Related papers
Schönwarling/Skowarcz and Dollkeim/Kovrovo-type crossbow fibulae in the Sambian-Natangian culture area
Archaeologia Baltica, 2020
The article is devoted to Schönwarling/Skowarcz and Dollkeim/Kovrovo-type crossbow fibulae with a long narrow foot and a full catch-plate, one of the most characteristic chronotypes of the Migration Period. The authors describe a number of specific construction features of the fibu-lae in the Sambian-Natangian culture area, which define their typological placement. Based on the results of a comparative analysis of prewar and modern archaeological sources, the authors propose an up-to-date specified chronology of these types. Contrary to the currently popular hypothesis, the analysed archaeological material in the Sambian-Natangian area does not demonstrate coexistence , but instead the smooth replacement of Schönwarling/Skowarcz fibulae by those of the Dollkeim/Kovrovo type in the transition phase D2/D3, i.e. about 430 AD.
Late La Tène-Roman cemetery in Novo mesto. Ljubljanska cesta and Okrajno glavarstvo. Studies on fibulae and on the relative chronology of the Late La Tène period / Poznolatensko-rimsko grobišče v Novem mestu. Ljubljanska cesta in Okrajno glavarstvo. Študije o fibulah in o relativni kronologiji pozne latenske dobe
The book contains a presentation of all preserved archaeological finds discovered in 1890 in Novo mesto on part of a road that until 1993 was the initial part of Ljubljanska cesta (Ljubljana road) and from then on the beginning of Seidlova cesta (Seidl's road), and of finds excavated in 1902 in the area of Okrajno glavarstvo (District board). The monograph also includes studies of some types of Late La Tène fibulae and a study on the relative chronology of the Late La Tène period. The author suggests for the cemetery, which till now appeared in the literature under the name Beletov vrt, a new name "Beletov vrt cemetery with its surroundings". It is composed of three main (Ljubljanska cesta, Okrajno glavarstvo and Beletov vrt) and two smaller parts (Hiša Vojska and Skabernetov vrt). The chapter on the history of research, including the transcriptions of all important written sources from the time before World War I, is devoted to this cemetery, as well as the chapter on its chronology. In the catalogue, on the plates and on some of the figures, the finds from the Ljubljanska cesta and Okrajno glavarstvo areas are presented; they are kept in the prehistoric and Roman collections as well as in the Coin Cabinet of the National Museum of Slovenia in Ljubljana. The studies of fibulae are devoted to the variants of the Nauheim type, appearing on the sites of the Mokronog Group in central and eastern Slovenia, to the Nova vas type fibulae and to the arched fibulae of the Idrija Ia type. A special chapter is devoted to the relative chronology of the Late La Tène period in the south-eastern Alpine area (the Mokronog Group and Magdalensberg in the Austrian Carinthia) and in northern Italy (Lombardy and the Veneto). 2008, Katalogi in monografije 39, 240 pages, 91 colour and b-w photos, drawings, tables and maps, 33 plates, 24 x 32,8 cm, hardcover, ISBN 978-961-6169-60-8. Price: 45 €
Volodarets-Urbanovych Ya.V. Fibulae of the period from the 5th to the first half of the 8th centuries from Poltava region (findings of the early 2000-ies)
Ukrainian Archaeology, 2015
Fibulae of the Early Mediaeval period from the south of Eastern Europe were always in the centre of the scholars’ attention. This fact caused a special interest in the new finds. For instance, fibulae were found on the territory of Poltava Oblast near the villages of Malyi Viazovok, Pavlivka, Shediyeve (2 items), Zasullia-Mhar (3 items), Batky, and Kovali (2 items). These are analyzed in this article.
Bow-tie shaped fibulae from the cemetery of Budapest/Aquincum-Graphisoft Park
Dissertationes Archaeologicae, 2020
The main aim of this paper is the presentation of two rare fibulae from the Eastern Cemetery of the civil town of Budapest/Aquincum. On the former territory of the Óbuda Gas Factory, new parts of the cemetery were excavated during the years 2004–2017 under the direction of G. Lassányi. The fibulae discussed in our study were found in the skeleton grave No. 795. These fibulae have a special form and their type can be defined easily. They belong to a low-numbered fibula type of Pannonia, the bow-tie shaped fibulae.
O nekim oblicima fibula s kasnolatenskog naselja Virovitica – Kiškorija sjever / On some shapes of fibulae from the Late La Tène settlement of Virovitica – Kiškorija sjever
The excavations at the settlement in Virovitica revealed fibulae which, along with many ceramic forms, allow us to place the settlement in a late La Tène period. Similarities with the ceramic finds from contemporaneous settlements in the Slovenian part of Podravina and Prekmurje are particularly numerous. Fibula cast in lead bronze belongs to the female attire of the Late La Tène period, and different variants of similarly cast fibulae have been found at the sites of the La Tène Culture in Central Europe. The bronze fibulae of the Beletov vrt type, found in the fillings of pit-dwellings in the north-eastern part of the settlement, are considered to be one of the characteristic late La Tène forms of the Mokronog Group. In view of the typological characteristics and distribution, it can be presumed that the fibulae originated from workshops located in the area of Podravina.
CROSSBOW FIBULAS FROM BITOLA AND ITS VICINITY
CROSSBOW FIBULAS FROM BITOLA AND ITS VICINITY, 2008
From these crossbow fibulas we can determine several new types, which can be dated approximately according to E.Keller.
Late La Tène and Early Imperial Fibulae from the Iapodian Territory / Kasnolatenske i ranocarske fibule s japodskog prostora
Prilozi instituta za arheologiju u Zagrebu 31, 2014, 181-214.
The unpublished fibulae from the Iapodian Collection of the Archaeological Museum in Zagreb come from several sites, mostly situated in the Lika region. The paper presents fibulae from the 2nd and 1st cent. BC. Although the information about the context of most finds is lacking, a few finds of previously unknown or rare types allow us to complement the distribution maps. Fibulae are used as markers of the network of regional contacts that shaped the material culture of Iapodian communities in the decades preceding the Roman conquest. In the same vein, early imperial Aucissa fibulae prove that the life continued even after the establishment of Roman authority.
SOFIJA PETKOVI]
Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade
CROSSBOW FIBULAE FROM GAMZIGRAD
(ROMULIANA)
UDC: 904:739.2"652"(497.11)
DOI: 10.2298/STA1060111P
e-mail: spetkovi@ai.sanu.ac.rs
Received: August 23, 2010
Accepted: November 30, 2010
Original research article
Abstract. – In the site of Gamzigrad – Felix Romuliana 31 crossbow fibulae (Zwiebelknopffibeln) were found.
Except the finds from large Roman necropolis, the crossbow fibulae from Gamzigrad compose a large collection from one site
in Serbia. The most of them were found in the exactly stratified archaeological units of two horizons of life in Romuliana
from the beginning of 4th to the middle of 5th century. Two kinds of analysis of the crossbow fibulae from Romuliana were made:
morphological – typological and statigraphical – chronological. Conclusions about the function and production of the crossbow
fibulae have been made according the results of these analysis.
Key words. – Late Roman period, Tetrarchy, Gamzigrad, Felix Romuliana, Crossbow fibulae, Typology of fibulae,
Function of fibulae, Production of fibulae.
I
n the site of Gamzigrad – Felix Romuliana thirty-one
Roman, crossbow or »bulbous« fibulae (crossbow
brooches, Zwiebelknopffibeln)1 have been found.
Considering that archaeological explorations on this
site have lasted for more then half a century, not a big
number of fibulae have been discovered. However, with
the exception of those types of finds from large Roman
necropolises2, crossbow fibulae from Gamzigrad constitute a comprehensive collection from one site in Serbia.
Furthermore, the majority of these finds originate from
the exactly stratified archaeological units, divided into
two horizons of life in Romuliana3: the first horizon of
construction of the Galerius’ palace, from the beginning
of the 4th century; and the second horizon of the Late
Roman fortification of Romuliana from the last decades
of the 4th and the first half of the 5th century. Even though
this type of dating in Roman provinces in present-day
Serbia is mostly based on analysis of fibulae from graves4,
their chronology also highly depends on finds from reliable archaeological units, from settlements and fortifications, including Romuliana.
Considering the specific function and chronological sensitivity of fibulae type 34, the finds examined in
1 Petkovi} type 34 (Petkovi} 2008 a, 392–467, table 10, map
16, T. LIII–LXXI).
2 The biggest number of crossbow fibulae from one archaeological site in Serbia comes from the necropolises of Viminacium
(Rexi}, Rai~kovi}, Milanovi} 2006; Red`i} 2007, 65–73, type
XXXVI; Petkovi} 2008a, 393; Spasi}-\uri} 2008).
3 For stratigraphy of cultural layers and horizons of life in Late
Roman Romuliana see: Srejovi} 1983, 14–16; Jankovi} 1983a, 99
etc.; Jankovi} 1983b, 120 etc.; Srejovi}, Vasi} 1994, 56–59; Petkovi} 2004, 127 etc.; Petkovi} 2006; Petkovi} 2008c; Petkovi}
2008d; Petkovi} 2010a; Petkovi} 2010b.
* The article results from the project: Urbanization and Transformation of the City Centres of Civil, Military and Residential Character in the
Region of the Roman Provinces Moesia, Pannonia, Dalmatia (no 147001) funded by the Ministry of Science and Technological Development
of the Republic of Serbia.
111
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
1
STARINAR LX/2010
2
4
3
0
3 cm
5
6
7
8
Plate I – 1) Cat. 4, type 34 A 1; 2) Cat. 9, type 34 A 2; 3) Cat. 13, type 34 C 3b; 4) Cat. 20, type 34 D 2;
5) Cat. 22, type 34 D 2; 6) Cat. 25, type 34 D 2; 7) Cat. 27, type 34 D 2; 8) Cat. 28, type 34 D 2
Tabla I – 1) Kat. 4, tip 34 A 1; 2) Kat. 9, tip 34 A 2; 3) Kat. 13, tip 34 C 3b; 4) Kat. 20, tip 34 D 2;
5) Kat. 22, tip 34 D 2; 6) Kat. 25, tip 34 D 2; 7) Kat. 27, tip 34 D 2; 8) Kat. 28, tip 34 D 2
112
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
Gamzigrad complete the picture of Romuliana over the
significant period of its history, from the end of the 3rd
to the end of the 5th century.
Two kinds of analysis of the crossbow fibulae from
Romuliana were made: morphological-typological and
stratigraphical-chronological. Conclusions about the function and production of the crossbow fibulae have been
made according to the results of this analysis. The text
is accompanied by a catalogue of analyzed finds.
STARINAR LX/2010
Type 34 B fibulae in Serbia are present in Pannonia
Secunda and Moesia Prima (Singidunum, Viminacium,
Horreum Margi), whereas one silver specimen comes
from Dardania (Zaskok near Uro{evac) (Map 1).
A type 34 C fibula, which belongs to a rare variant
of »the imperial fibulae«, was found in Gamzigrad.9 A
bow with a transverse bar was hollow-mold cast from
bronze, whereas other parts of the fibula, bulbs, foot and
cylindrical pin holder were made from tin bronze and
applied afterwards. Crossbow fibulae of this type are
gilded, whereas punched and/or incised decoration on
the bow is usually filled with niello. Type 34 C fibulae
have a short, curved bar, plastic knobs shaped as massive
bulbs on the head, a wide, short bow and a rectangular
foot with a cylindrical pin holder, both of trapezoid
cross-sections.
Depending on decoration on the bow and foot the
following sub-variants are identified: the first sub-variant
(34 C 1) with a bow and foot decorated with a longitudinal strip with a »fir branch« motif; the second subvariant (34 C 2) with a bow decorated with geometrical
(rhombs, circles with inscribed crosses) and vegetable
(vine, rosettes) motifs or a »fir branch« motif combined
with portrait medallions and/or metopes performed in
the niello technique and a rectangular foot, decorated
similarly as the bow with an impressed motif of peltae
along the edges; the third sub-variant (34 C 3) decorated
similarly as the previous, with foot-edges curved by a
string of peltae motifs (cat. 13, Figs. 12–13). Among the
type 34 C fibulae the most interesting are those with
»imperial portraits«, one of which is a specimen from
grave 6/06 from the Late Roman necropolis of Romuliana (Figs. 13–15).10
Type 34 C fibulae have been found at archaeological sites Sirmium, Singidunum, Viminacium, Idimum,
1.1 MORPHOLOGICAL-TYPOLOGICAL
ANALYSIS
Seven fibulae type 34 from Gamzigrad belong to an
early, A 1 variant (cat. 1–7), characterized by a cylindrical transverse bar, of a circular or polygonal crosssection, pine-shaped plastic knobs on the head and a
rectangular, faceted foot, which mildly narrows down at
the end (Figs. 1–6, Pl. I, 1).5
Variant A 2 (cat. 8–9) differs from the previous one by
a simple decoration incised on its bow or foot, occasionally filled with niello (Figs. 7–9. Pl. I, 2). Among the
fibulae of this variant there are luxurious ones, such as a
golden specimen from Romuliana discovered in a tomb
of one of Galerius’ dignitaries (cat. 9, Fig. 8, Pl. I, 2).6
Type 34 A fibulae in Serbia mostly come from sites
in Pannonia Secunda and the Danube limes of Moesia
Prima and Dacia Ripensis (Map 1).
Three fibulae from Gamzigrad belong to the type
34 B (cat. 10–12)7, characterized by a cylindrical transverse bar, of a circular or polygonal cross-section, occasionally with plated protuberances on both sides of the
bow (Figs. 9–10), volutes, (Fig. 11), or bird protomes.
