether 375 field cemeteries were collected. Before discussing each individual region in detail, it is worth considering only the distribution proportions,

Figure 18.2. Frequency of occurrence of field cemeteries and churches in the selected study regions. (Map by Mária Vargha.)

2 76 m á r ia va rgha , m art i n j an ovs ký, an d m art i n fajta

both regarding field cemeteries and churches, summarized in a chart (Fig. 18.2). It is very visible that the number of field cemeteries is much higher than that of churches, even though their timespan is much more restricted; while the churches are dated from the ninth to the thirteenth centuries, the included field cemeteries’ chronology barely goes beyond the eleventh century. This can partially be explained by the nucleation processes induced by the foundation of churches, but it cannot account for the entire phenomenon. At first, it has to be pointed out that only those churches appear in the database for which either archaeological evidence confirmed its early dating or, as was most often the case, there was preserved Romanesque architectural evidence. There, however, taphonomy has to be kept in mind, as many later reconstructions have wiped out the visible earlier architectural elements. Furthermore, it is striking that, except in the case of Prague, the number of churches in the twelfth century is almost negligible. It is also notable, however, that the number of churches dated to the thirteenth century is lower in Prague than in the other two regions. Finally, it is also important to say that the proportion of field cemeteries to churches is also quite different. While Pilsen shows a rather balanced distribution, that cannot be said of Prague, and especially not Ústi, specifically when considering that Ústi has the highest number of field cemeteries, but almost no churches were identified there until the thirteenth century. In the following, these issues will be discussed in detail in each respective study area. Results and Discussion A: Prague (Fig. 18.3)

Not surprisingly, the density of all sites was the highest in the case of Prague, the historical centre of the Czech lands in the central part of Bohemia. Geomorphologically, Prague is divided by the course of the Vltava River, which separates these parts of the city, with the only obstacle in its flow the spur at Prague Castle. The earliest settlement cores were concentrated around Prague Castle, predominantly in the adjacent Lesser Town and Vyšehrad (Klápště 2016). The present-day Old Town area was also inhabited in the early period, but it was insignificant compared to the other two settlement cores. This part of the town started to develop about a century later than the areas around the two hillforts but flourished already in the eleventh and twelfth centuries but expanded significantly outside of the area of the current Old Town from the thirteenth century onwards (see also the study of Katalin Szende in this volume). The picture seen from the distribution of sites somewhat corresponds to this idea. The oldest church, the Church of the Virgin Mary (Prague Castle), dates

to the end of the ninth century (Frolík and Smetánka 1997; Štefan and Wihoda 2018), and, not surprisingly, the appearance of field cemeteries is also very dense around the castle, which is not only the earliest centre but also one of the most well-researched (for a synthesis about the field cemeteries in the Prague area see: Havrda and Žd’ásrská 2017; Havrda and Tryml 2021). While there is also a concentration of field cemeteries around Vyšehrad, it is less dense in comparison to the Old Town area, which could partially be explained by the presence of early churches in and near the former site. The earliest churches are all associated with the two hillforts; around Prague Castle, there is a ninth- and two tenth-century churches, and both there and in connection with Vyšehrad eleventh-century churches were identified. In the Old Town area, with one exception, churches are dated from the twelfth century onwards, which is also generally the largest density of churches. It is also quite visible that while there is a concentration of churches and cemeteries in the three cores of the city, the church network in the areas further out is looser and corresponds well to the lands adjacent to Prague, which could be partially explained by a naturally looser network in the peripheries, but also with the state of research. The field cemeteries appear predominantly in the basin of the tributaries of the Vltava River, where presumably the settlements in these areas were located. The examination of the territoriality of the churches by the 2 km buffers revealed exciting results. In many cases, including both twelfth- and thirteenth-century churches, field cemeteries can be observed within or very near to this buffer area, and in some cases, in the immediate proximity of the churches, suggesting various ways of the transition of burials. In the case of field cemeteries located nearby thirteenth-century churches where no earlier buildings can be found, the existence of an earlier church can be presupposed. In the areas where field cemeteries appear but no churches are located nearby, it would be perhaps beneficial to compare them to the distribution of churches registered in the fourteenth century, which are often the first record of churches that might have been standing for centuries. The lack of data in the peripheral areas is also detectable in the comparison by the Thiessen-polygons drawn around the churches and the location of field cemeteries. In the centre, an interesting phenomenon can be seen; the field cemeteries align nicely near the edges of the polygons. This is even more striking, as a similar comparative analysis of field cemeteries and churches showed the same results in Hungary (cf. Vargha 2022). However, this pattern is less and less observable towards the peripheries, especially in areas where field cemeteries are present without churches. Considering that field cemeteries were generally located outside of the settlements, this spatial arrangement may lead to

18.   e mpow e ri ng t he voiceles s 2 7 7

Figure 18.3. Prague. 1) The distribution of field cemeteries in comparison with a 2 km buffer drawn around churches dated to the ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries. 2) The Thiessen network of all the churches combined and their relation to field cemeteries. (Map by Mária Vargha.)

Figure 18.4. Pilsen region. 1) The distribution of field cemeteries in comparison with a 2 km buffer drawn around churches dated to the ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries. 2) The Thiessen network of all the churches combined and their relation to field cemeteries. (Map by Mária Vargha.)

278 m á r ia va rgha , m art i n j an ovs ký, an d m art i n fajta

18.   e mpow e ri ng t he voiceles s 2 79

several hypotheses. First of all, a certain continuity of the settled areas may be presumed. Secondly, it is also quite intriguing that in many cases, except for the very central areas, only one field cemetery is associated with one or multiple polygons, suggesting that more than one community could have used a graveyard and also that a designated burial place might have been created for the community as a whole, something that is also a characteristic of the later churchyards. Nonetheless, it has to be also kept in mind that archaeological activities in centres are always more prevalent, and thus evidence decreases towards the peripheries. In a future study, it would be worth comparing a Thiessen network drawn around the field cemeteries with the location of churches dated up to the mid-fourteenth century, creating a reverse analysis that might confirm some of the ideas drawn above. B: Pilsen Region (Fig. 18.4)

Region B –Pilsen is located approximately 40 km southwest of Prague. It is a primarily hilly area, through which flows the Berounka River, formed by the confluence of the Mže and Radbuza rivers near the region’s capital, Pilsen. The elevation rises on the southern edge of the region, and the landscape takes on a mountainous character. The general distribution of sites shows a contrast to Prague; field cemeteries and churches appear much more loosely, primarily in the river valleys, and only a fraction of the churches can be dated before the thirteenth century. The overall situation might be explained by two factors: the region’s peripheral and geographically less advantageous character, and secondly, the state of research. The latter is also shown by the concentration of field cemeteries in the northern part, in the basin of the Mže and Berounka rivers, along which an important road connecting Bavaria and Bohemia ran (Schejbalová 2010; 2011), where, despite the continuous chain of field cemeteries, churches are almost entirely missing. Finally, a conspicuous difference between the northern and southern parts should be mentioned. Opposite to the situation described above, in the southern part of the region, around the town of Sušice and the hillfort of Prácheň, a concentration of churches dated exclusively from the thirteenth century and an almost complete absence of field cemeteries is observable. The missing field cemeteries are especially prevalent as the early hillfort would presume some settlement concentration there, at least in its proximity. The state of research can partially explain the missing sites, but the character of the region should also be considered; mountainous regions are generally colonized later than the lowlands, even though the presence of the early centre presupposes at least a smaller core that could sustain it.

Furthermore, the unfavourable economic situation of the region might also have played a role, which resulted in the better preservation of the thirteenth-century architecture and church network. Despite the general observation of various types of missing data in each part of the region, some conclusions and a limited comparison of the positioning of field cemeteries and churches can be drawn. With the exception of the mentioned river basins completely missing churches, field cemeteries tend to appear in the proximity of churches, dated mainly to the thirteenth century, a discrepancy that implies the existence of earlier sacral buildings in those areas and also shows a variety of ways of transitioning from field cemeteries to churchyards. While the data presented does not contradict the general theory of a later colonization, especially of the mountainous peripheries, the presence of field cemeteries in the western and southern edges of the region suggests otherwise. More precise conclusions could only be drawn with a more intensive archaeological survey of the southern parts targeting the identification of field cemeteries or early settlements. Concerning the northern areas, a similar reverse analysis, as suggested in the case of Prague, could draw exciting results about the missing churches in the Mže and Berounka basins. C: Ústí Region (Fig. 18.5)

The study region C – Ústí nad Labem is located in the northwest part of Bohemia, approximately 30 km from the border of Prague. The region can be morphologically divided into two parts. Half of the region comprises lowlands with the rivers Elbe and Eger; the other half includes Central Bohemian Uplands and the Ore Mountains. The Eger River flows through the area from west to east, and the Elbe River from south to north. A combination of the issues discussed in Prague and Pilsen can be seen concerning the distribution of sites. The northern part of Ústi, comprised of higher mountains, seems uninhabited based equally on the churches and field cemeteries. However, while the latter testifies that the central part of the region in the river valleys was densely and evenly populated from the eleventh century onwards, this is not reflected in the network of churches. Only a fraction of them, generally in connection to the four main centres — Žatec, Louny, Litoměřice, and Bílina — can be dated prior to the thirteenth century. The otherwise even distribution of field cemeteries gets denser around these centres, showing their contemporary importance. The distribution of churches is quite patchy compared to the field cemeteries. The first church foundations in the region are also associated with the main centres (Žatec, Litoměřice). More churches, dated to the twelfth century, appeared exclusively in the Elbe basin,

280 m á r ia va rgha , m art i n j an ovs ký, an d m art i n fajta

Figure 18.5. Ústí region. 1) The distribution of field cemeteries in comparison with a 2 km buffer drawn around churches dated to the ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries. 2) The Thiessen network of all the churches combined and their relation to field cemeteries. (Map by Mária Vargha.)

18.   e mpow e ri ng t he voiceles s 2 81

which connected the region directly with Prague. The majority of the churches in the region are dated to the thirteenth century. While their distribution is quite even in the areas where they appear, there are large parts where no churches were identified, despite the solid appearance of field cemeteries, suggesting that a good part of the churches potentially have disappeared without any traces. The taphonomical loss of the earlier churches is even more prevalent when comparing their distribution to field cemeteries. The majority of these later churches have field cemeteries either in their near proximity or near the 2 km radius buffer around them, suggesting a gap in continuity, which, as above, can be explained by an existing earlier church network that has disappeared without much trace. Due to the patchy church network, the correlation between field cemeteries and the Thiessen-polygons of the churches is harder to interpret. Nonetheless, in those areas where the churches show a uniform density, a convergence of field cemeteries nearby the churches and also along the borderlines can be observed, allowing similar conclusions described in connection with Prague. Furthermore, it seems that this area could also benefit from a reverse comparison with the fourteenth-century church network, depending on how the inclusion of the archival data from the AMČR will modify the image of the church network.

Conclusions The proximity analysis of churches and field cemeteries in the present pilot study, comparing three regions of medieval Bohemia, has revealed three crucial preliminary results. First of all, as was expected, significant

regional differences can be expected not only due to the diverse character of the physical environment and the distance from the centre, but also due to the state of research. Connected to the latter, it seems that not even the thirteenth-century church network appears to reveal all those sites where later church buildings might hide their earlier predecessors. This calls for the inclusion of fourteenth-century churches in the analysis, as they can lead to a more precise understanding of the continuity and transition of field cemeteries and churches. Finally, while this analysis at this point does not seem to be suitable to trace the differences between the eleventh- and twelfth-century church networks, it could be achieved by the closer analysis of those sites where churches and field cemeteries are located in each other’s proximity. Nonetheless, before the completion of the database of churches with unpublished archival archaeological data, final conclusions are yet to be made. The presented results are only the first impressions of the data analysis in the selected regions. Needless to say, further and more complex analysis is needed — including the comparative analysis of the whole study area and contextualization of the results of the analysis with historical theories.

Acknowledgements This study has been published with the financial support of the grant provided by the Faculty of Arts of Charles University, no. PRIMUS/21/HUM/019, entitled ‘Empowering the Voiceless. The Role of the Rural Population in State Building and Christianization in East-Central Europe’, implemented at the Faculty of Arts of Charles University.

