You are on page 1of 14

Grippe, Kamm

und
Eulenspiegel
Festschrift fur
Elmar Seebold zum 65. Geburtstag

Herausgegeben von
Wolfgang Schindler und Jurgen Untermann

Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York
1999

in the Museum at Sarajevo. as abusively stated in runic literature) was found. Findhistory According to the early records of the find.). TINEKE LooIJENGA. which bears a nearly complete futhark. Buturovic. several pieces of one or more pillars were found in a field. and curator Dr. . I have not seen the fragments that would bear runelike signs (for d and j:J?). Groningen Who wrote the Breza futhark. the four last runes are missing because an edge of the stone has broken away. In literature this church is referred to as Breza I. not marble. Lidija Fekefa for their friendly co-operation and for giving me the opportunity to study the Breza runic object. D. Here only Breza II will be discussed. 6th c. Another early Christian church ruin was excavated in 1913 near Breza. and the date may be early sixth century. Among the debris a fragment of a semi-circular half-column (marl. a village on 1. 1 During the recent war in Bosnia and Hercegowina and the siege of Sarajevo. they run right. I am also grateful to the Netherlands Association for Scienti- fic Research (NWO) for assigning me a travel-grant. Not yet all objects have been recovered and put back to their original places. about 25 kms North of Sarajevo (Bosnia). The runes are of the older futhark of24 charac- ters. and why? In 1930 remnants of a late antique building were excavated at Breza. The h is double barred. therefore I simply call it Breza. The building itself may have been an early Christian church. Therefore I could not inspect the column with the Latin alphabet. the contents of the showcases and a great many more or less portable objects had to be evacuated into the cellars of the museum. The runes are between 0. The present author inspected the fragment with the futhark on the 11th of October 1998.5 and 2. One of these fragments appeared to have a futhark-inscription. A third important find was a delicately ornamented bronze shieldboss (probably Germanic.' . Also. published by Cremosnik and Sergejev- ski in 1930. which indicates a West-Germanic origin.6 ems high. This church contained Latin inscriptions and grafitti as well. The fragment is 56 cm high and 30 ems in cross-section. I would like to thank the Director of the Zemalski Museum at Sarajevo Dr. Another col- umn has a Latin alphabet. the one excavated in 1930 is called Breza II. I the river Stavnja.

long and 19 m. The orientation was ofac North-South. 264 Tineke Looijenga Besides the futhark. other runelike signs were detected on different stone pieces. But significant items such as an altar schnitt . 144). VII). wide building. It does not give any idea of the object in which the inscription was cut. The building had an apse and a long nave flanked by two rectangu. the representation of the runes is according to reality. Arntz reproduced photos of these signs and of the part of the stone with were the futhark (Arntz/Zeiss 1939. colu The building 1943: During 1930 and 1931 an excavation of the field where the columns were found T revealed the basis of a 27 m. limest However. Sergej ofac Apart from the futhark and the Latin alphabet. some fragments bore Latin grafitti. blyde lar corridors (see illustration 1). The first impression was that it was a after n church. jevski walls. with On th entran the pr janovs opus i could layers ever fl was fl seem1 were fl before destro T duced the pill The rooms were separated by inner walls. and in this respect was fi the photo gives a reliable impression. Also Krause (1966) presents the same Suvo photo of the inscription. as there had been found similar plans of basilicas in Bosnia (see for seve- lars fr ral plans Sergejevski 1960: 564 and 566). This photo makes the impression of being taken from a fumis cast. Taf. whos illustration 1: plan of the building proba B into a which nextp umns.

