Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu:
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Abschlussarbeit Buch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Beograd
Arheološki Inst.
2010
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Đerdapske sveske
Posebna izdanja ; 7 |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Beschreibung: | PT: Material culture from early Byzantine fortresses in Djerdap. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache |
| Beschreibung: | 184, XVI S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. |
| ISBN: | 9788680093604 9788672691115 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cb4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV036861611 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20111121 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 101209s2010 abd| m||| 00||| srp d | ||
| 020 | |a 9788680093604 |9 978-86-80093-60-4 | ||
| 020 | |a 9788672691115 |9 978-86-7269-111-5 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)698608863 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV036861611 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a srp | |
| 049 | |a DE-12 |a DE-Re13 | ||
| 084 | |a 6,15 |2 ssgn | ||
| 084 | |a 7,41 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Špehar, Perica |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu |c Perica Špehar |
| 246 | 1 | 3 | |a Material culture from early Byzantine fortresses in Djerdap |
| 264 | 1 | |a Beograd |b Arheološki Inst. |c 2010 | |
| 300 | |a 184, XVI S. |b Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a Đerdapske sveske : Posebna izdanja |v 7 | |
| 500 | |a PT: Material culture from early Byzantine fortresses in Djerdap. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache | ||
| 502 | |a Zugl.: Belgrad, Univ., Magisterarb., 2004 u.d.T.: Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja na širem prostoru Đerdapa | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Material culture / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Excavations (Archaeology) / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Funde | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Sachkultur |0 (DE-588)4051157-1 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Funde |0 (DE-588)4071507-3 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Festung |0 (DE-588)4016934-0 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 4 | |a Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) / Antiquities | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Byzantinisches Reich |0 (DE-588)4009256-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Eisernes Tor, Donau |0 (DE-588)4092445-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 655 | 7 | |0 (DE-588)4113937-9 |a Hochschulschrift |2 gnd-content | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Byzantinisches Reich |0 (DE-588)4009256-2 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Eisernes Tor, Donau |0 (DE-588)4092445-2 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Festung |0 (DE-588)4016934-0 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 3 | |a Sachkultur |0 (DE-588)4051157-1 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 4 | |a Funde |0 (DE-588)4071507-3 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 830 | 0 | |a Đerdapske sveske |v Posebna izdanja ; 7 |w (DE-604)BV000844384 |9 7 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=020777361&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=020777361&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-020777361 | ||
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 307.09 |e 22/bsb |f 09021 |g 4971 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 307.09 |e 22/bsb |f 09021 |g 498 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 307.09 |e 22/bsb |f 09021 |g 398 |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804143561565798400 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | SADRŽAJ
11
UVOD
13
ISTORIJAT ISTRAŽIVANJA
15
ĐERDAP: GEOGRAFSKE ODLIKE
1
KOMUNIKACIJE
18
ADMINISTRATIVNE
PODELE
U RIMSKOM
1
VIZANTIJSKOM PERIODU
19
UTVRĐENJA NA DESNOJ OBALI DUNAVA U ĐERDAPU
20
UŠĆE POREČKE
REKE
22
VELIKO GOLUBINJE
22
MALO GOLUBINJE
23
HAJDUČKA VODENICA
25
TEKIJA (TRANSDIERNA)
26
SIP
28
KARATAS
(DIANA)
30
DONJE BUTORKE
31
PONTES
32
RTKOVO
-
GLAMIJA
I
35
KORBOVO
35
VAJUGA-KARAULA
35
MILUTINOVAC
38
LJUBIČEVAC-GLAMIJA
39
BRZA PALANKA (EGETA
)
41
UŠĆE
SLATINSKÉ
REKE
43
MIHAJLOVAC-BLATO
44
MORA
VAGEI
45
BORĐEJ
46
AKVE
(AQUAE)
48
RADUJEVAC-KARAMIZAR
48
UŠĆE TIMOKA
DUNAV
500
Є00
700
еСЮ
9
CO
iOOÛ m
49
POKRETNI NALAZI
49-53
POSUDE OD STAKLA
/
pehari na stopi, boca, balsamarijumi
/
53-74
DELOVI ODEĆEI NAKIT
/
kopče, pojasni jezičak, fibule,
igle za odeću, prstenje, narukvice, naušnice, perle, privesci, delovi torbica
/
75
PREDMETI OD KOSTI I ROGA
78-81
VAGE I TEGOVI
/
novčarske vage, tegovi
/
82-88
GRAĐEVINSKA OPREMA
/
klinovi, klamfe, baglama, brave, katanac,
ključevi, šarka, prozorska okna
/
89-95
OPREMA ZA OSVETLJAVANJE
/
nosači svetiljki, staklene svetiljke,
keramičke lampe, bronzana lampa
/
95-125
ALAT I PRIBOR
/
poljoprivredne alatke, alat za obradu drveta, alat za
obradu kamena, alat za obradu metala, alat i pribor za obradu vune i kože,
pribor za ribolov, alat i pribor za obradu hrane, kozmetički pribor, brusevi,
kresivo, stilusi, medicinski instrumenti, alat nepoznate namene
/
126-131
ORUŽJE
/
mač, štitovi, koplja, tribulusi, luk i
strele
/
132
KONJSKA OPREMA
132
RAZNO
134-143
NOVAC
/
ostava iz Akva, ostava iz Hajdučke vodenice, ostava sa ušća
Slatinské
reke,
ostava iz Tekije, pojedinačni nalazi novca
/
145
ZAKLJUČNA RAZMATRANJA
155
SPISAK PREUZETIH CRTEŽA
157
SUMMARY
175
BIBLIOGRAFIJA
185
TABLE
On the basis of preserved historical data, one can
notice that in the region of northern Illyricum, the
Danubian
limes was the scene of turbulent events
from the end of the 5th to the first half of the 7th
century, which did not only reflect on the Romaic
Empire but also on the neighbouring barbarian
tribes. In such a situation, the population of the
frontier fortifications, who were engaged either in
activities of a military or agricultural nature, faced
numerous challenges owing to the immediate prox¬
imity of the enemy, and because of their relatively
poor economic potential. Seeing that there is no
appropriate work that deals comprehensively with
this circle of problems, the decision was made to
assemble in one place all the known and accessible,
small finds of Early Byzantine culture, except pot¬
tery,147 which were unearthed in the fortifications
erected on the right bank of the Danube, on the
section from the confluence of the
Porečka
River to
that of the Timok. Hie said region was the frontier
zone of the Serbian part of the province of
Dacia
Ripensis in a length of about
200
km, where
22
fortifications of diverse sizes and importance were
archaeologically documented and researched.
The excavations that went on in this area in
the course of several decades resulted in the dis¬
covery of a series of fortifications, where traces of
residential architecture and
nécropoles
were found
in addition to the remains of ramparts, and a sig¬
nificant quantity of items of material culture dating
from the Early Byzantine period were also recorded.
Unfortunately, considering that the field records,
which should be the basic source of information,
are mostly incomplete, a large number of finds
have not been clearly, stratigraphically defined.
On the other hand, although some archaeological
investigations were finished several decades ago,
the publication of the material and results of the
excavations was not done satisfactorily, consider¬
ing that the majority of papers were reports on the
archaeological excavations. Apart from that, given
that some of the field research was done more than
forty years ago, a portion of the material, due to
inadequate treatment, has been destroyed or lost.
In spite of these difficulties, all the preserved
finds of Early Byzantine material culture were col¬
lected and catalogued, and were interpreted in an
attempt to shed light on the social and economic
structure of the population that lived in the border
lying fortifications. On this occasion, all the mobile
finds of the Early Byzantine horizon of the
Đerdap
fortifications were examined and classified into sev¬
eral, generally accepted groups, according to their
utilitarian value. Their classification according to
function was followed by their typologisation and
comparison with analogous or similar finds. The
said comparative method made it possible to com¬
pare the frontier zone with the other parts of the
Empire, relying on the traces of material culture.
Needless to say, accurately dated analogies, in some
cases, enabled the more precise chronological attri¬
bution of finds from the broader region of
Đerdap.
Likewise, one should stress that the illustrations
of these items do not depict all of the finds, they
show only the typologically representative items
belonging to particular kinds of materials. Besides
the drawings, the numerical figures of which cor¬
respond to the catalogue number of the find, pho¬
tographs have also been provided in certain cases.
147
A very small portion of the pottery from the Early Byzantine period has been published it. the reports on the excavations in particular
forts. Cf.
Цермановић-Кузмановић
1984;
Јовановић
1984;
Томовић
Í984a;
Cabricene
1986;
Milosevic,
Jeremie
1986,
Jovanov.c,
Korać, Janković
1986;
Tomović
1986;
Cermanović-Kuzmanović
1986.
159
******
After
the
Romans
had completed their con¬
quest of the Balkans, most probably after the year
9
AD, they formed the province of Moesia, which
was subsequently divided into two provinces. In
further administrative reorganisation during the
rule of Diocletian
(282-302),
the province of
Dacia
Ripensis came into being
(Vetters 1950: 6-7),
a sec¬
tion of which included the right bank of the Dan¬
ube from the confluence of the River
Porečka
to the
confluence of the Timok, which constituted part of
the limes of the province of
Dacia
Ripensis. The said
section was the region of
Đerdap,
which consisted
of the
Đerdap
Gorge and part of the Valachian Plain.