282 m á r ia va rgha , m art i n j an ovs ký, an d m art i n fajta

Works Cited Bak, János M. 2011. ‘Christian Identity in the Chronicle of the Czechs by Cosmas of Prague’, in Historical Narratives and Christian Identity on a European Periphery, ed. by Ildar H. Garipzanov (Turnhout: Brepols), pp. 167–82 Berend, Nora (ed.). 2007. Christianization and the Rise of the Christian Monarchy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Berend, Nora, Przemysław Urbańczyk, and Przemysław Wiszewski (eds). 2013. Central Europe in the High Middle Ages: Bohemia, Hungary and Poland, c. 900–c. 1300, Cambridge Medieval Textbooks (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Boháčová, Ivana. 2009. ‘Christianizace české společnosti a vznik významných sakrálních center (příklad Staré Boleslavi)’, in Kosciół w Monarchiach Przemyslidów i Piastów, ed. by Józef Dobosz (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie), pp. 87–97 Carver, Martin. 2003. The Cross Goes North: Processes of Conversion in Northern Europe, ad 300–1300 (Woodbridge: Boydell Press) Fejtová, Olga, and Kateřina Jíšová (eds). 2015. Městský farní kostel v českých zemích ve středověku, Documenta Pragensia Supplementa, vi (Praha, Dolní Břežany: Archiv hlavního města Prahy; Scriptorium) Frolík, Jan, and Zdeněk Smetánka. 1997. Archeologie na Pražském hradě (Prague: Paseka) Geary, Patrick J. 1994. Living with the Dead in the Middle Ages (Ithaca: Cornell University Press) Hanuš, Jiří. 2011 (ed.). Christianizace českých zemí v středoevropské perspektivě, Země a kultura ve střední Evropě, 19 (Brno: Matice Moravská) Hardt, Matthias. 2018. ‘Beiderseits der Grenze – Die Christianisierung Böhmens und der Slawen nördlich des Erzgebirges und in der Oberlausitz’, in Sachsen Böhmen 7000. Begleitband zur Sonderausstellung, ed. by Sabine Wolfram, Jiří Fajt, Doreen Mölders, and Marius Winzeler (Chemnitz: Staatliches Museum für Archäologie), pp. 127–36 Havrda, Jan, and Michal Tryml. 2021. ‘Pohřbívání na sklonku raného středověku. Pohřební areály v pražské předlokační aglomeraci v 11. až 1. polovině 13. století’, Archeologie ve středních Čechách, 25.1: 217–326 Havrda, Jan, and Anna Žd’ásrská. 2017. ‘K pohřbívání v pravobřežní části pražské předlokační aglomerace v 9. A 10. Století. Objev pohřebiště v areálu Klementina’, Staletá Praha, 33.2: 94–134 Kalhous, David. 2015. ‘Problémy formování církevní správy v českých zemích v raném středověku’, Studia Mediaevalia Bohemica, 7: 7–36 —— 2018. ‘East Meets West, West Meets East? Constructing Difference in the First Life of St Adalbert and in the Life of St Neilos’, in Greek Monasticism in Southern Italy. The Life of Neilos in Context, ed. by Barbara Crostini and Ines Angjeli Murzaku (London: Routledge), pp. 282–307 —— 2019. ‘Graves, Churches, Culture and Texts: The Processes of Christianization in the Early Middle Ages and Their Social and Cultural Context’, in The Fall of Great Moravia. Who Was Buried in Grave H153 at Pohansko near Breclav?, ed. by Jiří Macháček and Martin Wihoda (Leiden: Brill), pp. 110–29 Klaniczay, Gábor. 2002. Holy Rulers and Blessed Princesses: Dynastic Cults in Medieval Central Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) —— 2013. ‘The Cult of the Saints in Recent Historiographies of Central Europe’, Sanctorum, 10: 159–86 Klápště, Jan. 2016. The Archaeology of Prague and the Medieval Czech Lands, 1100–1600, Studies in the Archaeology of Medieval Europe (Sheffield: Equinox) Kožiak, Rastislav. 2007. ‘Conversio gentum a christianizácia vo včasnom stredoveku’, in Ružomberský historický zborník I., ed. by Peter Zmátlo (Ružomberok: Katedra histórie Filozofickej fakulty Katolíckej univerzity v Ružomberku), pp. 83– 106 Kuthan, Jiří. 1972. Středověká architektura v jižních Čechách do poloviny třináctého století (České Budějovice: Růže) Líbal, Dobroslav, and Anežka Merhautová. 1974. ‘Raně středověká architektura v Čechách’, Umění, 22.2: 160–75 Merhautová, Anežka. 1971. Raně středověká architektura v Čechách (Prague: Academia) Nodl, Martin, and František Šmahel (eds). 2019. Pohané a křesťané: Christianizace českých zemí ve středověku (Prague: NLN) Phelan, Owen M. 2014. The Formation of Christian Europe: The Carolingians, Baptism, and the Imperium Christianum (Oxford: Oxford University Press) Sanmark, Alexandra. 2004. Power and Conversion. A Comparative Study of Christianization in Scandinavia, Occasional Papers in Archaeology, 34 (Uppsala: Dept. of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University) Schejbalová, Zdeňka. 2010. ‘Pohřbívání v raném středověku v Plzeňském kraji. Výsledky nového vyhodnocení pohřebních areálů’, Acta Fakulty filozofické Západočeské univerzity v Plzni, 2010.4: 134–46 —— 2011. Raně středověká řadová pohřebiště v Plzeňském kraji, Raně Středověká Pohřebiště v Západních Čechách (Plzeň: Petr Mikota) Schutz, Herbert. 2010. The Medieval Empire in Central Europe: Dynastic Continuity in the Post-Carolingian Frankish Realm, 900–1300 (Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing) Sommer, Petr. 1996. ‘Christianizace střední Evropy a archeologické prameny’, Slavia Antiqua, 37: 137–45

18.   e mpow e ri ng t he voiceles s 2 83

—— 2001. Začátky křest̕anství v Čechách: kapitoly z dějin raně středověké duchovní kultury (Prague: Garamond) —— 2009. ‘Druhá vlna christianizace české společnosti’, in Přemyslovci. Budování českého státu, ed. by Petr Sommer, Dušan Třeštík, and Josef Žemlička (Prague: Lidové noviny), pp. 398–409, 413–17 —— 2012. ‘Der frühe böhmische Staat und die Christianisierung seiner Gesellschaft’, in Christianisierung Europas. Entstehung, Entwicklung und Konsolidierung, ed. by Orsolya Heinrich-Tamaska, Niklot Krohn, and Sebastian Ristow (Regensburg: Schnell & Schneider), pp. 261–74 —— 2017. ‘Der Übergang zu landeskirchlichen Strukturen. Christianisierung und Kirchenbau in Böhmen und Polen’, in Handbuch zur Geschichte der Kunst in Ostmitteleuropa 1, ed. by Jiří Fajt and Wilfried Franzen (Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag), pp. 222–31 Sommer, Petr, Dušan Treštík, and Josef Žemlicka. 2007. ‘Bohemia and Moravia’, in Christianization and the Rise of Christian Monarchy. Scandinavia, Central Europe and Rus’ c. 900–1200, ed. by Nora Berend (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 214–62 Štefan, Ivo. 2022. ‘Conversion and Christianization: Bohemia, Poland, Hungary and Rus’ (9th to 12th Centuries)’, in The Routledge Handbook of East Central and Eastern Europe in the Middle Ages, 500–1300, ed. by Florin Curta (Oxford: Routledge), pp. 101–20 Štefan, Ivo, and Ladislav Varadzin. 2007. ‘Počátky farní organizace v Čechách a na Moravě ve výpovědi archeologie’, in Církevní topografie a farní síť pražské církevní provincie v pozdním středověku, ed. by Jan Hrdina and Blanka Zilynská (Prague: Filosofia), pp. 33–53 —— 2014. ‘Super altare in ecclesia tua. Die Anfänge der Pfarrorganisation in den böhmischen Ländern aus archäologischer Sicht’, in Tradition – Umgestaltung – Innovation. Transformationsprozesse im hohen Mittelalter, ed. by Eike GringmuthDallmer, Jan Klápště, and Jan Hasil (Prague: Karolinum), pp. 357–72 Štefan, Ivo, and Martin Wihoda. 2018. Kostel Panny Marie na Pražském hradě: dialog nad počátky křesťanství v Čechách (Prague: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny) Thomas, Gábor, Aleks Pluskowski, Roberta Gilchrist, Guillermo García-Contreras Ruiz, Anders Andrén, Andrea Augenti, Astill, Grenville, Jörn Staecker, and Heiki Valk. 2017. ‘Religious Transformations in the Middle Ages: Towards a New Archaeological Agenda’, Medieval Archaeology, 61.2: 300–29 Třeštík, Dušan. 1991. ‘Křest střední Evropy aneb nesamozřejmost křesťanství’, Přítomnost, 2: 8–9 Třeštík, Dušan, and Petr Sommer. 2009. ‘Cesta ke křesťanské společnosti’, in Přemyslovci: Budování českého státu, ed. by Petr Sommer, Dušan Třeštík, and Josef Žemlička (Prague: Lidové noviny), pp. 240–45 Vargha, Mária. 2022. Modelling Christianisation. A Geospatial Analysis of the Archaeological Data on the Rural Church Network of Hungary in the 11–12th Centuries (Oxford: Archeolingua-Archeopress) Wood, Ian N. 2001. The Missionary Life: Saints and the Evangelisation of Europe, 400–1050 (Harlow: Longman) Žemlicka, Josef. 2014. ‘Christianizace a etatizační proces ve střední Evropě’, in Cyrilometodějská misie a Evropa: 1150 let od příchodu soluňských bratří na Velkou Moravu, ed. by Pavel Kouřil (Brno: Archeologický ústav Akademie věd ČR), pp. 22–26

Viktorie Janovská, N icolas M. Jansens, Martin Janovský, and To máš Klír

19. Spatial Analysis of Archaeological and Linguistic DataReveals the Boundaries of Frankish Power in Northern Bavaria

A bs t r act  Contact zones with a lively exchange of material culture, language, and ethnicities harbour yet untapped potential for the study of the early Middle Ages. One such zone is found in Germany’s northern Bavaria, where Slavic- and German-speaking populations came into contact on the eastern border of the Frankish Empire. A combination of archaeology and linguistics, using the tools of modern data sciences and statistical analysis, has revealed new opportunities for research. The identification of spatial differences between place names of Slavic or German origin and archaeological sources can reveal the reflexes of various socio-cultural changes. An important source of evidence for the gradual integration of northern Bavaria into Frankish power structures consists in the Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries found there. Their establishment began only after the associated funeral practice had been abandoned in the central part of the Frankish Empire in favour of burial in graveyards adjacent to churches. Our toponomastic dataset comprises place names known through historical linguistic analysis to be of Slavic origin in comparison to German place names of early provenance. Several of the analysed classes emerged within a specific socio-economic

T

Viktorie Janovská • ([email protected]) is a doctoral researcher at the Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Prague. Her main areas of research are medieval archaeology, archaeological-linguistic research, and nondestructive methods. Nicolas M. Jansens • ([email protected]) is a doctoral researcher at the Institute of Slavic Studies, Heidelberg University and the Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Prague. His primary research interests are northern European languages, language contact, toponomastics, pre- and early history, and graphematics. Martin Janovský • ([email protected]) is a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Prague. His main areas of research are anthropogenic soils, compositional data analysis, soil micromorphology. Tomáš Klír • ([email protected]) is an associate Professor of Archaeology at Charles University, Prague. His primary research interests are landscape history, onomastics, rural archaeology, and social and economic history in the Middle Ages and the early modern period. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 285–300. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138123

286 v ik to r ie j a n ovs ká, n i co l as   m . j an s e n s, mart i n janovsk ý, and to máš k lí r

context, such as names bearing the forms /‑hausen/ and /‑hofen/, which are related to royal and aristocratic estates. This paper presents the results of point pattern analysis involving linear modelling and kernel density estimation (KDE). It thereby outlines historical trends observed for Bavaria based on the confrontation of the archaeological evidence with that of toponomastics.

