1

ZAM Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters, Jahrgang 40, 2012, Seiten 1–25Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn

1 . I n t r o d u c t i o n2 . E x c a v a t i o n a n d m e t h o d o l o g y3 . C e m e t e r y d e s c r i p t i o n4 . A n t h r o p o l o g y5 . Po r t a b l e F i n d s6 . C o n c l u s i o n s7 . B i b l i o g r a p h y

1. I n t r o d u c t i o n

Between 2005 and 2008 a rescue archaeological excavation was carried out in an area intended for constructing a new housing estate called “Zličínský Dvůr” along the Hrozenkovská Street at the western edge of Prague, Czech Republic (fig. 1). Two institu-tions were subsequently involved in the excavation. From November 2005 to December 2006 it was led by Milan Kuchařík from the Department of Archaeo-logical Collections of the Museum of the Capital City of Prague, and in 2007 and 2008 it was led by Jiří Vávra from the company Labrys, o.p.s. (non-profit organization). The nucleus of the excavation team remained the same throughout this period.

In the course of the excavation three principal ar-chaeological features were excavated at the site: part of a Neolithic settlement area enclosed by a palisade, an abandoned prehistoric route and above all a com-plete skeletal burial ground of the Vinařice Group from the Migration Period, dating to the greater part of the 5th century AD (fig. 2). The Prague-Zličín site represents the largest inhumation cemetery yet exca-vated from the early stage of the Migration Period in Bohemia and one of the largest in Central Europe. Altogether 173 graves with evidence of at least 176 inhumation burials were recorded (fig. 3). Almost

The Migration Period Burial Site in Prague-Zličín, Czech RepublicPreliminary report

by

J i ř í Váv r a , Ja ro s l a v J i ř í k , Mi l an Kucha ř í k , Iv ana Ja ro šová , Marc e l a V í š ková and Pave l Kubá l ek , Prague

all graves were disturbed by secondary interferences and excavations which represent traces of the ancient reopening of graves.

We can define the main chronological stages of the development in Bohemia in the 5th and 6th cen-tury AD by reference to significant burial, settlement and hoard assemblages following the general Central European relative periodisation (tab. 1).1

The Vinařice Group is thus defined within the stages D2a–D3, and the Prague-Zličín burial ground contains a selection of finds from the greater part of the 5th century AD.

The Vinařice Group dominated the northern part of Bohemia in the 5th century AD. It is called after the first archaeological assemblage of this cultu-ral group, discovered in Vinařice, Central Bohemia, in the 1870’s. There are not many known archaeo-logical sites of the Vinařice Group in the Czech Re-public and among them small burial sites prevail. Sites such as Vinařice, Prague-Kobylisy, Prague-Veleslavín, Prague-Radotín, Kolín and some others were discovered or excavated many decades ago and from them only some collections of artefacts have been preserved until today. Recently, several new ce-meteries of the Vinařice Group have been excavated. Two of them are situated not far from the Prague-Zličín site – those are Litovice, excavated in 2003 and 2004,2 and Zbuzany, excavated in 2006 (both in Central Bohemia, west of Prague). Another ceme-tery was excavated in Vlíněves near Mělník (north of Prague) in 2006.3 Among all the sites excavated

1 For exact references to the precise finds: Svoboda 1965; Jiřík/Vávra 2008; Vávra/Jiřík/Kuchařík/Kubálek 2007; Jiřík/Peša/Jenč 2008; Droberjar 2002; Droberjar/Turek 1997.2 Pleinerová 2006, 483–498.3 Limburský/Likovský/Fleková/Velemínský 2008; Lim-burský/Likovský/Velemínský/Fleková 2010.

2

so far the key site for our knowledge of the Vinařice Group and the historical situation in Bohemia and also Central Europe in the 5th century AD is the Prague-Zličín cemetery. It vastly exceeds all the other cemeteries in the number of graves excavated and its significance is far greater than the other sites.

Development of the Vinařice Group can be tra-ced to the contact of parts of the local Suebian po-pulation of the Late Roman Period with influences and probably also new immigrants from other parts of Europe, especially the East. The mobility of vari-ous groups can be observed from an analysis of the material culture. For phase D2a (Untersiebenbrunn) (phases after Jaroslav Tejral) evidence of mobility con-sists of the occurrence of typical (post-)Chernyakhov-Sântana-de-Mureş assemblages of cast, gilt bronze bow fibulae with embossed decoration from Lovosi-ce, and from an unknown location in Bohemia with good parallels among bronze and silver specimens of Kokowski’s class F, bow fibulae found in the Závist settlement near Prague, and three similar fibulae from the Prague-Veleslavín cemetery; partly nomadic grave goods from Bříza near Litoměřice, antler combs with

bell-shaped or semicircular handles of Thomas’s class 3, such as those found in Vinařice, Prague-Podbaba-Juliska, grave 1 in Prague-Veleslavín, as well as gra-ves 17 and 19 in Litovice; a pyramid-shaped antler pendant (of a type improperly known as “Thor’s pendant”) from the early 5th century grave 29b in Lužec nad Vltavou, and probably an iron pendant from grave 9 in Prague-Bubeneč with a good analogy in Kosanovo (Ukraine). Most artefacts associated with the early Vinařice Group appear to have been manu-factured in sites on the Empire’s frontier on the Danu-be and the Rhine rivers. This is undoubtedly the case with military belt sets with chip carved decoration, such as the specimen from Prague-Vokovice, or the belt set from Prague-Radotín. The glass vessels are also of Roman origin, however they spread into the Bohe-mian basin during the whole of the 5th century. The characteristic provincial ceramics such as fragments of mortaria with green glaze (Závist), late terra sigil-lata of Argonne production (Závist) and African red slip ware (Slavhostice), and ceramics with burnished motifs (Závist, Prague-Podbaba-Juliska, grave 9 in Vinařice, Prague-Kobylisy, Řisuty, grave 4 in Prague-

Fig. 1 Prague-Zličín, Hrozenkovská Street, the archaeological excavation site.

3

Tab. 1 Main chronological stages in Bohemia during the 5th and 6th century AD.

Veleslavín, and grave 15 in Litovice) also appear in Bohemia. Moreover, a change of the settlement structure can be observed as well as the emergence of new settlements located on well-protected hilltops such as Závist, perhaps Prague-Petřín and Žatec and now also Prague-Kobylisy. The hand-made pottery tradition of the Late Roman Period is still preser-ved (Prague-Ruzyně settlement) and also the large cremation cemetery of the Late Roman Period in Plotiště nad Labem is used far into the 5th century. From the archaeological sources we can presuppose a kind of cohabitation of different groups of people in Bohemia.4

Changes to the archaeological material which re-flects the Vinařice group also shows the development of interregional relationships in Central Europe. The patterns of changes during the stage D2b or D2–D3 according to Jaroslav Tejral, and especially the cultural orientation of the Bohemian basin to the West and North can be traced from distribution of several types of artefacts. For example the fibulae of Niederflorstadt-Wiesloch and Groß Umstadt types clearly show contacts with the Lower-Main valley, Lower Saxony and the Burgundian territory of Sa-paudia. From the occurrence of golden pendant and glass vessels from Rhine factories at Runder Berg near Urach, we can trace important contacts to this large Alamannic settlement. A chip carved fibula of Wiesbaden class shows contacts between Bohemia (the Úherce grave) and the Dębczyno group of nor-thern Poland (the Świelino hoard).5

Within the latest phase of the Vinařice Group, D2–D3 and D3 according to Jaroslav Tejral, it is possible to observe afresh contacts with the East, es-pecially the Middle Danube region, from where the

4 Svoboda 1965, Jansová 1971, Motyková/Drda/Rybová 1991; Tejral 2006; Jiřík 2007; 2011.5 Werner 1981, 244–252; Koch 1987a and 1987b; Gaillard de Sémainville 2003, 27–29 fig. 6–9; Tejral 2006; Jiřík 2011.

so called moda danubica is widely spread not only to Bohemia, but also to Thuringia, south western Germany and Switzerland (e. g. Gültlingen, Basel-Gotterbarmweg) and in the case of Childerich’s gra-ve at Tournai also to Belgium. In central Bohemia these waves of influence could be evidenced by the presence of fibulae of Bákodpuszta-Sokolnice-Gur-suf types or developed buckles with a circular loop (Stehelčeves, grave 2).6

The Prague-Zličín site, reflecting as it does ma-terial culture within the greater part of the 5th cen-tury, mirrors the trends described above, and we can suggest contacts with different parts of the Barbari-cum and with the Roman provinces within period D.

2. E x c a v a t i o n a n d m e t h o d o l o g y

The excavation in Prague-Zličín started with soil stripping in November 2005 and it continu-ed through the unfavourable conditions of winter 2005/2006 with the aid of heated tents. By the end of 2006 the excavation covered almost the complete area of the first stage of the construction site. This area was divided into 4 excavation sections where we unearthed 118 skeleton graves.

In 2007 the excavation continued in other areas investigating 13 graves in section 5, which completed the excavation of the southwest edge of the main part of the cemetery, and starting the excavation at the se-cond part of the “Zličínský Dvůr” construction site, in sections 6 and 7. In 2007 and 2008 we excavated 42 inhumation burials in section 7. Thus we detected the eastern edge and finished the excavation of the complete Vinařice Group burial ground. In the area where feature 816 crossed the burial ground (fig. 2) we

6 Svoboda 1975; Quast 1993; Pinar Gil 2005; Tejral 2006, Jiřík 2011.

4

identified the superposition of three Vinařice Group graves over the cut and fillings of feature 816. This feature represents the remains of a prehistoric route which was to be abandoned and filled with humic soils displaced by erosion some time before the ce-metery was founded in the 5th century AD.