The basic communication route across this region,
which was frequently used by the military forces of
the Eastern Empire during the campaigns towards
the northern frontier territories, was along the right
bank of the Danube (Theophylacti Simocattae his-
toriae
VII
3-5; VIII 5-6:
ВИИНЈ
I
2007: 120, 123,
125-126;
Bavant
2004:313),
while the other impor¬
tant traveling route ran from the
Morava
River basin
towards the territory of todays north-eastern Bul¬
garia (Procopius
-
Bellům
Gothicum III
39:
ВИИНЈ
I
2007: 45;
Theophylacti
Simocattae
históriáé
I
3;
I
8:
ВИИНЈ1
2007:106,109;
Popović,
V.
1975:471-472;
Bavant
2004: 313).
Apart from the said roads, there
were other, less important routes of a local charac¬
ter, one of which extended along the
Porečka
River
towards the mineral rich regions in the hinterland
of the province, while the other stretched from
the confluence of the
Porečka
River, across Mount
Miroč
to ancient
Egeta
(Петровић, П.
1984:285).
The purpose of the oldest fort in this region
was to accommodate the Roman legions. It was made
of earth and protected by a palisade. These palisades
were soon replaced by stone fortifications erected on
the confluence of the River
Slatina,
in
Tekija,
Pontes
and
Dijana
(Kondié,
Zotović
1971: 38).
As a result
of changes in the defence system at the end of the 3rd
and in the first half of the
4*
century, smaller forts
were built, so-called burgus, which, in the
Đerdap
part of the limes, were recorded to have existed on
the localities of
Hajdučka vodenica, Donje Butorke,
Rtkovo
-
Glamija
I, Ušće
Slatinské
reke, Mihajlo-
vac-Blato, Mora
Vagei
and
Borđej (Tomović
1987:
97).
However, with the new fortification system it
was still impossible to contain the barbarian attacks
so that in the middle of the 5th century the limes
fell (Prisci
Fragmenta
1;
lb;
7-8:
ВПИН] І
2007:
9-12;
Lemerle
1954: 279-280;
Mirković
2006,
98).
Even though the Hun domination did not last
long
(Острогорски
1959: 79;
Скржинской
1960:
118-119;
Mirković
2006:99-100),
different barbar¬
ian tribes still plagued the northern borders of the
Empire with their constant incursions.
With the accession of Anastasius I
(491-518)
to the throne, the state treasury was replenished by
carrying out numerous reforms, which increased
the Empires strength. Parallel to economic reforms,
tax and military reforms were also introduced, the
primary effect of which was the reinforcement of
the defence lines along the border, i.e. in the renewal
of damaged and the erection of new fortresses in
order to check the barbarian advances. These mea¬
sures were continued successfully by his successors
so that during the time of Justinian I
(527-565),
it
was possible to launch the revival of the Empire.
During this process, among other things, the tem¬
porarily abandoned positions along the right bank
of the Danube were retrieved, testimony of which
are the numerous archaeologically documented
fortifications from this period. The renewal of the
limes brought an improvement in the fortification
system, which involved the construction of dif¬
ferent shapes of towers (polygonal, semi-circular,
circular, horseshoe, and so on), which provided
greater protection from the threat of siege devices.
In addition, proteichisma and
valli
were added to
increase the defensive power of the walls, as well
as sally ports, through which attacks were launched
against the enemy
(Kondié 1984a).
The aforesaid situation was also attested in
the region of
Đerdap
where, on the right bank of
the Danube between the confluence of the
Porečka
River and the confluence of the Timok, more than
twenty fortifications were archaeologically docu¬
mented as having been in use during the Early Byz¬
antine period. The different nature of the fortifica¬
tions (fortified town, castrum, observation post)
stipulated both their shape and dimensions, seeing
that in some cases, they served as large adminis¬
trative, military and ecclesiastical centres, whereas
they were sometimes built for stationing small mili¬
tary units. The number of fortifications discovered
on this
200
km long section of the Danube, simply
confirms the well-known fact that in the territory
of the Eastern Empire during the Early Byzan¬
tine period, a large number of fortifications were
renewed in order to strengthen the existing defence
system and prevent further barbarian penetration,
whereas cases of completely rebuilding fortifica¬
tions were rarer.
Depending on the size of the tributaries of
the Danube, that is, on the width of the bed and
basin through which they flowed, the opportunities
to penetrate into the interior of the province were
that much greater. It is precisely in these places
that fortifications were located to prevent the easy
penetration of invaders. Forts were erected along
160
sa
Шві
Hl
■Η
^Wkhowiiîşizei
Ušće Porečke
reke
1
Veliko Golubinje
1
Malo Golubinje
1
Hajdučka vodenica
1
Tekija
1
Sip
1
Dijana
1
Donje Butorke
1
Pontes
1
Rtkovo
-
Glamija
I
1
Korbovo
1
Vaj
uga-Karaule
1
Milutinovac
1
Ljubičevac-Glamija
1
Egeta
1
Ušće
Slatinské
reke
1
Mihajlovac
1
Mora
Vagei
1
Borđej
1
Akve
1
Raduj evac
-
Karamizar
1
Ušće Timoka
1
·· · 1
-r
:. - 2 :
:
■ .
:
■ . · .· ■
і
■
14
■·. 4 ····. .
Table
1.
The distribution of fortifications according to their surface area
the communication routes, for instance, at the
confluence of the
Porečka
River, the
Slatina
River
and the Timok. Apart from that, fortifications also
served to control the shallows across the Danube,
like at
Dijana
and Milutinovac, as well as at the
canal for bypassing the Danube cataracts (the Sip
Canal), while they sometimes played an important
role in the transport of the necessary goods and
troops since there were docks within their walls
(Hajdučka vodenica, Dijana).
In analysing the surface area of the fortifica¬
tions over the broader area of
Đerdap
that were in use
during the Early Byzantine period, a provisional divi¬
sion was made according to which cities spread over
an
areal
larger than
10
hectares, while the large forti¬
fications had an
areal
of between one and two hect¬
ares. Fortifications of medium size occupied from
0.5
to one hectare, while small forts did not exceed
a surface area of
0.5
hectares (Table
1).
Finally, one
may also single out fortifications, in which the sur-
161
face area was not ascertained, as a separate group.
However, we should mention that the said division
has certain shortcomings, considering that some
fortifications could have had suburbs that were not
inhabited all the time but served for the accommo¬
dation of livestock when danger arose. The most
numerous group consists of small-sized fortifica¬
tions, encompassing
14
forts
(77.78 %),
followed by
large fortifications that were recorded on two local¬
ities
(11.12 %).
Nevertheless, cities and medium-
sized fortresses, which were observed individually
were the fewest
(5.55 %),
while we have no data
about the surface area of four fortifications.148
Based on the available data, which in some
case is extremely scarce, the existing ramparts were
reconstructed on six localities during the Early
Byzantine period, that is in
Tekija,
Sip,
Dijana,
Pon¬
tes
as well on the localities of Vajuga-Karaule and
Akve, where the said renovation can be assumed,
whereas new fortifications were erected in nine
cases
(Vasić, Kondić
1986: 555).
On six localities,
the walls of new Early Byzantine fortifications were
erected around the existing burgi of Late Antiq¬
uity, thereby increasing the surface area that was
defended and strengthening the existing walls,
given that in this way double defence walls were
formed. This involved
Hajdučka vodenica, Donje
Butorke, Rtkovo
-
Glamija
I, Ljubičevac, Mihajlo-
vac, Mora
Vagei
and Bordej. In the case of the con¬
fluence of the River
Slatina,
the said principle was
not applied perhaps due to the excessive damage on
the burgus, since the new fortress was shifted further
upstream than the earlier erected walls. Whereas
in Milutinovac, the fort was erected on a location
where traces of earlier, ancient fortifications were
not attested, however, traces of buildings did exist
which can be linked with the Dacians. Finally, one
should mention that in the case of seven forts, we
have no data that can shed light with any certainty
regarding their connection with the earlier phases
of fortification building
(Ušće Porečke
reke,
Veliko
Golubinje, Malo Golubinje, Korbovo, Egeta, Radu-
jevac-Karamizar, Ušće Timoka),
while for the
Ušće
Porečke
reke
and Egeta,
we do not possess enough
confirmed data on the existence of new fortifica¬
tions that were erected during the 6th century.
As we can see, the largest number of fortifica¬
tions consisted of small forts, the surface of which
did not exceed
0.5
hectares, which testifies to their
purpose. Namely, the reduced population of the
Empire called for a less numerous army, which also
led to changes in the method of warfare, which now
focused on defensive tactics. Therefore, the crew
that manned most of the fortifications along the
Đerdap
limes did not have the task of preventing
enemy attacks but observing the border and send¬
ing information about eventual barbarian advances.
The fortifications themselves were erected in keep¬
ing with the geographical features so that in the most
inaccessible part (the section between the conflu¬
ence of the
Porečka
River and the Sip Canal), there
were only six fortifications, while in the part of the
Danubian
limes, which was open to territory occu¬
pied by barbarians by way of the Valachian Plain, we
recorded
16
fortifications.
