518  

we can tell—remain the same. The basic concept of the Avar way
of life persisted until the end of the Avar Empire (around 800).
Although Roman field patterns would have lent themselves to inten-
sive cultivation, crop husbandry evidently played but a minor role.
The equestrian herdsman’s greatest source of pride is his livestock:
all other means of displaying his status are carried on his person.
Nevertheless, at best, in the earliest period (until the first quarter of
the seventh century) the Avars were nomads. Later, they inhabited
permanent settlements, the high population of which did not permit
a nomadic way of life. Although cattle still formed the basis of Avar
agriculture in the eighth century, the horse occupied a major role
in Avar life. Up to the Late Avar Period, equestrian graves appear
to be exceptionally well endowed, even though they become increas-
ingly uniform by comparison with the considerable variety present
in the first half of the seventh century. Even the Avar warrior of
the time of Charlemagne can be assumed to have differed only in
small details from his predecessor of the era of Justinian I or that
of Maurikios. The heavily-armoured cavalry as described in the
Strategikon no longer existed in the eighth century. It probably required
a kind of “war economy”, and would have been impossible to main-
tain in long periods of peace.
In what respects do the Avar means of representation differ from
those of the Byzantines and Franks? First of all, it is apparent that
not much attention is being paid to furnishing the home. Although
we may assume the existence of valuable tapestries and woodwork,
the houses—of the common people, at least—were small and not
very comfortable. Certainly, the wealth of an Avar family was deter-
mined by the number of cattle it owned, as it had been in the time
of their nomadic ancestors. This set of values, which must have com-
prised specific ideas about the right to exploit the land, had survived
the transition to sedentariness. A permanent settlement of the Late
Avar Period appears not to have differed in any fundamental way
from one of the Early or Middle Avar Period. Despite the Avars’
obvious enthusiasm for Byzantine culture, not a single stone build-
ing is known from the Carpathian Basin.
The material culture of the Early Avar Period appears to have
been culturally heterogeneous: drawing on local, late Roman, Germanic
as well as eastern elements, which had presumably been introduced
by the Avars and which included some late Hunnic reminiscences,
plus Byzantine dress-ornaments, shapes and motifs, as well as tech-
   () 519

nological know-how. At the same time, there seem to have been

decisive influences and imports from Lombard Italy, from southern
Germany and—of course to a lesser extent—from other regions of
Europe as well. The process of standardisation of Avar culture begins
only in the second half of the seventh century, some time after the
Avar wars. However, local groups with particular types of dress or
burial customs may be observed even in the eighth century. Avar
culture remains diverse and very colourful.
Both in the Early Avar Period and in the eighth century, the
region around Keszthely, at the western end of Lake Balaton, con-
stitutes an special element within the Avar Empire, although for
totally different reasons. In the late sixth and probably still in the
early seventh century, in Keszthely there is distinct evidence of con-
nections with the Adria region and Italy; here, on the fringes of the
area of settlement, there is a well-organised Christian community
linked with Catholic Italy. Even if we have no written sources con-
cerning this, the fact that pilgrimages, perhaps even to the Holy
Land, were common, is an argument for a working church-organi-
sation in the area around Keszthely, possibly even in Pécs (Fünfkirchen).
Typically Avar cemeteries are found in the region around Keszthely
only from the Middle Avar Period onwards (for instance Gyenesdias).
Therefore—prior to the struggle for power around the year 626—
Keszthely seems to have been the end-point of the route to Italy,
virtually the bridge-head of Mediterranean, Late Roman and Lombard
culture in present-day western Hungary. It is quite possible that this
is linked to the old pact between the Lombards and the Avars.
However this may be: after 626, the situation seems to have changed
fundamentally. In the Late Avar Period, the Keszthely-culture no
longer has anything whatsoever to do with Italy or Byzantium. The
almost “baroque” enlargement of once typically Byzantine dress acces-
sories (basket earrings, dress pins) demonstrates, if anything, the local
population’s adherence to old traditions. It is not evidence of exter-
nal contacts and we have no proof of a flourishing Christian com-
munity in Keszthely in the Late Avar Period. Neither can the
continuation of a burial custom which does not include placing food
in the grave, limited to a very small area, be viewed as proof of a
Christian community at the western end of Lake Balaton in the Late
Avar Period. At the moment, in fact, it looks rather as if the re-
organisation of the Avar Empire in the seventh century and the far-
reaching isolation of the Carpathian Basin must also have caused
520  