There are large plastic knobs on the head in form of fluted pines (Figs. 10–11) or poppy pods (Fig. 9), the bow
is of triangular or trapezoidal cross-section and the rectangular foot sometimes narrows at the end. According
to the ornaments, the second sub-variant (34 B 2) was
identified, with a foot decorated with punched circles or
incisions (cat. 10–11, Figs. 9–10) and the third sub-variant
(34 B 3), with a foot decorated with an impressed peltae
motif (cat. 12, Fig. 11).
Variant B fibulae were often luxuriously crafted,
gilded and decorated with niello, especially the last subvariant, whose foot is decorated with two or three pairs
of peltae. On some specimens there are inscriptions
with a name of cesar, augustus, or vota and utere felix
formulas, representative of propaganda during the rule
of Licinius and Constantine I, at the beginning of the 4th
century8.
4 Besides the aforementioned necropolises of Viminacium,
those of Srem, Svilo{ and Be{ka are important for dating type 34,
as well as the necropolis in Jagodin Mala in Ni{ (Jovanovi} 1975;
Marijanski-Manojlovi} 1987; Dautova-Ru{evljan 2003).
5 Keller 1971, 32–35, type 1A, Abb. 11, 1; Pröttel 1988, 349–352,
tip 1 A, Abb. 1, 3–5; Petkovi} 2008a, 395, type 34 A, T. LIII–LIV.
6 Petkovi} 2009, 353, Figs. 8–9.
7 Keller 1971, 35–37, type 2 A–B, Abb. 11, 3–4; Pröttel 1988,
353–357, type 2 A–C, Abb. 2, 1–5; Petkovi} 2008a, 395–396, type
34 B, T. LV–LVIII.
8 Noll 1974, 226 etc.; Ivanovski 1987, 81–90, Fig. 3, 1; Mirkovi} 1989, 39 etc.; Vasi} 2001a, 178 etc.; Vasi} 2001b, 93 etc.
9 Keller 1971, 41, Type 5, Abb. 11, 12, Pröttel 1988, 364–369,
Type 5, Abb. 6; Petkovi} 2008a, 397, cat. 1420–1432, T. LIX–LX.
10 Laur-Belart 1959; Ivanov 1972; Jovanovi} 1976; Migotti
2008.
113
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
1. Vizi} (B)
2. Sremski Karlovci (B)
3. Sirmium (B)
4. ^alma (B)
5. Svilo{ (A, B)
6. Surduk – Rittium (B)
7. Be{ka (A,B)
8. Ora{ac ([abac) (A, B)
9. Glu{ci ([abac) (A)
10. [titar ([abac) (A)
11. Pri~inovi}i ([abac) (B)
12. U{}e (Obrenovac) (A,B)
13. Singidunim (B)
14. Ritopek – Castra Tricornia (A,B)
15. Brestovik (B)
16. Viminacium (A,B)
17. Sapaja – Translederata (B)
18. ^ezava – Castrum Novae (A)
19. Donje Butorke (B)
20. Rtkovo (B)
21. Romuliana (A, B)
22. Horreum Margi (B)
23. Braljina (Kru{evac) (A)
24. Naissus (B)
25. Zaskok (Uro{evac) (B)
Type 34 (Tip 34)
Map 1. Distribution
of the early crossbow fibulae
(type 34, var. A–B) in Serbia
Au Golden and gilded fibulae / Zlatne i pozla}ene fibule
Ag Silver fibulae / Srebrne fibule
Karta 1. Rasprostrawenost
ranih lu~nih krstobraznih
fibula (tipa 34, var. A–B)
u Srbiji
section, decorated along the sides by incisions (Pl. II,
1–7), and a long foot, either trapezoid or rectangular
adorned with facets and impressed »eyelets« (Figs.
16–25, Pl. I, 4–8).
Motifs of impressed »eyelets« can be symmetrically
distributes along the edge of the foot (Figs. 22–23, Pl. I,
4–5, Pl. II, 11–13) or grouped in pairs at the beginning and
the end (Figs. 16–21, Pl. I, 6–8, Pl. II, 8–10). Analysis of
different decorative patterns of »eyelets« on feet of this
variation of fibulae has not shown any chronological
differentiation among them (Table 2). However, there is
a possibility that different distribution of »eyelets« had
a symbolic value, meaning that the decoration on the
Ravna–Campsa, Prahovo–Aquae, Romuliana, ]i}evac,
Naissus and Ulpiana (Map 2).11
A discovery of three specimens in the hoard of
bronze artifacts found in Ni{ Fortress, stored around 378,
as well as finds in graves in Viminacium, from the »Pe}ine« necropolis, and Late Roman necropolis in Jagodin
Mala in Ni{, are important for chronological determination of this type of crossbow fibulae in Serbia. Based on
the archaeological context, the fibulae can be dated to a
period between the second third, and the end of 4th century. In historical context that is the period of dynasties
of Roman emperors Constantine I and Valentine I, lasting
from the death of Constantine I until the death of Theodosius I, i.e. from 337 to 395.12
The largest number of crossbow fibulae from Romuliana, eighteen of them (cat. 14–31), belong to type
34 D 2,13 characterized by a massive, triangular transversal bar curved on both sides of the bow with volutes or
schematized bird protomes, distinct bulb-shaped plastic
knobs on the head, a bow of triangular or trapezoid cross-
11
Petkovi} 2008a, 397, map 16; Popovi} 2009a.
Petkovi} 2008a, 397, 517, table 10.
13 Keller 1971, 37–41, type 3 B and type 4 A, Abb. 11, 6, 9;
Pröttel 1988, 357–364, type 3/4 B, Abb. 4a, 3–5; Petkovi} 2008a,
397, type 34 D 2, T. LXII–LXIII, LXIV, 1–2.
12
114
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
1. Sirmium
2. Singidunum
3. Viminacium
4. Ravna - Campsa
5. Prahovo - Aquae
6. Romuliana
7. Medve|a - Idimum
8. ]i}evac
9. Naissus
10. Ulpiana
Map 2. Distribution of the
»imperial« crossbow fibulae
(type 34, var. C) in Serbia
Karta 2. Rasprostrawenost
»carskih« krstobraznih
fibula (tipa 34, var. C)
u Srbiji
Type 34 C (Tip 34 C)
1. Variants A and B fibulae dated to the Tetrarchic
period and the time of Flavian dynasty of Constantine I,
mainly around the second half of the 3rd – the first half
of 4th century.17
2. Variants C 3 and D 2 fibulae dated to the time of
Valentinian dynasty until the battle of Hadrianopolis, or
foot marked the rank or branch in the military or administrative hierarchy.
Variant D fibulae stand second in prevalence among
crossbow fibulae in Serbia and constitute over a quarter
of all type 34 finds, i. e. 23.14%. They are distributed
over all Roman provinces in Serbia, both in the Danube
limes and further inland. According to analysis of grave
units containing finds of this variant of fibulae, mostly
from the necropolises in Be{ka, Svilo{ and Viminacium,
use of type 34 can be limited to a two-decade period:
from rise to power of Valentinian I and Valens until the
big collapse of the Roman army in the battle of Hadrianopolis, i. e. the start of Theodosius’ I rule.14 Analysis of
type 34 D fibulae from Roman provinces on the territory of Bulgaria confirmed the same chronological framework.15 Crossbow fibulae of this variant from Salona
have a somewhat broader chronological framework.16
According to the typological analysis of type 34 variants of fibulae from Romuliana, two groups of such
finds can be identified.
14
Petkovi} 2008a, 517, table 10, map 16.
Haralambieva 1990, pp. 86–88, type 3 A, Figs 3, 4–6, T. I,
4–6, T. II, 1–3, 6; Gen~eva 2004, 64, type 24d, T. XXIII, 1.
16 Iv~evi} 2000, 149–158, cat. 32–36, T. VI–VIII – the author
dates crossbow fibulae of this type from Salona according to the
typologies of E. Keller (see Keller 1971, 34–36, Typ 3, Abb. 11,
6–8) and F. M. Pröttel (see Pröttel 1988, 357–359, Type 3/4 A–B,
Abb. 4a): one in a 310–340 period, five artifacts in 340–390 and
nine in 340–360 period. It can be concluded that the most type 34 D
fibulae originate from the middle of 4th century.
17 Finds of type 34 A in Serbia are dated to the time of the First
Tetrarchy until the end of joint rule of Lucius and Constantine I, from
293 to 324 AD (Petkovi} 2008a, 395, 517, table 10), a type 34 B to
the first half of the 4th century (Petkovi} 2008a, 396, 517, table 10).
15
115
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
Table 1. Chronological table of the types of crossbow fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana)
accordint to dated archaeological units
Tabela 1. Hronolo{ka tabela tipova krstobraznih fibula sa Gamzigrada (Romuliana)
prema datovanim arheolo{kim celinama
116
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
crossed over the stomach.24 There was a military belt
(cingulum militae) with a bronze buckle laid by the side
of his lower left leg, together with a bag made of organic
material, either leather or cloth (decomposed), containing
his personal belongings which survived: iron metal, flint
and seven bronze coins. One coin belonged to the mintage of Emperor Constans between 340 and 350 AD,
whereas the other six were minted during the reign of
Emperor Valens, from 357 to 378.25
Analysis of grave finds laid next to the lower left
leg of the deceased indicates that the grave should be
dated to the last quarter of the 4th century:
The bronze buckle of the military belt had a rectangular plating decorated by faceting, and a spike with the
end shaped as a snake’s head, which exceeds its frame.
The rectangular frame of the buckle, decorated with
incised grooves along its edges and notches on the rims,
was fastened on the strap by three rivets. This type of
buckle is dated to the last quarter of the 4th or the first
half of the 5th century.26
the beginning of the reign of Theodosius I, mainly during the last third of the 4th century.18
1.2. STRATIGRAPHICAL-CHRONOLOGICAL
ANALYSIS
Based on the stratigraphy of cultural layers on Gamzigrad and conditions of finds, i. e. archaeological units,
the both typological groups of crossbow fibulae from
Romuliana have been analyzed (Table 1).
Among the total number of crossbow fibulae (31)
only four specimens have not been found in a definite
archaeological unit. Those are two type 34 A 1 fibulae,
accidental finds from an extra muros area of Galerius’
fortified palace (cat. 6–7), and two type 34 D 2 fibulae,
discovered during initial excavation campaigns in Gamzigrad (cat. 15–16). The rest of twenty-seven fibulae
mostly come from systematic archaeological excavations
in the fortified imperial palace. Several were found during research of a sacral-memorial complex on Magura
(two specimens, cat. 4–5) and trench excavations outside the fort’s walls (three specimens, cat. 8–9, 13).
Dating of archaeological units was given in accordance with currently accepted cultural stratigraphy of
the archaeological site of Gamzigrad.19 Archeological
units, explored before the 2002 excavations, were incorporated into the existing stratigraphy of cultural layers,
based on documented data from archaeological excavations on this site.20 Particularly relevant are the grave
finds of two type 34 fibulae, which come from the Late
Roman necropolis of Romuliana, explored between 2005
and 2006, south of the fortified palace, because the grave
units (the tomb was explored in 2005 and the grave 6/06
in 2006) contained other finds, including money.
The type 34 C 3 specimen decorated with »imperial
portraits«, found in grave 6/06,21 belongs to the second
typological group of crossbow fibulae from Gamzigrad
(cat. No. 13, Figs. 12–15, Pl. I, 3).22 A rectangular pitgrave had been dug along the outer side of foundation
of the southern rampart of Galerius’ palace, in the area
between polygonal towers 13 and 15. The grave is oriented in the west to east direction, and its left (northern)
longitudinal line is a part of the foundation of the southern
rampart. Even though stratigraphical situation of this area
is not quite clear,23 it is certain that the layer from which
the grave had been dug was above the foundation zone
of the southern rampart, i.e. that the later fortification of
Romuliana had already existed at the time of the burial.
An adult man had been buried in an extended position, lying on his back, with arms bent at the elbows and
18 Petkovi} 2008a, 397, table 10. Even though type 34 C fibulae
cover a wider chronological span, sub-variant 3, which the specimen
from Gamzigrad falls under, whose foot-edges are decorated with a
line of peltae, is dated to the Valentinian period.
19 See fn. 3. However, it should be taken into account that not all
movable finds from years of systematic research have been processed, most importantly, numerous ceramic materials. Publication of
a full archaeological database from Gamzigrad should complete, or
perhaps, change the present cultural stratigraphy of this multi-layered
site.
20 Documentation of the Archaeological Institute in Belgrade,
Documentation of the National Museum in Zajecar.
21 Petkovi} 2009, 266–267, Fig. 41–47; @ivi} 2009, 284–285,
Cat. 50, Pl. X.
22 See fn. 18.
23 In 1996, layers of rubble waste from the outside area of
southern rampart were removed to the assumed level from the period
of Galerius’ palace by construction machines. On that occasion solid
layer of crumbed waste, made of stone, tegulae fragments and pestled
limestone plaster, was formed against the rampart by bulldozers.
This 20 cm thick coating forms a recent layer, which closes the pit
of grave 6/06. That recent layer was, inaccurately, associated by dr.
Gerda von Bülow with the level of construction of southern rampart
and digging of a »fortification trench« along its side, and it was concluded that the burial in grave 6/06 is terminus post quem for the
construction of later fortification of Romuliana (v. Bülow, Schüler
2009, 236).
