Introduction
Early medieval swords from the territory of Romania belong to a relatively often overlooked topic and significant attention is not paid to it even in the academic literature. For this reason, I decided to write a short article to make this topic more widely known. My ambition is not to write a professional academic work that maps all the finds of swords including their detailed description with dimensions, as I do not have the possibilities for such a step. The primary goal of my article is to provide basic information and compile a list of all swords and sword fragments from the territory of Romania that are still known and available in the literature, dated between the 8th and 11th centuries, falling at the same time into the sword classification according to Jan Petersen or Alfred Geibig.
Currently, there is no more comprehensive monograph that would contain a complete and detailed description of individual specimens. Despite this, there were several works and studies dealing mainly with stray finds and, to a lesser extent, with finds from archaeological excavations or museum collections.
The largest group of swords and sword fragments consists of finds from the historical region of Transylvania (including Banat, Crișana and Maramureș), published in several works (Hampel 1907; Roska 1944; Bakay 1965, 1967; Vlassa 1965, 1967; Horedt 1967, 1968; Radosav 1986-1987; Kovács 1994-1995; Pinter 1992-1994; Cosma 2001, 2002; Oța 2008). The first comprehensive texts on this topic can be found in Radu R. Heitel’s article on archaeological evidence of the penetration of the Old Hungarians into Transylvania, in which numerous pieces of military equipment originating from the Inner Carpathian region and stored in individual museums from Romania are represented, some of which also include early medieval double-edged swords (1994-1995) or in Karl Z. Pinter’s book Spada şi sabia medievală în Transilvania şi Banat, secolele IX – XIV, which was first published in 1999 and eight years later was published as a second edition. Erwin Gáll prepared the currently up-to-date and relatively detailed chapter on swords, with descriptions of individual finds from Transylvania and Banat, in his thesis Az Erdélyi-medence, a Partium és a Bánság 10‒11. századi temetői (2013).
The second group consists of four specimens from Dobruja. The first was the discovery of the sword pommel cap from Păcuiul lui Soare, which was described, typologically and analogically evaluated by Radu Popa in his article (1984). The remaining three swords, including the aforementioned pommel cap, are further presented by Bulgarian authors Valeri Yotov (2011). In Romanian literature, Dobruja swords with short descriptions were published relatively recently and were included in the catalog of Mixobarbarii din Dobrogea în contextul lumii bizantine (secolele VI-XIII) by a collective of authors Talmațchi – Stănică – Șova – Custurea (2020).
The last, third group of swords is completed by the so far only known find from the historical region of Moldova, which was only marginally mentioned by Victor Spinei (2009), Erwin Gáll (2015) and Ion Tentiuc (2018-2019). From the historical region of Wallachia, no specimen of a sword from the observed period is known yet, falling in the classification of J. Petersen or A. Geibig. The literature of the authors presented above served as a source of information for the compilation of this article and catalog.
An attempt at chronological and typological classification
In this chapter, I would like to focus primarily on the list of all swords that can be found in the literature and their construction elements, including sword scabbards. At the same time, I set myself the goal of trying to classify individual objects within the typological classification according to Jan Petersen (Petersen 1919) or Alfred Geibig (Geibig 1991), taking into account analogies from different regions of Europe. In the case of the scabbard chapes, I used the typological classification according to Gala F. Korzuchina (Korzuchina 1950), Peter Paulsen (Paulsen 1953) and Vytautas Kazakevičius (Kazakevičius 1992).
Before I start devoting myself to the actual analysis of the finds, I would like to provide some information on the issue of the use of terminology of swords in Romanian written literature, which is most striking in the works created primarily in the Communism period and after it. In Romanian written literature, in both older (Vlassa 1965, 1967; Horedt 1967, 1968) and more recent (Șova 2020), we can meet the word sabie (plural săbii) for the sword. However, this is a misnomer, because as stated, e.g. in the Romanian-Czech dictionary (Dicționar Român-Ceh) compiled by Anca Irina Ionescu and published in 2002 by the Leda publishing house, the Romanian word sabie has the equivalent of saber in the Czech language (Ionescu 2002: 237). The Internet portal dexonline.ro (Dicționar explicativ al limbii române), which is actually a digitized form of one of the most important explanatory dictionaries of the Romanian language, states the following on its pages about the word sabie: Armă albă formată dintr-o lamă lungă de oțel ascuțită la vârf și pe una dintre laturi și fixată într-un mâner (A white [cold] weapon consisting of a long steel blade sharpened at the point and on one side, fixed in the handle). In the aforementioned Romanian-Czech dictionary, the word spadă is translated as sword (Ionescu 2002: 249). On the dexonline.ro portal, the word spadă (plural spade) has the following explanation: Armă formată dintr-o lamă dreaptă cu două tăișuri, din gardă și mâner, cu care se poate tăia și împunge (A weapon consisting of a straight double-edged blade, handles and crossguard used for chopping and stabbing). For example, Karl Zeno Pinter analyzed this issue in detail in the publication Spada şi sabia medievală în Transilvania şi Banat, secolele IX – XIV (Pinter 2007: 18-20).
Swords
In the available literature, I managed to find a total of 25 pieces of swords and their construction elements. A significant part of the analyzed material consists of fragments of swords and their structural elements in various forms: individual blades with a tang, blades with a crossguard and a tang. In a few cases, a fragment of a blade with the entire handle – pommel, tang and crossguard – has been preserved. We know just one example of a separate crossguard (as will be mentioned below, two crossguards are published in the literature, but in one case it is a misunderstanding of a fire striker). Similarly, we know just one piece of a separate pommel cap and one point of a blade with a preserved fuller. Only seven sword examples have been preserved in complete condition. Another problem of the discussed objects is the absence of a find context, which greatly complicates their placement in a typological classification, as well as the determination of a more precise chronology, and as a more detailed analysis will show later, only a small part of the total number of 25 swords convincingly corresponds to the established criteria.
The most numerous finds include specimens from the historical region of Transylvania (Romanian: Ardeal, Transilvania, Hungarian: Erdély, German: Siebenbürgen), under which I included the following three historical territories: Banat (Romanian, German: Banat; Hungarian: Bánság), Crișana (Romanian: Crișana; Hungarian: Körösvidék; German: Kreischgebiet) and Maramureș (Romanian: Maramureș; Hungarian: Máramaros).
From Transylvania, finds of swords and their construction elements are known from the following locations: Aiud (Alba county), Alba Iulia (Alba county), Brăișoru (Cluj county), Cluj-Napoca (Cluj county), Dăbâca (Cluj county), Dej (Cluj county Cluj), Deva – Micro 15 (Hunedoara county), Gâmbaș (Alba county), Ernei (Mureș county) and Tomnatec (Alba or Hunedoara county).
Within Banat, we know finds from the following locations: Cheglevici (Timiș county), Jimbolia (Timiș county), Orșova (Mehedinți county), Sasca Montană (Caraș-Severin county) and Săcalăz (Timiș county). Among the list of double-edged swords from Romania, I also included a find from the Serbian site of Kovin, which is currently in the collections of the National Museum of Banat in the city of Timișoara.
Three specimens are registered from the Crișana region: Arad – Pădurea Ceala (Arad county), Biharia (Bihor county) and Curtuiușeni – Dealul Cărămidăriei (Bihor county).
The only find of a sword from Maramureș comes from the site of Vetiș (Satu Mare county).
Separate blades are known from three localities, to which we can also assign a fragment of the sword tip with a distinct fuller from the locality Aiud (Hungarian: Nagyenyed) (Gáll 2013a: 150. tábla. 1). The object is stored in the historical museum in the town of Aiud (Muzeul de Istorie) under inventory number 4793. The circumstances of the object’s discovery are unknown. Gáll mentions only that it became part of the collection of the local history museum in 1964 (Gáll 2013a: 346). The total length of the fragment reaches 20.5 cm, width: 4.0 cm – 2.3 cm. The fuller is 0.9 cm wide and disappears 12 cm before the end of the blade tip. Based on its size and characteristics, E. Gáll assumes a dating to the end of the 11th century (Gáll 2013a: 346). Any typological classification of this fragment either under Petersen’s types or under Geibig’s construction types is practically impossible due to its condition.
Fragment of a blade from the locality of Arad-Pădurea Ceala (Hungarian: Arad-Csálya), which is located in the Museum Complexul Muzeal Arad under inv. no. 14384 is also a context-free find, which, according to Gáll, is characterized as a blade without a fuller with a total length of 62 cm and a width of 4.6 cm (Gáll 2013a: 41). Călin Cosma states that it is a single-edged blade derived from a saber dated to the 10th century (Cosma 2002: 149, 164, 340 – pl. 3-4). According to László Kovács, at least 3 male graves were found at the discussed site, including a saber and a double-edged sword (Kovács 1994-1995: 153). The typological classification of this blade in view of the given information is also impossible, as in the previous case.
Arad-Pădurea Ceala. Source: Gáll 2013a: 6. tábla. 1.
A blade fragment with a length of 55 cm and a width of 3.8 cm comes from the site of Curtuiușeni-Dealul Cărămidăriei (Hungarian: Érkörtvélyes). The context of the find is unknown. The blade is believed to have been discovered in a grave. The dating is given to the 10th century, based on the stirrups that were attached (Cosma 2001: 242; 2002: 149). Unfortunately, further data are not available (Heitel 1994-1995: 430, note 1380). In Jiří Košta’s database, provided by Tomáš Vlasatý, there is a note that this blade may also come from a scramaseax.
Curtuiușeni-Dealul Cărămidăriei. Source: Cosma 2001: Planșa nr. 15. 5.