During the excavation in Prague-Zličín the con-tents of all the graves was lowered at certain intervals in mechanical layers creating horizontal profiles of the natural strata within the graves7. Artefacts were collected and recorded by natural strata. Each level

7 The chosen methodology of the field research and docu-mentation of graves were partly inspired by methods used in the archaeological excavation of ancient Saxon burial ground in Immenbeck-Kattenberg near Buxtehude (Lower Saxony, Germa-ny). The excavation was led by Bernd Habermann of the City Museum in Buxtehude, and carried out in cooperation with the Lower Saxony State Office for the Care of Historical Monuments in Lüneburg (Jens von Dein). Both leaders of the Zličín excava-tion Milan Kuchařík and Jiří Vávra took part in the Buxtehude excavation within a student exchange programme between the Charles University in Prague and the University in Hamburg.

was photographically and geodetically recorded and drawn. Thus a sequence of documentation levels exists for every grave complex, including the grave cut, pit caused by secondary disturbance, and their contents. The digitized documentation shows the shape, depth, and dimensions of a grave, its layers of strata and their mutual relations, the location of skeletal remains and artefacts, areas of sampling, etc. (fig. 4). In summer 2008 we also documented four graves using a 3D laser scanner (fig. 5).

By sieving and flotation of the grave fill we re-covered many tiny artefacts and ecofacts, such as components of metal objects whose main parts were no longer present in graves due to secondary inter-ference, small glass beads, fragments of bones and teeth, palaeo-botanic remains etc. Samples for pa-lynological and palaeo-parasitological analyses were taken from the bottom level of graves.

Some finds preserved in a poor state, especially metal objects and some glass vessels were extracted from graves in situ – in blocks of earth wrapped in

Fig. 2 Prague-Zličín. The overall plan of the excavation with all components, 2008.

5

plaster bandages. The plaster blocks were then X-ray-ed at the conservation irradiation laboratory in the Museum of Central Bohemia in Roztoky u Prahy and passed to the Museum of the Capital City of Prague where they were disassembled and analysed with the aid of radiograms (fig. 6). In many cases the blocks contained more objects than we had presumed in the field. Similarly, some plaster blocks with glass vessels and other, especially metal objects were CT scanned at the Prague Centre of Industrial Tomogra-phy at the Czech Technical University in Prague (fig. 7). Remains of a wooden coffin from grave 11 were also scanned by computer tomography, which ena-bled preliminary determination of the kind of wood (oak) and the number of annual rings in the given samples. Unfortunately, the number of annual rings was not enough to enable the dendrochronological determination of the samples.

3. C e m e t e r y d e s c r i p t i o n

The inhumation burials in Prague-Zličín contai-ned human remains of individuals who were placed in graves with their heads to the west, supine (fig. 8). In three cases, two subsequent burials superimposed one above another were recorded within one grave. The buried individuals were placed in coffins made from hollowed tree trunks and covered by lids. Quite well preserved wooden parts of coffins were success-fully extracted from two graves. The excavation and extraction of skeletal remains was performed by an anthropologist.

The graves in Prague-Zličín, situated in irregular and incomplete rows approximately in north-south orientation, were arranged in one main group, which contained two or three subgroups and was accompa-nied by two smaller groups and four solitary graves (fig. 3). One of the two smaller groups consisted of two separate rows of graves in the southeast part of the cemetery. Grave 168 in this group contained a

Fig. 3 Prague-Zličín. The ground plan of the burial site with all graves, 2008.

6

Fig. 4 Prague-Zličín. Grave 41, a model of the grave cut created from the digitized field documentation.

Fig. 5 Prague-Zličín. Grave 161, a model of the grave created from 3D laser scanner data.

7

Fig. 6 Prague-Zličín. Grave 109, radiogram of an in situ block of earth, later removed, containing metal artefacts.

Fig. 7 Prague-Zličín. Grave 94, CT profile of an earth block showing the contents of a niche and a glass vessel inside.

8

Fig. 8 Prague-Zličín. Grave 152, burial with a ceramic vessel standing on a raised shelf.

Fig. 9 Prague-Zličín. Grave 136 (northward) with a typical structure of layers, undisturbed grave 135 (southward) without traces of a secondary intervention in antiquity.

pair of bronze fibulae of Wiesbaden type, which may be approximately dated to the first half of the 5th century AD, and is one of the earliest dating artefacts in the cemetery. Thus the two rows in this SE part probably represent the earliest graves of the Prague-Zličín cemetery and show the area where burying started at the site.

During the excavation the graves were usually identified at the surface from the dark colouring of secondary disturbances which had an oval layout and were typically situated on the west side of the gra-

ves. The intact parts of graves manifested themsel-ves mostly as light sandy layers of rectangular shape spreading out from the dark fillings of secondary reopenings (fig. 9).

The original, undisturbed grave cuts were of rec-tangular shape and approximately west-east orientati-on. Their depth from the surface (after soil stripping) varied from 20 centimetres to almost 3 metres. On average the graves were approximately 1–1.2 metres deep. Five graves were substantially larger than ave-rage, reaching 2–3 metres in depth. In contrast, there

9

were also 10 very small and shallow graves of 20–40 cm in depth and up to 100 cm in length. One of them contained a ceramic vessel; another two con-tained children’s teeth. Such features, representing the graves of very young children, were situated at the east and south edge of the main group of graves.

A typical grave construction consisted of vertical walls which became perimeter ledges at a certain le-vel above the bottom (fig. 5; 8; 10; 12). Even graves without such ledges contained a hint of them at the bottom, which was not flat or sharply separated from the walls. Post-holes were identified at the bottom of grave 32, which along with traces of timbering at the bottom and on the west wall of the grave cut

probably indicate a chamber grave. This is the only clear evidence of a chamber grave in the Prague-Zličín burial ground. For such a unique feature we can seek a comparison in the other important finds of chamber graves in the Elbe Germanic cultural area that date to phase D1. They are known from Nová Ves by Pohořelice (grave 13) in southern Moravia, in Beroun-Závodí in Central Bohemia and in Steßlitz in the Main river valley. A common feature of such graves is the construction of a chamber consisting of four corner posts, in some cases accompanied by another pair of posts in the middle of shorter sides (thus resembling the construction types of some sun-ken featured buildings). However, similar chamber

Fig. 10 Prague-Zličín. Grave 144, a glass flask with foot in a niche.

10

graves are also known from the Eastern Europe, as shown in examples from Chernyakhov, Danchen, Frunzovka, Furmanovka, and Maslova.8

A new unique find useful for studying the con-struction features of chamber graves is the chieftain grave from Poprad-Matejovce in Slovakia (excavated in 2006). The grave is dated to the period before 400 AD and it contained an extraordinarily well pre-served wooden structure that consisted of two con-centric chambers. These were made of larch beams that were caulked with tree bark. The outer chamber was overlaid by beech charcoal and thereby isolated from the surrounding ground. The inner chamber was constructed as a small log house with a low sadd-le roof covered by split stakes. The investigation of this find will give us important information not only about mortuary practices but also about cons-truction techniques that were used at the beginning of the Migration Period. The grave is provisionally identified as that of a Vandal chief.9

Another example from the Northeast is from what is now Pielgrzymów (Pilgersdorf, województwo warmińsko-mazurskie in Poland) where a burial bar-row with a house of the dead with several rooms was unearthed in 1937. It contained a rich inhumation burial dated to the 4th century AD.10

In Prague-Zličín 28 graves contained niches of various sizes at different levels above the bottom. They were situated in the west sides of grave cuts (fig. 10), only one was situated in the south western corner. The niches consisted of simple holes without any stone structures. Such structures, known from sites in southern Germany (e. g. Horb-Altheim, Hemmingen),11 are perhaps implied only in two ca-ses in Prague-Zličín: a flat stone was placed under a ceramic bowl in grave 75 and another one covered a glass beaker in grave 157. The niches usually contai-ned funerary artefacts, ceramic, and especially glass, vessels. We unearthed 13 niches containing a single glass vessel, 2 niches with a single ceramic vessel, 2 niches with a pair of ceramic vessels and 1 niche with a pair of a ceramic vessel and one of glass. Ten niches were found empty; in 3 such cases a glass vessel was discovered in a secondary position at the bottom of the grave. One glass vessel was redeposited in frag-ments at the bottom of a grave without a “normal”

8 Tejral 1999, 215 Abb. 9.9 Pieta/Roth 2007, 44–47.10 Bohnsack 1939, Taf. 77–78.11 Beilharz 2011, 30–35, Abb. 13.

niche but with a kind of a large niche in the north, lengthwise, wall where the burial was placed. The graves with niches represent less than 20 % of the overall number of graves in the Prague-Zličín burial site. The presence of niches in graves of the Vinařice Group has not been specifically discussed so far. The excavation of the Prague-Zličín burial site showed clearly that niches with artefacts may often occur in graves of the Vinařice Group.