24 I am grateful to my colleague Dr. Nata{a Miladinovi}-Radmilovi} for preliminary anamnesis of the deceased.
25 Vasi} 2009, 313.
26 Sommer 1984, 23, Taf. 61, Anm. 55; Gomolka-Fuchs 1982,
174, cat. 230; Gomolka-Fuchs 1991, 187, cat. 773; Gomolka-Fuchs
1995, 85, Taf. 1, 16–17; Uenze 1992, 175, Taf. 9, 24; Tejral 1997,
323, Abb. 1, 1, 8.
117
STARINAR LX/2010
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (###–###)
1
2
8
3
9
4
5
10
11
6
12
7
13
Plate II – Ornamental motives on fibulae of type 34 D 2 from Gamzigrad (Romuliana):
1) motive 1 on the bow; 2) motive 2 on the bow; 3) motive 3 on the bow; 4) motive 4a on the bow;
5) motive 4b on the bow; 6) motive 5 on the bow; 7) motive 6 on the bow; 8) motive 1 on the foot; 9) motive 2 on the foot;
10) motive 3 on the foot; 11) motive 4a on the foot, 12) motive 4b on the foot; 13) motive 5 on the foot
Tabla II – Ukrasni motivi na fibulama tipa 34 D 2 sa Gamzigrada (Romuliana):
1) motiv 1 na luku; 2) motiv 2 na luku; 3) motiv 3 na luku; 4) motiv 4a na luku;
5) motiv 4b na luku; 6) motiv 5 na luku; 7) motiv 6 na luku; 8) motiv 1 na stopi; 9) motiv 2 na stopi;
10) motiv 3 na stopi; 11) motiv 4a na stopi; 12) motiv 4b na stopi; 13) motiv 5 na stopi
orated along its rims by an incised string of three pairs
of peltae and volutes, on the beginning and the end, and
along the middle by an inlaid strip of tin silver with a
decoration in niello technique. The entire fibula was
gilded except for the silver strip on the foot. In the centre
of the decoration on this strip there was a square metope
with an »imperial portrait« surrounded by a multiple
»fir branch« motif. On the beginning and the end of the
bow there were incised rectangular metopes with
»imperial portraits«, which might have been filled with
The rectangular iron metal was not sufficiently preserved for its type to be precisely established, but together with the flint pointed to the »barbarian« EastGerman population, whose presence in Dacia Ripensis
should not have been expected before the end of the 4th
century.27
The numismatic finds suggest the year 367 as terminus ante quem non for the burial in grave 6/06. However,
the money was not laid in the grave as a tribute; it was the
property of the deceased, which he had carried along in
the bag on his belt. Therefore, the last year of mintage
is the most probable approximate time of death.28
A crossbow fibula was found on the right shoulder
of the deceased, foot pointing upwards, in a position
used for fastening a military cloak (paludamentum),
made of white woolen cloth, judging by the threads preserved on the inner side of the bow and on the corroded
iron pin of this brooch. A long rectangular foot was dec-
27
During the period after the battle of Hadrianopolis 379–381,
no later than 383, Theodosius I gave receptio to groups of »barbarians«, Goths, Huns, Alans in diocese of Dacia (Burns 1994, 43–72).
28 Burial in the grave 6/06 along the southern rampart can be
dated to a period after the battle of Hadrianopolis, in time of conflict with »barbarians« on the territory of Dacia Ripensis (see fn. 27).
118
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
niello. The iron pin, which was damaged and corroded,
had been additionally applied.29
Crossbow fibulae, embellished with portraits were a
sign of military and official honor. They were presented
personally by the emperor during the state holydays (dies
imperii) and the ruler’s anniversaries (vota).30 They were
manufactured in imperial workshops, which traveled
throughout the empire together with the emperor.31
Earlier, the fibulae of this type had been interpreted
as means of propaganda for the Flavian dynasty of Constantine I and his heirs.32 Dr. Branka Miggoti concluded, in her monography dedicated to these types of finds,
that after considering all known theories of portrait
interpreting on type 34 C fibulae, it was impossible to
give their definite interpretation.33 In a new study of
these fibulae, after analyzing their ornaments, Dr. Ivana
Popovi} asserts that medallions with portraits (imagines
clipetae) represent one of the favorite motifs of the Late
Roman style, witnessed in mosaics, frescos, silverware
and glassware, luxurious belt sets, and objects made of
ivory. According to the author, the portraits represent
allegories and lesser deities.34 However, it is unlikely
that the portraits on the official fibulae, manufactured at
imperial workshops, had a simple decorative character;
especially if other decorative motifs, connected with the
cult of Dionysus (fir branch, vine, ivy leaf), or early Christian symbols (cross and Christogram) are taken into
account. I assume that ornaments on type 34 C 3 fibulae carried an explicit ideological and political message
of their time, the meaning of which eludes us over a distance of millennium and a half.
A specimen from the village of Kolarci in Bulgaria
is interesting in terms of portrait interpretation. On the
end of a foot, whose edges have been lined with peltae,
or more precisely on the pin holder of trapezoidal crosssection, there was only one engraved portrait.35 A ¾ profile of a man was shown, turned to his left, wearing a
pageboy haircut and an militry overcoat (paludamentum),
fastened by a flat, discoid fibula on the right shoulder,
framed on both sides by leafy vines. As mentioned before, the decoration in form of incised pairs of peltae on
of the foot on this fibula, as well as on the specimen
found in Gamzigrad, is no older than the last third of the
4th century.36 It can be concluded that the individual was
an emperor considering the circular, plate fibula shown
on his right shoulder.37 In that case, »the emperor« shown
on the fibula from Kolarci ruled alone. That could have
been the depiction of Julian the Apostate (361–36.),
from the second half of the 4th century, whereas the
Dionysian motif of vine is understandable in the context
of pagan restoration attempt during his short rule. An
STARINAR LX/2010
almost identical portrait was shown in a rectangular metope on the foot of the fibula from Gamzigrad, decorated
along its length by a motif of a double »fir branch«. On
the beginning and the end of the bow there were two more
portraits in rectangular metopes, and there were three
visible circular medallions with crossing lines (Christograms?), which further complicate the interpretation by
suggesting Christian symbolism.38
Finally, it is possible that portraits on type 34 C 3
fibulae are cult depictions (Dionysus, allegories and/or
personification, Christ, the Apostles). Combinations of
pagan and Christian iconographic symbols that appear
on this type of fibulae are common in the 4th century,
during the establishment of Christianity and intensive
Christological debates. Equally, medallions and metopes
with portraits on these fibulae represent divinized portraits of reigning emperors or deceased rulers of the
same dynasty. That is suggested by nimbuses on some
of the portraits.39 Dionysus shown on the mosaic floor
of Triclinium of Palace I of Romuliana, who can probably be identified with a divinized emperor, also has a
blue nimbus, as well as analog depictions on third-century mosaics that could have been a model for this motif.40 Likewise, Constantine I solidi, minted in 316/317
in Ticinum and Siscia, show an emperor with nimbus as
Sol Invictus.41 In any case, a nimbus can be understood as
29 Pins on the crossbow fibulae made of non-ferrous metals,
gold, silver or bronze, were often replaced due to bending and breaking caused by tightening of heavy military coats.
30 Laur-Belart 1959, 68; Keller 1971, 44; Jovanovi} 1976,
48–49; Migotti 2008, 61–67.
31 Vasi} 2001a, 195–197; Migotti 2008, 69–71.
32 Laur-Belart 1959, 64 etc.; Ivanov 1972, p. 9 etc.; Jovanovi}
1976, 2 etc.
33 Migotti 2008, 16–22.
34 Popovi} 2009a, 108–106.
35 Ivanov 1972, 21, Fig. 15 – author regards this portrait as
divinized representation of Constantine I.
36 Crossbow fibulae of late type 34 F variant, which can be dated
in the end of 4th and the first half of the 5th century, have a foot with
this kind of decoration (Petkovi} 2008a, p. 400, T. LXII, 1–2).
37 Janes 1998, 388–391.
38 Dr. Branka Migotti notices strong Christian symbolism in
later specimens of fibulae type 34 C (Migotti 2008, 38–39).
39 Portrait of a male in toga (togatus) at the beginning of the
bow of the fibula from Romuliana has a nimbus, undoubtedly just
like the portrait at the end of bow of the fibula from Drnovo (Petru,
Petru 1978, T. IV, 3) as well as the one on the elevated end of the
foot of the specimen from the British Museum (Laur-Belart, Abb.
44, 2 a–b; Migotti 2008, T. 4, E 14).
40 Jeremi} 2006, 52, Abb. 8–9.
41 Popovi} 2010a, 150–151, Fig. 3.
119
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
or on ivory diptychs, like The Diptych of Stilicho from
Monza and diptychs from Louvre and Berlin.48
The prevalence of fibulae of second chronological
group in relation to dated archaeological units is interesting. In archaeological units dated to the last quarter of
the 4th century, five fibulae were discovered (18.52%),
three fibulae in units dated between the end of the 5th
century and the beginning of the 5th century (11.11%),
7 fibulae from units from between last quarter of the 4th to
the first half of the 5th century (25.93%) and four fibulae
in units from the first half of the 5th century (18.81%).
This ratio points to the fact that the largest number of
crossbow fibulae from Romuliana belong to the horizon
of settlements which appeared after the abandonment of
construction of the imperial palace, in the last third of
the 4th century, and that they were equally discovered in
units from the last quarter of the 4th and first half of the
5th century. I stress that fibulae of the second chronological group are absent in archaeological units from the end
of the 3rd to the beginning of the 4th century (Table 1).
Until today, no crossbow fibulae have been found in
archaeological units dating from the 6th and the beginning of the 7th century in Gamzigrad. In addition to that,
I emphasize that the Early Byzantine horizon of Romuliana, which spans between the end of the 5th and the end
of the 6th/beginning of the 7th century, contains ample
archaeological finds, including bronze and iron fibulae.
a sign of divinization. Furthermore, the imitatio deorum
motif is frequent on portraits of Roman emperors shown
on objects used as means of political propaganda, such
as money and jewelry.42
Judging by the manner of production of fibula from
grave 6/06 from Gamzigrad, decorations with multiple,
incised peltae on the foot, as well as the style of depicted
»imperial portraits«, I assume that it was made during
the last third of the 4th century.43 In case the fibula was
made in one of the imperial workshops so that it would
be presented during a special occasion, and if the portraits represented emperors of the Valentinian dynasty,
two possibilities occur: that the depicted emperors were
Valentinian I, Valens and Gratian, if the fibula was made
in honor of Gratian’s ascension to the throne in 367, or
that it was Valens, Gratian and Valentinian II shown in the
metopes, if the reason was that the latter was promoted to
Caesar.
Two typological groups of crossbow fibulae from
Romuliana generally fit into two chronological groups
of these finds, determined by analysis of archaeological
context they were found in (Table 1).44
Two chronological groups of type 34 fibulae in
Gamzigrad are:
– a group of crossbow fibulae dated between the
end of 3rd to the beginning of the 4th century;
– a group of crossbow fibulae dated between the
last quarter of the 4th to the first half of the 5th century.
The first chronological group is made from fibulae
of the first typological group, discovered in the archaeological units dated between the last decades of the 3rd
and the first quarter of the 4th century: types 34 A 1, 34
A 2, 34 B2 and 34 B 3 (cat. 1, 4–5, 8–12).
The second chronological group contains fibulae of
type 34 D 2 (cat. 14–28), i. e. type 34 D (cat. 29–31),
dated to the last third of the 4th century, one type 34 C 3 b
fibula from a grave dating between the end of 4th to the
beginning of the 5th century (cat. 13), and two earlier specimens of type 34 A 1, discovered in Tower 19 (cat. 2–3).
It is possible that a certain percentage of earlier types of
crossbow fibulae (11.11% in Gamzigrad) were found in
later archaeological units, because those objects symbolized status in the public service, army or administration,
and they were awarded for certain merits,45 so their
owners kept and worn them for years. It was common to
be buried with them,46 as well as showing them on sarcophagi, stelas or frescoes in tombs, wearing a crossbow
fibula on the right shoulder (Fig. 26).47 Likewise, highranking officials and military leaders were shown on artistic depictions wearing crossbow fibulae on the right
shoulder, like on Teodosius’ obelisk in Constantinople,
42
Popovi} 2001, 377 etc.
For the way of manufacturing see: Petkovi} 2008a, 394–395,
511; for decoration on the long foot in form of a line of incised peltae,
see: Buora 1997, 249; for stylistic analysis of portraits and »haircut«
see: Migotti 2008, 54–56.
44 By archaeological context I imply stratigraphy of cultural
layers and layers of life, which refers to a location of each fibula,
possible closed unit (grave, pit, stove etc.) and analysis of other
archaeological finds from that unit. In horizons of Late Roman Romuliana, most of the cultural layers also represent closed units,
because they are situated between two undisturbed levels (floors of
limestone plaster or firmly packed earth). Besides that, the majority
of layers of life perished in fire, so they are sealed with conflagration layer of burned soil, carbonated wood, soot and ash (Petkovi}
2004, 127–153; Petkovi} 2006, 29–45; Petkovi} 2008c, 61–63;
Petkovi} 2008d, 64–67).
45 Zahbelicky 1980, 1099–1101; Theune-Grosskopf 1995,
84–89; Janes 1998, 387–388.
46 Hence the most of known crossbow fibulae from Serbia
comes from necropolises (see fn. 2 and 4).
47 Zahbelicky 1980, 1101–1103, cat. 1, cat. 4, cat. 5; TheuneGrosskopf 1995, 83–87; Abb. 55, Abb. 59; Iv~i} 2001, 165, Fig. 1;
Jovanovi} 2007, 112–113, Figs. 15, 6; Pop-Lazi}, 166–167, Fig. 7.
