8/10/2019 177_182_Tonc_Prikaz_1

1/6

177

Dragan Boi: Late La Tne-Roman cemetery in Novo mesto : Ljubljanska cestaand Okrajno glavarstvo : studies on fibulae and on the relative chronology ofthe Late La Tne period = Poznolatensko-rimsko grobie v Novem mestu :Ljubljanska cesta in Okrajno glavarstvo : tudije o fibulah in o relativni kronologijipozne latenske dobe, Katalogi in monografije 39Narodni muzej Slovenije, Ljubljana, 2008, 233 stranica, naklada 600 primjeraka

Dragan Boi: Late La Tne-Roman cemetery in Novo mesto : Ljubljanska cesta andOkrajno glavarstvo : studies on fibulae and on the relative chronology of the Late La Tne

period = Poznolatensko-rimsko grobie v Novem mestu : Ljubljanska cesta in Okrajnoglavarstvo : tudije o fibulah in o relativni kronologiji pozne latenske dobe, Katalogi inmonografije 39

Narodni muzej Slovenije, Ljubljana, 2008, 233 pages, print run of 600 copies

U seriji Katalogi in monografije Narodnog muzeja Slove-nijeizala je 39. knjiga, koja se bavi kasnolatensko-rimskomnekropolom u Novom Mestu u Sloveniji. Novo Mesto vegodinama zauzima poseban poloaj u slovenskoj arheolo-giji kao iznimno znaajno nalazite za razdoblje itavog e-ljeznog doba. Dugogodinja sustavna istraivanja nekropo-le na poloaju Kapiteljske njive pod vodstvom Dolenjskog

muzeja Novog Mesta rezultirala su ne samo sjajnim nalazi-ma, poput novih primjera situlske umjetnosti, ve i nizomod (zasada) est monografija u ediciji Carniola Archaeologi-ca. Monografija publicirana 1992., kao druga u seriji, donosinalaze s keltsko-rimske nekropole na poloaju Beletov vrtna lijevoj obali Krke u sreditu dananjeg grada, proizale izsustavnih iskopavanja sredinom sedamdesetih godina pro-log stoljea. Grobne cjeline pruile su znaajne podatke okronologiji kasnolatenskog razdoblja kao i o nonji, grob-nom ritusu te poecima romanizacije lokalne zajedniceTauriska. Ta je slika sada nadopunjena novim spoznajamakoje donosi monografija dr. Dragana Boia s Intituta zaarheologijo pri Znanstveno raziskovalnom centru SAZU iz

Ljubljane. Poloaji Ljubljanjska cesta i Okrajno glavarstvopredstavljaju naime integralni dio nekropole koja obuhvaai poloaj poznat kao Beletov vrt, kao i dvije lokacije na koji-ma su poduzeta zatitna istraivanja mnogo manjeg opse-ga (kua Vojska i Skabernetov vrt). D. Boi stoga predlaeobjedinjeni naziv nekropola Beletov vrt s okolicom kojimbi se obuhvatilo spomenute poloaje, dok bi se termin ne-kropola Beletov vrt koristio za odreivanje grobova koje

je istraio Tone Knez i objavio u spomenutoj monografiji iz1992. godine.

Knjiga se otvara pregledom povijesti istraivanja, kojasu se na spomenute dvije lokacije odvijala 1890. odnosno

A new book dealing with the Late La Tne-Roman ne-cropolis in Novo Mesto, Slovenia has been published as the39th volume of the series Catalogues and Monographs ofthe National Museum of Slovenia. For some years now, NovoMesto has held a special place in Slovenian archaeology asan exceptionally significant Bronze Age site. The systematicexcavations of the necropolis on the position Kapiteljskenjive that lasted several years and were led by the Dolen-