Such niches could serve as proof of important cultural relationships. In this regard the Prague-Zličín burial ground could be seen as a part of a chain involving territories in Eastern Europe, where the ori-gin of such a funeral feature has recently been sought by Silvia Codreanu-Windauer, and also areas in what is today Germany (i. e. the Lower Main Valley and, later, the territory of Bavaria). We can mention the D2–D3 phase cemeteries of Pleidelsheim, Eshborn, Hemmingen, which according to their main charac-teristic finds show certain connections to the Vinařice Group. Starting with phase E1 the niches also occur in Munich-Perlach, Straubing-Bajuwarenstraße, Mu-nich-Unterhaching, Irlmauth, Altenerding.12 Also in Horb-Altheim (Baden-Württemberg) niches in 17 graves were discovered. The graves with niches in this site are dated mostly to the second half of the 5th century AD, some of them to the early 6th century AD. Some of the niches contained stone structures and were mostly situated in the southern wall or in the south western corner, less usually in the western wall of the graves.13 The niches are seen as “a typical phenomenon in early Merovingian cemeteries”.14

Almost all the graves in Prague-Zličín showed traces of intentional secondary reopenings. In most of the graves such secondary disturbances left more or less clear traces in the ground. They affected usually the west side of the grave cut, expanding its size and deforming its originally rectangular ground plan into a typical keyhole shape (fig. 9).15 Such shapes may

12 Codreanu-Windauer 1997, 25–28; for the Lower Main Valley cemeteries see more: Quast 1997, 175.13 Beilharz 2011, 30–35.14 Beilharz 2011, 30–31, list of 99 graves with niches from Aus-tria, Czech republic, Germany, Hungary and Switzerland 240–244.15 According to the field observation we assume that after loo-ting most of the looter’s shafts remained open and gradually got filled with ground displaced from grave walls and from the surface of surrounding area, bringing also small anachronistic ceramic fragments to fillings of the shafts. The earth often penetrated also into still existing coffin hollows and filled them. In such cases coffin shape is preserved even if the wooden parts of it decayed.

11

have not emerged as a direct result of the secondary pits but also of postdepositional processes afterwards (erosion of walls of the pits). The secondary pits were subsequently filled with a soil which was different from the original grave filling and such layers were documented in the field. According to structure of layers in some secondary pits we assume that at least some graves were left open or partly open after they had been reopened. Another consequence of the se-condary reopening of graves was the redeposition of skeletal remains and artefacts in secondary positions, sometimes even to the upper levels of a grave and in some cases probably even to other graves (e. g. in a grave with one burial we discovered remnants of two human skulls).16 The questions concerned with the secondary reopening of graves will demand a detailed analysis of all aspects, which is currently in progress.

A wide survey of cultural aspects of the secondary reopening of graves on the basis of historical, ethno-graphical and archaeological sources together with a detailed case study of a field situation was provided by Edeltraud Aspöck17. The author describes techniques of reopening and also a wide range of possible motiva-tion for such activity. Traces in the field of secondary reopenings were described as funnel-shaped, which is in concordance with our field observations in Prague-Zličín. The evidence of the manner of manipulati-on of human skeletal remains and artefacts differs at various sites. Such evidence, including completeness, presence and absence of certain parts of skeletons and position and distribution of bones and artefacts in grave and pit layers can reveal important information concerning the time interval between burial and se-condary reopening, what part of skeleton was affected by secondary disturbance, whether the secondary pit was left open and how long it took to fill up. All this shows the importance of detailed documentati-on not only of the burial itself but also of the inner structure of grave layers and other aspects of such ar-chaeological features. Such detailed evidence can also substantially contribute to the interpretation of the secondary reopening of graves as cultural behaviour. E. Aspöck summarizes explanations of motivation for such behaviour: 1) issues relating to inheritance law and its changes, 2) a shortage of metals in the early

16 Funeral artefacts or bones were often unearthed around the border line between looting pits and original grave fillings, i.e. at the bottom of looting pits. Many artefacts and perhaps a certain portion of skeletal remains must have become lost due to looting.17 Aspöck 2003, 225–264.

middle ages, 3) changes in the settlement structure, 4) the spread of Christianity (e. g. in some graves of the Merovingian Period objects connected with Christianity were not looted), 5) warfare, 6) change in social structure, 7) necessity of recycling of metals by commoners who did not have an access to the market with metals controlled by the nobility, 8) circulation of weapons (as reported from Anglo-Saxon areas), 9) ritual motives. Grave robbery is prohibited both by Roman law codes, which used the term sepulchri violatio, and by those Early Medieval ones, such as Lex Salica or Lex Frisionum, in which robbing is expressed differently: for example by the Visigoths as plodraub or rairaub.

Recently another contribution to this topic was made by Martine C. van Haperen18, who concludes that secondary reopening of graves may have repre-sented a kind of interaction between the living and the dead and objects regained in this way from graves may have served as “relics” and proof of the physical presence of ancestors among their descendants.

Secondary interference in graves from the Mig-ration Period was also considered by Czech authors. Bedřich Svoboda noticed anomalies in the arran-gement of skeletal remains in several burial sites in Bohemia and stated that disturbances focused on the upper parts of skeletons. He also emphasized the absence of precious metal objects, some of them being evidenced only by small fragments like fibula knobs, which was also observed in Prague-Zličín. On the basis of such indications together with some references from Early Medieval law codes B. Svobo-da concluded that secondary disturbance occurred at various time intervals from burials and that they were motivated by the desire to acquire goods.19 Similarly, Ivana Pleinerová in her publication of a Vinařice group cemetery in Litovice (Central Bo-hemia) excludes religious or ritual motivation for grave reopening. In accordance with the opinion of B. Svoboda she considers that grave robbery was made easier by some form of grave-marking at the surface.20 Recently, a collection of authors who pub-lished another Vinařice Group burial site in Vlíněves (near Mělník, Central Bohemia) has also investigated grave reopening and its significance. Among their most important conclusions belongs a statement that

18 van Haperen 2010.19 Svoboda 1965, 139–141.20 Pleinerová 2006, 489.

12

the documented arrangement of human remains in graves was in substantial part dependent on the sex determination of buried individuals. In the case of female burials secondary disturbances were directed to the area of neck and head, while in several male graves rotation of the whole upper part of the ske-leton was repeatedly observed. This phenomenon is explained by the authors as a result of intentional targeting of looters toward the head and neck area of female skeletons in order to obtain precious jewellery and toward lower parts of male skeletons in order to obtain weapons that were placed along their bodies. They may have had to turn round the body to strip off a belt with the desired weapon.21

21 Limburský/Likovský/Fleková/Velemínský 2008, 122–125; Limburský/Likovský/Velemínský/Fleková 2010.

On the basis of field observations we can suggest that the graves in Prague-Zličín were disturbed soon after burial. The looters were aware of the position of the graves in the field, they pinpointed their tar-get with high certainty and, with the exception of three or four probable cases, and they hardly omitted any grave in the whole cemetery. Therefore we also can assume that the graves were marked somehow at the surface. The looters must have also been quite familiar with the internal disposition of burials and arrangement of valuable items in them. The presence of spaces in coffins at the time of looting, which was proved by recorded intrusions of soil from the surface through the looting shafts, also supports the hypo-thesis of reopening shortly after the creation of the graves. On basis of anthropological observations we can also suggest that the joints of some secondarily

Fig. 11 Prague-Zličín. Grave 135, golden finds from the undisturbed grave, including a pair of golden fibulae of type Zličín.

Fig. 12 Prague-Zličín. Superposition of two graves, the shallower one was disturbed; the burial in the deeper one was not affected by the secondary disturbance.

13

replaced parts of skeletons still corresponded with the anatomical position, which suggests that the joint tis-sue in such cases had not completely decayed at the time of reopening (see below). Another significant contribution to this debate is the existence of three cases of two subsequent burials in one grave cut. In all three cases both subsequent burials were discovered disturbed. One pair of such superimposed burials was even intersected by another neighbouring grave. Ac-cording to these field observations, we can claim that at least some graves were reopened at the time when the graveyard was still in use.

Several graves at the Prague-Zličín burial site re-mained undisturbed. The most certain case is grave 135 (fig. 9). While excavating this grave we noticed no traces of secondary disturbance and at the bottom we recorded remains of a burial placed in the undis-turbed remnants of a wooden coffin along with ten gold artefacts, an amber bead and a number of glass beads (fig. 11; 16). These artefacts lay in their pri-mary position disposed on the presumed body: gold spirals with glass beads in the neck area, two gold fibulae at the left side of ventral area, an amber bead in the area of pelvis or thighbones and two gold shoe

buckles in the area of the feet. Additionally, a gold ring was recovered during the flotation of the coffin filling. This collection seems to be complete. In the grave we identified human remains of a child, from whom only teeth were preserved. Not only did remain undisturbed, grave 135 had also another exceptional feature: the burial was oriented with head to the east, which is in the opposite direction to all other recorded burials at the site. So far, we have found no explana-tion for this. Three other graves in the cemetery are assumed to have remained undisturbed as well. They also showed no clear traces of intentional secondary disturbances by humans and contained preserved ar-tefacts in primary positions (fig. 12–13). However, the field situation was not as unequivocal or burial goods as spectacular as in the above-mentioned grave 135.

4. A n t h r o p o l o g y

In general, human skeletal remains in Prague-Zličín were preserved in a very poor state in most graves. Most probably it was due to the natural con-ditions of the surrounding geological terrain. The

Tab. 2 Overview of the evaluation of bone preservation.