K e y wo r d s  Bavarian history; Frankish empire; Slavic settlement; GIS; toponomy; archaeology; burial rites

T

Introduction In this pilot study on the example of the Bavaria Slavica region, we present the possibilities offered by current methods of statistical and spatial point pattern analysis in the study of linguistic and cultural contact zones. We employed two geospatial analytical methods: linear modelling based on Pearson’s correlation coefficient and kernel density estimation (KDE). In this way, we decoded spatial trends in the distributions of a few selected examples of toponyms as indicators of Slavic- vs. German-speaking communities and in comparison to archaeological evidence, represented by the specific category of Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries, as a means to outline the expansion of Frankish state-building there. The historical settlement processes that occurred on the eastern edge of the Frankish Empire cannot be described in detail here, thus we refer the reader to the relevant literature (for the Frankish territory: Bosl 1969; Steidle 1989; Störmer (ed.) 1999, 42–100; Schmale and Störmer 1997; Merz and Schuh (eds) 2004; Bergmann and others (eds) 2007/22008; Hardt 2007; Andraschke 2016; for the Bavarian territory: Häusler 2004; Stieldorf 2012; Hensch 2012; 2013). Although the expansion of Frankish power structures and ecclesiastical organization in northern Bavaria is at least generally recorded in historical documents, little is known about the concrete impact on the rural population. The scarce written sources attest to the Christianization of ethnic Slavs (c. 750–1050); recent research has nevertheless made evident that perceived ‘Slavic’ ethnicity in Bavaria was tied not only to monolingual Slavic speakers, but also to a linguistically bilingual, sometimes German-speaking population (Klír 2020, 233–35). A similarly fluid boundary has been identified in the case of grave fields as well as so-called Slavic pottery (Klír 2020, 240–51). Northern Bavaria therefore appears today as a laboratory space for effective research on the complex relationship between ethnic and religious identities and the process of early state formation, Christianization, and the spread of

the Slavic and German languages. The present study makes a methodological contribution to this research. With respect to toponomastics, we made use of data sources available from GeoNames to produce an initial georeferenced dataset for Bavaria, which we then elaborated based on linguistic analysis and in reference to the works of especially Ernst Schwarz (1960), Ernst Eichler (1962), Wolf Armin Frhr. von Reitzenstein (1991–1992; 2006; 2009; 2017), Ernst Eichler and others (eds) (2001; 2006), and volumes of the Historisches Ortsnamenbuch von Bayern (HONB, 1951–). Note, however, that some geographical names in north-eastern Bavaria have been the subject of controversy, and existing interpretations continue to be revised (most recently in the studies of W. Janka and H. Bichlmeier, e.g. Janka 2011; 2012; 2016; Bichlmeier 2019; 2021a; 2021b; 2023). With respect to archaeology, the early medieval burial sites for northern Bavaria were comprehensively summarized in Ralf Pöllath’s (2002) dissertation. The chronology and cultural interpretation of the cemeteries is nevertheless constantly being revised ( J. Haberstroh 2007/22008, 177; C. Haberstroh 2004, 87–88; Losert 2007/22008, 144–48; 2009, 242–52; Wintergerst 2007/22008, 179). Tomáš Klír (2015; 2016; 2020) has given an overview of the settlement names and archaeological evidence in the region of northern Bavaria. Based on the spatial relationship between different types of toponyms, hydronyms, and archaeological findings, he has formulated several conclusions about the chronology of the spread of the Slavic language in Bavaria, the social context of language contact, and the indirect relationship between the Slavic language and ethnicity (Klír 2020). On the methodological level, however, he relied on manual plotting and his subjective evaluation of the resultant maps. In this study, we present a means of testing the existing findings using current statistical and spatial methods. Of course, the results published here represent merely a preliminary step along the way of digitally bringing archaeology and toponomastics together in the study region. We seek primarily to demonstrate the viability

Figure 19.1. A: The study region, within which Bavaria Slavica is located. B: Regions of Bavaria. Made with Natural Earth (2022) and data from the Bundesamt für Kartographie und Geodäsie (2022) (© GeoBasis-DE / BKG.)

19.   spat i al analysi s o f archaeo lo gi cal and li ngu i stic data 2 87

288 v ik to r ie j a n ovs ká, n i co l as   m . j an s e n s, mart i n janovsk ý, and to máš k lí r

of our mode of digitally designed research. At future stages, we will account for many more factors within the available data in order to produce more nuanced analyses. In this way, we believe, the combination of archaeology and toponomastics can go a long way towards the reconstruction of past human landscapes, giving insight into settlement processes, economic and political structures, and specific zones of cultural contact.

Bavaria Slavica — The Area of Research In the early Middle Ages, contact zones were areas of exchange among various human agents, each a unique melting pot of cultures, economies, and societies (Curta (ed.) 2005; Henning 2005, 24). A specific example is the area of Bavaria Slavica in the northeast of Germany’s Bavaria, where Slavic- and German-speaking populations came into contact on the eastern frontier of the Frankish Empire. The linguistic richness of this zone has been preserved in the network of place names to this day. Accordingly, Bavaria Slavica (historically terra s(c) lavorum) was a diffuse area, where German and Slavic languages intermingled in the early Middle Ages and where Slavic ethnicity was actuated. The chronology of language contact, its geographical pattern, the proportion of Slavic speakers, and the relationship between language and the construction of ethnicity are presently the subject of systematic research, the results of which are important also in general European comparison. They contribute to the understanding of the way in which the rapid spread of the Proto-Slavic language occurred in the early Middle Ages and how ethnicity was constructed and reified in the contact zones on the periphery of the Frankish Empire (Klír 2020). Bavaria Slavica can be loosely defined geographically and based on written sources, but its boundaries remain indistinct. It is primarily situated between the Main and Danube basins, where two linguistically and geographically differentiated historical territories exist. There was a Franconian territory (Upper and Middle Franconia) and a Bavarian territory (Upper Palatinate), which are separated from one another by the mountain barrier of the Franconian Jura. While the Upper Palatinate is drained by the Naab, Franconia is drained by the Main with only its north-eastern part lying in the Saale river basin (Fig. 19.1). Researchers have reconstructed the gradual integration of these territories into the emergent Frankish Empire. The traditional concept of the ‘Franconization’1



1 Some historians use the term ‘Europeanization of Europe’, implying the spread of one particular culture through conquest and influence. This cultural homogenization of Europe was

of the Upper Main region assumes a phased spread of power structures, involving political-administrative, ecclesiastical, and economic organization (Fried 1995; Smith 1995, 185–89), represented specifically by a system of counties, marches in the sense of more tightly defined economic units (Nelson 1995, 411–12), the incumbent ruler’s estates, and the estates of leading noble families (Bachrach 2022, 97–119; Freudenberg 2013, 302–06). The overall picture is influenced by the testimony of the written sources, which are abundant with respect to the eighth and ninth centuries in the Upper Main region, thanks to the establishment of the bishopric of Würzburg and the Fulda monastery (Störmer (ed.) 1999, 42–100; Losert 2009, 223–35; Freudenberg 2013; Klír 2020, 232–36). By contrast, we lack written sources pertaining to the Upper Palatinate until the beginning of the eleventh century. Charles the Great himself may have come into contact with Slavic settlement areas during his trip to the Würzburg bishopric. According to a document from c. 826–830 (Zeumer (ed.) 1886, 317–18, no. 40), he thereafter ordered churches to be built in the region of the rivers Main and Regnitz to facilitate the Christianization of the Moinwinidi et Radanzwinidi living there, identified as sclavi (e.g. Machilek 2007/22008, 289–94; Andraschke 2013; Klír 2020, 235–36). In addition to such historical mentions of Slavs, the toponomy also testifies to the presence of early Slavic settlement in the region (e.g. Schwarz 1960).

Carolingian-Ottonian Cemeteries In the Frankish Empire, the dead were initially buried in small grave fields on the edges of the settlement oikumene. These grave fields were divided into small groups, later into short rows (the conventional German term Reihengräberfeld and Czech řadová pohřebiště descriptively relate to this arrangement), which likely reflected family relationships. In the central part of the Frankish Empire, this funeral custom went out of use during the seventh century. However, in north-eastern Bavaria, we observe a time lag, as most of the early medieval burials there can be dated to the Late Merovingian and Carolingian periods (late seventh to ninth centuries), with the youngest of the burial sites having still been in use in the early eleventh century (Schwarz 1984; Pöllath 2002; Haberstroh 2004). Even in north-eastern Bavaria, however, the grave fields did not represent a temporally homogeneous group. In the western and southern regions, the earliest are dated to the second

determined by Frankish military hegemony, as described in The Making of Europe (Bartlett 1994, 269–91).

19.   spat i al analysi s o f archaeo lo gi cal and li ngu i stic data 2 89

half or the end of the seventh century, while their abandonment and the transition to church graveyards is dated there to the second half of the eighth century or the beginning of the ninth century. By contrast, in the north of the Upper Palatinate, grave fields were not established until the ninth century. The later practice of creating burial sites next to churches is a reflection of Christianization progressing among the rural population and the establishment of a church network (see related papers in this volume: by Ivo Štefan, David Kalhous, and Jozef Šrámek, Vargha and others, and Martin Čechura 2024). Whereas in the older, grave-field inhumation burials, we regularly encounter grave goods, the dead in the younger church graveyards were accompanied only by artefacts that can be characterized as elements of (the deceased’s) clothing (Štefan and Varadzin 2007, 36). An important starting point for any research is the extensive catalogue of these burials compiled by Pöllath (2002), although its chronological and cultural-historical interpretation is subject to debate and re-evaluation (summarized e.g. by Haberstroh 2000; 2007/22008; C. Haberstroh 2004; Losert 2008; 2009; Klír 2020, 247–51). As the period when these grave fields were in use in northern Bavaria spans the reign of the Carolingian and Ottonian dynasties, they are called Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries in this context and denoted as ‘CAROL/ OTT’ in our analyses. The characteristic features of Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries are as follows: most of them were multi-generational, the dead were oriented in a west-easterly direction, and simple goods were laid in the graves. Social inequality is reflected in the furnishing of the graves; males were buried with spurs and weapons, females with gold, silver jewellery, or other precious objects (Pöllath 2002, 231). With respect to the spread of the Slavic language in Bavaria Slavica, the current discourse assumes that grave fields in the southern and western regions existed well before the Slavic language spread there, such that Slavic place names were established in those regions only after the grave fields had fallen out of use. By contrast, with respect to the north-eastern region, their use appears to have been concurrent with the period of Slavic name-giving (Klír 2020, 251–55). The Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries in present-day northern Bavaria accumulate to form three distinct clusters (Pöllath 2002). Their highest rate of occurrence is in Upper Franconia along the Main curve and the rivers Regnitz, Keibach, Weismain, and Leinleiter. The second largest accumulation is in the Upper Palatinate along the rivers Heidenaab and Naab, mainly in the vicinity of Regensburg. The next largest grouping is in Middle Franconia in the catchment area of the Rednitz and Altmühl rivers. South of the Altmühl River, which

flows into the Danube, no Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries have been found.