Although the fortifications were erected
principally for defence from incursions by bar¬
barian tribes, at the same time they were the most
exposed points of communication with them,
through which trading was done. That is why the
fortifications on the limes were also centres where
goods were exchanged. The best illustration of this
is the fact that in
447-448
AD, among other things,
Attila
demanded that the frontier with the Romaic
Empire be shifted south of the Danube by the dis¬
tance of a five-day walk, and that the Illyrian goods
market be moved to Naissus, instead of it being
on the banks of the Danube
{Prisa Fragmenta
7:
ВИИНЈ
I
2007: 9-12).
The fortifications erected
along the northern frontier of the Empire were
distinguished by a diversified life, in which people
were primarily occupied with military activities,
but it also features different economic activities and
crafts, evidence of which are the mobile archaeo¬
logical finds so far collected during the archaeolog¬
ical excavations in the
Đerdap
region.
When erecting the fortifications beside the
facilities intended for military purposes, other
buildings were also constructed mostly in the opus
mixtum technique, while their roofs were covered
with tiles. In addition to buildings, a road, as well
as a suitable water and sewage system were built
beside the buildings inside the fortifications, the
existence of which was proved by a find of lead pipe
(Cat. No.
755).
Apart from that, less representative
facilities also existed, which were erected in a rather
more modest way by using rough or slightly hewn
stone bonded with mud, daub, or mortar. The said
facilities also had tile roofs, evidence of which is to
be found in finds of this type of material unearthed
in the
Ušće Porečke
reke
and the Rtkovo
-
Glamija
I localities
(Петровић, П.
1984: 286;
Gabričević
1986: 71-72).
The existence of wood in parts of the struc¬
tures was indicated by the remains of beams that
had been charred, window-frames and doors, as
were various construction elements used for fixing
and consolidating the wooden sections of buildings.
These having been mostly made of iron, such as dif¬
ferent types of nails (Cat.
Nos.
255-291),
clamps
148
The same types of fortifications were noticed in the hinterland of the province
Dalmaţia.
Cf.
Špehar 2008a;
Шпехар
2008b.
162
Balkan type
18
58,06%
Asia Minor type
25,81%
Lamps on foot
12,90%
Ovoid shaped lamp
3,23%
100%
Table
2.
The typology of ceramic lamps:
(Cat.
Nos.
292-305)
and a hinge (Cat. No.
306).
Besides construction elements for fixing, metal sec¬
tions of doors made of bronze and iron tell us about
the appearance of residential buildings during the
Early Byzantine period. In the course of investigat¬
ing the Early Byzantine horizon in the
Đerdap
for¬
tifications, parts of devices for locking doors were
found, such as the metal plating of locks, exclusively
made of bronze (Cat.
Nos.
307-310).
Besides them
were also documented iron parts of lock mecha¬
nisms (Cat. No.
311),
a padlock (Cat. No.
312),
as
well as keys of different shapes and dimensions (Cat.
Nos.
313-317).
Apart from doors, during the construction
of buildings windows were also installed, the exis¬
tence of which was proved by the fragmented finds
of window-panes, made primarily of glass that was
produced in a broad spectrum of colours (Cat.
Nos.
319-328).
When the sun shone, the multi-coloured
window-panes gave a certain colour to the light in
the interior of the building. On the other hand, thin,
whitish-coloured leaves of mica, cut in the shape
of rectangular little plates (Cat. No.
329)
were also
used for making window-panes, which were then
perforated and connected by lead rivets and placed
in wooden frames.
In addition to sunlight that was regulated
by means of windows, there was also lighting at
night. This was provided by static or movable light¬
ing equipment. The first group consisted of lamp
holders (Cat.
Nos.
330-334),
as well as specimens
of glass lamps with conically shaped lower sec¬
tions (Cat.
Nos.
335-352).
The other, much larger
group consisted mostly of ceramic lamps (Cat.
Nos.
353-383),
although a bronze specimen (Cat. No.
384)
was discovered, as well.
Based on the accepted divisions, the ceramic
lamps were classified as lamps of the Balkan and the
Asia Minor types, lamps of ovoid shape, and lamps
on a foot (Table
2).
The most frequent were the
so-called Balkan type
(18
specimens i.e.
58.06 %),
which was actually characteristic for this region of
the Eastern Empire. There were fewer specimens of
the Asia Minor type, eight in all
(25.81 %),
lamps
with a foot were represented by four finds, i.e.
12.90
%,
and there was one specimen of an ovoid shaped
lamp, that is,
3.23 %.
Besides lighting equipment, part of the
hinge from a chest of smaller dimensions (Cat.
No.
318),
as well as a fragment of furniture made
of bone (Cat. No.
199),
offer a modest insight into
the inventory of the households in the
Đerdap
for¬
tifications. Unfortunately, the collected quantity of
finds that could be described as household utensils
is extremely modest so that it does not offer a clear,
documented insight into this domain of life in the
Early Byzantine fortifications. The picture of house¬
hold furniture is, to some extent, complemented by
glass vessels (Cat.
Nos.
1-44),
which were princi¬
pally represented by multi-coloured specimens of
cups with a stem (Cat.
Nos.
1-39),
a grindstone
(Cat. No.
573),
as well as two fragments of a stone
mortarium (Cat.
Nos.
574-575).
According to all the data presented so far,
the most numerous type of household inventory
consisted of finds of glass cups, the use of which
was widespread during the paleo-Byzantine period.
Additional evidence of this lies in the number of
specimens of this type of find discovered inside the
residential and artisans complex in
Caričin grad,
in
the south-western quarter of its Lower Town. Given
that we encountered an extremely large number
163
of finds of glass vessels in the said area, one may
assume that they were used by all layers of the pop¬
ulation. According to what we have learned so far,
the view prevails among professional circles that
during the period of Late Antiquity, the primary
production of glass took place in the manufactur¬
ing centres in the East. The discovery in
Carian
grad
of the remains of glass making workshops and
the raw materials (Ivanisevic,
Stamenković
2009),
to make glass indicates that glass was also manu¬
factured in the Balkans during the 6th century, tes¬
timony of which is also the find of raw materials
for making glass, on the locality of
Gornji Streoc
(Ivanisevic,
Špehar
2006: 143,
fig.
4/11).
One
should not exclude the likelihood that a glass man¬
ufacturing centre actually existed in
Caričin grad,
from where it was distributed to the wider region
(Ivanisevic,
Stamenković:
2009).
The numerous fortifications, attested during
archaeological research in the region of
Đerdap,
were erected primarily for the accommodation
and protection of military units. The numerical
strength of the enemy required a new strategy of
defence, seeing that the available population was
largely reduced, owing to constant battles with
assailants, and to epidemics of smallpox or the
plague
(541-542),
which reduced the numbers of
the population by nearly
40 %,
as was the case with
Constantinople
(Geyer 2002: 41;
Laiou
2002: 44).
The erection of numerous fortifications on
the frontiers of the Roman Empire led to a defen¬
sive technique of warfare that was primarily based
on manning the interior of the fortresses with fewer
troops. Thus, along the Danube, in the territory of
the province of Moesia I,
Dacia Ripensis,
Moesia
II and Scythia, there were
104
military garrisons.
The soldiers stationed in the said fortresses, were
the
limitând
milites,
formed during the 5th and the
6th century. In this way, part of the Romaic popula¬
tion was conscripted to military service in return
for the awarding of land, thereby laying the foun¬
dations for creating what were later to become the
themes (Zuckerman
2004: 145-167).
Besides that,
certain barbarian tribes started being engaged in
the capacity offoederati.149 Also, more mobile units
were created in which there were fewer troops, with
the basic military formation consisting of a detach¬
ment of a strength of
300-400
men,
30
or
40
of them
armed with bows and arrows and the others with
spears. If it was necessary, these basic units could
be combined to form larger formations (Dennis,
Gamillscheg
1981: 75-91).
All these changes were
required by the new method of warfare in which
significant military forces, first of all cavalry, lay in
wait for the enemy in the interior, while the frontier
troops were responsible primarily for observation
and sounding the alarm.
Therefore, the assumption prevails that at
the end of 4th century in small forts, which were
the most frequent along the
Danubian
limes, units
of a maximum of
500
men were stationed, while
the main strategic centres could have had
1,000
to
1,500
troops, in which the ratio of infantry to
cavalry was
2:1.
Accordingly, we may conclude
that in that period, the limes from Singidunum
to the confluence of the Danube in the Black Sea
was defended by forces of around
44,000
soldiers,
12,500
of whom were in Moesia I,
11,500
in
Dacia
Ripensis,
10,500
in Moesia II, and
9,500
in Scythia
(Whitby
2007: 143).
During the 6th century, the section of the
Đer¬
dap
region between the confluence of the
Porečka
River and the confluence of the Timok belonged to
the prefecture of Illyricum, the military forces of
which were commanded by the
magister militum
per Illyricum. Under his command was one
legio
palatina,
eight mobile legions
(legio
comitatensis),
nine other legions
{legio
pseudo-comitatensis), six
auxiliary detachments
(auxilia palatina),
and two
special detachments (vexillatio comitatensis). Apart
from that, in the northern frontier lying regions of
the prefecture, as lower-ranking commanders who
could take action with some measure of indepen¬
dence were the
doux
of Moesia I and the
doux
of
Dacia (Ripensis?),
who under their command had
four to six legions, as well as over
40
auxiliary units
(Максимовић
1980: 20).
