New Finds From Rutevac and Deliberation on Purpose, Origin Place of Production and Ethnic Attribution of Mramorac Type Belts

8/11/2019 New Finds From Rutevac and Deliberation on Purpose, Origin Place of Production and Ethnic Attribution of Mramor

1/8

87

Starinar LVIII/2008, 87-94M. Stoji, New Finds from Rutevac and Deliberation on Purpose, Origin Place of Production...

MILORAD STOJI, Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade

NEW FINDS FROM RUTEVAC AND DELIBERATION ONPURPOSE, ORIGIN PLACE OF PRODUCTION AND ETHNIC

ATTRIBUTION OF MRAMORAC TYPE BELTS

Abstract: A pair of nearly identical silver artefacts was found in Rutevac by Aleksinac, known as Mramorac type belts, which usedto be found exclusively in Pomoravlje and within the Big Con uence zone. Twenty four such artefacts were published; of which20 are of silver plate, two of gilt silver plate and two of gold plate. The very fact that they are void of any fastening devices at thecorresponding ends for buckling up purposes or pinning up to a surface (cloth or leather), excludes their purpose as belts to be usedaround peoples waist; it could, however, be assumed that they served as a part of equipment of secular and religious leaders as akind of decorative ribbon broad bands with ample symbols, worn over the shoulder and breast at the same time cult object anda sign of dignity of the person wearing it. The fact that all the artefacts were found within one and the same territory and that theywere reconstructed due to frequent wear suggest the production and maintenance in one or more local workshops in Pomoravlje.Artefacts belonged to the Triballi, the only ancient Balkan peoples who were con rmed, both archaeologically and on the basis ofhistorical sources, in Pomoravlje, in the Triballian valley, living at the end of the 6th and in the 5th centuries BC, the period to whichthese luxurious artefacts were dated to.

Key words: Moravac type belts, ribbons, silver, Pomoravlje, Autariati, Triballi.

UDCDOIShort communication

Received: February13, 2009Accepted: May 04, 2009

Milorad Stoji, e-mail: [email protected]

* The article results from the project: Metal Ages in the Morava Basin (no 147007) funded by the Ministry of Science andTechnological Development of the Republic of Serbia.

On March 17th, 2007, during foundation dig-gings for the new church of Ognjena Marija(by the old one) in Rutevac, a pair of silverartefacts was found, known as Mramorac type belts.At the spot there was nothing at all suggesting the ex-istence of a grave. Artefacts were found at the depthof approximately 0.8 m, on the edge of the river ter -race, above the Juna Morava River. As soon as theworkers digging the foundations found the artefacts,the priest informed thereof Mr. Saa Risti, a collectorfrom Rutevac. Mr. Risti photographed the artefactsinsitu , taking them later to keep in his collection (Fig. 1).The photo shows that the silver artefacts were circu-larly bent, one in the other. There were no other nds.

Sides on the foundation ditch did not show any tracesof burial, suggesting that the spot in which the beltswere stored was relatively narrow.

According to their ornamentation and size of0.97 x 0.17 m, the artefacts from Rutevac are identi-cal, one of them is heavy 385 gr and the other 400 gr(slightly damaged), made of plate of equal thickness.1 One of the artefacts was damaged during excavationworks. As differing from majority of artefacts of thistype, which were in constant use prior to the storage,many of them worn-out, cracked or even mended,

1 Data concerning weight of the artefacts were obtained from theowner.


2/8

88


there are no traces of use on the mentioned ones. Ac-cording to the size and number of decorative motifs,these belts belong to the group of smaller sizes andmore modestly decorated.

Approximately one third of the belt is broadenedinto a trapezoid shape, while the rest of it is strapped(Figs. 4-9). Ornament is simmetrically set, same as inall other artefacts of the same type. Along the edgeof the trapezoid part runs a strap wrought in emboss-ing technique, within which there are: strapped motifshaped as Old Slavonic letter (az), sand clock motifor labrys, swastika motif with ends shaped as the Cy-rillic letter and strapped swastika of standard shape.There are 12 calotte-shaped bulges, set within andaround the mentioned motifs. The narrow strapped part of these silver artefacts is edged by embossed dots

and decorated with two rows of rhomboids, the inner part of which is decorated with embossing.According to their shape and ornamentation, the

artefacts from Rutevac are very similar to those fromMramorac and Novi Pazar and to some other ones.2 Theonly discrepance with regard to all the other artefacts ofthe same type is in the fact that the corners on the wider part of the artefacts from Rutevac are not rounded.