Selected Categories of Place Names The analysis of the toponymic system in north-eastern Bavaria can take advantage of the fact that the naming systems of German and Slavic languages were fundamentally different (Klír 2017, 384–89). Whereas Slavic place names were predominantly formed through suffixation (i.e. root + suffix), German ones were formed via compounding (i.e. specifier + linking morpheme + generic root). Slavic place names are therefore usually treated as a single chronological group, without the potential for internal subdivision. By contrast, German names can be classified, at least roughly, chronologically and, to some extent, socially according to the generic root. A special group is represented by so-called linguistically mixed names, especially compound names in which the German generic root is combined with a personal name of Slavic origin as the specifier. Place names in north-eastern Bavaria can be categorized in a multitude of ways, and the potential for statistical and spatial point pattern analysis is therefore enormously high. For this pilot study, however, we employ only a small selection of all possible categories. The toponomastic categories selected for geospatial comparison with the archaeological data are as follows: linguistic origin in the case of names of Slavic origin (‘SLAV’) and of mixed Slavic/German origin (‘SLAV/ GRMC’)2 in contrast to various German generic roots (Germ. Grundwörter), including several associated with early medieval inland cultivation, represented by the underlying forms /‑hausen/ (‘HAUSEN’), /‑hofen/ (‘HOFEN’),3 and /‑dorf/ (‘DORF’), alongside dehydronymic names with the root /‑bach/ (‘BACH’) and names with semantic reference to ethnically ‘Slavic’ inhabitants via the embedded ethnonym /‑winden/ (‘WINDEN’).4

2 Our data on the Slavic and mixed Slavic toponomy of Bavaria are primarily informed by Schwarz 1960; Eichler 1962; Eichler and others 2001; 2006; Janka 2011; 2012. Recently, Andraschke 2016; 2020 has acknowledged only a reduced presence of Slavic settlement in Bavaria but is contested on this by Bichlmeier 2019; 2021a, and elsewhere. The abbreviation ‘GRMC’ — suggesting ‘Germanic’ — reflects an earlier naming scheme that remains in the data analyses and outputs included here, to be properly understood as ‘German’. 3 Note that the forms /‑hausen/ and /‑hofen/ include a fossilized grammatical ending /‑en/, not only a generic root; see below. 4 The most extensive catalogue of settlement names of this type in Bavaria is given by von Reitzenstein 1991–1992. All uncertain cases have been removed from the data used here.

290 v ik to r ie j a n ovs ká, n i co l as   m . j an s e n s, mart i n janovsk ý, and to máš k lí r

Being almost entirely within the Upper Palatinate and Upper Franconia, the settlements bearing names of linguistically Slavic (‘SLAV’) and mixed Slavic/ German (‘SLAV/GRMC’) origin are clustered in the northeast of Bavaria, adjacent to Bohemia, Saxony, and Thüringen, into which territories the area of early Slavic settlement further extends. Place names of the type ‘WINDEN’ are documented in written sources from the second half of the eighth century onward and bear reflexes of the Old High German exonym Winid ‘Wend, Slav’, plural Winidā, from the earlier Latin Venedi (each known by variant spellings; see von Reitzenstein 1991–1992, 12–16). Settlements bearing names of this type are understood as a reflection of recruitment efforts that brought peoples generically identified as Slavs into German settlement areas to assist in inland cultivation, especially by clearance of forests. Accordingly, settlements of this type tend to be located in old forest areas, on the heights, and in climatically and economically unfavourable locations (Schwarz 1958; 1960, 343–48; von Reitzenstein 1991–1992). Their distribution is broader than that of settlements with genuine Slavic and Slavic/German names, with the highest density running in a band just outside of the Slavic settlement area. Nevertheless, the evidence linking place names of the type ‘WINDEN’ specifically to Slavic speakers is inconclusive. The designation ‘Winden’ may in this case have implied a particular legal (ethnic) status that could also have been applied to German-speaking communities (Klír 2020, 233–40, 251–55). Place names of the types ‘HOFEN’ and ‘HAUSEN’ emerged from a specific socioeconomic context. Those with the form /‑hausen/ were related to aristocratic landlords’ estates, those with /‑hofen/ to royal foundations. They were established mostly in the eighth and ninth centuries,5 to which time significant changes in power structures in the east of the Frankish Empire can be traced (Puchner 1962–1964; Störmer 2000). Both are archaic in exhibiting an unaltered root vowel together with the dative plural ending /‑en/ in contrast to the younger forms in /‑höfe(n)/ and /‑häuser(n)/ (Schwarz 1960, 80–87; Jochum-Godglück 1995, 402–03). Settlements bearing names of these types are effectively in mutually exclusive distribution with those bearing Slavic ones, while each type exhibits differing areas of highest density.



5 With respect to the entire early German linguistic area, JochumGodglück (1995, 396) ascribes the highest production of new names with/‑hausen/ to the seventh–ninth/tenth centuries, while /‑hofen/ is documented from the seventh/eighth onwards, with longer-lasting popularity.

Names of the type ‘BACH’ are found among the earliest attested settlements in northern Bavaria (Schwarz 1960, 104–08) and represent the transfer of names from streams and other minor waterways to settlements located nearby (Eberl 1925–1926, 73, 86). The period of this root’s most frequent use follows the transition to Middle High German (mid-eleventh century), as the older German hydronymic root /‑aha/ was phonetically reduced to a simple, variously emergent homophonic /‑e/, which itself was then often lost (Schwarz 1960, 101–02). The distribution of these settlements also shows some restriction in relation to the Slavic ones, being most highly concentrated in Middle Franconia and south of the Danube in Lower Bavaria. Settlement names of the type ‘DORF’ could indicate individual homesteads in the earliest period (c. eighth– ninth century), later rather collective settlements as they became more widespread, peaking in productivity in the twelfth century (Eberl 1925–1926, 83–84; Schwarz 1960, 87–90; Schützeichel 1977; cf. also Jochum-Godglück 1995, 403–04, 473–75). Their highest concentration is in Middle and Upper Franconia, followed by the Upper Palatinate, Lower Bavaria, and the more eastern parts of Upper Bavaria. Their frequency is markedly reduced in Swabia and southwestern Upper Bavaria as well as in Lower Franconia. Systematic consideration of the specifiers (Germ. Bestimmungswörter and Benennungswörter) occurring with all German primary roots could allow for chronological stratification, e.g. into early medieval constructions with personal names vs. later ones with other types in this position. However, this task remains to be done at future stages of our research, following the requisite elaboration of our dataset.

Methodology The aim of our research in the region of northern Bavaria is (i) to determine whether the quantities of Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries (‘CAROL/OTT’) and settlements associated with certain classes of names are related in geographical space and (ii) to determine the differences in spatial distribution between settlements whose names are of Slavic vs. German origin in relation to the Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries. With respect to the toponymic data for our project, we acquired an initial dataset for our study region from the GeoNames online gazetteer (described in Jansens 2023). We then further elaborated the dataset according to linguistic analyses and in consultation with the scholarly literature (see notes 2 and 4). In this way, we identified and tagged those settlement names that fall into the categories to be investigated here (see

19.   spat i al analysi s o f archaeo lo gi cal and li ngu i stic data 2 91

Table 19.1 with frequencies). The archaeological data were input by hand according to maps and lists of finds in the relevant literature, outlined above.

of KDE analysis using the R package spatstat (Baddeley and others 2015).

Table 19.1. Frequency of occurrence of selected categories.

Results

CATEGORY

CHARACTERISTIC

FREQUENCY

BACH DORF HAUSEN HOFEN WINDEN SLAV/GRMC SLAV CAROL/OTT

German German German German German Slavic and German Slavic Cemetery

2034 2116 849 732 174 178 309 77

The two datasets were then brought into the Geographic Information System (hereafter GIS) and R environments for geospatial comparison by means of point pattern analysis with linear modelling and kernel density estimation (KDE). With respect to the former, we measured the relationship strength of each of the categories ‘SLAV’ and ‘SLAV/GRMC’ in relation to the category ‘CAROL/ OTT’ using linear Pearson correlation and output the results for each pair as a map. An increasing linear relationship is represented according to the following scale: green < yellow < red. By contrast, blue indicates no linear relationship, and a decreasing linear relationship is indicated by a transition to the colour purple. As for the latter analytic method, we processed four toponymic categories (‘BACH’, ‘DORF’, combined ‘HOFEN_HAUSEN’, and ‘WINDEN’) in contrast to the archaeological category ‘CAROL/OTT’ by means

Settlements with Names of Slavic and Slavic/ German Origin vs. Carolingian-Ottonian Cemeteries

The results obtained from linear modelling to measure the spatial correlation of ‘SLAV’ and ‘SLAV/GRMC’ to ‘CAROL/OTT’ are diverse (Fig. 19.2). Slavic place names occur frequently along the curve of the Main, in the Naab river basin, along the Haidenaab, and east of the Upper Saale. A positive correlation between settlements with ‘SLAV’ names and ‘CAROL/OTT’ cemeteries was revealed primarily along the Lower Naab (north of Regensburg), then around Bamberg, in the catchment area of the Wiesent River, along the Main curve, on the Upper Haidenaab, and in the surroundings of Cham. The accumulation of Slavic/German mixed place names is most evident along the Main curve, in the catchment area of the Wiesent River, and then on the upper Haidenaab and around Cham. The strongest correlation between settlements with ‘SLAV/GRMC’ names and ‘CAROL/OTT’ cemeteries is found in the Lower Naab and Regen river basins. Furthermore, increasing linear relationships were again evident in the region of the Main curve, where the category ‘CAROL/ OTT’ showed the greatest accumulation. In contrast to the category ‘SLAV’, that of ‘SLAV/GRMC’ exhibited some correlation with ‘CAROL/OTT’ in the foothills of the Franconian Heights in Middle Franconia.

Figure 19.2. Linear Pearson correlations comparing the distributions of settlements with ‘SLAV’ and ‘SLAV/GRMC’ place names against ‘CAROL/OTT’ cemeteries.

292 v ik to r ie j a n ovs ká, n i co l as   m . j an s e n s, mart i n janovsk ý, and to máš k lí r

Figure 19.3. KDE analysis comparing the distribution of the categories ‘DORF’ and ‘BACH’ against ‘CAROL/OTT’.

19.   spat i al analysi s o f archaeo lo gi cal and li ngu i stic data 2 93

Place Names with the Roots /‑dorf/ and /‑bach/ vs. Carolingian-Ottonian Cemeteries

Place Names with the Forms /‑hausen/ and /‑hofen/ vs. Carolingian-Ottonian Cemeteries

In order to compare the distributions of ‘DORF’ and ‘BACH’ to that of the category ‘CAROL/OTT’, we carried out KDE analysis, yielding several areas of overlap and one of notable difference (Fig. 19.3). As indicated above, place names with /‑dorf/ and /‑bach/ were produced continuously over an extended time period but attained peak popularity at roughly the same time (c. twelfth century), and their distribution in Bavaria also shows some similarities. Settlements bearing such names are most highly accumulated in the Main curve region in the western part of Upper Franconia and around the Regnitz River. Further accumulation continues in the Altmühl river basin in Middle Franconia, while large accumulations of this category are also found along the Danube in Lower Bavaria and in the south-eastern part of the Upper Palatinate. In the context of northern Bavaria, settlements with ‘DORF’ names overlap with ‘CAROL/OTT’ wherever the cemeteries are found. The results of KDE analysis show that their most significant correlation is along the Main curve and in the Regnitz river basin. However, it should be noted that ‘DORF’ names are overall the most highly represented category in our analysis. Settlements with ‘BACH’ names are concentrated along waterways in general, and they overlap with Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries to a much lesser extent than do those with ‘DORF’ names. The former category is most densely accumulated in two spatially significant areas. The first encompasses the territory of Lower Bavaria and a strip of Upper Bavaria just south of the Danube, with the highest accumulation observed between the cities of Passau and Landshut. The second area is in Middle Franconia, where they are especially concentrated in a region with a high number of watercourses. In north-eastern Bavaria, the points show a somewhat fragmented pattern, whereby a partial overlap with the ‘CAROL/OTT’ category is observed in the Main curve region. There is an interesting difference between the spatial distributions of the place names of types ‘DORF’ and ‘BACH’, which KDE analysis has revealed. Whereas the catchment area of the Main river basin between Bamberg and Bayreuth has the highest accumulation of ‘DORF’ names, it does not exhibit any occurrence of ‘BACH’ names. There is, moreover, a lack of Slavic hydronyms in this region, as Germanic hydronyms predominate (Klír 2015, 186).