The Romaic military forces were divided
into two arms, the naval and the land troops, con¬
sisting of the infantry and the cavalry, which also
represented the strike force. The basic advantage
of the cavalry lay in its ability to rapidly traverse
vast distances, making it possible to launch sur¬
prise attacks and swiftly withdraw, or even entice
the enemy into an ambush.
The weapons used in battle, according to the
generally accepted divisions, can be classified into
defensive (shield, armour) and offensive, whereas
the finds of offensive weapons included those used
in close combat (sword, spear, knife), and warfare
at a distance (lance, bow and arrow). The said items
of weaponry were used in different combinations,
depending on the military arm. Thus, the basic weap¬
ons of the Romaic cavalry consisted of bows and
arrows, swords, as well as armour and shields. On
the other hand, infantrymen could be armed with
swords, shields and armour or, only with swords or
spears, while the archers constituted a separate group
armed with bows and arrows. During archaeological
excavations in the fortifications on the right bank of
164
the Danube, different items of weaponry were col¬
lected over the broader area of
Đerdap.
Thus, a sword
was unearthed (Cat. No.
677),
as were several han¬
dles of shields (Cat.
Nos.
678-681),
two fragments
of an umbo (Cat.
Nos.
682-683),
two specimens of
spears with a laurel-shaped tip (Cat.
Nos.
684-685),
and three specimens with tips in the shape of a wil¬
low-leaf (Cat.
Nos.
686-688).
Besides these, the finds
of this kind of material included specimens of the
coating from a reflexive bow (Cat.
Nos.
693-695),
as
well as different kinds of darts (Cat.
Nos.
696-727).
The tribulus, in the shape of a four-pronged briar,
was used as an obstacle against cavalry (Cat.
Nos.
689-692),
the sharp thorns of which pierced the soft
tissue on horses hoofs.
The most numerous type of weapon con¬
sisted of specimens intended for long distance
warfare, of which there were
35
specimens. It is
interesting to note that there was not much differ¬
ence in the types of darts, with the exception of a
single specimen of the so-called Mediterranean
type. This situation suggests that different shapes of
darts could be used at the same time and that their
diversity depended on their purpose: for hunt¬
ing or for waging war. The other types of weapons
were almost equally represented, for instance, six
fragmented finds of shields were unearthed, five
spearheads, four tribuli, and one fragmented find
of a sword. The perceived features of the diverse
types of weaponry, in which weapons intended for
combat at a distance were dominant, correspond to
our hitherto information according to which the
cavalry, who were equipped with bows and arrows
and whose existence was confirmed in the region
of
Đerdap
by three specimens of horses harnesses
(Cat.
Nos.
728-730),
played a crucial role.
Although the forts were primarily erected
in order to fulfill a military function, apart from
military detachments, they also housed members
of the civilian population, i.e. representatives of
the administration and the ecclesiastical organisa¬
tion, as well as farmers, artisans, merchants, fish¬
ermen, and suchlike, who made it possible for the
fortress to have a functioning economy. Judging
by the diverse tools and utensils that originated in
the Early Byzantine layers of the
Đerdap
fortifica¬
tions located on the right bank of the Danube, the
activities the fort s inhabitants engaged in, which
included soldiers, were of a diverse nature.
We singled out agriculture as the first aspect
of economic activity, which consisted of farming
the land and cattle-raising. Given that in the course
of the 5th to the 7th century, the large agricultural
holdings
-
villas
-
vanished after a series of barbar¬
ian invasions in Illyricum, farming activities were
done in the neighbourhood of the fortress
(Hen¬
ning 1987: 35-40,
Abb.
11).
Finds of hoes (Cat.
Nos.
385-387),
mattocks (Cat.
Nos.
389-391),
and
pick-axes (Cat.
Nos.
392-397)
indicate the devel¬
oped cultivation of the soil, testimony of which is
the find of a two-pronged hoe (Cat. No.
388),
which
served to till the soil around the vines in vineyards.
In the view of J.
Henning,
this type of find, dating
from between the 5th and the 7th centuries, is chara¬
cteristic of the regions of the Empire that were south
of the Lower
Danubian
Basin
(Henning 1987: 77,
Abb.
33).
Another aspect of crop-growing activities
is illustrated by scythes (Cat.
Nos.
398-401)
and
sickles (Cat.
Nos.
402-409)
which served to cut
grass and harvest crops, as well as pruning knives
of different sizes (Cat.
Nos.
410-417),
the larg¬
est specimens of which were most probably used
for clearing
forestland
or for cultivating orchards,
while the smaller ones were used in the cultivation
of vineyards. Like the two-pronged hoes, the prun¬
ing knives used in the cultivation of vineyards dur¬
ing the 5th to the 7th century were principally linked
with the regions south of the Lower
Danubian
Ba¬
sin, where the tradition of processing grapes con¬
tinued, seeing that this territory was still populated
by Romaic inhabitants
(Henning
1987: 93-94,
Abb.
45).
In contrast to the many different tools used in
crop-growing, very few finds directly indicated the
existence of cattle-raising because only two speci¬
mens of cow-bells were documented (Cat.
Nos.
418-419).
Nevertheless, cattle-raising played an
important role in the life of the Romaic population,
evidence of which are the numerous finds of tools
for processing wool and leather, which we shall dis¬
cuss later, in more detail.
Another activity was wood-working, which
had many purposes and uses, given that wood was
used as one of the basic raw materials in the construc¬
tion of buildings and for producing furniture, tool-
handles, weapons, fuel and so on. The many uses of
wood led to the manufacture of various tools that
were used in the particular stages of wood process¬
ing, starting with the felling of trees, right up to man¬
ufacturing finished products, as evidenced by the dis¬
covery of axes (Cat.
Nos.
420-430),
planes (Cat.
Nos.
431-433),
and scrape irons (Cat.
Nos.
434-442),
as
well as ordinary chisels (Cat.
Nos.
443-453).
Stone-working was also another craft in the
Đerdap
forts, considering that stone was one of the
basic building materials, Archaeological confirma¬
tion of the said activity, for the present exists in
only one specimen of tool (Cat. No.
455),
which,
to all appearances, was used in the final processing
stage for transferring smaller pieces of stone.
Although numerous metal objects origi¬
nated from the
Đerdap
region, judging by the few
165
collected specimens of the relevant tools (Cat.
Nos.
456-457),
metal-working as a craft, as well as the
absence of archaeologically documented foundries,
hardly existed at all inside the fortress walls. In this
respect, however, one should maintain a degree
of reserve, seeing that the small number of tools
intended for this type of craft was most probably
due to the scale of research that was done.
A particularly developed type of craft was the
production of bone items, which was very wide¬
spread in the region of
Đerdap.
Besides finished pro¬
ducts of bone, a significant number of semi-products
was also gathered (Cat.
Nos.
211-234),
which indicates
that the bone was processed by local craftsmen, inside
the fortresses in the localities of
Hajdučka vodenica,
Dijana,
Pontes,
Rtkovo
-
Glamija I, Ljubičevac-Gla-
mija, Ušće
Slatinské
reke,
Mora
Vagei and
Akve.
Parallel to the aforesaid crafts there was also
wool and leather-processing, which refers indirectly
to the existence of small and large cattle, which,
besides meat and dairy products, also provided
much needed raw materials such as wool, leather
and horn. Wool processing, from which clothing
was later made, was a lengthy process during which
a variety of tools were used in the different produc¬
tion phases. Thus, scissors (Cat.
Nos.
458-471),
were used to shear the sheep, after which the wool
was washed and dried and then combed with iron
carding combs (Cat.
Nos.
472-477).
Further pro¬
cessing entailed the spinning of wool into thread
and finally weaving, which later made it possible to
produce garments. Evidence of this manufacturing
process was verified in the finds of bronze and iron
distaffs (Cat.
Nos.
478-495),
as well as differently
shaped whorls made of clay (Cat.
Nos.
496-512),
lead (Cat. No.
513),
stone (Cat.
Nos.
514-516),
or
bone (Cat.
Nos.
517-530).
Besides wool, leather
was also produced, from which items of clothing
and footwear were made, satchels, straps, har¬
nesses, belts and so forth. The process of making
leather began by removing the skin from the ani¬
mal s body, after which it was cleaned by means
of special, semi-circular shaped knives and scrape
irons (Cat.
Nos.
531-541),
after which the skin
was dried and then treated. Of the tools used for
the
finalisation
process, a number of punches were
discovered (Cat.
Nos.
542-545),
by means of which
circular openings were created. During excava¬
tions, specimens of needles for sewing clothes (Cat.
Nos.
546-547)
were also unearthed.
Judging by the collected finds of appropriate
tools for this kind of economic activity, one can see
that the processing ofwool was the most important
domain of economic activty in the broader region
of
Đerdap
(Graph
1).
Tools connected with fishing as another kind
of economic activity constituted a separate group. As
the
Đerdap
fortress was located on the bank of a large
river that was rich in fish, fishing on a large scale was
mainly done by means of nets, testimony of which
are finds of bone and the iron needles required for
weaving, and repairing nets (Cat.
Nos.
548-550),
as
well as clay weights of different shapes for weighing
down the nets (Cat.
Nos.
551-560).
Besides catch¬
ing fish on a large scale, fishing by means of fishing
lines was also done, as we can see from the numer¬
ous finds offish hooks (Cat.
Nos.
561-567),
as well
as a weight for a float (Cat. No.
568).
