av_60_bozic.pdf

8/10/2019 AV_60_Bozic.pdf

1/34

63Arheoloki vestnik 60, 2009, str. 6395

A Hallstatt grave containing a cuirass,excavated near Stina by the Duchess of Mecklenburg in 1913he reliability o grave groups rom the Mecklenburg Collection

Dragan BOI

Izvleek

Grobna celota groba z oklepom iz gomile 52 oziromaIV v Stini, ki ga je leta 1913 izkopala vojvodinja Mecklen-burka, je bila e tirikrat predstavljena, vsakokrat nekolikodrugae. Nobena od tirih razliic pa se ne ujema povsems podatki v zapiskih vojvodinjinega tajnika Gustava Gold-berga. Od najdb, ki so jih doslej pripisovali grobu, so bilizanesljivo najdeni v njem samo oklep, kernos in lonek.Morda izvirajo iz njega tudi ciborij z nagubanim trupomin sulini osti. Zagotovo pa mu ne pripadajo pokrova,manja ciborija in 67 kalotastih gumbov z zanko. Manja

ciborija in pokrova so iz kakega drugega stikega groba, zMagdalenske gore ali celo s kakega drugega grobia do-lenjske haltatske kulture, kalotasti gumbi pa so z grobia

v Stranem dolu blizu Goleka pri Vinici.Figuralno okraena pasna spona s sprevodom mokih in

enske, ki jo je Rainer-Maria Weiss pripisal grobu z okle-pom iz gomile 52, Biba eran pa grobu z dvogrebenastoelado iz gomile 55 oziroma VI v Stini, ni iz nobenegaod teh grobov.

Grobne celote Mecklenburke zbirke so nezanesljive.Med pridatke haltatskih grobov z Magdalenske gorein iz Stine so bile zameane najdbe iz drugih grobov zistega ali celo z drugega najdia. V nekaterih so najdbe,

ki zagotovo izvirajo s poznohaltatsko-latenskega grobiav Stranem dolu blizu Goleka pri Vinici (npr. kalotast igumbi vrste Vinica, bronasti obroki z izrastki, bronasteigle v obliki pastirske palice in jantarne jagode vrst 8din 8e po Palavestri). Po drugi strani pa so bile haltatskenajdbe, ki jih je vojvodinja izkopala na Magdalenski goriin pri Stini, npr. deli sestavljene elade, zakljuka votleovratnice in odlomek iguralno okraene situle, zameane

v nekatere grobne celote iz Stranega dola blizu Golekapri Vinici.

Kljune besede:Slovenija, Dolenjska, Stina, Magdalen-ska gora, Bela krajina, Golek pri Vinici, Metlika; Hrvaka,

Grobnik, Kastav, Lika; Bosna in Hercegovina, dolina Une;stareja elezna doba, grob z oklepom, mlaja elezna doba,kalotasti gumbi vrste Vinica, obroki z izrastki, jantarne

jagode, Mecklenburka zbirka

Abstract

Te burial deposits rom the grave with a cuirass romtumulus 52 or IV at Stina, excavated by the Duchess oMecklenburg in 1913, have already been published ourtimes and have been differently presented each time. Noneo the our versions completely corresponds with the datain the notes o the Duchesss secretary, Gustav Goldberg. Othe finds that have previously been attributed to this grave,only a cuirass, a kernos and a small pot can definitely beascribed to it. In addition, a fluted ciborium and spearheadsmay derive rom the grave. wo lids, two smaller ciboria

and 67 dome-shaped loop-backed buttons are certainly notrom this burial. Te smaller ciboria and the lids are romanother Stina grave, rom Magdalenska gora or perhapssome other cemetery o the Dolenjska (Lower Carniola)Hallstatt culture, while the dome-shaped buttons originaterom the cemetery at Strani dol near Golek pri Vinici.

Rainer-Maria Weiss ascribed a belt-plate with igurativeornament depicting a procession o men and a woman to agrave with a cuirass rom tumulus 52. Biba eran ascribedthe same belt-plate to a grave with a double-crested helmetrom tumulus 55 or VI at Stina. However, the belt-plateis not rom any o these graves.

he grave groups o the Mecklenburg Collection are

unreliable. Finds rom other graves rom the same or evenrom a dierent site have sometimes been added to theHallstatt period graves rom Magdalenska gora and Stina.Some are undoubtedly rom the Latest Hallstatt-La necemetery at Strani dol near Golek pri Vinici (e.g.dome-shaped buttons o the Vinica type, bronze sun rings, bronzeshepherds crook pins and amber beads o Palavestras types8d and 8e). Conversely, some grave groups rom Golek priVinici contain Hallstatt period inds that were excavatedby the Duchess on Magdalenska gora and at Stina.

Keywords: Slovenia, Dolenjska, Stina, Magdalenskagora, Bela krajina, Golek pri Vinici, Metlika; Croatia,

Grobnik, Kastav, Lika; Bosnia and Hercegovina, the Unavalley; Early Iron Age, grave with a cuirass, Late Iron Age,dome-shaped buttons o the Vinica type, sun rings, amberbeads, the Mecklenburg Collection


2/34

64 Dragan BOI

INTRODUCTION

hree bronze cuirasses have been discovered ingraves o the Slovenian Hallstatt culture, all in theDolenjska region: two at Stina and one at Kandijanear Novo mesto (Dular, ecco Hvala 2007, 242,note 481, igs. 139 and 141). he cuirass romNovo mesto was the last to be discovered. It wasound in 1939 in tumulus 5 at Kandija, duringthe construction o a sports stadium (Knez 1986,

Wells 1981, 55, umulus IV:hus I judge the associations in this tumulus to be thoroughly trustworthy.

19, 51, no. 6, ig. 26: 5); it was not until 1941 that

Rajko Loar examined the rest o the inds romthis grave (Gabrovec 1960). A ew years earlier,in 1935, a local man, Albin Hrast, discovered thesecond grave with a cuirass rom Stina. It wasound in tumulus 40, 41 or 43 o the tumuluscemetery at Stina (Loar 1937; Gabrovec 1966b,26, igs. 47; Dular 2003, 117, igs. 65 and 66;Gabrovec, Kruh 2006). However, the purpose othe present study is to discuss the irst grave with

Fig.1:Metal grave goods rom grave 30, tumulus 52 rom Stina, ater Biba eran. Scale 1 = 1:6; 25 = 1:2.Sl. 1:Kovinski pridatki groba 30 gomile 52 iz Stine po Bibi eran. M. 1 = 1:6; 25 = 1:2.


3/34

65A Hallstatt grave containing a cuirass, excavated near Stina by the Duchess o Mecklenburg in 1913

Fig.2:Ceramic grave goods rom grave 30, tumulus 52 rom Stina, ater Biba eran. Scale = 1:4.Sl. 2:Keramini pridatki groba 30 gomile 52 iz Stine po Bibi eran. M. = 1:4.


4/34

66 Dragan BOI

a cuirass rom Stina, opened on 14thApril 1913by the Duchess o Mecklenburg in tumulus 52 othe large Stina tumulus cemetery.

he most recent study o this grave was by Bibaeran. Her work was published three years ago

in the irst part o the publication on the Hallstatttumuli near Stina in Dolenjska (eran 2006,263266, pls. 207208 figs.12). In this volumeStane Gabrovec, Ana Kruh, Ida Murgelj and Bibaeran mainly present inds kept at the NationalMuseum o Slovenia in Ljubljana. his was theourth publication o the irst Stina cuirass grave,which had previously been studied by Gabrovec(1978, 142, igs. 57 fig.4), Peter S. Wells (1981,62, ig. 85) and Rainer-Maria Weiss (1993). hegrave goods are stored in the Peabody Museum o

Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts,USA, and in the Museum or Prehistory and EarlyHistory in Berlin. eran decided that anotherpublication was necessary because in 1992 thecuirass, which or a long time was believed to havebeen lost, came back to the Museum in Berlin(eran 2006, 263).

TUMULUS 52 (TUMULUS IVAFTER THE DUCHESS OF MECKLENBURG)

Between 1905 and 1914 the Duchess excavated11 tumuli near Stina (Wells 1981, 47). At thetime o the excavation the tumulus containingthe cuirass grave had been named the ronteljtumulus (Gomila rondel) or the large tumulus(grosse Gomila) at entvid (Mahr 1934, 112, cat.no. 126; Gabrovec 1978, 134, ig. 3; Weiss 1993,177, note 26). In the auction sale catalogue o theMecklenburg Collection it is described as tumulusIV at entvid (St. Veit) (Mahr 1934, 112114).

he same description was used by Wells in hispublication o the Hallstatt period graves romHallstatt and Stina (Wells 1981, 5568). It ismarked with number 52 on the plan o the Stinatumulus cemetery, which comprises 125 tumulithat were still visible (Gabrovec 1994a, 37, 39,ig. 26; Gabrovec et al.2006, 270, ig. 72; Dular,ecco Hvala 2007, 167, 276, cat. no. 98, app. 5). Itis located at Vrhpolje pri entvidu in a group otumuli that lay urthest away southward rom theIron Age settlement. umulus 125 was adjacent to

it on its eastern side. his was excavated in 1906or the Berlin Museum by Alred Gtze, the heado its prehistoric department, and was ully lev-elled ater excavation (Gabrovec 1978, 132, ig.

3; Gabrovec 1994b; Gabrovec et al. 2006, 226,igs. 45 and 46).

THE GRAVE WITH A CUIRASS(GRAVE 30)

he grave with a cuirass was labelled withreerence number 30 at the time o excavation.According to the notes o the Duchesss secretaryGustav Goldberg, transcribed in 1933 in Zurichon the irst sheet o the card index reerring tothis grave (fig. 3) by Adol Mahr, who led thepreparations o the Mecklenburg Collection orthe auction sale in New York, and to the photo-graphs taken during excavation, the grave pit was3.1 m long, 1.1 m wide and covered with largestone slabs.1 A compressed, but well-preserved

cuirass lay beneath the slabs, surrounded by threeceramic vessels, two o them exceptionally wellmade and o very rare orms. One o the two hadour small vessels attached to its body. wo ironspearheads, less well preserved, and a ew circularbuttons had been deposited beneath the cuirass.No other grave goods were present (Wells 1981,47, 62, ig. 85: a; Weiss 1993, 177, note 27, igs.1012;2eran 2006, 264).

In 1977, without knowing about Goldbergs notesand based only on a photograph o an open grave

1 he Archaeological Department o the NationalMuseum o Slovenia has photocopies o the majority othe card index sheets about this grave (nos. 1, 2, 3b, 3c, 4band 6), sent to Stane Gabrovec by Hugh Hencken o thePeabody Museum. I would like to thank Janez Dular orbringing my attention to them. he originals are storedin: Mecklenburg Collection Records, #4077, Box 24, Fol-der 2, Peabody Museum o Archaeology and Ethnology,Harvard University.

2Weiss mentions that Wells knowledge o the circum-stances o discovery was based on A. Mahrs handwritten

notes rom 1934 (correctly 1933). hese notes presumed tobe by Mahr and cited by Weiss word or word in his noteare in act Mahrs transciption o Goldbergs notes romApril 14th1913. His excavation notes are preserved or everygrave o tumulus IV (Wells 1981, 55, tumulus IV).

Fig.3:he irst sheet o the card index concerning grave30, tumulus 52 rom Stina. (Held in the Archives o thePeabody Museum, Harvard University. Width o original:20.8 cm).Sl. 3: Prvi list kartoteke o grobu 30 gomile 52 iz Stine.

(Hrani: Arhiv Muzeja Peabody pri Harvardski univerzi.irina izvirnika 20,8 cm).