As a combined category (‘HOFEN_HAUSEN’), settlements bearing the forms /‑hofen/ and /‑hausen/ exhibit the largest accumulations in the region between Munich, Augsburg, and Ingolstadt. Throughout most of the Upper Palatinate (a notable exception being around Regensburg), Upper Franconia, and Middle Franconia, settlements with ‘HAUSEN’ names appear only individually. They are most heavily concentrated in a band running between the Danube to the north and the rivers Amper and Isar to the south, as well as independently in the eastern half of Lower Franconia, continuing to the northeast into Thüringen. In north-eastern Bavaria, there are more ‘HOFEN’ names than ‘HAUSEN’ ones, but both are quite sparse. The greatest accumulation of settlements with ‘HOFEN’ names is in the vicinity of the medieval royal court at Lauterhofen. The correlation of ‘HOFEN_HAUSEN’ with ‘CAROL/OTT’ is only partial (Fig. 19.4). We observe that the cemeteries of this type are not found in the areas of the greatest accumulation of ‘HAUSEN’ and ‘HOFEN’ names. Thus, we can assume that the areas of intensive royal power and highest property interest among the Frankish elites were simultaneously not inhabited by a population that buried its dead in so-called Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries. Thus, the hypothesis that these burial sites characterized areas where Frankish power and ecclesiastical structures were relatively weak is confirmed by our data (e.g. Klír 2020, 216, 237, 250). Place Names with the Ethnonym /‑winden/ vs. Carolingian-Ottonian Cemeteries

Settlements with names bearing the form /‑winden/ extend beyond Bavaria, also appearing in territories where Slavic place names are not found, such as in Württemberg and Hessen (Schwarz 1960, 336). In northern Bavaria, according to KDE analysis, the ‘WINDEN’ category is represented in a few minor accumulations, mainly in Lower and Middle Franconia, then along the rivers Lauterach and Regen in the Upper Palatinate. In none of these regions, however, does it directly overlap with the category ‘CAROL/OTT’; rather, in areas of accumulation in the Upper Palatinate, they are almost fully mutually exclusive (Fig. 19.5). In the Upper Franconian territory, only individual instances of the ‘WINDEN’ category are found. As noted earlier, we can observe that settlements bearing ‘WINDEN’ names are not found in the old settlement landscapes, but rather in old forest areas, especially in the highlands of the Haßberge, Steigerwald, Frankenhöhe, and the South Franconian Alba. Their

2 94 v ik to r ie j a n ovs ká, n i co l as   m . j an s e n s, mart i n janovsk ý, and to máš k lí r

Figure 19.4. KDE analysis comparing the distribution of the category ‘HAUSEN_HOFEN’ against ‘CAROL/OTT’.

distribution is therefore to be understood as connected with the expansion of the Frankish state.6 It has been claimed that, in the areas where ‘WINDEN’ place names are absent and where Slavic toponymy is dominant, the settlement processes of the Carolingian-Ottonian period were less strongly controlled. This is fully in accordance with the known distribution of the Frankish administrative centres and royal courts, estates donated by the monarch and nobility to ecclesiastical institutions, the colonization areas known in the written sources, and communication routes (Klír 2020; locations of the royal courts in

6 For example, in a copy from the twelfth century, the settlement name Bicdolfeswineden (with the title Bischof ‘Bishop’ miswritten in the first part of the name) — today’s Bischwind (Landkreis Schweinfurt) — indicates a relationship between a bishop as a proprietor and his ‘Winden’. Evidently, settlers understood as Slavs were recruited by the bishop of Würzburg to cultivate the land around this settlement (cf. von Reitzenstein 2017, 425).

Franconia are given e.g. by Bosl 1969, 29–31; Ettel 2001, 237, fig. 89; Pöllath 2002, i, 211–13; ii, fig. 38–39; Störmer 1999, 180–81; colonization areas by Bauer 1988; for communication routes more generally, cf. McCormick 2001, 553–57, map 19.2; regionally Schwarz 1975, 378–84; Häusler 2004, among others). In conclusion, place names with /‑winden/ reflect an exonymic practice of differentiating these settlements’ inhabitants from their neighbours, as they are scattered within the regions with German names only (Schwarz 1960, 343; Häusler 2004, 26). We stress, however, that there is insufficient evidence that this entails the distinction of a Slavic-speaking population from a surrounding German-speaking population. For the time being, it cannot be ruled out that this was a legal differentiation of communities in newly established settlements that may have spoken only German. The designation ‘Winden’ may thus have been intended as both a legal and an ethnic distinction without contemporary correlation with the Slavic language,

19.   spat i al analysi s o f archaeo lo gi cal and li ngu i stic data 2 95

Figure 19.5. KDE analysis comparing the distribution of the category ‘WINDEN’ against ‘CAROL/OTT’.

since the latter is only exceptionally attested in the areas in question. In any case, these names are an example of the external reification of foreignness, which is also represented in Frankish written sources concerning the Main river basin (Klír 2020, 233–40, 251–55). Based on KDE analysis, we see that the highest concentrations of ‘WINDEN’ names are in regions on the borders of Bavaria Slavica.

Conclusion This paper has presented the results of point pattern analyses based on toponomastic and archaeological datasets for northern Bavaria, including the area of so-called Bavaria Slavica. The observed differences between the distributions of place names of Slavic or German origin and Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries reflect various socio-cultural changes taking place on

the eastern border of the Frankish Empire in the early Middle Ages. The analyses revealed that (i) the distribution of Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries (‘CAROL/ OTT’) indeed stands in relationship to certain classes of toponyms in geographic space. Of the categories of place names studied here, several were shown to reflect the integration of the region into Frankish power structures. As an example, we can highlight the case of settlements with the forms /‑hofen/ and /‑hausen/ in their names, which are in an almost fully mutually exclusive distribution with the Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries. These settlement names originated mainly in the eighth and ninth centuries in a territory that was already firmly connected with the ecclesiastical and state institutions of the Frankish Empire, and their distribution reflects the centres of the property-based interests of the Frankish nobility. Moreover, settlements with names bearing the ethnonym /‑winden/ are most highly accumulated along the western fringe of Bavaria Slavica. They existed

296 v ik to r ie j a n ovs ká, n i co l as   m . j an s e n s, mart i n janovsk ý, and to máš k lí r

apart from the area of Slavic place names, in territories with an established German-speaking population, and their names are a result of external ethnification reflecting perceived cultural and/or legal differences. While evidence that would definitively indicate the presence of Slavic speakers is lacking, if we take a closer look at the distribution of settlements with /‑winden/ names, we can observe that they in fact delineate the western border of Bavaria Slavica. With respect to settlement names with the roots /‑dorf/ and /‑bach/, KDE analyses revealed a notable difference in their spatial distributions between Bamberg and Bayreuth. Whereas this region exhibits a large accumulation of /‑dorf/ names, it shows a negative occurrence of /‑bach/ names, even though watercourse names of Germanic origin predominate here. Furthermore, the results of our analyses show that (ii) Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries in Bavaria exhibit the closest correlations with toponymy of mixed Slavic/ German origin, of Slavic origin, and with the root /‑dorf/. By contrast, they bear no evidentiary relationship to settlements exhibiting the ethnonym /‑winden/ and are, for the most part, mutually exclusive with those bearing the forms /‑hausen/ and /‑hofen/. In addition, these results are compatible with existing ideas that the rise and later abandonment of grave field sites was not directly related to Slavic speakers, although they could have used at least some of them. Therefore, we infer that the Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries established after the second half of the eighth century in north-eastern Bavaria Slavica may have been used by speakers of Slavic as well as by speakers of German in areas where their mutual presence is indicated by settlements with mixed Slavic-German names. The Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries there were, thus, likely used by a linguistically heterogeneous

population. Finally, the predicted boundaries of Bavaria Slavica are corroborated by the distribution of /‑winden/ place names, the highest concentration of which was revealed on the basis of KDE analysis. To conclude, the statistical and spatial analyses presented here have great potential to test existing hypotheses about the course of language contact in northeastern Bavaria and the relationship between language and ethnicity. At the same time, the example of the analysis of the categories ‘BACH’ and ‘DORF’ has indicated a differentiated pattern of rural development in the Main catchment area that yet requires explanation, revealing how little use has been made so far of the testimony of German place names. Accordingly, a more detailed and comprehensive analysis can be expected to yield more objective and indeed new insights. It thereby remains a fact that the abandonment of the Carolingian-Ottonian cemeteries and transition to church graveyards is one of the few instances in which we can archaeologically capture the impact of changing ecclesiastical and power structures on rural populations.

Acknowledgements This study was supported by the project the Grant Schemes at Charles University, reg. no. CZ.02.2.69/0. 0/0.0/19_073/0016935 — ‘Interlinking language and material culture — a study of European populations in time and space’ and jointly by the Czech Science Foundation (WEAVE Lead Agency, reg. n. 22–23741K) and German Research Foundation (reg. n. 490754677) in the frame of the research project ‘Linguistic and cultural dynamics in a frontier society: New perspectives on northeastern Bavaria and western Bohemia in the Early Middle Ages’.

19.   spat i al analysi s o f archaeo lo gi cal and li ngu i stic data 2 97

Works Cited Digital Data Sources Bundesamt für Kartographie und Geodäsie. 2022. ‘Digitales Geländemodell Gitterweite 200 m (DGM200)’ [accessed August 2022] GeoNames, founded by Marc Wick, geographical names data [accessed April 2020] Natural Earth = ‘1:10m Cultural Vectors’, in Natural Earth, coord. by Nathaniel Vaughn Kelso, Tom Patterson, Dick Furno, Tanya Buckingham, Nick Springer, and Louis Cross, administrative boundary data [accessed August 2022] Primary Sources HONB = [Various authors]. 1951–. Historisches Ortsnamenbuch von Bayern, multiple vols (Munich: Kommission für bayerische Landesgeschichte) Secondary Studies Andraschke, Joachim. 2013. Überlegungen zu den Anfängen der Pfarreigründungen im ehemaligen Regnitzgau, Beiträge zur ostfränkischen Kultur- und Landeskunde, 2 (Bamberg: Kroha) —— 2016. Die germanisch-frühdeutschen Ortsnamen des Regnitz- und Obermaingebietes: Von der elbgermanischen Landnahme bis zur Merowingerzeit, Beiträge zur ostfränkischen Kultur- und Landeskunde, 4 (Haßfurt: Historischer Verein Landkreis Haßberge) —— 2020. ‘Das Land ist von Wald bedeckt und Slawen hausen dort’: Slawische Orts-, Wüstungs- und Flurnamen im Mainund Regnitzgebiet, Beiträge zur ostfränkischen Kultur- und Landeskunde, 5 (Haßfurt: Historischer Verein Landkreis Haßberge) Bachrach, David S. 2022. The Foundations of Royal Power in Early Medieval Germany: Material Resources and Governmental Administration in a Carolingian Successor State (Woodbridge: Boydell Press) Baddeley, Adrian, Ege Rubak, and Rolf Turner. 2015. Spatial Point Patterns: Methodology and Applications with R, Chapman & Hall/CRC Interdisciplinary Statistics Series (New York: Chapman & Hall/CRC) Bartlett, Robert. 1994. The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization, and Cultural Change, 950–1350 (Princeton: Princeton University Press) Bauer, Reinhard. 1988. Die ältesten Grenzbeschreibungen in Bayern und ihre Aussagen für Namenkunde und Geschichte, Die Flurnamen Bayerns, 8 (Munich: Selbstverlag des Verbands für Orts- und Flurnamenforschung in Bayern) Bergmann, Rolf, Günter Dippold, Jochen Haberstroh, Christian Lange, and Wolfgang Weiß (eds). 2007/2008. Missionierung und Christianisierung im Regnitz- und Obermaingebiet, Schriftenreihe des Historischen Vereins Bamberg, 41 (Bamberg: Selbstverlag des Historischen Vereins Bamberg) Bichlmeier, Harald. 2019. ‘[Review of:] Joachim Andraschke. Die germanisch-frühdeutschen Ortsnamen des Regnitz- und Obermaingebietes. Von der elbgermanischen Landnahme bis zur Merowingerzeit (Schriftenreihe des Historischen Vereins Landkreis Haßberge, Bd. 16; Beiträge zur ostfränkischen Kultur- und Landeskunde, Bd. 4), Haßfurt 2016, 401 S.’, Mainfränkisches Jahrbuch für Geschichte und Kunst, 71: 279–83 —— 2021a. Studien zu nordostbayerischen Orts- und Flurnamen auf -(n)itz und -(a)tz. Mit einer Karte von Alois Dicklberger (Dettelbach: Röll) —— 2021b. ‘Zu den oberfränkischen Ortsnamen Püchitz (Lkr. Lichtenfels, ehem. Lkr. Staffelstein), Hohenpölz, Tiefenpölz (Lkr. Bamberg, Altlkr. Ebermannstadt), Pölz (Lkr. Kumbach), Pöllitz (Lkr. Kulmbach), † Pölz/Pölnitz (Lkr. Bamberg) und Weidnitz (Lkr. Lichtenfels)’, Namenkundliche Informationen, 113: 53–91 —— 2023. ‘Zu den oberfränkischen Ortsnamen Tüschnitz (Lkr. Kronach), Zwernitz (Lkr. Kulmbach), Leuchnitz (Lkr. Lichtenfels) und dem Flurnamen Wepnitz (Lkr. Lichtenfels)’, Österreichische Namenforschung, 51: 71–112 Bosl, Karl. 1969. Franken um 800: Strukturanalyse einer fränkischen Königsprovinz, 2., erw. Aufl., Schriften zur bayerischen Landesgeschichte, 58 (Munich: Beck) Curta, Florin (ed.). 2005. Borders, Barriers, and Ethnogenesis: Frontiers in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages, Studies in the Early Middle Ages, 12 (Turnhout: Brepols) Eberl, Barthel. 1925–1926. Die bayerischen Ortsnamen als Grundlage der Siedlungsgeschichte, i–ii (Munich: Knorr & Hirth) Eichler, Ernst. 1962. ‘Zur Etymologie und Struktur der slawischen Orts- und Flußnamen in Nordostbayern’, Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Karl-Marx-Universität Leipzig. Gesellschafts- und Sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe, 11: 365–95 = Eichler, Ernst. 1985.