jska Museum in Novo Mesto have yielded not only excep-tional finds, such as new specimens of situla art, but alsoa series of six (for the time being) monographs as part ofthe Carniola Archaeologicaseries. A Monograph publishedin 1992, as the second in the series, presents finds from theCeltic-Roman necropolis on the position Beletov vrt on theleft bank of the Krka river, in what is now the town centre.These finds were the result of systematic excavations in themid-seventies of the last century. The grave assemblagesprovided significant data on the chronology of the Late LaTne period, as well as on the costume, the funerary riteand the beginnings of the Romanisation process in the lo-cal Taurisci community. This picture has now been comple-mented by the new insights presented in the monographby Dr. Dragan Boi of the Institute of Archaeology at theScientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sci-ences and Arts in Ljubljana. The positions Ljubljanska cestaand Okrajno glavarstvo are an integral part of the necropo-lis that also includes the position known as Beletov vrt andtwo locations that were the subject of rescue excavationsof much smaller scope (Hia Vojska and Skabernetov vrt).This is why D. Boi proposes that these positions be uni-fied under the name of the necropolis Beletov vrt and itssurroundings, while the name the Beletov vrt necropoliswould be used to refer to the graves investigated by ToneKnez and published in the mentioned 1992 monograph.

The book opens with an overview of the history of inves-tigations, which took place at these two locations in 1890

8/10/2019 177_182_Tonc_Prikaz_1

2/6

ASJA TONC, DRAGAN BOI: POZNOLATENSKORIMSKO GROBIE V NOVEM MESTU PRI KAZ, PRIL. INST. ARHEOL. ZAGREBU, 28/2011, STR. 177181

178

1902. godine. Zbog nestrunog iskopavanja i devastacijeprije dolaska strunjaka na teren nisu sauvane zatvorenecjeline, pa je samo zahvaljujui oznakama s brojem grobana nekim posudama u muzeju djelomino rekonstruiransadraj trinaest grobova istraenih tijekom radova na polo-aju Ljubljanske ceste. (Jo su dva groba istraena 1954. na

poloaju Ljubljanske ceste, dok je kod Okrajnog glavarstvau razdoblju 1989.1991. istraeno jo 19 grobova.) Iscrpanprikaz prepiske izmeu muzejskih djelatnika i bekog Zen-tral Kommissiona, kao i opisa okolnosti pod kojima je dolodo otkria, a zatim i iskopavanja grobova, nadopunjen jeprijepisima originalnih pisanih izvora (uz pisma i izvjetaje,tu su i izvaci iz novina), prikazanih na njemakom origina-lu s prijevodom na slovenski. Podaci koji se donose u ovimpoglavljima imaju i vrijednost za povijest slovenske kao i ar-heologije Novog Mesta, ali i za poznavanje lokalne povijestiopenito, stoga mogu posluiti i onima koji ne pripadajuarheolokoj struci. Ipak, ciljana publika jesu strunjaci kojise, prije svega, bave kasnolatenskim razdobljem, budui da

se veina daljnjeg teksta odnosi na analize pojedinih oblikafibula te pitanja kronologije grupe Mokronog i njoj susje-dnih podruja.

Na poetku treeg poglavlja koje donosi analizu fibula,autor specificira da se detaljna obrada u ovom dijelu zadr-ala na vrstama Nauheim II s podruja rasprostiranja gru-pe Mokronog, te na tipovima Idrija Ia i Nova Vas. Isto tako,pojanjava se kako je kao polazna toka posluila raspravaStefana Demetza. Demetzova monografija (Demetz 1999)postala je nezaobilazno tivo svakoga tko se u svojem radususretne s kasnolatenskim i ranorimskim oblicima fibula, atakav je poloaj stekla zahvaljujui iscrpnoj obradi golemekoliine materijala iz europskih muzeja te tipolokim podje-podje-