Another blade fragment is known from the site of Gâmbaș (Hungarian: Marosgombás) (Gáll 2013a: 159. tábla. 1). The object was preserved only with a tang, the the blade tip is absent. According to Erwin Gáll, it should be a grave find (personal communication with E. Gáll). Despite the fact that the fuller is quite clear, any typological classification is ruled out. Such is also the case of the fragment of a double-edged corroded blade from the town of Alba Iulia (Gyulafehérvár), which was preserved with a tang and without a tip. Its fuller runs through the center, which bears traces of alleged patternwelding in the form of a so-called herringbone pattern (⋘⋙) and in its upper part there are forged marks from patternwelded wire on both sides of the blade – a spiral and a cross with arms ending in the letter T (Pinter 2007: planșa 33: b). According to Radu R. Heitel, the point was broken off a long time ago, which must have been a fact already at the time of the publication of his article Die Archäologie der ersten und zweiten Phase des Eindringens der Ungarn in das innerkarpatische Transilvanien in a peer-reviewed journal and published in 1994-1995, nevertheless in there is a photo in which this blade is captured in its entire condition, i.e. with the point (Heitel 1994-1995: 434, Abb. 18. a). In this photo, it is possible to see the rounded tip of the blade and the fuller, which ends only a few centimeters before the point. I have not been able to find out exactly when the photo of the blade was taken and when exactly the tip broke off. The information about the circumstances of discovery is unknown (Pinter 2007: 67); it was probably found in an unknown place on the bank of the Mureș River and in the register of A. Csernis from 1905 it appears as an object taken from the Batthyaneum collection under the inventory number 5229 (Heitel 1994-1995: 430). Radu R. Heitel assumed that the sword was the product of a blacksmith who probably tried to imitate the markings on the blade according to Norse models from the second half of the 10th century, with the fact that he managed to pierce it, which is not clear from the available photo, which is not of the best quality, however, traces of attempts to insert additional decorations are visible below the cross symbol (Heitel 1994-1995: 431). According to K. Z. Pinter, the blade could belong to a sword with a hilt that falls under the V or L type within Petersen’s typology (Pinter 2007: 69). At the same time, the blade of the sword dates to the 8th – 9th century (Pinter 2007: 68). Full-surface patternwelding of blades was standard in the Frankish Empire in the Merovingian period – until the 8th century (Košta-Hošek-Dresler-Macháček-Přichystalová 2019: 220). Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that the analyzed blade could have been made in Frankish workshops. The decoration of patternwelded blades with simple marks began to be applied more often already in the early Carolingian period in the 8th century and was not unusual even in the 9th century and in the earlier phase of the 10th century, which can also be proven by finds of Moravian swords combining surface patternwelding with simple symbols – omega (Ω), spiral/circle or horizontal letter “S”/”8″ (Košta-Hošek 2020: 346). This fact is also confirmed by the Arab philosopher Al-Kindí (803-870), who in his work mentions Frankish swords decorated with gold or brass crosses (Košta-Hošek-Žákovský 2021: 147). The blade of the Alba Iulia sword has, as mentioned above, a forged cross with T-shaped arms on one side and a spiral on the other. Symbols of the cross or spiral are a relatively common element on the blades of early medieval swords. From the available literature, I managed to find about 40 pieces of swords, including individual blades that bear the same symbols, or are combined with a symbol in the form of the letter omega or various inscriptions. The largest number can be traced from Finland, where, according to Moilanen, there are up to 24 examples of swords and separate blades on which symbols of crosses and spirals are applied (Moilanen 2015: 349, 353, 355, 357, 366, 369-370, 374, 380- 383, 386, 390-391, 393, 399, 400-403, 410-411, 421). Next comes Germany with seven finds, including the Haithabu site (Geibig 1991: taf. 46, taf. 54. 1-3, taf. 119. 1-4, taf. 141, taf. 143; 1999: taf. 2, taf. 5). Three pieces each are known finds from Czech Republic (Košta-Hošek-Žákovský 2019: 182, 295, 321) and Gnëzdovo, Russia (Kainov 2012: Fig. 6. 3, Fig. 7, Fig. 12, Fig. 13, Fig. 19, Fig. 20). Two swords come from Lednica Island in Poland (Marek 2004: Plate 30. A, C). One sword is known from the Lithuanian locality Aizkraukle (Kazakevičius 1996: 70, 80 pav., 115) and one from Marcelová in the Komárno district in Slovakia (Kovács 1994-1995: 3. kép. 1). Both from the typological point of view and the classification in the time horizon, this is a diverse group of finds. Crosses and spirals were recognized on sword types E, D, H/I, L/Z, S, Z, X, Y, Æ and Petersen’s special type 1, on four specimens of Kirpičnikov type II A and Geibig combination types 5 (V I), 8, 12 (V I, V II), 12/13 (V I), 13 (V II), 14, 15 (V III) and 16 (V I). However, almost all of the listed objects do not have full-surface patternwelding on the blades, with the exception of two swords. One is Petersen’s type Y from the Czech site of Náklo – Lhota nad Moravou (or Příkazy), in the district of Olomouc in Moravia, dated between the end of the 9th century and the 10th century (Košta-Hošek-Žákovský 2019: 182, ID No 148). On one of the sides, roughly 60-80 mm below the guard, the fuller has a spiral-shaped insert with a diameter of 20 mm (Košta-Hošek-Žákovský 2019: 183). The second is a find from Finland: KM 6746:49, Turku, Kaarina, Ristimäki – the sword of Petersen’s special type 1 bears a circle symbol on one side and a spiral on the other in the patternwelded fuller under guard (Moilanen 2015: 380). Other relatively close analogies to the blade from Alba Iulia with common symbols of a cross and a spiral but without a patternwelded core are finds from Finnish sites: Lempäälä – KM 1996:73, L or Z type sword with a blade that has two crosses applied on one side with arms in the form of the letter T, between which there is a spiral (Moilanen 2015: 355), Kangasala – KM 11242, a Z type sword that has a cross with arms in the form of the letter T on one side of the blade and a spiral pattern on the other side (Moilanen 2015: 400) and Ikaalinen – SatM 10330, a Y type sword with a blade decorated on one side with two crosses with arms in the form of the letter T between which there is a spiral (Moilanen 2015: 421). A type E sword comes from the Russian site of Gnëzdovo with the blade that is also decorated on one side with two crosses with arms in the form of the letter T, between which there is a spiral, and the other side bears the decoration in the stylized form of a man (Kainov 2012: Figs. 12, 13). However, cross marks on the blades are also found on swords of later periods, such as the oldest surviving imperial sword from the 12th century, which bears a small silver cross in a circle, or the ceremonial imperial sword made in Palermo around 1220 with a blade decorated with a small golden cross (Košta – Hošek – Žákovský 2022: 147-148). In the case of Mikulčice swords from the territory of Great Moravia, it is assumed that those with applied crosses on the blades could represent the symbol of the Christian rulers of Great Moravia (Košta – Hošek – Žákovský 2021: 148). The fragmentary nature of the blade from Alba Iulia, as well as the absence of a hilt, do not allow a closer typological classification. In this case, the determination of the time horizon is possible thanks to the patternwelding and fuller decoration to the period from the 8th to the beginning of the 10th century.
Alba Iulia, in the photo you can see the blade still with the point.
Source: Heitel 1994-1995: Abb. 18. a.
Three finds of blades with preserved guards are known from the territory of Transylvania. The sword from Sasca Montană (Hungarian: Szászkabánya) in Caraș – Severin County is said to be donated by Frigyes Niuny to the Hungarian National Museum on October 10, 1862 (Kovács 1994-1995: 174). A fragment of a double-edged blade with a relatively narrow fuller and guard. The total length reaches 85.6 cm, the length of the guard is 8.5 cm, the blade is 73 cm long and 6 cm wide. From the available drawing of the sword, it is clear that the tang contains two objects placed in holes below each other, which may have served as rivets to fasten the scales of the hilt. Silviu Oța dates the sword to the 11th century with the remark that, like the finds of swords from the Banat sites of Orșova and Novi Bečej (Serbia), they do not have clear finding circumstances and, under these conditions, cannot be included in the burial horizon together with horse remains, equestrian equipment and typical weapons for nomadic ethnic groups (Oța 2008: 132-133). László Kovács dates it up to the Migration Period (Kovács 1994-1995: 174).
Sasca Montană. Source: Kovács 1994-1995: 171, 12. kép – Abb. 12, 1.
The sword from Ernei (Hungarian: Nagyernye) is another problematic find, as it is a context-free find. The item was donated to the Historical Museum in Cluj-Napoca by Count Domokos Teleki in 1918 under inventory number IV. 1919 and its discovery should have taken place at the Ernei site in Mureș county (Vlassa 1965: 669). The sword has the following parameters: length: 53.0 cm; hilt length: 13.0 cm; blade width: 4.3-4.0 cm; tang width: 2.0-0.7 cm; tang thickness: 0.4-0.5 cm; crossguard length: 8.3 cm; crossguard width: 2.2 cm; crossguard thickness: 1.0 cm (Gáll 2013a: 347). Nicolae Vlassa marked the sword under the erroneous name sabie (saber) as early medieval, typical of the 11th – 12th centuries, which falls into the category of so-called “Norman” or “Carolingian” swords (in the original text, again, the designation is saber) and whose owner could belong to a relatively wide ethnic group (Vlassa 1965: 669). As the closest analogies, he cites finds from the Hungarian sites of Székesfehérvár – Demkóhegy, Petersen type S (Bakay 1967: 116, Abb. 6), Szob – Vendelin, Petersen type X (Bakay 1967: 121, Abb. 10. 4) and unspecified sword from Budapest (Vlassa 1965: 669). Erwin Gáll dates the sword from Ernei to the end of the 11th century, but without a more specific typological classification due to its fragmentary nature (Gáll 2013a: 347). Now let’s look at the description of the sword itself, as given by N. Vlassa: “The specimen under discussion belongs to a series of straight double-edged swords, the crossguard of the hilt has the shape of an elongated rhombus, and the handle ends in the shape of a more or less regular spherical cap, somewhat flattened…” (Vlassa 1965: 669). According to L. Kovács, the blade should also have a fuller (Kovács 1994-1995: 169), while N. Vlassa and E. Gáll do not mention the fuller. The redrawing available in E. Gáll’s work Az Erdélyi-medence, a Partium és a Bánság 10‒11. századi temetői implies that the blade should be, just like the crossguard, diamond-shaped, which completely changes the view of this object. Personally, I think that the sword from Ernei has nothing to do with the double-edged early medieval swords of the 9th-11th centuries, and its dating should be reconsidered. The question is whether the object does not belong to the double-edged swords of the 5th-7th centuries with oval blades, the closest analogues of which can be traced in several places in Europe. Finds of such swords are known, for example, from the Polish site of Jakuszowice (Tejral – Zeman 2021: 287, Abb. 6. 11), the small cemetery Wien-Leopoldau on the north bank of the Danube (Tejral – Zeman 2021: 290, Abb. 8. 9), the Serbian locality Horgoš in the North Banat district (Tejral – Zeman 2021: 296, Abb. 13. 5) and Arzignano in northern Italy (Tejral – Zeman 2021: 303, Abb. 19. 1). One specimen was also found in the Moravian village of Horákov in the Czech Republic (Tejral – Zeman 2021: 309, Abb. 22. 1). Others are also known from the Bulgarian sites of Sokolare and Sliven (Pinter – Yotov 2021: 74, Plate III. 1 and 71, Fig. 10). This type of swords with a long crossguard are said refer to Persian (Sasanian) or Central Asian or late Sarmatian forms from the Volga region (Dyrda – Kontny – Mączyńska 2014: 121). Analogies are known both from the Hunnic and Alanic or East Germanic environments (Dyrda – Kontny – Mączyńska 2014: 121). Based on the above information, we can exclude the sword fragment from Ernei from the catalog, as in the case of the sword from Sasca Montană.
Ernei. Source: Vlassa 1965: 670, Fig. 1.
Drawing of the sword from Ernei. Source: Gáll 2013a: 179. tábla: 1.
Horákov. Source: Tejral – Zeman 2021: 309, Abb. 22. 1.
