The archer from Carnium
Boštjan ODAR
Izvleček
Abstract
Poznoantični prebivalci utrdbe Carnium so na ravnici ob sotočju Save in Kokre celo 6. stoletje pokopavali svojce ali bližnje. Velik del grobišča je bil izkopan na koncu 19. in v začetku 20. stoletja. 26. 7. 1900 je Jernej Pečnik izkopal izjemen grob bojevnika z mečem, 23 puščičnimi ostmi, kavljem za tul in dvema dolgima nožema. Zgolj napadalna bojevniška oprema v tem grobu kaže na poseben bojevniški položaj pokojnega. Vse puščične osti so bile namenjene prebijanju zaščitne opreme, lamelnih oklepov in verižnih srajc. Posebej zanimive so trikrilne osti s piramidastim vrhom, ki jih povezujem z bizantinsko oborožitvijo, in trije novi tipi puščičnih osti, ki zaenkrat nimajo sočasnih primerjav iz pozne antike.
Bojevnik, ki je pripadal višjemu družbenemu sloju, se je s temi puščicami lahko opremil v času zavezništva Langobardov z Bizantinci. Bojevnika, lokostrelca z mečem in nožema so verjetno pokopali v drugi polovici 6. stoletja.
Ključne besede: Karnij - Kranj, Slovenija, druga polovica 6. st., grob bojevnika, lokostrelec, meč, saks, puščične osti, kavelj za tul
The inhabitants of the Late Antiquity fortress of Carnium buried their kith and kin on the plain at the confluence of the Sava and the Kokra Rivers throughout the 6th century. A large part of this cemetery was excavated at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20'h century. On July 26th, 1900, Jernej Pečnik dug out an exceptional grave of a warrior with a sword, 23 arrowheads, a hook for quiver suspension and two long knives. The exclusively offensive weaponry indicates the deceased's particular status as a warrior. All arrowheads were used to penetrate defensive weaponry, that is scale armour and chain mail. Of particular interest among the arrowheads are the trilobate arrowheads with a pyramidal tip, tied to the Byzantine weaponry, as well as three new types of arrowheads, which are without contemporary parallels from the Late Antiquity as of yet.
The warrior, a member of the upper social classes, could have used these arrowheads in the time of the alliance between the Langobardi and the Byzantines. This archer with a sword and two knives was probably buried in the second half of the
6th century.
Keywords: Carnium - Kranj, Slovenia, second half of the 6'h century, warrior's grave, archer, sword, sax, arrowheads, hook for quiver suspension
INTRODUCTION
The plain named Lajh is situated in the immediate vicinity of the confluence of the Sava and the Kokra Rivers. Above it and to the north-east, rises a rock promontory. During the Late Antiquity, the latter was the site of a town, known by the name of Carnium, and it is, at present, the site of the old city centre of Kranj (Kos 1902; Šašel 197071, 33-35). To the inhabitants of Carnium, the plain underneath served to bury their kin throughout the 6th century and at the beginning of the 7th century (Vinski 1980).
A large part of the cemetery was excavated in the years 1896 to 1905 (Stare 1980; Knific 1995). Succeeding each other as excavators at Lajh were T. Pavšlar (1896-1900), J. Pečnik (1900), J. Szom-bathy (1901), J. Žmavc (1901), F. Schulz (1901), again J. Žmavc (1903-1904), and W. Šmid (1905). In 1982, a small trial excavation was conducted by M. Sagadin (1983), while the rescue excavations in late March, 2004, yielded several inhumation graves, among them also a female burial with precious grave goods (Sagadin 2004; Delo 30. 3. 2004, p. 7; Gorenjski glas 16. 4. 2004, p. 8).
First reports of the Late Antiquity graves from Lajh underneath Kranj were published by Žmavc (1904) and three years later by Šmid (1907). The material which was excavated by Pečnik in 1900 and Szombathy in the following year is held at the Natural History Museum in Vienna (NHM Wien), while the material from all other excavations is held at the National Museum of Slovenia (NMS). Most of the material from the Lajh cemetery was assembled and arranged by V. Stare for the monographic publication Kranj, nekropola iz časa preseljevanja ljudstev. This publication saw encouraging reviews (an overview by Knific 1995, 23), as well as a sharp critique, where Bona (1981) pointed out the shortcomings of the catalogue and the erroneous assignment of grave units (the Slovene translation of this article review in Hungarian is held at the NMS). In recent years, T. Knific of the National Museum of Slovenia has been conducting the task of reassembling grave units and situating the graves within a common plan of the cemetery, using the manuscripts and the original publications of the excavators as well as the more or less lengthy articles in the daily or weekly newspapers of the time (Knific 1995; Knific 2005). Studies on the Lajh cemetery were conducted also outside Slovenia, but were based, beside the original publications, also on the unreliable catalogue mentioned above (Martin 2000; Ibler 1990; Ibler 2001). The wide range of possibilities that the already excavated part of the cemetery still offers is indicated also by the diploma dissertations at the Department of Archaeology under the mentorship of Dr T. Knific, associate professor (Bras-Kernel 2002; Odar 2003; Milavec 2004, for example).
My acquaintance with warrior graves from Lajh occurred while I was writing the diploma dissertation on archer's equipment. This study (Odar 2003), however, did not include the warrior's grave of an archer with a sword, two long knives, and 23 arrowheads, since this particular grave unit, held at the Natural History Museum in Vienna, has not yet been published. Stare (1980, 8) mentioned Pečnik's three graves from 1900, while the sword and the hook for quiver suspension were published as separate finds and were not ascribed to one of Pečnik's graves. Knific (1995, 27-28) and Božič (2001, 210) both wrote about the grave with the sword and 23 arrowheads, while von Freeden (1991, 602, footnote 54) only mentioned the trilobite arrowheads that are held at the Natural History Museum in Vienna. On the incentive of T. Knific and A. Pleterski and with the support of the Institute of Archaeology (IzA), T. Korošec, who was to draw the objects, and myself visited the Natural History Museum in Vienna between November 15th and 19th, 2004, in
order to document the grave unit of the warrior and to prepare it for publication.
MANUSCRIPT SOURCES
1. Letter by Jernej Pečnik to Joseph Szombathy, dated July 27th, 1900. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg. Copy held at the Archive of the IzA. Two sheets written on the recto and verso, size 22.5 x 14.4 cm. Pečnik's manuscript in German. Written in Kranj.
schönen Ebenen Platze lasse ich zwei graben graben, so 1 Metter breit und einige 5 Metter lang ist sant Schotter, von Save aufgetragen wir graben und kommen wir gestern auf 3 Skelete in einem graben 2ter war einen 2 Metter tief, hat gehabt 1 grosses Schwert 85 cm lang, und 5 cm breit, auf beiden Seiten scharf, sehr schweres Schwert, einen solchen habe ich noch nicht ausgegraben, und bei dem Skelete war bei Kopfe 2 lange ungewöhnliche Messer und bei Schwert 23 Pfeilspitzen, verschiedener Gatung sehr interessante sonst nichts, bei 2 Skeleten waren keine beigaben ...
2.	Letter by Jernej Pečnik to Joseph Szombathy, dated November 10th, 1900. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg. Typewritten copy held at the Archive of the IzA. Pečnik's manuscript in German. Written in Kranj.
... Nro. 1. Skeletgrab in Krainburg 2 Metter tief, Kopf gegen Westen, gut erhaltene Skelet, aus Völkerwanderungszeit, Auf der rechten Seite, bei der rechten Hand gelegen, 1 grosser Schwert, gegen 90 cm lang, 5 cm breit, beim Schwerte 23 Pfeilspitzen, gut erhaltene, beim Kopfe, bei jeder Seite 1 Messer, in die Erde gesteckt, Messer sind beide gleich, 28 cm lange, 2 cm breite, ungewöhnliche Messer, Schwert auf beiden Seiten scharf. ...
3.	Letter by Joseph Szombathy to Jernej Pečnik, dated November 19th, 1900. Archives of the Republic of Slovenia, AS 956, Pečnik Jernej, tehnična enota 1, Ljubljana. Copy held at the Archive of the IzA. Sheet written on the recto and verso, size 28.5 x 22.6 cm. Szombathy's manuscript. Written in Vienna.
... Seien Sie so freundlich, mir über die Funde von Krainburg und Veldes einige Auskünfte zu geben, die mir für den Augenblick sehr erwünscht sind.
1. Was geschah mit den Knochen und dem Schädel jenes Grabes von Krainburg, das Sie ausgruben und in dem Sie das Schwert und die Pfeile fanden.
2.	Was geschah mit Ihren Funden von Veldes?
3.	Könnte man in Krainburg graben?
Diese Fragen bitte ich möglichst bald und möglichst pünktlich zu beantworten. Ihre letzte kleine Sendung mit dem Schwerte u.s.w. werde ich gerne kaufen. Aber heuer habe ich leider in der Dotation, aus welcher ich den Ankauf bestreiten soll, kein Geld mehr. Sie müßen also warten bis zu Anfang Jänner. ...
4.	Letter by Jernej Pečnik to Joseph Szombathy, dated November 20th, 1900. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg. Copy held at the Archive of the IzA. Four sheets written on the recto and verso, size 34.1 x 21 cm. Pečnik's manuscript in German. Written in Novo mesto.
... lasse ich im Juli heuer, auf dem Platze wo muss Grabfeld sein, 2 Graben ausgraben, bis 2 Metter tief, ein jeder Graben lasse Ich bei 4 Metter langen bis 5 Metter ausgraben, und nur 1 Metter breit, und komme Ich in einem Graben auf 1 Skeletgrab, und in dem 2 Graben finde Ich 2 Skeletgräber.
Skeletgräber in Krainburg
I. Graben 5 lang, und nur 1 Metter breit, 2 Metter tief, ausgegraben, unteren Grab.
... Ganz nahe am Zusammenfluß der Kanker mit der Save. Am Spitz steht das Mühlenetablissement Paušler. SO - SW von Fluße, NO von der über die Kanker nach Krainbg kommenden Bezirkstrasse begrenzt, NW an den Gemeindegrund anstoßend. Neben dieser Grenze ist die gegen die Bezirkstrasse offene Hofparzelle, auf der Paušler die Funde gemacht hat. Die werthvollen Grabfunde sind aus der Mitte. Bis zur Annahme meiner Punkte lasse ich die wartenden Arbeiter abtreten. ...
... Nachm. 1 h Beginn der Grabg. Von der Ecke städtischen Platzes an d. Strasse, neben der Zufahrt zum Paušlerischen Grunde zur Ecke des Paušleri-schen Wirtschaftsgebäudes 209 -. Der Messpunkt a liegt 3 m ab von 3 Aleebaume. Von a zur Ecke 15'00/ 115, zur Ecke d. W.-gebäudes 180°, zur Grabung 12'40/ 119, 13-60/144 ...
6. Plan of the cemetery made by Joseph Szombathy in 1901. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg. Copy and photo of the plan held at the Archive of the IzA, scale 1: 200. The plan made on a sheet, size 41.6 x 34 cm. Szombathy's manuscript. Drawing in pencil, partly traced in ink (fig. 3).
Grab Nro. 1. 1,50 m tief Kopf gegen Westen gut erhaltener Skelet, in Schotterboden, keine Beigaben.
Grab Nro. 2. 2 Metter tief, Kopf gegen Westen, bei rechter Hand 1 grosse Schwert, bei 90 cm lang 5 cm breit, beim Schwerte, auf Haufen zusammen, 23 Pfeilspitzen und bei Kopfe auf jeder Seite des Kopfes 1 Messer, Messer 28 cm lange, 2 cm breite, gut erhaltenes Skelet.
Grab Nro. 3. in zweiten Graben, nur 1 Metter tief wieder Kopf gegen Westen, ohne beigaben, so haben alle begrabene geschaut gegen Osten aus diesen 2 Probe graben, ist ersichtlich dass muss noch ein grosses Grabfeld sein, auf diesen schönen Platze, 60 Metter langen 40 Metter breiten, müssen noch Hunderte Gräber liegen. ...
5. Joseph Szombathy's field journal, dated to 1901. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg. Photographic copy held at the IzA. Photographs do not allow for a physical description. The inscription on the cover of the journal: NOTIZEN. Oberkrain. 1901. Krainburg 36. The journal has 28 pages.
PICTORIAL SOURCES
1.	1901. Unknown author. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg, Nr. 1607. Photographic copy held at the Archive of the IzA. Size 12.9 x 8.8 cm. Photo glued onto black base and light brown paper envelope (fig. 4).
2.	1901. Unknown author. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg, Nr. 1608. Photographic copy held at the Archive of the IzA. Size 12.9 x 8.8 cm. Photo glued to black base and light brown paper envelope (fig. 5).
3.	1901. Unknown author. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg, Nr. 1609. Photographic copy held at the Archive of the IzA. Size 12.9 x 8.8 cm. Photo glued to black base and light brown paper envelope (fig. 6).
4.	1901. Unknown author. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg, Nr. 1610. Photographic copy held at the Archive of the IzA. Size 12.9 x 8.8 cm. Photo glued to black base and light brown paper envelope (fig. 7).
PECNIK'S DISCOVERY OF THE GRAVE
Pečnik, in the letter addressed to the curator of the court museum in Vienna, Dr Szombathy, writes that miller Pavšlar had dug out over 100 graves on the spot where he built a large mill (source 1). First graves, however, had already been encountered in 1896 while clearing trees for a new construction there. Rutar also reported of 16 excavated skeletons (1899, 142-143). The discovery of a female grave with precious gold objects two years after that, on 1st December (Bras-Kernel 2002), caused further digging on Pavšlar's estate, with success. New finds from Pavšlar's estate found their way into daily and weekly newspapers of the time. Reports of gold treasures often caused the amateur excavator Pečnik to respond with vexation, drawing attention to the unprofessional and unsystematic grave digging on Pavšlar's estate (Knific 1995, 24-27). Through the municipal office and the local head office, he succeeded in stopping Pavšlar from further activity. He then wanted to inspect the extent of the cemetery himself.
Pečnik arrived in Kranj a day or two before July 27th. He writes (source 1) that a nice area along the Sava, a pasture, is situated next to Pavšlar's estate and belongs to the city of Kranj. After receiving the consent needed to dig from the city administration, he commenced his trial excavations in the immediate vicinity of Pavšlar's estate. On July 26th then, four workers stuck their shovels into the gravel. Pečnik had two trial trenches dug, 1 m in width and approximately 5 m in length. The letters inform us that they came across three skeletons in one trench. The second skeleton lay 2 m deep, it had a large sword, 85 cm long, 5 cm wide, and was sharp on both edges. He reports never to have dug out such a sword. At the head, there were two unusual long knives and, next to the sword, there were 23 very interesting arrowheads of different types. The other two skeletons in the trench did not contain grave goods. Pečnik carefully lifted the skulls and left them to dry, while the ditches were filled. During his brief absence, a local doctor came to visit and, without Pečnik's knowledge, took the skulls. This angered Pečnik, saying that the doctor ruined the skulls. He estimates that the area, 50 m in length and 20 m in width, as well as two smaller adjoining areas, should contain hundreds of graves that would need to be dug that year. Since the money soon ran out, he had to obtain it from elsewhere. He also writes that he does not intend to hand the sword to the museum in Ljubljana, rather offering his services to Szombathy, if the latter
Fig. 1: Situation of finds in the warrior's grave, according to Pečnik's description.
Sl. 1: Lega predmetov v grobu bojevnika po Pečnikovem opisu.
should decide to undertake excavations on this promising cemetery.
Pečnik sent the finds from the warrior's grave together with finds from other sites to Vienna on November 10th, 1900 (source 2). The contents of the said grave are to be found in the first group on the list of objects sent. In this list, as opposed to the first letter, he treats the Warrior's grave first, noting the sword as 90 cm long. The additional information that we get from this list is that the sword with the arrowheads lay along the right arm and the two knives, 28 cm in length and 2 cm in width, on each side of the head. The description of other finds matches that in the first letter.
Szombathy sent a reply to Pečnik on November 19th, 1900 (source 3). In it, he asks him for precise information about the finds from Kranj and Bled and also inquires about the fate of the bones and the skull from the grave with the sword and arrows. Furthermore, he asks Pečnik as to the possibility of excavating in Kranj. He writes that he would be happy to repurchase the small delivery with the sword and the rest, but that Pečnik would have to wait for the payment until the beginning of January, since the financial means for this purpose were already used up for the current year.
Pečnik, in his letter dated November 11th, 1900, describes the excavations at Lajh and includes the list of finds from the warrior's grave. He also lists the prehistoric sites in Kranj and its vicinity (source 4). The latter is preceded by a geographic description of Kranj, also the site of a Hallstatt settlement with the appertaining cemetery, of which Pečnik excavated 20 urn graves (Rozman 2004, 57, fig. 1). The next few paragraphs of the letter were dedicated to the cemetery of which he already wrote (source 1). The two letters complement each other. We thereby find out that the inhabitants of Kranj call the grassy fallow underneath and to the southwest of the city as ... na Lajhu ... (v Lajhu: Žmavc 1904; Žontar 1939; Josipovič 1981). In the second letter he mentions gold jewellery and other beautiful finds from the Migration period that were discovered on Pavšlar's estate. He writes of beautifully preserved skeletons that were completely destroyed by rough workers. It was this damage that led him to return to Kranj in order to stop further digging. He again mentions three areas that might contain several hundred burials. Here he had two trenches dug. Of the graves, he mentions the warrior's grave as the second one excavated, similarly as in the first letter (source 1). He writes that he laid the skeletons from the three graves onto wood, covered with paper, and let them dry on the sun near the excavated area and out of children's reach. During his visit to the city administration office, the workers filled both ditch-
es and were to keep an eye on the skeletons. Upon his return, the workers informed him that the young local doctor Globočnik from Kranj came by and took all three well preserved skulls. Angered, Pečnik immediately set off to look for the doctor in hope of regaining the skulls, but the latter had already gone to see a patient. Pečnik further writes that the finds were to be held at the Gymnasium in Kranj and mentions being in good relations with the mayor of Kranj, with the dean Kobler, and the head of the Gymnasium. Therewith, Pečnik concludes his description of the excavations at Lajh and continues the letter with the excavations in Bled.
The warrior's grave found its way into contemporary newspapers. The first to write about it was the Gorenjec newspaper (volume I/29), dated July 28th, 1900, "Antique finds. Pečnik excavated three graves on Thursday. The burials were oriented to the east. A two meters deep grave contained a rather broad, double-bladed sword over 90 cm long, two rather long knives, and 23 arrow heads. In the other two graves there was nothing to find." Two days later, the news was published also by the Slovenski narod (volume 33/173). Rutar (1901, 170) then writes, "Am "Lajh" unterhalb Krainburg öffnete er gegen Ende Juli mehrere Gräber in der Tiefe von 1 bis 2 M. und fand ein schweres zweiscnediges Schwert von 88 Cm. Länge und 5 Cm. Breite; ferner 23 gut erhaltene Pfeilspitzen, an welchen man noch Holzspuren erkennen konnte, und zwei 28 Cm. lange Messer."
SZOMBATHY AT LAJH
Szombathy's journal reveals (source 5, p.1) that he travelled from Vienna to Ljubljana on June 11th, 1901, and continued his way towards Kranj the following morning. After having met the city notables, Szombathy went to see the fallow at Lajh (na Lajhu), mentioned by Pečnik in his letters (^ig. 2).
Szombathy began the work by measuring off the excavation field at Lajh. Before excavating, he went to see the site north of Kranj, where, some years prior, Pečnik had excavated 20 urn graves. The excavation then began at one o'clock in the afternoon (source 5, p. 3). He took all measures from point a and strictly noted them, first the distance from point a and then the declination in degrees with the starting point at a (sources 5 and 6; fig. 3). The variables were separated with slashes. Point a was set 3 m from the third tree along the road and 15 m from the corner of lot 409/2 that belonged to the city of Kranj and bordered to Pavš-lar's estate to the east.
Fig. 2: Part of the Kranj cadastral district, plan issued on June 22nd, 1901 at Szombathy's request. Sl. 2: Del kranjskega katastrskega okraja, načrt po naročilu Szombathyja izdan 22. junija 1901.