5/34



6/34

68 Dragan BOI

Fig.4:Grave goods rom grave 30, tumulus 52 rom Stina, ater Stane Gabrovec.Sl. 4:Pridatki groba 30 gomile 52 iz Stine po Stanetu Gabrovcu.

kept in the National Museum o Slovenia, Gabrovecconcluded that, as well as the cuirass, a kernoswith our small vessels and our antithetic plasticspirals stored in the Berlin Museum belonged tothe grave (Gabrovec 1978, 142, igs. 2 and 5 fig.4:12). he Duchess gave the kernostogether withthe cuirass to the German Emperor Wilhelm II.Gabrovec also published a series o drawings oother grave goods (1978, 143, ig. 7 fig. 4: 3), theirst part o which had been assigned to the gravewith a cuirass in 1933 in Zurich by Mahr (Dobiat

1982, 1 and 16 fig. 3:b,d) while the second wasassigned to it in the Peabody Museum at HarvardUniversity by its head Hugh Hencken (fig. 3:gj).Hencken and Peter Wells, who was preparing a

publication o these objects at the t ime, made thedrawings available or Gabrovecs study.3 Wellspublication o grave 30, tumulus 52 or IV, oers adescription o the circumstances o discovery basedupon Goldbergs original notes and description oinds, urther photographs o the open grave, the

3 eran claims (2006, 263) that neither Wells 1981nor Weiss 1993 and 1999 mention that Gabrovec wasthe irst who reconstructed the burial deposits rom thecuirass grave in his article rom 1978. It is true that Wells

did not mention Gabrovecs article, which was publishedthree years earlier, but Weiss did acknowledge that Gab-rovec had presented or the irst time the entire contents,known at that time, o the grave excavated by the Duchesso Mecklenburg (Weiss 1993, 183, note 59).


7/34


cuirass and the kernos,as well as drawings o thekernosand other inds (Wells 1981, 62, 175177,ig. 85). In this version the grave group consistso the cuirass, spearheads and the kernos, threemore ceramic vessels and two lids (sherds o a

large reddish brown luted pot with cylindricalneck and reddish slip, a plain light brown smallpot, sherds o a brownish ciborium with graphitecoating, and sherds o two reddish lids with traceso graphite coating ibid., ig. 85: h,j,i and k figs.4:3/11; 2:1,4,5) and also 67 bronze loop-backedbuttons, most o which have a small boss in thecentre o the obverse (ibid., ig. 85: l,m fig. 1:2,3).4here are a ew dierences to Gabrovecspublication. hree sherds were identiied as rag-ments o a single smaller ciborium by Wells (ibid.,

ig. 85: i fig. 2:5) and as parts o three vessels byGabrovec (Gabrovec 1978, ig. 7: 68): a base andupper part o a oot, an everted rim and the loweredge o a oot, drawn as a rim by Gabrovec (fig. 4:3/68). Moreover, Gabrovec published a drawingo a lower edge o a oot ( ibid., ig. 7: 1 fig. 4:3/1) that does not appear in Wells.

I have already mentioned that as early as 1913the Duchess gave the two most valuable gravegoods rom the cuirass grave, the kernos andthecuirass itsel, to the German Emperor Wilhelm

II, who aterwards provided generous inancialsupport or her excavations. he inds were dis-played in the hallway o his Berlin palace untilthe November revolution in 1918 and were latertaken to the Berlin Museum. hey were part oa permanent exhibition there, accompanied by anote on loan rom His Majesty the Emperor. In1945 the Red Army sent the cuirass, together withalmost 44,000 other objects rom the Museum oEthnography (the Department or Prehistory andEarly History being a part o it) to Saint Petersburg.

All this material was transported to Leipzig as parto a secret initiative in 1977 and 1978 and inallystarted to return to the Museum o Ethnographyin Berlin in 1990, ater the all o the Berlin Wall.he Stina cuirass was part o a parcel dated 5 thJune 1992 (Weiss 1993, 168 and 176).

4 Illustrations o six bronze buttons, spearheads, anundecorated small pot, one o the two lids and a brownishciborium published by eran (figs . 1: 25; 2: 1,4,5) are

copied rom Wells publication. She does not agree with thereconstruction o the large luted pot published by Wells(1981, ig. 85: h) and Gabrovec (fig. 4:3/11), as the potscylindrical neck is the hollow oot o a ciborium (eran2006, 266, note 8, pl. 208: 10 fig. 2:2).

he return o the cuirass encouraged Weissto prepare an article about the cuirass grave inthe ollowing year (Weiss 1993). He used Wellspublished reconstruction o the grave group andadded a rectangular belt-plate, decorated in the

Situla style (ibid., 181, igs. 15: 9; 16) with a de-piction o a crouching animal igure on its rightedge with a procession o iteen males and oneemale walking towards it. All that was known othis belt-plate was that it was one o the inds romthe Carniola sites that have been given to EmperorWilhelm by the Duchess o Mecklenburg and thatit came to Berlin Museum as part o his loan in1918 (Dobiat 1982, 11). It was not known whereit had been discovered. It was irst published byWolgang Lucke and Otto-Herman Frey (Lucke,

Frey 1962, 71, cat. no. 20, pl. 33) and later byFrauke Geupel (Geupel 1972, 203, ig. 1). Weissound out, based on archival documents, that thebelt-plate had been among the prehistoric indsgiven by the Emperor to the Berlin Museum orrestoration on 21stOctober 1913 (Weiss 1993, 181;Weiss 1996, 44, note 20). he belt-plate had a tagsaying entvid, Grave with stone slabs 30, 14thApril 1913 (ibid., ig. 3, right column below).As the grave with a cuirass was opened on 14 thApril 1913, covered with stone slabs and labelled

as grave 30, Weiss concluded that the belt-platedoubtless originated rom this grave.

he grave with a cuirass excavated near Stinaby the Duchess o Mecklenburg, and other cuirassgraves ound in the south-eastern Alpine area, weredated by Weiss to c. 600 BC (Weiss 1993, 185).Moreover, the belt-plate was considered by him tobe one o the oldest Slovenian objects ornamentedwith the Situla style decoration (ibid.,184).

eran did not agree with Weiss assumptionthat the decorated belt-plate orms a part o the

irst cuirass grave rom Stina. In her publication,which I mentioned at the beginning o this article,she gave two reasons or this (eran 2006, 264).5First, Goldberg explicitly mentioned in his notesthat, except or the cuirass, spearheads, buttons and

5 eran expressed her disagreement with Weiss at-tribution o the belt-plate to the grave with a cuirass andwith his dating o the belt-plate to the time around 600BC twice beore 2006: eran 1997, 665, note 44; eran2001, 210, note 15. His assignment o the belt-plate to the

grave with a cuirass was also characterized as erroneousby Alexandrine Eibner (2000, 138, note 9) and it was noteven accepted by Peter urk, who dated the belt-plate tothe end o the 6thand to the 5thcentury BC (urk 2005a,63, cat. no. 52).


8/34

70 Dragan BOI

ceramic vessels, there were no other grave goods.Second, she believed that the belt-plate is muchlater than the cuirass and the remaining gravegoods. On the basis o its style it can be dated tothe Certosa and the Early Negova horizons.

wo notes stored in the archives o the BerlinMuseum (one dated to 27thor 30thOctober andthe other one to 21st November 1913) listed thebelt-plate as originating rom a grave with stoneslabs 30 (Steinplattengrab 30). eran thereorebelieved that the belt-plate belonged to anothergrave that was labelled similarly to that with thecuirass. Only grave 30 rom tumulus 55 or VI,which had a belt-plate listed as a grave good, wouldbe applicable (ibid.,264).

his grave was not covered with stone slabs ac-

cording to Goldbergs description (Wells 1981, 80).However, as many as 13 (o 32) graves discoveredin tumulus VI had been covered with stone slabs,which makes this tumulus dierent rom all theother tumuli excavated by the Duchess o Meck-lenburg at Stina (Mahr 1934, 115, cat. no. 132).eran thereore did not doubt (daher bestehtkein Zweiel daran) that grave 30 had also beencovered with stone slabs, even though Goldbergdid not mention them (eran 2006, 267), andchiely or this reason she ascribed the belt-plate

depicting a procession to this grave (ibid.,266269,ig. 71). According to Goldbergs notes, the gravecontained a ragmented double-crested helmetwith iron ragments scattered inside and aroundit, perhaps remains o a shield or harness, andalso a badly preserved belt-plate and a ragmento a spearhead (Wells 1981, 80). A helmet and acircular phalerawith two loops, part o harness,can be seen on a photograph o a block, litedrom the grave (ibid.,212, ig. 160).

THE GRAVE GROUP WITH THE BELT-PLATEWITH AN EXCEPTIONAL FIGURATIVE

ORNAMENT REMAINS UNKNOWN

It appears that the belt-plate with a processiono igures was not discovered in grave 30, tumulusIV, as assumed by Weiss, nor in grave 30, tumulusVI, as believed by eran.

Goldberg clearly stated that there had been noother inds in the grave with a cuirass except or

those listed, which do not include a belt-plate.his militates against Weiss assumption, as wasmentioned by eran (2006, 264). Moreover, thestyle o decoration on the belt-plate itsel is not as

old as the cuirass and the other grave goods. hismeans that the tag St. Veit, Steinplattengrab 30,14. April 1913, attached or glued to the belt-plate(Weiss 1993, 181; Weiss 1996, 44, ig. 3), containedthe wrong data. A tag with such content deinitely

reerred to the grave with a cuirass rom tumulusIV. It could have only been associated with thecuirass or the kernos in a parcel with inds romCarniola sent to the Emperor Wilhelm, whichwas brought to the Emperors ship in Hamburg byGoldberg, the Duchesss secretary, as early as June1913 (Gabrovec 1978, 130; Weiss 1993, 176, notes19 and 20). Who attached it to the belt-plate, andor what reasons, remains unknown.

However, it is evident that the belt-plate is noteven rom grave 30, tumulus VI. Although as

many as 13 graves were covered with stone slabs(Mahr 1934, 115, cat. no. 132), which is almosthal the graves rom this tumulus, it is not likelythat Goldberg would have orgotten to mentionthat stone slabs covered this particular grave. Aswith the other burials, he noted the size o thisgrave and the depth at which it was discovered.As we can see rom descriptions published byWells, graves 3, 6, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, 22, 23,24 and 26 were covered with slabs (Wells 1981,7279). I grave 30 had also been covered with

slabs, then there would be 14 graves covered withslabs. Moreover, zoomorphic and anthropomor-phic igures were visible beore restoration, whichmeans that the belt-plate was comparatively wellpreserved (Weiss 1993, 181). Goldberg on the con-trary noted that grave 30, tumulus VI, containeda badly preserved belt-plate (Wells 1981, 80), butdid not state whether it was iron or bronze. erandid not mention that the tag, attached or gluedto the decorated belt-plate, also stated the date o14th April 1913.6 Steinplattengrab 30, discovered

on that day is undoubtedly grave 30, tumulus IV,which is the grave with a cuirass, and not grave30, tumulus VI.

here is another reason, which conirms that thedecorated belt-plate did not come rom grave 30,tumulus VI. he tumulus was excavated between10 th November and 15th December 1913 (Wells1981, 72). Considering that it contained 32 graves,grave 30 was among the last to be excavated, most

6

Incorrect data on this label were obviously cited inthe previously mentioned documents stored in the Archiveo the Berlin Museum and dating to 27thor 30thOctoberand to 21stNovember 1913. hey note that the belt-platewas discovered in the grave with stone slabs no. 30.


9/34


likely in December. he archival documents romthe Berlin Museum, mentioned above, prove thatthe belt-plate came to Berlin as early as the secondhal o October 1913. his is beore they evenstarted to excavate tumulus VI. Moreover, archival

documents mentioned by Gloria Polizzotti Greisa ew years ago also state the exact date when theEmperor received the belt-plate (Polizzotti Greis2006, 4244, notes 26 and 27). he Duchess senthim a new parcel o inds in October 1913, thistime with the help o a Swedish archaeologistOscar Montelius, who had visited her excavationsat Stina. He met the Emperor in Bonn on 16 thOctober. As stated in a telegram sent to Monteliusby the Duchess on the same day, and rom Mon-telius letter to the Duchess written right ater his

meeting with the Emperor, a belt-plate decoratedwith a unique scene was among the inds. It wasparticularly valuable or the Emperor. He believedthat the igure o an animal depicted a god ratherthan a votive donation. Weiss notes that the Em-peror sent it or restoration only a ew days later,on 21stOctober 1913 (Weiss 1993, 181).