A fragmentary blade with an oval crossguard and an incomplete tang of the handle from the Morești/Brăișoru site (Horedt 1968: 424, Fig. 2) is another of the items donated to the historical museum in the city of Cluj – Napoca by the collector Count Teleki Domokos in 1918, under inventory number IV. 1920 (Vlassa 1967: 511). Since 1968, the sword has been stored in the National History Museum of Romania in Bucharest (Muzeul Național de Istorie a României) under inv. no. 54484 (Gáll 2013a: 317). The circumstances of the object’s discovery are unknown, and the place of its discovery is also a matter of conjecture, since two locations are presented in the literature – Morești (Malomfalva) in Mureș County and Brăișoru (Malomszeg) in Cluj County. Kurt Horedt presented the discussed sword as a find from the Morești site (Horedt 1952: 329, Fig. 10), at the same time arguing that when he discovered it in the depository of the museum in Cluj – Napoca, he himself noted the following: “F(und)O( rt) Malomfalva, Maros Torda, alter Zettel auf dem Gegenstand. Nach Inv(entar) Malomszeg” (Place of discovery Malomfalva, Mureș Turda, old label on the object. Malomszeg after the inventorisation) (Horedt 1967: 509). According to him, this information should have been given on a yellow label measuring 5 × 2 cm, which was stuck on the sword but was destroyed during cleaning before it was moved to Bucharest (Horedt 1967: 509). Nicolae Vlassa was of the opinion that the place where the sword was found must have been in the location of Brăișor, which he substantiated with the statement that the object was handed over to the museum between Nov. 30 – Dec. 2 1918 by the archaeologist Sándor Ferenczi, who during the inventory of the object, due to his knowledge of the Hungarian language and topographical locations, certainly could not have mistaken the names Malomfalva and Malomszeg (Vlassa 1967: 511). This theory is also supported by Erwin Gáll (Gáll 2013a: 317). In this work, the discussed sword will be included under the location of Brăișor (Malomszeg). Kurt Horedt dates it to the beginning of the 11th century (Horedt 1952: 329, Fig. 10) and Erwin Gál shifts the dating from the second half of the 10th century to the first half of the 11th century based on finds from the Carpathian basin (Gáll 2013a: 317). The sword fragment is characterized by a double-edged blade with a fuller running through the middle with the inscription ॥ ટ ડ | made of patternwelded wire. The other side of the blade is decorated with 12 inlaid rings. In the lower part of the blade there are clear traces of scabbard parts. It has an oval crossguard and an incomplete tang of the handle. The pommel has not been preserved, which, according to K. Horedt, excludes its typological classification (Horedt 1968: 422). Erwin Gáll classified the sword under Geibig’s combination type 11, corresponding to Petersen’s types U, V and W (Geibig 1991: 54). In this case, we can definitely rule out type W, since the hilt components were cast of copper alloy (Vlasatý 2018). Pommels of types U and V are characterized by a three-lobed caps and an oval upper guard (Moilanen 2015: 254-255). With type U, the pommel is slightly lower than with type V, and the middle lobe is at the same time the highest and widest (Moilanen 2015: 254). Due to the fact that the pommel of the sword from Brăișor has not been preserved, it is not important to focus on them in detail. Type U is characterized by an oval crossguard when viewed from above and they are low in profile (Moilanen 2015: 254), in type V the guards are also oval but relatively thick (Moilanen 2015: 255), despite the fact that there are also specimens with narrower guards. The hilt components of both types are often decorated, including the pommels. The hilt of the sword from Brăișor is not characterized by any decoration, at least there is no mention of it in the literature. Similar finds of swords are known from the Finnish sites of Vesilahti – KM 10390:3 (Moilanen 2015: 397), Lieto – KM 9433:1 (Moilanen 2018: 126) and Salo – KM 12543 (Moilanen 2018: 127) or from Degvold, Oppland, Norway (Androshchuk 2014: 77, Fig. 32). The dating is placed between the years 900 – 950, in a broader scope from the year 900 to the year 1000 for type U (Moilanen 2015: 254) and for type V it is dated to the years 900 – 950, but Moilanen assumes its use for the period 925 – 1000, possibly until 1050 (Moilanen 2015: 255). In both cases, this time classification corresponds with the dating proposed by Erwin Gáll. According to Petersen, the origin of this type must be sought somewhere outside the territory of Norway, the distribution of U swords within the geographical extension includes Norway, Denmark, Russia and Lithuania (Moilanen 2015: 254).
A fragmentary blade with an oval crossguard and an incomplete tang from the Morești/Brăișoru site (Horedt 1968: 424, Fig. 2) is another of the objects donated to the History Museum in Cluj-Napoca by the collector Count Teleki Domokos in 1918, with the inventory number IV. 1920 (Vlassa 1967: 511). According to Erwin Gáll, it was transferred to the Romanian National History Museum in Bucharest (Muzeul Național de Istorie a României) in 1968 (Gáll 2013a: 317). Researchers Martin Husár and Silviu Oța state, based on information provided in the museum register, that the sword was transported to Bucharest in 1974 (Husár-Oța 2024: 663, note 107). The sword is registered in the museum’s collections under the inventory number 54484 (Gáll 2013a: 317; Husár – Oța 2024: 663). The place of its discovery has been the subject of speculation. Kurt Horedt presented the discussed sword as a find from a fortress (cetate) at the Morești – Podeiu site, Târgu Mureș district (Horedt 1952: 329), while at the same time arguing elsewhere that when he discovered the sword in the museum depository in Cluj – Napoca, he himself noted the following: “F(und)O( rt) Malomfalva, Maros Torda, alter Zettel auf dem Gegenstand. Nach Inv(entar) Malomszeg” (Place of discovery Malomfalva, Mureș Turda, old label on the object. Malomszeg after the inventorisation) (Horedt 1967: 509). According to him, this information should have been given on a yellow label measuring 5 × 2 cm, which was stuck on the sword but was destroyed during cleaning before it was moved to Bucharest (Horedt 1967: 509). Nicolae Vlassa was of the opinion that the place where the sword was found must have been in the location of Brăișor, which he substantiated with the statement that the object was handed over to the museum between Nov. 30 – Dec. 2 1918 by the archaeologist Sándor Ferenczi, who during the inventory of the object, due to his knowledge of the Hungarian language and topographical locations, certainly could not have mistaken the names Malomfalva and Malomszeg (Vlassa 1967: 511). This theory is also supported by Erwin Gáll (Gáll 2013a: 317). The sword is heavily corroded (Husár – Oța 2024: 663-664). The fragmentary blade is double-edged, with a relatively distinct fuller running through its center, which is decorated on one side with seven short vertical lines, between which are placed the Latin letters S, one of which is turned upside down – II ટ III ડ II (Husár – Oța 2024: fig. 4.1e-1f). Today, only four vertical lines and both letters are visible to the naked eye, while the inverted letter S was probably inlaid with copper (Husár – Oța 2024: 664-665). The other side of the blade is inlaid with twelve circular motifs, connected by short lines, which have been partially preserved. This pattern was filled with brass, which is visible on 10 circles (Husár – Oța 2024: 664). Based on X-ray images, it was found that in addition to the central vertical connecting line, others were also preserved, one in the form of the letter V and the other in the form of an inverted letter M (Husár – Oța 2024: 664, fig. 4.1c-1d). The surface of the crossguard probably also bears traces of incrustation with some non-ferrous metal containing zinc (Husár – Oța 2024: 665). The lower part of the blade probably bears traces of the wooden construction of the scabbard (Gáll 2013a: 317; Husár – Oța 2024: 664). Due to the absence of a pommel, typological classification is practically impossible, which was also indicated by Kurt Horedt (Horedt 1968: 422). Erwin Gáll classified the sword under Geibig’s combination type 11 based on the lenticular shape of the crossguard (Gáll 2013a: 317). M. Husár and S. Oța also based themselves on Geibig’s combination typology. According to them, the blade can be compared to types 2 or 3, with a dating to the period of approx. 750–950 and 780–980 (Husár – Oța 2024: 665). According to them, the crossguard may belong to combination type 6 with a dating between 790–890 or combination type 11, where the dating is given for the period from 900 to 950 (Husár – Oța 2024: 665-666). At the same time, the researchers point out some lenticular shapes of the crossguards according to Petersen’s classification – special type 1, E, H/I, K, O-3, U and V (Husár – Oța 2024: 666). Personally, I think that type E can be definitely ruled out, since the crossguard does not bear any traces of pit decoration. The remaining types, due to the absence of a pommel and the shape of the crossguard, seem to be relatively suitable variants, especially types H/I, U and V. Kurt Horedt dates the sword to the beginning of the 11th century (Horedt 1952: 329). Erwin Gáll shifts the dating from the second half of the 10th century to the first half of the 11th century based on finds from the Carpathian Basin (Gáll 2013a: 317). In the case of the above-mentioned classification proposed by Martin Husár and Silviu Oța, the dating of this sword can be seen in a relatively wider time horizon, namely from the second half of the 8th century to approximately the first half of the 11th century.
Brăișoru/Morești. Source: Horedt 1968: Fig. 2.
In the case of crossguards, two specimens were recorded, one from the Dăbâca fortress in Cluj county and the other from the Dej location in the same county. The oval object that was found during archaeological excavations in the 1960s at the site of the former fortress, above the village of Dăbâca (Hungarian: Doboka), was identified as the crossguard of a double-edged sword and was discovered in area no. IV, on the northwest side, at the place where the above-ground building stood – S1/IV/1965 (Pascu, Rusu, etc. 1968: 178; Gáll 2013c: 211). Two pairs of gilded spurs, a fragment of green glazed pottery, a fragment of a cross and a pocket knife were also found together with the “crossguard”. The object was analogically compared with finds of swords from the territory of Croatia and Great Moravia, dating to the 9th century and typologically classified as Petersen’s type X (Pascu, Rusu, etc. 1968: 178, note 60). However, Erwin Gáll states that it is actually fire striker, which was incorrectly registered as a Petersen type X sword crossguard based on a 1968 article (Gáll 2013b: 182; 2013c: 211, note 48). At the same time, he adds that objects from the investigated object (S1/IV/1965) may have an unclear origin and it is not so well known what exactly belonged to the investigated object of the above-ground structure, since the original documentation of the finds was not processed in detail and also mentions two fire strikers with presumed dating up to the 12th century (Gáll 2013c: 211). Due to the fact that the dimensions of the object are not available in the literature, from the published redrawing (Pascu et al. 1968: Fig. 5. 7) and the photograph (Gáll 2013c: 232, plate 6), it can be concluded that the mentioned object could belong to double-sided oval fire strikers, which are known from various parts of Europe, such as find from Trondheim in Norway.
Fire striker from the Dăbâca fortress. Source: Pascu et al. 1968: Fig. 5. 7.
Fire striker from the Dăbâca fortress. Source: Gáll 2013: 232, plate 6.
The contextless find of the crossguard from the vicinity of the town of Dej (Hungarian: Dés) in Cluj County is said to date from 1904. In the same year, it was donated to the Transylvanian National Museum. The surface of the guard is covered with silver, on one and the other side there are clear traces of decoration with silver wire placed vertically and horizontally, but a significant part of them has fallen out (Hampel 1907: 222; Gáll 2013a: 98). As a result, it is practically impossible to reconstruct the pattern that decorated the guard. As part of the typological classification, the object under discussion can be assumed to belong to Petersen’s type S/Geibig’s combination type 10 (Gáll 2013a: 98), although it shows more elements identical to type R (personal consultation with Tomáš Vlasatý). The guards of the R types are oval when viewed from above and the ends widen when viewed from the profile, the ends being rounded (Moilanen 2015: 251). Usually, the oldest type S swords are dated to the first half of the 10th century, the youngest to the beginning of the 11th century (Hergessel – Snítilý 2020: 38-40), with types R, the dating can be shifted to the first half of the 10th century (Androshchuk 2014: 75). Longer use is also considered, in the timespan of 900 – 1010 (Moilanen 2015: 251). In the case of the guard from Dej, the dating is estimated at the second half of the 10th to the beginning of the 11th century (Gáll 2013a: 98). Similar analogies can also be traced in the Scandinavian environment, for example in an unknown locality from Hedermark in Norway or in Finland, in Hämeenlinna – KM 27141:1 (Moilanen 2018: 120). One such guard is also recorded among the finds from Haithabu (Geibig 1991: 371, Taf. 161. 5 – 7, Cat.-Nr. 304). R type swords were also found in other parts of Europe, such as France, the British Isles, Poland and Hungary (Moilanen 2015: 252).
Among the finds of swords that have been found with the entire hilt within Transylvania can be included specimens from the following locations: Biharia, Cheglevici, Deva, Orșova, Vetiș and Kovin.
The sword that is in the collections of the Muzeul Țării Crișurilor museum, Oradea under inv. no. 2833 was supposed to come from the site of the former fortress of Biharia (Hungarian: Bihar) near the village of the same name, 14 km north of the city of Oradea, in the county of Bihor (Horedt 1968: 422; Gáll 2013: 60). According to K. Horedt, this is a grave find and it should have been discovered before 1862, allegedly together with an iron stirrup and a fragment of another stirrup and an unidentifiable vessel that was supposed to be lost (Horedt 1968: 422). However, only the sword was registered in the museum (Gáll 2013: 60). The object itself consists of two parts, namely the hilt, which consists of an incomplete semicircular pommel, a tang, a short and straight crossguard and a fragment of the blade, including a separated fragment of the blade, probably a tip (Gáll 2013a: 17. table. 1). Kurt Horedt assigned this sword to Petersen’s type S, but based on the redrawing of the sword, we cannot agree with that. When viewed from the front, the pommel, as mentioned above, has a semi-circular shape and its lower side is straight, in profile it narrows from the bottom towards the top, thus taking on the shape of a triangle. Erwin Gáll classified the sword under Petersen’s type X, respectively under Geibig’s combination type 12, variant I (Gáll 2013a: 60). However, based on Geibig’s typology, pommels of variant I are straight and rounded at the top when viewed in profile, and in the case of pommels of variant II, it can be seen that their profile side has a more triangular shape (Geibig 1991: 57, Abb. 13). In this case, the crossguard of the presented sword shows elements of Geibig’s combination type 12, var. I, which means that the crossguard is short and straight, and in the second variant it is possible to notice how they lengthen significantly (Geibig 1991: 57, Abb. 13). If the sword from the Biharia fortress was drawn correctly, and the pommel is not significantly damaged, we can classify its hilt as follows: Geibig’s combination type 12, pommel – variant II, crossguard – variant I. Erwin Gáll dates the sword between the second half of the 10th and beginning of the 11th century (Gáll 2013a: 60). However, it is not excluded that the pommel of the sword can also be two-part, and thus we could classify it under Petersen’s type N. Swords of type N are similar to type X, but differ in the division of the pommel, thus pommel cap being riveted to the upper guard (Androshchuk 2014: 70).