Two letters by Pečnik to Szombathy in Vienna are of importance in evaluating the three graves, excavated by Pečnik on July 26th, 1900 (sources 1 and 4). Both letters show that the trial trenches were dug on city property, named by the inhabitants of Kranj as na Lajhu. This property was on lot 409/2, situated south of the local road and bordering Pavšlar's estate to the east.
In his field documentation (sources 5 and 6), Szombathy recorded 55 graves on lot 409/2. He also excavated five graves in two trial trenches beyond
the local road, in the triangle between the main and the side road on lot 423/1, marking them with letters A-E (_fig. 3). After Szombathy's departure, Pečnik excavated further three graves on lot 409/ 2. Szombathy numbered these three graves from 56 to 58 and the previously letter-marked graves from 59 to 63. To this total number of 63, another grave should be added. The first grave, uncovered on June 13th, was a child's grave and bore the same number, that is 1, as the grave excavated next and lying to its left. Szombathy made the
Fig. 3: Szombathy's plan of the excavated graves at Lajh in 1901. The inscription Anger "Na Lajhu" runs exactly in a west-easterly direction.
Sl. 3: Szombathyjev načrt izkopanih grobov na Lajhu leta 1901. Napis Anger "Na Lajhu" poteka točno v smeri zahod-vzhod.
distinction between the two by marking the child's Pečnik's contribution, therefore actually excavat-grave with the letter a. Szombathy, together with ed 64 graves.
Fig. 4: Photo 1607. Lajh underneath Kranj. Excavations of 1901. View towards the south. Pavšlar's mill, built between 1898
and 1900, is situated on the left side behind the lime tree. Sl. 4: Fotografija št. 1607. Lajh pod Kranjem. Izkopavanja leta 1901. Pogled proti jugu. Na levi strani za lipo stoji Pavšlarjev
mlin, zgrajen med 1898 in 1900.
1), where he writes, "... wir graben und kommen wir gestern auf 3 Skelete in einem Graben 2ter war einen 2 Metter tief, hat gehabt 1 grosses Schwert 85 cm lang, und 5 cm breit, ..." Since Pečnik in his letter did not abide by the the rules of the German grammar, the text may be read in two ways. A grammatically correct version would go: _ Wir graben und kommen wir gestern auf 3 Skelete in einem Graben. 2ter war einen 2 Metter tief, hat gehabt 1 grosses Schwert 85 cm lang, und 5 cm breit, _ However, this reading of the text does not correspond to the facts and his three graves could be mistaken with those on the



Fig. 5: Photo 1608. Lajh underneath Kranj. Excavations of 1901. View towards the northeast with the church of St Roch in the background.
Sl. 5: Fotografija št. 1608. Lajh pod Kranjem. Izkopavanja leta 1901. Pogled proti severovzhodu s cerkvijo sv. Roka v ozadju.
Looking carefully at Szombathy's plan (fig. 3), there are three graves with a marked position of the deceased but without a number. Two of these are drawn at the southeastern edge, while the third lies to the northwest of the excavation field. For the two that lie together, Szombathy noted 2 Gräber P's. The reasonable assumption would be that it is the two graves that Pečnik had excavated in one of the previous year's trenches. But doubt is aroused by Pečnik himself in his letter dated July 27th (source
flK :
Fig. 6: Photo 1609. Lajh underneath Kranj. Excavations of 1901. Sl. 6: Fotografija št. 1609. Lajh pod Kranjem. Izkopavanja leta 1901.
Fig. 7: Photo 1610. Lajh underneath Kranj. Excavations of 1901. The photo was probably taken while uncovering grave 22,
where a group of inquisitive visitors gathered. Sl. 7: Fotografija št. 1610. Lajh pod Kranjem. Izkopavanja leta 1901. Pogled proti severovzhodu s cerkvijo sv. Roka v ozadju. Fotografija je verjetno nastala ob odkritju groba 22, kjer se je zbrala skupina radovednežev.
plan, drawn within Pavšlar's estate without the position of the skeletons. But Pečnik never dug there. The text in the letter in question, therefore, needs to be read differently even though grammatically incorrectly. The possibility of a different reading of the text was indicated to me by D. Božič: _ Wir graben und kommen wir gestern auf3 Skelete. In einem Graben 2ter war einen 2 Metter tief, hat gehabt 1 grosses Schwert 85 cm lang, und 5 cm breit, Szombathy, in his journal, mentions the finest finds from the graves that Pavšlar dug in 1899, marking them on a sketch at the end of his journal (source 5, p. 18) as well as on the plan. Pečnik then, in the list dated November 20th, 1900, writes, "... und komme Ich in einem Graben auf 1 Skeletgrab, und in dem 2 Graben finde Ich 2 Skeletgräber ..." This confirms that Szombathy did mark Pečnik's graves 1 and 2. He determined the orientation and approximate size to all three skeletons, based on the information obtained from Pečnik.
It remains unknown, though, which of the two Pečnik's graves contained the warrior's equipment. Based on the assumption that Pečnik began excavating at the road and continued towards the river, as did Szombathy the following year, it would seem that the warrior's equipment was found in the lower-lying, southern grave. This conclusion is based on Pečnik's list from November 20th, 1900,
and the fact that Szombathy took his measures of the skeletons from point a. The tallest skeletons, around 1.80 m or taller, were those in graves 2, 19, and 41. Szombathy took the extreme points of the skeletons, head and feet, that had gradually stretched out. In most cases, the measures were given with the precision of a decimetre. Measured directly from the plan, the deceased nearer to the road is shorter from the one to his right for approximately 10 cm. The shorter would measure approximately 1.50 and the taller 1.60 m. Since Szombathy did not have precise information as to the size of the skeletons, he, in all likelihood, only indicated the differences in size on the plan.
Pečnik commencing his excavation as close as possible to Pavšlar's estate is, after all, understandable, since the results there were most promising. A second trench, 28 m to the northwest, was then made to verify the extent of the cemetery. The following year the excavation was recommenced at the spot where the extent of the Pečnik's trench with two graves, then filled up, could still be detected. The work began at the road and continued towards the Sava. Four unpublished photos have been preserved of these excavations, held at the Natural History Museum in Vienna, and published here for the first time (^igs. 4-7). Careful examination of the photos and the plan revealed that
Fig. 8: The supposed position of the photographer for the photo 1607. The visual field on the photo is marked with black lines. The excavated part of the cemetery is marked in grey, the blind spot in black, and the direction of the camera with a grey line. Sl. 8: Domnevni položaj fotografa ob nastanku fotografije 1607. Vidno polje na fotografiji je prikazano med krakoma. Prekopan del grobišča je poudarjen s sivo, mrtvi kot je označen s črno, s sivo črto pa usmerjenost kamere.
the photo 1607 was taken with the photographer standing left of the third tree, looking from east to west (^ig. 4). The photo is centred exactly towards the south. The long and strong shadows of the visitors and the large lime tree lead to the conclusion that an early morning moment of the summer excavations was captured. The height of the people at the southern edge of the excavation field and the position of the latter indicate that the photo was probably taken on Thursday, June 20 th, 1901, the day that Szombathy returned to Lajh after his brief absence from June 14th to 19th. The photo captured the moment just before or during the excavation of graves 17 and 18 (^ig. 8). The same visitors appear on all photos, made on the same day. The last photo was taken in the afternoon, probably during the uncovering of grave 22. The author of the photos remains unknown.
Plate 1
1.	Iron sword. A shallow groove runs along the middle of the blade on both sides. The blade bears traces of a wooden scabbard. Length 87.7 cm. Width 5.1 cm. Weight 814 g. Inv. no. 36498. Lit.: Stare 1980, 83, št. 15, t. 136: 1; Knific 1995, 28.
2.	Iron knife. The knife is restored, the rust removed, and the missing metal replaced with brown-reddish artificial material. The tang is partially preserved (approximately 2 cm are missing). Length 26 cm. Width 1.7 cm. Weight 50,4 g. Inv. no. 36499/1.
3.	Iron knife. Length 28.2 cm. Width 1.8 cm. Weight 58.4 g. Inv. no. 36499/2.
4.	Iron arrowhead. The head has parallel sides, that taper towards the tip, and a saddle-like transition into the tang. The tang bears a trace of a wooden stele. Length 10.3 cm. Width
1.3	cm. Weight 15.6 g. Inv. no. 36500.
5.	Iron deltoid arrowhead with a rhombic cross-section. The head has two side protuberances on the lower part and a saddle-like transition into the tang. The tang bears a trace of a wooden stele. Length 8.3 cm. Width 1 cm. Weight 10.2 g. Inv. no. 36501/1.
6.	Iron deltoid arrowhead with a rhombic cross-section. The head has two side protuberances on the lower part and a saddle-like transition into the partially preserved tang. The tang bears a trace of a wooden stele. Length 6.6 cm. Width 1.1 cm. Weight 9.4 g. Inv. no. 36501/2.
7.	Iron deltoid arrowhead with a rhombic cross-section. The head has two side protuberances on the lower part and a saddle-like transition into the partially preserved tang. Length 7 cm. Width 1.1 cm. Weight 11.6 g. Inv. no. 36501/3.
8.	Iron deltoid arrowhead with a rhombic cross-section. The head has two side protuberances on the lower part and a saddle-like transition into the partially preserved tang. The tang bears a trace of a wooden stele. Length 6.9 cm. Width 1 cm. Weight 9.2 g. Inv. no. 36501/4.
9.	Iron arrowhead with a trilateral deltoid head, grooves running along the middle of the sides, and a saddle-like transition into the tang. The tang bears the preserved part of a wooden stele with traces of binding. Length 10.6 cm. Width 0.8 cm. Weight 13.2 g. Inv. no. 36502/1.
10.	Iron arrowhead with a trilateral deltoid head, grooves running along the middle of the sides, and a saddle-like transition into the tang. The tang bears a trace of a wooden stele. Length 9.6 cm. Width 1 cm. Weight 12.2 g. Inv. no. 36503/1.
11.	Iron arrowhead with a trilateral deltoid head and a saddlelike transition into the tang. The tang bears a trace of the wooden stele. Length 9.3 cm. Width 0.9 cm. Weight 12.2 g. Inv. no. 36503/2.
12.	Iron arrowhead with a trilateral deltoid head. The head has grooves that run along the middle of the sides, intersected by transverse incisions on the lower part, and a saddle-like transition into the tang. Length 6.7 cm. Width 0.8 cm. Weight
9.4	g. Inv. no. 36504/1.
13.	Iron arrowhead with a trilateral deltoid head. The head has grooves that run along the middle of the sides, intersected by transverse incisions on the lower part, and a saddlelike transition into the tang. The tang is not preserved. Length 4.7 cm. Width 0.9 cm. Weight 8.8 g. Inv. no. 36504/2.
GRAVE GOODS Catalogue
All material is held at the Natural history Museum in Vienna. For the objects that are inventoried under the same number, a successive number behind a slash is added.
Plate 2
1. Iron arrowhead with a partially preserved trilobate head. The tip, probably pyramidal, is heavily corroded. The head has a saddle-like transition into the tang that bears a part of a wooden stele with traces of binding. Length 9.6 cm. Width 1.1 cm. Weight 13 g. Inv. no. 36505/1.
2.	Iron trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip. The head has a saddle-like transition into the tang that bears a part of a wooden stele. Length 8.5 cm. Width 1 cm. Weight 10.8 g. Inv. no. 36505/2.
3.	Iron trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip. The head has a saddle-like transition into the tang that bears a part of a wooden stele with traces of binding. Length 8.9 cm. Width 1 cm. Weight 11.6 g. Inv. no. 36506/1.
4.	Iron trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip. The head has a saddle-like transition into the tang that bears a part of a wooden stele with traces of binding. Length 8 cm. Width 0.9 cm. Weight 11 g. Inv. no. 36506/2.
5.	Partially preserved iron trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip. The tang, bearing a part of a wooden stele with traces of binding, probably belongs to the arrowhead. Total length 8.8 cm. Width 1 cm. Total weight 12.8 g. Inv. no. 36504/3, 36506/3.
6.	Iron trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip. The head has a saddle-like transition into the tang that bears a part of a wooden stele with traces of binding. Length 9.5 cm. Width 1.2 cm. Weight 10.6 g. Inv. no. 36507/1.
7.	Iron arrowhead has a heavily corroded head that continues into the tang. The tang, subsequently glued to the head, bears a part of a wooden stele with traces of binding. Length 9.4 cm. Width 0.9 cm. Weight 11.4 g. Inv. no. 36502/2, 36507/2.
8.	Iron trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip. The head has a saddle-like transition into the partially preserved tang with traces of a wooden stele. Length 6.4 cm. Width 1.2 cm. Weight 9.8 g. Inv. no. 36507/3.
9.	Iron trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip. The head has a saddle-like transition into the partially preserved tang with traces of a wooden stele. Length 6.3 cm. Width 1.3 cm. Weight 12.4 g. Inv. no. 36507/4.
10.	Iron trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip. The head has a saddle-like transition into the tang that bears a part of a wooden stele with traces of binding. Length 9.4 cm. Width 1.9 cm. Weight 18.2 g. Inv. no. 36508/1.
11.	Iron trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip. The head has a saddle-like transition into the tang with traces of a wooden stele. Length 8.4 cm. Width 1.9 cm. Weight 11.8 g. Inv. no. 36508/2.
12.	Iron trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip. The head has a saddle-like transition into the tang with traces of a wooden stele. Length 7.2 cm. Width 1.9 cm. Weight 11.4 g. Inv. no. 36508/3.
13.	Iron trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip. The head has a saddle-like transition into the tang with traces of a wooden stele. Length 7.4 cm. Width 1.4 cm. Weight 6.4 g. Inv. no. 36508/4.
14.	Iron hook with a rectangular ear terminating in a small knob. Length 4.4 cm. Width 2.1 cm. Weight 8 g. Inv. no. 36509. Lit.: Stare 1980, 83, št. 10, t. 135: 6; Knific 1995, 38.
Sword and two long knives
The deceased warrior had a sword along his right arm and two long knives on each side of his head
(fig. 9).
The sword still bears traces of a wooden scabbard. It is a double-edged sword, measuring 87.7 cm in length (pl. 1: 1). It does not stand out from other swords from either Lajh (tab. 1) or elsewhere (Menghin 1983; Losert, Pleterski 2003, 398-410) and does not exhibit elements that would enable a more precise chronological determination of his use. Its pommel, for example, was not preserved as was the case with three other swords from Lajh (41/Szombathy, 27/Žmavc, 6/Šmid).
Fig. 9: Preserved objects from the warrior's grave. Photo held at the Natural History Museum in Vienna. Sl. 9: Ohranjeni predmeti iz groba bojevnika. Fotografija NHM na Dunaju.
More revealing than the sword are the two identically long knives (pl. 1: 2, 3). They are interesting mostly due to their exceptionally narrow blades, which incited me to compare the knives of Lajh with blades in excess of 15 cm of length (tab. 1). Martin (2000, 143 pp) speaks of battle knives or saxes for lengths that exceed this length (differently: Wernard 1998, 774), while the criterion for the width of the blade is not included. The comparison reveals two deviations. The first one is represented by the two knives from the warrior's grave and the second, due to its length, by a sax that was probably found in grave 20/Schulz. The additional comparison of quotients between lengths and widths of the blades leaves only one deviation, represented by the two knives from the warrior's grave. Three groups of knives or saxes match
certain groups of knives from Altenerding. Most saxes from Lajh are comparable to short saxes of Altenerding group 1, the example from grave 20/ Schulz is comparable to the light saxes of group 2, while the long knives from the warrior's grave stand between knives and saxes of group 5 because of their exceptionally narrow blades (Pleterski, Belak 2005, fig. 6). While the short saxes of the Merovingian period in southern Germany are characteristic throughout the 6th century, the narrow saxes or knives appear only from the first quarter of the 6th century to AD 570/80. The light broad sword, on the other hand, appears in the last quarter of the 6th century (Wernard 1998, 774; cf. Pleterski, Belak 2005). The table above, therefore, indicates that there are no battle knives or saxes from the Early Merovingian period at Lajh.
Tab. 1: Length and width of the swords and saxes; (nos. of graves from: Stare 1980), partially preserved, supposedly in grave. Tab. 1: Dolžine in širine mečev in saksov; (št. gr. po Stare 1980), delno ohranjeno, domnevno v grobu.
		sword / meč	sax / saks		Stare 1980, plate / tabla	Knific 1995, p. / str.
grave / grob		total l./bl. l./bl. w. / sk. dl./dl. r./šir. r.	total l./bl. l./bl. w. / sk. dl./dl. r./šir. r. /	quotient / količnik bl. l. : bl. w. / dl. r. : šir. r.		
2/Pečnik °		87,7 / 77 / 5	28 / 21 / 1,7 26 / 21 / 1,7	12,2	136:1	27
41/Szombathy (614)		? / ? / 4,4	1 x	o	129-130	29
256/Schulz	(554)	90,6 / 79,8 / 6	25,8 / 22,5 / 4,2 26,6 / 19,5 / 3,1	5,3 6,3	123:1 124:2	30
11/2/Šmid	(11/2)	88,2 / 72,6 / 5	32,2 / 22, 2 / 3,6	6,2	7-8	32
Wergles (?) °		? / 61 / 4,3	o	o	129:2	29
15/Pavšlar	(343)	81,2 / 69 / 5,6	o	o	103-104 112:4	27
27/Žmavc	(355)	84,4 / 71,2 / 5	o	o	108-109 112:5	29
6/Šmid	(6)	84,2 / 73,4 / 4,2	o	o	2-6	32
3/Pavšlar	(331)	o	22,9 / 20 / 3,6	5,5	96-97	o
4/Pavšlar	(332)	o	24,4 / 18 / 3	6	97-99	o
24/Pavšlar	(352)	o	31,2 / 23,2 / 3,4	6,8	107	o
26/Szombathy (613)		o	25,5 / 20 / 3,8	5,2	128-129	o
4/Žmavc	(217)	o	24 / 21,6 / 3	7.2	68-69	o
6/Žmavc	(219)	o	29,4 / ? / 2,9	o	69	o
IV/Žmavc	(327)	o	23,8 / 16,6 / 3	5,5	95	o
20/Schulz	(548)	o	33,8 / 33,8 / 4,9	6,9	123-125	36
52/Šmid	(52)	o	27 / 20,2 / 2,8	7,2	23-24	o
125/Šmid	(125)	o	25,6 / 20,6 / 3	6,8	44-45	o
177/Šmid	(177)	o	21,4 / 18,8 / 2,7	6,9	58-59	o
180/Šmid	(180)	o	18,1 / 15,7 / 2,7	5,7	59-61	o
185/Šmid	(185)	o	27,7 / 19,6 / 2,9	6,7	61-62	o
Arrowheads
In order to better understand the division of arrowheads into particular types and their subsequent investigation, some basic expression are offered at this point that served to describe the objects.
Arrowheads are composed of three parts: the head, the neck, and the tang / socket. These appear in two combinations: head - tang / socket and head - neck - tang / socket (^ig. 10). Each of the parts has two or more forms. The head has various forms. The neck is either straight or spirally twisted. The arrowhead is attached to the stele by a tang or a socket.
Making the typology for the Late Antiquity and the Early Medieval arrowheads from Slovenia (Odar 2003, 54, 70-83), I gave a lot of thought as to the correctness of archaeological typologies. Consulting various authors I did not arrive at a final answer, though a way out of the doubt was indicated by Klejn's Archaeological Sources (1987) and Archaeological Typology (1988). I decided for the intuitive division of arrowheads based on the form of the head and the manner of joining the arrowhead to the stele. I constituted five basic types of arrowheads and marked them with letters A (trilobate head), B (flat head), C (bilobate head), Č (head with a rhombic cross-section), and D (head with a square cross-section). I have subdivided some types based on formal variants of the head and marked them with successive numbers. The manner of joining the head to the stele, on the other hand, led to the distinction between tanged (I) and socketed (A) arrowheads (^ig. 11).