14

level of preservation may have been partly influenced by the re-deposition of bones, which may have had positive consequences. Bones found within layers re-lating to secondary interventions were usually better preserved than those in primary positions. The degree of bone preservation (for details see below; tab. 2) can be classified according to established criteria22 from category 1 (firm complete bones) to category 5 (vi-sual absence of bones). The range varies from “firm” bones to “shadows” and negatives of bones or absolute decomposition where the presence of skeleton parts can be assumed only by detected soil elements, arran-gement of artefacts or results of specialized analyses (tab. 3–4). Because of the state of bone preservation in the field, results of the preliminary anthropolo-gical evaluation based on the field observation and those based on the post-laboratory processing of the anthropological material differ in some aspects. We must take both into account because after extraction

22 For more details see Kubálek 2009.

of bones or their shadows from the ground some in-formation and skeletal material was lost.

The recorded juxtaposition or association of bones allow us to assume that the secondary inter-ventions to graves occurred at various stages of de-composition of human remains, within a scale from almost no decomposition (that is a period shortly after the death of an individual) to a complete skele-tisation of human remains. In some cases bones may have been replaced outside the actual grave and even placed in another grave, as mentioned above (p. 11).

Evaluation of the skeletal remains in the field turned out to be very important in preventing the loss of information in further processing. In situ, we measured at least main dimensions (maximum length, physiological length) of selected bones which it was assumed might shatter into fragments that could not be reconstructed after extraction. This hel-ped to preserve information such as the dimensions and shapes of bones and their mutual relations and to obtain at least some data for graves from which no real bones could be preserved after extraction. Such data could also be taken into account in post-labora-tory evaluation of the anthropological material.

The preliminary results of the anthropological evaluation based upon field observations are sum-marized in the presented tables.

In the course of the basic post-laboratory eva-luation a detailed skeletal and dental inventory was conducted following the procedures recommended by Buikstra and Ubelaker23 and Knußmann.24 Sex and age-at-death were estimated using standard an-thropological methods.25 Sex was estimated mainly from morphology and metrics of the pelvic bones.26 For individuals without a complete pelvis, sex was determined using intra-population metric data coll-ected from individuals with determined sex using DSP method by Murail et al.27 and considering cra-nial and postcranial morphology.28 Age-at-death of immature individuals was estimated from the den-tal mineralization and eruption whenever possible.29 Long bones size and morphology were considered

23 Buikstra/Ubelaker 1994.24 Knußmann 1988.25 Buikstra/Ubelaker 1994.26 Murail/Brůžek/Houët/Cunha 2005; Novotný 1979; 1986.27 Murail/Brůžek/Houët/Cunha 2005.28 Černý/Komenda 1980; Novotný/İşcan 1991; Novotný/İşcan/Loth 1993; Acsádi/Nemeskéri 1970; Čihák 1987; Novotný 1985; Steel 1976; İşcan/Miller-Shaivitz 1984; Teschler-Nicola 1992.29 Ubelaker 1978.

Tab. 4 Characteristic secondary disturbances and degrees of de-composition can be categorised according to the extent to which

they affect the whole or part of the skeleton.

Tab. 3 Overview of the evaluation of the completeness of skeletons.

15

in cases of absence of teeth.30 Age-at-death of adults was estimated using all available criteria, including the morphology of the pubis symphysis and auricu-lar area of the pelvis, obliteration pattern of skull, dental macrowear values, ante-mortem dental loss, degenerative changes on vertebra, and other general age indicators.31

This preliminary analysis provided data for a total sample of 113 individuals from the Prague-Zličín population which were available for further study within the laboratory. This sample included 18 children (0–14 years), 28 males (4 subadults and 24 adults), 33 females (3 subadults and 30 adults), 29 individuals over 15 years of age and 5 immature individuals (< 15 years of age) of unknown sex. MI (Masculinity index) for individuals over 15 years of age was calculated at this population for 81.32 There were four cases of incomplete human skeletal re-mains accompanying another buried individual: in three cases skeletal remains of an adult individual (male, female or ambiguous individual) were accom-panied by parts of a child’s skeleton, in one case two adult females were identified within one burial.

On the one hand the incompleteness of skeletons results in a high number of ambiguous individuals, but on the other hand these fragments may still al-low future detailed analyses for sex estimation (e. g. discriminate analysis of intra-population metric data, measurements of meatus acusticus internus, DNA analysis). When age estimations allowed (n = 104), these individuals were included in paleodemographi-cal analysis using standards after Acsádi and Nemes-kéri33, but with broader age categories to increase the number of included individuals, as no newborn was found within the examined population. The results confirmed life expectancy at birth as 32.6 years, life expectancy by 20-year-old individuals was 21.5 years, and estimation of the life expectancy of individuals who exceeded 50 years was 7.5 years.

The results can be compared with analysis per-formed by Obertová and Wahl34 on a sample of 75 individuals from Horb-Altheim (the Neckar region, Baden-Württemberg, Germany) which dates to 450–510 AD. The Horb-Altheim population consisted of 32 (43 %) males, 42 (56 %) females and one ambi-

30 Stloukal/Hanáková 1978; Čihák 1987.31 Meindl/Lovejoy 1985; Meindl/Lovejoy 1989; Lovejoy 1985.32 Acsádi/Nemeskéri 1970.33 Acsádi/Nemeskéri 1970.34 Obertová/Wahl 2007.

guous individual. MI for individuals over 15 years of age was 69, which is lower than in Prague-Zličín. The MI value of the Prague-Zličín population may change after performing all sex-related assessments, thus the above mentioned value is to be considered a preliminary one. Life expectancy at birth of the Horb-Altheim population was slightly shorter than that in Prague-Zličín: Obertová and Wahl calculated life expectancy for this population at 30.8 years, life expectancy by 20-year-old males was 22.5 years, for females of the same age 22.7 years. When conside-ring these results it is necessary to be reminded of the absence of newborns and small children at the Horb-Altheim site, which was observed in Prague-Zličín population as well.

When comparing body stature in populations from Prague-Zličín and Horb-Altheim, the results may have been influenced by different methodolo-gies: at Prague-Zličín the method by Sjøvold35 was applied, whereas body stature at Horb-Altheim was estimated using various methods (for both whole and fragmentary bones).36 Body stature for males (n = 9) in the Prague-Zličín sample was estimated in a ran-ge between 171 cm and 180 cm (with a mean of 175 cm), whereas estimation of the female (n = 15) population were between 163 and 172 cm (95 % C.I. for mean, with mean of 167 cm). Number of individuals included in body stature estimation will increase when applying the methodology used by Obertová and Wahl.37 In spite of different methods and a varied population sample, body stature within Horb-Altheim population was almost the same as in Prague-Zličín population: males were on average 174 cm tall (with range of 167 cm to 180 cm), fema-les 163 cm (with range 156 cm to 169 cm).

It is intended that various anthropological analyses will be undertaken on the Prague-Zličín skeletal remains to describe the living conditions of the population. The evaluation of dental condition (including dental cariosity, dental enamel hypopla-sia), paleopathological assessment, dental enamel microwear, Sr, C, N isotopes, and analysis of aDNA would offer a significant contribution to building up a model of migration patterns within a broader Central Europe in the Migration Period.

35 Sjøvold 1990.36 Breitinger 1937; Bach 1965; Olivier/Aaron/Fully/Tissier 1978; Trotter/Gleser 1958; Müller 1935; Jacobs 1992.37 Obertová/Wahl 2007.

16

5. Po r t a b l e F i n d s

In this text we provide a preliminary informative overview of types of portable finds from the Prague-Zličín burial ground. A detailed specification of all finds and analysis of particular groups of artefacts is currently in progress. A preliminary chronological study of some finds has been published already.38

The excavation of the Prague-Zličín burial site recovered a broad spectrum of portable finds, even though nearly all the graves were looted in the past and thus a considerable amount of objects from them were lost. Some of the artefacts discovered can be regarded as unique, at least in the Czech Republic. As a conse-quence of secondary interference, many objects were damaged and re-deposited in secondary positions. Preserved finds were discovered in both primary and secondary positions, at various levels between the sur-face and the bottoms of graves.

Grave goods included 26 ceramic and 18 glass vessels. Most of them were discovered in a primary position close to the western wall of grave cuts, near the head of the deceased. Ceramic vessels were re-peatedly found at the bottom, approximately in the middle of the grave’s width, probably at the head of a presumed coffin, or in the south western corner of a grave cut, either at the bottom or higher on a shelf or

38 Vávra/Jiřík/Kubálek/Kuchařík 2007, 569–570; Jiřík/Vávra 2008, 527–528.

ledge (fig. 8). In seven cases a ceramic vessel was found placed in a niche. A pair of ceramic vessels was dis-covered also at the bottom level of two graves. Some ceramic vessels discovered in secondary positions were preserved only in a fragmentary state as a consequence of secondary intervention. In addition, anachronistic intrusive pottery fragments were found within the layers of secondary disturbances, which came from the surface of the surrounding ground.

The variety of types of ceramic vessels is repre-sented by bottles or flasks, bowls and jugs. Beside local handmade vessels, which are represented e. g. by several varieties of handmade carinated bowls cha-racteristic of the Vinařice Group, there appear imita-tions of Roman provincial style (e. g. a jug with trefoil mouth), others come from Roman provinces and also from more remote territories of Barbaricum, e.g. from the lower Elbe area. A unique find is represented by an undisturbed late Roman terra sigillata bowl of Argon-ne production, Chenet 319 type, which was found in a niche together with a glass beaker39 (fig. 22). Today there are only two completely preserved terra sigillata vessels in the Czech Republic, both burial finds.40 La-boratory processing of finds from looting shaft fillings revealed another fragment of late terra sigillata from Prague-Zličín.