lama koje prate rasprave o kronologiji, distribuciji, nainunoenja i porijeklu obraenih tipova fibula. Iako D. Boipriznaje vrijednost i znaaj Demetzovog djela, iznosi i kri-tiku neujednaenosti nekih iznesenih datacija ili tipolokihatribucija, to je sasvim normalna pojava u tako opsenomradu. Prihvaenost Demetzovih tipolokih podjela i krono-logije nije potrebno tumaiti poznavatelju aktualne literatu-re, koji je i sam vrlo dobro upuen u navedeno djelo, koje jena neki nain podloga za itanje Boieve analize, kao to jeto s druge strane i poznavanje Knezove objave materijala izBeletovog vrta. S druge strane, moe se rei i da je Boie-va analiza postala svojevrstan prirunik koji se koristi zaje-dno s Demetzovom monografskom obradom kao ispravakili dopuna, ali i kao upozorenje itatelju o potrebi kritikogsagledavanja podataka koje susree, to naravno vrijedi nesamo za istaknute primjere. Tipovi Idrija Ia i Nova Vas detalj-no su obraeni, s raspravama o povijesti istraivanja, obli-ku, nonji, kontekstu nalaza, rasprostranjenosti i dataciji.Eventualne nesporazume o nomenklaturi fibula tipa Idrijau budunosti e se izbjei zahvaljujui nabrajanju razliitihimena i miljenja koje su razni autori iznosili tijekom godina,a korisnosti tekstualnog dijela doprinose i aurirani popisinalazita s kartama rasprostranjenosti.

etvrto poglavlje donosi zakljuke o kronologiji ne-kropole Beletov vrt s okolicom, tonije njenih triju glavnih

and 1902. Because of the unprofessional excavation workand the devastation that took place before the arrival of ex-perts, the closed assemblages were not preserved, so thatthe partial reconstruction of the contents of thirteen gravesinvestigated in the excavations on the position of Ljubljan-ska cesta was based solely on the grave markings on somevessels in the museum. (Two more graves were examined

in 1954 on the position Ljubljanska cesta and another 19 inthe period between 1989 and 1991 at Okrajno glavarstvo).There is a detailed presentation of the correspondence be-tween the museum staff and the Vienna Zentral Kommis-sion, as well as a description of the circumstances of thediscovery and then also the excavation of the graves. Thispresentation is complemented by transcripts of originalwritten sources (letters, reports and newspaper clippings)in the German original with a Slovenian translation. Theinformation presented in these chapters is valuable for thehistory of Slovenian archaeology as well as the archaeol-ogy of Novo Mesto, but also with regard to the local his-tory in general terms and can, therefore, be useful also tothose who do not belong to the archaeological profession.

However, because most of the remaining text deals with theanalysis of certain forms of fibulae and the chronology ofthe Mokronog Group and its neighbouring areas, the targetaudience are, in fact, experts dealing above all with the LateLa Tne period.

At the beginning of the third chapter, which brings ananalysis of the fibulae, the author specifies that in this partthe detailed analysis is limited to the Types Nauheim II fromthe distribution area of the Mokronog Group, and the typesIdrija Ia and Nova Vas. He also explains that the startingpoint was the discussion by Stefan Demetz. Demetzs mon-ograph (Demetz 1999) has become indispensible for any-one who in their work comes across Late La Tne and earlyRoman forms of fibulae. It has attained this status owing tothe detailed analysis of very large amounts of material from

European museums, and the typological divisions that ac-company the discussions on chronology, distribution, man-ner of wearing and origins of specific types of fibulae. Al-though D. Boi acknowledges the value and significance ofDemetzs work, he also criticizes the inconsistencies of someof the stated datings and typological attributions, which isonly to be expected in such a comprehensive work. Thereis no particular need to explain the level to which Demetzstypological divisions and chronology have been acceptedto anyone who is familiar with current literature, and isquite familiar with the mentioned work itself, which is, ina way, the foundation for reading Bois analysis, as is alsoknowledge of Knezs publications of the material from Bele-tov vrt. On the other hand, it could also be said that Bois

analysis has become a textbook of sorts, used together withDemetzs monograph as a correction or supplement, butalso as a reminder to readers that the data they encountershould always be approached critically. This, of course, isnot limited to the stated examples. The types Idrija Ia andNova Vas are dealt with in detail, including discussions onthe history of investigation, the form, costume, context ofthe finds, distribution and dating. Possible misunderstand-ings in the naming system of the Idrija type fibulas will beavoided in the future thanks to the listing of the differentnames and opinions put forward by different authors overthe years. The updated lists of sites with distribution mapsalso contribute to the usefulness of the textual part.

