The fibula production of Brigetio Sáró, Csilla
Dissertationes archaeologicae ex Instituto Archaeologico Universitatis de Rolando Eötvös Nominatae.,
03/2022, Letnik:
3, Številka:
9
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
This article continues the author’s paper The fibula production of Brigetio: clay moulds published in Dissertationes Archaeologicae 3.8 (2020). The main aim of this paper is the presentation of a ...model plus several semi-finished and waste fibulae from Brigetio, adding to our knowledge about the fibula production of this archaeological site.
La necrópolis de Herrería tuvo una prolongada utilización desde el Bronce Final hasta bien entrada la Edad de Hierro. Su fase III, correspondiente al periodo Celtibérico Antiguo, ha proporcionado ...numerosos conjuntos cerrados significativos desde el punto de vista tipo-cronológico, que aportan nueva información sobre los inicios de la Edad del Hierro en la Meseta. Este artículo se centra en las 45 fíbulas recuperadas, clasificables en 10 tipos diferentes, de gran interés por estar bien contextualizadas. Palabras clave: cultura material, crono-tipología, fíbulas, cultura celtibéricaTopónimo: Meseta españolaPeríodo: Primera Edad del Hierro ABSTRACTThe Herreria necropolis was in use for a considerable length of time, from the Late Bronze to the Middle Iron Age. Its third phase, corresponding to the Early Celtiberian Period, produced numerous assemblages that are significant from a typo-chronological point of view. These items provide us with new information about the beginnings of the Iron Age on the Spanish plateau. This paper focuses on the 45 fibulae discovered, classified into 10 different groups, and of particular interest on account of their perfect contextualisation. Keywords: Material Culture, Chrono-tipology, fibulae, Celtiberian CulturePlace names: Central Hispanic PlateauPeriod: Early Iron Age REFERENCIASAlmagro Bach, M. (1966), “Sobre el origen posible de las más antiguas fíbulas anulares hispánicas”, Ampurias, 28, pp. 215-236.Argente, J. L. (1994), Las Fíbulas de la Edad del Hierro en la Meseta Oriental. Valoración tipológica, cronológica y cultural, Madrid, Ministerio de Cultura.Arlegui, M. (2012), “La necrópolis de El Inchidero (Aguilar de MOntuenga, Soria): estratigrafía, cronotipología y dataciones radiocarbónicas”, Complutum, 23 (1), pp. 181-201.Barril, M. (1993), “El coleccionismo en el Museo Arqueológico Nacional”, en A. Marcos Pous, (coord.), De Gabinete a Museo. Tres siglos de Historia, Ministerio de Cultura, Madrid, pp. 171-188.Cabré, E. y Morán, J. A. (1977), “Las fíbulas en las más antiguas necrópolis de la Meseta Oriental Hispánica”, Revista de la Universidad Complutense, Homenaje a A. García-Bellido, 109, tomo III, pp. 109-143.Camacho, P. (2017), “Las fíbulas del castro de Las Cogotas (Cardeñosa. Ávila)”, Boletín del Seminario de Arte y Arqueología, LXXXIII, pp. 123-156.Carrasco, J. y Pachón, J. A. 2006, “La fíbula de codo tipo Huelva. Una aproximación a su tipología”, Complutum 17, pp. 103-119.Carrasco, J. L., Pachón, J. A. y Gámiz, J., (2016), “Datos para el estudio de las fíbulas de pivote en la Península Ibérica. El ejemplar del Cerro de la Mora (Moraleda de Zafayona, Granada)”, Zephyrus, 77, pp. 119-145.Castiella, A. y Tajadura, J. (2001), “Campos de Urnas en Navarra”, Cuadernos de Arqueología de la Universidad de Navarra, 9, pp. 197 -222.Cerdeño, M. L. (1980), “Dos nuevos modelos de fíbulas-placa en la Meseta Oriental”. Boletín del Seminario de Arte y Arqueología, XLVI, pp. 153-160.Cerdeño, M. L. y Chordá, M. (2004), “Fíbulas de tipo navarro-aquitanas en el área celtibérica”, Cuadernos de Arqueología Universidad de Navarra, 12, pp. 161-175.