39 Vávra/Jiřík/Kubálek/Kuchařík 2007, 570 Fig. 10.40 For details about the other terra sigillata vessel see Halama 2010.

Fig. 13 Prague-Zličín. Grave 172, silver plaquettes situated in their primary position.

17

The collection of eighteen imported glass ves-sels is another unique to the Prague-Zličín site. It contains 14 beakers of various shapes and decorati-on and four flask-shaped vessels. Among the beakers chalice-shaped vessels with a concave bottom prevail, two beakers have a rounded bottom, one beaker has a low full foot wound with a glass thread and one beaker has a thin foot shaped into a tear drop. There is also an example of a cone-shaped beaker with a narrow flat bottom. Two bottles are of vial shape, with a narrow cylindrical neck, globular body and concave bottom. The other two flasks are tear drop shaped and one of them has a hollow foot. The bottle with foot (fig. 10), decorated on the shoulder with a spiral of glass thread and lower down with fine ob-lique fluting41 represents an exceptional find, with the nearest analogy coming from the elite cemetery in Bräunlingen in Baden-Württemberg, Germany.42

The most frequently occurring preserved arte-facts are clothing components and decoration belon-ging to the buried individuals. The most numerous finds are tiny black glass beads of 2–3 millimetres in diameter, whose number exceeds twelve thousand. These were sometimes accompanied by other kinds of beads of various colours and shapes, in both glass and metal, e.g. gold and (mainly) silver spirals, and several polyhedral shapes. These small beads ap-peared in primary positions especially in the area of the head, neck and upper part of chest; they were also found re-deposited in the western halves of grave cuts. They served as parts of necklaces and perhaps some of them were stitched to clothing. Beside be-ads, heads and necks of those buried were also ador-ned with other jewellery. In grave 172, together with small black glass beads, we discovered six circular silver medallions in an intact position in the neck area. The medallions most probably formed a neck-lace fastened in the nape area by a silver S-shaped pin (fig. 13). Two similar but damaged plaquettes were also discovered in another grave re-deposited in a secondary position. Two graves yielded five pieces of three-lobed gold pendants with little handles (Úher-ce type). They were found in secondary positions, at various levels above the bottom of the grave, there-fore it is not certain at which part of the body they were originally situated. Other, rather rare examples of jewellery decorating the heads and necks of the

41 Jiřík/Vávra 2008, 525.42 Périn/Wieczorek 2001, fig. 4.15.3.1.

dead are a gilded silver pin and a massive silver neck ring (fig. 14).

Beside the tiny beads, several dozens of bigger beads were uncovered. They were of various colours and shapes and 2–3 cm in diameter. They were re-peatedly discovered approximately in the area of the pelvis or between the thighbones, which shows their primary position. In some cases such beads were evidently re-deposited together with the bones of the lower limbs as a result of secondary interference. Most of these beads were made of glass, eight were made of amber.

Numerous metal brooches were found, three do-zen of various types, especially silver and gilded ex-amples, which are the most common, and also seve-ral of bronze, iron and gold. Their primary positions correspond with the area of the shoulders, trunk and hips of the buried individuals. However these parts

Fig. 14 Prague-Zličín. Grave 162, a silver torque.

Fig. 15 Prague-Zličín. Grave 168, a bronze fibula of Wiesbaden type.

18

of the graves were most afflicted by looters, so we dis-covered most of these items in secondary positions along with replaced bones, sometimes even in higher levels of the grave cuts. A pair of bronze fibulae of Wiesbaden type (fig. 15), which probably come from the River Main area and which can be dated to the second quarter of the 5th century AD, chronologi-cally and spatially suggests the beginning of burial in the south eastern part of the Prague-Zličín cemetery. This hypothesis is also supported by a pair of Bratei type fibulae or their related varieties, which come from the same part of the burial site and which may be preliminarily dated to the first half of the 5th century AD.

Other examples are represented by three pairs of gilded silver Danubian fibulae of Sokolnice-Bakod-puszta-Gursuf type with three buttons on a semicir-cular head-plate, decorated with chip carving (fig. 17).43 They can be dated to the period between the second third and the second half of the 5th centu-ry AD.44 Two pairs of such fibulae have a rhombic foot, whereas the other pair has a three-lobed foot ending.45 This element is documented on fibulae of this type from the burial site of Záluží u Čelákovic, which in general is dated to the Merovingian Peri-od.46 Such fibulae together with some other artefacts indicate the final phase of use of the graveyard at the turn of the 6th century AD.

43 Vávra/Jiřík/Kubálek/Kuchařík 2007, 569–570.44 Tejral 1997, 353, fig. 28:8–14; Tejral 2002, 321.45 Jiřík/Vávra 2008, 528, fig. 18.46 Svoboda 1965, tab. 103,1.3.

Another group is represented by various silver fibulae of Niederflorstadt-Wiesloch and Groß Um-stadt types,47 which become more common in the second third of the 5th century especially to the west and northwest of the Czech Republic.48

Two pairs of gold fibulae represent a unique find and also a new type – the Zličín type.49 The fibu-lae are of one-piece construction with an outer coil spring and a foot ending with a small spiral with cross fluting (fig. 11). The small spiral and the form of catch plate is analogous to crossbow brooches of Lauriacum and Invillino types, dated to the second half of the 5th century and the beginning of the 6th century AD.50 The first two pieces of the Zličín type fibulae to be discovered have a circular cross-section to the bow and the foot, whereas the more elaborate second pair has an approximately semicircular cross-section to the bow and a prismatic foot which ends in a small spiral with a circular cross-section.

Other more numerous items are metal belt and shoe buckles, made of iron or gilded silver. We dis-covered a gilded silver belt buckle with a frame in the form of two opposite zoomorphic heads, and a tongue of massive profile, and a belt plate decora-ted with S-shaped motifs (fig. 18). Some other finds have come from the processed plaster blocks: a partly gold-clad silver buckle with a circular, widened frame and tongue of massive profile, and a trapezoidal belt plate decorated with chip carving on its edges (fig. 19).51 According to the shape and design of the belt plate we can relate this item to Eastern groups and date it to the beginning of the Merovingian Period. This buckle is another item that indicates the final phase of burial at the Prague-Zličín site, at the turn of the 6th century AD. The plaster blocks contained several silver strap ends from the waist and pelvis area of the buried individuals.

Shoe buckles were repeatedly found in their pri-mary position at the feet and in several cases also in the knee area, which suggests the presence of a kind of high footwear, leather straps, or another pi-ece of clothing. The foot area of the graves was less disturbed by secondary interventions. The current collection of shoe buckles mostly consists of silver items, however some are gilded, or iron, and one

47 Vávra/Jiřík/Kubálek/Kuchařík 2007, 570.48 Böhme 1989, 398–400.49 Vávra/Jiřík/Kubálek/Kuchařík 2007, 569 fig. 4.50 Schulze-Dörrlamm 1986, 624–643 fig. 59–60.51 Jiřík/Vávra 2008, 527 fig. 17.

Fig. 16 Prague-Zličín. Grave 135, gold ring from the undis-turbed grave.

19

Fig. 17 Prague-Zličín. Grave 57, a gilded silver fibula of Sokolnice-Bakodpuszta-Gursuf type.

Fig. 18 Prague-Zličín. Grave 41, a gilded silver belt buckle decorated with zoomorphic motifs and niello.

Fig. 19 Prague-Zličín. Grave 132, a gilded silver belt buckle.

20

pair is made of gold. The majority of such objects had rather a plain shape of a slightly oval frame of circular cross-section with a massive tongue (fig. 20). There was also one shoe buckle with a bone frame and a gilded belt plate, a pair of bronze Danubian buckles with a belt plate with three massive rivets52 and a pair of similar, but smaller bronze buckles with three rivets on the strap-end. The gold buckles had a frame of semi-circular cross-section.

Within the artefact assemblage there are also some less frequently-occuring decorative components of clothing. Among them are seven globular hollow silver objects made of two hemispheres which were recorded in the trunk area and may be preliminarily identified as a kind of button perhaps bells sewn or hung on the clothing. One grave contained a bronze armlet re-deposited in a secondary position, yet still embracing the humerus. A gold spiral finger ring comes from the undisturbed grave 135 (fig. 16). Among unique finds there is a solidus from the beginning of the 5th century AD, from the reign of the Emperor Honorius, which had been modified into a disc brooch.

Another group of finds comprises iron knife bla-des, mostly situated in the area of the right thighbone and the lower part of the right upper limb. Iron arte-facts were often not identified until their conservation.

52 Jiřík/Vávra 2008, 528 fig. 8.

Toilet objects comprise another group of arte-facts. There are six one-sided combs made of bone plates connected by metal rivets. One of them has a protective case, which is a rare find in the Czech Republic (fig. 21). Three bronze tweezers were pre-served in graves. A bone awl comes from one grave. Another grave contained two flints discovered along with a metal object in the pelvis area. These items probably represent parts of a strike-a-light.

Beside metal and glass components of dress, in some cases we also managed to recover remnants of actual clothing and footwear. Corrosion layers of some metal objects contained little fragments of textiles or their imprints. Besides, some shoe and belt buckles bore fragments of leather coming probably from leather straps and belts. An exceptional find is represented by trichological material – remains of human hairs from grave 11.

