35
© aut hor/aut horsht t ps://doi .org /10. 26493/2350-54 43.12(1)35-57
House Urns in the Burial Practices of the Western Necropolis of Romula  
(NW Pannonia) 
Hišaste žare v pogrebnih praksah zahodnega grobišča Romule (SZ Panonija)
Irena Lazar in Alenka Tomaž
Univerza na Primorskem, Fakulteta za humanistične študije
Izvleček
Med letoma 2001 in 2004 je bila na lokaciji Ribnica pri Brežicah ob cesti Aquliea–Emona–Siscia razi-
skana obcestna in carinska postaja Romula, ki jo omenjajo že rimski itinerarji. Odkriti so bili večji del 
naselja, ostanki rimske ceste in zahodna nekropola s 131 grobovi. Tako kot na več grobiščih jugovzho-
dne Slovenije in severozahodne Hrvaške,so bili tudi v Ribnici odkriti štirje grobovi, v katere je bilo pri-
loženih osem hišastih žar. Hišaste žare zasledimo pretežno v bogatejših grobovih, kar je izraženo tako 
z grobno arhitekturo samo kot tudi z grobnimi pridatki. Časovni razpon grobov s priloženimi hišasti-
mi žarami na grobišču Romule sega od sredine 1. stoletja do konca 2. stoletja. Po obliki, okrasu in načinu 
izdelave hišastih žar iz Ribnice ne moremo v celoti vzporejati z najdbami z drugih najdišč, npr. bližnjih 
Dvorc pri Čatežu, Drnovega ali Drage pri Beli Cerkvi. Še najbolj se zdijo sorodne tistim iz Velikega 
Kamna in pa belokranjskim primerkom iz Rosalnic ali Borštka pri Metliki, četudi lahko tudi pri teh pri-
merjavah opazimo marsikatero razliko. 
Ključne besede: Romula, Pannonia, obcestna postaja, carinska postaja, zahodna nekropola, hišaste 
žare, Latobiki
Abstract
Between 2001 and 2004, the roadside and customs station of Romula, which is mentioned in Ancient 
Roman itineraries, was excavated at the site of Ribnica near Brežice on the Aquliea–Emona–Siscia road. 
The more significant part of the settlement, the remains of the Roman road, and the western necropo-
lis with 131 graves were uncovered. At Ribnica, as at several other burial sites in south-eastern Slovenia 
and north-western Croatia, four graves were discovered, containing eight house urns altogether. House 
urns are predominantly found in the richer graves, which is reflected both in the grave architecture it-
self and in the grave goods. The time span of the burials with house urns at Romula ranges from the mid-
first century to the end of the second century. Regarding form, decoration, and method of manufac-
ture, the house urns from Ribnica cannot be fully compared with finds from other sites, such as the 
nearby Dvorce near Čatež, Drnovo, or Draga near Bela Cerkev. They seem to be most closely related to 
those from Veliki Kamen and to the Bela Krajina specimens from Rosalnice or Borštek near Metlika, 
although even in these comparisons, many differences can be noted.
Keywords: Romula, Pannonia, road station, customs station, western necropolis, house urns, Latobici
st
u
d
ia
 u
n
iv
er
si
ta
t
is
 h
er
ed
it
a
t
i, 
le
t
n
ik
 12
 (2
02
4)
, š
t
ev
il
k
a
 1 
/ 
v
o
lu
m
e 
12
 (2
02
4)
, n
u
m
be
r 
1
36
Introduction
‘House-shaped’ urns or house urns, also known in the literature as Latobici ‘House’ urns, are one of the more in-
teresting and intriguing ceramic forms found in 
Roman-period graves in south-eastern Slovenia 
and north-western Croatia.1 
The first specimens of house urns were dis-
covered in present-day Slovenia more than two 
hundred years ago (Petru 1971, 9), and they 
aroused considerable interest at that time. Karl 
Dežman was the first to write about them in de-
tail (Deschmann 1886, 17), and his work was fol-
lowed by many others. We should mention Peter 
Petru, who published several works about house 
urns (Petru 1966) and discussed them separately 
in detail in a comprehensive study in 1971 (Petru 
1971). In this work, he not only collected all the 
known specimens of house urns up to that time 
but also gave a detailed overview of the history of 
their research, as well as examples of house mod-
els and house urns from prehistoric contexts in 
the wider European area. He devoted consider-
able attention to their manufacture, design de-
velopment, and decoration in a separate chap-
ter. He was also interested in the social position 
of the users of the house urns, their distribution, 
and their historical background (Petru 1971). 
More than fifty years after publication, some of 
his theses no longer seem relevant. However, his 
remarkable contribution to the knowledge of the 
subject itself cannot be overlooked. 
Interest in house urns has remained steady 
over the years, with numerous scholars con-
tinuing to contribute. Notable among them are 
Zoran Gregl (1997; 2007), Borut Križ (2003), 
and Phil Mason and Bernarda Županek (2018), 
each adding their unique perspectives to our un-
derstanding of house urns.
House urns are a form of ceramics found ex-
clusively in Roman-period graves in south-east-
1  In his study of house urns, Peter Petru included some spec-
imens from Austria, Germany, and Hungary in similar 
house-shaped urns. However, they seem to be quite differ-
ent in form from those from graves in south-eastern Slove-
nia and north-western Croatia (Petru 1971, 50–52, 66).
ern Slovenia and north-western Croatia. Their 
geographical distribution coincides to the great-
est extent with the area inhabited by the Celtic 
group Latobici before the arrival of the Romans, 
hence their frequent designation in the litera-
ture as Latobici house urns. In his study, Peter 
Petru collected almost 100 house urns from 22 
reliable sites and three unverified sites (Petru 
1971, 12). In recent decades, primarily, but not 
exclusively, during highway excavations, sever-
al new sites have been discovered where house 
urns have been added to the grave. Among 
them, we highlight Ribnica near Brežice, where 
during excavation between 2001 and 2004, four 
graves were found to contain eight specimens of 
house urns.
Romula (NW Pannonia) – Ribnica  
near Brežice
The Settlement
Roman Romula is located in the village of Rib-
nica near Jesenice in Dolenjska (Lower Carnio-
la) (Petru 1975, 259), or Ribnica near Brežice, as 
the site came to be known during the latest ar-
chaeological research (2001–2004). Romula was 
twice mentioned in ancient sources, in two Ro-
man itineraries (Šašel 1975): the Tabula Peutin-
geriana and Itinerarium Antonini from the end 
of the third century. The former (IV, 3) plac-
es it as a road station on the main via publica 
through Aquileia–Emona–Siscia–Sirmium, 10 
miles from the Neviodunum municipium and 14 
miles from the Quadrata station, while the latter 
marks it under the number 274.4 on the II Aq-
uileia–Senia–Siscia road, 10 Roman miles from 
Bibium and 14 miles from the Quadrata station 
(Šašel 1975, 76–77). It was built at the beginning 
of the Pannonian Plain. The settlement devel-
oped at the strategically exceptionally favoura-
ble point at the passage from the valleys of the 
Krka and Sava Rivers to the Pannonian Plain 
at the foot of the Gorjanci hills, at the passage 
into the plain of the Sava River (Savus). On the 
narrowest part of the terrace between the Sava 
River and the Gorjanci slope ran the via publica 
H
o
u
se
 U
r
n
s 
in
 t
h
e 
B
u
r
ia
l 
P
r
a
c
t
ic
es
 o
f 
t
h
e 
W
es
t
er
n
 N
ec
ro
po
li
s 
o
f 
R
o
m
u
la
37
Emona–Siscia; from the peaks and hills on the 
outskirts of Gorjanci hills, the view spreads 
west, east and to the north, while the slopes of 
Gorjanci protect the south side. The settlers 
built their settlement on the narrowest section 
between Gorjanci and the Sava River, which al-
lowed them to supervise the river traffic along 
the Sava River. In this way, the Romula road sta-
tion linked the entrance to Italy with the Bal-
kan Peninsula and was marked in the aforemen-
tioned itineraries.