There is some confusion about the nature of the building. Arntz quotes a certain Oelmann. The building was divided into a narthex. Above the burning-layer some slavic ceramics were found. which was destroyed by fire. The first excavators. which indicate that the walls may have still stood for some time before collapsing (Basler 1975: 260). others call it merely an early Christian church. Gregor Cremosnik and Demetrius this respect Sergejevski. Some steps on the inner side of the western wall might point to the presence of an upper chamber. and traces of opus spicatum (stones layed in herringbone motif) could be seen. and surrounded by a porticus. ii umns. or a tower (Bo- janovski/Celic 1969: 12. On the east-side may have been a kind of triumphal arch. a nave and a semi-circular apse. The builders also used spolia of antique buildings. Who wrote the Breza futhark. 144). and in doing so. Many fragments of lken from a limestone and marl pillars and capitals were found scattered around. It may have been. though. which prompted him to suppose that there were low walls upon which the columns stood. On one of those the futhark was carved. proba- ntation was bly destroyed by fire as a result of a Byzantine or Slavic attack (Arntz/Zeiss 1939: ro rectangu. Sergejevski observes that in this respect they remind of the two pil- see for seve. The capitals are worked in woodcut-style (Kerb- :h as an altar schnitt). Basler suggests also that the building was destroyed during the gothic wars of about 5 35. · Basler (1993: 28) describes the building in detail. for instance at the church ruin of stone with Suvodol. The relatively small marl pillars were shaped on a lathe. stated that the column with the runes may have stood in or in front of a church. Dr. of 1943. topped with rare square capitals. the building has indeed been destroyed by fire. perhaps situated inside the church. some sources speak were found of a church built by Goths. which gives the pillars the appearance of a somewhat stretched barrel (see illustration 3. who saw the pillars himself in 1935. On the front was an entrance as well. which had been painted red. or walls that were ornamented with half-columns (Sergejevski I 1943: 172). the rings and the slight convexity (entasis). On the front and on both sides the porticus was decorated with col. What- ever furniture there was has been burned. not one piece m was cut. they . In a later publication. lars from Monkwearmouth. Deducing from the layers of ashes on the floor. a platform (Basler 1993: 28). I next page). The floor was tiled. according to Sergejevski 1943: 174). the pillars were probably part of a canopy. that the ts the same furnishings were made of wood (Sergejevski 1943: 172). which can be de- duced from the grooves. Amid the debris a skeleton of a man was found. and who said that they were too small to have belonged to the church. was found in situ. The walls were stone-built in opus incertum. and why? 265 erent stone were not found (which occurred more often. The building may have had a wooden roof. Serge- ! ii bore Latin jevski stated that the fragments of the columns were found lying across the inner I ! I walls. page that it was a after next). I: which ended in two small chambers or chapels on either side (see illustration 2. With him were the 6th century shieldboss and some antique and seemingly "barbaric" potsherds. 25). The apse was decorated on the outside with massive sculptured wild boars' and rams' heads.

266 Tineke Looijenga preserved some stones bearing important Latin inscriptions (Cremosnik/Serge. illustration 3: p jevski 1930: 2). illustration 2: front view and side view of the building VLPIAE f - ]ROCUL[AN IIVALENS V F-PRINCEPS ET AELIAIVS ]CENO[P? .

--i 'O'I 1 ~-~~~rki~---n ~ E _J~. with a long inscription: VLPIAE r . .·. a large grave cippus was found. on one side of the apse. illustration 3: photo of a pillar . Who wrote the Breza futhark. ~ :~ '~: ·.F ]ROCUL[ AN-XX II V ALENS VARRON F-PRINCEPS DESITIATI ET AELIA IVSTA ]CENO[P? (after Cremosnik/Sergejevski 1930: 8). and why? 267 mo8nik/Serge. >Y For instance. face down._ ~~ .