Another sword that has been preserved in its entirety comes from the locality of Cheglevici (Hungarian: Keglevichháza), in Timiș county (Gáll 2013a: 111. tábla. 1). The circumstances of the find are unknown, yet it is said to be a grave find (Kovács 1994-1995: 167). All around the edge of the blade there are clear traces of the wooden construction of the scabbard. The crossguard gives the impression that it is straight, the pommel seems to be formed by a straight upper guard and a pommel cap, which when viewed from the front appears to be divided into three parts. Within the typology, according to Erwin Gáll, this sword can be assigned to Geibig’s combination type 10 / Petersen S (Gáll 2013a: 241). However, from the available redrawing of the object, it is rather difficult to classify the sword more precisely typologically, since it has not been restored and at the same time its condition is currently unknown (Gáll 2013a: 241). However, upon closer inspection of the presented sword, the typological classification under Geibig’s combination type 10 / Petersen S appears to be rather imprecise, as the crossguard and pommel do not show the characteristic features of this type. The dating is given to the end of the 10th to the beginning of the 11th century (Gáll 2013a: 241).
In 1975, in the Micro 15 neighborhood in the town of Deva (Hunedoara county), an Old Hungarian burial ground was discovered during the installation of a gas pipeline near school no. 6, between Aleea Streiului and Bejan streets (Gáll 2013a: 94). Grave no. 3 contained skeletal remains, probably of a man, together with a sword with a badly corroded blade, located in the upper part next to the skeleton (Gáll 2013a: 95). In addition to the skeleton and the sword, there were other objects in the grave: stirrups, fire striker with a stone, whetstone, bronze bracelet with pointed ends, earring, arrowheads (Gáll 2013a: 20. tábla. 1 – 16). The grave was marked as equestrian (Pinter 1992-1994: 235, 239). A double-edged sword consists of a blade, a long straight crossguard, a handle tang and a lenticular pommel in the shape of a so-called “Brazil nut” (Pinter 2007: 200, Planșa 34: b). Pinter classified the sword under Petersen’s type X (Pinter 1992-1994: 237). Smaller versions of the “Brazil nut” pommels can sometimes be confused with Petersen’s type X, but in general the underside of the lenticular pommels curve upwards and are longer than in the type X (Moilanen 2015: 269). Based on its shape, the sword from the equestrian grave from Deva can clearly be classified under Geibig’s combination type 16, variant I (Geibig 1991: 71, Abb. 17). Swords of this type are widespread throughout Europe, from Scandinavia to the Baltics to Russia, and thanks to their simple shape, they could have been made in several places (Moilanen 2015: 269). We can also trace the closest analogies in the territory of the Czech Republic, e.g. Hoštice in Kroměříž district (Košta – Hošek – Žákovský 2019: 108, ID No 61) or Terezín – Počaply near Terezín, Litoměřice district (Košta – Hošek – Žákovský 2019: 256-257, ID No 241). The dating of swords with a “Brazil nut” pommel has a relatively long time span, it is placed between the years 950 and 1250 (Moilanen 2015: 269). Based on the grave inventory, the sword from Deva is classified between the second half of the 10th and the beginning of the 11th century (Gáll 2013a: 96).
Objects from equestrian grave no. 3. from the Deva – Micro 15 location.
Source: Gáll 2013a: 20. tábla.
Another example that has been preserved almost entirely is the sword from Kovin (Serbian: Ковин, Romanian: Cuvin, Hungarian: Kevevára), stored in the National Museum of Banat, in the city of Timișoara. The sword was originally found at the Temesch – Cubin site, Pancsova district, Torontál county, today in Serbia (Pinter 2007: 73, 199, Planșa 33: c). No further information regarding the find is available. The only thing that is certain is that, based on the territorial administrative division, the object must have been found before 1918. The sword consists of a blade with a damaged edge and a missing tip, the crossguard is long and slightly bent towards the blade. There is a three-lobed pommel that is curved as well and is made of a single piece of material, with a line imitating two-part composition, a rather badly visible in its decoration (Vinski 1983: 25, 12 – Tab. III, 3). The blade is said to be patternwelded (Vinski 1983: 25). Karl Z. Pinter assigned the sword between Petersen’s types L and X, or as a special type L-X, dated to the beginning of the 10th century, and sees its origin in the Viking or Varangian environment (Pinter 2007: 75). Zdenko Vinski and László Kovács classify the sword as Petersen’s type Z (Vinski 1983: 25; Kovács 1994-1995: 167). Z. Vinski estimates the dating of the sword to the 11th century, considering it to be an isolated specimen within the Danube region and South-Eastern Europe (Vinski 1983: 27). Fedir Androshchuk suggests that Petersen’s criteria for the Z type are not clear enough, according to him the swords are characterized by a three-lobed pommel with a thicker and higher central lobe, and he himself notes that the characteristic feature is rather the curvature of the guards and that there is a considerable number of variants within the type (Androshchuk 2014: 84). The sword from Kovin, as well as the Bulgarian example from around the village of Gradešnica in the Vraca region, are the only two known Z type swords in the Balkans. However, the specimen from Kovin is characterized by a longer and less curved crossguard than is usual for most of these types. Relatively similar types to the discussed sword can be found in England (a sword fished from the Thames River from London) or in Norway (Bøen Nordre).
In the site of Orșova (Hungarian: Orsova) in Mehedinți County, a relatively well-preserved sword with a long crossguard, a short tang, a lenticular pommel and partially damaged blade that narrows significantly towards the tip was found (Kovács 1994-1995: 170, 11. kép – Abb. 11, 5). According to L. Kovács, there should be an unspecified brass mark in the fuller on both sides of the blade (Kovács 1994-1995: 172). The sword was allegedly fished out of the waters of the Danube (Madgearu 2019: 102) and today it should be stored in the Hungarian National Museum (Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum) under inv. number 53.119 (Kovács 1994-1995: 172). Alexandru Madgearu dates it to the 10th century (Madgearu 2019: 102), Silviu Oța moves the dating to the 11th century (Oța 2008: 132) and L. Kovács to the end of the 11th century (Kovács 1994-1995: 172). Within the typological classification, which is not mentioned in the literature, we can assume belonging to Geibig’s combination type 16, variant I, or Oakeshott’s type A (Geibig 1991: 71, Abb. 17; Oakeshott 1991: 10).
The last sword mentioned here from the territory of Transylvania is a find from the village of Vetiș (Gungarian: Vetés) in the county of Satu Mare, in the northwest of Romania. It was discovered in 1978 during work on planting an orchard (Radosav – Lazin 1986-1987: 159). The sword, which consists of a blade, a rectangular crossguard, a tang and a semicircular pommel, was supposed to be in good condition at the time of its publication, with the exception of the crossguard, which was missing a roughly 16 mm section in its center, where it was fixed to the blade and the tang. The blade was significantly corroded as well (Radosav – Lazin 1986-1987: 159). Doru Radosav and Gheorghe Lazin identified the sword as “Romanesque” falling under type C according to the typology of Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer (Radosav – Lazin 1986-1987: 161) and dating to the second part of the first half of the 13th century, or shortly after its half, arguing that the first written mention of the Vetiș location dates from 1238 and disturbed dwellings with remains of ceramics dated between the 13th and 14th centuries were also found at the site of the discovery of the sword (Radosav – Lazin 1986-1987: 161). Karl Z. Pinter proposed a typological classification under Petersen’s type X dating to the second half of the 10th century (Pinter 2007: 79). Erwin Gáll based on the characteristics of the sword, such as the shape of the crossguard, pommel, length, width of the blade and fuller, and weight placed this sword under Geibig’s combined type 12, variant II, dating to the end of the 11th century (Geibig 1991: 57, Abb. 13.; Pinter 2007: 200, Planșa 34:a; Gáll 2013a: 542-543).
The Transylvanian finds of swords include four more specimens about which nothing is known today. According to Radu R. Heitel, there should be a sword from Cluj-Napoca, a copy of which is said to be in the military museum in Bucharest. Apart from the fact that it is a Petersen type Y sword, dated to the late 10th to early 11th century, nothing more is known about it (Heitel 1994-1995: 438). Another one allegedly comes from Jimbolia (Hungarian: Zsombolia, Timiș county) – supposedly a western-type sword from the 10th century, but it could not be identified in any museum (Kovács 1994-1995: 179; Gáll 2013: 556, 741). Another one comes from Săcalăz (Hungarian: Szakálháza, Timiș county) – a double-edged sword with the remains of a scabbard was supposed to be a find from an equestrian grave. The identification as well as the age of the object cannot be determined today, as it has been lost (Kovács 1994-1995: 174). The last one was found in Tomnatec (Hungarian: Tomnatek, Alba or Hunedoara County) – this is another sword that is said to have been lost, no further information is available (Heitel 1994-1995: 430, note 138). I could not find information about the exact location of Tomnatec. Within the administrative division of Romanian municipalities, there are two localities named Tomnatec. One is located in the county of Alba and is a village that, together with other 34 villages, forms the municipality of Bistra. The second village called Tomnatec is located in Hunedoara county and together with eight other villages form the municipality of Bulzeștii de Sus. It is not so clear in which county the sword was discovered.
In the historical region of Dobruja (Romanian: Dobrogea, Bulgarian: Добруджа), which is located between Romania and Bulgaria, two fragments of swords were found in unknown places (which I have designated below in the text and catalog as Dobruja I and Dobruja II), further it is one a complete sword from the Albești site and a sword pommel cap from the island of Păcuiul lui Soare.
The best-preserved sword of all three Dobruja specimens is a stray find from the Albești site in Constanța county (Șova 2020: 163). The double-edged sword has been preserved with a crossguard, a handle and a two-part pommel. The hilt elements bear traces of decoration. On one side of the blade there is probably the inscription +ULFBERHT (Yotov 2011: 39) and on the other side a geometric mark, which could be schematically indicated approximately as follows: III IXXXI III (Yotov 2011: 45, Fig. 5: c-d) . According to Petersen’s classification, it corresponds to type V. These types are characterized by a round pommel cap, which appears narrow and pointed in cross-section. Their height varies between 3-4 cm. The pommel cap is about the same thickness as the upper guard. The cross-section of both guards are narrow, tapering towards the ends, and like the pommel cap, they are usually decorated with silver and bronze wires with a stepped motif (Petersen 1919: 154-155). The dating is given to the 10th century, and in the case of the Balkans, it shifts from the second half of the 10th to the beginning of the 11th century (Yotov 2011: 39; Șova 2020: 163). According to Jan Petersen, the V swords are dated to 900 – 950, while Mikko Moilanen assumes their use for the period 925 – 1000, possibly until 1050 (Moilanen 2015: 255). The closest analogy to the Romanian specimen is a sword found in the Sliven area in Bulgaria, identified as type H (Zlatkov 2014: 139), but showing clear features of type V (Viskupič 2023). In addition to these two rare finds, V type swords are known primarily from Scandinavia, Ireland, Germany, the territory of the former Kyivan Rus’, the Baltics, and France (Moilanen 2015: 255).