The fourth chapter presents the conclusions with re-

8/10/2019 177_182_Tonc_Prikaz_1

3/6

ASJA TONC, DRAGAN BOI: LATE LA TNEROMAN CEMETERY IN NOVO MESTO RE VIEW, PRIL. INST. ARHEOL . ZAGREBU, 28/2011, P. 177181

179

dijelova. U kronolokoj obradi nalaza s poloaja Okrajnoglavarstvo i Ljubljanska cesta atribucija materijala pojedi-nom stupnju ograniena je na pojedinane predmete kojiukazuju na vrijeme ukapanja grobova iz kojih materijal po-tjee, budui da, kako je spomenuto, nisu sauvane grobnecjeline. Nekropola na Beletovom vrtu ostaje dakle oslonac

za definiranje materijala karakteristinog za posljednji stu-panj grupe Mokronog, odnosno faze IIIa i IIIb, i upravo jenjoj posveen prvi dio ovog poglavlja, koje se otvara osvr-tom na dvije vrste ukopa i njihovu dataciju, pri emu se po-

java kamene grobne konstrukcije pripisuje razdoblju nakonKlaudija. Horizontalna stratigrafija nekropole pokazala jegrupiranje kasnolatenskih ukopa uglavnom na zapadnomdijelu nekropole Beletov vrt, dok se ranorimski grobovi odsrednjeaugustovskog doba nadalje nalaze veinom na nje-nom istonom dijelu. Iako se javljaju grobovi iz obje fazekasnog latena kao i rimskodobni ukopi, pokazalo se da sena Okrajnom glavarstvu pokopavanje odvijalo prvenstvenou stupnju Mokronog IIIa, dok na podruju Ljubljanske ceste

prevladavaju rimski grobovi koji seu sve do 4. st. n. e.Slijedi poglavlje o relativnoj kronologiji kasnolatenskog

razdoblja na podruju jugoistonih Alpa i sjeverne Italije, ukojem se opirnije govori o, na prethodnim stranicama na-znaenim, problemima datacije pojedinih vrsta materijalakao i nekih zatvorenih cjelina. O relativnoj kronologiji gru-pe Mokronog pisao je M. Gutin, a nakon njega u nekolikonavrata i D. Boi, koji se u ovom djelu nastavlja na zaklju-ke iznesene prije desetak godina pri uspostavi kronolokesheme koja se i danas koristi (Gutin 1977; 1984; Boi 1987;1999). U tekstu se objanjava usporeivanje ovih stupnjevas onima latenske kronologije vaee za prostor srednje Eu-rope, pa tako u razdoblju kasnog latena stupnju IIIa odgova-

ra LT D1, dok stupanj IIIb odgovara stupnju LT D2. Osnovnashema ostaje ista kao 1999., a novosti se odnose na dopunupopisa oblika karakteristinih za stupanj Mokronog IIIb dokoje se dolo analizom materijala s nekropole na Beletovomvrtu. Autor se dotie i problematine datacije poetka na-selja na Magdalensbergu u austrijskoj Korukoj, oko kojegse unato vrlo dobrom stanju objavljenosti i istraenosti, idalje vode rasprave, zasada bez konanog rjeenja. D. Bo-i iznosi svoju dataciju poetka naselja na temelju nekolikostratigrafskih cjelina koje se mogu smatrati najranije dati-ranim kontekstima naselja, pri emu se naposljetku slae sPiccottinijevim stavom i smjeta poetak trgovakog nase-lja na Magdalensbergu u prvu polovinu 1. st. pr. Kr., tonijeu prva tri desetljea ili fazu LT D1b relativne kronologije ka-snolatenskog razdoblja. S obzirom na niz postojeih razlii-tih interpretacija poetka ovog iznimno znaajnog naselja,ovaj je zakljuak jedan od najzanimljivijih u djelu te e zasi-gurno probuditi interes mnogih strunjaka izvan Slovenije,a mogue izazvati i kontroverze. Sljedee stranice D. Boiposvetio je kronologiji sjeverne Italije, odnosno onoj koju