Basler (1 mestic art. These points concern Breza as well. to Bojan Sergejevski 1960: 564 f. and Breza does not differ fundamentally from the others (cf. Ac tu Dating and Christianity The dating of the building is a point of interest taken up by several authors. the Bosnian basilicas are too small to place in contain many people. according to the above mentioned authors. it appears that the co- 24 early existence of a Latin alphabet and a futhark in the same building may point to an early Christian consecration ritual (see below). and eastwards to the Drina. according to them. of one of posed to compare the building to Syrian basilicas. This I would like to contradict. He gives a survey of more than twenty ruins of early style wa Christian· basilicas.e. gowina ence of an upper room and the deviating orientation of the building (North-South of ado instead of East-West). Unfortu- nately. tions. comparing it to the much later medieval gothic cathedrals. such as ]AULINUS and ]CORDIA. at any at Split. Serge- jevski launched another proposition: the sculptures should be compared to do. page 173. 4. It would have been carved in the soft marly surface by the 1962: 80) Ostrogoths. 268 Tineke Looijenga The inscription is dated into the second century AD. He mentions the possible pres. Basler suggests that its pur- ofmissio pose may have been profane. the Breza basilica maybe a should be dated later. this plan is original.e. it does not look like Serg plans of basilicas in other countries. Sergejevsk:i. and from 493-526 their king Theoderic reigned in Italy. o rate after the Ostrogoths had left Dalmatia (already in 471/2 part of them left for the mosai Italy. reigned Dalmatia from 493-555 AD. based their dating on the pres. 3. according to Basler (1975 and 1993). The name DESITIATI would point to a tribe living somewhere along the upper part of the river Bosna. the basilicas ofKlobu ondhalf all are built after the same plan. However. Illyric. Cremoilnik/Sergejevski (1930). he discusses some of the abnormalities of the Breza basilica. to the time of the East-Roman emperor Justinianus. The during the latter authors. 2. Sergejevsk:i never published the results of this second excavation. i. But in his 1943 publication. i. because of (I) the North-South orientation. also focused on other aspects. On the 11th international Congress of Byzantinists in Mfulchen in 195 8. (2) the To date t absence of both an altar and a sepulcher. Also dated tot the typical Kerbschnitt style of the capitals prompted them to assign the building to the Ostrogoths. Some other fragments of pillars show Latin grafitti. They even called the style "gothic". Espe- cording t cially the fact that runes were carved on one of the pillars would point to a "bar- have hin baric" use of the building. and Sergejevski as well. but ence of the futhark. In doing so. basilicas Sergejevski is said to have retracted his earlier statement that the building at the en was a church. who. In 1959-1962 a second excavation was executed by D. He enumerates four points of interest: 1. the Goths continued to claim Dalmatia. the buildings did not serve any other purpose than that tised mai of a church (Sergejevski 1960: 565). an idea that is taken up by Bojanovski/Celic (1969: 25). Thus they were regularly engaged in wars with . and (3) the presence of a futhark. They pro.). The first excavators.