The sword hilt from Albești. Source: Yotov 2011: 45, Fig. 5: b.
Part of the sword blade from Albești with geometric mark III IXXXI III.
Source: Yotov 2011: 45, Fig. 5: c.
Dobruja I – A double-edged sword with a relatively short crossguard, a tang and a blade fragment with a missing tip. The pommel was also not preserved. The fuller is faintly visible, but appears to be wide. It is a stray find (Șova 2020: 163). According to Valery Yotov, it should be Petersen type E or W (Yotov 2011: 40). We can definitely rule out both variants proposed by Yotov, for the following reasons: all the hilt components of the type W were made out of copper alloy (Vlasatý 2018), and in the case of type E, both hilt parts bear decoration in the form of circular or oval pits, sometimes accompanied with inlay of silver and/or copper wire (Androshchuk 2014: 52-53; Moilanen 2015: 244). If we focus on the short crossguard and the wide blade, the side arms of which are located just below the edges of the crossguard, the question arises as to whether we are dealing with a fragment of a Petersen type B sword, as relatively similar finds come from the Moravian site of Mikulčice – Valy (Košta – Hošek – Žákovský 2019: 169-170, ID No 134) and from Turku in Finland – KM 6482 (Moilanen 2015: 379). Both finds are characterized by a wide blade, but with the difference that both the Mikulčice and the Finnish specimen have a significantly higher crossguard than this Romanian example, as is common with this type (Androshchuk 2014: 42). However, due to the absence of the pommel, the typological classification is complicated. The dating is estimated at the end of the 9th to the beginning of the 10th century (Șova 2020: 163). An atypical element on this sword is the two holes in the tang, so it is not excluded that the time horizon may be older, namely the 8th-9th century (personal consultation with Tomáš Vlasatý). At the same time, I would like to draw attention to the previously mentioned sword from the Sliven area, whose tang also bears two holes located below each other, the function of which must certainly have been connected with the grip design (Viskupič 2023).
Dobruja II – a double-edged sword has been preserved with a fragment of the blade, a thin straight crossguard, a long tang and a semicircular pommel in the shape of the letter “D”. It is a stray find from an unknown place in the north of Dobruja (Șova 2020: 163). The sword is dated from the second half of the 10th century to the beginning of the 11th century (Yotov 2011: 40; Șova 2020: 163). According to Petersen’s classification, it can correspond to type X (Petersen 1919: 158-167, Yotov 2011: 40), respectively to Geibig’s combination type 12, variant I (Geibig 1991: 57, Abb. 13).
The find of a sword pommel cap, which was found at the site of a former fortress on the island of Păcuiul lui Soare in the county of Constanța, also comes from Dobruja (Popa 1984: 425, 429 – abb. 3). The pommel cap corresponds to a type close to the Petersen type R/S. I devoted a separate article to this object (Viskupič 2022).
Păcuiul lui Soare, redrawing of the pommel cap. Source: Popa 1984: 429, Abb. 3.
From the historical region of Moldavia (Romanian: Moldova) in the east of Romania, one sword comes from the site of Pașcani in Iași County. Information on the circumstances of the find, parameters or condition of the sword is not available. There is only a redrawing of it available in the work of Victor Spinei (Spinei 2009: fig. 9/13). The sword consists of a fragment of a blade with a straight and short crossguard and a tang with a two-part pommel consisting of an upper guard and a three-lobed pommel cap. From the available drawing, it is not certain whether the crossguard and the pommel have decoration. Erwin Gáll classifies the sword with Petersen’s type S, or Geibig’s combined type 11 (Gáll 2015: 319). Victor Tentiuc attributes it to the Petersen U type and dates it to the second half of the 10th century (Tentiuc – Munteanu 2022: 37). It is not excluded that it could also be a Petersen V type, or some kind of hybrid of this type (personal consultation with Tomáš Vlasatý). We can definitely rule out the type S suggested by Erwin Gáll. Considering that no further information is available about the sword and there is only a redrawing of it, in the typological classification we rather lean towards its second variant, which is Geibig’s combined type 11, which corresponds to Petersen’s types U and V (Geibig 1991: 54, 55 – Fig. 12). At this point, it is also worth mentioning that 8 finds of axeheads from the Romanian part of Moldova come from the period we are monitoring; they are Kirpičnikov’s type III axes from the locations of Dulcești (Neamț County), Liteni (Suceava County), Giurcani (Vaslui County ), Pleșești (Suceava county) and Prăjești (Bacău county) (Gáll 2015: 330 – Pl. 6. 3., 331 – Pl. 7. 2-3., 332 – Pl. 8. 2-3; Kirpičnikov 1966: 30, Рис. 6) and Kirpičnikov’s type IV from the sites of Fedești (Vaslui county), Jariștea (Vrancea county) and Siliștea Nouă (Suceava county) (Gáll 2015: 330 – Pl. 6.4, 331 – Pl. 7. 1., 332 – Pl. 8. 5; Kirpičnikov 1966: 30, Рис. 6).
Scabbard chapes
Only two specimens of sword scabbard chapes are known from the territory of Romania. One of them is said to come from Alba Iulia in Transylvania and the other from the vicinity of Bârlad.
Alba Iulia, Alba county – A bronze scabbard chape with a smooth body and a relief motif of an oriental palmette on the underside entered the collections of the Transylvanian National Museum in Cluj-Napoca in 1943 (Roska 1944: 102; Gáll 2013a: 199). Márton Roska, who described the object, indicated that the chape was considerably worn and it is not excluded that it was in the grave (Gáll 2013: 199), which cannot be verified. The context of the find is unknown (Roska 1944: 102). The closest analogies of this design were found in Belarus (Staraya Belitsa), Russia (Bulgar), and at a burial site in the Hungarian site of Beszterec (Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg county), where the chape was found in a grave together with a Petersen type S sword (Kainov – Makušnikov 2022: 165, 168 – Рис. 3. 1, 3). Gali F. Korzuchina assigned this chape type to group V, which includes a relatively wide range of chapes with a smooth body, a relief decoration of a plant ornament in the lower part and an upper decoration in the form of a zoomorphic or ornithomorphic head with several centers of production – Danube Region, East Prussia (Kainov – Makušnikov 2022: 163). On the basis of the specimen from the site of Beszterec and from Bulgar, it can be concluded that the center of the upper part of the chape from Alba Iulia was decorated with stylized bird heads shown in profile (Paulsen 1953: 66, Abb. 79). Korzuchina estimated the dating of this group at the end of the 10th to the beginning of the 11th century (Kainov – Makušnikov 2022: 163). Peter Paulsen classified the chape from Beszterec under the type of oriental palmette (orientalische palmette) and in the so-called of the Varangian-Baltic group (Eine warägisch-baltische Gruppe) (Paulsen 1953: 66, Abb. 78-79, 67-84). Vytautas Kazakevičius puts Lithuanian finds of Paulsen’s type of oriental palmette and the so-called Baltic-East Prussian group (Eine baltisch-ostpreußische Gruppe) into his group III and subgroup III b with the production place in the south of the Slavic territories of Russia, in Hungary or even in Bulgaria (Kazakevičius 1992: 99-100). It should be noted, however, that within the Lithuanian finds, not a single specimen matches the chape from Alba Iulia or its analogies from Belarus, Hungary and Russia in terms of the decoration of the upper and lower sides. Due to the fact that it is a diverse group of products, which differ from each other primarily in decoration, I decided to classify them typologically under Paulsen’s type of oriental palmette, without further classifying them into the subgroups of this type. The dating of the grave from Beszterec is placed to the end of the 10th to the beginning of the 11th century, the same dating is proposed by S. Kainov and O. Makušnikov for the specimen from the site of Staraya Belitsa (Kainov – Makušnikov 2022: 165). Erwin Gáll puts the dating of the chape from Alba Iulia to the turn of the 10th – 11th century (Gáll 2013a: 199).
The scabbard chapes from Alba Iulia (2) with analogies from the sites of Beszterec (1) and from Bulgar (3).
Source: Kainov – Makušnikov 2022: 169.
Bârlad – the context of the object is unknown. It is only known that it was discovered somewhere around the town of Bârlad (Vaslui county), which is located in the east of Romania in historical region of Moldavia (Spinei 1973: 277). According to Ion Tentiuc, the chape is not located in the Bârlad town museum, and it is even possible that Victor Spinei examined it in a private collection when he was conducting archaeological research in the area, and it was also allegedly not drawn or photographed (personal communication with Ion Tentiuc). From the available literature, we only know that the chape is dated to the period between the 11th and 12th centuries (Spinei 1973: 277). Regarding the typological classification, it should be type VII according to Korzuchina (Spinei 1973: 277, note 317; Korzuchina 1950: 67-68, Tab. 1), with analogies from Livonia and Couronia (Spinei 1973: 277, note 317; Arne 1913: 387, 34-37). In Kazakevičius’ typology, these chape belong to type V, which he divides into two groups – Va and Vb (Kazakevičius 1992: 102-106, Fig. 9-10). Artūrs Tomsons classified the Latvian finds under type V with division into groups 1, 2 and 3 (Tomsons 2012: 211-219, 118. att., 119. att., 120., 121., 122., 123. att.). They are considered to be the product of masters from the Baltic region, as their greatest concentration is found in the entire Baltic Sea region, especially in Courland and in western Lithuania (Arne 1913: 387; Tomsons 2012: 211). The dating is given from the 11th to the 12th century according to T. J. Arne (Arne 1913: 388), or from the 11th to the 13th century (Tomsons 2012: 211).
The Baltic analogies of the chape from Bârlad, types Korzuchina VII and Kazakevičius V.
Source: Arne 1913: 387.
Supplement to the scabbard chapes from the territory of Romania
It is certainly worth mentioning the fact that a scabbard chape was found in the neighbouring Republic of Moldova, which typologically and chronologically falls within the criteria defined by us, so it would be appropriate to provide some basic information about this object at this point. The find of the openwork chape comes from the vicinity of Mîrzoaia (Iurceni village, Nisporeni district) in the central part of the Prut-Dniester region (Tentiuc – Munteanu 2022: 28), approximately 20 km from the Prut river, which flows between Romania and the Republic of Moldova. The chape is a stray find and was made of an alloy of copper and lead (Tentiuc – Munteanu 2022: 29). Its condition is relatively good, but it shows signs of wear. The upper part of the chape is broken off and just below this part, there are holes of 0.3 cm on both sides, 1.1 cm apart. From the front view, the tip narrows from top to bottom and ends with an oval tip. The dimensions of the preserved object are as follows: height – 5.5 cm; maximum width at the opening – 4.1 cm; thickness – 0.7 cm; the thickness of the sheet from which the chape is made – 0.1 cm (Tentiuc – Munteanu 2022: 29). The surface is decorated with a motif that is almost identical on both parts, but the object was made by using two different matrices (Tentiuc – Munteanu 2022: 29, note 9). The motif has a zoomorphic character and its central part is formed by the long serpent-like coiled body of a four-legged animal in the form of a wide letter “S”, between which various bands are woven, and in the right part there is a distinct stylized animal paw, which seems to grasp the contours of the chape frame (Tentiuc – Munteanu 2022: 29, Fig. 3. 1-2). As part of the typological classification, we can assign the chape to the Paulsen’s type of the four-legged beast (germanische Vierfüßlermotiv) and to the Scandinavian group of the 10th century (Eine skandivanische Gruppe des 10. Jahrhunderts), with the fact that the Scandinavian group is dated to the first half of the 10th century (Paulsen 1953: 35-42). According to Androshchuk, the ornament of this group is decorated in the artistic style of Jellinge and he calls it type 6a (Androshchuk 2014: 171), but it is not excluded that the chape of this type should be depictions in the artistic style of Mammen, the spread of which in Scandinavia is given at the second half of the 10th century (Kainov 2009: 96-97). Ion Tentiuc and Octavian Munteanu (Tentiuc – Munteanu 2022: 32) also included the chape from Mîrzoaia in the same typological classification; they date its use to the second half of the 10th century, just like the sword from Pașcani (Tentiuc – Munteanu 2022: 37). The closest analogues to this specimen can be found in the localities of Danilovka, Linkunen, Listvin, Dombrádról, Gnëzdovo and Žąsinas (Tentiuc – Munteanu 2022: Fig. 5. 1-6).