— (2017), “Hierros antiguos en la Meseta oriental. La Celtiberia olvidada”, CuPAUAM, 45, pp. 47-65.Cerdeño, M. L. y Juez, P. (2002), El castro celtibérico de El Ceremeño (Herrería, Guadalajara), Teruel, Monografías Arqueológicas del S.A.E.T., 8.Cerdeño, M. L. y Sagardoy, T. (2007), La necrópolis celtibérica de Herrería III y IV(Guadalajara), Zaragoza, Fundación Segeda-Junta Comunidades Castilla-La Mancha.— (2016), La necrópolis de Herrería I y II. Las fases culturales del Bronce Final II-III. Madrid, La Ergástula.Collado, O., Ibáñez, R., Nieto, E. y Cotino, F. (1991-1992), “Dataciones por radiocarbono en Montón de Tierra, Griegos (Teruel): el C-14 como método de fechación del período Celtibérico Antiguo”, Kalathos, 11-12, pp. 139-159.Constantine, T. y Bilbao, M-V. (2013), “Les fibules de l’Âge du Fer en Aquitane”, en L’Âge du Fer en Aquitaine et ses marges. Mobilité des hommes, diffusion des idées, circulation des biens dans l’espace européen à l’âge du Fer, Actes du XXXVe Colloque de l’AFEAF, Bordeaux, pp. 309-318.Costantine, T. y Chordá, M. (2014), “Las fíbulas navarro-aquitanas y su contextualización a ambos lados de los Pirineos”, en F. Burillo y M. Chordá (coords.), VII Simposio sobre los Celtíberos: nuevos hallazgos, nuevas interpretaciones, Zaragoza, pp. 223-230.Cuadrado, E. (1957), “La fíbula anular hispánica y sus problemas”. Zephyrus, 8, pp. 5-76.— (1963), “Precedentes y prototipos de la fíbula anular hispánica”, Trabajos de Prehistoria, 7, Madrid, CSIC.Chordá, M. (2008-2009), “Análisis radiocarbónicos en la necrópolis de Griegos (Teruel)”, Revista Teruel, 92, pp. 7-18.— (2014), “Nuevas interpretaciones en la necrópolis celtibérica de “El Cuarto” de Griegos (Teruel)”, VII Simposio sobre los Celtibéricos: nuevos hallazgos, nuevas interpretaciones, Zaragoza, pp. 397-404.Faro, J. A. (2015), “La necrópolis de El Castillo (Castejón, Navarra). Vajilla e instrumental metálico de sacrificio y banquete en el valle medio del Ebro (s. VI-III a. C.)”, Lucentum, 34, pp. 31-118.— (2018), “Las fíbulas navarro-aquitanas y su evolución en el valle medio del Ebro. La necrópolis del Edad del Hierro de El Castillo (Castejón, Navarra)”, Aquitania, 34, pp. 87-116.Faro, J. A. y Unzu, M. (2006), “La necrópolis de la Edad del Hierro de El Castillo (Castejón, Navarra). Primeras valoraciones 200-2002”, Complutum, 17, pp. 144-166.Giesen, K. (2001), “Zyprische Fibeln Typologie und Chonologie”, Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology and Literature, 161.Gil-Mascarell, M. y Peña, J. L. (1989), “La fíbula ‘ad occhio’ del yacimiento de la Mola d´Agres”, Saguntum, 22, pp. 125-145.González Hernández. P. (2018), “Clasificación tipológica de las fíbulas protohistóricas de El Berrueco (El Tejado, Salamanca)”, en N. Hernández, J. Larrazabal y R. Portero (coords.), Arqueología en el valle del Duero. Del Paleolítico a la Edad Media, 6, Valladolid, Glyphos Publicaciones, pp. 241-256.Graells, R. (2014), “Problemas de cultura material: las fíbulas itálicas de la Primera Edad del Hierro en el Golfo de León”, Madrider Mitteilungen, 55, pp. 212-315.Graells, R. y Lorrio, A. J. (2017), Problemas de cultura material: broches de cinturón decorados a molde de la Península Ibérica (s. VII-VI a. C.), Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alicante, Alicante.López-Cachero, F. J. (2007), “Sociedad y economía durante el Bronce Final y la Primera Edad del Hierro en el Noreste peninsular: aproximación a partir de las evidencias Arqueológicas”, Trabajos de Prehistoria, 64 (1), pp. 99-120.López-Cachero, F. J. y Rovira, M. C. (2012), “El món funerari a la depresió prelitoral catalana entre el Bronce Final I la Primera Edat del Ferro: ritual i dinamismo social a partir del registre arqueòlogic”, en M. C. Rovira, F. J.López Cachero y F. Mzière (dirs.), Les necròplis de incineració entre l’Ebre i el Tiber (segles IX-VI