the activities of the Christian community to disappear almost com-

pletely. One find which may be perceived as evidence for Christian
burial customs in the eighth century is the existence of the iron
crosses on coffins from Székkutas. It is difficult to explain these as
a tradition without meaning.104 The other finds which might suggest
the existence of Late Avar Christians have no value as evidence,
because the transfer of motifs whose original meaning is, however,
lost in the process, is common on Late Avar belt-mounts.105 Apart
from that, it was some time ago that it was shown that the escutcheon-
shaped hinged fittings with eagle and “cross” from Boldog and
Komárno in fact imitate early Byzantine coins with eagle and the
numeric symbol X.106 At a synod in 796, it is reported that in the
eighth century, there were Christians living in the Avar Empire, but
they had lost contact with their brothers and sisters in faith and
were therefore in need of spiritual guidance.107 With this fact in mind,
the archaeological “evidence” for Late Avar Christianity should be
interpreted with particular care.
The archaeologist is frequently confronted with inquiries regard-
ing the world of beliefs of the population he is studying. Actually,
we know nothing about Avar religion, although the evidence from
analogous ethnographic studies seems to suggest that most groups of
people living in the Carpathian Basin in the Avar Period practised
a kind of shamanism. The evidence for the existence of a Christian
contingent in the early Avar Empire has already been mentioned.
However, the Byzantine cross from Ozora-Tótipuszta (Middle Avar
Period) is rather an expression of the wearer’s association with a
Byzantine form of representation than of her personal beliefs. The
co-existence and the mutual permutation of quite contradictory worlds

104
K.B. Nagy, “Székkutas-Kápolnadul  o avar temeto néhány 9. Szászadi síre-
gyüttese [Einige Grabkomplexe aus dem 9. Jahrhundert im awarischen Gräberfeld
bei Székkutas-Kápolnadul  o]”,
 Az Alföld a 9. szászadban, ed. G. L orinczy
 (Szeged
1993) pp. 151–69, esp. fig. 3,22–23; T. Vida, “Neue Beiträge zur Forschung der
frühchristlichen Funde der Awarenzeit”, Acta XIII congressus internationalis archaeologiae
christianae, Split—Pore‘ 1994 2, ed. N. Cambi and E. Marin, Studi di antichità cris-
tiana 54. Vjesnik za arheologiju i historiju Dalmatinsku 87/89 Suppl. (Split 1998)
pp. 529–40, esp. p. 534 with note 27 and fig. 7.
105
Vida, “Frühchristliche Funde”, pp. 534–6 and fig. 8.
106
Daim, Leobersdorf, p. 146 with notes 192–197.
107
W. Pohl, Die Awaren. Ein Steppenvolk in Mitteleuropa, 567–822 n. Chr. (München
1988) pp. 319–20.
   () 521

of beliefs, symbols and images, the syncretism of the Late Migration

Period, can frequently be deduced from the archaeological evidence.
What we now find so difficult to imagine, seems to have actually
existed in the Early Middle Ages: people adhered to several different
cults in the same way that nowadays it is (theoretically) quite possi-
ble to be a member of two or more different parties. Pictures, amulets
etc. could be interpreted according to Christian as well as to shaman-
istic beliefs. For the early medieval person this must have been, at
best, a theoretical problem. He was much more concerned with their
effectiveness in daily life.108 This is the reason why all motifs on
objects from the Late Avar Period, which seem to possess Christian
meaning, should be interpreted with care.109 Although we have no
positive evidence for a Christian church organisation within the Avar
Empire or for successful missionary activities during the seventh and
eighth centuries, it is quite possible that some Christian traditions
still existed at the time of the Avar wars. Maybe the types of dress
in Late Antique tradition, which we find in the regions around
Keszthely and Pécs (Fünfkirchen) in the eighth century are in fact
evidence for a small Christian community which survived the Avar
reign.
There are some exciting new ideas concerning the Avars’ cultural
orientation after their defeat at Constantinople in 626. If we are cor-
rect in assuming that the princely graves from Bócsa, Tepe and
Kunbábony belong to the second quarter of the seventh century,
they may in fact be interpreted as an attempt to create a represen-
tational culture which makes use of Byzantine technology in jew-
ellery-production and consciously looks for models in the East. The
act of focussing on a particular cultural root may have been deemed
necessary in order to build up the damaged ego and consolidate
power. A second way of interpreting the princely graves with golden
“pseudo-buckles” would be to perceive them as evidence of an alliance
(which was not at all adverse to Byzantium) with Kuvrat’s Bulgarian
Empire, which was then, after his death, followed by more inten-