New and extensive research (2001–2004) 
revealed a large settlement area with prominent 
public buildings, part of the Roman road Em-
ona–Siscia, and a large part of the western ne-
cropolis (Figure 1). It is important to single out 
the find of a votive inscription to Silvanus Au-
gustus, dedicated by the slave of the customs of-
ficers’ society, and an inscription ROMVLA on 
a lead tablet. These findings are essential for de-
fining the administrative status of the settle-
ment and confirming its location.
The Via Publica Emona–Neviodunum–Siscia
The Roman Road Emona–Neviodunum–Sis-
cia, which led in Roman times through pres-
ent-day Dolenjska, was originally a via milita-
ris, which means that during the conquest of the 
Western Balkans, it was founded, laid out, and 
to a large extent probably also built by the Ro-
man army for its conquest campaigns and oth-
er needs (Šašel 1977, 459, 466). The lack of ep-
igraphic finds means it cannot be known exactly 
when the road was built. During the reign of 
Emperor Augustus, this part of today's Dolen-
jska was included in Illyricum, a particular area 
founded before the establishment of the inde-
pendent province of Pannonia. Considering the 
political events in the empire and its strategic 
needs, it can be concluded that the road was al-
ready built in the Augustan period. At that time, 
there was no doubt that enough military units 
or legions were present in this area, which were 
prerequisites for the implementation of such 
Figure 1: Ribnica near Brežice, Location of the settlement, Roman road, western and eastern burial site on a digital or-
thophoto image, ©Google Satellite
st
u
d
ia
 u
n
iv
er
si
ta
t
is
 h
er
ed
it
a
t
i, 
le
t
n
ik
 12
 (2
02
4)
, š
t
ev
il
k
a
 1 
/ 
v
o
lu
m
e 
12
 (2
02
4)
, n
u
m
be
r 
1
38
Figure 2: Composite photograph of burial plots A and B (photo: Franci Aš) 
Figure 3: Composite photograph of burial plots C and D (photo: Franci Aš) 
H
o
u
se
 U
r
n
s 
in
 t
h
e 
B
u
r
ia
l 
P
r
a
c
t
ic
es
 o
f 
t
h
e 
W
es
t
er
n
 N
ec
ro
po
li
s 
o
f 
R
o
m
u
la
39
a demanding construction undertaking. Initial-
ly, these units were involved in Octavian's war in 
Illyricum (35–33 BC), then during Tiberius' op-
eration in Illyricum between 15 and 9 BC, and 
finally during the Pannonian-Dalmatian rebel-
lion in the years between 6 and 9 AD (Loven-
jak 1997, 90).
The Roman road Emona–Neviodunum–
Siscia route was first confirmed by archaeolog-
ical research in 1958 when the Eastern Romula 
necropolis was discovered, which lay in a narrow 
strip along the road (Petru 1969). During the 
2001–2004 excavations, the route of the road 
was again documented in several places, which 
enabled the reconstruction of its course through 
the entire settlement (Figure 1) (Tomaž, Lazar, 
and Breščak, forthcoming). 
The Cemeteries
The Eastern Necropolis (researched 1958–1960) 
lay east of the settlement and was partially exca-
vated in a narrow strip south of the Emona–Sis-
cia road (Petru 1969, 21). In the Eastern ceme-
tery, 41 graves, 5 of which were inhumations, one 
grave plot, and one built tomb were unearthed. 
They belong to the period from the early first 
century to the beginning of the third century.
The Western cemetery, near the village of 
Podgračeno, was excavated between 2002 and 
2004, stretching along the Roman road on its 
north side. A strip up to 1.50 m wide separated 
the western cemetery from the Emona-Neviodu-
num-Siscia road, eventually covered by road fill. 
The surveyed area where the burials were locat-
ed was 336 m long, with a maximum width of up 
to 16 m, but most of the burials, including the 
four burial plots, were spread along a length of 
99m. The orientation of all the graves more or 
less respected the course of the road. A total of 
131 graves were discovered, 99 of which were cre-
mation graves, 2 were cremation graves with the 
addition of uncremated teeth, 20 graves were 
Figure 4: Ribnica near Brežice, western necropolis, Grave 1 (photo: Franci Aš)
st
u
d
ia
 u
n
iv
er
si
ta
t
is
 h
er
ed
it
a
t
i, 
le
t
n
ik
 12
 (2
02
4)
, š
t
ev
il
k
a
 1 
/ 
v
o
lu
m
e 
12
 (2
02
4)
, n
u
m
be
r 
1
40
inhumations, and 6 contained inhumation bur-
ials and cremation residues. Four graves con-
tained no human remains or grave goods and 
were interpreted as either epitaphs or pre-pre-
pared graves (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forth-
coming). In more than twelve instances, graves 
also contained several burials.2 
Apart from individual or group graves, four 
larger grave plots (A, B, C, D) (Figures 2 and 
3) with several individual graves and two built 
tombs were also explored. One of the latter lay 
within grave plot B, and the other was built indi-
vidually in the far western part of the necropolis. 
The documented forms of cremation graves are 
pretty diverse, and we can divide them into six 
more significant groups: 1 – a burial in a simple 
grave pit and a bustum; 2 – a burial in an urn; 3 – 
a grave with tiles structure; 4 – a burial in a stone 
walled grave pit; 5 – a burial in a square chest-like 
grave made of stone slabs (Figure 4); 6 – a rec-
2 The data is based on a partially completed anthropologi-
cal analysis and the interpretation is therefore only prelim-
inary.
tangular built tomb. Skeleton graves were docu-
mented as: 1 – simple grave pits; 2 – burials with 
tile construction; and 3 – burials with stone slabs 
construction. 
House Urns from the Western Necropolis  
of Romula
Eight house urns were discovered in four differ-
ent graves at the Western cemetery of Romula3: 
Grave 1 (Figures 4 and 5, Tables 1–6), Grave 2, 
Grave 7 (Figure 6) and Grave 30. The proportion 
of graves with house urns is small, representing 
only three percent. Three were added to Grave 
1 (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. 
no. 55–57), one was added to Grave 2 (Tomaž, 
Lazar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. no. 78), 
two were added to Grave 7 of rectangular built 
Tomb 1 (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forthcom-
ing, cat. no. 156–157), and two were also added 
to Grave 30 (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forth-
coming, cat. no. 476–477). 
Based on the urn shape, the so-called ‘door open-
ing’, the shape of the roof, and the button or fini-
al, house urns can be grouped into three primary 
forms with several variations (Figure 7). House 
3  Petru mentions several fragments of House urns from the 
eastern necropolis of Romula in his study (Petru 1971, 50), 
although they were not documented by drawing. He also 
mentions an indication that a house urn from grave 35 
from Ribnica near Brežice was supposed to be in the muse-
um collection in Samobor. However, this information lat-
er proved to be inaccurate (Petru 1971, 50).