je utemeljio Raffaele De Marinis na osnovu grobnih nalazaiz Lombardije (De Marinis 1984), a koja se koristi i za drugeregije. Ovdje se iznose dva zanimljiva prijedloga. Prvi se od-nosi na uporabu kratice LTit za definiranje sjevernoitalskihstupnjeva po De Marinisu, a kojom bi se omoguilo razli-

gard to the chronology of the Beletov vrt necropolis andits surroundings, or more precisely, its three main parts. Inthe chronological analysis of the finds from the positionOkrajno glavarstvo and Ljubljanska cesta, the attribution ofthe material to a specific phase is limited to individual ob-

jects that indicate the time of the burial of the graves fromwhich the material originates, because, as stated earlier,

no grave assemblages have been preserved. The Beletovvrt necropolis, therefore, remains the principal support fordefining the material characteristic of the last phase of theMokronog Group, namely the IIIa and IIIb phase. It is thisnecropolis that is the subject of the first part of this chapterwhich opens with a review of two types of burial and theirdating, with the stone grave structure attributed to the pe-riod after Claudius. The horizontal stratigraphy of the ne-cropolis showed a grouping of Late La Tne burials mostlyin the western part of the Beletov vrt necropolis, while theearly Roman graves beginning with the Middle Augustanperiod are located mostly on the eastern part. Althoughthere are graves from both Late La Tne phases as well asRoman burials, it transpired that at Okrajno glavarstvo buri-

als took place primarily during the Mokronog IIIa phase,while the area of Ljubljanska cesta is dominated by Romangraves continuing up to the 4thcentury AD.

This chapter is followed by a chapter on the relativechronology of the Late La Tne period in the south-easternAlpine area and northern Italy, dealing in greater detail withthe problems, mentioned in the preceding pages, of datingcertain types of material as well as some closed contexts.The relative chronology of the Mokronog Group has beenaddressed by M. Gutin, and after him on several occasionsalso by D. Boi and in this work, Boi builds on the con-clusions presented some ten years ago when the chrono-logical scheme, still in use today, was first being established(Gutin 1977; 1984; Boi 1987; 1999). The text explains thecomparison of these phases with those of the La Tne chro-

nology valid for central Europe. Thus, in the Late La Tneperiod phase IIIa corresponds to LT D1 while phase IIIb cor-responds to phase LT D2. The basic scheme remains thesame as in 1999, the novelty being the additions to the listof forms characteristic of the Mokronog IIIb phase. Theseadditions resulted from the analysis of the material fromthe Beletov vrt necropolis. The author also addresses theproblematic dating of the inception of the settlement onMagdalensberg in the Austrian province of Carinthia, thatis still the subject of ongoing debates despite the fact thatit has been investigated and published to a high degree. D.Boi presents his own dating of the settlements inceptionbased on a few stratigraphic contexts that can be consid-ered to be the earliest dated contexts of the settlement. In

this he ultimately agrees with Piccottinis view and placesthe inception of the trading settlement on Magdalensbergin the first half of the 1st century BC, or more precisely, inthe first three decades or phase LT D1b of the Late La Tneperiod relative chronology. Bearing in mind that there arecurrently several different interpretations of the inceptionof this very important settlement, this conclusion is one ofthe most interesting in the work and will surely arouse theinterest of many experts outside Slovenia, and maybe evengive rise to controversy. D. Boi devotes the pages that fol-low to the chronology of northern Italy, as established byRaffaele de Marinis based on the grave finds from Lombardy(De Marinis 1984) and used also for other regions. Two inter-esting proposals are presented here. The first refers to using

8/10/2019 177_182_Tonc_Prikaz_1

4/6

ASJA TONC, DRAGAN BOI: POZNOLATENSKORIMSKO GROBIE V NOVEM MESTU PRI KAZ, PRIL. INST. ARHEOL. ZAGREBU, 28/2011, STR. 177181