BRONZE BUTTONS

Bronze buttons from the grave with a cuirass

According to Goldbergs notes, the cuirass gravecontained a ew circular buttons (einige rundeKnpe Weiss 1993, 177, note 27; eran 2006,264). However, the number o buttons assignedto the grave by Mahr in 1933 is no less than 67(Mahr 1934, 113, cat. no. 128 Gr. 30: sixty-sevenbronze buttons with loops;fig. 3: b). Drawings othe same six specimens occur in all our previouspublications o the cuirass grave (Gabrovec 1978,

143, ig. 7: 3,4; Wells 1981, 62, ig. 85: l,m; Weiss1993, 177, ig. 15: 3; eran 2006, 265, pl. 208:3,4 figs. 1: 2,3; 4: 3/3,4). hree are o the samesize and have a central boss on the obverse (fig. 1:3). he other three dier in size and are plain (fig.1: 2). As we can tell rom Wells description, whichreers to all 67 buttons, all are dome-shaped andloop-backed. hey dier in size, although mosthave a diameter o 1.6 to 1.7 cm. More than halhave a small central boss, which is solid accordingto the cross-section o one o the buttons.

Gabrovec, Wells and eran did not pay themmuch attention. Weiss mentioned them, but didnot engage in a more detailed typological orchronological deinition (Weiss 1993, 184, ig. 15:

3). He only noted that their purpose was unknownand that they did not tell us much as their posi-tion and distribution in the grave were not welldocumented.

he plain dome-shaped and loop-backed but-

tons (fig. 1: 2) ascribed to the grave do not tellus much, as they are present in dierent culturalenvironments o the Urnield culture and theEarly and Late Iron Ages (e.g. Sakara Suevi2004, 34, bronze dome-shaped buttons o type 1;Blei 2003; ribar 1974, 321, no. 23, pl. 3: 10).However, as we will see later, their dierence insize is not unimportant. Moreover, buttons witha small solid boss in the centre o the obverse,usually with a wide loop on the reverse, tell adierent story (fig. 1: 3).

Bronze dome-shaped buttons with a centralboss and a loop of type 2 after Sakara Suevi

Maa Sakara Suevi, while studying the mate-rial rom Katelir at Nova vas in Istria, categorisedbuttons with a central boss on the obverse and awide loop on the reverse as bronze dome-shapedbuttons o type 2 (Sakara Suevi 2004, 34). ype 2was thought by her to be the latest version o these

buttons, which first appeared in the Late Hallstattperiod (comp. Dular, ecco Hvala 2007, 68) andwas still used during the La ne period (SakaraSuevi 2004,35). Buttons categorised as type 2 bySakara Suevi can differ widely. Moreover, someeven differ rom the type as she defined it. o beprecise, a button rom grave 110 o the Hallstattperiod cemetery at Krina gora above Lo (Urleb1974, 96, pl. 22: 4) is not dome-shaped and has ahigh solid boss and a comparatively narrow loop. wobuttons rom mihel pod Nanosom (Gutin 1979,

79, pl. 68: 33 a and c) and one rom grave Sz 1484rom Most na Soi (eran, rampu 1973, pl. 16:12; eran, Lo Schiavo, rampu-Orel 19841985,245, pl. 137: 25) do not even have a boss, but a flatapex. Teir loops are angular. Buttons rom graveBenvenuti 278 in Este have hollow bosses and dia-metrically arranged small holes on the edges insteado loops (Frey 1969, 15, fig. 3: 5).

Only buttons rom Katelir at Nova vas (SakaraSuevi 2004, 34, ig. 202 fig. 5:4), Veli Miinacat Kastav near Rijeka (Gutin 1987, igs. 7: 7 and

8: 3 fig. 6:11,12) and buttons rom grave 52 atProzor in Lika (Drechsler-Bii 19721973, 50, pl.28: 14 fig. 6:7), which were categorised as type2 ater Sakara Suevi, have, just like the majority


10/34

72 Dragan BOI

o buttons rom the Stina cuirass grave (fig. 1: 3),solid bosses and more or less wide loops. Buttonsrom Nesactium (Mihovili 2001, 233, pl. 76: 47

fig. 5: 5,6) are somewhat dierent. A solid boss

with a trapezoid cross-section is very high, whilethe V-shaped loop is very narrow. Fiteen buttonswith a low boss rom Grobie at Grobnik (Blei2004, 77, pl. 8: 5.1.11) also possess narrow loops,but they are angular.

Dome-shaped buttons of the Vinica type(list 1 and fig. 13)

I suggest a term dome-shaped buttons o the

Vinica type to describe dome-shaped buttons,usually bronze, rarely iron, with a solid boss incentre o the obverse and usually with a wide loopon the reverse. Besides buttons rom Nova vas andNesactium in Istria, rom Kastav and rom grave52 at Prozor, some buttons rom Ribi in the Unavalley (fig. 5: 10,11) and rom the island o Krk(fig. 5: 79), numerous buttons rom Grobnik nearRijeka (fig. 6: 1416) and our buttons rom grave22 o the La ne period necropolis Pungart atMetlika (fig. 6: 5) classiy as this type. his type

o button has not been ound in the Early or LateIron Age graves o Dolenjska. he only exceptionshould be buttons rom two Stina tumuli exca-vated by the Duchess o Mecklenburg, namely the

buttons rom the cuirass grave rom tumulus 52 orIV (figs. 1: 3; 6: 1) and among the isolated indsrom tumulus 55 or VI (fig. 5: 1).

In addition, at least 12 graves rom the cemetery

Strani dol near Golek pri Vinici excavated by theDuchess o Mecklenburg (Dular 1985, 106, igs.103 and 126) contained this type o buttons.7heDuchess discovered c. 350 lat graves (PolizzottiGreis 2006, 26). Most o the grave goods arenow kept in the Peabody Museum at HarvardUniversity; they are, however, almost entirelyunpublished (Mahr 1934, 4756, 85109, cat. nos.49121; Polizzotti Greis 2006, 2528 and 55, pls.2; 59). heir photographs are available rom thePeabody Museum web pages. An advanced search

o the museum collections (http://140.247.102.177/col/advanced.cfm)8enables the user to search onour data at a time. With a search o place: Vinica(WHERE) and object: button (WHA), 72 pho-tographs o buttons become available. Numerousdome-shaped buttons o the Vinica type can berecognised rom the photographs.

he presence o the Vinica type buttons in twoHallstatt period tumuli rom Stina would indicate

7

My knowledge o the inds rom the lat Latest Hall-statt-La ne cemetery near Golek pri Vinici was enabledby Michael Geselowitz, who had many years ago sent mephotocopies o the drawings.

8Retrieved on Sept. 22. 2009.

Fig.5:Bronze dome-shaped buttons o the Vinica type. 13 Golek pri Vinici Strani dol (1 ascribed to tumulus 55

rom Stina ater Wells 1981 and Dobiat 1982); 4Nova vas Katelir (ater Sakara Suevi 2004); 5,6Nesactium (aterMihovili 2001); 7,8Baka, graves 1 and 3 (ater Lo Schiavo 1970); 9Krk (ater Lo Schiavo 1970); 10,11Ribi, graves33 and 273 (ater Mari 1968). Scale = 1:2.Sl. 5:Bronasti kalotasti gumbi vrste Vinica. 13Golek pri Vinici Strani dol (1 pripisan gomili 55 iz Stine, po Wells1981 in Dobiat 1982); 4Nova vas Katelir (po Sakara Suevi 2004); 5,6Nezakcij (po Mihovili 2001); 7,8Baka, grobova1 in 3 (po Lo Schiavo 1970); 9Krk (po Lo Schiavo 1970); 10,11Ribi, grobova 33 in 273 (po Mari 1968). M. = 1:2.


11/34


Fig.6:Bronze dome-shaped buttons (the Vinica type and plain). 14Golek pri Vinici Strani dol (ascribed to grave30, tumulus 52 rom Stina ater Wells 1981); 5,6Metlika Pungart (grave 22, ater ribar 1974); 710Prozor, grave52 (ater Drechsler-Bii 19721973); 1113Kastav Veli Miinac (ater Blei 2002); 1420Grobnik Grobie (aterBlei 2004). Scale = 1:2.Sl. 6:Bronasti kalotasti gumbi (vrste Vinica in preprosti). 14Golek pri Vinici Strani dol (pripisani grobu 30 gomile

52 iz Stine, po Wells 1981); 5,6Metlika Pungart, grob 22 (po ribar 1974); 710Prozor, grob 52 (po Drechsler-Bii19721973); 1113Kastav Veli Miinac (po Blei 2002); 1420Grobnik Grobie (po Blei 2004). M. = 1:2.

that they originate rom as early as the Hallstattperiod. However, as we will see later, the buttonsascribed to the Stina tumuli are not rom Stina.It transpires that some o the presumed gravegroups rom the cemetery Veli Miinac at Kastavare not reliable grave groups (Blei 2002, 79).Moreover, grave groups rom Golek pri Vinici areneither published nor reliable. It thereore appears

that only grave 1/1979 rom Kastav, grave 52 romProzor, grave 2/1987 rom Grobnik and grave 22rom Pungart at Metlika can help with dating theVinica type buttons.

Moreover, the irst o these our graves, i.e.the grave rom Kastav, is not much help. As aras anthropological analysis is concerned, this is aburial o an adult male. Blei notes that a badlypreserved iron knie and our buttons o the Vinicatype were discovered in this grave (ibid.,85, 98,no. 10.8; 100, no. 12, pl. 1: grave 1/1979). Basedon the knie, the grave cannot be precisely dated.

Nevertheless, Blei dated it to the La ne C1ater the central European chronology. his datingwas based on a chain pectoral, discovered closeby the grave, but outside it (ibid., 85, ig. 5). A


12/34

74 Dragan BOI

connection o our buttons with a male skeletonis also highly questionable. As seen on a groundplan, only two buttons lay in the grave pit and notour, as claimed by Blei. he other two buttonslay outside the grave, among bones that, according

to laus, belong to an adult donkey, a cow and twohumans (ibidem).

However, the grave group o the emale inhumationgrave 52 rom Prozor, which has comparatively richgrave goods, is reliable. Besides our bronze ibulaeand 114 bronze dome-shaped buttons (plain andthe Vinica type), stitched to a leather belt (fig. 6:710), it also contained numerous glass and amberbeads (Drechsler-Bii 19721973, 50, pls. 2728;Bakari 1993). Drechsler-Bii initially concludedthat the grave dated to La ne D, based on two

ibulae with two springs, a true and a alse one, anda ibula with a boat-shaped bow (Drechsler-Bii19721973, 50). She later oered a dierent date ophase 6 o the Iapodic group, corresponding withLa ne C ater the central European chronologyor 3rd2ndcenturies BC (Drechsler-Bii 1987,411and 414). Lidija Bakari did not agree with thisand dated the grave to the 1stcentury BC (Bakari1993, 114, cat. no. 96). Sakara Suevi however,accepted this altered date (2004, 35): Grave canbe, based on ... dated to phase 6 o the Iapodic

group, i.e.3rdcentury BC. Aleksandar Palavestraplaced it in his publication on prehistoric amberirst to the period between 300 to 1 BC (Palaves-tra 1993, 82 and 84), and secondly to La ne C2(ibid.,chronological table on p. 274).

he irst date that Drechsler-Bii suggested,i.e. the Late La ne period, was well ounded.It was supported with a statement that ibulaecomparable to the ibulae with two springs and theibula with a boat-shaped bow in grave 52 occurin grave groups rom Jezerine and Ribi, ascribed

by Mari to his phase Vb, and in the hoard romLiki Ribnik (Drechsler-Bii 19721973, 20 and50). Fibulae with a boat-shaped bow similar to theone rom grave 52 (ibid.,37, pl. 27: 8) have beenound in extremely late graves o the Jezerine andRibi necropoleis (Mari 1968, 34, pls. 5: 6; 16:20; 17: 12,19,22,23,31; 18: 29,30). Some o themcontain ibulae o Jezerine and Alesia types, char-acterist ic o La ne D2 ater the central Europeanchronology (ibid.,pls. 5: 7; 16: 21; 18: 31; Boi2008, 145, tab. 5). Moreover, the latest grave dates

as late as the Early Imperial period because oits strongly proiled ibulae (Mari 1968, pl. 17:2934). Some o these graves also contain ibulaewith two springs and a bead on the bow ( ibid.,

pls. 5: 3; 16: 22,28; 18: 25,26) and amber beads oPalavestras type 10 (ibid.,pls. 5: 8,12; 16: 29; 18:34; Palavestra 1993, typological plate 1 on p. 33).hese are orms that are also present in grave 52rom Prozor (Drechsler-Bii 19721973, pl. 27:

1,47; Palavestra 1993, 82, 3001 BC).Buttons o the Vinica type date to the Late La

ne, according to the evidence rom grave 52rom Prozor. Because it is a emale burial theywere part o a emale costume, stitched to a belttogether with plain dome-shaped buttons. I havealready mentioned that 114 buttons o both typeshad been preserved in this grave. heir sizes varya lot; the largest buttons are almost our timesas large as the smallest (fig. 6: 710). Numerousdome-shaped buttons (plain and the Vinica type)

ound at Kastav and Grobnik were most probablyalso parts o similar belts; they also occur in vari-ous sizes (Blei 2002, pls. 10 and 11; Blei 2004,pls. 7 and 8 fig. 6: 1113 and 1420).