555 AD. Thus they compare Breza with other Bosnian basilicas. The Kerbschnitt 1ossible pres- style was indigenous. Dabravina and in a lesser degree Duvno. Serge. but regarding its shape. 490-535). Espe- have hindered such a large enterprise. The shieldboss is slightly dome-shaped. (2) the cording to Sergejevski. it may be Langobardic (see for instance Werner Lg on the pres. They pro. or rather the middle part of Theoderic's palace. and why? 269 Justinianus. such as it is presented on •I. ac- tation. Also sn the building The identity of the building . surface by the dated to the early 6th c. at the end of the 5th. on the Via Alberoni. the futhark would then · Bosna. may be a provincial. uins of early ofKlobuk.1969: 25). If not by the Goths. or at the beginning of the 6th centuries. An indication of a date for Breza may be offered by the presence of the 6th c. In Alamannic regions this kind of shieldbosses have also been found. only stylistic criteria can 1ay point to an be used. since there are no documents. Avars and Slavs would futhark. Sergejevski (1960: 568) discusses the question of when Christianization took not look like place in the Dalmatian inlands. The of one of the palaces of Theoderic in Ravenna.and indigenous churches in Bosnia and Herce- ation. In 536 Dalmatia was reuni- rIATiwould fied with the East Roman empire). (see for instance Die Alamannen. the basilicas ond half of the 6th century. the Goths d in wars with . Unfortu- Syrian and Asia Minor churches . no coins that may indicate a date. pearly-rimmed halfway the dome and around the button. no inscriptions. According to him. perhaps during the reign of Justinianus. shieldboss. ts that its pur- To date the churches to the later 6th century would meet with difficulties. it to the much ge 173. which resulted from a merger he discusses of a domestic style with late-antique and early-medieval styles. Who wrote the Breza futhark. and (2) the hybrid sculptural style. according to Bojanovski and Celie (1969: :oRDIA. known and used already for centuries in Bosnia. imitation of the entry of the Diocletian palace ~ Breza basilica at Split. oint to a "bar- 24 early Christian churches were already excavated in Bosnia. during the Gothic era (ca. . The tions. rs that the co- Actually. Christianity was at first prac- too small to tised mainly in cities. The fronton ects. and have been carved by captured Germanic enemies. probably as result t the building of missionary activities on a large scale. The iose than that basilicas of rural Bosnia seem to have been built all in the same period. who were forced to take part Some other in the building activities of the church. 1962: 80). who all are dated to the sec- he others (cf. . tinianus. of them left for rever. 25). On the gowina as well -.). starting i. or "barbaric". It is difficult to fmd a parallel with the same decora- tl authors. Basler ( 197 5: 261) suggests that the Breza building may have been constructed >mpared to do. They point to two important features: (1) the architectural similarities with ski. It is exquisitely decorated with zig-zag lines made in tremolo-stitch technique. according (N orth-South to Bojanovski and Celie. who was emperor of Byzantium 527-565. dating the Bosnian basilicas is difficult. and may have arrived at a rather late date in Dalmatia. At the time Sergejevski wrote this (1958).s well. since the many wars with Goths. because the front of the building reminds him '. 1997: 209-218) . at any the mosaic in San Apollinare Nuovo at Ravenna (Basler 1975: 261 f.

Benedi who ad There may be a connection between the alphabets and the so-called crux de- pal obj cussata. 270 Tineke Looijenga Of interest is further that he mentions two richly decorated capitals showing both a cross within ranks.B. with the name Egbert Pontifical. and again joining the Christi two remaining comers. a book of special services for the use of gro nea a bishop. cross from one comer of the church diagonally to the other. i. MS Lat. Deua in adiutorium meum intende. The tice. Banting (1989: xxxvi) con- cludes that "the scribe seems to have drawn on a source from Northern France and Normandy in particular.C. H. A. visitors of the building could find their way in the written documents. ) The Pontifical could have been written in Wessex in the mid tenth century". In that way. cum Gloria absque Alleluia.e. These crosses point to Christianity. the runes(!). is kept in Paris. c. Fu Ostrogoths could read the Roman script and the Romans could encipher the script of the Ostrogoths. thus referring to the . a point to certain rights of the indigenous civilians. et ad dextro. according to Basler (197 5: 263 ). T church. The The manuscript. In the Middle Ages. The name Egbert refers to the first archbishop of York (732-766).). North-S gulo. in which the bishop takes his staff and in the consecr dust and ashes on the floor draws the alphabet in the form of a great St. i. orientalis scribat similiter. ofChri As Would the Ostrogoths have written their documents with runes? interm Very unlikely. During the consecration rites of a new church.q. scribens per pauimentum com cam. in how far the King's palace at Ravenna could influence the Roman building style in a far-off province. used by a comes. The most impor- contai tant problem is then.. one qu the pra The similarity to the Theoderican palaces causes Basler to think of a public function of the Breza building. A. the crux decussata in Brita played a role during inauguration rites and also when designing the lay-out of the cant. The rituals go back to older sources. whereas one of the capitals was ornamented with a liturgy cross in a mandorla. the bishop wrote on one empero post the Greek alphabet and on the other the Latin alphabet (Mekking 1988: 28).e. I would say. In the Dictionnaire d'Archeologie Chretienne et Liturgie.B. perhaps for administrative or juridical purposes.. Basler states (1993: differe 28 f. The origins of the Egbert Pontifical are not known. futhark. Leu is described in the Egbert Pontifical.darium. usque in sinistro angulo basilice oldest b occidentalis. Andrew's church. Leclercq (1907: 58) states that the crux decussata belongs to roman . This is an imaginary diagonal cross. 10575. well as in the He suggests that it was a curtis with an aula. connecting the four comers of a influen church. 46v) is described. deinde ueniens ad altare dicat.cosmos. and it w buta sua. domine as adiuuandum me festina. least on Deinde incipit pontifex de sinistro ab oriente. an. adding material found in Anglo-Saxon England. I propose another solution for the presence of both a Latin and a runic alphabet.darium. proved A consecration ritual for a new church (ordo quomodo aecclesia debeat dedicari) i.e. usque in dextro angulo occidentalis.C. ( . the ritual (f. The inscribed Franki futhark on one side of the corridor and the Latin alphabet on the other side would time. In Breza b it.