180

kovanje naspram srednjoeuropske nomenklature. Taj pri-jedlog rezultat je autorove usporedbe stupnja LT D1 po DeMarinisu s onim LT D1a srednje Europe, odnosno stupnja LTD2 Lombardije s fazom LT D1b. Tu dolazimo do drugog pri-

jedloga, odnosno uvoenja stupnja LT D3 za sjevernu Italiju(tonije LTit D3 po novoj nomenklaturi) koji bi odgovarao

srednjoeuropskom stupnju LT D2, a ukljuivao bi i ranoau-gustovsko doba, za razliku od De Marinisovog miljenja dase kraj kasnolatenskog doba mora datirati oko 30. g. pr. Kr.To nas pitanje dovodi do jo jednog problema u suvremenojliteraturi o kasnolatenskom razdoblju kojeg se u ovoj mono-grafiji samo marginalno spominje. Kako se izriito navodi,koritena je relativna kronologija po Gebhardu i Fischeru (v.biljeku 70) s tri kasnolatenske faze, za razliku od podjelena etiri stupnja (LT D1a, D1b, D2a, D2b) koju nalazimo kodS. Rieckhoff, J. Metzlera i nekih drugih autora (vidi o tomepregledno i saeto, s bibliografijom, u Rieckhoff 2008), iako

je prihvaena apsolutna datacija koju donosi J. Metzler. Ka-da se u monografiji o nekropolama Novog Mesta govori o

stupnju LT D1b u koji pripadaju fibule vrste Almgren 65 ilizdjeliaste (koljkaste ili Schsselfibule) treba imati na umuda se primjerice kod S. Rieckhoff ove vrste javljaju kao oblicikarakteristini za fazu LT D2a, odnosno Metzlerov horizontClemency. Takve razlike ustvari su isto terminoloke pri-rode i ne odnose se na sadrajni dio pojedinog stupnja usmislu oblika koji se u njemu javljaju, ali lako mogu dovestido zabuna poput pripisavanja datumskih okvira koji se razli-kuju od onih na koje cilja autor, stoga je potrebno jasno de-finirati koja se kronologija koristi, to autor sasvim ispravnoi ini. Izabrana shema prikladnija je utoliko to ne poznajepodjelu mlae faze kasnog latena na dva horizonta, a tozasada nije mogue uiniti za posljednju fazu grupe Mokro-

nog. Na ovom mjestu dovoljno je upozoriti na aktualnu pro-blematiku kronologije kasnolatenskog razdoblja i injenicuda paralelno egzistira nekoliko podjela, raenih naravnona regionalnoj osnovi, ali koje su oslonac za datiranje ma-terijala koji nalazimo i na naim prostorima. U poglavlju orelativnoj kronologiji moda se stoga moglo neto redakaposvetiti i toj temi kako bi se razrijeile eventualne dvojbekod manje upuenog itatelja, primjerice studenata koji eovu monografiju svakako morati koristiti pri prouavanjugrupe Mokronog i tipologije kasnolatenskih fibula. Ipak, sobzirom na vrlo opsenu bibliografiju lako je doi do daljnjeliterature o temi.

Poglavljem o relativnoj kronologiji zavrava se tekstu-alni dio monografije, a slijedi katalog predmeta pronae-nih na poloajima Ljubljanska cesta i Okrajno glavarstvo, suvodnim napomenama koji olakavaju pregled katalokih

jedinica i pripadajuih tabli s preglednim i jasnim crteima,uz koje se nalaze i dvije table s fotografijama kao i tabla scrteima staklenih predmeta u boji. Uz detaljno opisane iilustrirane predmete, navedeni su i nalazi koji nisu prikazanina tablama ili su poznati samo iz inventarnih knjiga, ime sezaokruuje pria o povijesti istraivanja s poetka monogra-fije. Tu je i popis nalazita s kartama rasprostranjenosti zatipove Nova Vas i Idrija Ia te bibliografija.