The artefact assemblage of the Prague-Zličín burial site includes a minimum of items that could be unequivocally identified as weapons. There is an iron trilobate arrowhead with an opening in one bla-de from grave 70, an iron double-edged arrowhead from grave 76 and probably another much deterio-rated iron arrowhead from grave 143.

6. C o n c l u s i o n s

The excavation of the Prague-Zličín burial site is currently at the processing and evaluation stage. Digitization of more than 1,500 drawings has been completed and conservation and laboratory proces-sing of particular finds and skeletal remains has re-cently been finished. We intend to carry out a num-ber of scientific analyses of the metal, glass, amber, archaeobotanical, anthropological, histological and trichological material as well as producing a GIS of the cemetery in the landscape context of the given region. We plan to carry out some of the analyses in international cooperation with the Römisch-Germa-nisches Zentralmuseum Mainz, Germany, and other institutions and experts abroad. The elaboration of such material offers several complex topics (e.g. secondary re-openings of graves, interregional con-tacts, burial rites) that need to be evaluated in more detail. Some projects have started recently.

The analysis of ceramic vessels combined with well-dated metal objects will serve as a chronological and typological framework for other contemporane-

Fig. 20 Prague-Zličín. Grave 132, a gilded silver shoe buckle with remnants of a leather strap.

21

ous sites. The burial site was detected and researched in totality, which is a significant point for the proces-sing and the evaluation of the results. Its excavation produced a rich complex of finds which illustrate broad cultural contacts with geographically remote areas, such as the North Sea region, the Rhineland, Gaul and the Middle Danube. It also brought new knowledge which contributes to the study of the late phase of the Vinařice Group in Bohemia and changes established ideas about this cultural group. The pre-sent knowledge of the extent of the Vinařice Group

burial sites, which have hitherto been referred to as small family cemeteries, probably does not reflect the original reality, exemplified by the case of the epo-nymous site in Vinařice, where a plate fibula of the Wiesbaden type from the beginning of the 5th century AD and a Krefeld or Rathewitz types of fibulae from the end of the Vinařice Group prove the existence of burials of at least two generations of inhabitants.

Preliminary conclusions enable us to link the final phase of the Vinařice Group in Bohemia with pre-Lombard development in the Danube region

Fig. 22 Prague-Zličín. Grave 609, a ceramic vessel of late terra sigillata Chenet 319 type with a glass beaker in a niche.

Fig. 21 Prague-Zličín. Grave 113, a bone comb with a protective case.

22

and to raise the question of a possible continuity of cemeteries into the later Migration Period.53 The problem deals with the continuation of the populati-on of Bohemia from the early stage of the Migration Period to the later Merovingian Period and its share in constituting an East Merovingian cultural zone, especially with regard to the early mediaeval Bavarii and Lombards. In addition, at the beginning of the 6th century AD, the population of Bohemia proba-bly took part in important processes which led to the transformation of the whole Elbe cultural zone. Such changes were probably accelerated by the ex-pansion of the Lombards and subsequently also of the Thuringians.54

At the beginning of the 6th century AD new cemeteries with Elbe Germanic objects emerge in the Middle Danube Region (e. g. Holubice, Lužice). For the first time they become part of the phenomenon of East Merovingian row grave cemeteries. Material culture related to the Middle and Lower Elbe Regi-on occurs at these sites. As for fibulae and ceramics they also show a certain relationship with Bohemia, e.g. with such sites as Hořín by Mělník, Doudlevce, Prague-Podbaba, Pnětluky, Lochenice and others. Metal artefacts in Bohemia show a relationship to sites in southern Bavaria (Altenerding, Munich-Perlach).55 In the first half of the 6th century ce-meteries containing a heterogeneous combination of material occur in Bavaria. This can be observed at si-tes like Straubing-Bajuwarenstraße, Munich-Perlach or Unterhaching. According to Hubert Fehr, it is not possible to definitely distinguish a single wave of migration coming from Germania to the Danube frontier area in the early 6th century AD, and, mo-reover, it is very hard or even impossible to distin-guish new immigrants from the descendants of the local provincial population.56 Some cemeteries show a relationship to Thuringian or, more generally, to the Elbe Germanic cultural zone.57 The relationship between Bohemia and Bavaria in the 6th century AD within the East Merovingian cultural zone has lately been discussed by Stephanie Zintl.58 Accor-ding to Dušan Třeštík, a population with its origin in

53 Vávra/Jiřík/Kubálek/Kuchařík 2007, 571; Jiřík/Vávra 2008, 528.54 Jiřík 2011.55 Tejral 2008, 268–276.56 Fehr 2010.57 E. g. Dannheimer 1998, tab. 96,3–4.58 Zintl 2004/2005, 347–352.

Bohemia would play a special role in the process of ethnogenesis of the Bavarii and Lombards, and they would represent a kind of reservoir of relatively elite status, probably warrior groups that could be utilized by both Bavarii and Lombards. 59

The elaboration of the cemetery in Prague-Zličín may also contribute significantly to the problem of ascription of an individual to a concrete social group or groups. According to written sources, a basic so-cial unit in some early medieval societies was the fara – derived from common Germanic *farō (Paulus Diaconus, Historia Langobardorum II,9, writes fa-ras, hoc est generationes vel lineas), which consisted of major families, including unmarried, unrelated, half-free people and servants.60 Studies of the physical anthropology in particular could answer questions of the social status and relationships between the rich burials equipped with precious metal jewellery, cur-rently discussed by Sebastian Brather.61

English by Ellen Swift

AcknowledgementsThe work was supported by the Czech Science

Foundation, grant number P405/11/2511, and by the Foundation Pro Archaeologia Saxoniae. For the CT profiles we are grateful to Ing. Josef Prokop from the Prague Centre of Industrial Tomography at the Fac-ulty of Nuclear Sciences and Physical Engineering of the Czech Technical University in Prague. The work was supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sports of the Czech Republic, grant number MSM6840770022. For the radiograms we are grate-ful to the Conservation and Restoration Department of the Museum of Central Bohemia in Roztoky, Czech Republic. For photographs in fig. 11, 14, 16, 18, 19 and 21 we are grateful to Martin Frouz.

7. B i b l i o g r a p h y

Acsádi/Nemeskéri 1970: György Acsádi/János Nemeskéri, History of human life span and mortality (Budapest).

Aspöck 2003: Edeltraud Aspöck, Graböffnungen im Früh-mittelalter und das Fallbeispiel der Langobardenzeitlichen Grä-ber von Brunn am Gebirge, Flur Wolfholz, Niederösterreich. Archaeologia austriaca 87, 225–264.

59 Třeštík 1997, 36, 49.60 Nedoma 2006, 278–282.61 Brather 2007, 20–23.

23

Bach 1965: Herbert Bach, Zur Berechnung der Körperhöhe aus den langen Gliedmaßenknochen weiblicher Skelette. Anthro-pologischer Anzeiger 29, 12–21.

Beilharz 2011: Denise Beilharz, Das frühmerowingerzeitli-che Gräberfeld von Horb-Altheim. Studien zu Migrations- und Integrationsprozessen am Beispiel einer frühmittelalterlichen Bestattungsgemeinschaft (Stuttgart).

Böhme 1989: Horst Wolfgang Böhme, Eine elbgermani-sche Bügelfibel des 5. Jahrhunderts aus Limetz-Villez (Yvelines, Frankreich). Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 19, 397–406.

Bohnsack 1939: Dietrich Bohnsack, Neue Germanengräber in Pilgramsdorf, Kr. Neidenburg. Nachrichtenblatt für deutsche Vorzeit, 291–296, tab. 77–78.

Brather 2007: Sebastian Brather, Römer und Germanen. Ethnogenesen und Identität in der Spätantike. In: Barbaren im Wandel. Beiträge zur Kultur- und Identitätsumbildung in der Völkerwanderungszeit, hrsg. Jaroslav Tejral. Spisy Archeologické-ho ústavu AV ČR Brno 26 (Brno) 11–27.

Breitinger 1937: Emil Breitinger, Zur Berechnung der Körperhöhe aus den langen Gliedmaßenknochen. Anthropolo-gischer Anzeiger 14, 249–274.

Brůžek 2002: Jaroslav Brůžek, A method for visual deter-mination of sex, using the human hip bone. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 117, 157–168.

Buikstra/Ubelaker 1994: Jane E. Buikstra/Douglas H. Ubelaker (Eds.), Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains. Missouri Archaeological Society. Proceedings of a Seminar at the Field Museum of Natural History. Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Seminar Series 44 (Arkansas).

Černý/Komenda 1980: M. Černý/S. Komenda, Sexual di-agnosis by the measurements of humerus and femur. Sborník prací Pedagogické Fakulty Univerzity Palackého v Olomouc. Biologie 2, 147–167.

Čihák 1987: Radomír Čihák, Anatomie I (Praha).Codreanu-Windauer 1997: Silvia Codreanu-Windauer,

Pliening im Frühmittelalter. Bajuwarisches Gräberfeld, Sied-lungsbefunde und Kirche. Materialhefte zur Bayerischen Vorge-schichte A 74 (Kallmünz/Opf.).

Droberjar 2002: Eduard Droberjar, Encyklopedie římské a germánské archeologie v Čechách a na Moravě (Praha).