The preparation of food was another type
of activity, proof of which were the iron handles
of pots (Cat.
Nos.
569-570),
a cleaver for chopping
meat (Cat. No.
571),
and a hook (Cat No.
572),
which suggest the existence of the butcher
s
trade.
Besides butchery, the existence was recorded of the
baker
s
trade, indirect testimony of which we find in
a grindstone (Cat. No.
573),
which served to grind
wheat, and several collected pastry scrapers (Cat.
Nos.
576-579).
Among the finds intended for food
processing were two specimens of mortarium (Cat.
Nos.
574-575),
which was a customary item among
household utensils. The most numerous finds of
utensils for preparing food were knives of differ¬
ent shapes (Cat.
Nos.
580-618)
although, because
of their universality, one may consider them to be
auxiliary tools that can be used for many purposes.
Judging by the number of agricultural tools
(36
items), as well as the number of specimens of
tools for wool and leather processing
(90
items),
one may conclude that farming played the leading
role in the economic life of Early Byzantine for¬
tresses (Graph
1).
Agricultural activities focused
on crop-growing, which was done in the narrow
fertile valleys of rivers, as well as vine-growing,
fruit-growing, and cattle-raising, which certainly
went on, on the slopes of the mountains that rose
in the hinterland of the
Đerdap
region. The vari¬
ous aspects of agriculture point to a relatively large
choice of nutritive raw materials, as well as articles
for export, such as meat, processed milk products,
leather, wine and suchlike. If one were to observe
the structure of agricultural tools, one would
remark that
77.78 %
of the tools belonged to the
crop-growing domain,
16.67 %
to cattle-raising,
and
5.56 %
to vine-growing. On the other hand, a
large number of tools intended for producing wool
and leather indicates that cattle-raising played a
more important role than crop-growing. Still, one
should not forget the fact that wool and leather
processing, were nevertheless an aspect of handi¬
craft and primarily testify to the degree of using
166
raw materials and not to the relationship between
cattle-raising and crop-growing.
Although the fields and meadows were
beyond the fortress walls, the people who culti¬
vated them did not live in villages near the farm¬
land but sought refuge inside the fortress walls. The
presence of a village population in an urban area,
on the other hand, testifies to the process of rurali-
sation that swept through the urban centres of the
Romaic Empire during the 6th century, as was the
case with Sirmium and
Caričin grad
where finds
of agricultural tools were recorded even though
it was a large and important ecclesiastical centre
(Поповић,
В.
2003:239-258).
The said process was
recorded in the territory of the whole Empire dur¬
ing the Early Byzantine period, in which the grad¬
ual deterioration of the cities was evident, while a
specific type of settlement appeared, the so-called
secondary centre, representing a transitional type
of settlement between a village and a city (Morri¬
son, Sodini
2002: 177-179).
Illustrating this thesis
is the fact that as opposed to agriculture, craftwork,
with the exception of the aforesaid wool and leather
processing, was far less frequent (Graph
1),
seeing
that other than leather and wool, only wood, metal,
and bone were processed.
Since specimens of tools for producing
more intricate woodwork were not attested in the
broader region of
Đerdap
(punches, drills
...),
one
may assume that wood-processing inside the for¬
tress mainly focused on carpentry. The scarcity of
tools for stonework was most probably due to the
amount of archaeological research that was done
although one should not exclude the possibility that
stone working was done outside the fortress. On the
other hand, the scarcity of tools used in metalwork-
ing (two items) points to the fact that foundries,
where the repair of tools and military equipment
could be performed, were outside the fortress walls.
The processing of bone, however, was confirmed by
numerous finds of finished bone objects, primar¬
ily combs, and also by the semi-finished products
attested on eight localities, which clearly indicates
the existence of workshop centres in this part of the
Danubian
limes.
In addition to farming and diverse crafts,
trading was also an occupation in the
Đerdap
for¬
tresses, given that some fortresses had harbours
(Hajdučka vodenica
and most probably
Dijana
and
Akve), where a variety of goods were delivered.
Precisely because of this, money changing existed
inside the fortresses where large monetary denomi¬
nations were exchanged for smaller ones and their
exact value was verified. Given that gold coins con¬
stituted the basis of the monetary system, the fun¬
damental difficulty in money changing was the fact
that as a result of protracted use and because the
edges of coins were sometimes clipped off, some
specimens of coin lost weight. On the other hand,
the appearance of forged coins was not unusual. In
order to avoid these problems, precision scales of
smaller dimensions and weights were used to weigh
coins and thereby determine their market value.
The equipment used for weighing coins and
money-changing was attested in
Hajdučka voden¬
ica,
where bronze scales were buried as part of
a hoard, along with
29
gold
solidi, a
tremissis and
weights. The said discovery confirms the existence
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
ia
ili
iu
і
ü
Щ
ISS«
pi
л^
А?
Л
C$0
C$0
Graph
1:
The representation of economic activities according to discovered specimens of tools
167
of money changing activities in this fortress, which,
because of its harbour, was a place where goods
were delivered by ship from distant places in the
Empire by way of the Danube. On the other hand,
this fortress was most probably a particular type of
collecting station for local products, which were
then dispatched by ship to their final destinations.
Besides
Hajducka
vodenica,
several finds of scales of
the same shape were discovered in
Dijana
(Cat.
Nos.
235-237)
while the find of a pan originated from
Ušće
Slatinské
reke
or
Ljubičevac,
(Cat. No.
238).
Besides scales, the money-changers equipment
included weights, which could be made of bronze
or glass. According to their purpose, one can clas¬
sify the collected specimens as mercantile (Cat. No.
239),
or monetary weights (Cat.
Nos.
240-249).
The
mercantile weights consisted of massive led speci¬
mens of weights (Cat.
Nos.
250-254),
which were
used for a large weighing machine.
Trade which went on in the
Đerdap
region
was primarily of a local nature. Nevertheless, there
was also inter-regional trade so that in this region,
besides money, which arrived from the large urban
centres, primarily Constantinople and Salonika, dif¬
ferent kinds of goods arrived, which were intended
both for the Romaic, as well as for the barbarian
population
(Bavant
2004: 332-333).
On the basis
of information so far, one may assume that certain
kinds of finds belonged to imports, such as lamps of
the Asia Minor type, whereas a slightly more reli¬
able testimony of trade between the broader region
of
Đerdap
and certain parts of the Empire, mainly
through the waterways, exists in certain forms of
ceramic vessels, primarily amphorae, which were
attested in the
Đerdap
fortifications. However, the
presence of amphorae can also be linked with the
transportation of the goods needed by military
units, as was the case on the locality of
Svetinje
near Viminacium
(Поповић,
M.
1988: 24).
On the
basis of the conclusions of Lj. Bjelajac, who identi¬
fied amphorae from
Pontes
(Bjelajac
1996: 67-72,
77-78,
type XX,
XXII)
and from Africa (Bjelajac
1996: 85-91, 92-93,
type XXVI-XXVII,
XXIX),
in the broader region of
Đerdap
on the localities of
Hajdučka vodenica, Tekija, Dijana,
Pontes, Miluti-
novac, Mihajlovac, Ušće
Slatinské
reke
and Akve,
it is
possible to observe from which areas of the Empire,
the imported goods reached the region of
Đerdap.
Judging by dated analogies, the said types already
appeared in the 4th century although they reached
their peak during the 5th and 6th century, while the
Pontes
amphorae were also attributed to the begin¬
ning of the 7th century, primarily in the regions of the
Lower
Danubian
Basin (Bjelajac
1996: 72-93).
Besides a review of the social-economic
structure of the population of
Đerdap
fortresses,
mobile finds collected during research in this
region provided details on the manner of clothing,
and on the inhabitants aesthetic needs and prefer¬
ences. Various materials were used for producing
clothing accessories and jewelry and, apart from
metals (most often iron and bronze), sometimes
bone was used, as well as glass. During archaeologi¬
cal research in the area of
Đerdap,
several groups of
these types of find were documented, such as sec¬
tions of belts (Cat.
Nos.
45-68),
fibulae (Cat.
Nos.
69-130),
pins for fastening clothing (Cat.
Nos.
131-134),
rings (Cat.
Nos.
135-142),
bracelets
(Cat.
Nos.
143-163),
earrings (Cat.
Nos.
164-172),
beads (Cat.
Nos.
173-178),
bone amulets (Cat.
Nos.
179-180),
and parts of satchels (Cat.
Nos.
181-191).
Costume and jewelry were primarily a way to show
that one belonged to a particular ethnic group,
and it also had social and economic implications
so that particular finds of this kind of material can
be viewed as specimens that were mainly though
not exclusively characteristic of members of the
Romaic population, seeing that these items were
also encountered among the barbarians.
Three buckles with metalwork of the Salona-
Histria type were singled out as typical Early Byz¬
antine products (Cat.
Nos.
45-47),
as well as two
so-called Sucidava buckles (Cat.
Nos.
48-49).
The
specimens of Salona-Histria buckles had appropri¬
ate parallels in the territory of the eastern Empire
although they were also to be found in the region
controlled by the Avars (Kiss
1996:
Taf.
50/6;
Garam
2001: 109,
Taf.
75/2).
The Sucidava type of buckle
was also to be found in the original territory of the
Germanic population
(Schulze-Dörrlamm 2002:
235,
Abb.
89/3).