a. C): metodología, practiques funeraris i societat, Barcelona, Museu d’Arqueolòia de Catalunya, Monografies, 14, pp. 37-55.Maluquer, J. (1953), “La necrópolis de la Edad del Hierro de La Torraza, en Valtierra (Navarra)”, Príncipe de Viana, LII-LIII, pp. 243-269.Maluquer, J. y Vázquez de Parga, L. (1957), “Avance del estudio de la necrópolis de 'La Atalaya', Cortes de Navarra”, Excavaciones en Navarra, V, pp. 123-188.Marlasca, R., Rovira, M. C., Carlús, X., López Cachero, J. F. y Villena, N. (2005), “Materiales de importación en la necrópolis de Can Piteu-Can Roqueta (Sabadell, Barcelona)”, en S. Celestino y J. Jiménez (dirs.), El periodo orientalizante. Actas del III Simposio Internacional de Arqueología de Mérida: protohistoria del Mediterráneo Occidental, Anejos del Archivo Español de Arqueología, XXXV, pp. 1039-1049. Martínez Ruíz, M. (1989), Fíbulas Protohistóricas en el Sur de la Península Ibérica, Sevilla, Publicaciones de la Universidad de Sevilla.Martínez-Sastre, V. (1992), “El poblado de Campos de Urnas de Fuente Estaca (Embid, Guadalajara)”, en J. Valiente (ed.): La celtización del Tajo Superior, Memorias del Seminario de Historia Antigua III, Universidad de Alcalá de Henares, pp. 67-78.Mohen, J-P. (1974), “Les fibules de l’Âge du Fer aquitaine”, Revue Historique et Archéologique du Libournais, XLII, 152, pp. 78-88.— (1980), L’Âge du Fer en Aquitaine du VIeme au IIIeme siécle avant J-C., Paris, Memoires de la Société Prehistorique Française, 14.Navarro, R. (1970), “En torno al paralelo de una placa-fíbula”, Pyrenae, 6, pp. 47-52.Pérez Casas, J. A. (1990), “Las necrópolis de incineración del Bajo Aragón, en F. Burillo (coord.), II Symposio sobre los celtíberos. Necrópolis celtibéricas, Zaragoza, pp. 111-121.Rodanés, J. M. y Picazo, J. V. (1997), “Bronce Final y Primera Edad del Hierro”. Caesaraugusta, 72-1, pp. 155-215. Volumen dedicado a Crónica del Aragón Antiguo: de la Prehistoria a la Alta Edad Media.— (2010), “Aproximación a la demografía de la ocupación de la Primera Edad del Hierro del Cabezo de la Cruz (La Muela, Zaragoza): fases II y III”, en F. Burillo (coord.), VI Coloquio Internacional de Arqueología Espacial, Arqueología de la Población, Zaragoza, pp. 209-225.Ruíz Delgado, M. M. (1989), Fíbulas protohistóricas en el sur de la Península Ibérica. Tesis Doctoral, Publicaciones Universidad de Sevilla, 112.Schüle, W. (1969), Die Meseta-Kulturen der Iberischen Halbinsen, vol. 1-2, Berlín.Storch de Gracia, J. J. (1989), La Fíbula en la Hispania Antigua: las fíbulas Protohistóricas del Suroeste Peninsular, Tesis Doctoral, Madrid Universidad Complutense.Vega, G. (2002), “Dataciones radiométricas del castro de El Ceremeño”, en M. L. Cerdeño y P. Juez, El castro celtibérico de El Ceremeño (Herrería, Guadalajara), Teruel, Monografías Arqueológicas del SAET, 8, pp. 127-131.— (2007), “Dataciones radiocarbónicas de la fase III de la necrópolis de Herrería (Guadalajara)”, en M. L. Cerdeño y T. Sagardoy, La necrópolis celtibérica
Fibulae are among the objects that were invented in the early Iron Age (1400 BC) and in the middle of this period(about 800 BC), it became common in different regions and its use by different ...cultures, in various forms and different applications has continued to this day. After the use of these Fibula spread, these constructions were used in various ways, including for Connecting clothes, personal decoration, and in some cases as a talisman. The late Iron Age fibulae of Iran include a variety of types that were found during excavations of various settlement sites and cemeteries. Regarding the history, typology and applications of fibulae discovered from Iran, no comprehensive research has been done in Iran and the researches of Western archaeologists do not include the findings of recent decades. Therefore, there are ambiguities regarding the history of their use, typology, application and construction technique. The present study aims to introduce and study the history and typology of Iron Age fibulae in Iran and tries to achieve the desired goals through descriptive-analytical methods and library tools. The results show that fibulae, after being invented in the Mediterranean basin, gradually spread to other regions and in many cases replaced rod pins.