The scabbard chape from the site of Mîrzoaia, Republic of Moldova.
Source: Tentiuc – Munteanu 2022: Fig. 3. 1-2.
Summary
Out of the total number of 27 swords and their construction elements including the chapes from the territory of Romania traced in the literature, only 17 specimens meet the chronological and typological criteria, corresponding to the classification according to Jan Petersen and/or Alfred Geibig (Aiud, Alba Iulia – blade and chape, Albești, Biharia, Brăișoru, Cheglevici, Dej, Deva, Dobruja I and II, Gâmbaș, Kovin, Orșova, Pașcani, Păcuiul lui Soare, Vetiș). These objects can be roughly assigned to the defined time horizon of the 8th to 11th centuries, as well as to the mentioned typological classification. However, the situation is complicated by the fact that most of the finds lack find circumstances. Until this day, research has focused on vague describing the objects and searching their analogies from other areas, while there is no metallographic examination. Five more specimens are included in the monitored period based on their description – Bârlad, Cluj – Napoca, Jimbolia, Săcalăz, Tomnatec. However, it should be noted that the status of these objects is currently unknown and they have not been properly published. The last five specimens (Arad – Pădurea Ceala, Dăbâca, Curtuiușeni, Ernei, Sasca Montană) can certainly be excluded from the monitored period and typology: in one case there are two different pieces of information in the literature regarding the classification of the object as such, so it is not clear, whether the blade was part of a sword or a saber, in the second case there was a misclassification of the object as a crossguard of a sword but in fact it is fire striker, in the third case it cannot be ruled out that it belongs to the blade of a scramaseax of an older date, and in the last two cases we have swords whose classification definitely belongs to the time horizon before the year 700.
The inclusion of the above analyzed objects from the territory of Transylvania (including the historical regions of Banat, Crișana and Maramureș) on the basis of their unclear find context and fragmentary state in a more precise time horizon is practically impossible. Erwin Gáll assumes that double-edged swords of the western type did not occur in this territory before the second half of the 10th century (Gáll 2013: 743). An exception may be the blade from Alba Iulia that has a relatively broader time classification based on the patternwelded fuller and its decoration, i.e. 8th – 10th century. The dating of swords from Biharia, Orșova and Vetiș can also be problematic. If the information about the grave context of the Biharia sword is true and indeed ceramics and the remains of a horse burial were found in the grave that was destroyed, we can determine its dating to the 10th century (Gáll 2013: 743). The dating of swords from Orșova and Vetiș are complicated given the timeframe of Geibig’s combination types 12 and 16 that exceed two centuries (Gáll 2013: 743). The occurrence of a single sword from Romanian Moldavia, as well as swords from the Romanian part of Dobrudja, are dated to the same time horizon. These militaria, including those from the Bulgarian side of the region, are traditionally attributed to the military campaign of Prince Svyatoslav of Kyivan Rus’ and his retinue from 968 – 971 against the Bulgarians, or are associated with the presence of members of the so-called the Varangian guard of the Byzantine emperors (Yotov 2016: 252) or with the Pechenegs, who had direct business or military contacts with Kyivan Rus’ (Yotov 2011: 40). As the circumstances of the discovery are unclear and unknown in case of these swords, their dating is roughly estimated to the second half of the 10th to the beginning of the 11th century (Yotov 2016: 252). In the case of one sword from an unknown location in the north of Dobruja (labeled as Dobruja I in the text and catalog), the dating could be assumed in a broader sense between the 8th century and the beginning of the 10th century. The presence of military units or merchants coming from the north, respectively from Kyivan Rus’, or members of the Varangian Guard on the lower Danube can also be evidenced by the finds of specific wooden house constructions from the Romanian village of Nufăru (on the banks of the Sfântu Gheorghe branch of the Danube in Tulcea county), whose parallels from 10th and 11th centuries are known from Novgorod or Staraya Ladoga (Yotov 2016: 252).
Catalog
Swords and scabbard chapes are arranged in alphabetical order in the catalog presented below.
Swords
Aiud (County Alba)
Storage location: Muzeul de Istorie, Aiud.
Inventory number: 4793
Metric data: Total length – 20.5 cm; width – 4.0 cm–2.3 cm; the fuller is 0.9 cm wide and disappears 12 cm before the end of the blade tip.
Description: Only the tip of the double-edged sword with part of the fuller was preserved.
Dating: Probably the end of the 11th century.
Typological classification: Due to the condition of the object, typological classification is impossible.
Literature: Gáll 2013a: 346.
Aiud. Source: Gáll 2013: 150. tábla. 1.
Alba Iulia (County Alba)
Storage location: Muzeul Național al Unirii Alba Iulia.
Inventory number: 226
Metric data: Total length – 722 mm; blade length – 644 mm; blade width – 50-42 mm; fuller width – 29-24-18 mm; grip length – 58 mm; grip width – 32-19 mm; tang thickness – 2.8-1.6 mm.
Description: The double-edged, corroded blade was preserved with a fragment of the grip. A fuller runs through the middle of the blade, which bears traces of full-surface pattern-welding. On its surface there is a distinct ornament, probably made of twisted pattern-welded panels, which creates a characteristic spike-like motif (or a so-called herringbone motif) in the form of two lines going with the spikes from each other, one line pointing the spikes towards the tang and the other towards the tip of the blade (⋘ ⋙). At a distance of 100 mm from the arms of the blade, there are forged marks from pattern-welded wire on both sides – a spiral and a cross with arms ending in the letter T. The blade of the sword was welded to a pattern-welded core.
Dating: 8th – 10th century.
Typological classification: Due to the condition of the object, typological classification is impossible.
Literature: Pinter 2007: 67-72.
Alba Iulia. Source: Pinter 2007: planșa 33: b.
Albești (County Constanța)
Storage location: Muzeul de Istorie Națională și Arheologie, Constanța.
Inventory number: 20794.
Metric data: Length – 97.5 cm; guard length – 9.9 cm.
Description: The sword has been preserved complete with the double-edged blade, guard, grip and pommel. The pommel of the sword consists of an upper guard and a pommel cap. There are clear traces of decoration on its surface. The upper guard is relatively thick, oval and beveled at both ends. The pommel cap is significantly high, evenly rounded and divided into three parts. The tang of the grip is relatively thick up to a certain length from the guard and narrows significantly towards the pommel. The guard of the sword is oval in shape, about the same thickness as the upper guard, and like both components of the pommel bears traces of decoration. The blade of the sword is relatively straight and tapers only slightly towards the tip. A fuller runs through its center, which is said to bear the inscription +ULFBERHT on one side and the geometric mark III IXXXI III on the other.
Dating: 2nd half of the 10th century to the beginning of the 11th century.
Typological classification: Petersen’s type V.
Literature: Yotov 2011: 39; Șova 2020: 163.
Albești. Source: Yotov 2011: Fig. 5: a-b.
Biharia (County Bihor)
Storage location: Muzeul Țării Crișurilor, Oradea.
Inventory number: 2833. Kurt Horedt states that in 1968 the sword was stored under the inv. number 2400 (Horedt 1968: 422).
Metric data: Total length – 31 cm; grip length with a pommel – 13.3 cm; pommel height – 3.6 cm; pommel width – 7 cm; thickness of the pommel at the bottom – 2.4 cm; thickness of the pommel on top – 0.5 cm; guard length – 12 cm; guard height – 2 cm; guard thickness – 1.8 cm; blade length – 16 cm; blade width – 4.6-4.7 cm.
Description: The sword consists of two fragments – the hilt, which consists of a pommel, a grip, a guard and a fragment of the blade, and to this part of the sword belongs another fragment of the blade, probably a tip. Based on the redrawing of the sword, it is not clear whether the pommel consists of an upper guard and a pommel cap or if it was made from one solid piece of iron. One of the sides appears to be significantly damaged, as well as the upper part. In profile, the shape of the pommel is conical, narrowing significantly towards the top. The lower part of the pommel is probably straight. The tang of the grip widens from the pommel toward the guard. The guard is short, straight, part of it is missing at one end. Both blade fragments are significantly damaged. The fuller is unrecognized.
Dating: 2nd half of the 10th to the beginning of the 11th century.
Typological classification: Geibig’s combination type 12. Pommel – variant II, guard – variant I. Generally thought to be Petersen’s type X. In case the pommel is two-pieced, the sword belongs to Petersen’s type N.
Literature: Horedt 1968: 422; Gáll 2013a: 60.
Biharia. Source: Gáll 2013: 17. tábla. 1.
Brăișoru (County Cluj) / Morești (County Mureș)
Ervin Gáll states that the location of Brăișoru is located in Sălaj county. It actually belongs to Cluj county. From the point of view of administrative division, Brăișoru is a village that belongs to the municipality (comuna) of Sâncraiu.
Storage location: Muzeul Național de Istorie a României, București.
Inventory number: 54484.
Metric data: Total length – 68.3 cm; blade length – 58.4 cm; grip length – 9.8 cm; blade width – 5.8 cm; fuller width – 2.2-2.3 cm; guard length – 9.5 cm; guard height – 3 cm; weight – 763.76 g.
Description: The fragment of a double-edged sword consists of the tang of the handle, the crossguard and the blade with a fuller. The pommel and the tip are absent. The tang is also fragmentary, slightly narrowing from the crossguard towards the broken-off part. The crossguard has an oval shape. When viewed from above, it narrows from the middle towards the ends. From the front view, it is straight, with rounded edges. It does not appear to bear traces of decoration, with the exception of alleged traces of zinc. The blade edge is damaged, on the underside there are clear traces of the wooden construction of the sword scabbard. A fuller runs through the middle of the blade, apparently without pattern-welding. Approximately seven centimeters from the crossguard, on one side there is a symbol made of copper (II ટ III ડ II) and on the other side there are 12 bronze circular ornaments connected to each other by lines, also made of bronze.
Dating: 2nd half of the 10th – 1st half of the 11th century.
Typological classification: Geibig’s combination type 11.
Literature: Gáll 2013a: 317; Husár – Oța 2024: 664.
Brăișoru / Morești. Source: Horedt 1968: Fig. 2.; Husár – Oța 2024: Fig. 3.
Cheglevici (County Timiș)
Storage location: Expoziția Memorială Béla Bártok, Sânnicolau Mare (since 1955).
Inventory number: ?
Metric data: Total length – 97.5 cm; pommel width – 7.2 cm; pommel height – 5.25 cm; grip length – 8.25 cm; tang width – 1.5 – 4.5 cm; guard length – 12.0 cm; guard width – 1.8 cm; blade length – 82.5 cm; blade width – 6.0 cm.
Description: The sword was preserved with a pommel, a tang, a guard and blade. There are clear traces of the wooden construction of the scabbard around the entire perimeter of the blade, which makes it impossible to recognize the fuller and possible pattern-welding or marks. From the available drawing, we can conclude that the bar gives the impression that it is straight and the pommel seems to be formed by a straight upper guard and a pommel cap, which when viewed from the front looks as if it is divided into three parts. The sword is said to have not been restored and its current condition is unknown.
Dating: late 10th to early 11th century.
Typological classification: Considering the information about the condition of the sword, its typological classification is complicated. Geibig’s combination type 10 is mentioned in the literature.
Literature: Gáll 2013a: 241.
Cheglevici. Source: Gáll 2013: 111. tábla. 1.