Leusinium (on the river Trebisnica in South Bosnia).10575. Breza may after all have been a :at St. however.( . :king 1988: 28). ) h century". The tice. albeit in a gain joining the Christian context. written down idical purposes. according to Benz (1956: 97). The Benedictine connection may be signifi- ie lay-out of the cant. The alphabet ritual appears in ORXLI forthe first >ther side would time. He mentions several authors who suggest ler states (1993: different sources for the alphabet ritual. The e Chretienne et longs to roman . For once the function of a complete futhark would be clear. been considerable crux decussata in Britain since the seventh century". according to Benz. a sacramentaire gregorien which contains virtually the same text as the amented with a one quoted above from the Egbert Pontifical. and why? 271 : I r l apitals showing liturgy. and it was considered equal to the Roman alphabet. Ii! who adds that "the forms ofliturgy used in St Peters in the Vatican were a princi- -called crux de. As to how the liturgical texts came to France and England. ad dextro. The order had had some influence in 6th century Dalmatia as well.Lat. and the alphabet itself as an elaboration of alpha-omega. Benz (1956: 64 ff.In Breza building presents a unique situation. Especially important were the presence of Benedictine monks in furthering this process. Moreover. The The occurrence of a runic alphabet and a Roman alphabet side by side in the . One of the two texts is called Ordo 1ld influence the Romanus XLI. Both texts are ordines that 'he most impor. If the alphabets played a part in the staff and in the consecration ritual such as is described above. is of "gallikanischer Herkunft". I). pal object of interest" to the pilgrims. which. Furtheron he discusses the significance of the X-form symbolising the name cipher the script of Christ.e. Salluntum (in Montene- ~s for the use of gro near Danilovgrad) and Baloe (see Basler 1993: 18). (732-766). ~9: xxxvi) con- rorthem France m England.). This rite evidently is derived from the practice used by the agrimensores oflatin antiquity. i. The inscribed Frankish (Benz 1956: 94 f. Banting points also to the fact that "the 1ur comers of a influence of St Peter's and the church in Rome had. Remains the problem of the ntum com cam- . the futhark proves a special significance among at least one Germanic tribe.. but actually reflecting older texts. we may think of nes? intermediating pilgrims who came back from Rome. according to Banting (1989: xxvii).e. since 'P wrote on one emperor Justinianus apparently maintained contacts with St Benedict (480-547). This is very unusual. it evidently was known and in use in a religious context. among which the Roman surveying prac- ::locuments.. but all sorts of orientations of the oldest basilicas seem to have occurred in Rome (Leclercq 1936: 2665-2666). Andrew's church. Who wrote the Breza futhark. proved by the fact that the emperor granted him some possessions in Dalmatia. iebeat dedicari) i. angulo basilice meum intende. according to Mekking as hink of a public well as Leclercq. contain rules of how to dedicate a church.) discusses two liturgical texts. an- North-South orientation. in the 9th century.