The broad
areal
of the distribution
of Early Byzantine buckles from the second half of
the 6th and the first half of the 7th century testify to
the process of acculturation, to which the barbarian
tribes were exposed.
Besides the typical buckles of the Early Byz¬
antine period, we may single out three belt tongues
discovered at
Hajdučka vodenica,
which were made
of silver, coated with gold (Cat. No.
68),
as impor¬
tant and typically representative Byzantine finds.
The materials from which they were made is also
interesting, considering that in the broader
Đerdap
region during this period, with the exception of
coins, specimens of material culture made of pre¬
cious metals were rarely attested.
The numerous finds of clothing accessories
and jewelry, collected during the investigation of
the forts on the section of the right bank of the
168
Danube
between the
Ušće Porečke
reke
and the
Ušće
Timoka,
were diverse but relatively simple,
modest specimens mostly made of bronze and iron
and occasionally of glass and bone. The exceptions
to this were the three specimens of the gold-plated
silver belt tongues discovered at
Hajdučka vodenica
(Cat. No.
68).
The choice of materials and the man¬
ner of producing the metal and bone accessories
and bronze jewelry, with the periodical appearance
of bone and glass, indicated a population of modest
economic potential that lived in the frontier region
of the eastern Empire, which was almost constantly
exposed to attacks by different barbarian tribes.
The most numerous finds of costume acces¬
sories, which one can reliably claim to represent
Early Byzantine products were the numerous speci¬
mens of fibulae. The fibula was the basic element
women used to fasten their clothing and was most
often attached at the breast
(Милинковић
2004:
192).
Based on their features, one may distinguish
fibulae with a back turned foot and a coil made of
bronze (Cat.
Nos.
69-88),
as well as fibulae with
a back turned foot and a pseudo-coil, also made
of bronze (Cat.
Nos.
89-126)
or iron (Cat.
Nos.
127-129).
Although both kinds of fibulae appeared
at the same time (during the 6th and 7th century),
the fibulae with a turned back foot, in the develop¬
ment of which three stages were observed, based on
the ratio of the width of the foot and of the bow,
and on the ornamented part of the fibula, are con¬
sidered to be slightly older. Thus, fibulae, in which
the width of the bow and the foot were identical
and the foot was decorated, appeared as the earli¬
est type. During the second phase, the width of the
bow increased, and the ornamentation appeared
both on the bow and the foot, while in the third
phase, a much broader, ornamented bow was pre¬
dominant (Uenze
1992: 146-154).
In contrast to
the fibulae with a turned back foot, the fibulae with
the pseudo-coil on the transition of the bow into
the foot had raised ribs, on which the ornamenta¬
tion was to be found exclusively on the bow, while
the foot was mainly undecorated, although some¬
times ribs could appear on it.
As for jewelry, fewer finds were unearthed
which one could describe as being mainly typi¬
cal of Early Byzantine material culture. A bronze
bracelet of the open type with circular beaten ends,
engraved with a motif in the shape of a cross (Cat.
No.
143),
as well as a composite earring made of
bronze wire, fine metal plate and glass, fixed in a
Particular setting (Cat. No.
164),
can be singled out
as characteristic specimens.
Finally, there were finds belonging to the
domain of costume accessories which consisted of
pieces of small, mainly leather or cloth satchels, and
the finds of iron, semi-circular buckles (Cat
Nos.
181-185)
which testify primarily to their appearance,
though they were often mistakenly classified as flints.
Besides these, there were also bone clasps
that had a rectangular shape and rounded edges,
which could be very richly ornamented with mo¬
tives of concentric circles (Cat.
Nos.
186-190),
as
well as the find of a buckle for a satchel, of the Papa
type, which is linked to the end of the 6th and the
first half of the 7th century (Cat. No.
191).
The relatively numerous finds of costume
accessories and jewelry that originated over the
broader
Đerdap
region, were principally made of
bronze and iron, while the use of bone and glass
was a little rarer. The choice of much cheaper mate¬
rials as well as the simple handwork suggest the
limited economic potential of the inhabitants in the
Đerdap
forts, who were unable to buy expensive
kinds of buckles, fibulae or jewelry but were obliged
to content themselves with simply made items pro¬
duced on a large scale. The extent to which simple
and cheap products were used in this region is
illustrated by the fact that on the section between
the confluence of the
Porečka
River and the conflu¬
ence of the Timok, only three specimens of silver,
gold-plated buckle tongues were recorded, as well
as a silver earring, which could indicate a slighter
wealthier individual.
The review of material finds from the Early
Byzantine period so far has dealt with the economic
activities of the population and with the way in
which they dressed. But apart from that, the mov¬
able finds collected on the broader
Đerdap
region,
to some extent, shed light on the other aspects of life,
such as the maintenance of hygiene and embellish¬
ment, testimony of which lies in finds of razors (Cat
Nos.
619-622),
which one should primarily link
with the male population, as well as tweezers (Cat.
No.
623),
and two fragmented stone palettes (Cat.
Nos.
624-625),
which were most probably used by
the female population. A separate, very numerous
group of these finds consisted of a large number of
two-row combs made of bone (Cat.
Nos.
626-656),
as well as the specimen of a single row comb (Cat.
No.
657),
and part of a sheath for a comb (Cat. No.
658),
which were often very richly ornamented.
We do not know much about the other
aspects of life that went on inside the
Đerdap
forts,
given that the evidence of them are the few items
that have been discovered, such as bone dice (Cat.
No.
206),
pipes made of hollow bone (Cat. No.
207-208),
and stilt (Cat.
Nos.
669-671),
which
could testify to the existence of literacy, or medical
instruments (Cat.
Nos.
672-675).
169
As regards the religious aspect of life that
went on in the
Đerdap
forts during the Early
Byzantine period, we have very little data. Namely,
during the archaeological research on the section
of the right bank of the Danube between the con¬
fluence of the
Porečka
River and the confluence
of the Timok, basilicas were attested only on the
localities of
Hajdučka vodenica, Dijana,
Vajuga-
Karaula and Akve. Given that the majority of the
Đerdap
fortifications were examined by means
of test pits, the possibility remains that the small
number of churches was not a true reflection of
circumstances in the field but the result of incom¬
plete investigation.
The main Christian centre in
Đerdap
was
Akve, where a bishop had his seat during the 4th
century
(Zeiller 1918: 154).
Although this episco¬
pal centre was mentioned fairly early, its fate was
little known during later periods, in which not even
archaeological data has been of any great help, see¬
ing that most of the
areal
of the former city has not
been researched. Based on the preserved written
data, we know that the region of Illyricum in which
the section along the right bank of Danube between
the confluence of the
Porečka
River and the con¬
fluence of the Timok was part of the archbishopric
based in Salonika until the year
535,
when a new
archbishopric was formed with its centre in the city
of Justinian
Prima was
formed
(Живковић
2004:
37-38, 43-44).
Judging by the available data, the process
of the reoccupying the forts in the region of the
Đerdap
limes, after the Hunic conquest in the mid¬
dle of the 5th century, most probably began during
the time of Anastasius I, only to reach its culmina¬
tion during the rule of Justinian I. In an attempt
to clearly define how the process of renewal of the
limes unfolded in the broader area of
Đerdap,
we
encounter numerous difficulties, given that our
knowledge of events in the central Balkans during
the second half and the end of the 5th century, is
very scanty and incomplete. A much better situa¬
tion prevailed during the
6*
century when written
sources, as well as finds of coins and their circula¬
tion indicated the economic circumstances in the
state, which otherwise depended directly on its
military-political position.
The collected coins, with the exception of the
gold coinage of Leo I and of
Zenon,
suggest that a
more significant flow of money began during the
reign of Anastasius I, from
497/498,
to be precise.
The culmination, which is also evidence of the eco¬
nomic progress of the state, was attested under the
rule of Justinus I and Justinian I, and only during
the rule of Justinus II, was there a gradual decline
in the Romaic economy, accompanied by an ever
decreasing inflow of money. The last known speci¬
mens of coins discovered in the broader area of
Đerdap
on the right bank of the Danube, belonged
to Maurikios and are dated to the period of
587/588,
whereas it was impossible to determine the emis¬
sion period for three specimens.
The calculation of all bronze
nominais
in the
value of
folles,
wherein the value of the coinage of
16
nummia was equated with semi-folles, enabled
an insight into the circulation of coins across the
broader area of
Đerdap.
After the collapse as a
result of attacks by the Huns in the middle of the
5th century, the circulation of coins was renewed in
the time of Anastasius I. In his reign, monetary cir¬
culation was resumed both in Sirmium
(Popović,
V.
1978)
and Naissus
(Црноглавац
2005),
while the
earliest coinage in Viminacium is connected with
Justinus
I
(Иванишевић
1988),
as well as Singidu-
num
(Иванишевић
1987).
In the region of north¬
ern Illyricum, like in Sirmium, the coinage of
folles
prevailed during the rule of Justinus I and in the
first half of the rule of Justinian I, whereas later, the
semi-follis took precedence.
A further decline in the minting of coins
issued after the reign of Justinus II, and ceased com¬
pletely first of all in Singidunum where the last coins
were struck in the year
577/578
(Иванишевић
1987),
and subsequently in Sirmium
(Popović,
V.
1978),
where the last known specimen was dated to
the year
578/579.