Up to date were published 24 artefacts of thesame type made of silver and gold, including the ar -tefacts from Rutevac (Fig. 10). A number of such ar -tefacts are kept abroad, but everything points to the

fact that they also were found within the territory ofSerbia. These artefacts were found in Pomoravlje andon the Titel plateau. From time to time, artefacts ofsame type are offered for sale in auction catalogues, but without a mention of the place of origin, thus itcould be plausible that even they originate from thementioned regions of our country.

These artefacts were considered belts, thoughthey did not have either buckling or fastening devicesto clasp or pin the artefact to an organic surface (clothor leather).3 On one of the recently discovered belts ofgilt silver plate from Batinac there is twice repeatedstylized gural composition which can be understoodonly when the scene is watched horizontally, meaningthat it was foreseen to set the complete artefact verti-cally, along its longitudinal axis, thus excluding any possibility to use it as belts around peoples waist.

The following data are relevant for determina-tion of purpose, origin, place of production and ethnicattribution:

Published were twenty four precious artefactslooking like belts made of silver and gold plate,decorated by geometric motifs, in lesser number

by vegetative ones (palmette motif), and the pairfrom Batinac was decorated by twice repeatedidentical gural composition.4 The largest number of artefacts is made 20 ofsilver plate, two of gilt silver plate and two ofgold plate.5All these precious artefacts were found in Po-moravlje 19 specimens and 5 specimens inLower Tisza region.6These are the most luxurious and most preciousartefacts within internal Europe of the period, atthe end of the 6th and in the 5th centuries BC.

They also represent the most numerous species of large artefacts made of silver and gold in Eu-rope, from the period corresponding to the end ofthe Archean and beginning of the classic periodof Greece.The ends of the artefacts are void of any bucklingor fastening devices for clasping or pinning it to asurface (cloth or leather) thus excluding their pur - pose to be used as belts around people waist.7

2 Valtrovi 1987, 30; Mano-Zisi/Popovi 1971, 1969, 191-208, (196,Tab. 68-70).

3 Valtrovi, Ibid.4 Stoji 2007, 55, Abb. 5.4 Stoji 2007, 55, Abb. 5.5 According to information obtained from associates, there are

artefacts made of bronze plate from Pomoravlje, kept in privatecollections in Belgrade.

6 Stoji 2007, Ibid, 52-53 Abb. 1.7 In Mid Europe, particularly within the region between the Boden Lake

in the east and the Geneva Lake in the west, were found approximately700 belts made of bronze plate during the period ranging from the 6th to the 4th centuries BC, which were rather narrower than the Mramoractype belts and have belt clasps and elements for fastening to a clothor leather; a large number of decorative motifs from these belts aresimilar to those on the silver and gold belts from Pomoravlje:calotte-like bulges, rhomboid rows, swastikas, sand clock motifs;there are no palmette motifs or gural composition on them; thesemid-European artefacts were made in continental geometricalstyle, while the artefacts from Pomoravlje and Lower Tisza Regionsuggest intertwining of European geometrical tradition with eastMediterranean gural elements: Kilian-Dirlmeir 1972; Stoji 2007.

Fig. 1. Artefacts in situ

. 1. in situ


3/8

89


Twice repeated stylized gural composition onartefacts of this type, which could be understoodonly if the scene is watched horizontally, meansthat they were foreseen to be set vertically, alongits longitudinal axis thus excluding their pur - pose to be used as belts around peoples waist.8In Umari were found, together with the belts, parts of human skeleton and the Novi Pazar trea-sure, originating from a grave, includes two beltsas part of the inventory, consequently, it was con-cluded that these artefacts represent offerings ingraves. Both pairs of belts from Batinac, judging by all the facts, originate also from graves.9On all these artefacts, with exception of the Rute-vac ones, there are visible traces of intensive and

relatively long use. All of them are, more or less,damaged by the use they are worn out, jagged

Fig. 4. Belt 1, detail of the narrower end

. 4. 1,

Fig. 5. Belt 1, detail of the broader end

. 5. 1,

Fig. 3. Belt 1, photo of the interior

. 3. 1,

Fig. 2. Belt 1

. 2. 1

and cracked; on several of them cracks were repaired by narrow silver straps xed with silverrivets, and on some of them were very success-fully reconstructed original motifs, also in silver,according to the original sample.10The fact that all these artefacts were found inone and the same territory and that the damag-es caused by constant wear were reconstructed,suggests that they were wrought and repaired inone or more local workshops in Pomoravlje and(or) possibly, in the Lower Tisza Region.Artefacts found in pairs are either identical orvery similar.

8 Stoji 2007, 55, Abb. 5.9 Stoji 1986, 25, Idem 2007; The ndings of these artefacts from

Rutevac rouse some doubts whether these artefacts always havesepulchral context.