298 v ik to r ie j a n ovs ká, n i co l as   m . j an s e n s, mart i n janovsk ý, and to máš k lí r

‘Zur Etymologie und Struktur der slawischen Orts- und Flußnamen in Nordostbayern’, in Beiträge zur deutsch-slawischen Namenforschung (1955–1981), reprints of minor works by Ernst Eichler (Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der DDR), pp. 269–395 Eichler, Ernst, Albrecht Greule, Wolfgang Janka, and Robert Schuh (eds). 2001. Beiträge zur slavisch-deutschen Sprachkontaktforschung, i: Siedlungsnamen im oberfränkischen Stadt-und Landkreis Bamberg, Slavica. Monographien, Hand-, Lehr- und Wörterbücher, 2 (Heidelberg: Winter) —— (eds). 2006. Beiträge zur slavisch-deutschen Sprachkontaktforschung ii: Siedlungsnamen im oberfränkischen Stadt-und Landkreis Bayreuth, Slavica. Monographien, Hand-, Lehr- und Wörterbücher, 4 (Heidelberg: Winter) Ettel, Peter. 2001. Karlburg-Rosstal-Oberammerthal: Studien zum frühmittelalterlichen Burgenbau in Nordbayern: Grabungen des Bayerischen Landesamtes für Denkmalpflege i–iii, Frühgeschichtliche und provinzialrömische Archäologie, 5 – Veröffentlichung der Kommission zur Vergleichenden Archäologie Römischer Alpen- und Donaulände (Rahden: Leidorf) Fried, Johannes. 1995. ‘The Frankish Kingdoms, 817–911: The East and Middle Kingdoms’, in The New Cambridge Medieval History, ed. by Rosamond McKitterick, ii: c. 700–c. 900 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 142–68 Freudenberg, Sebastian. 2013. Trado atque dono. Die frühmittelalterliche private Grundherrschaft in Ostfranken im Spiegel der Traditionsurkunden der Klöster Lorsch und Fulda (750 bis 900), Vierteljahrschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte, Beiheft 224 (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner) Haberstroh, Claudia. 2004. Das frühmittelalterliche Gräberfeld von Wirbenz, Gde. Speichersdorf, Kataloge der archäologischen Staatssammlung, 30 (Munich: Archäologische Staatssammlung) Haberstroh, Jochen. 2000. ‘Verzierungen auf handgeformter Keramik des 3.–6. Jahrhunderts im Main–Regnitz–Gebiet’. in Beiträge zur germanischen Keramik zwischen Donau und Teutoburger Wald: Kolloquium zur germanischen Keramik des 1.–5. Jahrhunderts, 17.–18. April 1998, Frankfurt a.M., ed. by Susanne Biegert, Siegmar von Schnurbein, Bernd Steidl, and Dörte Walter, Kolloquien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte, 4 (Bonn: Rudolf Habelt), pp. 227–64 Haberstroh, Jochen. 2007/22008. ‘Siedlungsgeschichtliche Grundzüge aus archäologischer Sicht bis zur Eingliederung in das Fränkische Reich’, in Missionierung und Christianisierung im Regnitz- und Obermaingebiet, ed. by Rolf Bergmann, Günter Dippold, Jochen Haberstroh, Christian Lange, and Wolfgang Weiß, Schriftenreihe des Historischen Vereins Bamberg, 41 (Bamberg: Selbstverlag des Historischen Vereins Bamberg), pp. 161–78 Hardt, Matthias. 2007. ‘Oberfranken im frühen und hohen Mittelalter’, in Der Orlagau im frühen und hohen Mittelalter, ed. by Peter Sachenbacher and Hans-Jürgen Beier, Beiträge zur Frühgeschichte und zum Mittelalter Ostthüringens, 3 (Langenweißbach: Beier & Beran), pp. 173–84 Hasil, Jan. 2010. ‘Raně středověké osídlení Chebska’, Studia Mediaevalia Pragensia, 9: 7–73 Häusler, Ines. 2004. ‘Der Beitrag des slavischen Siedlungsträgers zur Raumerschließung in der Oberpfalz – eine historischgeographische Analyse’, Regensburger Beiträge zur Regionalgeographie und Raumplanung, 9: 1–175 Heidenreich, Anja. 1998. Ein slawischer Friedhof mit Kirche auf dem Barbaraberg im Lankreis Neustadt/Waldnaaab. Mit anthropologischem Anhang, Archäologische Zeugnisse zur Siedlungsgeschichte, 1 (Pressath: Bodner) Henning, Joachim. 2005. ‘Civilization versus Barbarians? Fortification Techniques and Politics in the Carolingian and Ottonian Borderlands’, in Borders, Barriers, and Ethnogenesis: Frontiers in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages, ed. by Florin Curta, Studies in the Early Middle Ages, 12 (Turnhout: Brepols), pp. 23–34 Hensch, Mathias. 2012. ‘Jenseits von Niederbayern: Interdisziplinäre Überlegungen zu Herrschaftsstrukturen des 8. bis 11. Jahrhunderts in der mittleren Oberpfalz’, in Vorträge des 30. Niederbayerischen Archäologentages, ed. by Ludwig Husty and Karl Schmotz (Rahden: Leidorf), pp. 265–314 —— 2013. ‘Zur Struktur herrschaftlicher Kernräume zwischen Regensburg und Forchheim in karolingischer, ottonischer und frühsalischer Zeit’, in Zentrale Orte und zentrale Räume des Frühmittelalters in Süddeutschland, ed. by Peter Ettel and Lukas Werther, RGZM Monographien, 18 (Mainz: Verl. des Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseums), pp. 267–308 Janka, Wolfgang. 2011. ‘Zur lautlichen und strukturellen Integration von slavischen Orts- und Personennamen in Nordbayern’, in Interferenz-Onomastik: Namen in Grenz- und Begegnungsräumen in Geschichte und Gegenwart, ed. by Wolfgang Haubrichs and Heinrich Tiefenbach, Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Saarländische Landesgeschichte, 43 (Saarbrücken: Kommission für Saarländische Landesgeschichte und Volksforschung), pp. 333–46 —— 2012. ‘Zur flexivischen Integration slawischer Personennamen in Nordbayern’, in In simplicitate complexitas: Festgabe für Barbara Stefan zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. by Peter Anreiter, Ivo Hajnal, and Manfred Kienpointner, Studia interdisciplinaria Ænipontana, 17 (Vienna: Praesens), pp. 139–56 —— 2016. ‘Berg- und Flurnamen slawischer Herkunft in der nördlichen Oberpfalz’, in Berg- und Flurnamen in Bayern und Österreich: 8. Tagung des Arbeitskreises für bayerisch-österreichische Namenforschung vom 25. bis 27. September 2014 in Innsbruck, Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Onomastik, 16 (Vienna: Praesens), pp. 93–104 Jansens, Nicolas M. 2023. ‘Insights from Quantitative Toponomastics: Getting off the Ground with Open Data’, in Linguistische Beiträge zur Slavistik. XXIX. JungslavistInnen-Treffen vom 09. bis 10. September 2021 an der Ruhr-Universität

19.   spat i al analysi s o f archaeo lo gi cal and li ngu i stic data 2 99

Bochum, ed. by Christina Clasmeier and Julia Golbek, Specimina philologiae Slavicae, 212 (Berlin: Peter Lang), pp. 93–116 Jochum-Godglück, Christa. 1995. Die orientierten Siedlungsnamen auf ‑heim, ‑hausen, ‑hofen und ‑dorf im frühdeutschen Sprachraum und ihr Verhältnis zur fränkischen Fiskalorganisation (Frankfurt a. M.: Lang) Klír, Tomáš. 2015. ‘The Hydronymy of the Cheb District in the Context of Northeast Bavaria: On the Question of the Language Situation in the Early Middle Ages’, Praehistorica, 32: 173–223 —— 2017. ‘Social Context of the Slavic-German Language Contact: North-Eastern Bavaria and the Eger Region in the Early Middle Ages’, in Religion und Gesellschaft im nördlichen westslawischen Raum, ed. by Felix Biermann, Thomas Kersting, and Anne Klammt, Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Mitteleuropas, 82 (Langenweißbach: Beier & Beran), pp. 359–410 —— 2020. ‘Language, Material Culture, and Ethnifying on the Carolingian Borders: Slavs in Northeast Bavaria’, in New Perspectives on the Early Slavs and the Rise of Slavic: Contact and Migration, ed. by Tomáš Klír, Vít Boček, and Nicolas M. Jansens, Empirie und Theorie der Sprachwissenschaft, 6 (Heidelberg: Winter), pp. 193–273 Losert, Hans. 2007/22008. ‘Ansätze ethnischer Deutung archäologischer Sachkultur’, in Missionierung und Christianisierung im Regnitz- und Obermaingebiet, ed. by Rolf Bergmann, Günter Dippold, Jochen Haberstroh, Christian Lange, and Wolfgang Weiß, Schriftenreihe des Historischen Vereins Bamberg, 41 (Bamberg: Selbstverlag des Historischen Vereins Bamberg), pp. 137–60 —— 2008. ‘Slawen in der Oberpfalz – eine Bestandsaufnahme’, Acta archaeologica Carpathica, 42–43: 301–70 —— 2009. ‘Moinvinidi, Radanzvinidi und Nabavinida: Geschichte und Archäologie der Slawen in Bayern’, in Siedlungsstrukturen und Burgen im westslawischen Raum, ed. by Felix Biermann, Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Mitteleuropas, 52 (Langenweißbach: Beier & Beran), pp. 219–94 Machilek, Franz. 2007/22008. ‘Besitz- und Herrschaftsgeschichte’, in Missionierung und Christianisierung im Regnitz- und Obermaingebiet, ed. by Rolf Bergmann, Günter Dippold, Jochen Haberstroh, Christian Lange, and Wolfgang Weiß, Schriftenreihe des Historischen Vereins Bamberg, 41 (Bamberg: Selbstverlag des Historischen Vereins Bamberg), pp. 283–94 McCormick, Michael. 2001. Origins of the European Economy: Communications and Commerce ad 300–900 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Merz, Johannes, and Robert Schuh (eds). 2004. Franken im Mittelalter: Francia orientalis, Franconia, Land zu Franken. Raum und Geschichte, Hefte zur Bayerischen Landesgeschichte, 3 (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft) Nelson, Janet L. 1995. ‘Kingship and Royal Government’, in The New Cambridge Medieval History, ed. by Rosamond McKitterick, ii: c. 700–c. 900 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 383–430 Pöllath, Ralph. 2002. Karolingerzeitliche Gräberfelder in Nordostbayern: Eine archäologisch-historische Interpretation mit der Vorlage der Ausgrabungen von K. Schwarz in Weismain und Thurnau-Alladorf, i: Text, ii: Abbildungen, Listen, Literatur, iii: Katalog, iv: Tafeln (Munich: Arethousa) Puchner, Karl. 1962–1964. ‘Der Besitz oberbayerischer Stifte und Klöster um Cham und Roding’, Blätter für oberdeutsche Namenforschung, 5: 36–38 von Reitzenstein, Wolf-Armin Frhr. 1991–1992. ‘Ortsnamen mit Windisch/Winden in Bayern’, Blätter für oberdeutsche Namenforschung, 28–29: 3–76 —— 2006. Lexikon bayerischer Ortsnamen: Herkunft und Bedeutung. Oberbayern, Niederbayern, Oberpfalz (Munich: Beck) —— 2009. Lexikon fränkischer Ortsnamen: Herkunft und Bedeutung. Oberfranken, Mittelfranken, Unterfranken (Munich: Beck) —— 2017. ‘Rodungs-Ortsnamen mit Bischof in Bayern’, Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte, 80: 423–32 Schmale, Franz-Joseph, and Wilhelm Störmer. 1997. ‘Die politische Entwicklung bis zur Eingliederung ins Merowingische Reich’, in Handbuch der bayerischen Geschichte iii.1: Geschichte Frankens bis zum Ausgang des 18. Jahrhunderts, ed. by Max Spindler (Munich: Beck), pp. 70–88 Schützeichel, Rudolf. 1977. ‘“Dorf ”. Wort und Begriff ’, in Das Dorf der Eisenzeit und des frühen Mittelalters: Siedlungsform – wirtschaftliche Funktion – soziale Struktur. Bericht über die Kolloquien der Kommission für die Altertumskunde Mittel- und Nordeuropas in den Jahren 1973 und 1974, ed. by Herbert Jankuhn, Rudolf Schützeichel, and Fred Schwind, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen. Philologisch-Historische Klasse, 3 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht), pp. 9–36 Schwarz, Ernst. 1958. ‘Wenden beim Landesausbau in Deutschland’, Zeitschrift für Ostforschung, 7: 210–30 —— 1960. Sprache und Siedlung in Nordostbayern, Erlanger Beiträge zur Sprach- und Kunstwissenschaft, 4 (Nuremberg: Carl) Schwarz, Klaus. 1975. ‘Der frühmittelalterliche Landesausbau in Nordost-Bayern – archäologisch gesehen’, in Ausgrabungen in Deutschland – gefördert von d. Dt. Forschungsgemeinschaft 1950–1975, ii: Römische Kaiserzeit im freien Germanien – Frühmittelalter I, ed. by Kurt Böhner, RGZM Monographien, 1.2 (Mainz: Verlag des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums), pp. 338–409