Figure 5: Ribnica near Brežice, western necropolis, draw-
ing of Grave 1 (prepared by: Aleš Ogorelec)
Figure 6: Ribnica near Brežice, western necropolis, Grave 
7 within the grave plot B (photo: Franci Aš)
H
o
u
se
 U
r
n
s 
in
 t
h
e 
B
u
r
ia
l 
P
r
a
c
t
ic
es
 o
f 
t
h
e 
W
es
t
er
n
 N
ec
ro
po
li
s 
o
f 
R
o
m
u
la
41
Figure 7: Comparative overview of house urn forms at Ribnica near Brežice (drawings: Janja Tratnik Šumi; prepared 
by: Aleš Ogorelec)
st
u
d
ia
 u
n
iv
er
si
ta
t
is
 h
er
ed
it
a
t
i, 
le
t
n
ik
 12
 (2
02
4)
, š
t
ev
il
k
a
 1 
/ 
v
o
lu
m
e 
12
 (2
02
4)
, n
u
m
be
r 
1
42
urns with rounded oblong forms are grouped 
into form H 1 with three variations.
Variant H 1.1 includes house urns with 
rounded oblong forms tapering towards a low-
ringed base. The upper parts represent a conical 
roof with an accentuated finial with a pointed 
knob. The ‘doors’ are placed in this variant in the 
upper part of the vessel and are trapezoidal. The 
decoration is usually incised in horizontal arrays. 
House urns of form H 1.1 were found in 
Grave 1 (Figure 8) (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, 
forthcoming, cat. no. 55) and Grave 30 (Tomaž, 
Lazar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. no. 477). 
House urns of form H 1.2 have a strongly round-
ed, elongated, slightly biconical shape, which 
gently tapers towards a low ring-shaped base. 
The upper part is formed into a profiled coni-
cal roof form, which is divided into three parts 
by segmented plastic ribs. The roof ends in a flat-
tened button. The trapezoid-shaped door with 
a hole is in the central part of the urn. Such an 
urn was placed in Grave 1 (Figure 9) (Tomaž, La-
zar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. no. 56). The 
House urns of form H 1.3 have a bellied shape. 
The part with the door opening is separated 
from the rest of the vessel by two horizontal seg-
mented ribs. The upper part (roof) has two parts; 
the top is spherical with a small rounded conical 
knob. The opening is high in the urn's upper part 
and trapezoidal in shape. The base of the urn is 
concave. This shape of urn was added to Grave 
7 (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. 
no. 156).
The house urns of biconical shapes, more rigid 
and with flat or cylindrical form, are grouped in 
the form H 2. The biconical house urns with a 
cylindrical central part of the body and a square 
or rhomboidal opening are grouped in form 
Figure 8: House urn from grave 1 (10)  
(photo: Aleš Ogorelec)
Figure 9: House urn from grave 1 (11)  
(photo: Aleš Ogorelec)
H
o
u
se
 U
r
n
s 
in
 t
h
e 
B
u
r
ia
l 
P
r
a
c
t
ic
es
 o
f 
t
h
e 
W
es
t
er
n
 N
ec
ro
po
li
s 
o
f 
R
o
m
u
la
43
H  2.1. The roofs of these urns are conical, and 
the knobs are large and roof-shaped. Urns of this 
shape were found in Grave 2 (Tomaž, Lazar, and 
Breščak, forthcoming, cat. no. 78) and Grave 30 
(Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. 
no. 476). Another variant of the biconical house 
urn is one with a cylindrical central part that ta-
pers slightly towards the top (shape H 2.2). The 
central part of the urn has a trapezoidal door. 
The upper part unfortunately is not preserved in 
this variant. An urn of this shape was found in 
Grave 7 (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forthcom-
ing, cat. no. 157).
The most exciting form, however, is the house 
urn of the form H 3. This urn, composed of two 
parts, has the lower part made of a simple serv-
ing bowl (type Drag. 25) with a subsequent cut-
out door of a regular rectangular shape. For the 
upper part of the urn, a simple conical lid with 
a horn-shaped rim was used (the handle is miss-
ing). An example of a two-part house urn of the 
form H 3, which ingeniously joined two piec-
es of regular serving vessels to achieve or recre-
ate this very characteristic and specific form of 
the vessel, was discovered in Grave 1 (Tomaž, 
Lazar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. no. 57). 
This urn from Ribnica near Brežice is the only 
known example of a two-part house urn (Fig-
ure 10). 
The house urns from Ribnica near Brežice 
are made of finely refined clay without any visi-
ble inclusions. In all cases, they are wheel-thrown 
and fired in an oxidizing atmosphere. The colour 
of the surface and its inner layer is reddish yel-
low. They have a soft surface, which may be coat-
ed with a dark red (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, 
forthcoming, cat. no. 55 and 157), red (Tomaž, 
Lazar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. no. 476–
477), orange-red (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, 
forthcoming, cat. no. 56), light brown-orange 
(Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. 
no. 78) or red-orange slip (Tomaž, Lazar, and 
Breščak, forthcoming, cat. no. 57). The slip may 
be applied on the outer surface, inner and outer 
surfaces, or on part of the outer surface (Tomaž, 
Lazar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. no. 476). 
In one case, there was no coating (Tomaž, La-
zar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. no. 156), and 
in most cases, the coating is preserved only in 
traces. 
In several cases, house urns from Ribnica 
near Brežice are decorated with horizontal inci-
sions highlighting individual sections of the urn, 
such as the urns from Grave 1 (Tomaž, Lazar, 
and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. no. 55) and Grave 
30 (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forthcoming, 
cat. no. 477), which both belong to the urn form 
H 1.1. They may also be decorated with horizon-
tal grooves, such as the urn of form H 1.2 from 
Grave 1 (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forthcom-
ing, cat. no. 56) or the urn of form H2.2 from 
Grave 7 (Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forthcom-
ing, cat. no. 157). The house urn of form H 1.3 is a 
richly decorated urn with segmented plastic ribs 
and impressions in the upper part of the body 
(Tomaž, Lazar, and Breščak, forthcoming, cat. 
no. 156). However, the only decoration on the 
two-part house urn from Grave 1 is the original 
decoration of the serving bowl, which was used 
to create the urn’s lower part (Tomaž, Lazar, and 
Breščak, forthcoming, cat. no. 57).
Figure 10: House urn from grave 1 (12)  
(photo: Aleš Ogorelec)
st
u
d
ia
 u
n
iv
er
si
ta
t
is
 h
er
ed
it
a
t
i, 
le
t
n
ik
 12
 (2
02
4)
, š
t
ev
il
k
a
 1 
/ 
v
o
lu
m
e 
12
 (2
02
4)
, n
u
m
be
r 
1
44
Discussion
Comparisons to the house urns found at Ribni-
ca near Brežice can be found at several Roman 
sites in south-eastern Slovenia and north-west-
ern Croatia. The closest to Ribnica finds were 
the house urns discovered during the excava-
tions of the necropolis at Dvorce near Čatež in 
the 1990s. Five house urns are known from the 
site, but unfortunately, they have not yet been 
fully published. At this site, urns were buried in 
rectangular, stone slab-lined graves and circular 
walled tombs (Bavec 2016).