They have not been chiseled. points to artisans who where used to working with wood instead of stone. One runs horizontally on the left hand top.272 Tineke Looijenga The runes illustration 4: the runes fu th a r k q w h n IJ i p z s t e m The futhark is just below a groove. the runes run from about the centre of the column to the right. the whole futhark. for instance. or another sharp Pforz instrument. could on the other to be hand be imaginable. Rema In that respect the runes resemble runes on small metal or wooden objects. but the edge of the stone is broken away. 2 they The are quite unlike the runic inscriptions on stones in Scandinavia. When seen from front. on the right hand top comer. The inscription would have run all the way to the columns end. at stena- the same heigth as the futhark and another runs vertically on the left side of the terem column. but the fact that they are all there. These features may shape suit better Germanic artisans. Also the Kerbschnitt style is really a woodcutting-style. which runs under the upper brim of the col- umn's fragment. The runes are very neatly. but cut with a knife. such as is described above. as well as the whole that b alphabet. perhaps the rests of If letters (Roman cursive?) can be seen. West also across the runes. however also used in metal. In that case it is not so much the reading of the letters that 0 matters. carved into the soft marly sur- face with a sharp instrument. groov A function in a consecration rite. If only therefore rune it is unlikely that the runes would have had a public function for referendary use cm hi for the reading of Gothic documents. It seems that there were at least two more inscriptions that Beuc have been deliberately scraped off. Then follows e m I. If something meaningful was written is mscn Gothi or W Aqui 2 The shaping on a lathe of the columns and the cutting of runes with a knife. there are many scratches. but inconspiciously. ceive . and the four last runes have disappeared with it. otherwise one could not even see the bract inscriptions. more than it would antique artisans. Thus. The sequence is that of the older futhark until t. The broken-away piece agrees precisely with the space those four runes would have occupied. It is difficult to see the inscription if one does not know it is there. such as is suggested by Basler (see above). one must presume fork that the columns were situated on low walls. This inscription ends in a clear X Some strokes. Since the column with the runes is only 56 ems high. b ing d o are lacking. Aubi When scrutinizing the whole surface of the column.

These features may shaped k (Pforzen. width. respectively 2. it may as well have been script-imitation. which misses its side twig in the break. and it occurs perhaps in Mi. b. the double-barred h (Breza. at stena-C. or another sharp Pforzen and Bezenye have some runeforms in common. Bezenye and Pforzen. Bezenye I. and why? 273 uncertain.aps the rests of If the double-barred b rune is indeed diagnostic for the West Germanic runic il was written is inscriptions. Also the . Pforzen and Bezen- . These inscriptions date from the 5th and 6th centuries. ie soft marly sur- cut with a knife. inscriptions that Beuchte. illustration 5: drawing of the flower t e m ·brim of the col- ont.4 and 2. the runes run i would have run en away. Westeremden B. The runeform for p occurs also in : many scratches. A deliberate hand-made cut runs from top to bottom.e left side of the teremden B. near the centre of the stone. and perhaps Bezenye. the leaves are all about 2 ems.5 r referendary use cm high. except for Wes- . Skodborghus-B. p and z are the largest. at least that is where they were found. Who wrote the Breza futhark. A little below the futhark. Geographically nearest are the runic items of Aquincum. is a carving of a kind of flower. Watchfield. but should be considered in the light of other Continental or West-Germanic inscriptions.6 ems high. they run up to the rim of the tsler (see above). groove. The rune for k is very small: 0. The runeform for j occurs in Bergakker. Vad- : left hand top. The flower is 4 ems high. and three bracteates: Darum (V)-C. the l not even see the bracteates Raum K0ge-C and Borringe-C. It has five leaves (see illustration 5). which is from a much later date. The runes p z s t are all over 2 ems high. also found in Pforzen.inchen- Aubing nm?k and Neudingen Baar klefila}J. the conclusion is that this inscription cannot be assigned to the Gothic runic tradition. Breza. 2 they The runes are between 0. Dischingen.6 ems high. The last rune mld on the other to be seen is I. )f the letters that One would expect the rune for b following upon t. in the sequence up.5 and 2. One may be the roof- ad of stone. and the the older futhark oken-away piece cupied. although only one stroke can be per- ceived). know it is there. on the left side of the vertical inscription. The rune ne must presume for k has the shape of a roof. Remarks: len objects. most of them are about 2 ems. ife. Others are j (Bezenye). Each If only therefore rune occupies a space of about one cm. but here one must suppose well as the whole that b was one of the four runes which have disappeared in the break.