The typology above is supplemented by three new basic types E-G and by five variants of the A2 type. Graves from Lajh yielded six basic types
head/ konica
neck / vrat
socket / tulec
tang / trn
uu
Fig. 10: Composing parts of iron arrowheads. Sl. 10: Sestavni deli železnih puščičnih osti.
of arrowheads that are further subdivided (tab. 2). Type A2 is represented by trilobate arrowheads with a pyramidal tip (pl. 2: 1-13), type B by arrowheads with a flat head (1 - wide-leafed, 2 - narrow-leafed, 3 - rhombic), type C by bilobate arrowheads, type E by deltoid trilateral arrowheads (pl. 1: 913), type F by deltoid arrowheads with a rhombic cross-section (pl. 1: 5-8), and type G by an arrowhead with a lentiform cross-section (pl. 1: 4).
In the present-day Slovene territory, the A2 type arrowheads have been found on five hill-top settlements and at the Lajh cemetery (^ig. 12). Single arrowheads were found at Ajdna above Potoki (Perko in Sagadin 2004, 221, fig. 7), Gradec near Velika Strmica (Odar 2003, 22), Zidani gaber above Mihovo (Knific 1995, 36-37, fig. 11: 3), and in pairs at Rifnik (Bolta 1981,17; Pirkmajer 2001, 73, fig. 238) and Tonovcov grad (unpublished material currently held at the Institute of Archaeology, information supplied by T. Milavec).
Fig. 11: Types of arrowheads from the Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages from Slovenia. Sl. 11: Tipi puščičnih osti iz pozne antike in zgodnjega srednjega veka v Sloveniji.
Tab. 2: Types of arrowheads from graves at Lajh. Tab.2: Tipi puščičnih osti iz grobov na Lajhu.
	A2 I	B A	B1 A	B2 A	B3 I/ A	C A	E I	F I	G I	unknown / neznan	total / skupaj
2/Pečnik	12	o	o	o	o	o	5	4	1	1	23
8/Szombathy	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	6	6
20/Schulz	1 ° 1 ° 4					o	o	o	o	o	5
54/Schulz						o	o	o	o	o	1
6/Šmid	o	o	1	2	o	2	o	o	o	o	5
54a/Šmid	o	o	o	1	o	o	o	o	o	o	1
156/Šmid	o	5	3	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	8
177/Šmid	o	o	o	o	1	o	o	o	o	o	1
180/Šmid	o	o	1	2	3	1	o	o	o	o	7
203/Šmid	o	o	o	o	o	1	o	o	o	o	1
total / skupaj	13	5	6	5	8	4	5	4	1	7	58
The differences in lobe form of the arrowheads have already been pointed out by Knific (1993, 529). Their form was the basis for the division of type A2 heads into two groups. The first one is constituted by heads with pronounced lobes and the second one by heads with unpronounced lobes. Within these groups, the arrowheads are further subdivided, again on the formal basis (fig. 13).
The four arrowheads from grave 2/Pečnik (pl. 2: 10-13) have closest formal parallels (_fig. 13: 1) in an arrowhead, inserted in a part of a wooden stele, also found at Lajh (Stare 1980, pl. 125: 8; Knific 1995, fig. 11: 1), as well as in an arrowhead from Ajdna above Potoki. The Lajh arrowhead was found by F. Schulz in 1901, though its exact grave appurtenance is not known. The latter problem is not helped by the fact that Müllner inventoried the finds from the National Museum of Slovenia on a typological basis without regard to their grave units. Nevertheless, on the basis of Schulz's list of graves and the appertaining plan (the archive of the National Museum of Slovenia), Knific (1995, 38) was able to ascertain that the arrowhead in question lay either in grave 20/Schulz (now no. 548) or 54/Schulz (now no. 582). For the former, the excavator writes of five arrowheads and a long iron knife lying at the deceased's left hip. For the latter, the arrowhead was lying at the hip of a very large skeleton and, beside it, an iron and a bronze belt buckle, a comb, and a gold coin (Knific 1995, 36). To continue with the parallels, another comparable arrowhead was found during
the excavations at Rifnik, in the interior of house 5 that was abandoned at the end of the 6th century (Bolta 1981, 17, pl. 24: 91). A parallel outside Slovenia can be found at Kulina e Vogel, a site near Priština, where a bronze trilobate head with a pyramidal tip lay within a settlement layer dated to the 6th and the 7th centuries (Mehmetaj 1990, 99).
Formally, the arrowhead from Zidani gaber also belongs to this group. The only difference is that its pyramidal tip terminates with barbs that render the extraction of the arrowhead from the wound more difficult (fig. 13: 2).
The information on another arrowhead from Rifnik is not yet available. From the photo, though,
Fig. 12: The A2 type arrowheads were found on five hill-top settlements and a cemetery.
Sl. 12: Osti tipa A2 so bile odkrite na petih višinskih naselbinah in na grobišču.
Fig. 13: Variants of the A2 arrowhead type. Sl. 13: Različice puščičnih osti tipa A2.
its longer and differently formed head can be discerned, clearly differentiated from the others by the triangular form of its lobes and the transition into the tang which is not saddle-like as on the others (fig. 13: 3).
The heads with unpronounced lobes appear in two variants. The first variant has convex lobes (fig. 13: 4) and the second straight ones (fig. 13: 5). Both variants are to be found in grave 2/Pečnik (pl. 2: 2-9). An arrowhead with unpronounced lobes is known from Gradec near Velika Strmica (Odar 2003, 22). Eight such heads have been discovered at Brežac near Buzet and are ascribed to a grave unit containing a sword, silver belt set, horse apparel, and a shield (Marušic 1962, 455-461; Torcelan 1986, 25-27, pl. 2-5). If the reconstruction of the grave unit is correct, it is comparable to graves 90 and 119 from Castel Trosino (Mengarelli 1995, 114126, 137-152). Such arrowheads were also discovered in a warrior's grave at Inzing near Hartkirchen (Menghin 1983, 38) and at Gammertingen (Theune-Grosskopf 1997). The former is dated, on the basis of the sword, between 530 and 570 and the latter, with an almost identical grave composition, around 570. Further 25 such arrowheads were discovered in the ruins of the Early Byzantine fortress of Golemanovo Kale (Uenze 1992, pl. 41: 21-42; pl. 140: 6-8) and 7 arrowheads in the fortress of Sadovsko Kale in Bulgaria (ib., pl. 41: 19-20, 43-47). At Golemanovo Kale, the arrowheads are believed to attest to the fortress's violent destruction in 585 or 587 (Werner 1992, 417). Some researchers have attributed the trilobate arrowheads to Avars (Sergejevski 1954, 198, fig. 2c; Marušic 1962, 461; Bojanovski 1976, 247, fig. 2). The A2 type arrowheads, though, are not found in the Avar graves. This arrowhead type probably appears in the Alpine area prior to the
arrival of the Avars, that is during the short-lived Byzantine predominance in the mid 6th century that followed the fall of the Ostrogothic and ended with the establishment of the Langobard rule.
The warrior's grave at Lajh also contained arrowheads of the E-G types that are without contemporary parallels as yet. Similar arrowheads, however, are those of Early, High, and Late Middle Ages. In Slovenia, the latter are known from Puščava (Pleterski, Belak 2002, 251, 265-266, pl. 5: 7) and from the Kostanjevica fortress (Predovnik 2003, 92-99), for example.
Of type E, there were five arrowheads found in the said grave (pl. 1: 9-13). They have a characteristic trilateral deltoid head with a particular feature of grooves that run along the middle of the lower, longer part of the deltoid side. One of these arrowheads did not exhibit such grooves (pl. 1: 11), while two of the others had additional transverse incisions just underneath the transition from the head into the saddle (pl. 1: 12,13).
Deltoid arrowheads with a rhombic cross-section of type F are represented by four examples (pl. 1: 5-8). All exhibit side protuberances on the lower quarter of the head, in various degrees of preservation.
Type G is represented by an arrowhead with a lentiform cross-section and parallel edges (pl. 1: 4).
Hook for quiver suspension
There were two iron hooks found at Lajh. One is held at the National Museum of Slovenia while the other is in Vienna and is ascribed to grave 2/ Pečnik (pl. 2: 14) in the inventory book. It is interesting that in his letters to Szombathy, Pečnik does not mention the iron hook from the warrior's
grave, with a rectangular ear terminating in a small knob. This hook, held in Vienna, is published in Stare's monographic publication separately from the sword and described as bronze (Stare 1980, pl. 135: 6). The hook with a triangular ear, excavated by Schulz and held in Ljubljana, is of a less clear origin (ib., pl. 125: 7). It is mentioned already by Müllner (1901, 156). It most probably came from grave 20/Schulz where five arrowheads were found (Odar 2003, 60, 66; cf. Knific 1995, 36). Hooks, in graves usually found lying next to arrowheads, were probably used by archers to suspend the quiver to the belt (Medvedev 1966, 19-20, pl. 1: 8, 9, pl. 7: 6, 8-10). Similar hooks were found in graves 90 (bronze) and 119 (iron) from Castel Trosino (Mengarelli 1985, 122, fig. 141; 151, fig. 189), in the warrior's grave 48 from Nocera Umbra (Menghin 1985, 164, fig. 149; Paroli 1995, 226), slightly different and also earlier were found in mound 8 at Novogrigorjevka (Zaseckaja 1994, pl. 5: 12), in a grave from Kisil Adir together with bone remains of a composite bow and fourteen trilobate arrowheads (ib., pl. 37: 21), as well as in grave 2 from kurgan 8 in Kubei (ib., pl. 46: 19). Contemporary with the Lajh graves is a grave from Szegvär - Sapodal (Kom. Csongräd), where the deceased horseman was buried with rich horseman and warrior's equipment which included a long double-blade sword, a spearhead, and a composite bow in a bow-case together with trilobate arrowheads (Garam 1992, 139, 170-171, pl. 15-25). Next to the bow-case, a hook for its suspension was found lying. The remains of a lamellar armour and a coin of Mauricius Tiberius (582-602) were also in the grave.
ARCHERY UNDER THE ROMANS AND THE GERMANIC TRIBES
Interestingly, the Late Antiquity cemetery of Lajh did not reveal any composite bows (see Discussion). Their absence reflects the attitude of the population of Carnium towards such bows. The explanation for this lies in a sentence of Ammi-anus Marcellinus (XXX 2,17) where he states that one can identify a people by their customs, way of life, manner of dressing, and their armour. Let us first examine how the Romans included the composite bow in their weaponry. It occurred during the Augustan period, at the latest, but only in the infantry. It took the Persian threat under the Sas-sanid rulers to force the Roman Empire to change its military tactics in the east, when the importance of the classic infantry fighting in tight rows
decreased in favour of armoured horsemen, armed with spears or bows. During the 4 th century, the horse-archery units outnumbered the foot-archery ones. Notitia dignitatum (Indices: Equites: p. 319, Pedites: p. 325) talks of 54 horse- and 13 foot-archery units. Of those, there were 37 horse- and 9 foot-archery units present in the east, and 17 horse- and 4 foot-archery units in the west of the Empire. This clearly shows the need for a stronger presence of archery units in the east. In the west of the Empire, the Romans were in conflict with horse-archery nomads only in North Africa, while in the battles with the Germanic tribes archery did not play a significant role. The opposite was the case against the Arab, Persian, and Hunnic horse archers. These were also the peoples among which the Romans recruited soldiers to fill their auxiliary foot- as well as horse-archery units, since they enriched the Roman military knowledge of the nomadic mounted warfare (Coul-ston 1985, 243-244). The skill of these peoples on horse's back overawed the adversary time and again, since they had a specific tactic with a succession of sudden assaults and quick retreats whereby, during a galloping retreat, they hindered the pursuing adversary by shooting arrows at him. This surprise attack usually left the adversary without time to act and any hope of salvation thereby disappeared. If it, nevertheless, came to an up-close battle, the Huns first dragged the adversary from the saddle and then finished them off, as reported by Ammi-anus Marcellinus (XXXI 2,8-9).
Procopius of Caesarea, made secretary to the legendary general Belisarius in AD 527 by the Byzantine emperor Justinian I, was probably a contemporary of some of the warriors buried at Lajh. In the introduction to his History of the Wars (I 1,8-17), turned into Slovene in Pod Justinijan-ovim žezlom by K. Gantar (1961, 33-35), he comments that there is nothing grander and more important from the events that took place during the wars that he describes. He writes that the unusual things that happened will only be doubted by those that favour past times and deny the significance to contemporary events, adding that: "There are those, for example, who call the soldiers of the present day "bowmen," while to those of the most ancient times they wish to attribute such lofty terms as "hand-to-hand fighters," "shield-men," and other names of that sort; and they think that the valour of those times has by no means survived to the present,-an opinion which is at once careless and wholly remote from actual experience of these matters." Further he writes that archers of Homeric times did not ride horses, did not bear spears or shields and had
to conceal themselves behind the shield of some comrade or seek safety behind a tombstone on a mound. The technique of drawing bows and shooting of arrows was also bad, hardly harming those whom it hit. "Such, it is evident, was the archery of the past. But the bowmen of the present time go into battle wearing corselets and fitted out with greaves which extend up to the knee. From the right side hang their arrows, from the other the sword. And there are some who have a spear also attached to them and, at the shoulders, a sort of small shield without a grip, such as to cover the region of the face and neck. They are expert horsemen, and are able without difficulty to direct their bows to either side while riding at full speed, and to shoot an opponent whether in pursuit or in flight. They draw the bowstring along by the forehead about opposite the right ear, thereby charging the arrow with such an impetus as to kill whoever stands in the way, shield and corselet alike having no power to check its force." The 6th century armour of a horseman of higher classes corresponds to Procopius' description. Beside helmet, scale armour or chain mail, and shield, a warrior could also be bearing a spear and a sword as well as archery equipment in its case. Numerous graves of warriors from this period confirm this (Lajh in Kranj, Castel Trosino, Nocera Umbra, Gammertingen, Brežac near Buzet, for example).
Beside the Greeks and the Romans, other inhabitants of the Pontus were also forced to adapt to the new way of warfare. Because of their armour, the Goths living along the northern coast of the Black Sea were treated as a people of a Scythian rather than Germanic descent by their contemporaries in their "ethnographies" (Procopius VIII 5,5), since they were versed in mounted warfare with a spear, held with both hands (Wolfram 1985, 103; Wolfram 1990, 359). The Goths, contrary to their nomadic neighbours, never completely took up mounted warfare with bows. They, nevertheless, used archery to their advantage. Vegetius (I 20,4) reports that Romans suffered great losses from a swarm of arrows shot by the Goths, Valens was even reported to have succumbed to an injury inflicted by an arrow (Ammianus Marcellinus XXXI 13,12). An interesting example is that of Arses, Belisarius' hypaspist, whom an arrow hit between the nose and the right eye. Wounded, he continued fighting against the Goths in Rome. After the battle, a doctor by the name of Teoktistus pushed the arrow further so that the trilobate arrowhead came out at the neck. After separating the head from the stele, he carefully pulled the latter from the eye socket, leaving Arses with his eye-sight intact (Procopius VI 2,16-19, 25-30). Gothic noblemen
and princes were taught bow handling from their early age onwards. Claudius Claudianus mentions a tutor that gave Alarich, at an early age, archery equipment with bow-case as a gift and taught him to shoot with a bow (Bracher 1991, 154).
It is interesting that the Goths, upon their arrival and settlement in their new homeland in the present-day southern Russia completely took over only one manner of traditional warfare from their Sarmatian-Alannic neighbours, that is mounted with a spear (Lebedynsky 2001, 43-49), while almost completely rejecting the other manner of mounted warfare with a bow. Totila's defeat in the battle with the Byzantine army and, tied to that, downfall of the Gothic kingdom in Italy may be attributed also to the fact that Goths only included a few foot-archery units that could not take on the Byzantine horse-archery units (Belisarius' opinion). On their own, the Gothic archery units could only operate behind their spear-armed cavalry, which the Byzantine horse-archers could disable from afar (Procopius V 27,27).
The unreasonable refusal to fight from a distance and to increase the use of archery on the part of the Gothic military elites is probably connected with the principle stance of the Goths that follows the Germanic ancient ideals of a heroic man-to-man warfare. This they could not discard even in their new homeland (Rausing 1997, 59; Bracher 1991, 156).
What about the reception of the composite bow and the nomadic way of warfare by the Germanic peoples in central and western Europe? They excepted neither into their armour and military tactics, in spite of their nomadic neighbours to the east. The latter was particularly true for the tactics, since horses, available only to the warriors of higher classes, were rarely used in battle (Ammianus Marcellinus XVI 12,34). Procopius (VI 25,24) describes the forced march against the Franks in Italy in AD 537, under Theodebert: they had a small body of cavalry about their leader, and these were the only ones armed with spears, while all the rest were foot-soldiers having neither bows nor spears, but each man carried a sword and shield and one axe. Now the iron head of this weapon was thick and exceedingly sharp on both sides, while the wooden handle was very short. And they are accustomed always to throw these axes at one signal in the first charge and thus to shatter the shields of the enemy and kill the men." It was only during warfare with the Avars, who were advancing towards the west, that some soldiers of the higher classes saddled their horses and reached for the composite bow. Charlemagne, in his letter to Abbot Ful-
rad, expresses his demand that the cavalry units in battles against the Avars use also bows and arrows, in addition to spears and long as well as short swords (Karoli ad Fulradum Abbatem epistola).
In contact with the Huns, the Germanic tribes took over the Hunnic expression for the quiver. In Old High German it was called 'chohhari', 'der Köcher' in modern German, while the Langobar-di called it 'coccura' (Bracher 1991, 158). Langobardi used composite bows already during their stay along the middle reaches of the Danube as well as later in Italy, as attested to by several graves with trilobate arrowheads and bone remains of composite bows (Werner 1956, 49; Werner 1962, 80). The latter, however, did not enjoy such importance as to be depicted on prestige products, such as the silver platter from Isola Rizza (fig. 14) or the browband of a spangenhelm from Florence, for example, with depictions of warriors (Conti 1990, 96; Menghin 1985, 79-81).
There is, on the other hand, a depiction of a self bow on a valuable Franks or Auzon Casket. It is one of the more interesting art historical objects of the Early Middle Ages, originating from Northumbria. The casket, made around AD 700, plays a key role in understanding Early Medieval heroic tales of the Germanic peoples (Hauck 1973, 514-522). Of importance for this article is the depiction on the partially preserved lid of the casket (^ig. 15). It depicts the battle between the king Nidud (the helmet is the sign of a ruler) and the Germanic hero Egil. Nidud wishes to conquer a temple-like building, defended by bow and arrow by Egil, a trained archer. Egil already shot several arrows from the self bow and is readying himself for the next shot. Despite the very simplified depiction, the bow is in proportion to Egil's figure
Fig. 14: Central part of a silver platter depicting a battle between a horseman in Byzantine defense armour and two Germanic swordsmen. One of the latter had already fallen, while the other has just been stabbed by the horsemen with a spear (from von Hessen 1990, 229, 230; Böhner 1996; Kory 2004, 385-403).
Sl. 14: Osrednji del srebrnega pladnja z upodobitvijo boja med konjenikom v bizantinski zaščitni bojevniški opravi in germanskima mečevalcema. Eden od njiju je že padel v boju, drugega je konjenik pravkar prebodel s sulico (po: von Hessen 1990, 229, 230; Böhner 1996; Kory 2004, 385-403).
and can therefore be classified as a long bow. Arrows are fitted with at least two types of arrowheads. The one next to Egil's legs has a bilobate head, and the one on the bowstring is an arrow with a flat rhombic head. Other arrows that are visible whole could be fitted with flat as well as trilobate arrowheads.
Ordinary archery equipment was a constituent part of infantry battle units. The fact that archery
Fig. 15: A fighting scene on a partially preserved lid of the Franks Casket. In the centre there is a circular mount for attaching handles (from Hauck, 1973, 520: pl. 42).
Sl. 15: Prizor boja na delno ohranjenem pokrovu skrinjice iz Auzona. Na sredini je krožni nastavek za pritrditev ročaja (po: Hauck, 1973, 520: t. 42).