48 Zahbelicky 1980, 101, 103–104, cat. 1, cat. 7–8; Pröttel 1988,
369, Abb. 9, 1; Theune-Grosskopf 1995, 91, Abb. 57, Abb. 60, Abb.
64–65.
43
120
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
2. CONCLUSION: FUNCTION,
PRODUCTION AND WORKSHOPS
STARINAR LX/2010
and civil wars between Constantine and Maxentius. A
find which speaks in favor of this theory comes from a
burial in a tomb in Generala @danova street No. 11 in
Belgrade (Singidunum). An adult man was buried with a
type 34 B 1 fibula, together with Maximianus Herculius’
and Galerius’ money from 295–296, and six Diocletian’s
coins minted between 295–298.56
Even though type 34 B fibulae from Romuliana are
of modest design, similar crossbow fibulae of luxurious
design appear in Serbia, gilded, silver or decorated with
niello, especially a sub-variant with an ornament on the
foot which consists of two or three pairs of punched peltae (Type 34 B 3). Luxurious specimens of type 34 B
were mostly found in provinces of Pannonia II and Moesia I in Dardania, one gilded fibula, which originated
from Naissus, and a silver one from a burial of Late
Roman necropolis on the site of Zaskok near Uro{evac
(Map 1).57 They could have been produced at the imperial workshop in Trier, considering that this type of luxurious fibulae had been the means of Constantine’s political propaganda since 306 when he was declared
emperor.58 In that case, the number of them found in
Pannonia Secunda and Moesia Prima could testify about
Constantine’s territorial ambitions towards Illyricum,
until the decisive victory over Licinius at Cibalae in
316. At the same time, early type 34 A–B of crossbow
fibulae, as well as other artifacts from precious metal had
The collection of crossbow fibulae from Romuliana
facilitates the functional determination of these kinds of
finds. Due to uniqueness of the multi layer settlement
on Gamzigrad it was possible to follow the development of this type of fibulae.
The earliest specimen belongs to the early 34 A 1
variant, which developed from hinge T–fibulae. They
were discovered in appropriate archaeological units of
the Tetrarchic period: in the area of a consecrative-memorial complex on Magura (cat. 4–5), in a tomb explored
in 2005 south of the fortified palace (cat. 9) as well as
in the earliest layers at the location of eastern and western
gate of the later fortification (cat. 1 and 8).
The fibulae from Magura and the golden specimen
from the tomb are of special importance, because they
were discovered together with money and other artifacts, precisely dated between the end of the 3rd and the
beginning of the 4th century.49 Since no type 34 fibulae
had been found in archaeological units of the horizon of
the earlier Roman settlement, which had existed before
construction of the imperial palace in the 3rd century,50
I assume that the beginning of their use can be dated to
the transition from the 3rd to the 4th century. Historically
speaking, it is a time of the First Tetrarchy (293–305),
when administrative and military reforms took place besides other Diocletian’s reforms of the Roman Empire.
The collection of crossbow fibulae from Romuliana
clearly indicates the connection with the reforms mentioned previously. This type of fibulae had been carried
by the members of imperial administration and military
as a sign of rank and status.51 Golden and silver specimens of crossbow fibulae, characteristic for the period
of the First Tetrarchy, had been presented by the emperor personally, and had been a sign of high-ranking in
military and administrative hierarchy.52 At this time the
emperors also wear crossbow fibulae as a sign of rank,
as can be seen on the depiction of Galerius on a relief on
a triumphal arch in Salonika, and some sculptural depictions of Tetrarchs.53
In archaeological units dated to the beginning of the
4th century, which originate from the time of construction
of the imperial palace,54 three bronze type 34 B fibulae,
characteristic for the first half of the 4th century (cat.
10–12) were found. This type of crossbow fibulae had
been manufactured during the reign of Constantine I
and his dynasty.55 Specimens from Gamzigrad show that
their production could have begun during the first decade of the 4th century, at the time of the Second Tetrarchy
49
Petkovi} 2009, 253–261, Figs. 8–9, 12; Vasi} 2009, 309;
Popovi} 2009b; Bori}-Bre{kovi} 2009; Popovi} 2010b,
156–158, Fig. 131.
50 Petkovi} 2010a.
51 Theune-Grosskopf 1995, 84–89; Janes 1998, 388–390.
52 Diaconescu 1999, 205–217 , Abb. 1, 1–2, Abb. 2,1, Abb. 4,
3, etc.
53 Theune-Grosskopf 1995, 86, Abb. 58; Tomovi} 1997,
420–421, Figs. 1–2, 5–6.
54 Te later fortification of Romuliana, or representative ramparts
and towers of Galerius’ palace, were erected at the beginning of the
4th century, but they were not finished (Petkovi} 2004, 138–140,
Fig. 8, T. IX, 1–2; Petkovi} 2006, 32, 40, Fig. 4). Construction of
the imperial palace was abandonned no later than 316, when Constantine I won the battle over Licinius on the Cibalae and overtook
his territory in the western Illyiricum (Vasi} 2008, 12–13).
55 Petkovi} 2008a, 396, 517, table 10.
56 Simi} 1997, 36, T. II, G. 32, 1.
57 Petkovi} 2008a, 396–397, cat. 1409–1410, 1412–1415, T.
LVII, 1–2, T. LVIII, 1–2.
58 This type of luxurious fibulae, decorated with pairs of peltae
on the foot, were dated between 308/9 and 321/2 by Dr. Miloje Vasi}
(Vasi} 2001a, 180–191). The same author thinks that this type of
fibulae of luxurious design, with inscriptions dedicated to Maximian
Hercules and Constantine I, was manufactured in short period between years 306 and 316 (Vasi} 2001b, 93–105).
121
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
Decorative motifs on bows
of type 34 D crossbow fibulae:
Decorative motifs on feet
of type 34 D crossbow fibulae:
1. Longitudinal groove with transverse notches
(T. II, 1)
2. Longitudinal groove with diagonal notches
(T. II, 2)
3. »Fir branch« (T. II, 3)
4a. Braid (T. II, 4)
4b. Braid with a longitudinal line of impressed
rhombs (T. II, 5)
5. Longitudinal groove with a line of impressed
peltae (T. II, 6)
6. Longitudinal line of lying S spirals (T. II, 7)
1. At the beginning of the foot 1, – at the end 2 pairs
of »eyelets« (T. II, 8)
2. At the beginning and the end 2 pairs of »eyelets«
(T. II, 9)
3. At the beginning the foot 2 – at the end 3 pairs of »eyelets« (T. II, 10)
4a. Along each rim of the foot a line of »eyelets« (T. II, 11)
4b. Along each rim of the foot a line of »eyelets«
connected by a tangent into a flowing spiral (T. II, 12)
5. Along each rim of the foot a line of alternately impressed
circles and triangles (T. II, 13)
Table 2. Table of the ornamental motives of crossbow fibulae of type 34 D 2 from Gamzigrad (Romuliana)
Tabela 2. Tabela ukrasnih motiva krstobraznih fibula tipa tip 34 D 2 sa Gamzigrada (Romuliana)
122
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
for contributions to the imperial service. In those terms,
it is interesting to consider the possibility of forging
type 34 D crossbow fibulae, suggested by the poor production of some specimens from Romuliana (Figs. 18–20,
Figs. 23–24),63 as well as exuberant decorations on others,
which is a sign of »barbarian taste« (Fig. 20, Fig. 24, T.
I, 7–8, PL. II, 4–6, 12).64 This begs the thought that type
34 D 2 crossbow fibulae were manufactured at local
workshops, perhaps within a local army unit, exclusively for its needs. It explains the poor design quality
of some artifacts, or too many decorations on others, with
use of a large number of techniques and motifs (incising, punching, impressing). Namely, the craftsman was
a member of a local army unit, probably of »barbarian«
origin, with a limited skill and knowledge of metallurgy.
However, the meaning of crossbow fibulae remains the
same from the end of the 3rd to the middle of the 5th century: they are symbols of engagement in state, i.e. imperial service. The person carrying a crossbow fibula works
in service and under the patronage of the Roman Empire and the emperor himself, regardless of whether they
are a member of administration, the army, or a group of
»barbarians« bound to the Empire by a contract. (receptio, foedus).65
The lack of type 34 fibulae in the sixth-century
Romuliana contradicts the opinion that crossbow fibulae
had been worn by members of the army, and administrative elite of Justinian’s era.66 This view is based on
artistic depictions of Emperor Justinian I and Empress
Theodora with their escort, on mosaics in the San Vitale
basilica in Ravenna, in which dignitaries wear robes
(chlamys) fastened on the right shoulder by this type of
been produced in workshops in Sirmium and Naissus,
for the sake of Licinius’ propaganda.59
Based on all cited examples, I assume that type 34 A
and 34 B fibulae had been worn by members of the imperial army and administration, according to clearly established rules that resulted from Diocletian’s reforms.
On the other hand, that is not the case for the most
numerous group of crossbow fibulae from Gamzigrad,
type 34 D 2. The archaeological context, a broad chronological span, ranging from the end of the 4th until the
end of the 5th century, of units where different decorative
motifs were discovered, do not suggest a clearly defined official character of these fibulae. The attempt of
classification and analysis of decorations incised on the
bow or foot of type 34 D 2 specimens from Romuliana,
do not lead to specific conclusions about their function
(Pl. II, Table 2). They had been worn probably by members of military units stationed at the fortification of
Romuliana. I assume that those were smaller squads of
light cavalry auxiliary units.60 A question remains whether
these fibulae were a mark of army rank, or an army
branch, or were they awarded for special merits. The
already mentioned, luxurious type 34 C 3 fibula from
grave 6/06 represents an antithesis to numerous specimens of type 34 D 2. Crafted at an imperial workshop
in the last third of the 4th century, and presented on a
special occasion, it definitely testifies to a promotion of
a person it had been given to. In that sense, this fibula represents the ornatus, but from the moment of donation
it also marks a high status of its owner (ornamentum dignitatis). The owner of this fibula, symbolically buried
along the foundation of the southern rampart of Romuliana, was a high-ranking official of the Roman Army,
or perhaps a commander of the squad stationed in
Gamzigrad.
Workshops in which crossbow fibulae from Romuliana were crafted can be identified according to their
official character. Luxurious specimens (cat. 9 and 13)
were manufactured at imperial workshops, most likely in
Naissus or Sirmium.61 Early type 34 A and 34 B fibulae
are also presumed to have been produced in imperial
workshops, which were state controlled production facilities, like weapons production factories, fabricae.
Except in Horreum Margi,62 such workshops had to
have existed in cities near legionary camps, Singidunum
and Viminacium.
Comparison of finds of the first and second chronological group of crossbow fibulae from Romuliana leads
to the conclusion that their function evolved from a role
of strictly established marks of rank in the army and administration, to decorations awarded on different occasions
59
Mirkovi} 1989; Popovi} 1997; Popovi} 2002; Popovi}
2004, 232–235.
60 Petkovi} 1999, 227–228; Petkovi} 2008b, 361–363; Petkovi} 2010 b, 195, Fig. 168.
61 About the official character of workshops for manufacturing
items from precious metals see: Popovi} 1997; Popovi} 2002; Popovi} 2008.
62 Weapon workshop in Horreum Margi, present-day ]uprija,
was listed in document Notitia dignitatum (Not. dign., or. XI, 39.)
63 It appears as if some fibulae were cast in molds, made by
according to the »original« such as cat. nos. 16–18, 24–25, 27–28.
64 Bows of some fibulae were extensively decorated by combinations of different geometrical motifs: grooves with transverse and
slanting notches, wave patterns, braids, spirals, circles, »eyelets«,
rhombs. This crowded decoration fills the entire visible surface of
the bow (horror vacui) and has the same attributes of the rustic,
»barbarian« style, most likely transferred from textile.
65 About luxurious specimens of early crossbow fibulae, as a
status symbols of members of local elite outside the territory of Roman
empire see: Werner 1989; Diaconescu 1999, 203–217.
123
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
fibulae. On the mosaic of the basilica of San Apollinare
Nuovo in Ravenna from the first quarter of the 6th century, in the scene of Trial of Christ, Pilate was depicted
with an army cloak fastened by a crossbow fibula on the
right shoulder.67 Crossbow fibula also appears on the
depiction of St. Theodore on a mosaic in the church of St.