Inhumation grave 2/1987 rom Grobnik alsocontained a 4 cm wide belt with dome-shapedbuttons o two dierent sizes and two types at-tached (Cetini 1996, 195, ig. 11; Blei 2003;Blei 2004, 57, 63, 91, ig. 17, pl. 1: 12). wosets o larger buttons were stitched along the edges,with smaller buttons stitched between them in

the shape o ive-lea lowers. Blei did not paymuch attention to these buttons, she only notedthat they are dome-shaped or hal dome-shapedbuttons (ibid.,58, 63, 2. Pojasna ploica, 91). Shedid not publish any drawings o them. A photo-graph showing a reconstruction o the belt withbuttons and two rectangular plates (ibid.,ig. 17)is small, but still allows us to see that the largerbuttons stitched along the edges have a boss inthe centre. hese are dome-shaped buttons o theVinica type. In trench 3, where grave 2/1987 was

discovered, another 57 buttons o this type wereound (ibid.,75, nos. 5.1.1, 5.1.2 and 5.1.3, pl. 7:5.1.1 and 5.1.2). A cast rectangular belt-plate oBela Cerkev type attached to the belt (ibid.,ig. 17and pl. 1: grave 2/1987, no. 2) enables the grave tobe dated to the phase Mokronog IIIa or La neD1 (Boi 1999, 198). he belt also possessed arectangular mount with our attachment points,cast in the same mould as the belt-plate.

A ragment o an amber bead, most probably allthat remains o a necklace, was also discovered in

the grave. he skeleton was very badly preserved.According to the anthropological analysis it wasmale (Blei 2004, 58). However, this is veryunlikely.


13/34


Grave 22 rom Pungart at Metlika also containedbuttons o the Vinica type. It was a cremated emalegrave with a pair o silver ibulae o the Middle Lane scheme with wide springs (ribar 1974, 321,pl. 3: 3,4 fig. 7:1,2) and numerous buttons; i.e.our larger buttons with a diameter o around 12mm and c. 100 smaller buttons with a diametero 4 mm (ibid., pl. 3: 10). Larger buttons have acentral boss, which is shown on the drawing in

ribars paper as hollow, although in reality it issolid (fig. 6: 5,6).9

9Inormation rom Janez Dular.

he ibulae have a tripartite clip and two tripartitemouldings, which are lat on the underside andlocated on the bent part o the oot (Boi 1983,119, ig. 37). One o the mouldings lies beorethe clip, and the other just beore the bow. Silveribulae ound mostly at Mihovo (Aubelj 1999, ig.on p. 172) but also on Strmec above Bela Cerkev(Stare 1973, 76, nos. 879 and 880, pl. 47: 2,3 fig.7:3,4) are very similar. hey were a characteristic

o emale costume in the Mokronog IIIa periodo the Mokronog group (Boi 1999, 198; Boi2008, 58), which correlates to La ne D1 aterthe central European chronology. he only dier-

Fig.7:Silver ibulae o the Middle La ne scheme with wide springs. 1,2Metlika Pungart, grave 22 (ater ribar 1974);3,4Bela Cerkev Strmec (ater Stare 1973). Scale = 1:2.Sl. 7:Srebrne ibule srednjelatenske sheme z dolgo peresovino. 1,2Metlika Pungart, grob 22 (po ribar 1974); 3,4BelaCerkev Strmec (po Stare 1973). M. = 1:2.


14/34

76 Dragan BOI

ence between these ibulae is that the ibulae romMetlika do not have a lat bow and their springsare narrower. he ibulae thus indicate that grave22 rom Metlika and grave 2/1987 rom Grobnik,which both contained a belt with large dome-shaped

buttons o the Vinica type and with small plaindome-shaped buttons, are contemporary.

Leaving the specimens rom Stina aside, wecan see that buttons o the Vinica type have alimited distribution, rom Istria in the West tothe Una valley in the East (fig. 13). he onesound in grave 22 rom Metlika, in grave 2/1987rom Grobnik10and in grave 52 rom Prozor werestitched to emale belts together with plain dome-shaped buttons. his most probably also appliesto buttons rom graves at Golek pri Vinici and

numerous buttons rom Kastav and Grobnik notassigned to grave groups. he evidence rom thethree graves mentioned dates them to the LateLa ne. hat is why it is unlikely that a button,ascribed to grave 3 rom Baka (fig. 5: 8) reallyoriginates rom this grave (Lo Schiavo 1970, 426,pl. 24: 14). wo graves rom Ribi are alreadyEarly Roman and, like grave 3 rom Baka, alsocontained just one button o the Vinica type each.Mari classiied these buttons among the earlierorms that still occurred in some graves o period

VI in the Una valley (Mari 1968, 37, pls. 20: 20;22: 3 fig. 5: 10,11).

A NEW RECONSTRUCTIONOF THE GRAVE WITH A CUIRASS

FROM STINA

As noted beore, there are no buttons o theVinica type in Dolenjska, except or those romStina. Buttons o this type that have been ascribed

to the cuirass grave excavated in 1913 (figs. 1: 3; 6:1) were, judging on the basis o the cited compari-sons, stitched to a emale belt dating to the LateLa ne period together with plain dome-shapedbuttons o three dierent sizes (figs. 1: 2; 6:24). Itis, thereore, not possible that they originate romthis grave.However, according to Goldbergs notesthe grave contained a ew circular buttons, whichare either not preserved or were assigned to someother grave in the Mecklenburg Collection.

Tese buttons prove that previous publications o

the cuirass grave group are incorrect. Buttons that

10 As noted beore, it is very unlikely that grave 2/1987rom Grobnik belonged to a male.

are not only rom another grave, but rom anothersite, have been ascribed to this grave instead o thebuttons really ound in the grave. Tey date to theLate La ne and are certainly not rom Stina,because Stina tumuli did not contain subsequentburials o the La ne period (Gabrovec 1994a,41). hey are also not rom Magdalenska gora,

because no such buttons were ound in the Late Lane graves there. Tey can only be rom Golek priVinici, where buttons o the Vinica type, with, asa rule, accompanying plain dome-shaped buttons,were ound in at least 12 graves. Moreover, but-tons o the Vinica type, appearing among isolatedfinds rom tumulus 55 or VI rom Stina (list 1,no. 2 fig. 5: 1), certainly originate rom the samesite. Tey were obviously stitched to a emale belttogether with plain dome-shaped buttons, whilethree sizes o plain loop-backed buttons also ap-

pear among isolated finds rom tumulus VI (Wells1981, 80, isolated finds rom tumulus VI, 213, fig.161: a, ourth row). Such a combination preciselycorresponds to dome-shaped buttons ascribed tograve 30, tumulus IV (fig. 6: 14), and to the buttonsrom grave 52 rom Prozor (fig. 6: 710).

I dome-shaped and loop-backed buttons do notoriginate rom the cuirass grave, the same can alsoapply to other grave goods. Only objects recognizedrom descriptions or visible on photographs arecertainly rom this grave. According to Mahrs

transcription o Goldbergs notes (fig. 3), threeceramic vessels were deposited in the grave; twoo them exceptionally well made and o very rareorms. he irst one, marked by Mahr in 1933 with(c), had, according to Goldberg, our small vesselsattached to its upper part (am oberen Rand derUrne sind 4 kl. Urnen). his is the kernos(figs. 4:2; 8:2), which can also be seen on a photograph.11

11 he Duchess o Mecklenburg had already giventhe cuirass and kernos to the Emperor Wilhelm II in

June 1913, two months ater the grave with a cuirass wasdiscovered (Weiss 1993, 175, notes 19 and 24). Gabrovecwas the irst to ascribed the kernosto this grave, based ona photograph o an open grave, in which the cuirass andkernosare visible (Gabrovec 1978, 142, ig. 5 fig. 4: 2).

Fig.8:Stina, grave 30, tumulus 52. Grave goods that donot certainly originate rom the grave are marked with aquestion mark. 1,2,47 ater eran 2006; 3 ater Goldbergsnotes. Scale 1 = 1:6; 2,4,5 = 1:4; 6,7 = 1:2.Sl. 8:Stina, grob 30 gomile 52. Z vpraajem so oznaeni

pridatki, katerih pripadnost grobni celoti ni zanesljiva.1,2,47 po eran 2006; 3 po Goldbergovih zapiskih. M.1 = 1:6; 2,4,5 = 1:4; 6,7 = 1:2.


15/34



16/34

78 Dragan BOI

It was missing in Zurich, because it had alreadybeen given to the German Emperor in June 1913.In accordance with Goldbergs inormation aboutthree vessels, in 1933 Mahr assigned two other ves-sels to the cuirass grave along with the kernos. he

second vessel, marked by him with (d), was small(kl. Ge) and the third, marked with (e), waslarger (greres Ge). Only the small pot (fig.8:4) could be the aore-mentioned small vessel,12clearly labelled with a tag that is now attached tothe irst sheet o the card index (fig. 3). It says: KlUrne aus Grab 30. (d) Gr Gomila St Veit 15 April1913. In addition, only the large luted pot (fig. 4:3/11) could be the aore-mentioned larger vessel,because it was certainly not assigned to the gravein the Peabody Museum, as it does not correspond

to Henckens descriptions (fig. 3:gj).According to Wells and Weiss publications, in

addition to the kernos,the small pot and the largeluted pot the grave also contained parts o threeother vessels, a smaller ciborium with graphitecoating (fig. 2: 5) and two lids (fig. 2:4), whichhad been assigned to the cuirass grave by Hencken(fig. 3:gj). eran transormed the large pot intoa ciborium (fig. 2: 2) and added another smallerciborium (eran 2006, 266, pl. 208: 7 fig. 2: 6).She reconstructed it rom two ragments, published

by Gabrovec (Gabrovec 1978, ig. 7: 1,8 fig. 4:

Wells, Weiss and eran (fig. 2: 3) did the same. he sameconclusion might have been reached much earlier especiallyby some o the prehistorians in the Museum or Prehis-tory and Early History in Berlin, where the cuirass andkernosormed parts o a permanent exhibition rom 1922(Weiss 1993, 177, note 24; Weiss 1999, 64). On a careulreading o the auction sale catalogue, published in 1934in New York (cr. Weiss 1993, 182, note 47), it would havebeen obvious that Ferenc de ompa rom Budapest, in hisarticle about the tumulus cemetery at Stina (Mahr 1934,

59) mentioned that the late Duchess o Mecklenburg hadhanded over the bronze cuirass rom grave 30, tumulus IVto the ormer German Emperor and consequently split upthe grave group (he whole grave in which this armorwas ound was thus split up). he cuirass rom grave 30,tumulus IV, is not mentioned in the catalogue part o theauction sale catalogue. However, other grave goods romthis grave are listed: 67 bronze buttons with loops, twoiron spearheads and three characteristic ceramic vessels,including a vessel with our small beakers attached to it(one with our little cups attached to the upper part o the

vessel ibid.,113, cat. no. 128). his data was mislead-

ing or an eventual buyer, as the kernos,which arrived inBerlin in 1913, was not auctioned.12eran states (2006, 266, pl. 208: 5) that it is 6 cm

high. From the 1:4 scale in Wells publication (Wells 1981,176, ig. 85: j), it is 8 cm high.

3/1,8). he irst is not included in Wells publica-tion, while the other was considered by him to bethe lower edge o a oot and not a rim, as believedby Gabrovec (Wells 1981, ig. 85: i).