108
On the amulet-capsules: T. Vida, “Frühmittelalterliche scheiben- und kugelför-
mige Amulettkapseln zwischen Kaukasus, Kastilien und Picardie”, Berichte der Römisch-
Germanischen Kommission des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 76 (1995) pp. 219–90, esp.
pp. 263 ff.
109
Vida, “Frühchristliche Funde”.
522  

sive relations with the Byzantine Empire. However, it is important

to stress that this shifting of the orientation of Avar cultural expres-
sion would be evident even if we had no knowledge of Avar polit-
ical history. It would be a grave methodological error to interprete
the archaeological sources from the point of view of the scanty writ-
ten evidence rather than empirically.
Thanks to the decoding of eighth-century Mediterranean orig-
inals in the Avar Empire and its periphery, our perception of the
relationship of Avar and Byzantine or Italo-Byzantine culture is now
becoming much clearer. We are also aware of the influence which
Byzantine technology had on Avar craftsmanship. On the other hand,
Avar culture was strong enough to consciously select from what Medi-
terranean art had to offer, to adapt it stylistically and even to create
totally new motifs on the basis of these stimuli. Due to the wealth of
archaeological remains, the Avar material and its Byzantine or Italo-
Byzantine models are well suited to studying the mechanisms of
cultural transfer and illuminating the system of values, their com-
munication through art and even some of their psychological aspects.
This set of questions was discussed with reference to the griffin-motif
and the boar, the Byzantine birds and the “Chinese” scroll with
blossoms.
The archaeological finds will make it necessary to re-evaluate the
role of the Bulgarians on the Balkans and along the middle and
lower Danube. On the one hand, we can observe strong cultural
relations between the Bulgarian centre of power from Pliska and
Preslav to Varna, and the Byzantine Adria region (Dyrrachium and
surroundings, present-day Albania); on the other hand, there seems
to be a strong link with the region of Avar culture. We cannot quite
predict at present, where the latest research will lead us; neverthe-
less, in the eighth century there is a network of connections between
the Carpathian Basin, Italy, the Balkans and the Black Sea Region
which seems to have been much more intensive than we would have
thought possible even a short while ago.
Christianity, which had frequently played an important role in the
stabilisation of power and social structure, had not (yet) gained access
to eighth-century Avar culture. As a result, when Charlemagne set
the army in motion from Bavaria, the Franks were able to use
“pagan-war” propaganda as a powerful lever. Apparently, Avar tra-
dition was no longer strong enough: certain members of the Avar
   () 523

elite changed sides rapidly without being able to build up positions

of power of their own.
The fundamental cultural changes which were brought about by
the Avars’ defeat by Charlemagne and by the re-organisation of the
eastern part of the Carolingian Empire are becoming increasingly
clear from the archaeological sources. However, some interpretations
are hindered by our problems with absolute fine chronology. There
is definite evidence for the establishment of political and church cen-
tres with a huge input of resources and of a surprisingly high stan-
dard (e.g. Zalavár-Mosapurc), and as a result for an attempt to create
an extensive church, political and economic infrastructure. There is
also evidence for the immigration of settlers from other Slav terri-
tories, which was presumably encouraged by the political leaders.
There is also evidence of immigration from Bavaria and of the short-
or middle-term survival of Avar population groups and settlements.
The extent of the latter, however, varies considerably from region
to region. At the moment it is still difficult to say, to what extent
the cultural integration of the population had been completed when
Magyar rule was established in the Carpathian Basin. Archaeological
research in areas of Slav settlement near Kremsmünster and in the
Enns valley, as well as in the precincts of the “Great Moravian
Empire”, in the princedom Thunau, have yielded good results. Al-
though in both cases—as the burial customs demonstrate—the Slav
ancestry of the population is evident (regardless of their self-percep-
tion!), we can also observe a stronger link with Bavarian and East
Carolingian culture. The written sources which are available both
for Kremsmünster and the Kamp valley, support the archaeological
evidence and illuminate the political background.
Avar traditions were strong enough to survive fundamental changes
in the political geography of Europe. However, the Avar Empire did
not come to grips with the transition to medieval state. This difficult
task was achieved, around 200 years later, by the Magyar king
Stephen. It is due to him that Hungary has survived until the pre-
sent day, while the Avars were assimilated by the Carolingian pop-
ulation and are only accessible to historians and archaeologists.
In one respect, the methods used by the historian and the archae-
ologist are very similar: both must attempt to abandon modern ter-
minological systems and to decipher the early medieval “code”. The
historian has to use the terminology of the written sources as a start-
524  