Fig. 16: The appurtenance of archers to the lower classes is evident through their simple clothes, while the members of the upper classes, horsemen, are equipped with valuable defensive weaponry, chain mails and helmets, and armed with shields and spears. The exception is a member of the upper classes, equipped as a foot soldier with bow and arrows (from: Grape 1994). Sl. 16: Pripadnost lokostrelcev nižjemu sloju se kaže v njihovi preprosti obleki, medtem ko so pripadniki višjega sloja, konjeniki, opremljeni z dragoceno zaščitno opremo, verižnimi srajcami in čeladami ter oboroženi s ščiti in sulicami. Izjema je en sam pripadnik višjega sloja, ki je kot pešec opremljen z lokom in puščicami (po: Grape 1994).
did not play a role of prestige with Germanic peoples is illustrated by an order given by the Langobard king Aistulf. He ordered that the poor free men that can possess a shield, should at least equip themselves with an quiver full of arrows and a bow, since even the poorest of men could seek out a yew or an elm tree and cut off a suitable branch to make into a hunting or a battle weapon with a bit of skill. There is no talk of complicated procedures needed to make a composite bow of different materials, which was a valuable weapon with nomadic peoples precisely for that reason. In addition to a horse, soldiers of the middle and higher classes were obligated to procure armour suitable to their social standing (cuirass or chain mail, helmet, shield, long spear, sword), while archery equipment was not included (Leges Langobardorum, Ahistulfi leges) (Bracher 1991, 160; Lebedynsky 2001, 26-27). Similar demands for armour of different social classes can also be found with the west Goths and Ala-manni as well as later, as is illustrated on the Bayeux Tapestry (fig. 16).
There was no wide acceptance of composite bows on the part of the Germanic peoples in Europe, they rather continued to use self bows. This can be ascribed to an important fact of the composite bows being glued (Coulston 1985, 250-251). The glue quickly gave way if exposed to a humid environment and they were useless in rain. The use of the composite bow was, therefore, more suited to and more effective in arid expanses (ib., 270). In order to protect the self bows against dampness and rain, though, it sufficed to apply grease or wax. A similar protection was used for arrow stele.
DISCUSSION
The Lajh cemetery yielded 10 graves with arrowheads as grave goods. In addition to the warrior's grave with 23 arrowheads there were three graves with a single and six with 5-8 arrowheads. Graves with several arrowheads were probably burials of warriors and trained archers. For those with a single arrowhead, on the other hand, it is difficult to determine whether the arrowhead was a grave good or was the cause of the man or woman's death.
Interestingly, there were no bows found in the graves. It can be said with certainty that composite bows were not put in graves, since a large number of bone or horn combs and the well preserved skeletons indicate that the bone or horn parts of bows would also have been preserved. A possible explication could be that bows were not put in graves. The more likely assumption, however, would be that graves contained self bows, together with arrows, but nothing has been preserved. Similarly, therefore, to the shield in grave 6/Šmid where the wooden parts have also not been preserved. Wooden stele, on the other hand, have been partly preserved on the spot where the wood touched the metal. Also preserved are parts of a wooden scabbard of the sword in grave 41/Szombathy.
None of the other parts of archery equipment has been preserved at Lajh; quivers, for example, probably made of leather, or bracers, made of leather or bone, sometimes even metal.
A rare Early Middle Ages cemetery with excellently preserved bows and other wooden objects as grave goods was excavated at Lupfen near
Oberflacht, in the German state of Baden-Württemberg. Graves of the Alamannic archers yielded eleven self bows, made of yew. These well preserved, at present slightly curved bows measure between 1.68 and 1.83 m in length (Wolf 1997, 385-388).
Graves at Lajh show that the presence of blad-ed weapons always coincides with the presence of arrowheads in their vicinity (Odar 2003, 5965). At least four of eight graves have swords on the right side of the deceased (graves 2/Pečnik, 26/Žmavc, 6/Šmid, and 11/2/Šmid). In graves 2/ Pečnik and 6/Šmid arrowheads were found lying close-by, on the same side as the swords. Where there were no swords found, their "status position" was taken over by the sax and the arrowheads were found lying next to it. Three graves with arrowheads revealed the sax next to the left arm and in one grave on each side of the head. The rating scale for the armour is indicated by grave 2/Pečnik where the arrowheads lay next to the sword and the two long knives. Grave 156/Šmid is also interesting, since the arrowheads represented the only weapon in the grave. Most of the heads lay next to the ankles, while two were found next to the left thigh under the arm.
Based on grave goods (glass beads, three clay spindle-whorls, iron belt ring, and a knife, all now lost, as well as an arrowhead, preserved) and height of the skeleton, grave 203/Šmid contained the burial of a woman. The presence of the arrowhead lying in the pelvic area is, therefore, all the more surprising. A similar position of the arrowhead can be seen in grave 54/Schulz where a very large and strong body was found, probably male (iron and bronze belt-buckles, a gold coin, and a comb). In both cases we might assume that the arrowhead lay at the cause of the persons' demise. This possibility is indicated also by the deceased from Wien-Leopoldau who lost his life in battle. He was killed by an arrowhead that was wedged, with its trilobate head, deep between the warrior's second and third lumbar vertebrae (Reuer 1984, fig. 2). Had the arrow missed the spine, the warrior would still have succumbed to the wound (ib., fig. 5: reconstruction of the battle), while the explanation and the significance of the arrowhead's position would have been significantly less clear. It is supposed that the arrowheads from Lajh were put into graves in their quivers. Some arrowheads were stuck together by rust (in grave 156/Šmid, for example). The possible positions of bows in graves, on the other hand, are difficult to determine, since their presence cannot be proved. Based on its shape, a bow can only be put in a grave parallel to the deceased if the latter
is buried in a simple grave pit (for large tombs this is not necessarily the case). Such a position is indicated mainly by graves with composite bows. In many graves arrowheads were found lying next to the bow, as illustrated by graves from Blučina (Tihelka 1963), Aktöbe, Kokel, and Zamantogaj Korymy (Bona 1991, 14, 112, 116). The possibility of intentionally breaking the bow before its deposition into a grave, similar to the Celtic habit of sword bending, should also be considered.
Due to their consumptive nature, arrowheads were only used once and were not treated as objects of value. Their production was considered as simple by the blacksmiths, the importance was put more on the quantity and less on the quality of the product (Ruttkay 1976, 326, 327). This, together with the constant intermixing of various peoples during the Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, makes the arrowheads a less reliable bearer of the information that are usually most interesting to archaeologists. Nevertheless, there are exceptions.
In Slovenia, the only self bow was found during archaeological investigations at the Ljubljansko barje. This wooden bow is approximately 1.25 m long and around 5600 years old, slightly older than the one found with Ötzi who died while crossing the Similaun Glacier (Velušček, Čufar 2003; Velušček 2004, 43-44; Spindler 1993). Otzi's was also a self bow. A fragment of a composite bow, on the other hand, was found at Rifnik near Šentjur, settled in several periods from prehistory to the 6th century AD (Bolta 1981, pl. 24: 20; Ciglenečki 1999, 324). Of the bow, only the upper part of a bone ear lath with a nock for the bowstring is preserved. The lath was found in room 2 of house 5. In this house a trilobate arrowhead with a pyramidal tip was also found. Around the house, two more arrowheads were found. For the arrowhead with a rhombic cross-section (Bolta 1981, 26, pl. 26: 12), parallels point to the date of the last third of the 6 th, possibly the beginning of the 7 th century (Odar 2003, 77-78).
A re-examination of the composition of grave goods in the warrior's grave, excavated by Pečnik in 1900, and a comparison with other grave units of warriors at Lajh shows two obvious differences. First, the composition of arrowheads in the grave has no parallels, neither at Lajh nor in its broad surroundings, since the E-G arrowhead types remain without parallels at present. Types E-G and A2 were probably used to penetrate costly defensive equipment. In my opinion, type A2 was used to penetrate scale armour and spangenhelms, while types E-G with their narrow heads were shot at
the adversary wearing chain mails (Paulsen 1967, 134, pl. 60). The warrior from Lajh was, therefore, an archer of a special status. Attesting to this are the trilobate arrowheads with pyramidal tips of the A2 type, exhibiting excellent blacksmith craftsmanship in comparison to arrowheads with flat heads from other graves at Lajh. The trilateral heads with grooves on the sides of type E are also carefully made. The grooves could have been used to carry venomous poison, possibly extracted from common monkshood that grows on meadows. Type F arrowheads are also a particularity due to their small protuberances in the lower part. The latter rendered the extraction of the head from the chain mail difficult. Such an arrowhead then obstructed the warrior during battle even if it did not wound him. The arrowheads were carefully selected and we cannot exclude the possibility that the archer had some of his arrows custom made. This thought is based on the two equally long knives that are also without parallels at the Lajh cemetery. The sword itself does not stand out from its contemporaries though it confirms the special status of the archer (Procopius I 1,8-17). Moreover, the deceased is the only warrior with sword but without belt set and other objects in his grave. Offensive weaponry only was put in his grave, thereby accentuating his special status of a warrior; a warrior who found his last resting place on a beautiful plain by a river, as the finder of his grave put it on several occasions.
Lamellar armour, spangenhelms, and type A2 arrowheads, the latter of a particular importance for this article, appear in settlements and individual graves in the southeastern subalpine area and indicate the influences in weaponry in the time of crossing Byzantine and Langobard political interests in the mid 6th century in the area of the present-day Slovenia (Polis Norikon, Narzes' march to Italy, for example) (Procopius VII 33,7-11;
Ciglenečki 1992; Šašel-Kos 1994; Lottar, Bratož, Castritius 2005). Rescue excavations, conducted at the southwestern city walls in the old city centre of Kranj in 2005, present as yet unknown facets of the Late Antiquity Carnium and complete the archaeological map of the remains of Byzantine warrior equipment in Slovenia (tab. 3) (Bitenc, Knific 2001; Böhner 1996; Kory 2004, 385-403). On August 6th, archaeologists excavated a well preserved shoulder part of a lamellar armour that laid together with an ango on the floor, in the interior of a defence tower at the walls dating from the mid 6th century (Slovenske novice, leto 9, št. 30, 13. 8. 2005, p. 9; Delo 13. 8. 2005, p. 7). A few days later the remaining part of the completely preserved armour was found, while another completely preserved armour was found lying not far away (I thank M. Sagadin for the possibility to visit the site and see both armours).
Concurrently with the abandonment of the Byzantine lamellar armour in central Europe, the use of trilobate arrowheads with a pyramidal tip was also abandoned. The E-G type arrowheads, on the other hand, became a common practice due to the increasing use of chain mails during the Middle Ages. Those of the grave of the archer from Carnium represent the earliest examples dated to the Late Antiquity as of yet.
Acknowledgements
The making of this article was aided by numerous colleagues. The incentive for it came from Dr T. Knific and Ddr A. Pleterski. The visit to the Natural History Museum in Vienna was supported and made possible by the Institute of Archaeology. At the Natural History Museum, drawing and preparing the archaeological material were kindly aided by Dr A. Heinrich and Dr A. Kern. Drawings were done in Vienna
Tab. 3: Some of the sites in Slovenia with fragments of the Byzantine warrior equipment. Tab. 3: Nekatera najdišča v Sloveniji z ostanki bizantinske bojevniške opreme.
Site/ najdišče	Spangenhelm/ rebrasta čelada	Lamellar armour / lamelni oklep	A2 Arrowheads/ puščičneostiAl
Ajdna above Potoki / Ajdna nad Potoki	o	o	•
Gradec near Velika Strmica / Gradec pri Veliki Strmici	o	o	•
Gradišče above Bašelj / Gradišče nad Bašljem	o	•	o
Kranj	o	•	0
Lajh below Kranj / Lajh pod Kranjem	?	o	•
St. Lambert near Pristava above Stična / Sv. Lambert pri Pristavi	•	o	o
Rifnik near Šentjur / Rlfnik pri Šentjurju	•	•	•
Tonovcov grad	o	•	•
Zidani gaber above Mihovo / Zidani gaber nad Mihovim	•	•	•
by T. Korošec, while D. Lunder-Knific traced them in ink. Dr S. Ciglenečki and Ddr A. Pleterski helped me with precious advice in writing the article, while Dr T. Knific and Dr D. Božič are to be credited for the final content of the article. Procopius' text from
the Loeb collection was translated into Slovene by G. Pobežin.
I sincerely thank you all.
Translation: Andreja Maver
BITENC, P. and T. KNIFIC (eds.) 2001, Od Rimljanov do Slovanov. Predmeti. - Ljubljana.
BÖHNER, K. 1996, Die frühmittelalterlichen Spangenhelme und die nordischen Helme der Vendelzeit. - Jahrbuch des RGZM 41/2, 471-549.
BOJANOVSKI, I. 1974, Ranosrednjovjekovno utvrdjenje u Vrbljanima na Sani. - Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja u Sarajevu 29, 245-258.
BOLTA, L. 1981, Rifnik pri Šentjurju. Poznoantična naselbina in grobišče. - Katalogi in monografije 19.
BONA, I, 1981, Vida Stare, Kranj, nekropola iz časa preseljevanja ljudstev. - Archaeologiai ertesito 108, 294-299.
BONA, I. 1991, Das Hunnenreich. - Stuttgart.
BOŽIČ, D. 2001, Herman II. Celjski, Jernej Pečnik in pleter-ska kartuzija. - In: Hodil po zemlji sem naši ... , 207-218, Ljubljana.
BRACHER, A. 1991, Waffen in Frühmittelalter. - Dissertation, Wien.
BRAS-KERNEL, H. 2002, Ženski grob z zlatim nakitom iz Lajha v Kranju - Diploma thesis, Ljubljana.
CIGLENEČKI, S. 1992, Polis Norikon. Poznoantične višinske utrdbe med Celjem in Brežicami. - Podsreda.
CIGLENEČKI, S. 1999, Barbari prihajajo. - In: B. Aubelj, D. Božič and J. Dular (eds), Zakladi tisočletij. Zgodovina Slovenije od neandertalcev do Slovanov, 341-342, Ljubljana.
CONTI, P. M. 1990, Il quadro storico-politico. - In: G. C. Menis (ed.), I Longobardi, 92-96, Milano.
COULSTON, J. C. 1985, Roman archery equipment. - In: The Production and Distribution of Roman Military Equipment. Proceedings of the Second Roman Military Equipment Research Seminar, BAR. International Series 275, 222-298.
FREEDEN, U. von 1991, Awarische Funde in Süddeutschland?
-	Jahrbuch des RGZM 38/2, 593-610.
GANTAR, K. 1961, Procopius Caesariensis. Pod Justinijanovim žezlom. - Ljubljana.
GARAM, E. 1992, Die münzdatierten Gräber der Awarenzeit.
-	In: Awarenforschungen 1, Archaeologia Austriaca Monographien 1, Studien zur Archäologie der Awaren, 135-250.
GRAPE, W. 1994, The Bayeux Tapestry. - Munich, New York.
HAUCK, K., W. KRAUSE and H. BECK, 1973, Auzon, das Bilder- und Runenkästchen. - In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 1, 514-522.
HESSEN, O. von 1990, Il costume maschile. - In: G. C. Menis (ed.), I Longobardi, 178-201, Milano.
IBLER, U. 1990, Studien zum Kontinuitätsproblem am Übergang von der Antike zum Mittelalter in Nord- und West Jugoslawien. - Dissertation, Bonn.
IBLER, U. 2001, Krainburg. - In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 17, 290-295.
JOSIPOVIČ, D. 1981, K pravilnemu pisanju ledine "V Lajhu" (Kranj-Lajh). - Kronika 29, 51-52.
KNIFIC, T. 1993, Hunski sledovi v Sloveniji? - In: Ptujski arheološki zbornik, 521-542, Ptuj.
KNIFIC, T. 1995, Vojščaki iz mesta Karnija. - In: Kranjski zbornik 1995, 23-40, Kranj.
KNIFIC, T. 2005, Gospe iz mesta Karnija. - In: Kranjski zbornik 2005, 331-343, ^anj.
KOLIAS, T. G. 1988, Byzantinische Waffen. - Wien.
KORY, R. 2004, Schuppen- und Lamellenpanzer. - In: Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 17, 375-403.
KOS, F. 1902, Gradivo za zgodovino Slovencev 1, 221-229. -Ljubljana.
LEBEDYNSKY, I. 2001, Armes et guerier barbares au temp des grandes invasion. - Paris.
LOSERT, H. and A. PLETERSKI 2003, Altenerding in Oberbayern. Struktur des frühmittelalterlichen Gräberfeldes und Ethnogenese der Bajuwaren. - Berlin, Bamberg, Ljubljana.
LOTTER, F., R. BRATOŽ and H. CASTRITIUS 2005, Premiki ljudstev na območju Vzhodnih Alp in Srednjega Podonavja med antiko in srednjim vekom. - Ljubljana.
MARTIN, M. 2000, Mit Sax und Gürtel ausgestattete Männergräber des 6. Jahrhunderts in der Nekropole von Kranj (Slowenien). - In: R. Bratož (ed.), Slovenija in sosednje dežele med antiko in karolinško dobo. Začetki slovenske etnogene-ze/Slowenien und die Nachbarländer zwischen Antike und karolingischer Epoche. Anfänge der slowenischen Ethnogene-se 1, 141-198, Ljubljana.
MARUSIC, B. 1962, Longobardski i staroslavenski grobovi na Brešcu i kod malih vrata ispod Buzeta v Istri. - Arheološki radovi i rasprave 2, 453-469.
MEDVEDEV, A. F. 1966, Ručnoe metateljnoe oružie (Luk i strelj, samostrel) VIII-XIV vv. - Arheologija SSSR, Svod arheolo-gičeskih istočnikov E1-36.
MEHMETAJ, H. 1990, Kulina, Tenešdol, Multistrata Settlement. - Arheološki pregled 29, 96-99.
MENGARELLI, R. 1995, La necropoli barbarica di Castel Trosino. - In: La necropoli di Castel Trosino, 1-260, Ascoli Piceno.
MENGHIN, W. 1983, Das Schwert im frühen Mittelalter. - Stuttgart.
MENGHIN, W. 1985, Die Langobarden. Archäologie und Geschichte. - Stuttgart.
MILAVEC, T. 2004, S-fibule v Sloveniji. - Diploma thesis, Ljubljana.
MÜLLNER, A. 1901, Die "Frankengräber" bei Krainburg. -Argo 9/1, 156.
NOTITIA DIGNITATUM. - Berlin, O. Seeck (ed.), 1876.
ODAR, B. 2003, Lokostrelstvo v pozni antiki in zgodnjem srednjem veku. - Diplomska naloga, Oddelek za arheologijo Filozofske fakultete Univerze v Ljubljani.
PAROLI, L. 1995, La necropoli di Castel Trosino: un riesame critico. - In: L. Paroli et al. (eds.), La Necropoli altomedie-vale di Castel Trosino. Bizantini e Longobardi nelle Marche, 199-325, Milano.
PAULSEN, P. 1967, Alamannische Adelsgräber von Niederstotzingen. - Veröffentlichungen des staatlichen Amtes für Denkmalpflege Stuttgart. Reihe A/12, Stuttgart.
PIRKMAJER, D. 2001, Rifnik pri Šentjurju. - In: P. Bitenc, T. Knific (eds.), Od Rimljanov do Slovanov. Predmeti, 73-74, Ljubljana.
PLETERSKI A. and M. BELAK 2002, Grobovi s Puščave nad Starim trgom pri Slovenj Gradcu. - Arheološki vestnik 53, 233-300.
PLETERSKI A. and M. BELAK 2005, Časovno razmerje grobišč Lauterhofen in Altenerding. - Arheo (in print).
PREDOVNIK, K. 2003, Trdnjava Kostanjevica. - Archaeologia Historica Slovenica 4.
PROFUMO, M. C. 1995, La Necropoli di Nocera Umbra (piazza Medaglie d'Oro). - In: L. Paroli et al. (eds.), La Necropoli altomedievale di Castel Trosino. Bizantini e Longobardi nelle Marche, 329-335, Milano.
RAUSING, G. 1997, The Bow. - Manchester.
REUER, E. 1984, Die Pfeilspitzen von Leopoldau. - Archaeo-logia Austriaca 68, 155-160.
RIESCH, H. 1996, Untersuchungen zu Efizienz und Verwendung alamanischer Pfeilspitzen. - Archäologisches Korrespo-denzblatt 29, 567-582.