Droberjar/Turek 1997: Eduard Droberjar/Jan Turek, Zur Problematik der völkerwanderungszeitlichen Siedlungen in Böh-men (Erforschung bei Jenštejn, Kr. Praha-východ). In: Neue Bei-träge zur Erforschung der Spätantike im mittleren Donauraum, hrsg. Jaroslav Tejral/Herwig Friesinger/Michel Kazanski. Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno 8 (Brno) 99–118.

Fehr 2010: Hubert Fehr, Am Anfang war das Volk? Die Ent-stehung der bajuwarischen Identität als archäologisches und inter-disziplinäres Problem. In: Archaeology of Identity – Archäologie der Identität, hrsg. Walter Pohl/Matthias Mehofer (Wien) 211–231.

Gaillard de Sémainville 2003: Henri Gaillard de Sémain-ville, À propos de l’Implantation des Burgondes. Réflexions, Hypothéses et Perspectives. In: Burgondes, Alamans, Francs et Romains. Dans ľest de la France, le sud-ouest de ľAllemagne et la Suisse Ve–VIIe s. aprés J.-C., ed. Françoise Passard/Sophie Gizard/Jean-Pierre Urlacher/Annick Richard (Besançon) 17–39.

Halama 2010: Jakub Halama, Jak vysvětlit nález sigillatové mísy z Neratovic? Možnosti interpretace a kontext zajímavého nálezu. In: Archeológia barbarov 2009. Hospodárstvo Germánov – sídliskové a ekonomické štruktúry od neskorej doby laténskej po včasný stredovek/Archaeology of the barbarians 2009. Econ-omy of the Germans – settlement and economic structures from the Late La Tène period till the Early Middle Ages, ed. Ján Bel-

jak/Gertrúda Březinová/Vladimír Varsik. Archaeologica Slovaca Monographiae. Communicationes 10 (Nitra) 547–578.

İşcan/Miller-Shaivitz 1984: Mehmet Yaşar İşcan/P. Miller-Shaivitz, Discriminant Function Sexing of the Tibia. Journal of Forensic sciences 29/4, 1087–1093.

Jacobs 1992: K. Jacobs, Estimating Femur and Tibia length from fragmentary bones. An evaluation of Steele’s (1970) method using a prehistoric European sample. American Journal of Physi-cal Anthropology 89, 333–345.

Jansová 1971: Libuše Jansová, Hradiště nad Závistí v ob-dobí pozdně římském a v době stěhování národů (Hradiště ob Závist in der späten römischen Kaiserzeit und Völkerwande-rungszeit). Památky archeologické 62, 135–176.

Jiřík 2007: Jaroslav Jiřík, Entstehung und Entwicklung der sogenannten Vinařice-Gruppe im Nordteil des Böhmischen Bek-kens. Forschungstand und Interpretationsversuch. In: Barbaren im Wandel. Beiträge zur Kultur- und Identitätsumbildung in der Völkerwanderungszeit, hrsg. Jaroslav Tejral. Spisy Archeologické-ho ústavu AV ČR Brno 26 (Brno) 121–145.

Jiřík 2011: Jaroslav Jiřík, Bohemian Barbarians. Bohemia in Late Antiquity. In: Neglected Barbarians of the fifth, sixth and seventh centuries, ed. Florin Curta. Studies in the early Middle Ages 32 (Turnhout) 263–317.

Jiřík/Peša/Jenč 2008: Jaroslav Jiřík/Vladimír Peša/Petr Jenč, Ein Silberdepot der frühen Phase der Völkerwanderungszeit aus der Elbe-Klamm bei Hřensko, Bz. Děčín, und sein kultureller Kontext. Arbeits- und Forschungsberichte zur sächsischen Bo-dendenkmalpflege 50, 185–209.

Jiřík/Vávra 2008: Jaroslav Jiřík/JiříVávra, Druhá etapa výz-kumu pohřebiště z doby stěhování národů v Praze-Zličíně. In: Barbarská sídliště. Chronologické, ekonomické a historické as-pekty jejich vývoje ve světle nových archeologických výzkumů, ed. Eduard Droberjar/Balázs Komoróczy/Dagmar Vachůtová. Ar-cheologie barbarů 2007 = Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno 37 (Brno) 517–530.

Knußmann 1988: Rainer Knußmann, Anthropologie. Handbuch der vergleichenden Biologie des Menschen (Stuttgart).

Koch 1987a: Ursula Koch, Die Glas- und Edelsteinfunde aus den Plangrabungen 1967–1983 I. Text. Der Runde Berg bei Urach VI/I (Heidelberg).

Koch 1987b: Ursula Koch, Die Glas- und Edelsteinfunde aus den Plangrabungen 1967–1983 II. Farbtafeln und Karten. Der Runde Berg bei Urach VI/II (Heidelberg).

Kubálek 2009: Pavel Kubálek, Tafonomie pohřebiště z doby stěhování národů v Praze-Zličíně. In: Archeologia Barbarzyńców 2008. Powiązania i kontakty w świecie barbarzyńskim, ed. Ma-ciej Karwowski/Eduard Droberjar. Collectio Archaeologica Reso-viensis XIII (Rzeszów) 615–626.

Kučková/Vávra/Hynek/Kodíček 2010: Štěpánka Kučková/Jiří Vávra/Radovan Hynek/Milan Kodíček, Analýza obsahu ke-ramických a skleněných nádob metodou peptidového mapování. In: Archeológia barbarov 2009. Hospodárstvo Germánov – síd-liskové a ekonomické štruktúry od neskorej doby laténskej po včasný stredovek/Archaeology of the barbarians 2009. Economy of the Germans – settlement and economic structures from the Late La Tène period till the Early Middle Ages, ed. Ján Beljak/Gertrúda Březinová/Vladimír Varsik. Archaeologica Slovaca Monographiae. Communicationes 10 (Nitra) 639–644.

Limburský/Likovský/Fleková/Velemínský 2008: Petr Lim-burský/Jakub Likovský/Klára Fleková/Petr Velemínský, Zachova-lost antropologického materiálu jako nepřímý doklad rituálních praktik na pohřebišti stěhování národů ve Vlíněvsi, okr. Mělník. Acta archaeologica Opaviensia 3, 117–128.

24

Limburský/Likovský/Velemínský/Fleková 2010: Petr Lim-burský/Jakub Likovský/Petr Velemínský/Klára Fleková, Kostrové pohřebiště vinařické skupiny ve Vlíněvsi, okres Mělník. Stěhování národů – populační skupina a vykrádání hrobů, Památky archeo-logické 101, Praha, 111–168.

Lovejoy 1985: C. Owen Lovejoy, Dental Wear in the Lib-ben Population. Its Functional Pattern and Role in the Deter-mination of Adult Skeletal Age at Death. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68, 47–56.

Meindl/Lovejoy 1985: Richard S. Meindl/C. Owen Lovejoy, Ectocranial Suture closure. A Revised Method for the Determina-tion of skeletal age at Death Based on the Lateral-anterior Sutures. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68, 1, 57–66.

Meindl/Lovejoy 1989: Richard S. Meindl/C. Owen Love-joy, Age Changes in the Pelvis: Implications for Paleodemogra-phy. In: Age Markers in the Human Skeleton, ed. M.Y. İşcan. Charles C. Thomas (Springfield, Illinois) 137–168.

Motyková/Drda/Rybová 1991: Karla Motyková/Petr Drda/Alena Rybová, Some notable imports from the end of the Ro-man Period at the site of Závist. In: Archaeology in Bohemia 1985–1990, ed. Petr Charvát (Praha) 56–63.

Müller 1935: G. Müller, Bestimmung der Länge beschädig-ter Extremitätenknochen. Anthropologischer Anzeiger 12, 70–72.

Murail/Brůžek/Houët/Cunha 2005: P. Murail/Jaroslav Brůžek/Francis Houët/Eugénia Cunha 2005: DSP. A tool for probabilistic sex diagnosis using worldwide variability in hip-bone measurements. Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d’An-thropologie de Paris NS 17, 2005, 3–4 ; 167–176 [varia, mis en ligne le 15 juin 2010. URL: http://bmsap.revues.org/1157].

Nedoma 2006: Robert Nedoma, s. v. Verwandschaft § 2. Das System der Verwandtenbezeichnungen. In: Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde 32 (Berlin, New York) 278–282.

Novotný 1979: Vladimír Novotný, Nové hodnocení sul-cus preauricularis jako nejhodnotnějšího morfoskopického zn-aku pánevní kosti k rozlišení pohlaví. Scripta medica 52 (Brno) 500–502.

Novotný 1985: Vladimír Novotný, Determination of sex from Talus and Calcaneus. Scripta Medica 58 (Brno).

Novotný 1986: Vladimír Novotný, Sex Determination of the Pelvis Bone. A Systems Approach. Anthropologie 24/2–3, 197–206.

Novotný/İşcan 1991: Vladimír Novotný/Mehmet Yaşar İşcan, Sex determination from the skull Using Morphoscopic and Morphometric characteristic. In: Craniofacial identification, ed. Mehmet Yaşar İşcan/Richard P. Helmer (New York).

Novotný/İşcan/Loth 1993: Vladimír Novotný/Mehmet Yaşar İşcan/Susan R. Loth, Morphologic and Osteometric Assess-ment of age, Sex and Race from the Skull. In: Forensic Analysis of the Skull. Craniofacial Analysis, Reconstruction, and Identi-fication, ed. Mehmet Yaşar İşcan/Richard P. Helmer (New York) 71–88.