ing point and he must then examine what was meant by the names
given in the texts. The archaeologist discovers types of artefacts,
forms of dress, types of settlements, burial customs, evidence for other
customs and much more besides. He has to consider what status each
of these cultural elements once possessed within a given semiotic
structure and which of them were understood as a criterion for differ-
entiating between groups. We can assume with some certainty that
there were just as many possibilities of identification in early medieval
society as there are today; some of them manifest themselves in
the archaeological material. However it is highly problematic to
label one or more of these “cultural groups” as “ethnic”, without
extensive spatial comparison. If ethnicity is really a phenomenon of
“social psychology”—as defined by Leo S. Klejn—this would imply
that we are over-stressing our material by a long way.

[Translated by Birgit Bühler]

Illustration acknowledgements

Figures in the Text

Fig. 1. From W. Pohl, Die Awaren. Ein Steppenvolk in Mitteleuropa, 567–822 n. Chr.
(München 1988) map 2, revised. Graphic arts: Franz Siegmeth
Fig. 2. Graphic arts: Franz Siegmeth
Fig. 3. Reitervölker aus dem Osten. Hunnen + Awaren, ed. F. Daim (Halbturn 1996) pp.
344–5
Fig. 4. F. Daim et al., Leobersdorf p. 168
Fig. 5. Ibid., p. 148

Plates
Pl. 1. 1 Hampel, Alterthümer, pl. 208; 2–3 drawing by Franz Siegmeth I. Kovrig,
“Contribution au problème de l’occupation de la Hougrie par les Avars”,
Acta Archaeologica Hungarica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 6 (1955) pl. VII
Pl. 2. 1 Daim, Leobersdorf, pl. 153; 2 Garam, Funde byzantinischer Herkunft in der
Awarenzeit vom Ende des 6. bis zum Ende des 7. Jahrhunderts (Budapest 2001) pl.
92; 3 H. Winter, Awarenzeitliche Grab- und Streufunde aus Ostösterreich, pl. 28; 4
Garam, Funde, pl. 94; 5 ibid., pl. 94; 6 Hampel, Alterthümer, pl. 180; 7
Garam, Funde, pl. 81; ibid., pl. 93
Pl. 3. Bóna, “A Szegvár-sápoldali lovassír”, fig. 1
Pl. 4. Ibid., fig. 2–5
Pl. 5. 1 Garam, Funde, pl. 3; 2 ibid., pl. 2; 3 ibid., pl. 1; 4 ibid., pl. 41; 5 ibid.,
pl. 31; 6 ibid., pl. 32; 7 ibid., pl. 31; 8 ibid., pl. 32
Pl. 6. Drawings by Péter Posztobányi
Pl. 7. Garam, Goldgegenstände, pl. 53–55; 58; 60–62
Pl. 8. Ibid., pl. 56–58
   () 525