so it may be that part of the Lango bards became Christians during their stay in Bosnia. who definitely defeated the Goths in 555. sent his commander Narsus to Italy. Emperor Justinianus (527-565) succeeded in 536 to incorporate Dalmatia in the East Roman empire. waged battle against Justinia- nus and recaptured Salona. king Totila (541-552). The brooches from Bezenye. The Langobards migrated in the 4th c. Justinianus. He offered Justinianus peace in 551. I think. One may presume that somehow Justinianus succeeded in building the Breza church in between the turmoils of successive barbaric invasions. the Langobards settled in lower Austria. tried in vain to win back Dalmatia. The Gepides successively were defeated. They are. Theoderics daughter and heiress. It therefore seems that the Lango bards lived in the Breza region from around 535 until 567. leaving the area to the A vars.274 Tineke Looijenga ye). The bad relations between Langobards and Gepides led them to war. from the lower Elbe to the upper Elbe. Audoins son Alboin led the Langobards away to North Italy in 567. combat arose concerning the former Gothic possessions in Dalmatia. After Odoaker defeated the Rugii in 488. (Krause/Jankuhn 1966: 310. the most eligible to have cut this futhark in the column. Thus the Langobards and Gepides could enter the area. The building of the church need not coincide with the cutting of the futhark. in return. but as terminus ad quern the destruction of the building may be taken. or Pallersdorf. leaving the Langobard parts of Dalmatia to the A vars and the Slavs. under the condition that he could keep his possessions in Italy. Krause even states that the Langobards were Christi- anized at the end of the 5th c. Opitz (1977) lists Breza among his Siidgermanische Runeninschriften. The Lango bards occupied the North of Bosnia and the region between the rivers Bosna and Drina. A short survey of the history of the Langobards may explain how they got to the Balkan. Helped by the A vars the Langobards succeeded in dispelling the Gepides from Pannonia. The Aquincum runic brooch may be Langobardic. as the site is called. To Krause (1966: 19 f. In 526 they invaded upper Pannonia. from 489-526. no source given). which is exactly the area in which Breza lies! Vitilas successor. in 535. Antonsen (1975) lists Breza as an East Germanic inscription. They suggest Alamanni or Langobards as possible makers.) it was not clear how Lango bards could have gotten in the region near Breza. some thirty years. are consid- ered Langobardic (included in Werner 1962). Around 430 they arrived in Bohemia. which has . The Goths. and it has a variant of the Breza k rune: A. In the meantime the Dalmatian borders were left un- watched. which had just been deserted by the Ostrogoths. Arntz/Zeiss (1939) date the inscription on the basis of a possible presence of Langobards or Alamanni in the area. The Bosnian churches were built before or during the period the Langobards settled in the area. After the murder of Amalasuntha. under their new king Vitigis (536-540).