As well as the kernos (fig. 8:2), the grave with

a cuirass had certainly contained the small pot(fig. 8: 4), which had been labelled with the tagnow attached to the irst sheet o the card index.As the small pot is plain and o a simple orm,Goldbergs data, saying that two out o threevessels are exceptionally well made and o veryrare orms, could only reer to the kernos andthe third vessel. Although this designation (wellmade and o a very rare orm) is still too generalor a reliable determination, the luted ciborium(eran 2006, 266, note 8, pl. 208: 10 fig. 8:5),

which had already been assigned to the cuirassgrave by Mahr in 1933, corresponds well to it.I, however, we consider other replacements, thisvessel might also have come rom another grave.he same applies to the spearheads (fig. 8: 6,7);they could be rom the cuirass grave, but theycould also come rom a dierent grave. Since ac-cording to Goldberg the cuirass grave containedonly three ceramic vessels, o which the kernosand the small pot could be determined while thethird one was exceptionally well made and o a

very rare orm (maybe the luted ciborium), it iscertain that the ragments o the two lids and othe one or two ciboria with graphite coating thathad been assigned to the grave by Hencken arenot rom this grave.

Considering the above, only the cuirass, thekernos,the small pot and a ew circular buttons,now lost or in an unknown place, certainly origi-nate rom the grave with a cuirass (fig. 8: 14).he luted ciborium and spearheads (fig. 8: 57)may also belong to it. he two lids, the one or

two smaller ciboria with graphite coating and 67dome-shaped and loop-backed buttons (o theVinica type and plain) (figs. 2: 46; 1: 2,3) areundoubtedly not rom this grave.

THE RELIABILITY OF GRAVE GROUPSFROM THE MECKLENBURG COLLECTION

Grave groups from Stinaand Magdalenska gora

In previous literature describing the Mecklen-burg Collection, which besides a smaller numbero inds rom some other sites comprises inds


17/34


rom Hallstatt, Vae, Hallstatt period tumuli onMagdalenska gora and at Stina and a lat LatestHallstatt-La ne cemetery at Golek pri Vinici(Mahr 1934; Hencken 1978; Wells 1981; Dobiat1982; Polizzotti Greis 2006), it has not been stressed

strongly enough that many o the published gravegroups are incorrect (comp. Weiss 1996) becausethe material has been mixed up. It is not yet pos-sible to make the same conclusion or the gravegroups rom Vae, as they have not been published.However, a lot o inds, doubtlessly originating romGolek pri Vinici, were ascribed to Hallstatt periodgraves rom Stina and Magdalenska gora. hisact has not been so obvious beore now, becausethe majority o the Vinica inds have not yet beenpublished. Finds o Vinica character only occur

in those graves rom Magdalenska gora and Stinathat were excavated by the Duchess o Mecklenburgand are now kept in the Peabody Museum. heyare not present among the grave goods rom gravesrom these two sites which are kept in the NationalMuseum o Slovenia in Ljubljana and the NaturalHistory Museum in Vienna (ecco Hvala, Dular,Kocuvan 2004; Gabrovec et al.2006). Moreover,they are, o course, absent rom graves rom theother Hallstatt period sites in Dolenjska.

Let me mention only some examples. Rings

with protrusions, reerred to as sun rings inthe auction sale catalogue o the MecklenburgCollection and in Henckens publication, cast ina two-piece mould, occur in some o the Hallstattperiod graves rom Magdalenska gora (Mahr 1934,80, cat. no. 25, grave 30, pl. 7: 25; 82, cat. no. 34,grave 44, pl. 1: 34; Hencken 1978, igs. 63: b; 127:d; 204: e; 265: d; 359: q fig. 9: 1). Such ringsare otherwise only known rom Golek pri Vinici(Gabrovec 1966a, 179, no. 43, pl. 20: 12,1416,18;Lo Schiavo 1970, 469, no. 29, pl. 37: 25 figs. 9:

2,3; 10), Podzemelj (Dular 1978, pl. 14: 5) and Sv.Duh in rnomelj (Boi 1992, 191, note 10).13he La ne period shepherds crook pins, oundonly at Golek pri Vinici (Gabrovec 1966a, pl. 19:19), Podzemelj (Dular 1978, pls. 15: 23; 16: 16;Boi 2001, 196, igs. 15; 1820; 198, list 4) and

13 According to inormation sent by Phil Mason on25thMay 2009, the sun ring rom rnomelj 2 ragmentso the same ring was discovered in 1990 in stratigraphicunite 160, i.e.in the Late Roman layer o a conical shaped

dump o waste material in the northern, external side othe Late Roman deensive tower at the church o Sv. Duh.hese inds obviously originate rom the Late La ne lay-ers that were damaged with the construction o the LateRoman ortiication.

Kastav (Blei 2002, 82, 92, cat. no. 2, ig. 4, pl. 1:2) were ascribed to two Hallstatt graves rom theMecklenburg Collection excavated on Magdalenskagora (Hencken 1978, 24, grave 37, ig. 78: a) and

at Stina (Wells 1981, 59, grave 19, ig. 73: a,b),and even occur among isolated inds rom thecemetery o Hallstatt (ibid.,24, ig. 27: a).14 It isobvious rom the above examples, that the pinsrom Golek pri Vinici were added to material romother sites (Boi 2001, 197).

14 Wells did not recognize the pin and thought thatthe ragments probably belonged to one or two handles

o a bronze vessel. he pins decoration on one side othe head and the lower part, rectangular in cross-sectionand with a bent terminal, are identical to well preservedshepherds crook pins rom Podzemelj (Dular 1978, pl. 16:2,4; Boi 2001, 196, igs. 15 and 19).

Fig.9:Golek pri Vinici Strani dol. Sun rings (1 ascribedto grave 25, tumulus IV rom Magdalenska gora). 1 aterHencken 1978; 2,3 ater Gabrovec 1966a. Scale = 1:2.Sl. 9:Golek pri Vinici Strani dol. Obroki z izrastki (1pripisan grobu 25 gomile IV z Magdalenske gore). 1 poHencken 1978; 2,3 po Gabrovec 1966a. M. = 1:2.

Fig.10: Golek pri Vinici Strani dol. Sun rings. (Photo:Rudol Berce. Stored by: the Archaeological Departmento the National Museum o Slovenia).Sl. 10:Golek pri Vinici Strani dol. Obroka z izrastki.(Foto: Rudol Berce. Hrani: Arheoloki oddelek Narodnegamuzeja Slovenije).


18/34

80 Dragan BOI

Amber beads of Palavestras types 8d and 8e

here are many amber beads o special typeamong the unpublished material rom Golek priVinici; besides a vertical peroration in the centre,

they also have a horizontal tangential peroration.he circumerences o some o the beads are cutout around the terminals o the horizontal per-orations. Palavestra (1993, 31, typological plate1) categorised such beads as type 8d (roundedcircumerence) or 8e (cut out circumerence). Hedid not know the beads rom Vinica. His distribu-tion map (ibid.,p. 187) shows that such beads onlyoccur in Lika (Kompolje and Prozor Bakari2004, cat. no. 5.1; Bakari 2008), at the Jezerinenecropolis in the Una valley, on Magdalenska gora,

at Stina (Hallstatt period graves o the Mecklen-burg Collection) and in the La ne period graverom Kapiteljska njiva at Novo mesto (Palavestra1993,174, types 8d and 8e).

Bead o type 8d rom the comparatively earlygrave 139 at Kompolje (ibid., 77, 750650, 79,type 8d), discovered during the old Brunmidexcavations, is the only example rom the earlyHallstatt period. On the Jezerine necropolis, such

beads (see graves, listed ibid., 99, type 8d andgrave 264) occur in graves o Maris phases II,IV, Va, Vb and VI:

phase II:Jezerine 129 and 216 (Radimsk 1895,94 and 112; Mari 1968, 17, note 142 on p. 68);

phase IV:Jezerine 264, 318 and 520 (Radimsk1895, 123, ig. 306, 137 and 177; Mari 1968, 27,note 221 on p. 73);

phase Va: Jezerine 325 (Radimsk 1895, 138,ig. 378 on p. 130; Mari 1968, pl. 4: 12; 32, note244 on p. 74 fig. 11:2);

phase Vb: Jezerine 136b and 175 (Radimsk1895, 96 and 104; Mari 1968, 35, notes 272 and274 on p. 75);

phase VI:Jezerine 68 (Radimsk 1895, 81, ig. 127;Mari 1968, pl. 6: 17; 38, note 300 on p. 76).

One o the two graves rom phase II, datingrom 500 to 360 BC according to Mari (1968, 40),has not been published, i.e.inhumation grave 129containing a semicircular bow fibula, while grave216, like grave 121a, contained a Certosa type fibulao Xg variant afer eran (Radimsk 1895, 93, fig.169; 112; Mari 1968, pl. 2: 20 and tab. 3: 85; eran1976, 334). Mari (1968, 17) believed that thesetwo fibulae indicated direct connections with the

Fig. 11: Amber beads o Palavestras type 8d. 1 Golek pri Vinici Strani dol (ascribed to grave 4, tumulus 52 romStina ater Wells 1981); 2 Jezerine, grave 325 (ater Radimsk 1895). Scale = 1:2.Sl. 11:Jantarne jagode vrste 8d po Palavestri. 1Golek pri Vinici Strani dol (pripisane grobu 4 gomile 52 iz Stine, poWells 1981); 2Jezerine, grob 325 (po Radimsk 1895). M. = 1:2.


19/34


eastern Alpine area and ound good comparisonsonly among finds rom mihel pod Nanosom. eran(1976, 334, fig. 52) showed that fibulae o the Xgvariant occurred in Posoje, Notranjska and Kras, inRijeka hinterland, in Dolenjska, Bela krajina and in

the valley o the river Una. She did not agree withMaris absolute dating o phase II, as it does nothave prominent elements that would justiy such anearly date (ibid.,note 164 on p. 421). Graves 121aand 216 containing fibulae o the Xg variant andgrave 95 with fibula o the type XII were dated tothe first Late Hallstatt horizon o Jezerine graves,which she did not believe began beore the middleo the 4thcentury (ibid.,435).

Considering the dates o the Jezerine graves thatcontain beads o Palavestras type 8d, we can claim

that they originate rom the end o the Hallstattperiod and were also used during the whole Lane period and exceptionally still at the begin-ning o the Roman period. On the other hand,beads o type 8e perhaps date only to the La neperiod, because they only occur on the necropoliso Jezerine, in graves o Maris phases III, IV, Vaand Vb (see graves, listed in Palavestra 1993, 99,type 8e, and graves 467 and 518):

phase III: Jezerine 103 (Radimsk 1895, 87,ig. 154; Mari 1968, 23, note 193 on p. 72 fig.12:1);

phase IV:Jezerine 318, 515, 520 and 524 (Radim-sk 1895, 137, 176, ig. 570, 178; Mari 1968, 27,

notes 221 and 222 on p. 73);phase Va:Jezerine 308, 359 and 467 (Radimsk

1895, 135, 145, ig. 415, 168, ig. 523; Mari 1968,pl. 4: 28; 32, notes 244 and 245 on p. 74 fig .12:2).

phase Vb: Jezerine 518 (Radimsk 1895, 177,ig. 575; Mari 1968, 35, note 273 on p. 75).

Some amber beads o type 8e were also discov-ered in Prozor (Palavestra 1993, 85, type 8e) butcannot be closely dated.

As noted beore, beads o types 8d and 8e have

been said to derive rom Hallstatt period graveson Magdalenska gora and at Stina, all rom theMecklenburg Collection (Magdalenska gora:Hencken 1978, igs. 20: b; 75: a,b; 89: d; 98: a;262: l,m; 365: c; Palavestra 1993, 174; Stina: Wells1981, igs. 58: b; 78: a; 84: a; 96: a; 147: c; 150: g;157: c; Palavestra 1993, 174 figs. 11: 1; 12: 3),and in the La ne period grave 35 in tumulus Aon Kapiteljska njiva at Novo mesto (Knez 1986,97, pl. 48: 13).