Obertová/Wahl 2007: Zuzana Obertová/Joachim Wahl, Anthropologische Untersuchungen zur Bevölkerungsstruktur und Lebensweise der frühmerowingerzeitlichen Population von Horb-Altheim (450–510 n. Chr.). Fundberichte aus Baden-Württemberg 29, 559–601.

Olivier/Aaron/Fully/Tissier 1978: G. Olivier/C. Aaron/G. Fully/G. Tissier, New estimations of stature and cranial capacity in modern man. Journal of Human Evolution 7, 513–518.

Périn/Wieczorek 2001: Das Gold der Barbarfürsten. Schät-ze aus Prunkgräbern, hrsg. Patrick Périn/Alfried Wieczorek (Stuttgart).

Pieta/Roth 2007: Karol Pieta/Peter Roth, Kniežacia hrobka z Popradu-Matejoviec. Pamiatky a Múzea za rok 2006, 3, 44–47.

Pinar Gil 2005: Joan Pinar Gil, A propósito de una hebilla de plata de la segunda midad del siglo V conservada en el MAN. Hortus Artium Medievalium. Journal of the International Re-search Centre for Late Antiquity and Middle Ages 11, 299–317.

Pleinerová 2006: Ivana Pleinerová, Litovice (okr. Praha-západ). Hroby vinařického stupně doby stěhování národů. In: Archeologie barbarů 2005, ed. Eduard Droberjar/Michal Lu-tovský (Praha) 483–498.

Quast 1993: Dieter Quast, Merowingerzeitliche Grabfunde aus Gültlingen. Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühge-schichte in Baden-Württemberg 52 (Stuttgart).

Quast 1997: Dieter Quast, Vom Einzelgrab zum Friedhof. Beginn der Reihengräbersitte im 5. Jahrhundert. In: Die Alaman-nen (Stuttgart) 171–190.

Schulze-Dörrlamm 1986: Mechthild Schulze-Dörrlamm, Romanisch oder germanisch? Untersuchungen zu den Arm-brust- und Bügelknopffibeln des 5. und 6. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. aus den Gebieten westlich des Rheins und südlich der Donau. Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 33, 593–720.

Sjøvold 1990: Torstein Sjøvold, Estimation of stature from long bones utilizing the line of organic correlation. Human Evo-lution 5, 431–447.

Steel 1976: D. Gentry Steel, The Estimation of the Sex on the basis of the Talus and Calcaneus. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 45, 581–588.

Stloukal/Hanáková 1978: Milan Stloukal/Hana Hanáková, Die Länge der Längsknochen altslawischer Bevölkerungen unter Berücksichtigung von Waschstumsfragen. Homo 29, 1, 53–69.

Svoboda 1965: Bedřich Svoboda, Čechy v době stěhování národů (Praha).

Tejral 1997: Jaroslav Tejral, Neue Aspekte der frühvölker-wanderungszeitlichen Chronologie im Mitteldonauraum. In: Neue Beiträge zur Erforschung der Spätantike im mittleren Do-nauraum, hrsg. Jaroslav Tejral/Herwig Friesinger/Michel Kazan-ski. Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno 8 (Brno) 321–392.

Tejral 1999: Jaroslav Tejral, Archäologisch-kulturelle Ent-wicklung im norddanubischen Raum am Ende der Spätkaiser-zeit und am Änfang der Völkerwanderunszeit. In: L’Occident romain et l’Europe centrale au début de l’époque des Grandes Migrations, ed. Jaroslav Tejral/Christian Pilet/Michel Kazanski. Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno 13 (Brno) 205–271.

Tejral 2002: Jaroslav Tejral, Beiträge zur Chronologie des langobardischen Fundstoffes nördlich der mittleren Donau. In: Probleme der frühen Merowingerzeit im Mitteldonauraum, hrsg. Jaroslav Tejral. Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno 19 (Brno) 313–350.

Tejral 2006: Jaroslav Tejral, s. v. Vinařicer Kulturgruppe. In: Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde 32 (Berlin, New York) 414–423.

Tejral 2008: Jaroslav Tejral, Ein Abriss der frühmerowin-gerzeitlichen Entwicklung im mittleren Donauraum bis zum Anfang des 6. Jahrhunderts. In: Kulturwandel im Mitteleuropa. Langobarden, Awaren, Slawen, hrsg. Jan Bemmann/Michael Schmauer (Bonn) 249–283.

Teschler-Nicola 1992: Maria Teschler-Nicola, Sexualdi-morphismus der Zahnkronendurchmesser. Ein Baitrag zur Ge-schlechtdiagnose sub adulter Individuen anhand des frühbron-zezeitlichen Gräberfeldes von Franzhausen I, Niederösterreich. Anthropologischer Anzeiger 50, 1–2, 27–49.

Třeštík 1997: Dušan Třeštík, Počátky Přemyslovců. Vstup Čechů do dějin (530–935) (Praha).

Trotter/Gleser 1958: Mildred Trotter/Goldine C. Gleser, A re-evaluation of estimation of stature based on measurements of

25

stature taken during life and of long bones after death. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 16, 79–123.

Ubelaker 1978: Douglas H. Ubelaker, Human skeletal re-mains. Excavation, analysis, interpretation (Chicago).

Valečka 1983: Základní geologická mapa ČSSR 1:25 000, list 12–234 Hostivice, ed. Jaroslav Valečka (Praha).

van Haperen 2010: Martine C. van Haperen, Rest in pieces. An interpretive model of early medieval ‘grave robbery’. Medieval and Modern Matters 1, 1–36.

Vávra/Jiřík/Kubálek/Kuchařík 2007: Jiří Vávra/Jaroslav Jiřík/Pavel Kubálek/Milan Kuchařík, Pohřebiště z doby stěhování národů v  Praze-Zličíně, ul. Hrozenkovská. Průběžná zpráva o metodice a výsledcích výzkumu. In: Archeologie barbarů 2006,

ed. Eduard Droberjar/Ondřej Chvojka. Archeologické výzkumy v jižních Čechách, Supplementum 3 (České Budějovice) 565–577.

Vávra/Jiřík/Kuchařík/Kubálek 2009: Jiří Vávra/Jaroslav Jiřík/Milan Kuchařík/Pavel Kubálek, Výzkum pohřebiště z doby stěhování národů v Praze-Zličíně v letech 2005–2008. Archaeo-logica Pragensia 19, 209–230.

Werner 1981: Joachim Werner, Zu einer elbgermanischen Fi-bel des 5. Jahrhunderts aus Gaukönigshofen, Ldkr. Würzburg. Ein Beitrag zu den Fibeln vom ‘Typ Wiesbaden’ und zur germanischen Punzornamentik. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 46, 224–254.

Zintl 2004/2005: Stephanie Zintl, Das frühmerowingische Gräberfeld von München-Perlach. Bericht der Bayerischen Bo-dendenkmalpflege 45/46, 281–370.

Zusammenfassung: Das völkerwanderungszeitliche Gräberfeld in Prag-Zličín, Tschechische Republik

Das Gräberfeld der Vinařicer-Gruppe aus der älteren Phase der Völkerwanderungszeit in Prag-Zličín, Hrozenkovská Straße, ist mit 173 erfassten Körpergräbern das größte Gräberfeld dieser Epoche in Böhmen und eines der größten in Mitteleuropa. Die Datierung der Fundstelle in das 5. Jahrhundert n. Chr. wurde anhand von Fibeln, Schnallen, Glasbechern, Keramik, verschiedenen Beschlägen und weiteren Kleinfunden aus Metall vorgenommen. Eine Gürtelschnalle, eine Fibel und einige andere Gegenstände deuten auf ein Ende um 500 n. Chr. Der Charakter der Funde belegt eine überregionale Bedeutung des Gräberfeldes und deutet auf Kulturbeziehungen zu Gallien, dem Rhein- und Donaugebiet sowie zum Nordseeraum hin. Fast alle Gräber weisen Spuren sekundärer Graböffnung in derselben Periode auf. Ein besonderes Verdienst der Ausgrabung liegt in der Dokumentation von Nischen mit Keramik- und Glasgefäßen, die als ein wichtiges Merkmal der Vinařicer-Gruppe gelten. Die Bearbeitung des umfangreichen Fundmaterials steht erst am Anfang und wird vorraussichtlich längere Zeit in Anspruch nehmen. Die metallographischen und andere technologische Analysen wie anthropologisch-biologische, dendrologisch- und chronologischen Untersu-chungen sowie die Erstellung eines GIS-Modells für das gesamte Gräberfeld sind in Planung.

Deutsch von Doris Wollenberg

Summary: The Migration Period Burial Site in Prague-Zličín, Czech Republic

The cemetery of the Vinařice Group in Prague-ZličÍn, Hrozenkovská St. , belonging to the earlier phase of the Migration Period, represents with 173 documented inhumation graves the largest graveyard of this epoch in Bohemia and one of the largest in Central Europe. Its dating into the 5th century AD is grounded on brooches, buckles, glass vessels, ceramics, different fittings and other metal objects. A belt buckle, a brooch and some other objects indicate an end around 500 AD. The character of the finds suggests a supra-regional importance of the cemetery and cultural relations to Gaul, the Rhineland and the regions along the Danube as well as to the North Sea. Nearly all graves show traces of secondary openings in the same period. A special benefit of the excavation lies in the documentation of niches with ceramic and glass vessels, which are counted as typical of the Vinařice group. The analysis of the considerable material has just begun and will probably take a longer time. The metallographic as well as anthropological-biological, dendrological and chronological analysis and the establishment of a GIS model of the whole cemetery are planned.

26