Many house urns were also discovered 
during the recent excavations of Roman cem-
eteries in the Drnovo area. In total, nine house 
urns were discovered in six rectangular stone-
built tombs, with one house urn added to four 
tombs (tombs 1, 16, 17, 18), two house urns added 
to tomb 14, and three house urns added to tomb 
7. The graves from the Drnovo 2 site are dated 
to the second and third centuries (Vojaković and 
Novšak 2022, 107). However, researchers assume 
that some of the tombs were looted in the Ro-
man or semi-transitional period due to the scarce 
grave goods in the individual tombs (Vojaković 
and Novšak 2022, 105). 
The settlement and necropolis area of 
Drnovo or Neviodunum stands out in terms of 
the number of known house urns. Sonja and Pe-
ter Petru published them in 1978 (Petru and Pet-
ru 1978). Their publication is based mainly on 
the Pečnik excavation collection from the Drno-
vo area, currently held by the National Museum 
of Slovenia. Due to the historical circumstances, 
the museum material does not have information 
on the exact archaeological context or preserved 
burial complexes. Identification and interpre-
tation could, therefore, be based primarily on a 
formal analysis of the findings. These finds were 
also the basis for Petru's study on the Latobici 
house urns (Petru 1971). 
The following nearby site, where house urns 
are present in most of the discovered graves, is 
Veliki Kamen (Uršič 1985, 19). Here, five round 
and square-built tombs were discovered dur-
ing protective excavations in 1962. As many as 
nine house urns were discovered in four graves. 
In Grave 1, a single house urn was added; how-
ever, in Grave 3, there were four of them, and 
in Graves 2 and 5, two house urns were placed 
(Uršič 1985, 21–25). 
A Roman-period burial site and parts of a 
road station (probably Crucium) were discov-
ered in Draga near Bela Cerkev on the Ljublja-
na–Obrežje motorway route and excavated in 
2002 (Križ 2003; Udovč 2022). At this burial 
site a burial plot, eleven walled tombs, ten cre-
mation and five inhumation graves were found 
(Udovč 2022, 23). There were also house urns in 
seven graves among the elaborate grave goods. 
In three graves, only one house urn was placed 
(Graves 3, 20, and 21); three graves contained 
up to two urns (Graves 7, 10, and 14); and three 
house urns were added in Grave 1 (Udovč 2022). 
To the southeast of Romula, we should also 
mention the site of Gornja vas near Žumberk in 
neighbouring Croatia, where seven stone tombs 
were found to contain various forms of house 
urns. Most of them were placed to the tombs 
individually, but in two tombs two house urns 
were discovered in each tomb (Gregl 1997, 57). 
Based on the grave finds, the authors conclude 
that the burial site was in use from the middle 
of the first century until the time of the Marco-
mannic Wars (Gregl 1997, 79). 
In addition to the highlighted sites, where 
house urns are represented in more significant 
numbers, it is worth mentioning that they are 
also found in other cemeteries in the Dolen-
jska and Posavje regions. However, they oc-
cur in smaller numbers, or the sites still need 
to be fully published. These include Zloganje 
near Škocjan (Breščak 1981), Straža near Novo 
mesto (Knez 1965; Križ, Stipančič, and Škedelj 
Petrič 2009, 359, cat. no. 4), the Škobernetov 
vrt site (Križ, Stipančič, and Škedelj Petrič 
2009, 359, cat. no. 1, 3a, 3b), the Beletov vrt site 
(Knez 1992) and Ljubljanska cesta site in Novo 
mesto (Božič 2008), Mačkovec near Novo mes-
to (Mason 2012; Mason and Županek 2018), a 
single grave from Šahovec near Dobrnič (Slabe 
H
o
u
se
 U
r
n
s 
in
 t
h
e 
B
u
r
ia
l 
P
r
a
c
t
ic
es
 o
f 
t
h
e 
W
es
t
er
n
 N
ec
ro
po
li
s 
o
f 
R
o
m
u
la
45
1975), Medvedjek–Gmajna (Stemberger Fle-
gar and Predan 2022) and others. In the area of 
Bela Krajina, graves with house urns were also 
found at Borštek near Metlika (Dular 1974), 
Rosalnice (Dular 1976), Otok near Podzeml-
je (Dular 1976), Štrekljevec (Dular 1976) and 
at the site of Hrast near Jugor (Dular 1976). 
Some individual finds of house urns from other 
sites, however, were already mentioned and de-
scribed by Peter Petru in his study (Petru 1971, 
14–52). 
All comparable house urns are technologi-
cally very diverse, sharing only the use of gener-
ally refined clay admixtures and often a coating 
on the outer and/or inner surface. At Drnovo 
2, for example, house urns are included among 
the tableware with a coating as a separate func-
tional-typological group (Vojaković and Novšak 
2022, 68, cat. no. 12, 18, 50–52, 75, 97, 101, 118–
122, 133, 149, 177, 184, 201). They are mostly made 
of refined clay admixture, with rare to moderate 
inclusions. They have a light-coloured inner core 
and a red-to-dark-red slip on the vessel's outer 
and/or inner surface. They are most often dec-
orated with painted decoration, occasionally 
with incisions or ribs, and the visual appearance 
is complemented by the so-called window open-
ings and the rooster-shaped button on the top of 
the urn (Vojaković and Novšak 2022, 68). 
At the Draga cemetery near Bela Cerkev, 12 
house-shaped urns were unearthed, each with 
its own unique features. Some are adorned with 
rectangular ‘window’ openings on the back, and 
their button may end in the form of a rooster 
(Udovč 2022, cat. no. 68–69, 142) or a moulded 
button (Udovč 2022, cat. no. 102–103, 159). They 
may be coated with a red coating, have a decorat-
ed upper part or roofs, and some have a central 
part where the doors are located with a rib be-
low and above, accentuated or separated (Udovč 
2022, 84). In individual cases this part may also 
be separated by a groove (Udovč 2022, cat. no. 
30–31, 48). 
Upper part of the house urn from the Med-
vedjek–Gmajna site is also wheel-thrown and 
made from a medium- to fine-grained clay ad-
mixture but with frequent inclusions of cham-
otte. The outer surface also has a red slip (Stem-
berger Flegar and Predan 2022, cat. no. 8). 
Most house urns from the site Dvorce 
near Čatež are similar in appearance and pro-
duction technology to those found at Ribni-
ca near Brežice, Drnovo 2, and Draga near Bela 
Cerkev. They are wheel-thrown and made from 
fine-grained clay. They are coated with a red slip 
and fired in an oxidizing atmosphere. On some, 
painted decoration is visible (for example, urns 
from Grave 2 and Grave 5). However, there is 
also a specimen from Grave 10, which is uncoat-
ed and fired in a reductive atmosphere so its co-
lour is not bright orange but brown (Bavec 2016).
At the Veliki Kamen site, Grave 3 contained, 
in addition to a house urn of grey fired clay with 
a red coating, an urn of grey-black fired clay with 
a black coating, which has a spruce twig motif 
incised on both sides of the door opening (Uršič 
1985, 22). 
House urns made of grey-black fired clay 
occur, among others, at the site of Gornja vas in 
Žumberak. In Grave 24, a black-fired urn deco-
rated with incisions and rouletted ornament and 
with eight X signs above the door opening was 
found (Gregl 2009, 48, Grave 24: cat. no. 1). In 
the same grave, a grey-fired house urn was also 
found (Gregl 2009, 48, Grave 24: cat. no. 4). The 
house urn from grave 40 is also black-fired, dec-
orated with horizontal grooves and rouletted or-
nament (Gregl 2009, 62, Grave 40: cat. no. 2). 