Dej (County Cluj)
Storage location: Muzeul Național de Istorie a Transilvaniei, Cluj-Napoca.
Inventory number: ?
Metric data: Length – 10.7 cm; width: 2.8 cm; height – 1.5 cm; weight: 188.5 g.
Description: The guard is straight, it widens towards the end on both sides. The sides are rounded. When viewed from above, the guard is oval, in the center on both sides there is an opening for fitting the blade. The surface is covered with silver, on one and the other side there are clear traces of decoration with silver wire placed vertically and horizontally, but a significant part of the wires has fallen out. Therefore, it is practically impossible to reconstruct the pattern that decorated the guard.
Dating: second half of the 10th to the beginning of the 11th century.
Typological classification: Petersen’s type R/S, Geibig’s combination type 10.
Literature: Gáll 2013a: 98.
Dej. Source: Hampel 1907: 222, a-d.
Deva (County Hunedoara)
Storage location: Muzeul Civilizației Dacice și Romane, Deva.
Inventory number: 27.1011.
Metric data: Total length – 892 mm; blade length – 762 mm; blade width – 45 mm (in the past it could be around 50 mm); grip length – 100 mm; width – 24-5 mm; guard length – 162 mm; guard thickness – 11mm; maximum width of the pommel – 85 mm; pommel height – 36 mm; pommel thickness – 29 mm.
Description: The double-edged sword consists of a corroded blade, a straight guard, a grip and a so-called Brazil nut-shaped pommel. Due to corrosion, the fuller is only faintly visible on both sides, but it stretches from the guard to the tip, which has broken off.
Dating: 2nd half of the 10th – beginning of the 11th century.
Typological classification: Geibig’s combination type 16, variant I.
Literature: Pinter 2007: 79-82; Gáll 2013a: 96.
Deva. Source: Pinter 2007: 200, planșa 34: b.
Dobruja I (unknown location in the north)
Storage location: Muzeul de Istorie Națională și Arheologie, Constanța.
Inventory number: 6618.
Metric data: Length – 70.5 cm; guard width – 6.3 cm
Description: The double-edged sword was preserved without the pommel and tip. Its guard is very short, and appears to be straight from the front, the blade is located just below the edges of the guard. It is not clear from the attached photo whether the guard is oval or straight. The tang of the handle tapers towards its end from the guard, and two holes are placed one below the other on its surface. The blade is quite wide, probably with a fuller.
Dating: end of the 9th – start 10th century. It is possible that the sword may be older (8th – 9th century).
Typological classification: Due to the condition of the sword, typological classification is impossible.
Literature: Șova 2020: 163; personal consultation with Tomáš Vlasatý.
Dobruja. Source: Yotov 2011: Fig. 7.
Dobruja II (unknown location in the north)
Storage location: Muzeul de Istorie Națională și Arheologie, Constanța.
Inventory number: 38359
Metric data: Length – 48.2 cm; guard width – 9 cm; pommel width – 4 cm.
Description: A double-edged sword with a blade fragment. The guard is straight, towards the ends it seems to narrow slightly. The tang of the handle is long, ending in a semicircular pommel with a straight underside. The pommel gives the impression that it is made of only one piece of iron. The fuller is faintly visible.
Dating: 2nd half of the 10th century – beginning of the 11th century.
Typological classification: Probably Petersen’s type X / Geibig’s combination Type 12, variant I.
Literature: Șova 2020: 163.
Dobruja. Source: Yotov 2011: Fig. 6.
Gâmbaș (County Alba)
According to Erwin Gáll, this is a grave find, and its discovery should have taken place during archaeological excavations in 1905 (Gáll 2013: 322; personal communication with E. Gáll).
Storage location: Muzeul de Istorie, Aiud.
Inventory number: 3478.
Metric data: Total length – 65.3 cm; blade width – 4.9 – 4.5 – 4.0 cm; fuller width – 1.7-1.3 cm; length of tang fragment – 8.5 cm; width of the tang fragment – 2.5-1.0 cm; weight – 560 g.
Description: A fragment of a double-edged blade with an incomplete hilt tang. The fuller is evident along the entire length of the blade. The guard as well as the pommel have not been preserved.
Dating: No dating.
Typological classification: Without typological classification.
Literature: Gáll 2013a: 322.
Gâmbaș. Source: Gáll 2013: 159. tábla. 1.
Kovin (South Banat district, Vojvodina, Serbia)
Storage location: Muzeul Național al Banatului, Timișoara.
Inventory number: 3203.
Metric data: Total length – 822 mm; blade length – 691 mm (the original length could have been about 10-15 mm longer due to the small part of the missing tip); blade width – 45-47 mm and closer to the preserved part of the tip, it becomes 23 mm; blade thickness – 3.4 -1.3 mm; fuller width – 21-14 mm; grip length – 91 mm; grip width – 31-18 mm; tang thickness: 3.1 mm; guard length – 136 mm; thickness – 18-11.3 mm; maximum pommel thickness – 16 mm; pommel height – 34 mm; pommel width – 69 mm.
Description: The sword consists of a blade with a missing point, it is damaged at the end. A distinct fuller runs through its center, allegedly with traces of pattern-welding. The guard of the sword is long, slightly bent towards the blade. The tang tapers from the guard towards the pommel, and a pommel is placed at its end. It is slightly bent upwards, away from the guard. The pommel consists of an upper guard and a pommel cap made of one piece of material. The pommel cap is three-lobed, the two side lobes are lower and the central one is the highest. The top of the central one is oval when viewed from the front. The grooves separating the upper guard from the pommel cap, including those separating the lobes on the pommel cap, are relatively weakly visible.
Dating: 11th century.
Typological classification: Petersen’s type Z.
Literature: Pinter 2007: 73-75; Vinski 1983: 27.
Kovin. Source: https://mnab.ro/sectia-de-istorie/colectia-de-arme/.
Orșova (County Mehedinți)
Storage location: Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum, Budapest.
Inventory number: 53.119
Metric data: ?
Description: The sword is relatively well preserved. It consists of a significantly long guard, a short tang, on which a Brazil nut-shaped pommel is mounted. The blade is damaged in some places and narrows significantly towards the tip. The fuller passing through the center of the blade is distinct, ending at a relatively greater distance from the tip. In an unspecified part of the fuller, there should be an unspecified brass symbol on both sides of the blade
Dating: end of the 11th century.
Typological classification: Geibig’s combination type 16, variant I., or Oakeshott’s type A.
Literature: Kovács 1994-1995: 172.
Orșova. Source: Kovács 1994-1995: 170, 11. kép – Abb. 11, 5.
Pașcani (County Iași)
Storage location: ?
Inventory number: ?
Metric data: ?
Description: The sword is a fragment of a blade with a straight and short guard, which has an oval shape when viewed from above. The tang tapers only slightly from the guard towards the pommel, which is probably made of two parts – the upper guard and the pommel cap. The pommel cap is divided into three parts by lobes, with the two lateral ones being lower and the central one being the highest. It is possible that the guard and the upper guard are decorated
Dating: second half of the 10th century.
Typological classification: Geibig’s combination type 11.
Literature: Gáll 2015: 319; Tentiuc – Munteanu 2022: 37.
Pașcani. Source: Spinei 2009: Fig. 9. 13.
Păcuiul lui Soare (County Constanța)
Storage location: Muzeul Dunării de Jos, Călărași.
Inventory number: ?
Metric data: Maximum height – 36 mm; length – 73 mm; width at the base – 2 mm; weight – 0.148 kg.
Description: The pommel cap was made of bronze. It consists of three lobes, two smaller lateral ones and one larger, central lobe. The central lobe narrows from top to bottom. It is bordered on both sides by grooves that could probably have been fitted with twisted silver wires creating a herringbone pattern. The central lobe is separated from the two lateral segments by a deep joint. The lower edge of the pommel cap is arched outwards, which means that the upper guard apparently had to be bent in order for the pommel cap to fit into it. At the highest point of the pommel cap, which is on the upper side of the central lobe, there is an opening used to fix the pommel cap to the tang of the hilt. The inside of the pommel cap is hollow. The surface of the pommel cap bears traces of gilding and silvering. All three lobes are decorated with a braid ornament. However, a more precise reconstruction of the pattern is not possible due to its fragmentary nature, as the silver insert has completely fallen out in many places. The pommel cap has a zoomorphic shape, which is further enhanced by two pairs of symmetrically located protrusions on the side walls of the central lobe, which are pointed and act like eyes.
Dating: end of the 10th – beginning of the 11th century.
Typological classification: close to Petersen’s type R/S
Literature: Popa 1984: 425-431; Viskupič 2022.
Păcuiul lui Soare. Source: Popa 1984: 428, Abb. 2.
Vetiș (County Satu Mare)
Storage location: Muzeul județean Satu Mare.
Inventory number: 1199/A.
Metric data: Total length – 90.8 cm; grip length – 8.5 cm; grip width – 2.6-1.6 cm; pommel height – 2.5 cm; pommel width – 4.7 cm; pommel thickness – 2.0; guard length – 12.9 cm; guard width – 1.2-1.3 cm; blade length – 79.1 cm; blade width: up to 3/4 reaches 5.0 cm, the last 2.5 cm towards the tip narrows to 1.9 cm; fuller width – 1.3 cm; weight – 600 g.
Description: The sword consists of a blade, a rectangular guard, a grip and a pommel. The blade is relatively straight, slightly narrows towards the tip, at the same time it has a significantly damaged edge. Approximately 10-20 mm is missing from the tip. The blood groove runs along the entire length of the blade and disappears approximately 85 mm before the tip. The guard is straight, with a rectangular cross-section. Its part between the tang and the blade is damaged. The tang of the handle tapers from the guard towards the pommel. The semicircular pommel with a flat bottom is placed at the end of the tang.
Dating: end of the 11th century.
Typological classification: Geibig’s combination type 12, variant II.
Literature: Pinter 2007: 78-79; Gáll 2013: 542-543.
Vetiș. Source: Gáll 2013: 292. tábla.
Scabbard chapes
Alba Iulia (County Alba)
Storage location: Muzeul Național de Istorie a Transilvaniei, Cluj-Napoca.
Inventory number: 4151.
Metric data: Height in the middle – 9.8 cm; height of the side – 9.1 cm; opening width: 4.9 cm.
Description:
Bronze sword scabbard chape with smooth body. The upper part is damaged, lined with two rows of pearl decoration, between which an interwoven braid-like pattern is incorporated. The oblong, semi-oval object tapers towards the end and is terminated by a cylindrical projection, with a rounded end, which bears signs of wear. The surface is decorated on both sides, in the lower part, with a relief palmette pattern, which ends from the sides in the form of two horizontal lines, stretching towards a cylindrical projection, but continues upwards, as if they end at the top and end and/or pass into the stem of a plant ornament which branches on the sides and upwards towards the top into three parts ending in the shape of a heart-shaped leaf. In the lower part of the ornament, in the places where the lines from the sides pass to the top end, they are divided by the gap of two more vertically placed relief strips, which are shaped in the lower part into a kind of double leaf or trefoil.
Dating: turn of the 10th – 11th centuries.
Typological classification: Paulsen’s type of oriental palmette.
Literature: Ciugudean – Dragotă 2002: 47; Gáll 2013a: 199.
Alba Iulia. Source: Ciugudean, Dragotă 2002: 47, № 103; Gáll 2013: 85. tábla. 1. a-c.
Bârlad (County Vaslui)
Storage location: ?
Inventory number: ?
Metric data: ?
Description: ?
Dating: allegedly 11th – 12th century.
Typological classification: it is said to be type VII according to Korzuchina..
Literature: Spinei 1973: 277; personal communication with Ion Tentiuc.
Geographical distribution of individual sword finds and their fragments.
By clicking on the button below you can download the table summarizing the catalog data.