ROZMAN, B. 2004, Keramika iz prazgodovinske naselbine v Kranju (Pavšlarjeva hiša). Arheološki vestnik 55, 55-109.
RUTAR, S. 1899, Ein Goldscmuck der fränkischen Zeit aus Krainburg. - Mitteilungen der k.k. Centrall-Commission für Erforschung und Erhaltung der Kunst- und historiscen Denkmale 25, 142-143.
RUTAR, S. 1901, Fundbericht aus Krain von Jahre 1900. -Mitteilungen der k.k. Centrall-Commission für Erforschung und Erhaltung der Kunst- und historischen Denkmale 27, 170.
RUTTKAY, A. 1976, Waffen und Reiterausrüstung des 9. bis zur ersten Hälfte des 14. Jahrhunderts in der Slowakei (2).
-	Slovenska archeologia 234/2, 245-395.
SAGADIN, M. 1983, Kranj, Lajh. - Varstvo spomenikov 25, 252.
SAGADIN, M. 2004, Arheološke najdbe v starem Kranju. -ELGO vestnik. Poslovno glasilo družbe Elektro Gorenjska 2, 28-29.
SERGEJEVSKI, D. 1954, Staro-hrišcanska bazilika u Klobuku. - Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja u Sarajevu 9, 189-210.
SPINDLER, K. 1993, Der Mann im Eis. - München.
STARE, V. 1980, Kranj. Nekropola iz časa preseljevanja ljudstev.
-	Katalogi in monografije 18.
SZOMBATHY, J. 1902, Grabfunde der Völkerwanderungszeit vom Saveufer bei Krainburg. - Mittheilungen der Centrall-Commission für Erforschung und Erhaltung der Kunst- und historiscen Denkmale 1, 226-231.
SASEL, J. 1970-71, Alpes Iuliana. - Arheološki vestnik 21-22, 33-44.
SaSEL-KOS, M. 1994, Romulovo poslanstvo pri Atilu (Ena zadnjih omemb Petovione v antični literaturi). - Zgodovinski časopis 48/3, 285-295.
SMID, W. 1907, Die Reihengräber von Krainburg. - Jahrbuch für Altertumskunde 1, 55-77.
THEUNE-GROSSKOPF, B. 1997, Die Konrolle der Verkehrswege.
-	In: Die Alamannen, 237-242, Stuttgart.
TIHELKA, K. 1963, Das Fürstengrab bei Blučina, Bez. Brno-
Land, aus der Zeit der Völkerwanderung. - Pamatky Arche-ologicke 54/2, 495-497. TORCELLAN, M. 1986, Le tre necropoli altomedievali di Pingu-ente. - Ricerche di archeologia altomedievale e medievale 11. UENZE, S. 1992, Die spätantiken Befestigungen von Sadovec.
-	Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 43. VELUŠČEK, A. and ČUFAR K. 2001, 5600 let star lok z
Ljubljanskega barja. - Gea 11/ 1, 48-49. VELUŠČEK, A. et al. (eds.) 2004, Hočevarica. Eneolitsko kolišče na Ljubljanskem barju. Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 8.
VIDRIH-PERKO, V. and M. SAGADIN 2004, Gorenjska v antiki.
-	In: Kamniški zbornik 17, 207-224.
VINSKI, Z. 1980, Ovrednotenje grobnih pridatkov. - In: V. Stare, Kranj. Nekropola iz časa preseljevanja ljudstev. - Katalogi in monografije 18, 17-32. WERNARD, J. 1998, Hic scramasaxi loquuntur. Typologisch-chronologische Studie zum einscneidigen Schwert der Mero-wingerzeit in Süddeutschland. - Germania 76, 747-787. WERNER, J. 1956, Beiträge zur Archäologie des Attila Reiches.
-	Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, 38.
WERNER, J. 1962, Die Langobarden in Pannonien. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der langobardischen Bodenfunde vor 568. - Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, 55. WERNER, J. 1992, Golemanovo Kale und Sadovsko Kale: Kritische Zusammenfassung der Grabungsergebnisse. - In: S. Uenze, Die Spätantiken Befestigungen von Sadovec, Münchner Beiträge zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 43, 391-403. WOLF, R. 1997, Schreiner, Drechsler, Böttcher, Instrumentenbauer. Holzhandwerk im frühen Mittelalter. - In: K. Fuchs (ed.), Die Alamannen, 379-388, Stuttgart. WOLFRAM, H. 1985, Ethnogenesen im frühmittelalterlichen Donau- und Ostalpenraum (6.-10. Jahrhundert). - In: H. Beumann, W. Schröder (eds.), Frühmittelalterliche Ethno-genese im Alpenraum, Nationes 5, 97-151. WOLFRAM, H. 1990, Die Goten. Von Anfängen bis zur Mitte
des 6. Jahrhunderts. - München. ZASECKAJA, I. P. 1994, Kultura kočevnikov južnoruskih step
v hunski dobi (konec IV.-V. stol.). - Sankt-Petersburg. ŽMAVC, J. 1904, Das Gräberfeld im Lajh bei Krainburg. -Jahrbuch der k.k. Zentral-Kommission für Erforschung und Erhaltung der Kunst- und historischen Denkmale 2, 233-274. ŽONTAR, J. 1939, Zgodovina mesta Kranja. - Kranj.
Lokostrelec iz Karnija
UVOD
Ravnica z imenom Lajh leži v neposredni bližini sotočja rek Save in Kokre, nad njo pa se s severovzhoda dviguje skalni pomol. V pozni antiki je na njem stalo mesto z imenom Car-nium, poslovenjeno Karnij, na istem mestu pa je danes staro mestno jedro Kranja (Kos 1902; Šašel 1970-71, 33-35). Prebivalci Karnija so na ravnici pod mestom svojce pokopavali celo 6. stoletje in v začetku 7. stoletja (Vinski 1980).
Večji del grobišča je bil izkopan v letih od 1896 do 1905 (Stare 1980; Knific 1995). Po časovnem zaporedju so na Lajhu izkopavali T. Pavšlar (1896-1900), J. Pečnik (1900), J. Szomba-thy (1901), J. Žmavc (1901), F. Schulz (1901), ponovno J. Žmavc (1903-1904) in W. Šmid (1905). Manjše poskusno izkopavanje
je leta 1982 izvedel M. Sagadin (1983), pri zaščitnih izkopavanjih konec marca 2004 pa je bil med več skeletnimi grobovi odkrit ženski grob z dragocenimi pridatki (Sagadin 2004; Delo 30. 3. 2004, str. 7; Gorenjski glas 16. 4. 2004, str. 8).
Prvo poročilo o poznoantičnih grobovih z Lajha pod Kranjem je objavil Žmavc (1904), tri leta kasneje pa še Šmid (1907). Gradivo, ki ga je na Lajhu izkopal Pečnik leta 1900 in Szomba-thy naslednje leto, hrani Naravoslovni muzej na Dunaju (NHM Wien), ostalo pa Narodni muzej Slovenije v Ljubljani (NMS). Večino gradiva z grobišča na Lajhu je za monografijo Kranj, nekropola iz časa preseljevanja ljudstev zbrala in pripravila V. Stare (1980). Monografija je doživela vzpodbudne ocene (pregledno Knific 1995, 23), a tudi ostro kritiko, v kateri je I. Bona (1981) opozoril na pomanjkljivosti kataloga in napačno sestavljanje grobnih
celot (slovenski prevod v madžarščini napisane knjižne ocene hrani NMS). V zadnjih letih v Narodnem muzeju Slovenije T. Knific poskuša grobne celote ponovno sestaviti in grobove umestiti v poenoten načrt grobišča, pri tem pa uporablja rokopisno zapuščino in izvorne objave izkopavalcev ter krajše in daljše prispevke v dnevnem in tedenskem časopisju tedanjega časa (Kni-fic 1995; isti 2005). Študije o grobišču na Lajhu so nastajale tudi izven Slovenije, vendar so ob izvornih objavah izhajale tudi iz nezanesljivega kataloga (Martin 2000; Ibler 1990; Ibler 2001). Da gradivo iz že izkopanega dela grobišča nudi še veliko raziskovalnih možnosti, dokazujejo tudi diplomska dela Oddelka za arheologijo pod mentorstvom izr. prof. dr. T. Knifica (npr. Bras-Kernel 2002; Odar 2003; Milavec 2004).
Ob pripravi diplomske naloge o lokostrelski opremi sem se srečal z grobovi bojevnikov z Lajha. Iz tedanje študije (Odar 2003) je izpadel grob bojevnika, lokostrelca z mečem, dolgima nožema in 23 puščičnimi ostmi. Grobna celota, ki jo hrani Naravoslovni muzej na Dunaju, doslej še ni bila objavljena. Staretova (1980, 8) omeni tri Pečnikove grobove iz leta 1900, meč in kavelj za tul pa objavi kot ločeni najdbi in ju ne pripiše enemu od Pečnikovih grobov. O grobu z mečem in 23 puščič-nimi ostmi sta pisala Knific (1995, 27-28) in Božič (2001, 210), von Freeden (1991, 602; op. 54) pa le omeni trikrilne puščič-ne osti, ki jih hrani Naravoslovni muzej na Dunaju. Na pobudo T. Knifica in A. Pleterskega sva z risarko T. Korošec ob podpori Inštituta za arheologijo (IzA) med 15. in 19. 11. 2004 obiskala Naravoslovni muzej na Dunaju z namenom dokumentirati grobno celoto in jo pripraviti za objavo.
ROKOPISNI VIRI
1. Pismo Jerneja Pečnika Josefu Szombathyju z dne 27. 7. 1900. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krain-burg. Kopijo hrani arhiv IzA. Obojestransko popisana lista velikosti 22,5 x 14,4 cm. Pečnikov rokopis v nemščini. Napisano v Kranju.
1.	Was geschah mit den Knochen und dem Schädel jenes Grabes von Krainburg, das Sie ausgruben und in dem Sie das Schwert und die Pfeile fanden.
2.	Was geschah mit Ihren Funden von Veldes?
3.	Könnte man in Krainburg graben?
Diese Fragen bitte ich möglichst bald und möglichst pünktlich zu beantworten. Ihre letzte kleine Sendung mit dem Schwerte u.s.w. werde ich gerne kaufen. Aber heuer habe ich leider in der Dotation, aus welcher ich den Ankauf bestreiten soll, kein Geld mehr. Sie müßen also warten bis zu Anfang Jänner. ...
4.	Pismo Jerneja Pečnika Josefu Szombathyju z dne 20. 11. 1900. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krain-burg. Kopijo hrani arhiv IzA. Obojestransko popisani štirje listi velikosti 34,1 x 21 cm. Pečnikov rokopis v nemščini. Napisano v Novem mestu.
... lasse ich im Juli heuer, auf dem Platze wo muss Grabfeld sein, 2 Graben ausgraben, bis 2 Metter tief, ein jeder Graben lasse Ich bei 4 Metter langen bis 5 Metter ausgraben, und nur 1 Metter breit, und komme Ich in einem Graben auf 1 Skeletgrab, und in dem 2 Graben finde Ich 2 Skeletgräber.
Skeletgräber in Krainburg
I. Graben 5 lang, und nur 1 Metter breit, 2 Metter tief, ausgegraben, unteren Grab.
Grab Nro. 1. 1,50 m tief Kopf gegen Westen gut erhaltener Skelet, in Schotterboden, keine Beigaben.
Grab Nro. 2. 2 Metter tief, Kopf gegen Westen, bei rechter Hand 1 grosse Schwert, bei 90 cm lang 5 cm breit, beim Schwerte, auf Haufen zusammen, 23 Pfeilspitzen und bei Kopfe auf jeder Seite des Kopfes 1 Messer, Messer 28 cm lange, 2 cm breite, gut erhaltenes Skelet.
... auf dem schönen Ebenen Platze lasse ich zwei graben Graben, so 1 Metter breit und einige 5 Metter lang ist sant Schotter, von Save aufgetragen wir graben und kommen wir gestern auf 3 Skelete in einem graben 2ter war einen 2 Metter tief, hat gehabt 1 grosses Schwert 85 cm lang, und 5 cm breit, auf beiden Seiten scharf, sehr schweres Schwert, einen solchen habe ich noch nicht ausgegraben, und bei dem Skelete war bei Kopfe 2 lange ungewöhnliche Messer und bei Schwert 23 Pfeilspitzen, verschiedener Gatung sehr interessante sonst nichts, bei 2 Skeleten waren keine beigaben ...
2.	Pismo Jerneja Pečnika Josefu Szombathyju z dne 10. 11. 1900. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krain-burg. Tipkopis hrani arhiv IzA. Pečnikov rokopis v nemščini. Napisano v Novem mestu.
... Nro. 1. Skeletgrab in Krainburg 2 Metter tief, Kopf gegen Westen, gut erhaltene Skelet, aus Völkerwanderungszeit, Auf der rechten Seite, bei der rechten Hand gelegen, 1 grosser Schwert, gegen 90 cm lang, 5 cm breit, beim Schwerte 23 Pfeilspitzen, gut erhaltene, beim Kopfe, bei jeder Seite 1 Messer, in die Erde gesteckt, Messer sind beide gleich, 28 cm lange, 2 cm breite, ungewöhnliche Messer, Schwert auf beiden Seiten scharf. ...
3.	Pismo Josefa Szombathyja Jerneju Pečniku z dne 19. 11. 1900. Arhiv RS, AS 956, Pečnik Jernej, tehnična enota 1, Ljubljana. Kopijo hrani arhiv IzA. Obojestransko popisan list velikosti 28,5 x 22,6 cm. Szombathyjev rokopis. Napisano na Dunaju.
... Seien Sie so freundlich, mir über die Funde von Krainburg und Veldes einige Auskünfte zu geben, die mir für den Augenblick sehr erwünscht sind.
Grab Nro. 3. in zweiten Graben, nur 1 Metter tief wieder Kopf gegen Westen, ohne beigaben, so haben alle begrabene geschaut gegen Osten aus diesen 2 Probe graben, ist ersichtlich dass muss noch ein grosses Grabfeld sein, auf diesen schönen Platze, 60 Metter langen 40 Metter breiten, müssen noch Hunderte Gräber liegen. ...
5.	Terenski dnevnik Josefa Szombathyja iz leta 1901. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg. Fotografsko kopijo hrani IzA. S fotografij ni mogoče narediti fizičnega opisa. Na platnici zvezka napis: NOTIZEN. Oberkrain. 1901. Krainburg 36. Zvezek ima 28 strani.
... Ganz nahe am Zusammenfluß der Kanker mit der Save. Am Spitz steht das Mühlenetablissement Paušler. SO - SW von Fluße, NO von der über die Kanker nach Krainbg kommenden Bezirkstrasse begrenzt, NW an den Gemeindegrund anstoßend. Neben dieser Grenze ist die gegen die Bezirkstrasse offene Hofparzelle, auf der Paušler die Funde gemacht hat. Die werthvollen Grabfunde sind aus der Mitte. Bis zur Annahme meiner Punkte lasse ich die wartenden Arbeiter abtreten. ...
... Nachm. 1 h Beginn der Grabg. Von der Ecke städtischen Platzes an d. Strasse, neben der Zufahrt zum Paušlerischen Grunde zur Ecke des Paušlerischen Wirtschaftsgebäudes 209 -. Der Messpunkt a liegt 3 m ab von 3 Aleebaume. Von a zur Ecke 15 00/115, zur Ecke d. W.-gebäudes 180°, zur Grabung 12^40/119, 13^60/144 ...
6.	Načrt grobišča izdelal Josef Szombathy leta 1901. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg. Kopijo in fotografijo načrta hrani arhiv IzA. Načrt grobišča v merilu 1 : 200. Načrt na listu velikosti 41,6 x 34 cm. Szombathyjev rokopis. Risba v svinčniku, deloma prevlečena s tušem (sl. 3).
SLIKOVNI VIRI
1.	1901. Avtor neznan. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg, Nr. 1607. Fotografsko kopijo hrani arhiv IzA. Velikost 12,9 x 8,8 cm. Fotografija prilepljena na črno podlago in papirno ovojnico svetlo rjave barve (sl. 4).
2.	1901. Avtor neznan. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg, Nr. 1608. Fotografsko kopijo hrani arhiv IzA. Velikost 12,9 x 8,8 cm. Fotografija prilepljena na črno podlago in papirno ovojnico svetlo rjave barve (sl. 5).
3.	1901. Avtor neznan. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg, Nr. 1609. Fotografsko kopijo hrani arhiv IzA. Velikost 12,9 x 8,8 cm. Fotografija prilepljena na črno podlago in papirno ovojnico svetlo rjave barve (sl. 6).
4.	1901. Avtor neznan. NHM Wien, Prähistorische Abteilung, Fundakt Krainburg, Nr. 1610. Fotografsko kopijo hrani arhiv IzA. Velikost 12,9 x 8,8 cm. Fotografija prilepljena na črno podlago in papirno ovojnico svetlo rjave barve (sl. 7).
PEČNIKOVO ODKRITJE GROBA
V pismu, naslovljenem na kustosa dvornega muzeja na Dunaju dr. Szombathyja, Pečnik piše, da je mlinar Pavšlar na mestu, kjer je postavil velik mlin, izkopal nad 100 grobov (vir 1). Na prve grobove so naleteli leta 1896 ob ruvanju dreves na mestu, kjer naj bi stala novogradnja. O 16 izkopanih okostjih je poročal Rutar (1899, 142-143). Odkritje ženskega groba z dragocenimi zlatimi predmeti dve leti kasneje,1. decembra (Bras-Kernel 2002), pa je povzročilo nadaljnje prekopavanje Pavšlarjeve posesti. Uspeh ni izostal. Novitete iz Pavšlarjeve posesti so našle prostor v dnevnem in tedenskem časopisju tedanjega časa. Na novice o zlatokopih se je večkrat nejevoljno odzval starinokop Pečnik, ki je opozarjal na nestrokovno in nesistematično prekopavanje grobov na Pavšlarjevem posestvu (Knific 1995, 24-27). Pečnik je preko občinskega urada in okrajnega glavarstva uspel preprečiti Pavšlarju nadaljnje kopanje. Sam pa je hotel preveriti obseg grobišča.
Dan ali dva pred 27. julijem je Pečnik prispel v Kranj z namenom, da izvede poskusna izkopavanja v neposredni bližini Pavšlarjeve posesti. Pečnik piše (vir 1), da je zraven lep prostor, pašnik, ki pripada mestu Kranj. Za kopanje na lepi ravnici, ki leži ob Savi, je Pečnik pridobil soglasje mestne uprave. 26. julija so štirje delavci zakopali v gramozna tla. Pečnik je dal kopati dva poskusna jarka, 1 meter široka in približno 5 metrov dolga. V pismu beremo, da so naleteli na tri okostja v enem jarku. Drugo okostje je ležalo 2 m globoko, ob sebi pa je imelo velik meč, 85 cm dolg in 5 cm širok, na obeh straneh oster. Takega meča še ni izkopal, piše Pečnik. Pri glavi sta bila dva dolga nenavadna noža in ob meču 23 zelo zanimivih puščičnih osti različnih vrst. Pri drugih dveh okostjih ni bilo pridatkov. Pečnik je lobanje previdno dvignil in jih dal sušiti, jarke pa dal zasipati. Med kratkotrajno odsotnostjo Pečnika je prišel na ogled mestni zdravnik, ki je brez njegove vednosti odnesel lobanje. Pečnik se je jezil, da mu je uničil lobanje. Po njegovi oceni mora na prostoru, dolgem 50 metrov in širokem 20 metrov, kot tudi na dveh manjših v bližini biti še na stotine grobov, ki bi jih bilo še letos treba prekopati. Ker mu je denar kmalu pošel, si ga je moral za nadaljnje kopanje izposlovati od drugod. Piše še, da meča, ki ga je izkopal, ne namerava dati ljubljanskemu muzeju in Szombathyju ponuja svoje usluge, če se odloči za izkopavanja na obetavnem grobišču.