Beads o types 8d and 8e certainly occur only in

graves o the Jezerine necropolis in the Una valleydated rom the Latest Hallstatt to the Late La ne,and exceptionally even the Early Roman period, atKompolje and Prozor in Lika, in numerous gravesat Golek pri Vinici and in one o the La ne periodgraves at Novo mesto. hey are absent rom theHallstatt period graves in Dolenjska, other than theMecklenburg Collection graves rom Magdalenskagora and Stina. It is thereore evident that beadsthat have been published as parts o Hallstatt pe-riod necklaces rom Magdalenska gora and Stina

are not rom these two sites. Instead, inds romGolek pri Vinici have been mixed up with indsrom the Hallstatt period graves rom the twoDolenjska sites. Moreover, a necklace, publishedby Polizzotti Greis as the one originating romMagdalenska gora, can only be rom Golek priVinici (Polizzotti Greis 2006, 94, pl. 19).

Grave groups from Golek pri Vinici

Apart rom the Magdalenska gora and Stinagrave groups, the ones rom Golek pri Vinici are alsounreliable. Some o the grave goods rom certainVinica burials were, without a doubt, ascribed to

Fig.12: Amber beads o Palavestras type 8e. 1,2 Jezerine,graves 103 and 467 (ater Radimsk 1895); 3 Golek priVinici Strani dol (ascribed to grave 25, tumulus 55 rom

Stina ater Wells 1981). Scale = 1:2.Sl. 12:Jantarne jagode vrste 8e po Palavestri. 1,2Jezerine,grobova 103 in 467 (po Radimsk 1895); 3Golek pri Vinici Strani dol (pripisane grobu 25 gomile 55 iz Stine, poWells 1981). M. = 1:2.


20/34

82 Dragan BOI

dierent graves. Moreover, some inds rom theHallstatt period tumuli rom Magdalenska goraand Stina were ascribed to Vinica grave groups.I shall cite just two obvious examples.

According to the auction sale catalogue o the

Mecklenburg Collection, Grave 97 rom Golek priVinici contained remains o a bronze vessel (Mahr1934, 93, cat. no. 69).15Tese are actually the remainso the rim o a composite helmet;16considering thedecoration, they belonged to the helmet discoveredin grave 15, tumulus V near Stina (Gabrovec19621963, 308, note 65; 321, no. 3, 322, pl. 9: 2;Egg 1980, 246, fig. 3: 1; Wells 1981, 71, grave 15,fig. 125: ; Egg 1986, 167, cat. no. 105, fig. 115: 2,pl. 49: b; Boi 1992, 191, notes 13 and 14). In thesame Vinica grave group two terminals shaped like

animal heads rom a hollow torc also occur.17It ishighly questionable whether these two objects origi-nate rom Golek pri Vinici. Similar terminals havebeen ound mostly in western Slovenia, in Posoje(Most na Soi eran, Lo Schiavo, rampu-Orel19841985, 30, no. 8, hohler Halsring, 368, grave2337, no. 5, pl. 246: C5; Mlinar 2009, 221, fig. 4:3; 5), Gorenjska (Monje ibid.,221, note 43) andNotranjska (mihel pod Nanosom Gutin 1979,78, pl. 65: 7). wo terminals o a single torc havebeen ound at Magdalenska gora in Dolenjska (ecco

Hvala, Dular, Kocuvan 2004, 164, grave 1/1, no. 14,pl. 127: 14; Mlinar 2009, 221, note 39), but theyare completely absent eastwards rom this site. Itis thereore most probable that the terminals romgrave 97 at Golek pri Vinici actually originate romMagdalenska gora. Tere is even a possibility thatthey, just like the parts o a composite helmet romthe same grave, originate rom Stina.

Moreover, a ragment o a situla with igurativerepouss ornament supposedly originates romgrave 222 at Golek pri Vinici. An ornament o ive

embossed dots, arranged in a crisscross pattern,can be seen between the rivets that ix the situlabody. No other objects decorated in the Situla stylewere discovered in Hallstatt period graves in Belakrajina. Observing the decoration o the Vinicaragment, this is very probably a ragment o a sitularom grave 6-7-7a, tumulus V rom Magdalenska

15 69. Vinica, continued: graves 96, 97, 98a, and 98b.Comprising ragments o a rare bronze vessel (?) withherring-bone ornamentation, ound in gr. 97. Unortunately

it was only possible to preserve ragments.16Online collection. http://140.247.102.177/col/longDi-splay.cfm?ObjectKey=117004[retrieved on Sept. 22. 2009].

17Online collection. http://140.247.102.177/col/longDi-splay.cfm?ObjectKey=116417[retrieved on Sept. 22. 2009].

gora (Hencken 1978, 30, ig. 111), which has acorresponding ragment missing.

Conclusion

Te above article states that grave groups romMagdalenska gora, Stina and Golek pri Vinici, allin the Mecklenburg Collection, have to be studiedwith extreme caution. I a find cannot be reliablyrecognized, based on data in Goldbergs notes, onsketches or in photographs (e.g. like the kernosrom the grave with a cuirass, which can be seenon a photograph and was described by Goldberg asa ceramic vessel with our small vessels attached),there is no guarantee that it came rom the grave to

which it has been assigned in publications. It couldbe rom another grave rom the same site or evenrom a different site. I we consider Janez Dularsreport on handling the finds rom the MecklenburgCollection in the period rom 1905 to 1933, whilethe collection was being prepared or the auctionin Zrich (Dular 2009), it is not astonishing thatnumerous transpositions occurred. Finds o theVinica character rom the Hallstatt period gravesdiscovered on Magdalenska gora and at Stinadoubtlessly originate rom Golek pri Vinici.

I I once again mention Peter Wells belie, statedat the beginning o this article, that grave groupsrom Stina, tumulus 52 or IV, ater the Duchesso Mecklenburg, are completely reliable, I unor-tunately have to argue that this is incorrect. heevidence or this are, e.g., the grave with a cuirass(no. 30), a grave with two shepherds crook pins(no. 19 Wells 1981, 59, ig. 73)18and graves romthe same tumulus that contain amber necklaceswith beads o types 8d and 8e (nos. 4, 23, 29 and41a). he smaller ciboria and the two lids (eran

2006, 266, nos. 79 fig. 2:46) ascribed to thecuirass grave are rom a dierent Stina grave,rom Magdalenska gora or even rom some othersite o the Dolenjska Hallstatt culture excavatedby the Duchess o Mecklenburg. Dome-shapedbuttons (plain and the Vinica type) rom the samegrave (fig. 1: 2,3), two shepherds crook pins romgrave 19 and amber beads o types 8d and 8erom graves 4 (fig. 11: 1), 23, 29 and 41a are, onthe contrary, rom the cemetery Strani dol nearGolek pri Vinici in Bela krajina.

18eran and Gabrovec presume, that a bowl-shapedhelmet, stored in the Berlin Museum, originates rom thisgrave (Gabrovec et al.2006, 262, pl. 206).


21/34


Acknowledgements

Many thanks to Janez Dular or the inormation on thehistory o the Mecklenburg Collection and or providingme with some literature. Te inormation on the finds waskindly provided by Martina Blei Kavur rom the Faculty

o Philosophy, University o Rijeka and by Phil Mason romthe Institute or the Protection o Cultural Heritage o Slov-

Fig.13: Distribution map o dome-shaped buttons o the Vinica type (list 1).Sl. 13:Karta razprostranjenosti kalotastih gumbov vrste Vinica (seznam 1).

enia, Regional Unit Novo mesto. I am grateul to PolonaBitenc, Barbara Jerin, Ida Murgelj and Peter urk, all romthe National Museum o Slovenia in Ljubljana, ManredNawroth rom the Museum or Prehistory and Early Historyin Berlin and Patricia Kervick rom the Peabody Museum,Harvard University, Cambridge, USA, or their help with

the illustrations. Finally, I warmly thank to Nina Crummyrom Colchester who kindly checked the translation.

At least 34 buttons with diam. mostly 1.6 to 1.7 cm (ascribedto grave 30, tumulus 52 rom Stina figs.1:3; 6:1).

Wells 1981, 62, grave 30, 176, ig. 85: 1.A small number o buttons (ascribed to isolated inds

rom tumulus 55 at Stina fig. 5:1).Wells 1981, 80, isolated inds rom tumulus VI, 213,

ig. 161: a, third row right.2 buttons (fig. 5:2,3).Dobiat 1982, 43, nos. 34123421, pl. 10: 39,45.

3. Nova vas Katelir(fig. 5:4)One button, diam. 1.8 cm.Sakara Suevi 2004, 137, ig. 202.

4. Nesactium (fig. 5:5,6)2 buttons, diam. 1.8 cm. Somewhat dierent.Mihovili 2001, 233, pl. 76: 47.

LIST 1 (fig. 13)

Dome-shaped buttons of the Vinica type19

1. Metlika Pungart, grave 22 (fig. 6:5)4 buttons, diam. around 1.2 cm.ribar 1974, 321, grave no. 22, no. 23, pl. 3: 10.

2. Golek pri Vinici Strani dol, graves 1, 3, 30, 34, 35,43A, 78, 127, 145, 204, 215 and 277 and isolated inds

Buttons rom graves are unpublished.

19Dome-shaped buttons o the Vinica type are usually

bronze. Apart rom the bronze examples, 12 iron buttonswere ound at Kastav. I am grateul to Martina Blei Ka-vur rom Rijeka or the inormation on the buttons romBaka and Garica on the island o Krk, rom an unknownsite on the island o Krk and rom Ribi.


22/34

84 Dragan BOI

5. Kastav Veli Miinac, grave 1/1979 and isolatedinds (fig. 6:11,12)

Gutin 1987, 47, igs. 7: 7; 8: 3.Cetini 1996, 196, ig. 12.Blei 2002, 97, cat. no. 10.2 (44 buttons, diam. 1.8

cm and smaller); 98, pl. 10: 10.3 (5 iron buttons, diam.

1.67 cm); 98, pl. 11: 10.5 (20 buttons, diam. 1.75 cm); 98,cat. no. 10.6 (7 iron buttons, diam. 1.7 cm); 85, 98, pl.1: 10.8 (grave 1/1979 4 buttons, diam. 0.82 cm); 99, pl.11: 10.09 (8 buttons, diam. 0.83 cm); 99, cat. no. 10.10(2 buttons, diam. 1.8 cm); 99, cat. no. 10.11 (one button,diam. 1.87 cm).

6. Grobnik Grobie, grave 2/1987 and isolated inds(fig. 6:1416)

Ljubi 1889, 155, no. 11.Blei 2004, 57, ig. 17 (grave 2/1987); 75, pl. 7: 5.1.1

(7 buttons, diam. 0.820.93 cm), 5.1.2 (7 buttons, diam.1.31 cm); 75, cat. no. 5.1.3 (43 buttons, diam. 1.34 cm); 76,pl. 7: 5.1.6 (61 buttons, diam. 1.72 cm); 76, cat. no. 5.1.7(1 button, diam. 1.24 cm); 77, pl. 8: 5.1.11 (15 buttons,diam. 1.24 cm).

7. GaricaUnpublished. Inormation rom Martina Blei Ka-

vur.

8. Baka, graves 1 and 3 (fig. 5:7,8)9 dome-shaped buttons (the Vinica type and plain),

diam. 1.1 to 1.7 cm (grave 1) and one button, diam. 1.2cm (grave 3).

Lo Schiavo 1970, 425, grave 1, no. 2, pl. 24: 2; 426, grave3, no. 3a, pl. 24: 14.

9. Island of Krk(fig. 5:9)Larger number o dierent sized buttons.Lo Schiavo 1970, 425, cat. no. 230, pl. 23: 12a.

10. Prozor, grave 52 (fig. 6:7)114 dome-shaped buttons o dierent sizes (the Vinica

type and plain) with diam. rom 0.4 to 1.5 cm. Buttonswere stitched to a leather belt.

Drechsler-Bii 19721973, 37, grave 52, no. 14, pl.28: 14.

Bakari 1993, 115, cat. no. 96, n.