10 Stoji 1986, 86.


4/8

90


Fig. 8. Belt 2, detail

. 8. 2,

Fig. 7. Belt 2, photo of theinterior

. 7. 2,

Fig. 6. Belt 2

. 6. 2

On the basis of nds from Novi Pazar, from theend of the 6th century BC and analogies with theSindos necropolis, these artefacts are dated intothe period at the end of the 6th and rst half of the5th centuries BC.11These most recent ndings, the rst from the JunaMorava Basin, back up assumption of goldsmithscraftsmanship in uence from the Thessalonikihinterland onto the toreutics in Pomoravlje.12 Artefacts belonged to the Triballi, the only an-cient Balkan peoples who were con rmed, botharchaeologically and on the basis of historicalsources, in Pomoravlje, in the Triballian valley,living at the end of the 6th and in the 5th centuriesBC, the period to which these luxurious artefactswere dated to.13

11 Sindos 1985, Kat. Nr. 56-57, 89, 97, 108, 115, 117, 181-182, 200,217, 349, 357, 362, 381, 417, 437, 456, 477, 481.

12 About cultural connections between Pomoravlje and Macedonia,that is, of the Thessaloniki region: Stoji 2007, 63-64. Even earlier,there were some ndings which could have been connected to the

ndings of Mramorac type, originating from Juna Morava Basin,among which is gilt silver bracelet from Vrtite from the 6th centuryBC, the one end of which is hammered into a trapezoidal shape anddecorated on the upper and bottom sides in embossing techniquewith motifs reminding of individual letters of the Greek alphabetwhile the other end nishes with a sphere shape: Garaanin/Ajdi1971, Kat. Nr. 470; Vasi 1987, T. LXVIII/16, Idem 1994; braceletfrom Vrtite is of similar shape as the silver ring from Peka Banja,only the hammered part is narrower: artefact from Peka Banja:

Arheoloko blago Kosova i Metohije 1998, Kat. Nr. 228.13 As differing from the previous periods, there is certain number ofliterary sources on the geographic position of individual regionsof the Triballian land during the last development period of this peoples, on the basis of which, however, it is not possible todetermine boundaries of the whole country of this peoples. Theoldest written source on one part of the Triballian territory comesfrom Herodotus (485-425 BC), the father of history who, most probably, conveys data of the logograph (logograph = historianand geographer) Hekatey. Hekatey from Milet was tireless travelercollecting data on Europe and Asia for the sake of king Darius andhis aggressive policy, during the last quarter of the 6th and at the beginning of the 5th centuries BC, which he published in his workGs periodos (Geography). He gave, inter alia, description of manyregions in the Danube watershed, including also Pomoravlje. It iscertain that Herodotus took over, from this citizen of Milet, datafor his own History Historiai (Narratives) on rivers the Angro(Juna or Zapadna Morava together with Ibar) and the Brongo(Velika Morava) and Triballian valley. The river Angro owsnorth from the Illyrian country and ows into the Triballian valley( ) and into the river Brongo, and the Brongo

ows into the Istar. Thus the Istar accepts both big rivers. Thereis a certain dilemma concerning Hekateys and Herodotuss riverAngro whether it is Juna Morava or more probably ZapadnaMorava together with the Ibar. It is certain that the Brongo is VelikaMorava and the Triballian valley theVelika Morava valley. Since the Velika Morava valley does notcover huge territory, certain experts wonder why should the ancientwriters mention in their work this rather small region and overlookconsiderably larger regions in this part of the world. If, however,one takes into consideration continuity of life in this valley duringall the development periods of the Triballi, its strategic signi canceduring the transitional zone from the northern into the centralBalkans, defense systems, forti cations, number of settlements andnecropolises, including settlements and necropolises from the endof the 6th and the beginning of the 5th centuries BC, material proofs


5/8

91


Archaeological material from the period 6 th-5th centuries BC found within the regions of thesouth Baka and Banat, which is very similarto the archaeological artefacts from Pomoravljeof the same period, suggests that these regions

belonged also to the same peoples.The cult purpose of these artefacts is suggested by the unique shape and motifs found on eachof the specimen, such as motifs in the shape ofthe big Old Slavic letter (az), sand clock (or butter y) and swastika (palmette being its al-ternation, as con rmed by the specimen fromPoarevac).14Since two identical specimens were found as of -ferings at the internment of the dead person, itis certain they belonged to one individual, who