The remaining urns at the site of Gornja vas at 
Žumberak are light-toned, fired in an oxidizing 
atmosphere and coated with a red slip. Among 
them, the urn from Grave 36 stands out, with 
a prominent decoration on the cylindrical cen-
tral part of the lining. In addition to the hori-
zontal grooves and lines of impressions, it has an 
incised figural decoration. On each side of the 
door opening stylized human figures are carved, 
which, according to the researcher's interpre-
tation, represent the door guards. In addition, 
X-shaped symbols are carved on the door and 
on the cylindrical central part of the urn’s body 
(Gregl 2009, 57, vol. 31: 1).
st
u
d
ia
 u
n
iv
er
si
ta
t
is
 h
er
ed
it
a
t
i, 
le
t
n
ik
 12
 (2
02
4)
, š
t
ev
il
k
a
 1 
/ 
v
o
lu
m
e 
12
 (2
02
4)
, n
u
m
be
r 
1
46
Table 1: Comparative overview table of selected types of grave goods with house urns from the sites of Ribnica near 
Brežice, Draga near Bela Cerkev, Veliki Kamen, Drnovo 2, and Gornja vas near Žumberk  
(prepared by Alenka Tomaž).
Site Grave 
number
Ggrave  
construction
Number 
of house 
urns
Oil lamps
fib
ul
ae
iro
n 
kn
iv
es
am
be
r
Glass
co
in
s
Dating Publication
st
am
pe
d
ot
he
rs
ba
lsa
m
ar
iu
m
ve
ss
el
s
Ribnica 
near Brežice 
- western 
cemetery
Grave 1 grave pit enclosed with stone 
slabs
3 2       1 3 2     unpublished
Grave 2 grave pit enclosed with stone 
slabs
1             3    
Grave 7 rectangular stone-built tomb 2     4       1 1 141
Grave 30 simple grave pit 2     2         1 98–117
Draga near 
Bela Cerkav
Grave 1 walled stone chest with  
a stone lid
3 1   1     1       Udovč (2022), 
Križ (2004)
Grave 3 chest made of tegulae  
with a stone lid
1 2   2         2 140–144
Grave 7 tomb with a dome  
and an entrance
2   1   1       1 1. half 
of 3. 
century
Grave 10 tomb with a dome  
and shaft entrance
2 1 1   1       3 270–
275, 275, 
275
Grave 14 tomb with a dome  
and shaft entrance
2 1   1 1          
Grave 20 tomb with a dome  
and shaft entrance
1 1   4 2       1 138– 161
Grave 21 circular tomb with a dome 1 1   2 3       1 98–117
Veliki 
Kamen
Grave 1 circular stone-built tomb 1                   Uršič (1985)
Grave 2 rectangular stone-built tomb 2     2            
Grave 3 circular stone-built tomb 4     1            
Grave 5 not preserved 2     1            
Drnovo 2 Tomb 1 stone-built rectangular tomb 1                   Vojaković 
and Novšak 
(2022)
Tomb  7 stone-built rectangular tomb 3                  
Tomb 14 stone-built rectangular tomb 3 1                
Tomb 16 stone-built rectangular tomb 1               2 147, 
125–128
Tomb 17 stone-built rectangular tomb 1                  
Tomb 18 stone-built rectangular tomb 1 1                
Gornja vas 
near 
Žumberak
Grave 24 circular   stone-built tomb 2     1     1   1 86 Gregl (1997; 
2007)Grave 32 destroyed structure 1                 1. – 2. 
century
Grave 36 circular stone-built tomb (dry 
stone) with a dome
1     7     1 4 1 41–50, 
69–81, 
80–81, 
125–128
Grave 40 ellipsoidal stone-built tomb 2 1   1 1         1. – 2. 
century
Grave 
40a
urn on the outside of Grave 40 1                 1. – 2. 
century
Grave  43 rectangular stone structure 1   1             1. – 2. 
century
Grave 62 stone construction 1                 1. – 2. 
century
H
o
u
se
 U
r
n
s 
in
 t
h
e 
B
u
r
ia
l 
P
r
a
c
t
ic
es
 o
f 
t
h
e 
W
es
t
er
n
 N
ec
ro
po
li
s 
o
f 
R
o
m
u
la
47
Individual black, brown, and grey-fired 
urns are also known from Drnovo (Petru and 
Petru 1978, 70), while grey and grey-black-fired 
urns have been found in Grave 10 in Rosalnice 
(Dular 1976, 192).
Given the recently discovered house urns, 
their number, diverse shapes/forms, produc-
tion technology, decoration, and their long-last-
ing use, we can assume that they were made in 
different workshops. For this reason, Petru's hy-
pothesis about a centre for house urns produc-
tion in Roman Neviodunum (Petru 1971) no 
longer seems justified. Instead, it appears they 
were made upon the buyer's order, judging by 
their extraordinary diversity in the details.
Graves from the western necropolis in 
Romula, where house urns are found, can be 
chronologically placed from the mid-first centu-
ry to the first half or mid-second century, based 
on the composition of grave goods and the coins 
found. Considering the chronologically defina-
ble grave complexes from other well-dated sites, 
the graves from Ribnica are among the earliest. 
The graves from Veliki Kamen, which contained 
House urns, could be dated from the late first 
century to the end of the second century, but no 
coins as additional support for possible dating 
were not found (Uršič 1985, 35). 
The newly discovered graves from Drno-
vo show a modest range of finds that would al-
low for a more precise chronological placement; 
only in tomb 16 do two coins help to rough-
ly date it to the mid-second century (Vojaković 
and Novšak 2022). The graves with house urns 
from Draga near Bela Cerkev are dated from the 
late first century to the end of the third century, 
based on the grave goods and the accompanying 
coin finds (Križ 2003; Udovč 2022).
The latest finds and new grave complexes in-
dicate the use of house urns in burial cults over 
a relatively wide time span (Table 1). The earliest 
finds are known from Ribnica and date to the 
mid-first century, while most well-dated grave 
contexts originate from the second century. 
The youngest grave contexts with accompany-
ing house urns come from the cemetery at Draga 
near Bela Cerkev and date to the end of the third 
century (Križ 2003; Udovč 2022).
The burial architecture of the graves, par-
ticularly those housing urns, serves as a signifi-
cant indicator of the social status of the deceased. 
This architectural aspect suggests that the indi-
viduals were part of a wealthier social class, capa-
ble of commissioning or constructing masonry 
tombs with square or circular floor plans, or lin-
ing grave pits with stones or stone slabs. A nota-
ble exception is a single case from Ribnica, where 
urns were placed in a simple grave pit (Grave 
30), a rare occurrence that stands out among the 
findings.
The composition of grave goods at five cem-
eteries examined in more detail reflects a diverse 
and high-quality assortment of local and im-
ported items (Table 1). Most commonly found 
alongside house urns in graves are oil lamps with 
stamps, likely associated with burial rituals, as 
well as items of personal adornment, with fib-
ulae standing out in both number and variety 
of forms. A unique feature regarding the grave 
goods in graves with house urns is represented by 
the graves from Draga near Bela Cerkev, as five 
contained iron knives (Udovč 2022). Among the 
high-quality imported items, it is worth men-
tioning the amber items from Grave 1 in Ribni-
ca near Brežice and glass vessels in Graves 1, 2, 
and 7, as well as Graves 24 and 36 from Gorn-
ja vas near Žumberk (Gregl 2007). The ceram-
ic grave goods are primarily of a local or regional 
character, with hardly any imported Italic pot-
tery (Table 1).