Pl. 9. Das awarenzeitlich gepidische Gräberfeld von Kölked—Feketekapu A, pl. 34; 59; 76
Pl. 10. Ibid., pp. 42; 45 and pl. 36
Pl. 11. Kiss, “Előzetes jelentés” Part I, pp. 267; 279; 293–4; 304; 319
Pl. 12. Ibid., Part I, p. 31
Pl. 13. Reconstruction Tivadar Vida; drawing by Sándor Ősi
Pl. 14. Kiss, “Előzetes jelentés” Part I, p. 332
Pl. 15. 1 Garam, Goldgegenstände, pl. 43; 2 Bakay, “Az avarkor idő rendjéől,
pl. III
Pl. 16. 1 Bakay, “Az avarkor idő rendjéől”, pl. IV; 2 Das awarenzeitlich gepidische
Gräberfeld von Kölked—Feketekapú A, pl. 70; 3 Daim, Sechs Gräber mit
westlichen Gegenständen”, pl. 2; 4 Bende, “Pitvaros”, fig. 5; 5 F. Daim
and A. Lippert, Das awarische Gräberfeld von Sommerein am Leithagebirge, NÖ
(Wien 1984) pl. 15–16
Pl. 17. 1 Bóna, VII. sz-i avar települések és Arpád-kori magyar falu Dunaújvarosban
(Budapest 1973) p. 40; 2 Reitervölker aus dem Osten p. 378
Pl. 18. 1 Vida, Die awarenzeitliche Keramik I (6.–7. Jh.) (Budapest 1999) pl. 1; 2
ibid., pl. 92; 3 Vida, “Zu einigen handgeformten frühawarischen Keramik-
typen und ihren östlichen Beziehungen”, Awarenforschungen, ed. F. Daim
(Wien 1992) pl. 8; 4 ibid., pl. 13; 5 Daim and Lippert, Das awarische
Gräberfeld von Sommerein, pl. 1; 6 Vida, Keramik I, pl. 3
Pl. 19. E. Tóth and A. Horváth, Kunbábony. Das Grab eines Awarenkhagan (Kecskemét
1992) pl. I–IV
Pl. 20. Ibid., pl. II, XI–XII
Pl. 21. Ibid., pl. V, VII, XIII, XV
Pl. 22. Ibid., pl. IX–X, XXV–XXVI
Pl. 23. I. Popovic’, Zlatni avarski pojas iz okoline Sirmijuma (Beograd 1997) fig. 14;
16; 22; 24–25
Pl. 24. G. Fülöp, “Awarenzeitliche Fürstenfunde von Igar”, Acta Archaeologica
Hungarica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 40 (1988) fig. 10; 13–14
Pl. 25. R. Müller, “Vorbericht über die Freilegung des Grabes eines hohen
Militärs aus der Mittelawarenzeit in Gyenesdiás”, Communicationes Archaeo-
logicae Hungariae (1989) fig. 2; 5–6
Pl. 26. Ibid., fig. 5; 10
Pl. 27. Ibid., fig. 8–9
Pl. 28. Garam, Goldgegenstände, pl. 85–87
Pl. 29–32. Mödling—Goldene Stiege, ed. F. Daim, K. Matzner and H. Schwammenhöfer
(forthcoming)
Pl. 33. Daim, “Zur nachgedrehten Keramik aus dem awarischen Gräberfeld
von Mödling—An der goldenen Stiege”, Slawische Keramik in Mitteleuropa
vom 8. bis 11. Jahrhundert, ed. C. Stana (Brno 1994) fig. 1–2
Pl. 34. Daim, “‘Byzantinische’ Gürtelgarnituren des 8. Jahrhunderts”, Die Awaren
am Rand der byzantinischen Welt. Studien zu Diplomatie, Handel und Technolo-
gietransfer im Frühmittelalter, ed. id. (Innsbruck 2000) pp. 113; 123; 137 ff.;
167
Pl. 35. 1 Hampel, Alterthümer, pl. 186,4; 2–5 R. Müller, “Keszthely-Kultur I”,
pp. 292–3
Pl. 36. Daim, Leobersdorf, pl. 69–71
Pl. 37. 1–4 A. Trugly, “Gräberfeld aus der Zeit des awarischen Reiches bei
der Schiffswerft in Komárno I”, Slovenská Archeológia 35 (1987) pp. 200;
256; 257; 5–9 Trugly, “Komárno I”, p. 302
Pl. 38. A. Trugly, “Gräberfeld aus der Zeit des awarischen Reiches bei der
Schiffswerft in Komárno II”, Slovenská Archeológia 41 (1993) pp. 244; 286;
290
Pl. 39. L. Bende, “A pitvarosi késo avar temeto 51—sírja (Adatok a késo avar
526  

kori lószerszámok díszítéséhez)”, A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve—Studia

Archaeologica 4 (1998) p. 212
Pl. 40. 1–2 Ibid., p. 214; 3 p. 216
Pl. 41. 1 Ibid., p. 225; 2 p. 224
Pl. 42–44. Hampel, Alterthümer, Vol. III, pl. 288–319
   () 527

Plate 1:1: Early Avar bit with side-bars made of antler (Cikó, Hungary); 2 Thrust
lance (Zámoly, Hungary); 3 “Apple-shaped” stirrup (Bicske, Hungary). Scale: 1:2.