Pečnik je predmete iz groba bojevnika skupaj s predmeti z drugih najdišč poslal na Dunaj 10. novembra 1901 (vir 2). V seznamu poslanih predmetov sodi vsebina groba pod prvi sklop. Tokrat Pečnik grob z mečem postavi na prvo mesto, meč pa je
v tem opisu dolg 90 cm. Nov je podatek, da je meč s puščicami ležal ob desnici, noža dolga 28 cm in široka 2 cm pa na vsaki strani ob glavi. Opis ostalih predmetov je enak kot v prvem pismu.
Szombathy je Pečniku odgovoril 19. novembra 1900 (vir
3).	Prosil ga je za natančne podatke o najdbah iz Kranja in z Bleda in se pozanimal o usodi kosti in lobanje iz groba z mečem in puščicami. Pečnika je tudi povprašal o možnostih za kopanje v Kranju. Majhno pošiljko z mečem in ostalim bo z veseljem odkupil, vendar mora Pečnik počakati na plačilo do začetka januarja, ker je Szombathyju denar za ta namen za tekoče leto pošel.
Pečnik je v pismu z dne 20. 11. 1900 opisal izkopavanje na Lajhu s seznamom najdb iz groba bojevnika na Lajhu ter naredil popis prazgodovinskih najdišč v Kranju in njegovi okolici (vir 4). V seznamu je začel z geografskim orisom Kranja, kjer je bila nekoč halštatska naselbina s pripadajočim grobiščem. Na tem grobišču je Pečnik izkopal 20 žarnih grobov (Rozman 2004, 57, sl. 1). Tretjega in nekaj nadaljnjih odstavkov je Pečnik posvetil grobišču, o katerem je poročal že prej (vir 1). Vendar se pismi v nekaterih delih dopolnjujeta. Tako npr. izvemo (vir
4),	da Kranjčani travnato ledino spodaj, jugozahodno pod mestom, imenujejo ... na Lajhu ... (v Lajhu: Žmavc 1904; Žontar 1939, 505; Josipovič 1981). Sedaj omenja zlat nakit in druge lepe najdbe iz časa preseljevanja ljudstev, odkrite na Pavšlarjevem posestvu. Piše o lepo ohranjenih okostjih, ki pa so jih grobi delavci povsem uničili. Zaradi škode, ki da se dela, se je odločil za odhod v Kranj z namenom preprečiti nadaljnje kopanje. Ponovno je omenil tri območja, primerna za grobišče z več sto pokopi. Kjer domneva grobišče, je dal izkopati dva jarka. Tokrat je grob z orožjem tako kot v prvem pismu (vir 1) spet omenjen kot drugi odkriti grob. Izvemo, da je okostja iz treh grobov lepo položil na les, podložen s papirjem, in jih dal sušiti na sonce blizu izkopa, da ne bi prišli zraven otroci. Medtem ko se je mudil na mestni upravi, so delavci oba jarka zasuli, popazili pa naj bi tudi na okostja. Čez pol ure se je Pečnik vrnil in z jezo ugotovil izginotje okostij. Delavci so mu povedali, da se je pri izkopu pomudil mladi okrožni zdravnik Globočnik iz Kranja in odnesel vse tri dobro ohranjene lobanje. Pečnik se je takoj odpravil k njemu, vendar je zdravnik že odšel k bolniku. Pečnik je upal, da zdravnik še vedno hrani lobanje. O najdbah pa je povedal, da bi jih želeli hraniti v kranjski gimnaziji, in omenil, da ima dobre odnose s kranjskim županom, dekanom Koblarjem in direktorjem gimnazije. S tem je Pečnik zaključil opis izkopavanj na Lajhu in seznam nadaljeval z izkopavanji na Bledu.
Grob bojevnika je našel mesto v tedanjem časopisju. Prvi je o njem poročal Gorenjec (letnik I/29) dne 28. 7. 1900: -Starinske najdbe. Pečnik je v četrtek izkopal troje grobov. Pokopi so bili usmerjeni proti vzhodu. Dva metra globok grob je vseboval nad 90 cm dolg, precej širok dvorezen meč, dva precej dolga noža in 23 ostvi za puščice. Pri drugih dveh ni bilo ničesar najti. Dva dni kasneje je novico objavil še Slovenski narod (letnik 33/ 173). Rutar (1901, 170) pa piše: ... Am "Lajh" unterhalb Krainburg öffnete er gegen Ende Juli mehrere Gräber in der Tiefe von 1 bis 2 M. und fand ein schweres zweischneidiges Schwert von 88 Cm. Länge und 5 Cm. Breite; ferner 23 gut erhaltene Pfeilspitzen, an welchen man noch Holzspuren erkennen konnte, und zwei 28 Cm. lange Messer. ...
SZOMBATHY NA LAJHU
V Szombathyjevem dnevniku beremo (vir 5, str. 1), da je z Dunaja v Ljubljano odpotoval 11. junija 1901, naslednje jutro pa je nadaljeval pot proti Kranju. Po srečanju z mestnimi veljaki si je Szombathy ogledal ledino na Lajhu, katero mu je v pismih omenjal Pečnik (sl. 2).
Potem, ko je Szombathy naredil izmere za določitev izkop-nega polja na Lajhu, si je šel ogledat najdišče severno od Kranja,
kjer je Pečnik pred leti izkopal 20 žarnih grobov. Ob enih popoldne je Szombathy začel izkopavati (vir 5, str. 3). Szombathy je vse meritve izvajal iz točke a, v dnevniku pa meritve dosledno zapisoval v zaporedju razdalja v metrih od točke a, odklon v stopinjah z izhodiščem v točki a (vira 5 in 6; sl. 3). Obe spremenljivki je ločil s poševnico. Točko a je postavil 3 metre vstran od tretjega drevesa ob cesti in 15 metrov od vogala parcele 409/2, ki je bila v lasti mesta Kranj in je na vzhodu mejila na Pavšlar-jevo posest.
Za umestitev treh grobov, ki jih je 26. julija 1900 izkopal Pečnik, sta pomembni Pečnikovi pismi, ki ju je poslal Szom-bathyju na Dunaj (vir 1 in 4). Iz obeh pisem izhaja, da je poskusna jarka izkopal na mestnem zemljišču, ki so ga Kranjčani imenovali na Lajhu. Gre za parcelo 409/2, ki je na vzhodu mejila na Pavšlarjevo posest in ležala južno od lokalne ceste.
V terenski dokumentaciji (vira 5 in 6) je Szombathy zabeležil 55 grobov na parceli 409/2, na drugi strani čez cesto pa je v trikotu med glavno in stransko cesto na parceli 423/1 v dveh poskusnih sondah izkopal pet grobov in jih označil s črkami A-E (sl. 3). Po odhodu Szombathyja je Pečnik izkopal še tri grobove na parceli 409/2. Szombathy je te tri grobove oštevilčil od 56 do 58, s črkami označene grobove pa od 59 do 63. Dejansko je Szombathy s Pečnikovo pomočjo izkopal 64 grobov. Prvi grob, ki so ga odkrili 13. junija, je bil otroški. Naslednji je ležal levo od prvega, oba pa sta bila označena s številko 1. Otroškemu je Szombathy dodal črko a. Tako je Szombathy s pomočjo Pečnika dejansko izkopal 64 grobov.
Če pozorno pogledamo Szombathyjev načrt (sl. 3), opazimo tri neoštevilčene grobove z vrisano lego pokojnih. Dva sta narisana na JV meji izkopnega polja, tretji leži SZ od izkopa. Pri tistih dveh, ki ležita skupaj, je Szombathy pripisal 2 Gräber P's. Upravičeno bi domnevali, da gre za grobova, ki ju je Pečnik izkopal v eni od sond prejšnje leto. Za nejasnost pa je poskrbel Pečnik sam v pismu z dne 27. julija (vir 1), kjer je zapisal: ... wir graben und kommen wir gestern auf 3 Skelete in einem graben 2ter war einen 2 Metter tief, hat gehabt 1 grosses Schwert 85 cm lang, und 5 cm breit, ... Ker se v pismu Pečnik ni držal slovničnih pravil nemškega jezika, lahko besedilo v tem pismu beremo na dva načina. Slovnično pravilno bi bilo: ... Wir graben und kommen wir gestern auf 3 Skelete in einem Graben. 2ter war einen 2 Metter tief, hat gehabt 1 grosses Schwert 85 cm lang, und 5 cm breit, ... Vendar se tako brano besedilo ne sklada z dejstvi in bi lahko njegove tri grobove zamenjali s tistimi na načrtu, ki so vrisani na Pavšlarjevem zemljišču brez lege okostij. Ker pa Pečnik nikoli ni kopal na Pavšlarjevem posestvu, je potrebo besedilo v omenjenem pismu brati drugače, čeprav slovnično nepravilno. Na možnost drugačnega branja me je opozoril D. Božič: ... Wir graben und kommen wir gestern auf 3 Skelete. In einem Graben 2ter war einen 2 Metter tief, hat gehabt 1 grosses Schwert 85 cm lang, und 5 cm breit, ... Szom-bathy v dnevniku omenja najboljše najdbe iz grobov, ki jih je izkopal Pavšlar leta 1899. Umestil jih je v skico na koncu dnevnika (vir 5, str. 18) in na svoj načrt. V seznamu z dne 20. novembra 1900 (vir 4) je Pečnik zapisal: ... und komme Ich in einem Graben auf 1 Skeletgrab, und in dem 2 Graben finde Ich 2 Skeletgräber ... To potrjuje, da je Szombathy dejansko označil Pečnikova grobova 1 in 2. Vsem trem pokojnim je tudi določil usmeritev in njihovo okvirno velikost po podatkih, ki jih je dobil od Pečnika.
Kateri od dveh Pečnikovih grobov je vseboval bojevniško opremo, ostaja nepojasnjeno. Če izhajamo iz domneve, da je Pečnik začel kopati od ceste proti reki tako kot naslednje leto Szombathy, se zdi, da je bila bojevniška oprava priložena v spodnji, južnejši grob. Sklep temelji na Pečnikovem seznamu z dne 20. novembra 1900 in na dejstvu, da je Szombathy naredil izmere okostij s točke a. Največji so bili pokojni iz grobov 2, 19 in 41, visoki okoli 1,80 ali več. Szombathy je namreč meril skrajni točki okostij, glave in nog, ki so se sčasoma razlezla. V večini primerov je podal mere na decimeter natančno. Pokojni bliže cesti je manjši od pokojnega na njegovi desni
strani za približno deset centimetrov, merjeno neposredno iz načrta. Manjši bi meril približno 1,50 metra, večji 1,60 metra. Ker pa Szombathy ni imel natančnih podatkov o velikosti okostij, je po vsej verjetnosti razliko v velikosti na načrtu le nakazal.
Tudi sicer je razumljivo, da je Pečnik prvi izkop zastavil čim bliže Pavšlarjevi posesti, kjer je bil rezultat najbolj obetaven. Z drugim izkopom 28 metrov proti SZ pa je preveril obseg grobišča. Naslednje leto so začeli izkopavati prav na mestu, kjer je še bilo mogoče zaznati obseg zasutega Pečnikovega jarka z dvema grobovoma. Začeli so pri cesti in nadaljevali proti reki Savi. Z izkopavanj so se ohranile štiri neobjavljene fotografije, ki jih hrani NHM na Dunaju in jih sedaj prvič objavljamo (sl. 4-7). Po natančni preučitvi fotografij in načrta grobov menim, da je bilo stojišče za fotografijo 1607 levo ob tretjem drevesu, šteto od vzhoda proti zahodu (sl. 4). Sredina fotografije je usmerjena naravnost proti jugu. Zaradi dolgih, izrazitih senc obiskovalcev in velike lipe sklepam, da je ujet zgodnji dopoldanski trenutek poletnih izkopavanj. Glede na višino ljudi ob južnem robu izkopa in njegovo lego je fotografija verjetno nastala v četrtek, 20. 6. 1901, ko se je Szombathy po kratki odsotnosti med 14. in 19. 6. vrnil na Lajh. Ujet je trenutek tik pred ali med odkritjem grobov 17 in 18 (sl. 8). Na vseh fotografijah se pojavljajo isti obiskovalci. Zadnja fotografija je nastala popoldne, verjetno ob odkritju groba 22. Štiri fotografije so nastale istega dne. Avtor fotografij zaenkrat ostaja neznan.
PREDMETI IZ GROBA Katalog
Vse gradivo hrani Naravoslovni muzej na Dunaju. V primerih, ko je več predmetov vodenih pod isto inventarno številko, sem za poševnico dodal zaporedno številko.
Tabla 1
1.	Železen meč. Po sredini rezila na obeh straneh poteka plitev žleb. Na rezilu meča so sledi lesene nožnice. Dolžina 87,7 cm. Širina 5,1 cm. Teža 814 g. Inv. št. 36498. Lit.: Stare 1980, 83, št. 15, t. 136: 1; Knific 1995, 28.
2.	Železen nož. Nož je restavriran: očiščen rje in na manjkajočih delih zapolnjen z rjavo rdečkasto umetno snovjo. Trn ni v celoti ohranjen (manjkata približno 2 cm). Dolžina 26 cm. Širina 1,7 cm. Teža 50,4 g. Inv. št. 36499/1.
3.	Železen nož. Dolžina 28,2 cm. Širina 1,8 cm. Teža 58,4 g. Inv. št. 36499/2.
4.	Železna puščična ost ima konico z vzporednima stranicama, ki se zaključita v ost. Konica sedlasto prehaja v trn, na katerem je sled lesenega naperka. Dolžina 10,3 cm. Širina 1,3 cm. Teža 15,6 g. Inv. št. 36500.
5.	Železna puščična ost deltoidne oblike ima rombični presek.
V	spodnjem delu ima stranska izrastka. Konica sedlasto prehaja v trn, na katerem je sled lesenega naperka. Dolžina 8,3 cm. Širina 1 cm. Teža 10,2 g. Inv. št. 36501/1.
6.	Železna puščična ost deltoidne oblike ima rombični presek. V spodnjem delu ima stranska izrastka. Konica sedlasto prehaja v delno ohranjen trn, na katerem je sled lesenega naperka. Dolžina 6,6 cm. Širina 1,1 cm. Teža 9,4 g. Inv. št. 36501/2.
7.	Železna puščična ost deltoidne oblike ima rombični presek. V spodnjem delu ima stranska izrastka. Konica sedlasto prehaja v delno ohranjen trn. Dolžina 7 cm. Širina 1,1 cm. Teža 11,6 g. Inv. št. 36501/3.
8.	Železna puščična ost deltoidne oblike ima rombični presek.
V	spodnjem delu ima stranska izrastka. Konica sedlasto prehaja v delno ohranjen trn, na katerem je sled lesenega naperka. Dolžina 6,9 cm. Širina 1 cm. Teža 9,2 g. Inv. št. 36501/4.
9.	Železna puščična ost ima trirobo konico deltoidne oblike, ki sedlasto prehaja v trn. Trn tiči v delu lesenega naperka
s sledovi navitja. Po sredini stranic potekajo žlebovi. Dolžina 10,6 cm. Širina 0,8 cm. Teža 13,2 g. Inv. št. 36502/1.
10.	Železna puščična ost ima trirobo konico deltoidne oblike, ki sedlasto prehaja v trn. Na trnu je sled lesenega naperka. Po sredini stranic potekajo žlebovi. Dolžina 9,6 cm. Širina 1 cm. Teža 12,2 g. Inv. št. 36503/1.
11.	Železna puščična ost ima trirobo konico deltoidne oblike, ki sedlasto prehaja v trn. Na trnu je ostanek lesenega naperka. Dolžina 9,3 cm. Širina 0,9 cm. Teža 12,2 g. Inv. št. 36503/2.
12.	Železna puščična ost ima trirobo konico deltoidne oblike, ki sedlasto prehaja v trn. Po sredini stranic potekajo žlebovi, v spodnjem delu prekinjeni s prečnimi vrezi. Dolžina 6,7 cm. Širina 0,8 cm. Teža 9,4 g. Inv. št. 36504/1.
13.	Železna puščična ost ima trirobo konico deltoidne oblike, ki sedlasto prehaja v trn. Trn ni ohranjen. Po sredini stranic potekajo žlebovi, v spodnjem delu prekinjeni s prečnimi vrezi. Dolžina 4,7 cm. Širina 0,9 cm. Teža 8,8 g. Inv. št. 36504/2.
Tabla 2
1.	Železna puščična ost ima delno ohranjeno trikrilno konico. Vrh konice, verjetno piramidast, je močno načela rja. Konica sedlasto prehaja v trn, ki tiči v delu lesenega naperka s sledovi navitja. Dolžina 9,6 cm. Širina 1,1 cm. Teža 13 g. Inv. št. 36505/1.
2.	Železna puščična ost ima trikrilno konico s piramida-stim vrhom. Konica sedlasto prehaja v trn, na katerem je ostanek lesenega naperka. Dolžina 8,5 cm. Širina 1 cm. Teža 10,8 g._ Inv. št. 36505/2.
3.	Železna puščična ost ima trikrilno konico s piramida-stim vrhom. Konica sedlasto prehaja v trn, ki tiči v delu lesenega naperka s sledovi navitja. Dolžina 8,9 cm. Širina 1 cm. Teža 11,6 g._ Inv. št. 36506/1.
4.	Železna puščična ost ima trikrilno konico s piramida-stim vrhom. Konica sedlasto prehaja v trn, ki tiči v delu lesenega naperka s sledovi navitja. Dolžina 8 cm. Širina 0,9 cm. Teža 11 g. Inv. št. 36506/2.
5.	Delno ohranjena železna puščična ost ima trikrilno konico s piramidastim vrhom. Zdi se, da trn, ki tiči v delu lesenega naperka s sledovi navitja pripada h konici. Skupna dolžina 8,8 cm. Širina 1 cm. Skupna Teža 12,8 g. NHMW, inv. št. 36504/ 3, 36506/3.
6.	Železna puščična ost ima trikrilno konico s piramida-stim vrhom. Konica sedlasto prehaja v trn, ki tiči v delu lesenega naperka s sledovi navitja. Dolžina 9,5 cm. Širina 1,2 cm. Teža 10,6 g. Inv. št. 36507/1.
7.	Železna puščična ost ima zaradi rje močno poškodovano konico, ki prehaja v trn. Trn tiči v delu lesenega naperka s sledovi navitja. Trn je naknadno zlepljen s konico. Dolžina 9,4 cm. Širina 0,9 cm. Teža 11,4 g. Inv. št. 36502/2, 36507/2.
8.	Železna puščična ost ima trikrilno konico s piramida-stim vrhom. Konica sedlasto prehaja v delno ohranjen trn, na katerem je sled lesenega naperka. Dolžina 6,4 cm. Širina 1,2 cm. Teža 9,8 g. Inv. št. 36507/3.
9.	Železna puščična ost ima trikrilno konico s piramida-stim vrhom. Konica sedlasto prehaja v delno ohranjen trn, na katerem je sled lesenega naperka. Dolžina 6,3 cm. Širina 1,3 cm. Teža 12,4 g. Inv. št. 36507/4.
10.	Železna puščična ost ima trikrilno konico s piramida-stim vrhom. Konica sedlasto prehaja v trn, ki tiči v delu lesenega naperka s sledovi navitja. Dolžina 9,4 cm. Širina 1,9 cm. Teža 18,2 g. Inv. št. 36508/1.
11.	Železna puščična ost ima trikrilno konico s piramidastim vrhom. Konica sedlasto prehaja v trn, na katerem je sled lesenega naperka. Dolžina 8,4 cm. Širina 1,9 cm. Teža 11,8 g. Inv. št. 36508/2.
12.	Železna puščična ost ima trikrilno konico s piramida-stim vrhom. Konica sedlasto prehaja v trn, na katerem je sled
lesenega naperka. Dolžina 7,2 cm. Širina 1,9 cm. Teža 11,4 g. Inv. št. 36508/3.
13.	Železna puščična ost ima trikrilno konico s piramidastim vrhom. Konica sedlasto prehaja v trn, na katerem je sled lesenega naperka. Dolžina 7,4 cm. Širina 1,4 cm. Teža 6,4 g. Inv. št. 36508/4.
14.	Železen kavelj s pravokotnim ušesom se zaključi z bunčico. Dolžina 4,4 cm. Širina 2,1 cm. Teža 8 g. Inv. št. 36509. Lit.: Stare 1980, 83, št. 10, t. 135: 6; Knific 1995, 38.