Conclusion
The problem of interpreting house urns in the 
region of south-eastern Slovenia and north-west-
ern Croatia has been addressed by numerous au-
thors in the past. The first comprehensive study 
of house urns, as a distinctly local element of Ro-
man graves in the area of present-day south-east-
ern Slovenia, was contributed by Peter Petru 
(Petru 1971), as already mentioned. He linked 
house urns to the community of the Celtic 
tribe of Latobici, which inhabited this area from 
st
u
d
ia
 u
n
iv
er
si
ta
t
is
 h
er
ed
it
a
t
i, 
le
t
n
ik
 12
 (2
02
4)
, š
t
ev
il
k
a
 1 
/ 
v
o
lu
m
e 
12
 (2
02
4)
, n
u
m
be
r 
1
48
the second half of the first century BC onward 
(Petru 1966; 1971). His thoughts and conclusions 
have largely been summarized in the publica-
tions of Zoran Gregl (Gregl 1997; 2007; 2009). 
Borut Križ, in the exhibition catalogue for Dra-
ga near Bela Cerkev, contemplated how urns rep-
resent a particular form of final resting place in a 
spiritual-religious sense and indicate a strong be-
lief in the afterlife (Križ 2003, 24). A more recent 
study by Phil Mason attempted to connect the 
occurrence of house urns spatially and ideolog-
ically to the settlement patterns of the younger 
Iron Age and the contemporary Celtic commu-
nities (Mason 2012).4 Phil Mason and Bernarda 
Županek, in their article from 2018, link house 
urns to the elements of the Norico-Pannonian 
tradition and highlight the mixing of local cul-
tural identities with new ones brought by Ro-
manization (Mason and Županek 2018). How-
ever, they all agree that house urns played an 
important role in burial rituals.
The current state of newly discovered ne-
cropolises and their material culture, temporal 
occurrence, spatial distribution, and, last but not 
least, the stylistic and technological diversity of 
house urns suggest that we could examine their 
role in the context of burial practices from a dif-
ferent perspective, not necessarily in connection 
with prehistoric tradition.
The following facts and observations sup-
port this. The oldest contexts in which house 
urns appear date back to the mid-first century 
when the Romanization of present-day Slovenia 
4 The possibility of origins of Roman house urns in pre-
historic contexts of Dolenjska, specifically from the late 
Bronze Age, has also been investigated by Ana Kovačič, 
Bine Kramberger, and Kaja Stemberger Flegar (2023, 17).
was already in full swing or was even slowly con-
cluding. House urns are, for the most part, un-
known in Late La Tène and early Roman bur-
ial sites in Dolenjska. At several Roman period 
burial sites in Dolenjska, an area inhabited by 
the Latobici, house urns do not even appear in 
graves (for example, at the Praetorium Latobico-
rum – Trebnje). The emphasized elements of the 
indigenous Celtic communities, as reflected in 
the epigraphic and onomastic materials during 
the first century, significantly declined and near-
ly disappeared by the second century, and only 
exceptionally are they present in the third centu-
ry, as evidenced by the case of Celeia (Šašel Kos 
1984). In contrast, house urns remain in graves 
until the end of the third century.
So, are house urns genuinely connected 
with the tradition of Latobici, the indigenous 
community in this area? Do house urns really 
highlight the complexities of how different cul-
tures approached death and commemoration, by 
blending traditional customs with the influenc-
es of Roman ideology? What direction does the 
current state of research and the presented facts 
indicate? Perhaps it would be worthwhile to con-
sider different aspects and beliefs of individual 
groups of inhabitants who marked the unique-
ness of their beliefs or attitudes towards burial 
practice with the use of house urns, in which the 
souls of the deceased found a characteristic and 
familiar residence. 
New and in-depth research may help an-
swer or dismiss this provocative suggestion.
H
o
u
se
 U
r
n
s 
in
 t
h
e 
B
u
r
ia
l 
P
r
a
c
t
ic
es
 o
f 
t
h
e 
W
es
t
er
n
 N
ec
ro
po
li
s 
o
f 
R
o
m
u
la
49
Table 1: Ribnica near Brežice, finds from Grave 1 (drawings: Janja Tratnik Šumi; table prepared by: Aleš Ogorelec)
st
u
d
ia
 u
n
iv
er
si
ta
t
is
 h
er
ed
it
a
t
i, 
le
t
n
ik
 12
 (2
02
4)
, š
t
ev
il
k
a
 1 
/ 
v
o
lu
m
e 
12
 (2
02
4)
, n
u
m
be
r 
1
50
Table 2: Ribnica near Brežice, finds from Grave 1 (drawings: Janja Tratnik Šumi; table prepared by: Aleš Ogorelec)
H
o
u
se
 U
r
n
s 
in
 t
h
e 
B
u
r
ia
l 
P
r
a
c
t
ic
es
 o
f 
t
h
e 
W
es
t
er
n
 N
ec
ro
po
li
s 
o
f 
R
o
m
u
la
51
Table 3: Ribnica near Brežice, finds from Grave 1 (drawings: Janja Tratnik Šumi; table prepared by: Aleš Ogorelec) 
st
u
d
ia
 u
n
iv
er
si
ta
t
is
 h
er
ed
it
a
t
i, 
le
t
n
ik
 12
 (2
02
4)
, š
t
ev
il
k
a
 1 
/ 
v
o
lu
m
e 
12
 (2
02
4)
, n
u
m
be
r 
1
52
Table 4: Ribnica near Brežice, finds from Grave 1 (drawings: Janja Tratnik Šumi; table prepared by: Aleš Ogorelec) 
H
o
u
se
 U
r
n
s 
in
 t
h
e 
B
u
r
ia
l 
P
r
a
c
t
ic
es
 o
f 
t
h
e 
W
es
t
er
n
 N
ec
ro
po
li
s 
o
f 
R
o
m
u
la
53
Table 5: Ribnica near Brežice, finds from Grave 1 (drawings: Janja Tratnik Šumi; table prepared by: Aleš Ogorelec) 
st
u
d
ia
 u
n
iv
er
si
ta
t
is
 h
er
ed
it
a
t
i, 
le
t
n
ik
 12
 (2
02
4)
, š
t
ev
il
k
a
 1 
/ 
v
o
lu
m
e 
12
 (2
02
4)
, n
u
m
be
r 
1
54
Table 6: Ribnica near Brežice, finds from Grave 1 (drawings: Janja Tratnik Šumi; table prepared by: Aleš Ogorelec)
H
o
u
se
 U
r
n
s 
in
 t
h
e 
B
u
r
ia
l 
P
r
a
c
t
ic
es
 o
f 
t
h
e 
W
es
t
er
n
 N
ec
ro
po
li
s 
o
f 
R
o
m
u
la
55
References
Bavec, U. 2016. Rimsko grobišče Dvorce pri 
Čatežu in hišaste žare: mednarodna 
arheološka razstava, 15. 12. 2015 - 10. 5. 2016. 