11. Ribi, graves 33 and 273 (fig. 5:10,11)One button, diam. 1.8 cm (grave 33) and the second,

diam. 1.6 cm (grave 273).uri 1900, 9, grave 33; 28, grave 273, no. 9.Mari 1968, 37, pls. 22: 3; 20: 20.20

20 Ater the paper had already been inished, BleiKavur drew my attention to the Hallstatt period grave 18o the necropolis o Gradina near Dragii in Dalmatia,which contained at least two dome-shaped buttons (Brusi1999, pl. 16: 1,2). Brusis publication having no catalogue,their position in the grave remains unknown. he largerone has a solid boss, but the smaller is plain. he button

with a boss is similar to the buttons o the Vinica type,but it diers rom them in having an extremely smallopening in the loop and a relatively high boss. Because othese characteristics it is close to the button rom grave 19o the same necropolis (ibid.,pl. 17: 6), which also has a

very small opening, a stil l higher boss and a peaked, notrounded, section. Fairly similar to it are the two buttonsrom Nesactium (fig. 5:5,6), mentioned above, which dierrom the common buttons o the Vinica type.

Grave 18 rom Dragii is undoubtedly emale becauseo the inclusion o amber beads and a bronze needle (ibid.,pl. 16: 5,6). As Brusi has published a drawing o just one

(ibid.,pl. 4: 4) out o 160 dome-shaped buttons in grave4B o the necropolis near Dragii (ibid., 8, pl. 27: 2), itis probable that in grave 18 there were in act more thantwo buttons. I they lay in the region o the waist, theywould have decorated a belt; they may thereore representa predecessor o the Late La ne emale belts, to whichbuttons o the Vinica type and plain dome-shaped buttonswere attached.

AUBELJ, B. (ed.) 1999, Zakladi tisoletij. Zgodovina Slovenijeod neandertalcev do Slovanov. Ljubljana.

BAKARI, L. 1993, 96. Inventar groba 52. In:Arheolokimuzej u Zagrebu. Izbor iz fundusa,114115, Zagreb.

BAKARI, L. 2004, 5. Ogrlice (2 kom.) (5. Necklaces [2specimens]). In: Ratnici na razmeu istoka i zapada(Warriors at the crossroads o East and West), 359,Zagreb.

BAKARI, L. 2008, 142. Halskette. In: Dreitausend JahreVorgeschichte. Meisterwerke der Metallzeit im konti-nentalen Kroatien, Schritenreihe des Keltenmuseums

Hochdor/Enz 7, 194.BLEI, M. 2002, Kastav u posljednjem tisuljeu prije

Krista (Kastav im letzten Jahrtausend vor Christus). Vjesnik Arheolokog muzeja u Zagrebu35, 67146.

BLEI, M. 2003, Ukrasna pojasna ploica iz Grobnika(Grtelzierplttchen aus Grobnik). Opuscula Archaeo-logica27, 331335.

BLEI, M. 2004, Grobnik u eljezno doba (Grobnik inthe Iron age). Vjesnik Arheolokog muzeja u Zagrebu37, 47117.

BOI, D. (ed.) 1983, Keltoi. Kelti in njihovi sodobniki naozemlju Jugoslavije (Keltoi. Die Kelten und ihre Zeit-genossen au dem Gebiet Jugoslawiens). Ljubljana.

BOI, D. 1992, Mokronoka skupina latenske kulture vpoznolatenskem obdobju. Unpublished PhD thesis, Fa-

culty o Arts o the University o Ljubljana / Neobjavljenadisertacija, Filozoska akulteta Univerze v Ljubljani.

BOI, D. 1999, Die Erorschung der Latnezeit in Slo-wenien seit Jahr 1964 / Raziskovanje latenske dobe

ranslation: Nives Kokeza


23/34


na Slovenskem po letu 1964. Arheoloki vestnik 50,189213.

BOI, D. 2001, Ljudje ob Krki in Kolpi v latenski dobi /Zur latnezeitlichen Bevlkerung an Krka und Kolpa.

Arheoloki vestnik52, 181198.BOI, D. 2008, Late La ne-Roman cemetery in Novo

mesto. Ljubljanska cesta and Okrajno glavarstvo. Studieson fibulae and on the relative chronology of the Late Lane period / Poznolatensko-rimsko grobie v Novemmestu. Ljubljanska cesta in Okrajno glavarstvo. tudije o

fibulah in o relativni kronologiji pozne latenske dobe. Katalogi in monograije 39.

CEINI, . 1996, Rezultati novijih arheolokih istraiva-nja Grobia (Die Ergebnisse neuerer archologischenForschungen au der Lokalitt Grobie). Grobnikizbornik4, 188204.

URI, V. 1900, Ein Flachgrbereld der Iapoden inRibi bei Biha. Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen ausBosnien und der Herzegowina7, 432.

DOBIA, C. 1982, Funde aus der Sammlung Mecklenburg.Kleine Schriten aus dem Vorgeschichtlichen SeminarMarburg 12.

DRECHSLER-BII, R. 19721973, Nekropola prahistorij-skih Japoda u Prozoru kod Otoca (Grberelder vorge-schichtlicher Iapoden in Prozor bei Otoac). Vjesnik

Arheolokog muzeja u Zagrebu67, 154.DRECHSLER-BII, R. 1987, Japodska grupa. In:

Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja 5, eljezno doba,391441, Sarajevo.

DULAR, J. 1985, Arheoloka topografija Slovenije. opo-grafsko podroje11 (Bela krajina). Ljubljana.

DULAR, J. 2003, Haltatske nekropole Dolenjske / Diehallstattzeitlichen Nekropolen in Dolenjsko. OperaInstituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 6.

DULAR, J. 2009, Kako je nastala in zakaj je odla na tujeMecklenburka zbirka (he origin o the MecklenburgCollection and why it was moved abroad). Argo52/12, 3047.

DULAR, J. and S. ECCO HVALA 2007, South-EasternSlovenia in the Early Iron Age. Settlement - Economy -Society / Jugovzhodna Slovenija v stareji elezni dobi.Poselitev - gospodarstvo - druba. Opera InstitutiArchaeologici Sloveniae 12.

EGG, M. 1980, Zum Helmragment von Magdalenska

gora (Fragment elade z Magdalenske gore). Situla2021, 241249.EGG, M. 1986, Italische Helme. Studien zu den ltereisenzeit-

lichen Helmen Italiens und der Alpen. Monographien /Rmisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum 11.

EIBNER, A. 2000, Zu den Grtelblechen von Stina einmachtgeladenes Symbol der Kriegerausrstung? In:B. Gediga, D. Piotrowska (eds.), Kultura symbolicznakrgu pl popielnicowych epoki brzu i wczesnej epokielaza w Europie rodkowej/ Die symbolische Kultur desUrnenfelderkreises in der Bronze- und frhen Eisenzeit

Mitteleuropas,Prace Komisji Archeologicznej / PolskaAkademia Nauk, Oddzia we Wrocawiu 13, 129156.

FREY, O.-H. 1969, Die Entstehung der Situlenkunst. Rmisch-Germanische Forschungen 31.

GABROVEC, S. 1960, Grob z oklepom iz Novega mesta(Panzergrab von Novo mesto). Situla1, 2779.

GABROVEC, S. 19621963, Haltatske elade jugovzhodnoalp-skega kroga (Die hallstttischen Helme des sdostalpinenKreises). Arheoloki vestnik1314, 293347.

GABROVEC, S. 19641965, Haltatska kultura v Sloveniji(Die Hallstattkultur Sloweniens). Arheoloki vestnik 1516, 2163.

GABROVEC, S. 1966a, Srednjelatensko obdobje v Slove-niji (Zur Mittellatnezeit in Slowenien). Arheolokivestnik 17, 169242.

GABROVEC, S. 1966b, Zur Hallstattzeit in Slowenien. Germania 44, 148.

GABROVEC, S. 1978, Dolga pota stikih izkopanin. Zbornik obine Grosuplje10, 127145.

GABROVEC, S. 1994a, Stina1, Naselbinska izkopavanja /Siedlungsausgrabungen. Katalogi in monograije 28.

GABROVEC, S. 1994b, Zur Geschichte der Hallstattor-schung in Slowenien. In: Festschrift fr Otto-HermanFrey zum 65. Geburtstag,Marburger Studien zur Vor-und Frhgeschichte 16, 219234.

GABROVEC, S. and A. KRUH 2006, Gomila 40, 41 ali 43.Grob z oklepom / Grabhgel 40, 41 bzw. 43. Grab mitPanzer. In: Gabrovec et al.2006, 158162.

GABROVEC, S., A. KRUH, I. MURGELJ and B. ERAN2006, Stina2/1, Gomile stareje elezne dobe/ Grabhgelaus der lteren Eisenzeit. Katalogi in monografije 37.

GEUPEL, F. 1972, Funde der spten Hallstattzeit aus Krajina,Slovenija. Forschungen und Berichte14, 203208.

GUIN, M. 1979, Notranjska. K zaetkom elezne dobena severnem Jadranu / Notranjska. Zu den Anfngender Eisenzeit an der nrdlichen Adria. Katalogi inmonograije 17.

GUIN, M. 1987, La ne ibulae rom Istria. Archaeo-logia Iugoslavica24, 4356.HENCKEN, H. 1978, he Iron Age Cemetery of Magda-

lenska gora in Slovenia. Bulletin / American Schoolo Prehistoric Research 32.

KLEMENC, J. 1935, Ostava u Likom Ribniku (DerSchatzund von Liki Ribnik). Vjesnik Hrvatskogaarheolokoga drutva16, 83125.

KNEZ, . 1986, Novo mesto1, Haltatski grobovi/ Hallstat-tzeitliche Grber. Carniola Archaeologica 1.

LJUBI, S. 1889, Popis arkeologikoga odjela Nar. zem.muzeja u Zagrebu I/1, Egipatska sbirka predhistorikasbirka. Zagreb.

LO SCHIAVO, F. 1970, Il gruppo liburnico-japodico. Me-morie. Atti della Accademia nazionale dei Lincei, Classedi Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche14, 363525.

LOAR, R. 1934, Predzgodovina Slovenije, posebej Kranj-ske, v lui zbirke Mecklenburg (Die VorgeschichteSloweniens, insbesondere Krains, im Lichte der Sam-mlung Mecklenburg). Glasnik Muzejskega drutva zaSlovenijo 15, 591.

LOAR, R. 1937, Bronasti oklep z Vrhpolja pri Stini (Armurede bronze provenant de Vrhpolje prs de Stina). Glasnik

Muzejskega drutva za Slovenijo 18, 7386.LUCKE, W. and O.-H. FREY 1962, Die Situla in Providence

(Rhode Island). Ein Beitrag zur Situlenkunst des Osthall-

stattkreises. Rmisch-Germanische Forschungen 26.MAHR, A. 1934 (ed.), Prehistoric Grave Material from

Carniola excavated in 190514 by H. H. the late DuchessPaul Friedrich of Mecklenburg. New York.


24/34

86 Dragan BOI

MARI, Z. 1968, Japodske nekropole u dolini Une. Gla-snik Zemaljskog muzeja23, 580.

MIHOVILI, K. 2001, Nezakcij. Prapovijesni nalazi 1900. -1953./ Nesactium. Prehistoric finds 1900 - 1953. Mo-nograije i katalozi / Arheoloki muzej Istre 11.

MLINAR, M. 2009, About three Iron Age inds, excavated

in the year 1927 at Most na Soi. In: G. ieengraber,B. Kavur, A. Gaspari (eds.), Keltske tudije/ Studies inCeltic Archaeology2,Papers in honour of Mitja Gutin,Protohistoire Europenne 11, 217223.

PALAVESRA, A. 1993, Praistorijski ilibar na centralnomi zapadnom Balkanu(Prehistoric amber in Central andWestern Balkans). Posebna izdanja / Srpska akademijanauka i umetnosti. Balkanoloki institut 52.

POLIZZOI GREIS, G. 2006, A Noble Pursuit. heDuchess of Mecklenburg Collection from Iron Age Slo-venia. Cambridge, Mass.

RADIMSK, W. 1895, Die Nekropole von Jezerine inPritoka bei Biha. Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen ausBosnien und der Herzegowina3, 39218.

SAKARA SUEVI, M. 2004, Katelir. Prazgodovinskanaselbina pri Novi vasi / Brtonigla (Istra)(Prehistoric Set-tlement near Nova vas / Brtonigla [Istria]). Koper.

SARE, V. 1973, Prazgodovina marjete. Katalogi inmonograije 10.

RIBAR, V. 1974, gano srednjelatensko grobie v Metliki(Brandgrber aus dem mittleren La-ne in Metlika).