3 00 v ik to r ie j a n ovs ká, n i co l as   m . j an s e n s, mart i n janovsk ý, and to máš k lí r

—— 1984. Frühmittelalterlicher Landesausbau im östlichen Franken zwischen Steigerwald, Frankenwald und Oberpfälzer Wald, RGZM Monographien, 5 (Mainz: Verl. des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums) Smith, Julia M. H. 1995. ‘Fines imperii: The Marches’, in The New Cambridge Medieval History, ed. by Rosamond McKitterick, ii: c. 700–c. 900 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 169–89 Steidle, Hans. 1989. Die Entstehung der frühmittelalterlichen Gesellschaft in Ostfranken: Ein Beitrag zur frühmittelalterlichen Gesellschaftsgeschichte und Feudalismusforschung, Mainfränkische Studien, 46 (Würzburg: Freunde Mainfränkischer Kunst und Geschichte – Schweinfurt: Historischer Verein) Stieldorf, Andrea. 2012. Marken und Markgrafen: Studien zur Grenzsicherung durch die fränkisch-deutschen Herrscher, Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Schriften, 64 (Hannover: Hahn) Störmer, Wilhelm. 1999. Franken von der Völkerwanderungszeit bis 1268, Dokumente zur Geschichte von Staat und Gesellschaft in Bayern. Abt. 2: Franken und Schwaben vom Frühmittelalter bis 1800, 1 (Munich: Beck) —— 2000. ‘Der Raum Franken von der Völkerwanderungszeit bis 1268 im Lichte der schriftlichen Dokumente’, Frankenland, 52: 391–95 Štefan, Ivo, and Ladislav Varadzin. 2007. ‘Počátky farní organizace v Čechách a na Moravě ve výpovědi archeologie’, in Církevní topografie a síť pražské církevní provincie v pozdním středověku, ed. by Jan Hrdina and Blanka Zilynská, Colloquia mediaevalia Pragensia, 8 (Prague: Filosofia), pp. 33–54 Wintergerst, Magnus. 2007/22008. ‘Die Siedlungsgeschichte aus archäologischer Sicht vom achten bis elften Jahrhundert’, in Missionierung und Christianisierung im Regnitz- und Obermaingebiet, ed. by Rolf Bergmann, Günter Dippold, Jochen Haberstroh, Christian Lange, and Wolfgang Weiß, Schriftenreihe des Historischen Vereins Bamberg, 41 (Bamberg: Selbstverlag des Historischen Vereins Bamberg), pp. 179–94 Zeumer, Karolus (ed.). 1886. Formulae Merowingici et Karolini aevi, Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Formulae, 5 (Hannover: Hahn)

Stefan E ichert

20. THANADOS — The Anthropological and Archaeological Database of Sepultures

A bs t r act  THANADOS (The Anthropological and Archaeological Database of Sepultures) is an interdisciplinary project (go!digital NextGeneration, funded by the Austrian Academy of Sciences – GDND 2018 039) in the fields of archaeology, (physical) anthropology, and digital humanities. It is carried out at the Natural History Museum Vienna (NHMW) in cooperation with the Austrian Archaeological Institute (ÖAI) and the Austrian Centre for Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage (ACDH-CH) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences (ÖAW). THANADOS deals with the digitization of early medieval grave finds from the territory of Austria and its neighbouring countries. The data published to date on cemeteries and burial grounds from the period between late antiquity (c. 400 ce) and the early high Middle Ages (c. 1100 ce) were collected within the framework of the project and digitized in English. THANADOS provides a web portal through which these data are made publicly available, visualized, and presented. This article discusses the basic principles of how archaeologists and anthropologists document and publish grave finds. It discusses a data model developed based on these principles and maps the information within classes and properties of the CIDOCCRM. The technical implementation, based entirely on open source technology, design aspects of the user interface and its components, as well as its functionalities are presented. Another focus is on the discussion of interoperability in connection with Linked Open Data and the integration of the data into the semantic web via international data aggregators, such as ARIADNEplus.

T

K e y wo r ds  Early Middle Ages, burial archaeology, anthropology, Digital Humanities, Open Science

T

Stefan Eichert • ([email protected]) is an archaeologist and digital humanist at the Department of Prehistory at the Natural History Museum Vienna. Power in Numbers: State Formation and Christianization on the Eastern Edge of Europe, ed. by Mária Vargha and Ivo Štefan, BBL, 4 (Turnhout, 2024), pp. 301–308. © BREPOLS PUBLISHERS DOI 10.1484/M.BBL-EB.5.138124

302 s te fa n e i c he rt

Introduction — How Data on Burials are Documented Archaeologists and anthropologists publish grave finds or cemeteries worldwide always in the same way. Firstly, the underlying sources, i.e. the information unearthed and documented during the excavation, are presented in the form of a catalogue with descriptive texts (descriptions), categorizations (typology, gender, etc.), information on dimensions (e.g. burial depth), and other values (e.g. age at death), as well as with spatial (cemetery plan), temporal (chronology/dating), and graphic (drawings, photos, scans, 3D models, etc.) data. Secondly, an analysis and interpretation of these data are presented. This duality serves to make scientific knowledge comprehensible so that readers have the sources and the data on which the interpretation is based at their disposal, so they can reflect on the results. Of course, in the course of research history, documentation methods have evolved, and there are synchronous, as well as diachronic, differences in the quality and quantity of the information presented. An old excavation from the nineteenth century or an improperly conducted find recovery will have documented fewer of the aspects mentioned above than a scientific research excavation of the present day. As a rule, these publications are articles or books in printed form, especially studies published before the second turn of the millennium. With increasing digitization and the growing demand for Open Access, this has changed considerably towards (additionally or even singularly) electronic publications. Still, these are usually in the form of PDF files, thus, the information content is practically no different from that of a physical publication. The first publication on an early medieval cemetery from Austria, the cemetery of Köttlach in Lower Austria, excavated in 1852 and published in 1854 (Franck 1854), was also the first to be available Open Access online. In the 2000s, it was already in the public domain and was digitized and (re)published as part of the Google Books initiative (). The most recent monographic publication, the cemetery of Thunau Obere Holzwiese by Elisabeth Nowotny (2018), is also Open Access. Even if, as is more and more often the case, digital databases are attached to the publication (e.g. as DVDs: Stadler 2005) or these are deposited in a public repository, they rarely follow any standards, as there are no general definitions for the treatment of digital information on burials. Depending on the researcher’s methodology, these data may be in the form of tables, database files, or as GIS data. Only a few studies include also online applications that can be accessed in parallel to print or

online publications (e.g. Lochner and Hellerschmid 2016, ). These ‘repositories’ are also mostly independent data collections that use different formats, terminologies, and spatial reference systems. In order to work constructively with the available information and make different sites comparable, the data must be, in principle, reverse-engineered. Either the data available in text and image form must be digitized and brought into a uniform format or existing digital data must be restructured and standardized.

Archaeological Data Model (Fig. 20.1) In addition to the previously described, almost worldwide uniform, way of presenting grave finds, they are also always structured similarly, if not identically, in terms of content. This structuring of the basic data comprises four levels with different documentation layers. The site itself is the superordinate unit and functions as a data container for all subunits. The second level deals with the observed archaeological features (e.g. graves). They are usually, in turn, a data container for information on related stratigraphic units, in our case, the buried individuals (further referred to as ‘burials’), which are in turn a container for further data on physical objects, in our case grave goods or finds. This reflects a certain hierarchy that can be traced in all traditional publications on burial sites, at least for the Middle Ages in the region under study. Each unit (site, grave, burial, find) is naturally associated with certain other information. This distinction is sometimes arbitrary and depends on the interpretation of the archaeologists, but in most cases, it is predefined by the circumstances observed during the excavation. For example, if a site contains both a prehistoric and a medieval cemetery, the interpreting researchers may draw a temporal boundary between them to define them as two different sites (e.g. Pitten in Lower Austria with a Bronze Age and a medieval cemetery, see: Friesinger 1978). Such boundaries can also be drawn depending on spatial features (e.g. Grabelsdorf in Carinthia, where there is an upper cemetery on a hill in close proximity to a lower cemetery at the foot of the hill, and the two are treated as different sites, see: Eichert 2010). The distinction at the second level (graves) is also highly dependent on the archaeologists’ interpretation. In some cases, researchers do not distinguish between a grave (as the sum of stratigraphic units and interfaces) and its contents (i.e. human remains, backfill, etc.), but if there is more than one individual/burial in a grave, this distinction would be needed. Also, for example, in the case of a mass grave or unclear physical boundaries between two or more

2 0.   t h an ad o s — t h e ant hro po lo gi cal and archaeo lo gi cal datab ase o f se p ultures 3 03

Figure 20.1. Archaeological data model of burial finds.

burials, this could then be documented in one grave, although not based on hard facts but the interpretative decision of the observer. The same applies to finds that cannot be assigned to a specific individual in a grave, for example. However, this can be solved by assigning the finds not to the individual but to a backfill layer of the grave as a separate stratigraphic unit. In addition, the level of the burial can be seen as a further data container, which contains individual bones or osteoarchaeological data as subunits. In principle, the observed structuring represents a hierarchical, relational data model on four levels.