U uobiajenoj vrlo pohvalnoj praksi slovenskih izdanja

the abbreviation LTit in defining the north Italian phasesaccording to De Marinis, which would make it possible todistinguish this from the central European naming system.This proposal is the result of the authors comparison of theLT D1 phase according to De Marinis and the LT D1a phaseof central Europe, that is, the Lombard LT D2 phase with theLT D1b phase. This leads to the second proposal, which is

the introduction of the phase LT D3 for northern Italy (moreprecisely LTit D3 according to the new naming systemwhich would correspond to the central European phaseLT D2 and would include the early Augustan period. This isin contrast to De Mariniss view that the end of the Late LaTne period should be dated to around 30 years BC. Thisissue brings us to another problem present in the literatureon the Late La Tne period, mentioned only marginally inthis work. It is expressly stated that the relative chronologyaccording to Gebhard and Fischer was used (see footnote70) with three Late La Tne phases, in contrast to the divi-sion into four phases (LT D1a, D1b, D2a, D2b) that we find inthe work of S. Rieckhoff, J. Metzler and some other authors(see clearly and concisely presented with a bibliography in

Rieckhoff 2008), although the absolute dating presented byJ. Metzler is accepted. When the monograph on the NovoMesto necropolises refers to phase LT D1b which includesthe Almgren 65 or the dish (or Schssel) fibulae, one shouldbear in mind that in the work of J. Rieckhoff, for example,these types appear as forms characteristic of the LT D2aphase, that is, Metzlers Clemency horizon. These differenc-es are, in fact, purely terminological in nature and do not re-fer to the substance of the phases in terms of the forms thatappear within them, but they could, however, easily lead toconfusion, such as time frame attributions that differ fromthe ones the author intended. It is therefore, necessary, toprecisely identify the chronology being used, as the authorquite rightly does. The chosen scheme is more appropriateas it does not recognise the division of the younger stage

of Late La Tne into two horizons, which is for now impos-sible to do for the last phase of the Mokronog Group. Here itwill suffice to point to the current problems in Late La Tnechronology and the fact that several divisions exist simulta-neously, that were, of course, developed on a regional levelbut are the principal foundation for dating material foundalso in areas of Croatia. The chapter on relative chronology,therefore, could have devoted a few lines also to this topicin order to resolve possible dilemmas among less knowl-edgeable readers, for instance students, who will definitelyhave to use this monograph when studying the MokronogGroup and the typology of Late La Tne fibulae. Neverthe-less, the very comprehensive bibliography facilitates accessto additional literature on the topic.

The chapter on relative chronology completes the tex-tual part of the monograph. It is followed by a catalogueof the objects discovered on the positions Ljubljanska cestaand Okrajno glavarstvo. The introductory remarks assist inexamining the catalogue units and accompanying graphswith well laid out and clear drawings, along with two tableswith photographs and a table with colour drawings of glassobjects. Along with the detailed descriptions and illustra-tions of the objects, the author also lists the objects thatwere not presented in the tables or are known only from in-ventory books. This completes the account of the history ofinvestigation from the beginning of the monograph. Thereis also a list of sites with distribution maps for the types No-va Vas and Idrija Ia, and a bibliography.

8/10/2019 177_182_Tonc_Prikaz_1

5/6

ASJA TONC, DRAGAN BOI: LATE LA TNEROMAN CEMETERY IN NOVO MESTO RE VIEW, PRIL. INST. ARHEOL . ZAGREBU, 28/2011, P. 177181

181

i ova je monografija izala u dvojezinom, slovensko-en-gleskom obliku i bogatoj opremi s ilustracijama u boji. Ti-sak knjige popraen je prigodnom izlobom odranom uDolenjskom muzeju u Novom Mestu, potom i u Narodnommuzeju Slovenije u Ljubljani, u kojoj su na iroj publici pri-stupaan nain prikazani poeci istraivanja u Novom Me-

stu, ujedno i poeci slovenske arheologije.Monografija o nalazima s dvaju lokacija u dananjem