used to utilize them simultaneously.One person can wear two such specimens onlyif they are placed over the shoulders, with the broader part on the breast, of course; in this man-ner (put in vertical position) the symmetric orna-mentation would be emphasized and the guralcompositions could be quite understandable.This kind of artefacts, the broader part of whichis one third of the longitude and one half of thetotal mass, without additional equipment, could be worn placed over one and the other shoulder.The problem, however, is that metal sheets bendnaturally into a circle (in the same manner the belts in Rutevac were found), which means thatthey could not be closely pressed against the body.Were these artefacts used as belts around thewaist (which is rounded) there would be no rea-son for them to be jagged or cracked, becausecracks on strapped sheet objects are caused byunnatural bending, such as most probably was bending over human shoulders.There is small possibility, though it could not

be excluded altogether, that these artefacts were part of equipment in a temple, that is, on the altar,

but in such a case there is inevitable speculationconcerning its jaggedness and damage by obvi-ous manual use thereof and particularly one mustwonder why would these artefacts end as offer -ings in a grave of an individual, even if he werea priest.It could, however, be assumed that these luxuri-ous artefacts served probably as a part of equip-ment of secular and religious leaders as a kindof decorative ribbon broad bands with amplesymbols, worn over the shoulder and breast atthe same time cult object and a sign of dignity ofthe person wearing it.15Taking into consideration everything mentionedso far, the corresponding name for these bigand luxurious artefacts islenta decorative

ribbon.16

of contacts of the population of this region with the oldest Greekcolonies on the western part of the Black Sea Region, consequently,it is no wonder that the famous Greek historians knew about thisregion. Stoji 1997, 119, 123, 126-128. 119-133: The developmentof the Triballi within the territory ranging from the Ibar valley andOvarsko-Kablarska Gorge in the west up to the Isker in the eastand from the con uence of the Tisza in the north up to the GrdelicaGorge in the south during the period of the 6th- 4th centuries BC ischaracterized by their connections with the Greek and Macedonianworld. The rst contacts with this world was achieved by thesouthwest parts of the community at the end of the 6th and at the beginning of the 5th centuries BC, as represented by the ndingsfrom Peka Banja, Novi Pazar, Atenica and Kruevica. During the

rst decades of the 5th century, contacts of this region with the Greek

world ceased, but very soon, the central regions of the population Juna Morava, Velika Morava and Lower Tisza basins establishedcontacts with Macedonia, Thessaloniki hinterland, as con rmed byanalogies for many elements (appearance, size, kinds of material,decorative motifs) found on the luxurious artefacts of Mramoractype. During the Greek-Persian or Peloponnese wars, the connectionswere interrupted of this world with the region in the center of whichwas the Morava valley. During the last decades of the 5th centuryBC, simultaneously with the break up of contacts made along theMorava-Vardar valley, the most eastern region (between the Timokand the Isker rivers) of the mentioned population takes over primacyin connections with the Greek world.

14 Symbolic meaning of the swastika and palmette (palm) is excep-tionally positive and similar: Chevalier/Gheerbrant 1983, 661-662,474.

15 On symbolic signi cance of these artefacts: Stoji 2007, 62-64.16 Lenta decorative ribbon is a Russian name for wide strap placed

over shoulders and breast, on which are pinned high decorations:Renik srpskohrvatskog knjievnog jezika 1969, 186.

Fig. 9. The drawing of one of the two identical objects

. 9.


6/8

92


Novi Pazar AU x 21.Batinac AU+AG/AU 2 x 22.Mramorac AG x 23.Kolare AG x 24.Umari AG x 25.Miloevac AG x 16.Vina AG x 27.Titel AG 2 x 28. Novi Sad AG x 29.AG x 110.Rutevac AG x 211.

Fig. 10. Map of the site

. 10.

Any possibility is excluded that these artefacts belonged to Autariati or Illyrians, as con rmed by thefollowing facts:

Up to recently, the luxurious artefacts of Mramo-rac type were considered Illyrian, even the proofs that the Illyrians and the Autariatians hadconquered Pomoravlje, justifying such attitudeon the basis of several bronze artefacts from theIllyrian territory (but not always from the Au-tariatian one) decorated by the same technique,though very modestly, which were established as prototypes for the future luxurious artefacts fromPomoravlje.It is understandable that magni cent and numer -ous toreutic products (belts, decorative ribbons,straps, earrings, bracelets and other), such as theones originating from the Macedonian Sindos,in uence goldsmith craftsmanship in some ofthe neighboring and close-by regions, but it isnot probable that artefacts, such as the ones fromthe Illyrian territory, are models for the largest admost expensive artefacts in the interior Europeduring the 6th and 5th centuries BC.