Cosmas and Damian in Rome, which dates to the first
half of the 6th century.68 Likewise, on a fresco in the catacombs of San Gennaro in Naples, dated according to
stylistic characteristics to the beginning of the 6th century, an individual by the name of Theotecnus is shown
with a type 34 fibula on his right shoulder.69
Later depictions of crossbow fibulae from the 7th
century are also well known. On the Mother of God icon
from the Monastery of St. Catherine on the Sinai, dated
between the end of the 6th and the beginning of the 7th
century, St. Theodore and St. George are shown in
chlamys with crossbow fibulae on the right shoulders.70
In one 6th–7th century Sinai icon, kept in the Kiev Lavra,
Sts. Sergius and Bacchus are shown with robes fastened
on the right shoulder with rudimentary crossbow fibulae,
reduced to three »bulbs«.71 At the 7th century basilica of
St. Dimitrius in Salonika, this saint was depicted as a
»holly warrior«, with a cloak fastened on the right shoulder with a crossbow fibula.72
I regard the artistic representation of crossbow fibulae on Early Byzantine monuments of the 6th and 7th
centuries as a mere traditional depiction of clothing of
emperors, court and army dignitaries, as well as Christian saints during the Late Roman period, in the 4th and
the 5th century. This traditionalism in the Late Roman
art had been canonized in Early Byzantine period, in the
6th and 7th centuries. Besides that, the above mentioned
artistic testimonies display massive gold plated fibulae
with a long foot, decorated with incised pairs of peltae,
known as fibulae type Keller/Pröttel 6,73 or luxurious
golden crossbow fibulae with a long foot ornamented
by Christian symbols in opus interrasile technique, type
Pröttel 7.74 Both types are dated to the 5th century and
rarely appeared on the territory of the Eastern Roman
Empire.75
Five fibulae type Keller/Pröttel 6 are known to have
been found on the territory of Serbia (Petkovi} type 34
F), in three sites; one in Singidunum, three from Viminacium and one from the fortification Ravna (Campsa) on
the Danube.76 Two of them are particularly important
for the chronology of this type in Serbia. They come from
graves G–851 and G–1033 from the Viminacium necropolis of Pecine.77 In the first grave (G–851), which contained dislocated bones of two deceased,78 besides a type
34 F fibula, a bronze military belt buckle was discovered,
STARINAR LX/2010
with a rectangular plating and a B-shaped frame with a
spike that exceeds it, and money from the Constantine I,
Constantine II and Constancius II period, minted between 335/6 and 361.79 In the other grave (G–1033) a
type 34 F crossbow fibula was found on the right shoulder of a (male ?) deceased; parts of a silver military belt
were found near the pelvis, with a buckle of the same
type as in the previous grave, rectangular plating and a
glass cup placed above the head as a tribute.80 A bow
and foot of this fibula are decorated longitudinally with
a »fir branch« motif, and circles with crosses inscribed,
whereas at the end of the foot, or more exactly on the
trapezoid pin holder, there was a ¾ male portrait, facing
to his right, incised in the circular medallion.81 Even
though it belongs to the 5th century variant, the fibula
from grave G–1033 resembles the find from the Bulgarian village of Kolarci in regards of decoration, it can be
concluded that it is an early specimen of type 34 F.82
According to the analyases of money and parts of belt
sets,83 burials in graves G–851 and G–1033 can be
dated to the last third of the 4th – first half of the 5th century.84 Therefore, I assume that crossbow fibulae in
Roman provinces in present-day Serbia had been in use
until no later than mid-5th century, i.e. until the fall of the
Danube limes between 441 and 443.
66
Zahbelicky 1980, 1107–1108.
Zahbelicky 1980, 1105, cat. 11.
68 Zahbelicky 1980, 1105–1106, cat. 13; Theune-Grosskopf
1995, 93, Abb. 66, 102, Abb. 74.
69 Zahbelicky 1980, 1108, cat. 10; Pröttel 1988, 370, Abb. 9.
70 Theune-Grosskopf 1995, 105, Abb. 76.
71 Zahbelicky 1980, 1106, Kat. 16; Theune-Grosskopf 1995, 105.
72 Zahbelicky 1980, 1106, Kat. 15.
73 Keller 1971, 52, Abb. 11, 13; Pröttel 1988, 369–371, Abb.
8, 2–4.
74 Pröttel 1988, 370, Anm. 166, Abb. 8, 6; Theune-Grosskopf
1995, 95–101, Abb. 69, Abb. 75.
75 Pröttel 1988, 370–371, Abb. 11; Buora 1997, 354–368.
76 Bojovi} 1983, kat. 453, T. LV, 453; Petkovi} 2008, 399, T.
LXXI, 1–2.
77 Petkovi} 2008a, 465, kat. 1676–1677, T. LXXI, 1–2; Spasi}-\uri} 2008, 419–423, Sl. 8–9, T. I, 5–6.
78 Spasi}-\uri} 2008, 422.
79 I am grateful to dr. Mirjana Arsenijevic, who processed the
numismatic material from the necropolises of Viminacium when she
was working in the Archaeological institute in Belgrade.
80 Spasi}-\uri} 2008, 419–421.
81 Spasi}-\uri} 2008, Sl. 8. 1.
82 See fns. 35 and 36.
83 Spasi}-\uri} 2008, Sl. 8. 2, Sl. 9. 2.
84 Tejral 1997, 323–328, Abb. 1.2, 6, 11, 7, Abb. 2. 3–5, 10–11.
67
124
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
The question arises as to whether some other types
had overtaken the official role, or the function of crossbow fibulae, after the restoration of the Danube limes
and border provinces in Lower Danube in the 5th century (Moesia I, Dacia Ripensis, Moesia II). For now,
without the typological, chronological and functional
analysis of Early Byzantine crossbow fibulae from the
region mentioned above, it is impossible to give an
answer to this question, despite the indications that that
some types with an incised cross, Christian inscriptions
and schematic portraits of emperors and saints, could
have marked the status in the clerical hierarchy or the
Roman army.85 I observe that the Early Byzantine fibulae decorated in such a way have been found in horizon
of life from the 6th – the beginning of the 7th century in
Romuliana.
STARINAR LX/2010
Fig. 2. Cat. 2, type 34 A 1
Sl. 2. Kat. 2, tip 34 A 1
3. Tower 19, segment II, layer E. National Museum
in Zaje~ar, C 733/02. Type 34 A 1. Bronze. Dim: 5 cm.
Pin is missing, and the foot is damaged. Fluted bar.
Fluted pine shaped knobs on a double annular shaped
base. Bow of trapezoidal cross-section longitudinally
decorated with an incised wave pattern. A rectangular
foot narrows at the end, faceted. Unpublished. DD: last
quarter of 4th century. (Fig. 3)
3. CATALOGUE
3.1 Type 34, variant A
1. The western gate (?). National Museum in
Zaje~ar, inv. G/272. Type 34 A 1. Bronze. Dim: 7 cm.
Pin is missing. Fluted bar. Pine-shaped knobs on an
annular base. Bow of trapezoidal cross section. Faceted,
rectangular foot narrows at the end. Published: Jankovi} 1983 a, cat. 84. DD: the last quarter of the 4th century. (Fig. 1)
Fig. 3. Cat. 3, type 34 A 1
Sl. 3. Kat. 3, tip 34 A 1
4. Magura. National Museum in Zaje~ar, inv. G/1575.
Type 34 A 1. Bronze. Dim: 5.7 cm. Whole. Fluted bar.
Pine-shaped knobs on a double annular base. Bow of trapezoidal cross-section. Short, rectangular foot narrows
at the end, faceted. Published: @ivi} 2003. cat. 413. DD:
the end of 3rd and the beginning of the 4th century. (Fig. 4,
T. I, 1)
Fig. 1. Cat. 1, type 34 A 1
Sl. 1. Kat. 1, tip 34 A 1
2. Tower 19, segment II, layer E. National Museum
in Zaje~ar, C 672/02. Type 34 A 1. Bronze. Dim: 6.2 cm.
Whole. Fluted bar, pine-shaped knobs. Bow of trapezoidal cross-section longitudinally decorated with a groove
with transverse notches. A rectangular foot narrows at the
end, faceted. Published: Petkovi} 2006, p. 35, Pl. III, 2.
DD: last quarter of 4th century. (Fig. 2)
85
Haralambieva 1998, 368–370, Abb. 1–5; Jovanovi} 2007,
68–70, Sl. 7.4.
125
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
Fig. 4. Cat. 4, type 34 A 1
Fig. 6. Cat. 7, type 34 A 1
Sl. 4. Kat. 4, tip 34 A 1
Sl. 6. Kat. 7, tip 34 A 1
5. Magura. National Museum in Zaje~ar, inv. G/1654.
Type 34 A 1. Bronze. Dim: 4.3 cm. Part of the bow with
a foot. Bow of trapezoidal cross-section. Rectangular foot
narrows at the end, faceted. Unpublished. DD: End of
the 3rd – beginning of the 4th century.
Dim: 4.7 cm. Pin and middle bulb missing. Fluted bar.
Spherical knobs on an annular base. Bow of trapezoidal
cross-section. Short, rectangular foot narrows at the end,
faceted. Unpublished. DD: the end of 3rd and the beginning of the 4th century. (Fig. 7)
6. Extra muros, accidental find (field of Dimitrije Ili}
from the village Gamzigrad). National Museum in Zaje~ar, inv. G/254 Type 34 A 1. Bronze. Dim: 7 cm. Pin
missing Fluted bar. Pine-shaped knobs. Bow of trapezoidal cross-section. Rectangular foot narrows at the end,
faceted. Unpublished. (Fig. 5)
Fig. 7. Cat. 8, type 34 A 2
Sl. 7. Kat. 8, tip 34 A 2
Fig. 5. Cat. 6, type 34 A 1
9. Extra muros, tomb east of fortification. National
Museum in Zaje~ar, C 1137/05. Type 34 A 2. Gold,
bronze. Dim: 5.9 cm. Bronze pin missing. Fluted bar.
Pine-shaped knobs with a groove in the middle fitted with
a ring made of granulated gold wire. Bow of trapezoidal
cross-section longitudinally decorated with a strip with
transverse notches. There is a groove between the foot and
the bow fitted with a ring made of granulated gold wire.
Rectangular foot narrows at the end, longitudinally decorated similarly as the bow and faceted at the beginning
and the end. DD: the end of 3rd and the beginning of the
4th century. Published: Petkovi} 2009, p. 253, Figs. 8–9;
@ivi} 2009, p. 278, Cat. 4, Pl. IIa. (Fig. 8, T. I, 2)
Sl. 5. Kat. 6, tip 34 A 1
7. Extra muros, accidental find (Petar Bo`anovi}
from the village Gamzigrad). National Museum in Zaje~ar, inv. G/1603. Type 34 A 1. Bronze. Dim: 5 cm. Pin
and foot missing. Fluted bar. Pine-shaped knobs on an
annular base. Bow of trapezoidal cross-section. Published: @ivi} 2003. cat. 421. (Fig. 6)
8. Extra muros, east of the eastern gate. National
Museum in Zaje~ar, inv. G/1027. Type 34 A 2. Bronze.
126
STARINAR LX/2010
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
Fig. 10. Cat. 11, type 34 B 2
Sl. 10. Kat. 11, tip 34 B 2
Fig. 8. Cat. 9, type 34 A 2
Sl. 8. Kat. 9, tip 34 A 2
12. Sector of »the Big temple«. National Museum in
Zaje~ar, inv. G/599. Type 34 B 3. Bronze. Dim: 7.5 cm.
Pin is missing as well as part of the bar with one bulb.
Large fluted bulbs on an annular base. Bow of trapezoidal cross-section decorated with transverse incisions.
Long rectangular foot faceted and decorated with a pair
of peltae at the beginning and the end. The end of foot
is curved. Published: @ivi} 2003, cat. 416. DD: the beginning of the 4th century. (Fig. 11)
3.2. Type 34, Variant B
10. Entrance to tower XIV. National Museum in
Zaje~ar, inv. G/581. Type 34 B 2. Bronze. Dim: 8 cm.
Pin is missing, foot is broken. Large knobs shaped like
poppy pods on an annular base. Bow of trapezoidal crosssection. Long rectangular foot faceted and decorated
with one or two pairs of circles. Published: Jankovic
1983 a, 114. cat. 83, DD: the beginning of the 4th century (Fig. 9)
Fig. 11. Cat. 12, type 34 B 3
Sl. 11. Kat. 12, tip 34 B 3
Fig. 9. Cat. 10, type 34 B 2
3.3. Type 34, Variant C
13. Extra muros, grave 6/06. National Museum in
Zaje~ar, C 81 e/06. Type 34 C 3 b. Bronze, gold, silver,
iron. Dim: 8 cm. Iron pin and bulbs of tin bronze are
damaged. Large, distinct bulbs shaped by hammering
from thin tin bronze. Wide, hollow cast, short bow of
trapezoidal cross-section, with a massive curved traverse
bar. Longitudinally decorated with a strip done in niello
technique: alternately placed circles with inscribed
crossing lines (christogram?), and rhombs with vines; at
the beginning and the end of the bow there are square
spaces, metopes with depictions of male busts. At the
beginning of the bow, a face in en face position was de-
Sl. 9. Kat. 10, tip 34 B 2
11. Sector of »the Big temple«. National Museum
in Zaje~ar, inv. G/689. Type 34 B 2. Bronze. Dim: 5 cm.
The head is damaged, and a large portion of the bow
is missing. Large fluted bulbs on an annular base.
Bow of trapezoidal cross-section. Long rectangular
foot narrows at the end, faceted and longitudinally
decorated with a strip with reticulated and punched
decorations. Unpublished. DD: the beginning of 4th
century. (Fig. 10)
127
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
3.4. Variant 34 D
14. Between Tower 14 and western rampart of the
younger fortification. National Museum in Zaje~ar, inv.
G/206. Type 34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 8 cm. A pin and part
of the bar with one bulb is missing. Large, distinct bulbs.
Bow of trapezoidal cross-section longitudinally decorated with a »fir branch« motif, and with a pseudo filigree
on the border with the foot. A rectangular foot longitudinally decorated with two grooves, faceted on the beginning and the end with one and two pairs of »eyelets«.
Unpublished. DD: the last quarter of the 4th – the first
half of 5th century. (Fig. 16)
picted, dressed in furnished clothes (a toga?), with a
wide hat or a nimbus around their head. A person’s ¾
profile facing to his left is shown at the end of the bow,
wearing pageboy hairstyle and a paludamentum fastened
by a circular plate fibula on the right shoulder. A long
rectangular foot, with edges cut (hemstiched) with three
pairs of carved peltae and volutes (at the beginning and
the end), is longitudinally decorated with an inserted tin
silver strip, with a double motif of fir branch in niello
technique. There is a square metope in the middle of the
foot, with a male ¾ portrait facing to his left crafted in
niello technique. The depiction is the same as the one at
the beginning of the bow, only better crafted. Cylindrical
pin holder of trapezoidal cross-section is made of tin silver.