In the broader region of
Đerdap,
the last emission of coins was attributed to Mau¬
rikios, and dated from
587/588,
which is connected
with the fact that the
Đerdap
fortifications fell dur¬
ing the nineties of the 6th century. In contrast to
that, the last coinage in Viminacium is connected
to the year
592/593
(Иванишевић
1988).
The cir¬
culation of coins held out the longest in the vicin¬
ity of Naissus, where the last coinage (Hexagram) is
attributed to Heraclius, i.e. to the period of
615-625
(Црноглавац
2005)
(Graph
2).
It is also interesting
to note that on the other side of the Iron Gorge, in
Olthenia, most of the coins were attributed to the
rule of Justinus II, after which a gradual decline
in the production of coins followed, while the last
specimens of coinage were dated to the reign of
Heraclius (Oberlander-Tarnoveanu
2001: 33-60).
Viewed through the prism of the mints, in
the region of northern Illyricum, the most fre¬
quent coinage was that of Propontis (Constanti¬
nople, Nikomedia, Cyzicus), coupled with the fact
that in the period of
518-522,
the mint in Salonika
increased its production. The beginning of the rule
of Justinus II signaled an increase of coins minted
in Salonika, from which source the army was evi-
170
dently
financed. On the other hand, the coin¬
age from Antioch featured most frequently in the
time of Justinus I, as well as in the first years of the
rule of Justinian I (before the monetary reform of
538/539),
after which they only appeared as indi¬
vidual coins. The striking frequency of specimens
minted in Constantinople compared to other mints
was due to the importance of the
Danubian
limes
for the defence of the Empires territory, which was
under the direct command of the Emperor. That
was the reason why the most numerous specimens
of coins came from the capital, given that food sup¬
plies, reinforcements, as well as pay, arrived pri¬
marily on ships by way of the Danube
(Petrović,
Vasić
1996: 18).
■Đerdap
Sírmium
Singidimum
- - -
-Viminacium
Naissus
oraph
2
A comparison of the circulation of bronze coins in the
Đerdap
region with certain cities in the region of the
Dacian
diocese and
Pannonia
II
■λ********************
The restoration of Byzantine power along the
right bank of the Danube at the end of the 5th or
beginning of the 6!h century, as well as the strength¬
ening of the existing fortifications, unfortunately,
did not lead to a desire for peace, given that the
Empires northern frontiers were frequently under
attack by barbarian tribes. The process of renewal
m
eastern Empire commenced by Anastasius was
resumed during the period of his successor, Justi¬
nus I
(518-527),
who very soon nominated his able
and widely popular nephew Justinian as his heir,
and in the last year of his reign, his co-ruler.
Although by origin from the interior of the
Empire, Justinian I was aware of the former impor¬
tance of the Roman Empire and so, from the begin-
ning of his rule, he aspired renew of its lost glory.
First of all, Justinian commenced tax, monetary and
legal reforms. But, parallel to these, he also worked
on strengthening the frontiers of the Empire by
means of renewing the existing and constructing
new fortifications. During this venture, he erected
and renewed about
460
fortifications in the region
of Illyricum, in which
37
forts were renewed in the
region of the city of Ad Aquas
(Prahovo)
alone, and
he constructed another fortress (Procopius
-
De
aedificiis, IV
4:
ВИИНЈ1
2007:64-65;
Dagron
1984:
6).
All of the activities he undertook were merely a
preparation for the project that was to represent the
principal feature of his entire rule. The re-conquest
of lost territories
(Острогорски
1969: 87-88).
No matter how visionary the newly enthroned
emperor was, the brilliant men who worked with
171
him (Belisarius, Tribonian, Narses, John of Cappa-
dokia) deserved credit for the achievement of his
aspirations.
Although the entire second half of the 6th
century was marked by constant wars the Byzan¬
tines waged with different barbarian tribes, there
are few written accounts that testify to the conflict
in the region of the
Đerdap
limes. Soon, the Avars
and Slavs imposed themselves as the chief rivals
of the Byzantines on the northern frontiers of the
Empire. They had different reasons for waging war.
The Avars were exclusively focused on looting while
the Slavs gradually settled in the region of northern
Illyricum. The pressure of these two tribes was con¬
tinually growing so that it was not until after sign¬
ing a peace treaty with the Parthians in
591
that
the Empire was able to oppose them. Nevertheless,
even then, battles were waged mainly in the region
of the Lower Danube, or military operations were
launched around Singidunum. On the other hand,
neither did the Avars hesitate and in the period
between
593
and
596,
they staged a series of attacks
as a result of which the fortifications on the
Đerdap
section of the limes were destroyed, which can be
seen from the halt in the circulation of coins pro¬
duced in Salonika (Theophylacti Simocattae his-
toriae VI
6-9, 11,
VII
2, 4-5, 11:
ВИИНЈ
I
2007:
113-121;
Lemerle
1954:291-292;
Popović,V.
1975:
463-464;
Popović,
V.
1979: 623-624).
The Avars continued their attacks in
597,
concentrating on
Dalmaţia
(Theophylacti Simo¬
cattae
históriáé
VII
12:
ВИИНЈ
I
2007: 121-122).
A two-year lull followed after which the Avars
launched a fresh assault across the Danube, the
aim of which was to lay siege to Constantinople
(599-600),
but it resulted in failure. The Avars then
withdrew, only after having signed an agreement
with the Byzantines that the latter could cross the
Danube, which represented the border, only in the
event of a campaign against the Slavs {Theophylacti
Simocattae
históriáé
VII
15:
ВИИНЈ
I
2007: 122;
Pohl 1988: 156-159).
Soon, during the year
600,
a
Byzantine invasion followed in the region of South¬
ern
Banat
and the
Tisa
River under the command of
Priskus, in which the Avars suffered several defeats
(Theophylacti Simocattae
históriáé
VII
3:
ВИИНЈ
I
2007: 123-124).
A Romaic counter-attack resumed
the following year, when a significant victory was
scored near Viminacium, after which it seemed that
the Avars would finally be routed. Nonetheless after
unsuccessful operations conducted in Avar-held
territory in
602,
a military uprising broke out and a
change occurred on the throne, which was usurped
by Phokas
(602-610).
Given that almost all the
military forces were withdrawn to the capital due
to the clashes with Persia and because of possible
insurrection, the northern frontiers of the Empire
apparently remained unprotected, abandoned to
the mercy of barbarian tribes (Theophylacti Simo¬
cattae
históriáé
VIII 5-6:
ВИИНЈ
I
2007: 124-126;
Баришић
1956: 74; Pohl 1988: 159-162).
Still, this period of Early Byzantine his¬
tory has not yet been explained fully, considering
that different views exist regarding the events that
occurred after the arrival of Phokas on the throne.
The more acceptable view among the majority of
scholars is that during Phokas rule, the northern
borders of the Empire in the Balkans were open to
constant barbarian incursions, principally by Slav
and Avar tribes (Grafenauer
1950: 74-75;
Lemerle
1954: 292;
Ferjančić
1984: 85).
Conversely, there
are views according to which the Avars, Slavs and
Langobards
signed a peace treaty in
602.
This was
followed by the conquest of
Istria
and then, by an
attack on Thrace. Phokas confronted with danger,
in
604
signed a truce and paid tribute to the Avar
leader. According to
E
Barišić,
the truce was con¬
venient for both sides, seeing that the Avars were
shaken after several serious defeats, while the Byz¬
antines considered the threat from Persia far more
dangerous, therefore, they needed peace on their
northern borders
(Баришић
1956: 75-75).
The absence of written sources regarding the
Avar-Slav incursions during Phokas reign, as well
as the absence of archaeological evidence (hoards
of coins) that would indicate barbarian incursions,
are conducive to this opinion. On the other hand,
the small quantities of individual specimens of
coins dating from the beginning of the 7th century
indicate that, at this point, the region of northern
Illyricum represented part of Byzantine territory
over which the court in Constantinople only had
nominal authority.
It would appear, after the fall of the
Danu¬
bian
limes during the last decades of the 6th century,
which in some cases was temporary, whereas in oth¬
ers, was of a more permanent nature, that a period
followed with a unclear sequence of events and, in
the course of the second decade of the 7th century
during the rule of Heraclius, there was a fresh Avar-
Slav onslaught against the imperial territory where
the remains or traces of central administration still
survived to some extent. Among other things, sug¬
gesting this were several individual finds of coins
belonging to Heraclius that were in circulation in
the region of the central part of the Balkans until
615.
It would seem that in the middle of the second
decade of the 7th century, there was a large penetra¬
tion by these two tribes, during which almost all
the fortifications in the interior of the Balkans were
172
destroyed, leading to the total collapse of Byzantine
authority and to the permanent settlement of the
Slavs in these regions
(Popović,
V.
1975: 489-490;
Ρορονΐό,ν.
1979:627-631).
The extremely hard times that were the domi¬
nant feature in this part of the Empire during the 6th
century were not merciful to the Byzantine popula¬
tion so that besides the temporary defeats of certain
forts, we know of a case in which it was decided not
to finish a new fortress. Namely, the construction of
the fortress that was commenced on the locality of
Rtkovo
-
Glamija I was never finished, most prob¬
ably due to the danger from enemy attacks, and the
walls remained incomplete.