Arheoloki vestnik25, 319352.ECCO HVALA, S., J. DULAR and E. KOCUVAN 2004,

eleznodobne gomile na Magdalenski gori/ Eisenzeitli-che Grabhgel auf der Magdalenska gora. Katalogi in

monograije 36.ERAN, B. 1976, Certoka ibula (Die Certosaibel). Arheoloki vestnik27, 317536.

ERAN, B. 1997, Heros der Hallstattzeit. Beobachtungenzum Status an Grbern um das Caput Adriae. In: C.Becker et al.(eds.), Hrnos. Beitrge zur prhistorischen

Archologie zwischen Nord- und Sdosteuropa. Festschrift

fr Bernhard Hnsel,Internationale Archologie. Studiahonoraria 1, 653669.

ERAN, B. 2001, Dolgoiv spomin. Preitki haltatskegaobredja v pustnih egah na Slovenskem? (A long-livedmemory. Can the survival o Hallstatt rituals be seenin carnival celebrations in Slovenia?). Arhe oloki

vestnik52, 207219.ERAN, B. 2006, Gomila 52. Gomila IV po vojvodinji

Mecklenburki / Grabhgel 52. Grabhgel IV nachHerzogin von Mecklenburg. In: Gabrovec et al.2006,263269.

ERAN, B. and N. RAMPU 1973, Prispevek h krono-logiji svetolucijske skupine (Contributo alla cronologiadel gruppo preistorico di Santa Lucia). Arheolokivestnik24, 416460.

ERAN, B., F. LO SCHIAVO and N. RAMPU-OREL19841985, Most na Soi (S. Lucia) 2. Katalogi inmonograije 23.

URK, P. 2005a, Images of life and myth . Exhibition Ca-talogue. Ljubljana.

URK, P. 2005b, Podobe ivljenja in mita. Katalog arheolokerazstave. Ljubljana.

URLEB, M. 1974, Krina gora pri Lou. Haltatska nekropola(Hallstattzeitliches Grbereld Krina gora). Katalogiin monograije 11.

WEISS, R.-M. 1993, Der Brustpanzer von Stina-St. Veit. Acta Praehistorica et Archaeologica25, 168185.

WEISS, R.-M. 1996, Ein reiches Kreigergrab aus Magdalenskagora Neue Erkenntnisse zu einem alten Fund. ActaPraehistorica et Archaeologica 28, 4058.

WEISS, R.-M. 1999, Des Kaisers alte Funde. Die Sammlung

hallstattzeitlicher Funde aus Krain, Slowenien. In: I.Griesa, R.-M. Weiss, Hallstattzeit, Die Altertmer imMuseum r Vor- und Frhgeschichte 2, 4873.

WELLS, P. S. 1981, Te Emergence of an Iron Age Economy.Te Mecklenburg Grave Groups from Hallstatt and Stina. Bulletin / American School o Prehistoric Research 33.

UVOD

V grobovih haltatske kulture v Sloveniji so bili odkrititrije bronasti oklepi, vsi trije na Dolenjskem: dva pri Stiniin eden v Kandiji pri Novem mestu (Dular, ecco Hvala

2007, 242, op. 481, sl. 139 in 141). Novomeki oklep je bilodkrit kot zadnji leta 1939 pri gradnji portnega stadiona vgomili 5 v Kandiji (Knez 1986, 19 s, 51, t. 6, sl. 26: 5), samgrob pa je ele leta 1941 raziskal Rajko Loar (Gabrovec1960). Samo nekaj let pred tem, leta 1935, je domain Albin

K haltatskemu grobu z oklepom, ki ga je leta 1913 pri Stini izkopala vojvodinja MecklenburkaO zanesljivosti grobnih celot Mecklenburke zbirke

Wells 1981, 55, umulus IV:hus I judge the associations in this tumulus to be thoroughly trustworthy.

(Zato menim, da so grobne celote v tej gomili popolnoma zanesljive.)

Hrast v gomili 40, 41 ali 43 stikega gomilnega grobiaizkopal drugi grob z oklepom iz Stine (Loar 1937; Ga-brovec 19641965, 34, op. 53, t. 25; Dular 2003, 117, sl.65 in 66; Gabrovec, Kruh 2006). Predmet priujoe tudijepa je prvi grob z oklepom iz Stine, ki ga je 14. aprila 1913

v gomili 52 velikega stikega gomilnega grobia odprlavojvodinja Mecklenburka.Zadnjo predstavitev tega groba je pripravila Biba eran

pred tremi leti v prvem delu publikacije o haltatskih gomilahv okolici Stine na Dolenjskem (eran 2006, 263266, t.


25/34


207208; sl. 12). V njem Stane Gabrovec, Ana Kruh, IdaMurgelj in eranova predstavljajo predvsem najdbe, ki sehranijo v Narodnem muzeju Slovenije v Ljubljani. o je eetrta objava tega groba, ki so ga pred tem objavili Gabrovec(1978, 142 s, sl. 57; sl. 4), Peter S. Wells (1981, 62, sl. 85)in Rainer-Maria Weiss (1993). Njegove pridatke hranijo

v Muzeju Peabody Harvardske univerze v Cambridgeu vZDA in v Muzeju za prazgodovino in zgodnjo zgodovino vBerlinu. eranova se je odloila za ponovno objavo zato,ker je oklep, ki je dalj asa veljal za izgubljenega, leta 1992spet priel v berlinski muzej (eran 2006, 263).

GOMILA 52(GOMILA IV PO VOJVODINJI MECKLENBURKI)

Vojvodinja je v asu med 1905 in 1914 v bliini Sti-ne izkopala 11 gomil (Wells 1981, 47). Gomila, ki je

vsebova la grob z oklepom, je bil a v asu izkopavanjaimenovana gomila rontelj (Gomila rondel) ali velikagomila (grosse Gomila) pri entvidu (Mahr 1934, 112,kat. t. 126; Gabrovec 1978, 134, sl. 3; Weiss 1993, 177,op. 26). V drabenem katalogu Mecklenburke zbirkenosi oznako gomila IV pri entvidu (St. Veit) (Mahr1934, 112114), ki jo je zadral tudi Wells v svoji knjigio haltatskih grobovih iz Hallstatta in Stine (Wells 1981,5568). Na nartu stikega gomilnega grobia, ki obsega125 e vidnih gomil, je oznaena s tevilko 52 (Gabrovec1994a, 40, sl. 26; Gabrovec et al. 2006, 270, sl. 72; Dular,ecco Hvala 2007, 167, 276, kat. t. 98, pril. 5). Lei vVrhpolju pri entvidu v skupini gomil, ki so v smeri proti

jugu najbolj oddaljene od eleznodobnega naselja. Protivzhodu je bila tik ob njej gomila 125, ki jo je za berlinskimuzej leta 1906 izkopal vodja prazgodovinskega oddelkaAlred Gtze in je bila po izkopavanju povsem zravnana(Gabrovec 1978, 132 ss, sl. 3; Gabrovec 1994b; Gabrovecet al. 2006, 226 ss, sl. 45 in 46).

GROB Z OKLEPOM (GROB 30)

Grob z oklepom je dobil med izkopavanjem zaporednotevilko 30. Iz zapiskov tajnika vojvodinje Gustava Gold-berga, ki jih je leta 1933 v Zrichu na prvi list kartoteke

groba z oklepom (sl. 3) prepisal Adol Mahr, ki je vodilpripravo Mecklenburke zbirke za drabo v New Yorku, ins otograij, posnetih ob izkopavanju, izhaja, da je bila 3,1m dolga in 1,1 m iroka grobna jama pokrita z velikimikamnitimi ploami.1Pod njimi so leali stisnjen, sicerpa zelo dobro ohranjen oklep in okoli njega tri kerami-ne posode, dve od njih zelo lepo izdelani in zelo redkeoblike. Ena od teh dveh je imela na robu 4 posodice. Pod

1 Arheoloki oddelek Narodnega muzeja Slovenijehrani otokopije veine kartotenih listov o tem grobu(t. 1, 2, 3b, 3c, 4b in 6), ki jih je Stanetu Gabrovcu poslal

Hugh Hencken iz Muzeja Peabody. Nanje me je ljubezni-vo opozoril kolega Janez Dular. Izvirniki so shranjeni varhivu Mecklenburke zbirke, #4077, katla 24, mapa 2,ki ga hrani Muzej Peabody za arheologijo in etnologijopri Harvardski univerzi.

oklepom so leali e dve slabe ohranjeni elezni suliniosti in nekaj okroglih gumbov. Drugih pridatkov v grobuni bilo (Wells 1981, 47, 62, sl. 85: a; Weiss 1993, 177, op.27, sl. 1012;2eran 2006, 264).

Gabrovec je leta 1977, ko e ni poznal Goldbergovihzapiskov, samo na podlagi otograije odprtega groba, ki jo

hrani Narodni muzej Slovenije, ugotovil, da sodi vanj polegoklepa tudi kernos s tirimi aicami in tirimi antiteti-nimi plastinimi spiralami, shranjen v berlinskem muzeju(Gabrovec 1978, 142 s, sl. 2 in 5; sl. 4:12). Vojvodinja ga

je hkrati z oklepom podarila nemkemu cesar ju WilhelmuII. Gabrovec (1978, 143, sl. 7; sl.4:3) je objavil tudi risbedrugih pridatkov, katerih prvi del je grobu z oklepom leta1933 v Zrichu pripisal Mahr (Dobiat 1982, 1 s in 16; sl. 3:b,d), drugega pa ele v Muzeju Peabody pri Harvardskiuniverzi njegov direktor Hugh Hencken (sl. 3: gj). Narazpolago sta mu jih dala Hencken in Peter Wells, ki jetakrat e pripravljal njihovo objavo.3

Wellsova objava groba 30 gomile 52 oziroma IV vsebujepoleg opisa najdinih okoliin, ki temelji na Goldbergovihizvirnih zapiskih, in opisov najdb tudi otograije odprtegagroba, oklepa in kernosa ter risbe kernosa in drugih najdb(Wells 1981, 62, 175177, sl. 85). Grobna celota obsegapoleg oklepa, sulinih osti in kernosa e tri keramineposode in dva pokrova (repinje velikega rdekasto rjavegalonca z nagubanim trebuhom, valjastim vratom in rde-kastim premazom, neokraen svetlorjav lonek, repinjerjavkastega ciborija z graitnim premazom in repinje dvehrdekastih pokrovov s sledovi graitnega premaza, ib., sl.85: h,j,i in k; sl. 4:3/11; 2:1,4,5) ter 67 bronastih gumbovz zanko na spodnji strani, ki imajo na sredini veinoma

majhno izboklino (ib., sl. 85: l,m; sl. 1:2,3).4

V primerja-vi z Gabrovevo objavo je nekaj drobnih razlik. Wells jeeni sami posodi, in sicer manjemu ciboriju (ib., sl. 85: i;sl. 2: 5), pripisal tri dele, ki jih je bil Gabrovec opredelilkot dele treh posod (Gabrovec 1978, sl. 7: 68): dno inzgornji del noge, izvihano ustje in spodnji rob noge, ki je

2Weiss navaja, da se je Wells pri svojih izvajanjih gledenajdinih okoliin oprl na rokopisne zapiske A. Mahra izleta 1934 (prav 1933!). Domnevni Mahrovi zapiski, ki jih

je Weiss v opombi dobesedno navedel, so Mahrov prepiszapiskov tajnika Goldberga z dne 14. aprila 1913. Njegoviizkopavalni zapiski so ohranjeni za vsak grob gomile IV

(Wells 1981, 55, gomila IV).3Po eranovi (2006, 263) niti Wells l. 1981 niti pozneje

Weiss l. 1993 ali 1999 nista omenila, da je sestav groba zoklepom ponovno rekonstruiral prav Gabrovec v lankuiz leta 1978. Wells Gabrovevega lanka, ki je izel tri letapred njegovo knjigo, res ni omenil, Weiss pa ga je, in sicerz besedami, da je Gabrovec v njem prvi predstavil popolnotakrat znano vsebino groba, ki ga je izkopala vojvodinjaMecklenburka (Weiss 1993, 183, op. 59).

4 Risbe estih bronastih gumbov, sulinih osti,

av_60_bozic.pdf

Documents