Meč in dolga noža
Pokojnemu bojevniku so v grob položili meč ob desnico in dva dolga noža levo in desno ob glavi (sl. 9).
Na meču so še vidne sledi lesene nožnice. Dvorezni meč (t. 1: 1) z dolžino 87,7 cm ne izstopa v primerjavi z ostalimi meči z Lajha (tab. 1) ali z meči od drugod (Menghin 1983; Losert, Pleterski 2003, 398-410) in ne vsebuje elementov, ki bi natančneje opredeljevali čas njegove uporabe. Na trnu meča ni bilo glaviča, kot so se ohranili na treh mečih z Lajha (41/Szomba-thy, 27/Žmavc, 6/Šmid).
Bolj pomenljiva sta dva identična dolga noža (t. 1: 2,3). Zanimiva sta predvsem zaradi nenavadno dolgega in ozkega rezila. Zato sem primerjal nože z Lajha, katerih rezila so daljša od 15 cm (tab. 1). Od te dolžine naprej Martin (2000, 143 ss) govori o bojnih nožih ali saksih (drugače Wernard 1998, 774), kriterij za širino rezila pa ni podan. Ob primerjavi sak-sov z Lajha opazimo dve odstopanji. Odstopanje dveh nožev v dolžini in širini sem že omenil. Saks, domnevno iz groba 20/ Schulz, pa odstopa zaradi dolžine. Primerjava količnikov iz razmerja med dolžinami in širinami rezil pa pokaže le izstopanje obeh dolgih nožev iz obravnavanega groba. Tri skupine nožev ali saksov z Lajha se ujemajo z nekaterimi skupinami saksov iz Altenerdinga. Večina saksov z Lajha se združuje s kratkimi saksi v skupini 1, primerek domnevno iz groba 20/ Schulz sodi k lahkim saksom v skupino 2, dolga noža pa zaradi izjemno ozke kline stojita na meji med noži in saksi v skupini 5 (Pleterski, Belak 2005, sl. 6). Medtem ko so kratki saksi v merovinškem obdobju v južni Nemčiji značilni za celo 6. stoletje, so ozki saksi oziroma noži umeščeni v čas od prve četrtine 6. stoletja do leta 570/80. Lahki široki meči pa se pojavijo v zadnji četrtini 6. stoletja (Wernard 1998, 774; primerjaj Pleterski in Belak 2005). Iz tabele torej izhaja, da bojnih nožev ali saksov iz mlajšega merovinškega obdobja na Lajhu ni.
Puščične osti
Za lažje razumevanje delitve puščičnih osti v posamezne tipe in njihovo nadaljnje preučevanje naj na začetku podam nekaj osnovnih izrazov, ki so služili za opisovanje predmetov.
Puščične osti sestavljajo trije deli: konica, vrat in nasadilo, ki se pojavljajo v dveh kombinacijah: konica-nasadilo in koni-ca-vrat-nasadilo (sl. 10). Vsak od treh delov ima dve ali več oblik. Konica ima različne oblike. Vrat je raven ali vzvojen. Nasadilo je oblikovano v trn ali tulec.
Pri izdelavi tipologije za puščične osti iz pozne antike in zgodnjega srednjega veka v Sloveniji (Odar 2003, 54, 70-83) se mi je pogosto postavilo vprašanje o pravilnosti arheoloških tipologij. Dokončnega odgovora, ki sem ga iskal pri različnih avtorjih, nisem dobil, pot iz dvoma pa so mi nakazali Klejnovi Arheološki viri in Arheološka tipologija (Klejn 1987; Klejn 1988). Odločil sem se za intuitivno delitev puščičnih osti glede na obliko konice in način nasaditve osti na naperek. Določil sem pet osnovnih tipov konic in jih označil s črkami A (trikrilna konica), B (ploščata konica), C (dvokrilna konica), Č (konica rombičnega preseka) in D (kvadratnega preseka). Nekatere tipe sem nadalje delil glede na oblikovne različice konic in jih zaporedno
označil s številkami. Glede na nasadilo sem ločil osti, ki imajo trn (I) ali tulec (A) (sl. 11).
To tipologijo sedaj dopolnjujem s tremi novimi osnovnimi tipi E-G in z delitvijo tipa A2 na pet različic. V grobovih na Lajhu je prisotnih šest osnovnih tipov puščičnih osti, ki se delijo še naprej (tab. 2). Tip A2 predstavlja trikrilne osti s piramida-stim vrhom (t. 2: 1-13), tip B osti s ploščato konico (1 - širo-kolistna, 2 - ozkolistna, 3 - rombična), tip C osti z dvokrilno konico, tip E deltoidne trirobe osti (t. 1: 9-13), tip F deltoidne osti z rombičnim presekom (t. 1: 5-8) in tip G ost z lečastim presekom (t. 1: 4).
Na ozemlju današnje Slovenije poznamo osti tipa A2 iz šestih višinskih naselbin in z grobišča na Lajhu (sl. 12). Posamično so bile najdene na Ajdni nad Potoki (Vidrih-Perko in Sagadin 2004, 221, sl. 7), Gradcu pri Veliki Strmici (Odar 2003, 22) in Zidanem gabru nad Mihovim (Knific 1995, 36-37, sl. 11: 3), po dve pa sta bili odkriti na Rifniku (Bolta 1981,17; Pirkmajer 2001, 73, sl. 238) in na Tonovcovem gradu (neobjavljeno gradivo začasno hrani Inštitut za arheologijo, podatke posredovala T. Milavec).
Na razlike med ostmi glede na obliko krilc je pokazal že Knific (1993, 529). Osti tipa A2 delimo v dve skupini. V prvo sodijo osti z izrazitimi krilci, v drugo z neizrazitimi krilci. Znotraj prve skupine se osti med seboj spet razlikujejo po obliki krilc, podobno tudi v drugi skupini (sl. 13).
Štirim ostem iz groba 2/Pečnik (t. 2: 10-13) sta po obliki (sl. 13: 1) najbližji puščična ost z Ajdne nad Potoki in ost z Lajha, ki tiči v delu lesenega naperka (Stare 1980, t. 125: 8; Knific 1995, sl. 11:1). Slednjo je leta 1901 izkopal F. Schulz, ni pa znano, v katerem grobu se je nahajala. Narodni muzej hrani Schulzov seznam grobov z načrtom (hrani arhiv NMS). Žal je Müllner predmete inventariziral tipološko brez podatkov o grobnih celotah. Knific (1995, 38) je na podlagi Schul-zovega seznama ugotovil, da je puščična ost ležala v grobu 20/ Schulz (zdaj 548) ali grobu 54/Schulz (zdaj 582). V prvem je po opisu izkopavalca na levi strani ob kolku pokojnega ležalo pet puščičnih osti in dolg železen nož. V drugem grobu je pri zelo velikem okostju puščična ost ležala ob kolku, zraven pa so ležali železna in bronasta pasna spona, glavnik in zlatnik (Knific 1995, 36). Enako ost so odkrili pri izkopavanju notranjosti hiše 5 v naselbini na Rifniku, ki je bila opuščena konec 6. stoletja (Bolta 1981, 17, t. 24: 91). Primerjavo izven Slovenije najdemo na najdišču Kulina e Vogel pri Prištini. Bronasta trikrilna ost s piramidastim vrhom je ležala v naselbinski plasti 6. in 7. stoletja (Mehmetaj 1990, 99).
Po obliki se omenjenim ostem pridružuje ost z Zidanega gabra. Razlikuje se le po tem, da se piramidast vrh zaključuje z zatičnimi krilci, ki so služila težjemu izdrtju konice iz rane (sl. 13: 2).
Za drugo rifniško ost še ni na voljo natančnejših podatkov, s fotografije pa je razvidno, da ima daljšo in drugače oblikovano konico, ki se od ostalih jasno loči po trikotni obliki krilc in prehodu v trn, ki ni sedlast (sl. 13: 3).
Osti z neizrazitimi krilci se pojavljajo v dveh različicah. Pri prvi imajo osti izbočena krilca (sl. 13: 4), pri drugi so krilca ravna (sl. 13: 5). Obe različici sta zastopani v grobu 2/Pečnik (t. 2: 2-9), eno tako ost pa poznamo z Gradca pri Veliki Strmici (Odar, 2003, 22). Osem tovrstnih osti je bilo odkritih v Brežcu pri Buzetu in jih pripisujejo grobni celoti z mečem, srebrno pasno garnituro, konjsko opremo in ščitom (Marušic 1962, 455-461; Torcellan 1986, 25-27, t. 2-5). Če je rekonstrukcija grobne celote pravilna, potem je primerljiva z grobovoma 90 in 119 iz Castel Trosina (Mengareli 1995, 114-126, 137-152). Tovrstne puščične osti so bile odkrite tudi v grobu bojevnika v Inzingu pri Hartkir-chnu (Menghin 1983, 38) in v Gammertingenu (Theune-Grosskopf 1997). Prvi je opredeljen po meču v čas med leti 530 in 570, drugi s skoraj enako sestavo predmetov v čas okoli leta 570. 25 takih puščičnih osti je bilo odkritih tudi v razvalinah zgodnje-bizantinske utrdbe Golemanovo Kale (Uenze 1992, t. 41: 21-42;
t. 140: 6-8) in 7 osti v utrdbi Sadovsko Kale v Bolgariji (ista, t. 41: 19-20, 43-47). Nekateri so trikrilne puščične osti pripisovali Avarom (Sergejevski 1954, 198, sl. 2c; Marušic 1962, 461; Bo-janovski 1976, 247, sl. 2). Osti iz utrdbe Golemanovo Kale naj bi pričale o njenem nasilnem uničenju leta 585 ali 587 (Werner 1992, 417). Vendar osti tipa A2 ni najti v avarskih grobovih. Ta tip puščičnih osti se verjetno pojavi v alpskem svetu pred Avari v kratkotrajnem obdobju bizantinske prevlade sredi 6. stoletja, ki je sledila padcu vzhodnogotske in se končala z vzpostavitvijo langobardske oblasti.
V grobu lokostrelca so ležale še osti tipov E-G, ki zaenkrat nimajo sočasnih primerjav. So pa puščičnim ostem tipa F podobne osti, značilne za visoki in pozni srednji vek. Pri nas so npr. znane s Puščave nad Starim trgom pri Slovenj Gradcu (Pleter-ski in Belak 2002, 251, 265-266, t. 5: 7) in iz trdnjave Kostanjevica (Predovnik 2003, 92-99).
Tip E predstavlja pet osti (t. 1: 9-13). Njihova značilnost je triroba deltoidna konica. Posebnost so žlebovi, ki potekajo po sredini daljšega dela deltoidne stranice. Na eni od osti teh vrezov ni bilo (t. 1: 11), na dveh osteh pa sta tik pred prehodom iz konice v sedlo še dva prečna vreza (t. 1: 12,13).
Tip F predstavlja štiri osti z deltoidno konico rombičnega preseka (t. 1: 5-8). Pri vseh so opazni stranski izrastki na spodnji četrtini konice, vendar z različno stopnjo ohranjenosti.
Tip G predstavlja ost s konico lečastega preseka in vzporednima robovoma (t. 1: 4).
Kavelj za tul
Na Lajhu sta bila odkrita dva železna kavlja. Enega hrani NMS, drugi je na Dunaju in je v inventarni knjigi pripisan grobu 2/Pečnik (t. 2: 14). Zanimivo je, da železnega kavlja s pravokotnim ušesom in bunčico na zaključku Pečnik v pismih naslovljenih na Szombathyja ne omenja. Kavelj z Dunaja je v monografiji objavljen ločeno od meča in je opredeljen kot bronast (Stare 1980, t. 135: 6). Železni kavelj s trikotnim ušesom, ki ga je izkopal Schulz, ima manj jasen izvor (ista, t. 125: 7). Omenja ga že Müllner (1901, 156), po vsej verjetnosti pa sodi v grob 20/ Schulz s petimi puščičnimi ostmi (Odar 2003, 60, 66; prim. Knific 1995, 36). Kavlje, ki v grobovih ponavadi ležijo skupaj s puščičnimi ostmi, so verjetno uporabljali lokostrelci za pripenjanje tula s puščicami na pas (Medvedev 1966, 19-20, t. 1: 8, 9, t. 7: 6, 810). Podobni kavlji so ležali v grobu 90 (bronast) in 119 (železen) iz Castel Trosina (Mengarelli 1995, 122, sl. 141; 151, sl. 189), v bojevniškem grobu 48 iz Nocere Umbre (Menghin 1985, 164, sl. 149; Paroli 1995, 226), malo drugačni in tudi starejši so bili odkriti v gomili 8 v Novogrigorjevki (Zaseckaja 1994, t. 5: 12), v grobu iz Kisil Adira s koščenimi ostanki sestavljenega loka in 14 trikrilnimi puščičnimi ostmi (ista, t. 37: 21) in v grobu 2 iz kurgana 8 v kraju Kubei (ista, t. 46: 19). Sočasen z grobovi na Lajhu je grob iz Szegvar - Sapodala (Kom. Csongräd), v katerem je bil pokopan konjenik z bogato konjeniško in bojevniško opremo, med katero je sodil dolg dvorezni meč, sulična ost ter sestavljen lok s tulom in trikrilnimi puščicami v njem (Garam 1992, 139, 170-171, t. 15-25). Poleg tula je ležal tudi kavelj za njegovo obešanje. V grobu so ležali še ostanki lamelnega oklepa in novec Mavricija Tiberija (582-602).
LOKOSTRELSTVO PRI RIMLJANIH IN GERMANIH
Zanimivo je, da na poznoantičnem grobišču na Lajhu ni bilo odkritih sestavljenih lokov (glej razpravo). Njihova odsotnost odraža odnos prebivalcev Karnija do tovrstnih lokov. V stavku Amijana Marcelina (XXXI 2,17), da je neko ljudstvo mogoče prepoznati po njegovih običajih, načinu življenja in po njegovi oborožitvi, se skriva odgovor. Najprej poglejmo, kako so sestavljene loke v svojo oborožitev prevzeli Rimljani. Z njimi
so se oborožili najpozneje v avgustejskem obdobju, vendar le v pehoti. Šele perzijska nevarnost pod sasanidskimi vladarji je rimski imperij prisilila v spremembo taktike bojevanja na vzhodu imperija, ki je zmanjšala pomen klasičnega pehotnega bojevanja v strnjenih vrstah v korist oklepljenih konjenikov, oboroženih s sulicami ali loki. V 4. stoletju so bile konjeniške lokostrelske enote številčnejše od pehotnih. Notitia dignitatum (Indices: Equites: str. 319, Pedites: str. 325) posreduje podatke o 54 konjeniških in 13 pehotnih lokostrelskih enotah. V vzhodnem delu imperija je bilo prisotnih 37 konjeniških in 9 pehotnih lokostrelskih enot, v zahodnem pa 17 konjeniških in 4 pehotne. Razmerje jasno kaže na potrebo po večji prisotnosti lokostrelskih enot na vzhodu. V zahodnem delu imperija so bili Rimljani v navzkrižju s konjeniško-lokostrelskimi nomadi le v severni Afriki, medtem ko pri Germanih v bitkah proti Rimljanom lokostrelstvo ni bilo v ospredju. Toliko bolj so bili na udaru na vzhodu pred arabskimi, perzijskimi in hunskimi konjeniki lokostrelci. Ravno pri teh ljudstvih so Rimljani novačili za dopolnitev svojih pomožnih pehotnih in konjeniških lokostrelskih enot. Tako so novinci obogatili znanje nomadskega načina bojevanja na konju v rimski vojski (Coulston 1985, 243-244). Njihova spretnost na konjskem hrbtu je vedno znova vzbujala strahospoštovanje nasprotnikov, saj so imeli posebno taktiko z menjavanjem nenadnega napada in hitrega umika, pri čemer so ob galopira-jočem umiku ovirali sledečega jim nasprotnika tako, da so nanj sprožali puščice. Ob takem nenadnem napadu ponavadi nasprotnik ni imel časa, da bi ukrepal in se je zanj končalo vsako upanje na rešitev. Če je vendar prišlo do boja od blizu, so Huni nasprotnike s svojimi vrvmi zvlekli s sedel in jih nato ugonobili, kot nam poroča Amijan Marcelin (XXXI 2,8-9).
Prokopij iz Cezareje, ki ga je bizantinski cesar Justinijan I. leta 527 dodelil za tajnika legendarnemu bizantinskemu vojskovodji Belizarju, je bil verjetno sodobnik nekaterih bojevnikov, pokopanih na Lajhu. Prokopij (I 1,8-17) v uvodnih besedah k svoji zgodovini vojska, ki jih je v knjigi Pod Justinijanovim žezlom poslovenil K. Gantar (1961, 33-35), med drugim pravi, da v vsej zgodovini ni nič večjega in pomembnejšega od dogodkov, ki so se odigrali v teh vojskah. V nenavadne stvari, ki da so se v njih zgodile, bodo podvomili le tisti, piše, ki dajejo prednost preteklim časom in odrekajo pomembnost sodobnim dogodkom, in nadaljuje, da ... nekateri današnje vojake prezirljivo imenujejo "lokostrel-ce", bojevnikom pradavnih časov pa hočejo vzdeti tako veličastne nazive kot "borci prve linije", "ščitonosci" in podobno. Ti ljudje so prepričani, da vrline starih časov ne živijo več; takšno mnenje pa je skrajno nevzdržno in dokazuje popolno nepoznavanje predmeta ... V nadaljevanju piše, da lokostrelci homerskih časov niso jezdili konj, niso nosili kopja niti ščita in da so se morali skrivati za ščiti tovarišev ali iskati varno zavetje za kakim nagrobnikom na gomili. Tudi tehnika napenjanja loka in sprožanja puščic je bila slaba, tako da je zadetemu komaj povzročila škodo. ... Takšna je bila lokostrelska umetnost v preteklih časih. Nasprotno pa gredo sodobni lokostrelci v boj opremljeni s ščiti in obuti v golenke, ki jim segajo do kolen. Ob desnem boku jim visijo strelice, ob levem meč. Nekateri nosijo poleg tega s sabo še kopje, na ramenih pa majhen ščit brez ročaja, ki jim krije vrat in obraz. Vsi so bolj ali manj izurjeni jezdeci in znajo med naglim dirom prožiti puščice na levo in na desno in so zmožni ustreliti zasledujoče in bežeče sovražnike. Tetivo napnejo izpred svojega obraza v smeri, kije nasprotna desnemu ušesu; puščico izprožijo s takšno silo, da zadetega doleti neizbežna smrt in da njenega pritiska ne more zadržati niti ščit niti oklep.... S Prokopijevim opisom bojevnika se sklada oborožitev konjenika višjega stanu v 6. stoletju. Zraven čelade, lamelnega oklepa ali verižne srajce in ščita je lahko imel pri sebi še sulico in meč ter lokostrelsko opremo, shranjeno v toku. To potrjujejo številni grobovi bojevnikov tistega časa (npr. Lajh pod Kranjem, Castel Trosino, Nocera Umbra, Gammertingen, Brežec pri Buzetu).
Poleg Rimljanov in Grkov so se na novi način bojevanja morali prilagoditi tudi ostali prebivalci pontskega bazena. Ob
severni obali Črnega morja živeče Gote so sodobniki v svojih "etnografijah" zaradi oborožitve obravnavali kot ljudstvo skitskega in ne germanskega izvora (Prokopij VIII 5,5), vešče bojevanja na konju s sulico, ki so jo držali z obema rokama (Wolfram 1985, 103; id. 1990, 359). Vendar pa Goti za razliko od nomadskih sosedov nikoli niso povsem prevzeli bojevanja z lokom na konju. Seveda so lokostrelstvo s pridom uporabljali. Kot poroča Vegecij (I 20,4) so Rimljani imeli velike izgube zaradi roja puščic, sproženih s strani Gotov, Valens pa naj bi podlegel poškodbi, ki jo je povzročila puščica (Amijan Marcelin XXXI 13,12). Zanimiv je primer Belizarjevega hypaspista, Arzesa, ki je bil s puščico zadet med nosom in desnim očesom. Arzes je ranjen nadaljeval z bojevanjem proti Gotom v Rimu, po bitki pa mu je zdravnik, Teoktistus po imenu, puščico porinil do konca, tako da je trikrilna puščična ost prodrla zadaj skozi vrat. Potem, ko jo je zdravnik ločil od naperka, je tega previdno potegnil iz očesne votline, Arzes pa ob tem ni niti oslepel in je ozdravel brez posledic (Prokopij VI 2,16-19, 2530). V ravnanju z lokom so se že od malega urili tudi gotski plemiči in princi. Claudius Claudianus nekje omenja vzgojitelja, ki je Alarihu v rani mladosti podaril lokostrelsko opremo s tokom in ga naučil streljati z lokom (Bracher 1991, 154).