Novom Mestu u Dolenjskoj u potpunosti sadrajem odgo-vara svom podnaslovu, odnosno iscrpno obrauje pitanjapojedinih oblika fibula i relativne kronologije kasnolaten-skog razdoblja. Rasprave potaknute dosad neobjavljenimnalazima posluile su autoru za ire analize koje nadilazepodruje rasprostiranja grupe Mokronog, a engleski e pri-

jevod zasigurno olakati meunarodnu recepciju djela. Ia-ko na trenutke pri itanju tekst moe djelovati suhoparnozbog velike koliine informacija, djelo je logino koncipira-no i moe se po potrebi iitavati i tematski kroz poglavlja,to pogotovo vrijedi za izdvojene oblike fibula koje se mogu

itati i kao tri zasebna lanka. Djelo se nadovezuje na dosa-danje radove D. Boia u kojima je zacrtao osnove krono-logije mlaeg eljeznog doba, ovaj put s detaljnijom obra-dom posljednje faze u periodizaciji tog razdoblja. Knjiga jerezultat pedantne analize i panje za detalje koja je oita i uprijanjim radovima, te je s pravom ve sada postala neza-obilazno djelo za sve koji se zanimaju za sloenu i izazovnuproblematiku kasnolatenskog doba.

In line with the usual highly praiseworthy practice ofSlovenian publishers, this monograph was also publishedin bilingual form, in English and Slovenian, richly designedand with colour illustrations. The publication of the bookwas accompanied by an exhibition held at the DolenjskaMuseum in Novo Mesto, and then also in the National Mu-seum of Slovenia in Ljubljana. These exhibitions presented,

in a manner accessible to the wider public, the beginningsof investigations in Novo Mesto which were also the begin-nings of Slovenian archaeology.

The content of the monograph on the finds from twolocations in todays Novo Mesto in Dolenjska is entirely trueto its subtitle it deals thoroughly and in great detail withissues relating to certain forms of fibulae and the relativechronology of the Late La Tne period. The author makesuse of the discussions prompted by the previously unpub-lished finds for a wider analysis, transcending the distribu-tion area of the Mokronog Group, and the English transla-tion will certainly facilitate the international reception ofthe work. Although at times the text may seem somewhatdry because of the large amount of information presented,

the work is logically conceived and, if needed, can be readby topics across the chapters, which is especially true forthe fibula forms that have been singled out and that can beread as three separate articles. The monograph builds onthe existing work of D. Boi in which he outlined the basicsof the Late Iron Age chronology, this time dealing in moredetail with the last phase in the period. The book is the re-sult of meticulous analysis and attention to detail that wasevident in the authors previous works, and has rightfullyalready become indispensible for all those with an interestin the complex and challenging issues of the Late La Tneperiod.

Asja Tonc

LITERATURA / BIBLIOGRAPHY

Boi, D. 1987, Zapadna grupa, in: Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja, V,Benac A. (ed), Sarajevo, 855-897.

Boi, D. 1999, Die Erforschung der Latnezeit in Slowenien seit Jahr1964,Arheoloki Vestnik, 50, 189-213.

De Marinis, R. 1984, Treviglio (Bergamo), Studi etruschi, vol. L, 519-522.Demetz, S. 1999, Fibeln der Sptlatne- und frhen rmischen Kaiserzeit in

den Alpenlnder, Frhgeschichtliche und Provinzialrmische Ar-chologie Materialen und Forschungen, 4, Rahden.

Gutin, M. 1977, Relativna kronologija grobov Mokronoke skupine, in:Keltske tudije, Breice, 67-103.

Gutin, M. 1984, Die Kelten in Jugoslawien, Jahrbuch des Rmisch-Ger-manischen Zentralmuseums, 31, 305-363.

Rieckhoff, S. 2008, Geschichte der Chronologie der Spten Eisenzeit inMitteleuropa und das Paradigma der Kontinuitt, Leipziger online-Beitrge zur Ur- und Frhgeschichtlichen Archologie, 30, 1-11.

Prijevod i lektura / Translation and Proofreading

Sanjin Miheli

8/10/2019 177_182_Tonc_Prikaz_1

6/6

182