Published: Petkovi} 2009, 266–267, Figs. 46–47; @ivi}
2009, 285, Cat. 50e, Pl. X, 50e. DD: the end of 4th –
beginning of 5th century. (Fig. 12–15, Pl. I, 3)
Fig. 16. Cat. 14, type 34 D 2
Sl. 16. Kat. 14, tip 34 D 2
15. National Museum in Zaje~ar, inv. G/462. Type
34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 5 cm. A pin is missing together with
a part of the bar with a bulb and the middle bulb, the foot
is damaged. Large, distinct bulbs on an annular base. Bow
of trapezoidal cross-section longitudinally decorated with
Fig. 12. Cat. 13, type 34 C 3 b
Sl. 12. Kat. 13, tip 34 C 3 b
Fig. 13. Cat. 13, the detail of »imperial« portrait on the foot of fibula
Fig. 14 and 15. Cat. 13, the detail of »imperial« portrait on the beginning and on the end of fibula’s bow
Sl. 13. Kat. 13, detaq stope sa »carskim« portretom
Sl. 14 i 15. Kat. 13, detaq »carskog« portreta na po~etku i na kraju luka fibule
128
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
18. Sector of Palace I. National Museum in Zaje~ar,
inv. G/591. Type 34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 7.5 cm. A pin is
missing as well as a part of the bar with one bulb and the
middle bulb. Large, distinct bulbs on a pseudo filigree
base. Bow of trapezoidal cross-section longitudinally
decorated with a strip, rimmed by pseudo filigree, with
an incised braid, and pseudo filigree on the border with
a foot. Long trapezoidal foot longitudinally decorated
with a strip with an incised »fir branch« motif. Faceted
and decorated on the beginning and the end with two
and three pairs of »eyes«. Published: @ivi} 2003, cat. 425.
DD: the last quarter of 4th – the first half of 5th century.
(Fig. 20)
a strip with slanting incisions. Long trapezoidal foot
longitudinally decorated similarly as the bow, faceted
and embellished at the beginning and the end with one
and two (?) pairs of »eyelets«. Unpublished. (Fig. 17)
Fig. 17. Cat. 15, type 34 D 2
Sl. 17. Kat. 15, tip 34 D 2
16. National Museum in Zaje~ar, inv. G/480. Type
34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 7.8 cm. Head and pin missing.
Bow of trapezoidal cross-section longitudinally decorated with a strip with diagonal incisions, and with pseudo filigree on the border with the foot. Long trapezoidal
foot longitudinally decorated similarly as the bow,
faceted and decorated at the beginning and the end with
two and three pairs of »eyelets«. Unpublished (Fig.18)
Fig. 20. Cat. 18, type 34 D 2
Sl. 20. Kat. 18, tip 34 D 2
19. Sector of »the Big temple«. National Museum
in Zaje~ar, inv. G/652. Type 34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 8 cm.
A pin is missing and a middle bulb. Large distinct bulbs.
Bow of trapezoidal cross-section longitudinally decorated with a groove with transverse incisions, at the end by
pseudo filigree. Long rectangular foot longitudinally
decorated with two grooves, at the beginning and the end
faceted and decorated with two pairs of circles. Published: @ivi} 2003, cat. 417. DD: the last quarter of 4th –
the first half of 5th century. (Fig. 21)
Fig. 18. Cat. 16, type 34 D 2
Sl. 18. Kat. 16, tip 34 D 2
17. Sector of Palace I. National Museum in Zaje~ar,
inv. G/591. Type 34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 7.5 cm. A pin is
missing. Large, distinct bulbs. Bow of trapezoidal crosssection longitudinally decorated with a »fir branch« motif.
Long trapezoidal foot longitudinally decorated with two
grooves, faceted and decorated at the beginning and the
end with one and two pairs of »eyelets« Published: Jankovic 1983 A, p. 114, cat 82. DD the last quarter of 4th
– the first half of 5th century. (Fig. 19)
Fig. 21. Cat. 19, type 34 D 2
Sl. 21. Kat. 19, tip 34 D 2
20. Sector of eastern gate. National Museum in Zaje~ar, inv. G/845. Type 34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 6.7 cm. Pin
and bulbs missing. Bow of trapezoidal cross-section longitudinally decorated with a groove with transverse incisions. Long rectangular foot with rounded end longitudinally decorated in the same way, and along the rims
with a line of ten alternating circular and triangular
Fig. 19. Cat. 17, type 34 D 2
Sl. 19. Kat. 17, tip 34 D 2
129
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
notches. Unpublished. DD: the last quarter of 4th – the
first half of 5th century. (T. I, 4)
21. Sector of »the Small temple«. National Museum
in Zaje~ar, inv. G/1506. Type 34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 6.5
cm. Pin and middle bulb missing. Large, distinct bulbs
on an annular base. Bow of trapezoidal cross-section
longitudinally decorated with three grooves and transverse notches. Long rectangular foot with serrated end
longitudinally decorated with a groove, and along its
rims with an array of seven »eyelets«. Published: @ivi},
cat. 419. DD: the last quarter of 4th – the first half of 5th
century. (Fig. 22)
Fig. 23. Cat. 24, type 34 D 2
Sl. 23. Kat. 24, tip 34 D 2
25. Sector of Thermae, layer E. National Museum
in Zaje~ar, C 593/05. Type 34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 8.3 cm.
Pin is missing. Large, distinct bulbs. Bow of trapezoidal
cross-section longitudinally decorated with two punched
lines and a groove with transverse lines in the middle.
Long trapezoidal foot longitudinally decorated the same
way as the bow, faceted at the beginning and the end
and ornamented with two and three pairs of »eyelets«.
Unpublished. DD: the last quarter of 4th – the first half
of 5th century.
Fig. 22. Cat. 21, type 34 D 2
Sl. 22. Kat. 21, tip 34 D 2
22. Tower 19, segment III, layer E. National Museum
in Zaje~ar, inv. G/1756. Type 34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 8.7 cm.
Pin and bulbs missing. Bow of triangular cross-section.
Pseudo filigree on the border with the foot. Rectangular
foot longitudinally decorated with a groove, at the beginning and the end faceted and decorated with two pairs
of circles. Unpublished. DD: the last quarter of 4th – the
first half of 5th century. (T. I, 5)
Fig. 24. Cat. 25, type 34 D 2
Sl. 24. Kat. 25, tip 34 D 2
23. Tower 19, segment I, layer E. National Museum
in Zaje~ar, C87/97. Type 34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 5 cm. Foot
with a bow fragment. Bow of triangular cross-section.
Rectangular foot longitudinally decorated with two grooves, at the beginning and the end faceted and decorated
with two pairs of circles. Unpublished. DD: the last
quarter of 4th – the first half of 5th century.
26. Sector of Thermae, layer D, house 1/07. National
Museum in Zaje~ar. C 299/07. Type 34 D 2. Bronze. Dim:
4 cm. Pin and foot are missing. Large, distinct bulbs.
Bow of trapezoidal cross-section. Unpublished. DD: the
first half of the 5th century.
24. Tower 19, segment II, layer C. National Museum
in Zaje~ar, C347/02. Type 34 D 2. Bronze. Dim: 5.1 cm.
Pin and middle bulb missing. Large, distinct bulbs. Bow
of triangular cross-section longitudinally decorated
with a groove and a line of peltae. Long trapezoidal foot
longitudinally decorated with two grooves and along the
rims with an array of six eyes connected by tangents.
Published: Petkovic 2006, p. 36, PL. III,6. DD: the last
quarter of 4th – the first half of 5th century.
27. Sector of Thermae, layer D, house 1/07. National Museum in Zaje~ar. C 357/07. Type 34 D 2. Bronze.
Dim: 8.5 cm. Pin is missing. Large, distinct bulbs. Bow
of trapezoidal cross-section longitudinally decorated
with an engraved braid with an array of impressed
rhombs in the middle. Long trapezoidal foot has two
grooves at the middle, and it is faceted at the beginning
and the end with two and three pairs of »eyelets«.
Unpublished. DD: the first half of the 5th century.
130
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
28. Sector of Thermae, layer E. National Museum in
Zaje~ar, C 448/07. Type 34 D 2. Bronze, iron. Dim: 8.3 cm.
Iron pin is damaged. Large, distinct bulbs, with base decorated with pseudo filigree. Bow of trapezoidal crosssection, longitudinally decorated with an array of laid S
spirals. Long rectangular foot has two grooves along the
middle, faceted at the beginning and the end and ornamented with two and three pairs of »eyelets«. Unpublished.
DD: the last quarter of 4th – the first half of 5th century
STARINAR LX/2010
Fig. 25. Cat. 29, type 34 D 2
Sl. 25. Kat. 29, tip 34 D 2
29. National Museum in Zaje~ar, inv. G/1576, 1995
Type 34 D. Bronze. Dim: 5.5 cm. Middle bulb is missing,
foot is broken.86 Large, distinct bulbs on an annular base.
Bow of trapezoidal cross-section longitudinally decorated with a strip with an engraved »fir branch« motif.
Published: @ivi} 2003, cat. 420. DD: the last quarter of
4th – the first half of 5th century (Fig.25)
Fragment of transverse curved bar with two lateral bulbs.
Distinct bulbs on an annular base. Unpublished. DD: the
last quarter of 4th – the first half of 5th century.
31. Tower 19, segment II, layer E, under the furnace
6. National Museum in Zaje~ar, C 803/02. Type 34 D 2.
Bronze. Dim: 2.4 cm. Fragment of transverse curved bar
with one lateral, distinct bulb on a pseudo filigree base.
Unpublished. DD: the last quarter of 4th century.
30. Tower 19, segment II, layer C. National Museum
in Zaje~ar, C 147/02. Type 34 D. Dim: 4.8 cm Bronze.
Fig. 26. A part of the funeral monument from the site Tilva ro{ (Bor, eastern Serbia) with the presentation
of decesed persons with crossbow fibulae on their right shoulders, the end of 3rd – beginning of 4 th century
(Photo from the documentation of Museum of Mining and Metallurgy in Bor)
Sl. 26. Deo nadgrobnog spomenika sa lokaliteta Tilva Ro{ (Bor, isto~na Srbija) na kome su pokojnici
prikazani sa krstobraznim fibulama na desnom ramenu, kraj III – po~etak IV veka
86 Large portion of the fibula was damaged during conservation,
but the drawing in a terrain inventory (C 77/95) shows that the fibula
had a long, rectangular, faceted foot with an incised decoration (?).
131
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
STARINAR LX/2010
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Bojovi} 1983 – D. Bojovi}, Rimske fibule Singidunuma, Beograd 1983.
Bori}-Bre{kovi} 2009 – B. Bori}-Bre{kovi},
Novi pogled na numizmati~ke nalaze sa Magure,
Zbornik Narodnog muzeja XIX–1, arheologija, Beograd
2009, 343–365.
Buora 1997 – M. Buora, »Zwiebelkopffibeln« dell
tipo Keller 6 da Aquilea, AV 48, Ljubljana 1997,
247–260.
Burns 1994 – Th. S. Burns, Barbarians within the
Gates of Rome, A Study of Roman Military Policy and
the Barbarians, ca. 375–425 A.D., Bloomington – Indianapolis 1994.
von Bülow, Schüler 2009 – G. von Bülow, T.
Schüler, Geophysical and Archaeological Research at
Gamzigrad – Report of the 2004–2007 Campaignes,
Starinar LVII/2007, Beograd 2009, 231–249.
Dautova-Ru{evljan 2003 – V. Dautova-Ru{evljan,
Kasnoanti~ka nekropola kod Svilo{a u Sremu, Novi Sad
2003.
Diaconescu 1999 – A. Diaconescu, Ornamenta
dignitatis: Gradabzeichen und Symbole des sozialen
Status bei den lokalen Eliten von Dakien nache dem
Aurelianische Rückzug, Acta MN 36/I, Cluj – Napoca
1999, 203–243.
Gen~eva 2004 – E. Gen~eva, Rimskite fibuli
ot Bølgariý ot kraý na I v. pr. n. e. do kraý na VI v.
na n.e. (E. Gen~eva, Les fibules romaines de Bulgarie
de la fin du Ier s. av. J.–C. à la fin du VIe s. ap. J.–C.),
Veliko Tørnovo 2004.
Gomolka-Fuchs 1982 – G. Gomolka-Fuchs, Die
Kleinfunde, in: Iatrus–Krivina II. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen 1966–1973, Berlin 1982, 149–205.
Gomolka-Fuchs 1991 – G. Gomolka-Fuchs, Die
Kleinfunde, in: Iatrus–Krivina IV. Ergebnisse der
Ausgrabungen 1975–1981, Berlin 1991, 167–205.
Gomolka-Fuchs 1995 – G. Gomolka-Fuchs, Die
Kleinfunde und ihre Aussagen zur Bevölkerung von
Iatrus, in: Iatrus–Krivina V. Studien zur Geschichte des
Kastells Iatrus, Berlin 1995, 81–105.
Haralambieva 1990 – A. Haralambieva, A.
Lukovi~ni fibuli vøv Varnenski muzeç, INMV
26(41), Varna 1990, 29–41.
Haralambieva 1998 – A. Haralambieva, Darstellungen christlischer Symbole, Inschriften und Heiligen
auf Trachtzubehor des 4.–7. Jhs. Aus Heutigem Bulgarien, Acta XIII Congressus internationalis Archaeologiae
Christianae, vol. III, Split–Vatikan 1998, 367–373.