The National Archaeological Museum of Athens possesses fourteen Greek fibulae of different sizes found during American excavations at Halae of Locris carried out between 1911 and 1914. They belong to ...the hinged fibula group, which is characterized by the distinctive decoration of its bows. Fibulae of this type have been found in the area of the Central Balkans, Romania, and northern and central Greece. Observable differences in the shapes of the decorative elements of these fibulae are of regional nature and allow several varieties to be identified within the type. The fibulae in question represent a local transformation of the northern models manifested mainly in the use of native Greek patterns particularly in the case of the palmettes decorating their hinge plates which are purely Greek in shape, and in the form of projections adorning their bows. The high artistic quality of the Halae fibulae reinforces the conviction of their Greek workmanship. They differ from each other in details, and this makes them very good examples of the development of the Greek variant of the hinged type fibula in the 5th century BC.
In 2021, eight Thracian silver objects came to my attention during a research stay at the Roman-Germanic Central Museum, Leibniz Research Institute for Archaeology (RGCM) Mainz, Germany, which have ...been ignored by the scientific community so far. The presented silver convolute, which forms part of the collection of the RGCM, consist of two bracelets, three fibulae and three hemispherical fragments. As the archaeological context is missing, the objects had been analysed and placed in a chronological and geographical context with other objects of this kind. It was established that the three fibulae belong to the Bukyovtsi Type. The bracelets have strong similarities with pieces from several hoards in north-western and central Bulgaria, for example from Vladinya (Lovech region) or Granitovo (Belogradchik region). Due to the stylistic features of the objects, they can be dated to the second half of the 4th century BC.
Twenty fibulae have been found so far during the Seyitömer Höyük salvage excavations. The majority of the samples are of the type defined as the Anatolian Phrygian fibulae. There is a total of 18 ...fibulae in this type. One of the 18 Anatolian Phrygian type fibulae is the subject of this study. The fibula is included in the group defined as Type XII 9 by Blinkenberg and later by Muscarella, and appears as Variant A IV in Caner’s study, where a more comprehensive typological evaluation was made. The artefact presents a new image that differs from all fibulae found so far. In our example, the three metal bars that make up the main body are separated from each other by two channels. The fibula, which differs from the only similar example in many aspects, is different from all Anatolian Phrygian type fibulae found in Anatolia, Western Anatolia, the Aegean Islands, Greece, and Italy, where Anatolian Phrygian type fibulae were found and produced. Our study suggests that the Seyitömer Höyük fibula should be defined as a new sub group under the term Variant A IV 3b, according to Caner’s typology. In addition, the thought that the fibula in question pioneered some belt buckles that were created by emulating the Anatolian Phrygian fibulae is also emphasized.