Pri vsem povedanem je zanimivo, da so Goti ob prihodu in ustalitvi v južni Rusiji od svojih sarmato-alanskih sosedov popolnoma prevzeli samo en način tradicionalnega bojevanja v novi domovini, s sulico na konju (Lebedynsky 2001, 43-49). Drugemu načinu, z lokom na konju, pa so se skoraj v celoti odrekli. Totilov poraz v boju z Bizantinci in z njim povezan zaton gotskega kraljestva v Italiji smemo pripisati tudi temu, da so Goti imeli samo nekaj lokostrelskih pehotnih enot, ki pa proti bizantinskim konjeniškim niso mogle iti v napad (mnenje Belizarja). Same so lahko delovale le izza svoje s sulicami opremljene konjenice, ki pa so jo bizantinski konjeniki lokostrelci lahko že od daleč onemogočili (Prokopij V 27,27).
Nerazumno zavračanje bojevanja na daleč s strani gotskih vojaških elit in s tem povečane uporabe lokostrelstva je verjetno povezano z načelno držo, ki sledi germanskim praidealom junaškega bojevanja moža na moža in se ji niso mogli v celoti odpovedati niti v novi domovini (Rausing 1997, 59; Bracher 1991, 156).
Kako pa je bilo s sprejemom sestavljenega loka in nomadskim načinom bojevanja pri germanskih ljudstvih v srednji in zahodni Evropi? Tudi pri njih ne eno ne drugo ni bilo prevzeto v oborožitev in taktiko bojevanja, kljub njihovim nomadskim sosedom na vzhodu. Slednje še posebej ne, ker niti konjev, ki so bili na voljo le višjemu stanu bojevnikov, pogosto niso uporabili v bitkah (Amijan Marcelin XVI 12,34). Prokopij (VI 25,2-4) opisuje bojni pohod Frankov leta 537 v Italijo pod vodstvom Teodeberta: ... imeli so maloštevilno konjenico, ki je jezdila ob poveljniku, ti so bili edini oboroženi s sulicami, medtem ko pehota ni imela niti lokov niti sulic, temveč je vsak nosil meč in ščit in eno sekiro. Železni del sekire je bil širok in izjemno oster na obeh straneh, leseni ročaj pa zelo kratek. Navadno najprej na enotno povelje hkrati zalučajo te sekire, da uničijo ščite nasprotnikov in jih nato pobijejo ... Šele ob bojih z Avari, prodirajočimi na zahod, so nekateri iz višjih slojev osedlali konje in segli po sestavljenem loku. V pismu opatu Fulradu Karl Veliki namreč izrazi zahtevo, da naj konjeniške enote v bojih proti Avarom poleg sulic ter dolgih in kratkih mečev uporabijo tudi loke in tule s puščicami (Karoli ad Fulradum Abbatem epistola).
So pa Germani ob stikih s Huni prevzeli njihovo besedo za tul za shranjevanje puščic. V starovisokonemščini se je imenoval "chohhari", danes "der Köcher", po langobardsko "coccura" (Bracher 1991, 158). Langobardi so posedovali sestavljene loke že v času bivanja ob srednji Donavi in kasneje v Italiji, kar dokazujejo posamezni grobovi s trikrilnimi puščičnimi ostmi in koščenimi ostanki sestavljenih lokov (Werner 1956, 49; Werner 1962, 80). Vendar pa pri njih sestavljen lok ni imel take veljave, da bi bil upodobljen na prestižnih izdelkih, kot sta na pri-
mer srebrni pladenj iz Izole Rizze (sl. 14) in čelni del rebraste čelade iz Firenz (Conti 1990, 96; Menghin 1985, 79-81), kjer so upodobljeni bojevniki.
Po drugi strani pa imamo upodobitev enostavnega loka na dragoceni skrinjici iz Auzona. Gre za enega zanimivejših umetnostnozgodovinskih predmetov zgodnjega srednjega veka, izvirajočega iz Northumbrije. Skrinjica, izdelana okoli l. 700, ima ključno vlogo pri razumevanju zgodnjesrednjeveških junaških pripovedi Germanov (Hauck 1973, 514-522). Za nas pomembna je upodobitev na pokrovu skrinjice, ki je le deloma ohranjen (sl. 15). Na njem je prikazan boj med kraljem Nidu-dom (čelada je vladarsko znamenje) in germanskim junakom Egilom. Nidud želi zavzeti templju podobno zgradbo, ki jo z lokom in puščicami brani Egil, izurjen lokostrelec. Egil je z enostavnega loka sprožil več puščic in se pripravlja na naslednjo sprožitev puščice. Kljub močno poenostavljeni upodobitvi je lok glede na Egilovo postavo v sorazmerju in ga smemo uvrstiti med dolge loke. Puščice so opremljene vsaj z dvema vrstama puščičnih osti. Tista, ki leži ob Egilovi nogi, ima dvokrilno konico, na tetivi pa je pušcica s ploščato rombično konico. Ostale v celoti vidne puščice pa bi lahko bile opremljene tako s ploščatimi kot s trikrilnimi konicami.
Navadna lokostrelska oprema je bila sestavni del pehotnih bojnih enot. Da lokostrelstvo pri Germanih ni bilo stvar prestiža, govori tudi ukaz langobardskega kralja Aistulfa. Nepremožni svobodnjaki, ki zmorejo posedovati ščit, naj se opremijo vsaj s tulom, polnim puščic, in lokom. Celo najrevnejši je lahko stopil do tise ali bresta in si odrezal primerno vejo, ki jo je potem z malo spretnosti predelal v preprosto lovsko ali bojno orožje. Tu ni govora o zapletenih postopkih, potrebnih za izdelavo iz različnih surovin sestavljenega loka, ki je zaradi svojih lastnosti tako pri nomadskih kot ostalih ljudstvih veljal za dragoceno orožje. Pripadniki višjega in srednjega stanu so morali poleg konja poskrbeti za oborožitev, primerno njihovemu stanu (oklep ali verižna srajca, čelada, ščit, dolga sulica, meč), med katero pa ni zahteve po lokostrelski opremi (Leges Lango-bardorum, Ahistulfi leges) (Bracher 1991, 160; Lebedynsky 2001, 26-27). Podobne zahteve po oborožitvi različnih slojev prebivalstva najdemo tudi pri Zahodnih Gotih in Alamanih in še mnogo pozneje, kot nam to nazorno prikazuje znamenita tapiserija iz Bayeuxa (sl. 16).
Da Germani v Evropi niso množično sprejeli sestavljenih lokov in so še naprej uporabljali enostavne loke, smemo pripisati pomembnemu dejstvu, da so bili sestavljeni loki lepljeni (Coulston 1985, 250-251). Lepilo je v vlažnem podnebju hitro popustilo, v dežju pa so bili sestavljeni loki neuporabni. Zato je bila uporaba sestavljenih lokov mnogo bolj primerna in učinkovita v sušnih podnebnih prostranstvih (isti, 270). Za vzdrževanje in zaščito enostavnih lokov pred vlago in dežjem pa je zadoščala njihova namastitev ali povoskanje. Podobno so zaščitili tudi naperke puščic.
RAZPRAVA
Na Lajhu je bilo izkopanih 10 grobov, v katere so priložili puščice. Poleg groba s 23 puščičnimi ostmi je bila v treh grobovih 1, v šestih pa 5-8 puščičnih osti. V grobovih z več puščičnimi ostmi so verjetno bili pokopani bojevniki, izurjeni lokostrelci. Za grobove z eno puščično ostjo pa je težje reči, ali je bila v njih pridatek ali pa je celo povzročila smrt pokojnega ali pokojne.
Zanimivo je, da v grobovih s puščicami niso našli lokov. Zagotovo lahko rečemo, da sestavljenih lokov niso priložili v grobove, saj bi se glede na veliko število ohranjenih roženih in koščenih glavnikov ter dobro ohranjenih okostij morali ohraniti tudi koščeni ali roženi deli sestavljenih lokov. Lahko postavimo manj verjetno domnevo, da lokov niso prilagali v grobove. Bolj verjetno pa je, da so enostavne loke skupaj s puščicami priložili
v grob, vendar se niso ohranili. Tako kot se niso ohranili leseni deli ščita v grobu 6/Smid. Pri puščičnih osteh pa so se ohranili ostanki lesenih naperkov tam, kjer so se stikali s kovino. Podobno se je v grobu 41/Szombathy na meču ohranila lesena nožnica.
Na Lajhu se niso ohranili tudi drugi deli lokostrelske opreme, kot npr. tuli za puščice, verjetno usnjeni, ali zaščitna oprema za roke, ki je lahko bila tako usnjena kot koščena, včasih tudi iz kovine.
Eno izmed redkih grobišč zgodnjega srednjega veka, kjer so se odlično ohranili v grob položeni loki in drugi leseni predmeti, so izkopali v Lupfenu pri Oberflachtu, v nemški deželi Württemberg. V grobovih alamanskih lokostrelcev se je ohranilo 11 enostavnih, iz tise izdelanih lokov. Dobro ohranjeni, sedaj rahlo usločeni loki merijo v dolžino med 1,68 in 1,83 m (Wolf 1997, 385-388).
Kadar je v grobovih na Lajhu orožje z rezilom, puščične osti vedno ležijo v njegovi bližini (Odar 2003, 59-65). Vsaj v štirih od osmih grobov so meči ležali na desni strani pokojnega (v grobovih 2/Pečnik, 26/Žmavc, 6/Smid in 11/2/Smid). Na isti strani nedaleč od mečev so v grobu 2/Pečnik in 6/Smid ležale puščične osti. Če ni bilo priloženega meča, je njegov "statusni položaj" prevzel saks in puščice so ležale ob njem. V treh primerih je v grobovih s puščičnimi ostmi saks ležal ob levi roki, v enem pa na vsaki strani glave. Da je znotraj orožja obstajala vrednostna lestvica, nam kaže grob 2/Pečnik, kjer so puščične osti ležale ob meču in ne ob enem od dveh dolgih nožev pri glavi. Zanimiv je tudi grob 156/Smid, v katerem so bile samo puščice brez ostalega orožja. Večja skupina puščič-nih osti je ležala ob gležnjih, dve osti sta ležali ob stegnu pod levo roko.
V grobu 203/Smid je po pridatkih (pogrešane so steklene jagode, tri glinasta vretenca, železni locenj, nož) in velikosti skeleta sodeč bila pokopana ženska. Zato toliko bolj preseneča puščična ost, ležeča v predelu medenice. Podobno lego puščične osti najdemo še v grobu 54/Schulz, kjer je ležalo zelo veliko in močno truplo (železna in bronasta spona, zlatnik, glavnik), verjetno moško. V obeh primerih je morda puščična ost povzročila tragični konec pokojnih. Na to možnost napeljuje pokojni iz WienLeopoldaua, ki je izgubil življenje med bojem, usodna pa je bila puščica, katere trikrilna ost se je bojevniku zarila globoko med drugo in tretje ledveno vretence (Reuer 1984, sl. 2). Tudi če bi puščica zgrešila hrbtenico, bi bojevnik rani podlegel (isti, sl. 5: rekonstrukcija poteka dvoboja), razlaga in pomen lege puščične osti v grobu pa bi bila v tem primeru veliko manj jasna. Domnevam, da so bile osti v grobove priložene s tuli vred. Nekatere osti so bile ob izkopavanjih zaradi rje zlepljene skupaj (npr. v grobu 156/Smid). O možni legi lokov v grobovih je zaradi njihove nedokazljive prisotnosti težko govoriti. Lok kot pridatek je glede na svoje lastnosti lahko položen v grob le vzporedno s pokojnim, če je pokojni pokopan v navadni grobni jami (za velike grobnice to ni nujno), kar dokazujejo predvsem grobovi s sestavljenimi loki. V mnogih grobovih so puščične osti ležale ob loku, kot kažejo grobovi iz Blučine (Tihelka 1963), Aktöbeja, Kokla in Žamantogaj Korymyja (Bona 1991, 14, 112, 116). Upoštevati je treba tudi možnost, da so lok včasih pred odložitvijo v grob obredno prelomili, kot so npr. Kelti zvijali meče.
Puščične osti zaradi svoje potrošne narave, večinoma le enkratne uporabe, niso predstavljale dragocenosti. Njihova izdelava je v kovaštvu veljala za nekaj enostavnega, poudarek je bil na količini, manj na kakovosti izdelave (Ruttkay 1976, 326, 327). Zaradi tega in stalnega mešanja različnih ljudstev v pozni antiki in zgodnjem srednjem veku puščične osti niso najboljši nosilec podatkov, ki arheologe ponavadi najbolj zanimajo. Vendar so tudi pri puščičnih osteh včasih izjeme.
Edini lok v Sloveniji je bil strokovno izkopan ob arheoloških raziskavah na Ljubljanskem barju. Približno 1,25 m dolg leseni lok, star okoli 5600 let, je malo starejši od tistega, ki ga
je imel pri sebi Ötzi ob usodnem prečkanju ledenika na Si-milaunu (Velušček, Čufar 2003; Velušček 2004, 43-44; Spindler 1993). V obeh primerih gre za enostaven lok. Ostanek sestavljenega loka pa je bil odkrit na Rifniku pri Šentjurju, ki je bil poseljen v različnih obdobjih od prazgodovine do konca 6. stoletja po Kr. (Bolta 1981, t. 24: 20; Ciglenečki 1999, 324). Od celotnega sestavljenega loka se je ohranil le vrhnji del koščene ploščice s pravokotno zarezo za namestitev tetive. Ploščica je bila odkrita v prostoru 2 hiše 5. V tej hiši je ležala tudi trikril-na puščična ost s piramidastim vrhom. Okoli hiše 5 pa sta ležali še dve puščični osti, ost z rombičnim presekom (Bolta 1981, 26, t. 26: 12) pa smemo na podlagi primerjav umestiti v čas zadnje tretjine 6., lahko pa še na začetek 7. stoletja (Odar 2003, 77-78).
Če ponovno pogledamo sestavo pridatkov v grobu bojevnika, ki ga je leta 1900 izkopal Pečnik, in jo primerjamo z ostalimi grobnimi celotami bojevnikov na Lajhu, vidimo dve očitni razliki. Sestav puščičnih osti nima primerjave niti na Lajhu niti daleč naokrog, saj trije tipi osti E-G ostajajo brez sočasnih primerjav iz pozne antike. Osti tipa A2 in E-G so zaradi svoje masivnosti bile primerne za prebijanje dragocene zaščitne opreme. Menim, da je bil tip A2 namenjen prebijanju lamelnih oklepov in rebrastih čelad, tipe E-G pa so zaradi ozkih konic verjetno naperili v nasprotnika z verižno srajco (Paulsen 1967, 134, t. 60). V našem primeru gre torej za lokostrelca posebnega ranga. O tem pričajo trikrilne osti s piramidastim vrhom tipa A2, ki izkazujejo vrhunsko kovaško spretnost v primerjavi z navadnimi ploščatimi konicami iz drugih grobov na Lajhu. Tudi triro-be konice tipa E z žlebovi na stranicah so skrbno izdelane. Žlebovi so lahko služili za vnos smrtonosnega strupa, mogoče pridobljenega iz travniške turške preobjede. Osti tipa F so zaradi majhnih izrastkov v spodnjem delu spet svoja posebnost. Zaradi njih je bilo izdrtje osti iz verižne srajce oteženo. Taka puščica je nasprotnika v boju ovirala, četudi ga ni ranila. Puščice so bile skrbno izbrane in ni izključeno, da je lokostrelec nekatere dal zase posebej kovati. Na to misel napeljujeta dva popolnoma enako dolga noža, ki na grobišču prav tako nimata primerjave. Meč sam ne izstopa v primeri z drugimi sočasnimi, a poseben status lokostrelca dodatno potrjuje (Prokopij I 1,8-17). Celo več. Je edini bojevnik z mečem v grobu brez pasnega sestava in drugih predmetov. Tako so ob položitvi zgolj napadalnega orožja v grob želeli poudariti poseben status bojevnika, ki je v drugi polovici 6. st. našel poslednji počitek na lepi ravnici ob reki, kot je večkrat zapisal odkritelj njegovega groba.
Lamelni oklepi, rebraste čelade in za nas pomembne puščične osti tipa A2 iz naselbin in iz posameznih grobov v jugovzhodnem predalpskem prostoru kažejo na vplive v oborožitvi v času
križanja bizantinskih in langobardskih političnih interesov sredi 6. stoletja na ozemlju današnje Slovenije (npr. Polis Norikon, Narzesov pohod v Italijo) (Prokopij VII33,7-11; Ciglenečki 1992; Šašel-Kos 1994; Lottar, Bratož, Castritius 2005). Zaščitna izkopavanja v letu 2005 ob JZ obzidju v starem mestnem jedru Kranja kažejo do sedaj neznano podobo poznoantičnega Kar-nija in dopolnjujejo arheološko karto z ostanki bizantinske bojevniške opreme v Sloveniji (tab. 3) (Bitenc, Knific 2001; Böhner 1996; Kory 2004, 385-403). Tako so arheologi 6. 8. 2005 izkopali dobro ohranjen ramenski del lamelnega oklepa, ki je skupaj z angom ležal na tleh znotraj obrambnega stolpa ob obzidju iz druge polovice 6. stoletja (Slovenske novice, leto 9, št. 30, 13. 8. 2005, str. 9; Delo, 13. 8. 2005, str. 7). Nekaj dni kasneje je bil najden ostali del v celoti ohranjenega oklepa, nedaleč vstran pa še drugi, v celoti ohranjen oklep (za ogled najdišča in obeh oklepov se zahvaljujem M. Sagadinu).
Z opustitvijo nošnje bizantinskih lamelnih oklepov v srednji Evropi se opusti tudi uporaba trikrilnih osti s piramidastim vrhom. Osti tipa F pa zaradi vse bolj razširjene uporabe verižnih srajc v visokem in poznem srednjem veku preidejo v splošno rabo in v grobu karnijskega lokostrelca poleg osti tipa E in G predstavljajo novost s konca pozne antike.
Zahvale
K nastanku tega članka so pripomogli številni kolegi. Pobudo zanj sta dala dr. T. Knific in ddr. A. Pleterski, obisk Naravoslovnega muzeja na Dunaju pa je podprl in omogočil Inštitut za arheologijo. V Naravoslovnem muzeju sta nama z risarko pri pripravi arheološkega gradiva in izvirne dokumentacije prijazno pomagala dr. A. Heinrich in dr. A. Kern. Gradivo je na Dunaju s svinčnikom izrisala T. Korošec, D. Lunder-Knific pa je risbe odela v črnilo. Z dragocenimi nasveti ob nastajanju članka sta mi pomagala dr. S. Ciglenečki in ddr. A. Pleterski, za končno vsebinsko podobo članka pa sta zaslužna dr. T. Knific in dr. D. Božič. Prokopijeva besedila iz zbirke Loeb je poslovenil G. Pobežin.
Vsem najlepša hvala.
Boštjan Odar Regentova 2 SI-2000 Maribor b_odar@yahoo.com
Pl. 1: Lajh underneath Kranj, grave Pečnik 2. Iron, wood. Scale = 1:2, sword = 1:4. T. 1: Lajh pod Kranjem. Grob Pečnik 2. Železo, les. M. = 1:2; meč = 1:4.
Pl. 2: Lajh underneath Kranj, grave Pečnik 2. Iron, wood. Scale = 1:2. T. 2: Lajh pod Kranjem. Grob Pečnik 2. Železo, les. M. = 1:2.