Ivanov 1972 – T. Ivanov, Obrazite na Konstantin i sinovete mu vørhu lukovi~nite fibuli ot
Bølgaria, Arheologiý /1972–4, Sofiý 1972, 9–29.
Ivanovski 1987 – M. Ivanovski, The Grave of
Warrior from the Period of Licinius I Found at Tarane{,
AI/24, Ljubljana 1987, 81–90.
Iv~evi} 2001 – S. Iv~evi}, Lukovi~aste fibule iz Salone u Arheolo{kom muzeju u Splitu, VAHD 92/2000,
Split 2001, 125–187.
Janes 1998 – D. Janes, Brooches and Insignia and
Loyality to the Late Roman State, VHAD 87–89, Acta
XIII Congressus internationalis Archaeologiae Christianae, vol. III, Split–Vatikan 1998, 387–394.
Jankovi} 1983a – \. Jankovi}, U sutonu antike,
u: Gamzigrad. Kasnoanti~ki carski dvorac, ur: D.
Srejovi}, Beograd 1983, 98–119 .
Jankovi} 1983b – \. Jankovi}, Ranovizantijski Gamzigrad, u: Gamzigrad. Kasnoanti~ki carski
dvorac, ur: D. Srejovi}, Beograd 1983, 120–141 .
Jovanovi} 1975 – A. Jovanovi}, Krstobrazne
fibule iz anti~ke zbirke Narodnog muzeja u Ni{u,
ZNM VIII, Beograd 1975, 235–245.
Jovanovi} 1976 – A. Jovanovi}, O problemu
fibula sa portretima, ZRFF XIII, 1, Beograd 1976,
43–51.
Jovanovi} 2007 – A. Jovanovi}, Ogledi iz anti~kog kulta i ikonografije, Beograd 2007.
Keller 1971 – E. Keller, Die spätrömischen
Grabfunde in Südbayern, MBV 14, München 1971.
Laur-Belart 1959 – R. Laur-Belart, Ein frühchristlische Grab aus Bazel, Ur-Schweiz XXIII, 4, Bazel 1959,
57–71.
Marijanski-Manojlovi} 1987 – M. MarijanskiManojlovi}, Rimska nekropola kod Be{ke u Sremu, Novi
Sad 1987.
Migotti 2008 – B. Migotti, Lukovi~aste fibule s portretima na podru~ju Rimskog carstva (The Crossbow
Brooches with Portraits in the Roman Empire), Zagreb
2008.
Mirkovi} 1989 – M. Mirkovi}, Natpisi na
»carskim« fialama i fibulama i Licinijeva propaganda, 316–322. godine, ZRFF XVI, Beograd 1989,
37–44.
Noll 1974 – R. Noll, Eine goldene »Kaiserfibel« aus
Niederemmel vom Jahre 316, Bonner Jahrbuch 174/
1974, Bonn 1974, 221–244.
Petkovi} 1999 – S. Petkovi}, Meaning and Provenance of Horses’ Protomes Decoration on the Roman
132
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
Antler Combs, Starinar XLIX/1998, Beograd 1999,
213–228.
Petkovi} 2004 – S. Petkovi}, Arheolo{ka
iskopavawa u ju`noj kuli zapadne kapije mla|eg
utvr|ewa na lokalitetu Romuliana – Gamzigrad u
2002. godini, Glasnik SAD 20/2004, Beograd 2004,
127–153.
Petkovi} 2006 – S. Petkovi}, Study of Stratigraphy
of Cultural Layers of Late Roman Romuliana; Case
Study: South Tower of West Gate of Later Fortification,
in: Felix Romuliana. 50 Years of Archaeological Excavations, Papers from the International Conference, Zaje~ar, 27th–29th October 2003, ed: M. Vasi}, Arheolo{ki
institut, Odbor za arheologiju SANU i Narodni muzej u
Zaje~aru, Beograd 2006, 29–45.
Petkovi} 2008a – S. Petkovi}, Fibule u rimskim
provincijama na tlu Srbije, od I do IV veka n.e., Doktorska disertacija odbranjena 18. 02. 2008. godine na
Filozofskom fakultetu, Univerzitet u Beogradu.
Petkovi} 2008b – S. Petkovi}, Unilateral Antler
Combs from Romuliana, Starinar LVI–LVII/2006–2007,
Beograd 2008, 353–366.
Petkovi} 2008c – S. Petkovi}, Iskopavawa na
lokalitetu Gamzigrad – Romuliana, 2004. godine,
Arheolo{ki pregled nova serija 2/3 (2004/2005),
Beograd 2008, 61–63.
Petkovi} 2008d – S. Petkovi}, Iskopavawa na
lokalitetu Gamzigrad – Romuliana, 2005. godine,
Arheolo{ki pregled nova serija 2/3 (2004/2005),
Beograd 2008, 64–67.
Petkovi} 2009 – S. Petkovi}, Late Roman Necropolis of Romuliana, Area South of the Fortified Palace
(Research 2005–2006), Starinar LVII/2007, Beograd
2009, 251–275.
Petkovi} 2010a – S. Petkovi}, Rimski Gamzigrad pre carske palate, in: Felix Romuliana – Gamzigrad, ed: I. Popovi}, Beograd, 2010, 33–42.
Petkovi} 2010b – S. Petkovi}, Romulijana u
vreme posle carske palate, u: Felix Romuliana –
Gamzigrad, ur: I. Popovi}, Beograd 2010, 167–200.
Petru, Petru 1978 – S. Petru, P. Petru, Neviodunum
(Drnovo pri Kr{kem), Ljubljana 1978.
Pop-Lazi} 2009 – S. Pop-Lazi}, Late Roman Necropolis Beljnja~a in [id, Starinar LVIII/2008, Beograd 2009, 163–174.
Popovi} 1997 – I. Popovi}, Les production officielles et priveés des ateliers d’ orféuverie de Naissus et
de Sirmium, Antiquité tardive 5, 133–144.
Popovi} 2001 – I. Popovi}, Imitatio deorum kao
motiv na nakitu iz Gorwe Mezije (Summary: Imitatio
deorum as a Motif in Jewelry from Upper Moesia), u:
STARINAR LX/2010
Vetsigatio vetustatis Aleksandrini Cermanovi}Kuzmanovi} od prijateqa, saradnika i u~enika, ur:
M. Lazi}, Beograd 2001, 371–389.
Popovi} 2002 – I. Popovi}, The Production of Gold
and Silver Workshops in Late Roman Sirmium, in: The
Roman and Late Roman City, The International Conference (Veliko Trnovo 26–30 July 2000), ed: L. RusevaSlokoska, R. Ivanov, V. Dintchev, Sofia 2002, 383–387.
Popovi} 2004 – I. Popovi}, Specific Variants of
Gold and Silver Early »Zwiebelknopf« Fibulae from
Eastern Serbia, Starinar LIII–LIV/ 2003–2004, Beograd 2004, 225–239.
Popovi} 2008 – I. Popovi}, Naissus (Ni{) –
Augusta Trevirorum (Trier) and the reciprocal relationship between late antique imperial workshops, Trierer
Zeitschrift 69/70–2006/2007, Trier 2008, 191–200.
Popovi} 2009a – I. Popovi}, Gilt Fibula with
Christogram from Imperial Palace in Sirmium, Starinar
LVII/2007, Beograd 2009, 101–112.
Popovi} 2009b – I. Popovi}, Novi pogled na
arheolo{ke nalaze iz konsekrativnog spomenika I
na Maguri, Zbornik Narodnog muzeja XIX–1, arheologija, Beograd 2009, 315–342.
Popovi} 2009c – I. Popovi}, Silver Belt Garniture
from the Tomb outside Romuliana Walls, Antiquité tardive 17/2009, Brepols 2009, 317–326.
Popovi} 2010a – I. Popovi}, Verska politika
Konstantina Velikog i wegovi oficijelni portreti
na novcu, u: Ni{ i Vizantija. Zbornik radova VIII.
Osmi nau~ni skup »Ni{ i Vizantija«, dani Sv. Cara
Konstantina i Carice Jelene, Ni{ 3–5. juni 2009,
ur: M. Rakocija, Ni{ 2010, 147–162.
Popovi} 2010b – I. Popovi}, Sakralno-funerarni kompleks na Maguri, u: Felix Romuliana –
Gamzigrad, ur: I. Popovi}, Beograd 2010, 141–158.
Pröttel 1988 – P. M. Pröttel, Zur Chronologie de
Zwibelknopffibeln, JRGZM 35/1, Mainz 1988, 347–
372.
Red`i} 2007 – S. Red`i}, Nalazi rimskih fibula na
nekropolama Viminacijuma, Beograd 2007.
Rexi}, Rai~kovi}, Milovanovi} 2006 – S. Rexi}, A. Rai~kovi}, B. Milovanovi}, Krstaste fibule u grobovima viminacijumskih nekropola, Arheologija i prirodne nauke 2, Beograd 2006, 24–45.
Simi} 1997 – Z. Simi}, Rezultati za{titnih arheolo{kih istra`ivanja na prostoru jugoisto~ne nekropole
Singidunuma, Singidunum 1, Beograd, 21–56.
Sommer 1984 – M. Sommer, Die Gürtel und Gürtelbeschläge des 4. und 5. Jahrhunderts im römischen
Reich, Bonner Hefte zur Vorgeschichte 22, Bonn 1994,
1–83.
133
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
Spasi}-\uri} 2008 – D. Spasi}-\uri}, Prilog prou~avawu pozla}enih krstobraznih fibula
iz Viminacijuma, Glasnik SAD 24/2008, Beograd
2008, 401–430.
Srejovi} 1983 – D. Srejovi}, Uvod, u: Gamzigrad. Kasnoanti~ki carski dvorac, ur: D. Srejiovi}
Beograd 1983, 5–16.
Srejovi}, Vasi} 1994 – D. Srejovi}, ^. Vasi}, Imperial Mausolea and Consecration Memorials in Felix
Romuliana (Gamzigrad, East Serbia), Belgrade 1994.
Tomovi} 1997 – M. Tomovi}, O jednoj gorwomezijskoj skulptorskij predstavi »tetrarhijskog
cara« (Summary: An Upper Moesian sculptoral representation of the »Tetrachial emperor«), u: Uzdarje Dragoslavu Srejovi}u ( Dragoslavo Srejovi}),
ur: M. Lazi}, Beograd 1997, 475–482.
Tejral 1997 – J. Tejral, Neu Aspekte der frühvölkerwanderungszeitlischen Chronologie im Mitteldonauraum, in: Neue Beiträge zur Erforschung der
Spätantike im mittleren Donauraum, Hrsg: J. Tejral, H.
Friesinger, M. Kazanski, Brno 1997, 321–362.
Theune-Grosskopf 1995 – B. Theune-Grosskopf,
Zwiebalknopffibeln und ihre Träger–Schmuck und
Rangabzeichen, in: Die Schraube zwischen Macht und
Pracht, Das Gewinde in der Antike, Sigmaringen 1995,
77–112.
Uenze 1992 – S. Uenze, Die spätantiken Befestigungen von Sadovec (Bulgarien), MBV 43, München
1992.
STARINAR LX/2010
Vasi} 2001a – M. Vasi}, Osvrt na nalaz IV veka
iz Star~eva, ZNM XVII–1, Beograd 2001, 175–201.
Vasi} 2001b – M. Vasi}, Neka pitawa o fibulama sa carskim natpisima, u: Vestigatio vetustatis
Aleksandrini Cermanovi}-Kuzmanovi} od prijateqa, saradnika i u~enika, ur: M. Lazi}, Beograd 2001,
91–107.
Vasi} 2008 – M. Vasi}, Prolasci i boravci rimskih imperatora kroz Ni{ krajem III i u IV veku (Roman Emperors Passing through or staying in Ni{ in Late 3rd and 4th
Centuries), in: Naissus I, Ni{ 2008, 7–27.
Vasi} 2009 – M. Vasi}, Findings of Coins from Romuliana, unearthed in 2005 and 2006, outside the Fortified Palace, Starinar LVII/2007, Beograd 2009, 309–314.
Werner 1989 – J. Werner, Zu den römischen Mantelfibeln zweiter Kriegergräbern von Leune, Jahresschrift
für Mitteldeutsche Vorgeschicht 72/1989, Halle/Saale
1989, 121–134.
Zahbelicky 1980 – H. Zahbelicky, Zwiebelknopffiebeln als Kennenzehchen von Soldaten, in: Roman
Frontier Studies 1979, ed: W. S. Hanson, L. J. F. Keppie,
B. A. R. Int. Ser. 71, Oxford 1980.
@ivi} 2003 – M. @ivi}, Felix Romuliana. 50
godina odgonetawa (Felix Romuliana. 50 Years of Solving), Beograd 2003.
@ivi} 2009 – M. @ivi}, Catalogue of Small Finds
from Excavations outside the Fortified Palace Romuliana (2005–2007), Starinar LVII/2007, Beograd 2009,
277–307.