Brežice: Posavski muzej Brežice.
Božič, D. 2008. Poznolatensko-rimsko grobišče v 
Novem mestu: Ljubljanska cesta in Okrajno 
glavarstvo; študije o fibulah in o relativni 
kronologiji pozne latenske dobe. Katalogi in 
monografije 39. Ljubljana: Narodni muzej 
Slovenije.
Breščak, D. 1981. ‘Zloganje.’ Varstvo spomenikov 
23:265–266. 
Deschmann, C. 1886. ‘Die neusten römischen 
Funde von Dernovo (Neviodunum) in 
Unterkrain.’ Mitteilungen der Kaiserlich-
Königlichen Zentral-Kommission 12:17.
Dular, J. 1974. ‘Rimski grobovi z Borštka v 
Metliki.’ Arheološki vestnik 25:353–369.
Dular, A. 1976. ‘Rimski grobovi iz Rosalnic, 
Štrekljevca in Otoka pri Podzemlju.’ 
Arheološki vestnik 27:191–201.
Gregl, Z. 1997. Rimske nekropole sjeverne 
Hrvatske. Zagreb: Arheološki muzej u 
Zagrebu.
Gregl, Z. 2007. ‘Rimskodobna nekropola 
nekropola Gornja vas na Žumberku.’ 
Vjesnik Arheološkog muzeja u Zagrebu 40 
(1):221–331.
Gregl, Z. 2009. Žumberak i Latobici, hommage 
jednoj planini. Zagreb: Arheološki muzej u 
Zagrebu.
Knez, T. 1965. ‘Rimski grobovi v Straži.’ 
Arheološki vestnik 16:145–164.
Knez, T. 1992, Novo mesto 2. Keltsko - rimsko 
grobišče Beletov vrt / Novo mesto 2. Keltisch 
römisches Gräberfeld Beletov vrt. Carniola 
archaeologica 2. Novo mesto: Dolenjski 
muzej.
Kovačič, A., B. Kramberger, and K. Stemberger 
Flegar. 2023. ‘House Urns through the 
Ages.’ In TRAC 2023, Theoretical Roman 
Archaeology Conference, Conference 
Information, programme and Abstracts, 17. 
Exeter: University of Exeter.
Križ, B. 2003. Draga pri Beli Cerkvi: antična 
nekropola; katalog razstave = Draga near 
Bela Cerkev: Roman Cemetery; Exhibition 
Cataogue. Novo mesto: Dolenjski muzej.
Križ, B., P. Stipančič, and A. Škedelj Petrič. 
2009. Arheološka podoba Dolenjske. Novo 
mesto: Dolenjski muzej.
Lovenjak, M. 1997. ‘Štirje novi miljniki s ceste 
Emona: Neviodunum.’ Arheološki vestnik 
48:89–96.
Mason, P. 2012. ‘Something Old Something 
New, Something Borrowed… 
Romanisation and the Creation of Identity 
in Early Roman Central and South-
Eastern Slovenia.’ In Emona med Aqvilejo 
in Panonijo (Emona between Aquileia 
and Pannonia), edited by I. Lazar and B. 
Županek, 389–406. Koper: Univerza na 
Primorskem, Znanstveno-raziskovalno 
središče, Inštitut za dediščino Sredozemlja, 
and Univerzitetna založba Annales.
Mason, P., and B. Županek. 2018. ‘Being 
Roman: Rethinking Ethnic and Social 
Boundaries in the Roman South-Eastern 
Alpine World.’ Theoretical Roman 
Archaeology Journal 1 (1). https://doi.org 
/10.16995/traj.354.
Petru, P. 1969. ‘Rimski grobovi iz Dobove, 
Ribnice in Petrušnje vasi = Römische 
Gräber aus Dobova, Ribnica in Petrušnja 
vas.’ Slovenska akademija znanosti in 
umetnosti, Ljubljana.
Petru, P. 1975. ‘XII, Krško, Ribnica, 
Podgračeno.’ In Arheološka najdišča 
Slovenije, edited by L. Bolta, 259. 
Ljubljana: Državna založba Slovenije.
Petru, P. 1966. ‘Hišaste žare, dokaz migracije 
dela plemena Latobici.’ Arheološki vestnik 
17:361–371.
Petru, P. 1971. Hišaste žare Latobikov. 
Ljubljana: Narodni muzej Slovenije.
Petru, S., and P. Petru. 1978. Neviodunum 
(Drnovo pri Krškem). Katalogi in 
monografije 15. Ljubljana: Narodni muzej 
Slovenije.
st
u
d
ia
 u
n
iv
er
si
ta
t
is
 h
er
ed
it
a
t
i, 
le
t
n
ik
 12
 (2
02
4)
, š
t
ev
il
k
a
 1 
/ 
v
o
lu
m
e 
12
 (2
02
4)
, n
u
m
be
r 
1
56
Slabe, M. 1975. ‘Antični grob iz Šahovca pri 
Dobrniču.’ Arheološki vestnik 26:242–249.
Stemberger Flegar, K., and P. Predan 2022. 
Medvedjek–Gmajna. Arheologija na 
avtocestah Slovenije 103. Ljubljana: Zavod 
za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije.
Šašel, J. 1975. ‘Rimske ceste v Sloveniji.’ In 
Arheološka najdišča Slovenije, edited by L. 
Bolta, 74–81. Ljubljana: Državna založba 
Slovenije.
Šašel, J. 1977. ‘Viae militares.’ In Studien zu 
den Militärgrenzen Roms II, edited by D. 
Haupt and H. G. Horn, 334–244. Köln: 
Rheinland.
Šašel Kos, M. 1984. ‘Prerez čez zgodovino 
celejanskih prebivalcev v luči onomastičnih 
in prozopografskih podatkov.’ Živa antika 
34:252–255.
Tomaž, A., I. Lazar, and D. Breščak. 
Forthcoming. Ribnica pri Brežicah II: 
Romula, cesta in grobišče. Ljubljana: Zavod 
za varstvo kulturne dediščine Slovenije.
Udovč, K. 2022. Draga pri Beli cerkvi. 
Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 101. 
Ljubljana: Zavod za varstvo kulturne 
dediščine Slovenije.
Uršič, A. 1985. ‘Rimsko grobišče na Velikem 
Kamnu.’ In Veliki Kamen, edited by M. 
Guštin, 19–32. Brežice: Posavski muzej.
Vojaković, P., and M. Novšak. 2022. Drnovo 
2. Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 
104. Ljubljana: Zavod za varstvo kulturne 
dediščine Slovenije.
Summary
Since their first discovery over 200 years ago, house-
shaped urns, or simply House urns, have aroused con-
siderable attention. Numerous researchers have written 
about them, with Peter Petru's work from 1971 particu-
larly standing out in the field of study.
During archaeological research at the site of 
Ribnica near Brežice (the Roman roadside station of 
Romula) between 2001 and 2004, extensive settlement 
remains of the station and part of the Roman road Em­
ona–Neviodunum–Siscia were excavated, along with 
the western necropolis of Romula, which featured four 
burial plots and 131 graves. Eight House urns were also 
placed in four of these graves. The proportion of graves 
containing House urns at Ribnica near Brežice repre-
sents only three percent of all graves. Based on the walls' 
shape, door openings, and the roof and button-like fin-
ish, they can be classified into three basic forms with sev-
eral variations (H 1: H 1.1–H 1.3, H 2: H 2.1–H 2.2, and 
H 3). The most exciting form of House urn is form H 
3, which consists of two parts. The lower part was made 
using a bowl of the Drag. 25 type, into which doors were 
subsequently cut; the upper part of the urn utilized a 
conical lid with a horn-shaped curled edge. So far, the 
find from Ribnica near Brežice is the only known exam-
ple of a two-part House urn.