J. In: Enkainia. D. 8. anti- ./Zeiss. jevo. 19-20. 14?- 1 -526. iker defeated the Arntz. (1975): Die "Basilika II" in Breza bei Sarajevo. (1956): Zur Geschichte der romischen Kirchweihe nach den Texten des 6. (1993): Spatantike und Frilhchristliche Architektur in Bosnien und der Herzegowina. S. In: 1e could keep his Nase Starine. n the turmoils of Die Alamannen (1997): Archaologisches Landesmuseum Baden-Wilrttemberg. D. D. Neue Folge. 12-13. )strogoths. p. Textteil. Sarajevo. m to war. Jankuhn (1966): Die Runeninschriften im alteren Futhark.Langobardic cooperation. Werner. Kirchzarten. In 526 they 154. in the region near i I n how they got to Bibliography I I ower Elbe to the Antonsen. H. rrds were Christi. In: Novi- tates Musei Saravoensis. Beitriige zur Kenntnis der langobardischen ng of the futhark. anus and the Langobards may be proved by the fact that the Langobardic king iriften./Sergejevski. H. pp. (1962): Die Langobarden in Pannonien. S. are consid. B. K. Skopje. To Krause Audoin got parts of South-Pannonia and Noricum in 546. deuxieme partie Noirmoutier-Orvieto. Tafelteil. E. (1907): Abecedaire. G. ln: Ziva antika. pp. 563-568. (1939): Die einheimische Runendenkmaler des Festlandes. Actes du X!Ile congres International d'etudes anciennes.-Hist. organise par le Comite "Eirene" .sible presence of considered as a Christian . Gottingen. In: Akten des XI. Sergejevski. lefeated./Dzemal. godisnjak zavoda za zastitu spomenika kulture Bosne i Hercegovine XII. (1936): Orientation. Bosna and Drina. Milnchen. DUsseldorf. 21-53. nr. during which the futhark and the Latin ABC were cut on two pillars. 7-25. Antiquite vivante. Phil. 77.Forschungen. taken. Milnchen. D. combat tificals). The Langobards quarische Abteilung nr. (1960): Plan der Frilhchristlichen Basiliken Bosniens. Paris. A. 9. iperor Justinianus Basler. Wien.Dubrovnik 7-12 act. A. (1988): Een kruis van kerken rond Koenraads hart. H. 202-204. That there existed friendly terms between Justini- ianic inscription. Franz Dolger und Hans-Georg Beck. 156-177. 1956. may be . 1974. Gesammelte Arbeiten zum 800 jahrigen Weihegedachtnis der Abteikirche Maria Laach am 24. ng the Langobard Mekking. Bodenfunde var 568. (1975): A Concise Grammar of the Older Runic Inscriptions. premier. ~against Justinia- Basler. H. Who wrote the Breza futhark.J . . Stuttgart. (1930): Gotisches und romisches aus Breza bei Sarajevo. After Banting. Helped Leclercq. nr.) (1989): Two Anglo-Saxon Pontificals (the Egbert and Sidney Sussex Pon- . Ttibingen. and why? 275 ailed. ie that somehow Cremosnik. 19. unic brooch may shieldboss. Leipzig. Schriften der Balkan-Kommission. (1977): Siidgermanische Runeninschriften im alteren Futhark aus der Merowingerzeit. D. n back Dalmatia. Zutphen. C. :lers were left un. Jahrhunderts. Heft 55 A & B. London. in: Dictionnaire d'Archeologie Chretienne et de Liturgie. OSB.J. igible to have cut 2. (ed. Stadhoudeis. Benz./H. gion from around Opitz./Mekking.M. Problem i konzervacija. l'e partie A-Amende. A. Wien. in 535. lnterna- ecame Christians tionalen Byzantinistenkongresses Milnchen 1958. In: Utrecht kruispunt van de Middeleeuwsekeik. tome douzieme. W. happened in the 6th century (based for instance on the presence of the 6th c. d the Langobards Sergejevski.. Milnchen. Eds. Bojanovski. (1943): Archaologische Forschungen in Bosnien in den Jahren 1920-1940. H.J. source given). Krause. 1-9. Paris. Eds. Klasse. in: Dictionnaire d'Archeologie Chretienne et de Liturgie. l. Sara- :r Narsus to Italy. The consecration of the church. (1969): Kasnoanticka Bazilika u Brezi. 259-264.H. which has . perhaps preceding the bapti- )r Langobards as cism of a group ofLangobards. Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.t Roman empire. buried under the layers of ashes). Abh. tome :s from Pannonia. Auflage. August 1956. In: Siidost .-7. Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Audoins Leclercq.

Related Interests