According to written sources, the in ux of the Autariati from their homeland towards the

southeast of the Balkan Peninsula occurred at theend of the 4th century BC, in 335 BC, at the timeof return of Alexander III (the future Alexanderthe Great) from his campaign against the Triballi,that is, approximately 200 years later with regardto the dating of the Mramorac type ndings.17Even if the in ux of the Autariati towards theeast across Pomoravlje occurred at the end of the6 th or in the 5th centuries BC, for which, how-ever, there is no basis either in the Greek sourcesor in archaeology, it would be very hard to explain the existing distribution of the Mramoractype belts nding sites the Morava valley Lower Tisza Region, the two regions on thenorth-south axis, of which one is not even on theBalkan Peninsula.At the end, it is not possible to connect distribution of any kind of archaeological material onone cardinal direction with the ethnic in ux onanother cardinal direction (the Autariati moved inthe west-east direction, while the decorative ribbons were found in the north-south direction).

17 Papazoglu 1969, 69-67


7/8

93


Anyway, not one specimen of luxurious arte-facts, like the mentioned ones in Pomoravlje andLower Tisza Region, was found within the Au-tariatian (or Illyrian) territory.There are still supporters of the theory on Autari-atian or Illyrian origin of these artefacts, thoughit is not possible to defend such an attitude be-cause, inter alia, how to explain the fact that a population, which has never either produced orhad at its disposal certain kind of very represen-tative luxurious artefacts in their homeland, all ofa sudden, in some supposedly occupied territory,such as Pomoravlje and Lower Tisza Region(!!!), has a mass production of such objects in the

new environment and uses them during an exten-sive period of time and intensively at that.18The most recently discovered pair of Moravac

type artefacts made of precious metal from Rutevac the Juna Morava valley- which is published in this paper, represents the rst artefacts of this type withreliable discovery circumstances and without a sepul-chral character. This nd, with regard to its location,con rmed the signi cance of the Vardar-Morava com-munication with the Thessaloniki region for the devel-opment of goldsmith craftsmanship in Pomoravlje inthe 5th century BC.

18 Vasi 2005, 29-31.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1998 - , , 1998.

Chevalier/Gheerbrant 1983 , Chevalier, J./Gheerbrant, A., 1983, Rjenik simbola , Zagreb 1983.

/ 1971 , . /. -, - , 1971.

Kilian-Dirlmeir 1972 I. Kilian-Dirlmeir,Die hallstattzeitlichen Grtelbleche ubd BlechgrtelMitteleuropas,PBF XII 1, Mnchen 1972.

Mano-Zisi/Popovi 1971 Dj. Mano-Zisi./Lj.Popovi, Der Fund von Novi Pazar (Serbien), Berichtder Rmisch-Germanischen Kommission 1969, Berlin1972, 191-208.

Papazoglu 1969 F. Papazoglu , Srednjobalkanska plemena u predrimsko doba , Sarajevo 1969.

- 1969 -

, 1969.Sindos 1985 , , ,

1985.

Stoji 1986 M. Stoji,Gvozdeno doba u basenuVelike Morave , Svetozarevo-Beograd 1986.

Stoji 1997 M. Stoji, Les caractristiques principales de la culture triballe, in: TheThracianWorld at the Crossroads of Civilizations I, Bucharest,119-133, 1997.

Stoji 2007 M. Stoji, Zwei neue Grtelaus Edelmetall viom Typ Mramorac aus Batinac inSerbien, Praehistorische Zeitschrift 82. Band, 2007.Heft 1, 51-65.

1887 . , , IV, 1887.

Vasi 1987 R. Vasi, Oblast istonog Kosova, june Srbije i severne Makedonije,Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja V, Sarajevo 1987.

Vasi 1994 - R. Vasi, Srebro i zlato V i IV veka pre n.e. u Srbiji, Zbornik Narodnog muzeja XXIV,aak 1994.

Vasi 2005 R. Vasi, Die Eisenzet imZentralbalkan-chronologische und etnische Fragen,in: Silber der Illyrer und Kelten im Zentralbalkan ,

Eberdingen 2005, 29-31.


8/8

94


- ( ) a , , .

. 0,8 , , . insitu , . , ( ) , .

, , 0,97 x 0,17 , . - . , , , , , , . - , .

1/3 , . , . , , , : - (), , - . 12 , -. , , ,

. - ,

, ,

,

. - - .

24 -

, ; . , - ( ). -, - , , , .

/ , , , .

, - , ; , , - VI V ..

, -, , , - , .

, -- V ..

: , , , , , .

Documents

New Finds From Rutevac and Deliberation on Purpose, Origin Place of Production and Ethnic Attribution of Mramorac Type Belts