Acknowledgment
Finally, I would like to thank Tomáš Vlasatý for the help, consultation and provided literature, as well as for the opportunity to publish the article. At the same time, I would also like to express my thanks to Erwin Gáll from the Archaeological Institute in Bucharest, for his help in finding and consulting some examples of swords, as well as for the literature provided, and also my thanks to Ion Tentiuc from the National History Museum in Chisinau for his help in providing information about of the scabbard chape of the sword from the city of Bârlad.
Bibiliography
Androschchuk, Fedir (2014). Viking Swords: Swords and Social aspects of Weaponry in Viking Age Societies, Stockholm.
Arne, Ture Johnsson (1913). Einige Schwert-Ortbänder aus der Wikingerzeit. In: Opuscula Archaeologica Oscari Montelio Septuagenario dicata, Stockholm, 375–390.
Ciugudean, Horia Ion – Dragotă, Aurel (2002). Catalogul expoziţiei „Civilizaţia medievală timpurie din Transilvania: rit şi ritual funerar (sec. IX-XI), Alba Iulia.
Cosma, Călin (2001). Necropole, morminte izolate și descoperiri funerare cu caracter incert din secolele al IX-lea și al X-lea din vestul și nord-vestul României. In: Ephemeris Napocensis, XI.
Cosma, Călin (2002). Vestul şi nord-vestul României în secolele VIII – X d. H. Cluj – Napoca.
Dyrda, Krzysztof – Kontny, Bartosz – Mączyńska, Magdalena (2014). Niezwykłe odkrycie grobu wojownika z wczesnego okresu wędrówek ludów w Juszkowie, gm. Pruszcz Gdański. In: Honoratissimum assensus genus est armis laudare, R. Madyda-Legutko, J. Rodzińska-Nowak (eds.), Kraków, p. 111-134.
Gáll, Erwin (2013a). Az Erdélyi-medence, a Partium és a Bánság 10-11. századi temetői I-II, Szeged.
Gáll, Erwin (2013b). Dăbâca: Necropola din jurul bisericii din grădina lui A. Tămaș. Câteva idei privind evoluția habitatului medieval de la Dăbâca. In: Analele Banatului, S.N., Arheologie – Istorie, XXI, p. 159 – 210.
Gáll, Erwin (2013c). From the fortress of Stephen I (997–1038) to the centre of ‘lord Gelou’. Dăbâca (germ.: Dobeschdorf; hung.: Doboka) in the nationalist myths in the 20th Century. In: Ziridava Studia Archaeologica 27, p. 203 – 310.
Gáll, Erwin (2015). The archaeological research state of the 9/10–11th centuries in Moldova (Romania). Some thoughts on funerary places and stray finds (axes). In: Ziridava Studia Archaeologica, 29, p. 313 – 332.
Geibig, Alfred (1991). Beiträge zur morphologischen Entwicklung des Schwertes im Mittelalter, Neumünster.
Hampel, József (1907). Ujabb tanulmányok a honfoglalási kor emlékeiről, Budapest, p. 222.
Heitel, Radu Robert (1994-1995). Die Archäologie der ersten und zweiten Phase des Eindringens der Ungarn in das innerkarpatische Transilvanien. In: Dacia NS, XXXVIII – XXXIX, p. 389 – 439.
Hergessel, Jan – Snítilý, Pavel (2020). Příběh meče – Výjimečný archeologický nález z Lázní Toušeně, Městské muzeum v Čelákovicích.
Horedt, Kurt (1952). Morești, raionul Târgu Mureș. In: Studii și cercetări de istoria veche, III, p. 328-348.
Horedt, Kurt (1967). Cu privire la locul de descoperire a sabiei de la Morești. In: Acta Mvsei Napocensis IV, p. 509 – 510.
Horedt, Kurt (1968). Interpretări arheologice, 2. Săbiile şi spadele din secolul X în bazinul carpatic. In: Acta Mvsei Napocensis V, p. 419 – 428.
Hošek, Jiří – Košta, Jiří – Žákovský, Petr (2019). Ninth to mid-sixteenth century swords from the Czech Republic in their European context. Part I, Praha – Brno.
Hošek, J. – Košta, J. – Žákovský, P. (2021). Ninth to mid-sixteenth century swords from the Czech Republic in their European context. Part II, Praha – Brno.
Ionescu, Anca Irina (2002). Rumunsko – český slovník, dicționar român – ceh. Leda, Voznice.
Kainov 2009 = Каинов, С. Ю (2009). Наконечники ножен мечей из Гнёздова. In: Acta Militaria Mediaevalia V, Krakow-Sanok, p. 79-110.
Kainov, S. Yu. (2012). Swords from Gnёzdovo. In: Acta Militaria Mediaevalia VIII, p. 7-68.
Kainov – Makušnikov 2022 = Каинов, С. Ю. – Макушников, О. А (2022). Наконечник ножен меча из Старой Белицы (Гомельская обл., Беларусь). Военная археология – Статьи, 7, p. 162 – 170.
Kazakevičius, Vytautas (1992). Sword chapes from Lithuania. In: Acta Universtitatis Stockholmiensis – Studia Baltica Stockholmiensia 9.
Kirpičnikov 1966 = Кирпичников, А. Н (1966). Древнерусское оружие. Вып. 2: Копья, сулицы, боевые топоры, булавы, кистени IX – XIII вв, Москва – Ленинград.
Korzuchina 1950 = Корзухина, Гали Фёдоровна (1950). Из истории древнерусского оружия XI века. In: Советская археология XIII, 1950, 63-94.
Košta, Jiří – Hošek, Jiří (2014). Early Medieval Swords from Mikulčice, Brno: Institute of Archaeology of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.
Košta, Jiří – Hošek, Jiří – Dresler, Petr – Macháček, Jiří – Přichystalová, Renáta (2019). Velkomoravské meče z Pohanska u Břeclavi a okolí – nová revize. In: Památky Archeologické, Vol 110, p. 173 – 235.
Košta, Jiří – Hošek, Jiří (2020). Raně středověký meč ze sbírek Středočeského muzea v Roztokách u Prahy v kontextu vývoje mečů 9. a 10. století. In: Levý Hradec v zrcadle archeologických výzkumů, Praha – Archeologický Ústav AV ČR, p. 340 – 356.
Kovács, László (1994-1995). A Kárpát – Medence Kétélű Kardjai A 10. Század 2. Feléből. In: Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae, Budapest, p. 153 – 189.
Madgearu, Alexandru (2019). Expansiunea Maghiară în Transilvania, Târgoviște.
Moilanen, Mikko (2015). Marks of fire, value and faith : swords with ferrous inlays in Finland during the late Iron Age (ca. 700-1200 AD), Turku.
Oakeshott, Ewart (1991). Records of the Medieval Sword. Boydell Press..
Oța, Silviu (2008). Orizonturi funerare din Banatul istoric (secolele X-XIV). Sibiu.
Paulsen, Peter (1953). Schwertortbänder der Wikingerzeit: ein Beitrag zur Frühgeschichte Osteuropas, Stuttgart.
Pascu Şt., Rusu M., Iambor P., Edroiu N., Gyulai P., Wollmann V., Matei Şt. (1968). Cetatea Dăbîca. In: Acta Mvsei Napocensis V, p. 153 – 202.
Petersen, Jan (1919). De Norske Vikingesverd: En Typologisk-Kronologisk Studie Over Vikingetidens Vaaben. Kristiania.
Pinter, Karl Zeno (1992-1994). Spada medievală din mormântul de călăreț de la Deva, considerații tipologice și cronologice. In: Sargetia XXV, p. 235 – 246.
Pinter, Karl Zeno (2007). Spada și sabia medievală în Transilvania și Banat (secolele IX – XIV), Sibiu.
Pinter, Zeno-Karl – Yotov, Valeri (2021). The Byzantine spatha in the late 5th century and the 6th century AD in the Balkans. In: Swords in Byzantium, p. 61-82, Varna, 2021.
Popa, Radu (1984). Knaufkrone eines wikingerzeitlichen Prachtschwertes von Pacuiul lui Soare. In: Germania, 62, 425 – 431.
Radosav, Doru – Lazin, Gheorghe (1986-1987). Spada – Feudal Timpurie De La Vetiș (Județul Satu Mare). In: Studii Și Comunicări Satu Mare, vol. 7-8, p. 159-162.
Roska, Márton (1944). A gyulafehérvári (Alba Iulia, Alsófehér M.) viking bronzkardtokvég. In: Közl. Nemzeti Múz. Éremtárából 4, 102–108.
Spinei, Victor (1973). Informaţii despre vlahi în izvoarele medievale nordice. II. In: Studii şi Cercetări de Istorie Veche şi Arheologie, TOMUL 1, p. 259-282.
Spinei, Victor (2009). The Romanians and the Turkic Nomads, Leiden – Boston 2009.
Șova, Constantin (2020). Mixobarbaroi from Dobruja in the context of the Byzantine World (6th–13th Century) /Mixobarbarii din Dobrogea în contextul Lumii Bizantine (Secolele VI–XIII), Cluj – Napoca, p. 163.
Tejral, Jaroslav – Zeman, Tomáš (2021). Die Kriegergräber mit Schwertern des sog. Asiatischen Typs im Mitteldonauraum unter Berücksichtung des Neufundes von Horákov (Mähren, CZ). In: Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 72 (2), p. 279–334.
Tentiuc, Ion – Munteanu, Octavian (2022). Conexiunile spaţiului est-carpatic cu lumea vikingă: o nouă buterolă din epoca medievală timpurie descoperită în Moldova, in: Tyragetia – Arheologie, istorie antică. Serie Nouă, vol. XVI [XXXI], nr. 1, p. 25 – 46.
Tomsons, Artūrs (2012). Divasmeņu zobeni Latvijas arheoloģiskajā materiālā 9.-13.gs., Rīga.
Vinski, Zdenko (1983). Razmatranja o poslijekarolinškim mačevima 10. i 11. stolječa u Jugoslaviji, in: Starohrvatska prosvjeta, Vol. III No. 13, p. 7 – 64.
Viskupič, Michal (2022). The sword pommel from Păcuiul lui Soare. In: Projekt Forlǫg : Reenactment and science [online]. [2023-12-26]. Available here: https://sagy.vikingove.cz/en/the-sword-pommel-from-pacuiul-lui-soare/
Viskupič, Michal (2023). Early medieval double-edged swords from the territory of Bulgaria (800 – 1100). In: Project Forlǫg : Reenactment and science [online]. [2023-12-26]. Available here: https://sagy.vikingove.cz/en/early-medieval-double-edged-swords-from-the-territory-of-bulgaria-800-1100/
Vlasatý, Tomáš (2018). Petersen type W sword. In: Project Forlǫg : Reenactment and science [online]. [2018-03-18]. Available here: https://sagy.vikingove.cz/en/petersen-type-w-sword/
Vlassa, Nicolae (1965). Sabia feudală timpurie de la Ernei. In: Acta Mvsei Napocensis, II, p. 669 – 671.
Vlassa, Nicolae (1967). Tot despre locul de descoperire a sabiei „de la Morești“. In: Acta Mvsei Napocensis IV, p. 511 -512.
Yotov, Valeri (2011). Byzantine Time Swords (10th–11th Centuries) in Romania. In: Studia Universitatis Cibiniensis Series Historica VIII Supplementum No.1, p. 35 – 46.
Yotov, Valery (2016). Traces of the Presence of Scandinavian Warriors in the Balkans. In: Androshchuk, F. – Shepard, J. – White, M. (eds.). Byzantium and the Viking world, Uppsala, p. 241-254.
Zlatkov 2014 = Златков, Методи (2014). Меч от Сливен – Sword from Sliven In: Цар Самуил (✝ 1014) в битка за България, Българска академия на науките – Национален археологически институт с музей, София, 2014 – Tsar Samuil (✝ 1014) in battle for Bulgaria, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences – National Institute of Archaeology with Museum, Sofia, Sofia, 2014, 139.