The Logical Data Model In order to implement this archaeologically specified data model in practice, and to technically realize it for the THANADOS project, the project team developed and adapted the open-source software OpenAtlas (Watzinger 2019). The aim was to digitize the existing information according to best practice standards and also to be able to fulfil the FAIR principles, with a focus on integrating or aggregating the data into existing European or international infrastructures (Meghini and others 2017). The data is stored in OpenAtlas via classes and properties of the CIDOC CRM (Conceptual Reference Model) (Fig. 20.2): CIDOC CRM (ISO21127) is a formal ontology intended to facilitate the integration, mediation and interchange of heterogeneous cultural heritage

information. It was developed by interdisciplinary teams of experts, coming from fields such as computer science, archaeology, museum documentation, history of arts, natural history, library science, physics and philosophy, under the aegis of the International Committee for Documentation (CIDOC) of the International Council of Museums (ICOM). […] CIDOC CRM contains the most basic relationships to describe what happened in the past at a human scale, i.e. people and things meeting in space-time, parts and wholes, use, influence and reference (Doerr and others 2015, 444). CIDOC CRM has also been implemented in various archaeological use cases (e.g. Masur and others 2014) Technologically, a PostgreSQL/PostGIS database is used, and the available information is recorded as complexly as necessary and, at the same time, as simply as possible via a user-friendly user interface (see Eichert 2021 for a detailed explanation) (Fig. 20.3). In order to make the data more comprehensible, compatible, and interoperable, various entities can be linked to gazetteers, vocabularies, thesauri, and other reference systems. THANADOS uses, amongst others, Geonames () for spatial relations, The Getty Art and Architecture Thesaurus – AAT for functional typology (), PeriodO (https://perio.do/) for chronological periods, the WHO International Classification of Diseases – ICD () for diseases and pathologies, and Wikidata () for general vocabulary. In order to define the connections between an entity, respectively a classification or

304 s te fa n e i c he rt

Figure 20.2. Logical data model using mappings to classes and properties of the CIDOC CRM.

Figure 20.3. Hierarchy of Site, Feature, Stratigraphic Unit, and Finds/Osteology Datasets.

categorization in THANADOS with an external reference/vocabulary entry, the SKOS () terms ‘exact match’ and ‘close match’ are used (Fig. 20.4). Via a built-in API in the OpenAtlas Software, data can be exposed in various ways such as JSON-LD using the Linked Places (), or LOUD – linked art () format, XML, RDF, Turtle, CSV, etc. (). THANADOS and OpenAtlas, since they mainly work with historical and archaeological sources, are often confronted with spatial and temporal inaccuracies and uncertainties. For example, a site may be only located vaguely, and have an equally imprecise dating. In order not to suggest an arbitrary precision here and not to force users to commit to subjectively chosen time spans and locations when entering data, we use a concept that, in principle, represents one hundred percent certainty with varying precision. In absolute chronological terms, it is based on the GeoJSON-T model (). A cemetery whose occupation begins in the first half of the eighth century and ends in the eleventh century, for example, would be documented with a total of four time dates, as follows:

2 0.   t h an ad o s — t h e ant hro po lo gi cal and archaeo lo gi cal datab ase o f se p ultures 305

Figure 20.4. Links to external reference systems.

Earliest begin: 1.1.700 Latest begin: 31.12.749 Earliest end: 1.1.1000 Latest end: 31.12.1099 Since dating is in most cases an interpretative concept that depends heavily on the state of research and the interpreting researcher, this is one way of depicting the chronological framework as precisely and at the same time as reliably as possible. Ideally, the dating information has a certainty of one hundred percent. The narrower the information for the time spans, the more precise is the dating. The work with spatial information is similar; point, polyline, and polygon geometries are technically supported. A precisely localized site of a single find, for example, via GPS data, could be documented with a point coordinate. A precisely measured outline of a church cemetery with a polygon is classified as ‘shape’. If the location of the site is not known exactly, for example because it is only known that graves were uncovered in the area of a village in the nineteenth century, it can also be documented using a polygon, within the extent of which the find was located with one hundred percent certainty. In this case, the polygon would be classified as an ‘area’ (see Eichert and others 2016 for details).

The THANADOS Web Application Currently (August 2022), the publicly available data collection comprises 446 cemeteries with 5280 graves, 5560 individuals, 11,506 finds, and 6161 osteoarchaeological records. As mentioned above, data acquisition was made via the OpenAtlas system, and the data is stored in a PostgreSQL database backend. Existing data from completed projects (Diesenberger and others 2020; Popović and others 2019; Eichert and others 2019) and numerous digital data recordings on early medieval cemeteries carried out for theses at the University of Vienna formed an extensive basis. These datasets were translated into English and supplemented by publications that had not yet been digitized; currently, almost all published grave finds of the period under investigation are available in a digital form.

In order to present, disseminate, and visualize these data in a contemporary way, a web application was designed with THANADOS, which has been online since 2019 and is publicly accessible via all common browsers without access restrictions. The application is based on Python and Flask on the server side, and on HTML 5, JavaScript, and CSS on the client side, i.e. common open-source web technology. The data is retrieved from the database via the application, transferred to the browser in a JSON or GeoJSON format, and then visualized/presented on the client side depending on the context. Bootstrap (currently version 5) was used as the framework for the responsive interface. Each location or entity has its own landing page with a persistent URL, via which it can be uniquely identified and accessed. The metadata is stored in the source code, and an assessment according to the FAIR Data Object Assessment Metrics () currently results in a FAIR level of ‘moderate’ with 56 per cent. Each of these landing pages contains all available information on the respective entity, as well as links to superordinate and subordinate entities. A complete catalogue with all linked entities can also be displayed. Each site has an interactive burial ground plan, provided that the graves were also spatially documented during the excavation, in which each individual grave was recorded as GIS geometries. Technologically, the JavaScript library ‘Leaflet.js’ was used for this. This cartographic view offers various GIS functionalities and query options in order to be able to carry out mapping, visualization, and spatial analysis directly in the browser on the intrasite level. In addition, a dashboard for each site visualizes the most important statistical data in the form of diagrams and plots. This was implemented with ‘charts.js’ and ‘D3.js’, also open-source JavaScript libraries. Intersite comparisons can be made using interactive charts. Likewise, any search criteria can be queried via a global search and also combined to search through the entire stock of data. The results are output in tabular form and on a map. All data can be downloaded as CSV, GeoJSON, and image files. All results and information generated by THANADOS are available as open data under the Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 licence.

3 06 s te fa n e i c he rt

Where information from third parties or differently licensed data occurs, this is marked separately, for example, in the case of images or drawings from the original publications. In addition to the URL of the landing page and the THANDADOS portal, the actual authors are always cited, i.e. the authors of the original publication from which the content was digitized, which in turn helps to disseminate their results and their bibliometric impact.

2 0.   t h an ad o s — t h e ant hro po lo gi cal and archaeo lo gi cal datab ase o f se p ultures 307

Works Cited Diesenberger, Maximilian, Stefan Eichert, and Katharina Winckler (eds). 2020. Der Ostalpenraum im Frühmittelalter – Herrschaftsstrukturen, Raumorganisation und archäologisch-historischer Vergleich, Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters Vol. 23, Denkschriften der philosophisch-historischen Klasse, 511 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften) Doerr, Martin, Maria Theodoridou, Edeltraud Aspöck, and Anja Masur. 2015. ‘Mapping Archaeological Databases to CIDOC-CRM’, in Proceedings of the 43rd Conference on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology – CAA2015 – Keep The Revolution Going, ed. by Stefano Campana, Roberto Scopigno, Gabriella Carpentiero, and Marianna Cirillo (Oxford: Archaeopress Publishing LTD), pp. 443–52 Eichert, Stefan. 2010. ‘Grabelsdorf – villa Gabrielis. Betrachtungen zur Entwicklung einer Siedlung vom 7. bis ins 11. Jahrhundert’, Carinthia, I.200: 105–32 —— 2021. ‘Digital Mapping of Medieval Cemeteries: Case Studies from Austria and Czechia’, Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, 14.1, Article 3: 1–15 Eichert, Stefan, Bernhard Koschicek, and Mihailo Popović. 2016. ‘Digitising Patterns of Power (DPP): A Digital Approach towards Recording, Managing, Analysing and Presenting Archeological and Historical Information Based on Case Studies from Eurasian Mountainous Regions’, Acta Archaeologica Carpathica, 51: 257–83 Eichert, Stefan, Jiří Macháček, and Nina Brundke. 2019. ‘Frontier – Contact Zone – No Man’s Land. The Morava – Thaya Region During the Early Middle Ages’, in Power in Landscape. Geographic and Digital Approaches on Historical Research, ed. by Mihailo Popović, Veronika Polloczek, Bernhard Koschicek, and Stefan Eichert (Leipzig: Eudora Verlag), pp. 45–64 Franck, Alfred Ritter von. 1854. ‘Bericht über die Auffindung eines uralten Leichenfeldes bei Kettlach unweit GIoggnitz und über einige andere bemerkenswerthe Fundstücke’, Archiv für Kunde österreichischer Geschichts-Quellen, 12: 235–46 Friesinger, Herwig. 1978. Studien zur Archäologie der Slawen in Niederösterreich, 2. Teil, Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommission, 17/18 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften) Lochner, Michaela, and Irmtraud Hellerschmid. 2016. Ein Gräberfeld der jüngeren Urnenfelderkultur aus Franzhausen-Kokoron (UFK). Epub. doi:10.1553/KatalogUFK [accessed 2019/11/07] Masur, Anja, Keith May, Gerald Hiebel, and Edeltraud Aspöck. 2014. ‘Comparing and Mapping Archaeological Excavation Data from Different Recording Systems for Integration Using Ontologies’, in Proceedings of 18th Conference on Cultural Heritage and New Technologies CHNT, 11. – 13. Nov. 2013 (Vienna: Stadtarchäologie, Museen der Stadt Wien) Meghini, Carlo, Roberto Scopigno, Julian Richards, Holly Wright, Guntram Geser, Sebastian Cuy, Johan Fihn, Bruno Fanini, Hella Hollander, Franco Niccolucci, Achille Felicetti, Paola Ronzino, Federico Nurra, Christos Papatheodorou, Dimitris Gavrilis, Maria Theodoridou, Martin Doerr, Douglas Tudhope, Ceri Binding, and Andreas Vlachidis. 2017. ‘ARIADNE: A Research Infrastructure for Archaeology’, ACM Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, 10.3: Art. 18, 1–17 Nowotny, Elisabeth. 2018. Thunau am Kamp – Das frühmittelalterliche Gräberfeld auf der Oberen Holzwiese (Mit Beiträgen von Karina Grömer, Martin Ježek, Mathias Mehofer, Erich Nau, Gabriela Ruß-Popa und Sirin Uzunoglu-Obenaus), Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommission, 87 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften) Popović, Mihailo, Veronika Polloczek, Bernhard Koschicek, and Stefan Eichert (eds). 2019. Power in Landscape. Geographic and Digital Approaches on Historical Research (Leipzig: Eudora Verlag) Stadler, Peter. 2005. Quantitative Studien zur Archäologie der Awaren I. (Mit Beiträgen von Walter Kutschera, Walter Pohl und Eva Maria Wild), Mitteilungen der Prähistorischen Kommission, 60 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften) Watzinger, Alexander. 2019. ‘OpenAtlas – How to Grow Software for Historians’, in Power in Landscape. Geographic and Digital Approaches on Historical Research, ed. by Mihailo Popović, Veronika Polloczek, Bernhard Koschicek, and Stefan Eichert (Leipzig: Eudora Verlag), pp. 193–204

Online Sources



3 08 s te fa n e i c he rt





Borders, Boundaries, Landscapes

All volumes in this series are evaluated by an Editorial Board, strictly on academic grounds, based on reports prepared by referees who have been commissioned by virtue of their specialism in the appropriate field. The Board ensures that the screening is done independently and without conflicts of interest. The definitive texts supplied by authors are also subject to review by the Board before being approved for publication. Further, the volumes are copyedited to conform to the publisher’s stylebook and to the best international academic standards in the field.

Titles in Series Supernatural Encounters in Old Norse Literature and Tradition, ed. by Daniel Sävborg and Karen Bek-Pedersen (2018) Landscape and Myth in North-Western Europe, ed. by Matthias Egeler (2019) Minjie Su, Werewolves in Old Norse-Icelandic Literature: Between the Monster and the Man (2022)

In Preparation Redefining Ancient Epirus, ed. by Milena Melfi and Maria Stamatopoulou