134
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
Rezime:
STARINAR LX/2010
SOFIJA PETKOVI], Arheolo{ki institut, Beograd
KRSTOOBRAZNE FIBULE SA GAMZIGRADA
(ROMULIANA)
Kqu~ne re~i. – Kasna antika, tetrarhija, Gamzigrad, Felix Romuliana, krstoobrazne fibule,
tipologija fibula, funkcija fibula, proizvodwa fibula.
tim »okcima« (sl. 16–25, T. I, 4–8). Motiv »okaca« mo`e
biti simetri~no raspore|en du` rubova stope (sl. 22–23,
T. I, 4–5) ili grupisan u parovima na wenom po~etku i kraju (sl. 16–21, T. I, 6–8).
Fibule varijante D su druge po zastupqenosti me|u
krstobraznim fibulama u Srbiji i ~ine gotovo ~etvrtinu
svih nalaza tipa 34, odnosno 23,14%. Rasprostrawene su u
svim rimskim provincijama u na{oj zemqi, kako na dunavskom limesu, tako i u unutra{wosti.
Tipolo{kom analizom varijanti fibula tipa 34 iz
Romulijane uo~avaju se dve grupe ovih nalaza:
1. Fibule varijanti A i B, koje se mogu opredeliti u
tetrarhijski period i vreme Flavijevske dinastije Konstantina I, generalno u kraj III – prvu polovinu IV veka.
2. Fibule varijante C 3 i D 2, koje se datuju u vreme Valentinijanske dinastije do Hadrijanopoqske bitke ili do
po~etka vladavine Teodosija I, generalno u posledwu tre}inu IV veka.
Na osnovu stratigrafije kulturnih slojeva na Gamzigradu analizirani su uslovi nalaza krstoobraznih fibula
obe tipolo{ke grupe iz Romulijane (Tabela 1).
Od ukupnog broja krstoobraznih fibula (31), samo ~etiri primeraka nije imalo siguran arheolo{ki kontekst.
(kat. 6–7, kat. 15–16) Ostale fibule uglavnom poti~u sa sistematskih arheolo{kih iskopavawa u utvr|enoj carskoj
palati. Nekoliko je prona|eno pri istra`ivawima sakralno-memorijalnog kompleksa na Maguri (kat. 4–5) i
sondirawu van bedema utvr|ewa (kat. 8–9, 13).
U okviru druge tipolo{ke grupe krstoobraznih fibula sa Gamzigrada je i primerak tipa 34 C 3 b na|en u grobu
6/06 (kat.br. 13). Na osnovu analize nalaza polo`enih uz
levu nogu pokojnika grob se datuje u posledwu ~etvrtinu IV
veka. Novac na|en u grobu daje 367. godinu za terminus ante
quem non sahrane, a posledwa godina kovawa (378.) najverovatnije je i pribli`an datum smrti pokojnika.
Na osnovu na~ina izrade, ukrasa vi{estrukih izrezanih pelti na stopi i stila predstavqanih »carskih portreta«, fibula iz groba 6/06 se datuje u posledwu tre}inu
IV veka.
Dve tipolo{ke grupe krstoobraznih fibula iz Romulijane uklapaju se generalno u dve hronolo{ke grupe ovih
nalaza (Tabela 1):
1. grupa krstoobraznih fibula datovana u kraj III – po~etak IV veka i
2. grupa krstoobraznih fibula datovanih u posledwu
~etvrtinu IV – prvu polovinu V veka.
Prvu hronolo{ku grupu ~ine fibule prve tipolo{ke
grupe, na|ene u arheolo{kom kontekstu datovanom od po-
Na nalazi{tu Gamzigrad – Felix Romuliana do sada je otkrivena tridesetjedna krstoobrazna ili »lukovi~asta« fibula
(Crossbow Brooches, Zwiebelknopffibeln). Izuzimaju}i nalaze sa velikih rimskih nekropola, krstoobrazne fibule
sa Gamzigrada ~ine obiman uzorak sa jednog nalazi{ta u Srbiji. Ve}ina ovih fibula poti~e iz jasno stratificiranih
arheolo{kih celina, opredeqenih u dva horizonta `ivota
u Romulijani: 1. horizont izgradwe Galerijeve palate s po~etka IV veka i 2. horizont kasnoanti~kog utvr|enog naseqa iz posledwih decenija IV i prve polovine V veka.
Krstoobrazne fibule iz Romulijane analizirane su na
dva na~ina: formalno-tipolo{ki i stratigrafsko-hronolo{ki. Na osnovu navedene analize dati su zakqu~ci o wihovoj funkciji i proizvodwi. Tekst je propra}en katalogom
nalaza analiziranih u tekstu.
Sedam fibula tipa 34 sa Gamzigrada pripada ranoj varijanti A 1 (kat. 1–7, sl. 1–6, T. I, 1).
Varijanta A 2 (kat. 8–9) razlikuje se od prethodne jednostavnim urezanim ukrasom na luku i stopi (sl. 7–9, T. I, 2).
Ovoj varijanti pripada i luksuzan zlatan primerak, na|en
2005. godine u grobnici Galerijevog velikodostojnika (kat.
9, sl. 8, T. I, 2).
Fibule tipa 34 A iz Srbije uglavnom poti~u sa lokaliteta u Drugoj Panoniji i sa dunavskog limesa Prve Mezije i Priobalne Dakije (Karta 1).
Tri fibule sa Gamzigrada pripadaju tipu 34 B (kat.
10–12): dva primerka podvarijanti 2, sa stopom ukra{enom
utisnutim kru`i}ima ili urezima (kat. 10–11, sl. 9–10) i
jedan podvarijanta 3, sa stopom ukra{enom utisnutim motivom pelti (kat. 12, sl. 11).
U Srbiji su fibule tipa 34 B zastupqene u Drugoj Panoniji i Prvoj Meziji (Singidunum, Viminacium, Horreum
Margi), a u Dardaniji jedan primerak je na|en u Naisu i jedna srebrna fibula poti~e sa nekropole Zaskok kod Uro{evca (Karta 1).
Na Gamzigradu je na|ena jedna fibula tipa 34 C, podvarijanta 3 malobrojnih »carskih fibula«, sa lukom ukra{enim nielo tehnikom geometrijskim i vegetabilnim motivima i portretnim medaqonima i/ili metopama, sa
pravougaonom stopom ~iji su rubovi profilisani (a`urirani) nizom pelti (kat. 13. sl. 12–15, T. I, 3).
Fibule tipa 34 C na|ene su u Srbiji na lokalitetima
Sirmium, Singidunum, Viminacium, Idimum, Ravna–Campsa,
Prahovo–Aquae, Romuliana, ]i}evac, Naissus i Ulpiana
(Karta 2).
Najve}i broj krstoobraznih fibula iz Romulijane (kat.
14–31), pripada tipu 34 D 2, ~ija je duga stopa, trapezoidnog ili pravougaonog oblika, ukra{ena fasetama i utisnu-
135
Sofija PETKOVI], Crossbow Fibulae from Gamzigrad (Romuliana) (111–136)
sledwih decenija III do prve ~etvrtine IV veka: tipovi 34
A 1, 34 A 2, 34 B 2 i 34 B 3 (kat. 1, 4–5, 8–12).
Druga hronolo{ka grupa sadr`i fibule tipa 34 D 2
(kat. 14–31), datovanog u posledwu tre}inu IV veka, fibulu tipa 34 C 3 b iz groba s kraja IV veka (kat. 13) i dva starija primerka tipa 34 A 1, na|ena u Kuli 19 (kat. 2–3).
Logi~no je da se stariji tipovi krstoobraznih fibula
u odre|enom procentu (na Gamzigradu 11,11%) javqaju i u
mla|im arheolo{kim celinama, jer se radi o predmetima
koji su ozna~avali status u vojsci ili administraciji, te
su ih vlasnici ~uvali i nosili niz godina (sl. 26).
Najve}i broj krstoobraznih fibula iz Romulijane
pripada drugoj hronolo{koj grupi, horizontu naseqa nastalog u posledwoj tre}ini IV veka posle napu{tawa izgradwe carske palate, i podjednako su zastupqene u celinama posledwe ~etvrtine IV veka i prve polovine V veka
(Tabela 1).
Pore|ewe nalaza prve i druge hronolo{ke grupe krstoobraznih fibula iz Romulijane dovodi do zakqu~ka da
je wihova funkcija evoluirala od striktno utvr|enih
oznaka ~ina u vojsci i administraciji do odlikovawa za
individualne zasluge u carskoj slu`bi, dodeqivanih razli~itim povodom.
Najstariji primerci pripadaju ranoj varijanti 34 A,
koja se razvila iz zglobnih T – fibula na prelazu III u IV
vek, u vreme Prve tetrarhije (293–305.) Zlatan primerak
iz grobnice (kat. 9) i fibule sa Magure (kat. 3–4) ukazuju
na oficijelan karakter tipa 34 A. U arheolo{kim celinama nastalim u vreme izgradwe carske palate po~etkom IV
veka, na|ene su tri bronzane fibule tipa 34 B (kat. 10–12),
karakteristi~ne za period vladavine Konstantina I i wegove dinastije. Primerci sa Gamzigrada pokazuju da je wihova proizvodwa mogla po~eti ve} tokom prve decenije IV
veka, u vreme Druge tetrarhije i gra|anskih ratova izme|u
Konstantina i Maksencija.
Luksuzna fibula tipa 34 C iz groba 6/06, izra|ena u
carskoj radionici u posledwoj tre}ini IV veka i darovana
posebnom prigodom, bez sumwe predstavqa odlikovawe, a od
trenutka donacije ozna~ava visok status wenog vlasnika
(ornamentum dignitatis). Mu{karac sahrawen uz temeq ju`-
STARINAR LX/2010
nog bedema Romulijane, sa vojnim ogrta~em (paludamentum)
pri~vr{}enim ovom fibulom na desnom ramenu, imao je
visok ~in u rimskoj vojsci, mo`da zapovednika odreda stacioniranog u utvr|ewu.
Arheolo{ki kontekst i {iroko datovawe celina u kojima su nala`eni primerci tipa 34 D 2, kao i raznovrsnost
wihovog ornamenta, ne ukazuju na jasno izdiferenciran oficijelni karakter ovih fibula. Na osnovu klasifikacije i
analize ukrasa na ne mo`e se ni{ta zakqu~iti o wihovoj
funkciji (Tabela 2). Pretpostavqam da su ih kao oznaku
~ina ili roda u rimskoj vojsci nosili pripadnici odreda
stacioniranih u utvr|ewu Romulijane.
Radionice u kojima su izra|ivane krstoobrazne fibule iz Romulijane mogu se identifikovati shodno wihovom
oficijelnom karakteru. Luksuzni primerci (kat. 9 i 13)
izra|eni su u carskim radionicama u Naisu ili Sirmijumu.
Rane krstoobrazne fibule, tipa 34 A i 34 B, proizvodile su
oficijelne radionice u Sirmijumu i Naisu, a najverovatnije i u Singidunumu, Viminacijumu i Horreum Margi.
Krstoobrazne fibule tipa 34 D su izra|ivane u lokalnim radionicama, u okviru odre|ene vojne jedinice iskqu~ivo za wene potrebe. O tome svedo~i lo{ kvalitet izrade
i prenatrpan ukras sa velikim brojem upotrebqenih motiva i tehnika.
Smisao krstoobraznih fibula ostaje isti od kraja III do
sredine V veka: one su oznake anga`mana u carskoj slu`bi.
Osoba koja nosi krstobraznu fibulu deluje pod pokroviteqstvom i u slu`bi Rimske imperije i samog cara, bilo da
je pripadnik administracije, vojske ili »varvara« povezanih ugovorom sa Carstvom.
U horizontu `ivota VI veka u Romulijani nedostaju
nalazi fibula tipa 34. Mo`e se pretpostaviti da je posle
Justinijanove obnove dunavskog limesa i pograni~nih provincija u Dowem Podunavqu neki drugi tip preuzeo oficijelnu funkciju i zna~ewe krstoobraznih fibula. Postoje indicije da su pojedinii tipovi, sa ranohri{}anskim
natpisima i simbolima ili portretima svetaca ili careva, ozna~avali status u crkvenoj hijerarhiji ili rimskoj
vojsci. Ovako ukra{ene ranovizantijske fibule nala`ene
u celinama VI do po~etka VII veka u Romulijani.
136
Related papers
Human Embalming Techniques: A Review
American Journal of Biomedical Sciences, 2018
Maria Montessori tra modernisti, antimodernisti e gesuiti
Maria Montessori tra modernisti, antimodernisti e gesuiti, 2018
XVIII. Yüzyıldan XX Yüzyıla Osmanlı Kadın Dış Giyimi Ferace ve Yaşmak
XVIII. Yüzyıldan XX Yüzyıla Osmanlı Kadın Dış Giyimi Ferace ve Yaşmak, 2023
Memoria de actividades
Makaronesia Boletin De La Asociacion De Amigos Del Museo De Ciencias Naturales De Tenerife, 2012
Translocation for conservation: Neonates are less suitable than adults
Austral Ecology, 2020
Pre-Treatment of Transplant Donors with Hydrogen Sulfide to Protect against Warm and Cold Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury in Kidney and Other Transplantable Solid Organs
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
Molecular dynamics identifies semi-rigid domains in the PD-1 checkpoint receptor bound to its natural ligand PD-L1
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
Nuclear Energy Density Optimization: UNEDF2
Proceedings of the Conference on Advances in Radioactive Isotope Science (ARIS2014), 2015
Embracing uncertainty in research with young children
International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 2018
On the locus of talker-specificity effects in spoken word recognition: an ERP study with dichotic priming
Language, cognition and neuroscience, 2017
Deriving Stopping Rules for the Probabilistic Hough Transform by Sequential Analysis
Computer Vision and Image Understanding, 1996
Related topics
- Find new research papers in:
- Physics
- Chemistry
- Biology
- Health Sciences
- Ecology
- Earth Sciences
- Cognitive Science
- Mathematics
- Computer Science