The problem of interpreting House urns in the re-
gion of south-eastern Slovenia and north-western Croa-
tia has sparked a lively debate among numerous authors. 
They generally agree that these urns played a significant 
role in burial rituals. Peter Petru, in his work from 1971, 
linked House urns to the community of the Celtic tribe 
Latobici, which inhabited this area from the second half 
of the first century BC onward. His thoughts and con-
clusions have been summarized by numerous other au-
thors, including Zoran Gregl. Borut Križ speculated 
that the urns, in a spiritual-religious sense, represented a 
special form of final resting place and indicated a strong 
belief in the afterlife. Phil Mason attempted to spatial-
ly and ideologically connect the occurrence of House 
urns to the settlement patterns of the younger Iron 
Age and the contemporary Celtic communities. Lat-
er, he and Bernarda Županek linked House urns to the 
elements of the Noric-Pannonian tradition, highlight-
ing the mixing of local cultural identities with new ones 
brought by Romanization.
Given the newly discovered House urns, their 
number, diverse shapes, production technology, deco-
ration, and the longevity of their use, we are faced with 
a compelling need for further research. We assume that 
these urns were produced in different workshops, which 
challenges Petru's hypothesis about a centre for the pro-
duction of House urns in the area of Roman Neviodu­
num. Instead, it seems they were made upon the buyer's 
order. The latest reflections on them also suggest that 
we could view their role in burial practices from a dif-
ferent perspective, not necessarily in connection with 
prehistoric tradition, primarily evidenced by their tem-
H
o
u
se
 U
r
n
s 
in
 t
h
e 
B
u
r
ia
l 
P
r
a
c
t
ic
es
 o
f 
t
h
e 
W
es
t
er
n
 N
ec
ro
po
li
s 
o
f 
R
o
m
u
la
57
poral occurrence. Furthermore, at several Roman-era 
burial sites in Dolenjska, namely an area inhabited by 
the Latobici, house-shaped urns do not appear in graves 
at all (for example, at the Praetorium Latobicorum – Tre-
bnje). Thus, are House urns really connected with the 
tradition of the Latobici or the indigenous communi-
ties of this area? It would be worth considering different 
frameworks or beliefs of individual groups of inhabit-
ants who marked the uniqueness of their beliefs or their 
relationship to burial practices by using House urns in 
which the souls of the deceased found a characteristic 
and familiar residence. New and in-depth research may 
help to answer or dismiss this provocative suggestion.
Povzetek
Hišaste žare vse od prvih odkritij pred več kot 200 leti 
vzbujajo precejšnjo pozornost. O njih so pisali številni 
raziskovalci, zlasti pa izstopajo dela Petra Petruja; za po-
znavanje tematike je še zlasti pomembno njegovo delo 
iz leta 1971.
Med arheološkimi raziskavami na najdišču Ribni-
ca pri Brežicah (rimska obcestna postaja Romula), med 
letoma 2001 in 2004, je bilo poleg obsežnih naselbin-
skih ostalin postaje in dela rimske ceste Emona–Nevio-
dunum–Siscia raziskano tudi zahodno grobišče Romu-
le s štirimi grobnimi parcelami in 131 grobovi. V štirih 
izmed njih je bilo položenih tudi osem hišastih žar. De-
lež grobov, v katerih so bile pridane hišaste žare, v Rib-
nici pri Brežicah predstavlja zgolj 3 % vseh grobov. Na 
osnovi oblikovanosti ostenja, odprtin za vratca in stre-
hastega oz. gumbastega zaključka smo jih lahko raz-
vrstili v tri osnovne oblike z več različicami (H 1: H 1.1–
H 1.3, H 2: H 2.1–H 2.2 in H 3). Najzanimivejša oblika 
hišastih žar je oblika H 3, ki je sestavljena iz dveh delov. 
Za spodnji del je bila uporabljena skleda, posnetek obli-
ke Drag. 25, v katero so bila naknadno izrezana vratca; za 
zgornji del žare pa je bil uporabljen konični pokrov z ro-
govilastim izvihanim robom. Zaenkrat je najdba iz Rib-
nice pri Brežicah edini znan primerek dvodelne hišaste 
žare. 
S problemom interpretacije hišastih žar na obmo-
čju jugovzhodne Slovenije in severozahodne Hrvaške 
so se ukvarjali številni avtorji, ki se večinoma strinjajo, 
da so imele pomembno vlogo v pogrebnih ritualih. Pe-
ter Petru je v svojem delu iz leta 1971 hišaste žare povezal 
s skupnostjo keltskega plemena Latobikov, ki je to ob-
močje poseljevala od druge polovice 1. stoletja pr. n. št. 
dalje. Njegove misli in zaključke so povzeli številni dru-
gi avtorji, med njimi tudi Zoran Gregl. Borut Križ je 
razmišljal v smeri, da so v duhovno-religioznem smislu 
žare predstavljale posebno obliko zadnjega počivališča 
in obenem nakazovale močno vero v posmrtno življe-
nje. Phil Mason pa je skušal pojavnost hišastih žar pro-
storsko in idejno navezati na poselitveni vzorec mlajše 
železne dobe ter tedanjih keltskih skupnosti. Kasneje 
sta z Bernardao Županek hišaste žare navezovala na ele-
mente noriško-panonske tradicije in izpostavljala meša-
nje lokalnih kulturnih identitet z novimi, ki jih je prines-
la romanizacija. 
Glede na novoodkrite hišaste žare in njihovo šte-
vilo, raznoliko obliko, tehnologijo izdelave in okras pa 
tudi dolgoživost njihove uporabe domnevamo, da so jih 
izdelovali v različnih delavnicah, zaradi česar se Petru-
jeva hipoteza o centru izdelave hišastih žar na območju 
rimskega Nevioduna ne zdi več upravičena. Prej se zdi, 
da so bile izdelovane po naročilu. Najnovejši razmislek 
o njih kaže tudi, da bi na njihovo vlogo v pogrebnih pra-
ksah lahko pogledali tudi z drugega zornega kota in ne 
nujno v povezavi s prazgodovinsko tradicijo, za kar pri-
ča predvsem njihova časovna pojavnost. Prav tako se na 
več rimskodobnih grobiščih Dolenjske, torej na obmo-
čju, ki so ga poseljevali Latobiki, hišaste žare v grobovih 
ne pojavljajo (primer Praetorium Latobicorum – Treb-
nje). Torej, ali so hišaste žare res povezane s tradicijo La-
tobikov oz. z avtohtonimi skupnostmi tega prostora? 
Veljalo bi pomisliti tudi na drugačne okvire oz. verova-
nja posameznih skupin prebivalcev, ki so posebnost svo-
jega verovanja ali odnosa do pogrebnega kulta v pogreb-
nem ritualu obeležili z uporabo hišaste žare, v kateri je 
duša pokojnih našla značilno in prepoznavno prebivališ-
če. Nove in poglobljene raziskave bodo morda pomaga-
le odgovoriti ali pa opustiti ta provokativen namig.