Viewed through the prism of the archaeo¬
logical finds, one could, in certain cases based
on accurately dated analogous finds, speak of the
possible existence of life in the
Đerdap
forts at the
beginning of the 7th century. Primarily testifying
to this were analogous finds of the Salona-Histria
type of buckle, which originated in the territory of
Hungary, where they were dated to the end of the
6th, that is, to the first third of the 7th century (Kiss
1996:
T.
50/6;
Garam
2001: 109,
T.
75/2),
as well as
the specimen of a buckle of the Papa type of satchel
discovered in
Dijana,
which is dated to the end of
the 6th or first half of the 7th century
(Garam
2001:
110; Schulze-Dörrlamm 2002: 224-226).
The finds
of the Sucidava type buckle, of which we know the
analogies from the Avar necropolis Desk G, grave
No.
25
(Garam
2001:
T.
61/8),
dated to the end of
the 6th century or beginning of the 7th century can
be similarly classified. The specimens of ceramic
lamps of the Asia Minor type may also have
belonged to the beginning of the 7th century, see¬
ing that corresponding parallels dated to the first
half of the 7th century were documented to have
been found in the location of a shipwreck near
Jasi
Ade (Vitelli
1982: 193,
L12, fig.
9/3-4).
Still, as the
said specimens do not originate from stratigraphi-
cally, clearly defined ensembles, one cannot reli¬
ably speak of the existence of life at the beginning
of the 7th century. However, one can only speculate
on the possibility that such a situation developed
and only future excavations, combined with the
sources that are still preserved, can give a suitable
and definite answer.
Regardless of whether the
Đerdap
limes
ceased to exist at the end of the 6th or beginning
of the 7th century, the fortifications on the section
along the right bank of the Danube between the
confluence of the
Porečka
river and the conflu¬
ence of the Timok became deserted over a longer
period of time, after the end of Byzantine domina¬
tion. During the early medieval period, first of all
the
Ušće
Slatinské
reke
locality was settled in the
8-9th century and subsequently
(Jovanović, Korać,
Janković, Đ.
1986: 384-387),
Pontes,
in the period
from the 9th to the 10th century
(Гарашанин, Васић,
Марјановић-Вујовић
1984: 25-27; 44-47;
Vasić
1997: 150;
Vasić
1999: 34-35).
On the other hand,
on Ušće Porečke
reke,
Hajdučka vodenica,
Pontes,
Vajuga, Egeta and Mora
Vagei,
the remains of set¬
tlements and
nécropoles
were seen to have existed
throughout the high medieval period.
Based on the collected and presented finds of
Early Byzantine material culture, one may observe
that besides being manned by troops, the inhabit¬
ants of the
Đerdap
forts were of relatively modest
potential, who were primarily engaged in agricul¬
ture, although some kinds of crafts or trades were
clearly represented, such as wool and leather, or
bone processing, as well as in a certain level of trad¬
ing. In addition to the finds of agricultural tools
inside the city walls, the ruralisation and disinte¬
gration of the former way of life was confirmed by
a relatively modest group of costume accessories
and jewelry, and only four finds produced from
precious materials, and it seems, by the very poor
church organisation.
Judging by the finds of remains of material
culture, this mixed population of military troops
and farmers, whose economic potential was mod¬
est, differed very little from its compatriots in the
interior of Illyricum. Nevertheless, the fact that
the inhabitants of the
Đerdap
fortifications were
on the Empire
s
front line of defence made life sig¬
nificantly more difficult in this region, considering
that they were exposed to overwhelming barbarian
attacks. Despite its adaptability and determination,
the population of the
Đerdap
fortresses was unable
to sustain itself in the face of a far more powerful
adversary, which finally vanquished it and resumed
its advance, unimpeded, further into the Balkans.
173
|
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| author | Špehar, Perica |
| author_facet | Špehar, Perica |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Špehar, Perica |
| author_variant | p š pš |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV036861611 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)698608863 (DE-599)BVBBV036861611 |
| format | Thesis Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>02869nam a2200613 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV036861611</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20111121 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">101209s2010 abd| m||| 00||| srp d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9788680093604</subfield><subfield code="9">978-86-80093-60-4</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9788672691115</subfield><subfield code="9">978-86-7269-111-5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)698608863</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV036861611</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">srp</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-Re13</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">6,15</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Špehar, Perica</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu</subfield><subfield code="c">Perica Špehar</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="246" ind1="1" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Material culture from early Byzantine fortresses in Djerdap</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Beograd</subfield><subfield code="b">Arheološki Inst.</subfield><subfield code="c">2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">184, XVI S.</subfield><subfield code="b">Ill., graph. Darst., Kt.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Đerdapske sveske : Posebna izdanja</subfield><subfield code="v">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PT: Material culture from early Byzantine fortresses in Djerdap. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="502" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zugl.: Belgrad, Univ., Magisterarb., 2004 u.d.T.: Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja na širem prostoru Đerdapa</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Material culture / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Excavations (Archaeology) / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Funde</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Sachkultur</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4051157-1</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Funde</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4071507-3</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Festung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4016934-0</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) / Antiquities</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Byzantinisches Reich</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4009256-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Eisernes Tor, Donau</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4092445-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="655" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4113937-9</subfield><subfield code="a">Hochschulschrift</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd-content</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Byzantinisches Reich</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4009256-2</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Eisernes Tor, Donau</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4092445-2</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Festung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4016934-0</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Sachkultur</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4051157-1</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Funde</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4071507-3</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="830" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Đerdapske sveske</subfield><subfield code="v">Posebna izdanja ; 7</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV000844384</subfield><subfield code="9">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=020777361&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=020777361&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-020777361</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">307.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09021</subfield><subfield code="g">4971</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">307.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09021</subfield><subfield code="g">498</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">307.09</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09021</subfield><subfield code="g">398</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| genre | (DE-588)4113937-9 Hochschulschrift gnd-content |
| genre_facet | Hochschulschrift |
| geographic | Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) / Antiquities Byzantinisches Reich (DE-588)4009256-2 gnd Eisernes Tor, Donau (DE-588)4092445-2 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) / Antiquities Byzantinisches Reich Eisernes Tor, Donau |
| id | DE-604.BV036861611 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-07-09T22:49:37Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9788680093604 9788672691115 |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-020777361 |
| oclc_num | 698608863 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-12 DE-Re13 DE-BY-UBR |
| owner_facet | DE-12 DE-Re13 DE-BY-UBR |
| physical | 184, XVI S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. |
| publishDate | 2010 |
| publishDateSearch | 2010 |
| publishDateSort | 2010 |
| publisher | Arheološki Inst. |
| record_format | marc |
| series | Đerdapske sveske |
| series2 | Đerdapske sveske : Posebna izdanja |
| spelling | Špehar, Perica Verfasser aut Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu Perica Špehar Material culture from early Byzantine fortresses in Djerdap Beograd Arheološki Inst. 2010 184, XVI S. Ill., graph. Darst., Kt. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Đerdapske sveske : Posebna izdanja 7 PT: Material culture from early Byzantine fortresses in Djerdap. - Zsfassung in engl. Sprache Zugl.: Belgrad, Univ., Magisterarb., 2004 u.d.T.: Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja na širem prostoru Đerdapa Material culture / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) Excavations (Archaeology) / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) Funde Sachkultur (DE-588)4051157-1 gnd rswk-swf Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 gnd rswk-swf Festung (DE-588)4016934-0 gnd rswk-swf Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) / Antiquities Byzantinisches Reich (DE-588)4009256-2 gnd rswk-swf Eisernes Tor, Donau (DE-588)4092445-2 gnd rswk-swf (DE-588)4113937-9 Hochschulschrift gnd-content Byzantinisches Reich (DE-588)4009256-2 g Eisernes Tor, Donau (DE-588)4092445-2 g Festung (DE-588)4016934-0 s Sachkultur (DE-588)4051157-1 s Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 s DE-604 Đerdapske sveske Posebna izdanja ; 7 (DE-604)BV000844384 7 Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=020777361&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=020777361&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Špehar, Perica Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu Đerdapske sveske Material culture / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) Excavations (Archaeology) / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) Funde Sachkultur (DE-588)4051157-1 gnd Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 gnd Festung (DE-588)4016934-0 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4051157-1 (DE-588)4071507-3 (DE-588)4016934-0 (DE-588)4009256-2 (DE-588)4092445-2 (DE-588)4113937-9 |
| title | Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu |
| title_alt | Material culture from early Byzantine fortresses in Djerdap |
| title_auth | Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu |
| title_exact_search | Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu |
| title_full | Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu Perica Špehar |
| title_fullStr | Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu Perica Špehar |
| title_full_unstemmed | Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu Perica Špehar |
| title_short | Materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrđenja u Đerdapu |
| title_sort | materijalna kultura iz ranovizantijskih utvrdenja u derdapu |
| topic | Material culture / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) Excavations (Archaeology) / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) Funde Sachkultur (DE-588)4051157-1 gnd Funde (DE-588)4071507-3 gnd Festung (DE-588)4016934-0 gnd |
| topic_facet | Material culture / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) Excavations (Archaeology) / Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) Funde Sachkultur Festung Iron Gates (Romania and Serbia) / Antiquities Byzantinisches Reich Eisernes Tor, Donau Hochschulschrift |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=020777361&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=020777361&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV000844384 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT speharperica materijalnakulturaizranovizantijskihutvrđenjauđerdapu AT speharperica materialculturefromearlybyzantinefortressesindjerdap |