This article is devoted to analyzing 24 fibulae originating from the Ust-Kamensk kurgan cemetery. Typologically, these finds are not very diverse. The bow fibulae (18 pieces) are the most numerous ...among them. Hinged arc-shaped brooches (3 pieces) and military clasps (2 pieces) are represented in a significantly smaller number. The spring fibulae with the button at the end of the continuous lamellar receiver are observed only in one fibula. The overwhelming majority of the specified decorations (21 pieces) form a single chronological group dated according to different chronological schemes to the second – third quarters or the second half of the 1st century – early 2nd century AD. Only three pieces do not belong to this group: two military fibulae date back to an earlier period and one spring fibulae with the button on the receiver end was made later. Taking into account modern research, military brooches cannot date back later than the early 1st century AD. The brooch with the button on the receiver dates back to the first half – middle of 2nd century AD. Considering that fibulae are the most reliable and precisely dated indicators in the inventory of the Ust-Kamensk kurgan cemetery, their dating can be confidently extended to the chronology of the whole burial ground. Thus, the monument was used for at least 100 years, from the early 1st century AD up to the first half – the middle of the 2nd century AD, but not just in the middle of the 1st – beginning of the 2nd centuries AD, as it was considered earlier. The majority of fibulae from the Ust-Kamensk collection have possibly been made in Olbia or delivered through it from the Roman provinces. Only the military brooches and the spring fibulae with the button on the receiver end, apparently, are of a different origin.
The archaeological research carried out in 1949 by Radu Vulpe in the protohistoric settlement of Poiana (Galati County, Romania) led to the discovery of several silver objects. For a long time, how ...these objects were associated or not, as well as their archaeological contexts, remained unknown. Finding and studying the unpublished Radu Vulpe’s field diary from 1949 allows the identification of two hoards : one consists of a pair of larger Almgren type 82 fibulae, the other includes two other smaller Almgren 82 type fibulae, a lost earring, seven rings and four republican denarii. Other objects uncovered in 1949 were discovered in isolation. Some of these objects provide consistent indications for local processing of precious metals in the late phase of the settlement (late 1st century AD and the beginning of the 2nd century AD). The four silver Almgren type 82 fibulae must be added to the more than four dozen similar fibulae attested so far at Poiana. The supraregional analogies of the Almgren 82 fibulae from Poiana reflect, if only in part, the importance of this centre as a node of a long‑range network that connected the Empire and the steppe.
The fibulae which can said to be the predecessor of today's safety pins, originated in the Near East, Aegean and Eastern Europe in the 13th-12th century BC and was popular. It is known that fibulae ...were diversified throughout the ages by different cultures and therefore became a typologically rich group. At first fibulae had a practical purpose which was to fasten clothes but in time precious metals were begun to be used for their production; hence they became prestige objects. The fibulae found for themselves a place in the royal reliefs of Iron Age Anatolia, in the graves of the nobles and they have been used also as temple offerings in the Aegean world. Particularly where maternity is concerned, one of the subtypes that women left as offerings are the waterfowl fibulae known as Island or Rhodian Type. Similar examples have been found in the Aegean and Mediterranean world and according to what we know today the main production centre of these fibulae was in Rhodes. Numerous similar fibulae found in Rhodos validate this island as the main production centre. Waterfowl fibulae, found in other areas are considered as unique artefacts as they are not common outside Rhodes. The waterfowl fibula in the Aydın Archaeological Museum which is analysed in this study is extremely important as to the fact that it is a rare example from Anatolia. It can be dated to the Late Geometric Period.
PDF
