Avar-Age Polearms and Edged Weapons. Classification, Typology, Chronology and Technology

(Nandana) #1

18 CHAPTER 1


historical theory had a significant impact on Avar archaeology: István Bóna tried


to identify these two ethnic components of the Avars using archaeological


methods, including a consideration of the history of weapons. Bóna regarded


‘sacrificial finds’ containing reed-shaped spearheads88 and ring-pommel


swords89 as attributes of the Inner Asian group, while swords with P-shaped


suspension loops and sword hilts decorated with ring-pendants as attributes


of the Central Asian (Hephtalite) group.90 The popularity of Bóna’s theory is


marked by the fact that its specific elements are still used as arguments in Avar


archaeology.


Such immigration theories were always popular in Hungarian research on


early medieval history and archaeology as an explanation for cultural and tech-


nological change. The beginning of the Middle Avar period marked consider-


able transformation in material culture, interpreted as a consequence of the


migration of the ‘Onogur Bulgars’. This theory was already used in 19th century


Hungarian scholarship,91 but István Bóna constructed a coherent system based


on archaeological, numismatic and historical92 arguments regarding the ‘immi-


gration in the Middle Avar period’. According to his view, during the last third


of the 7th century (around 670 based on numismatic and historical sources)


a new ethnic group (Onogur Bulgars) settled in the Carpathian Basin causing


significant changes in the material culture of the Avar Qaganate, a basic ele-


ment of which was the sudden appearance of the sabre.93 The idea of Onogur


migration fundamentally affected research on the Avar Age for decades due to


the professional authority and educational activities of István Bóna.


The idea of Onogur migration was eventually severely criticised by Csanád


Bálint, drawing attention to contradictions in the theory.94 The critique


88 Bóna 1971a, 240 (24); Bóna 1980, 47–48; Bóna 1984a, 310.
89 Bóna was influenced by a comparative study by Joachim Werner (1988) and a monograph
written by Akio Ito (1971) on the Korean antiquities of the Silla Period (Bóna 1980, 51).
90 István Bóna (1980, 52) mainly used the Central Asian Sogdian wall paintings of Afrasiab
and Penjikent for distinguishing this group.
91 The idea of the Onogur immigration around 670 was already proposed by Géza Nagy
Géza in the volume ‘The History of Hungarian Nation’ (‘Magyar nemzet története’) writ-
ten for the millenium of the Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian Basin (Nagy 1895,
CCCXLVIII–CCCXLIX).
92 Bóna was influenced by the theory of Samu Szádeczky-Kardoss on the immigration of
Kuber, son of Kuvrat (ruler of Great Bulgaria) (Szádeczky-Kardoss 1968, 84–87).
93 István Bóna (1970) modified his theory several times (Bóna 1982–83; Bóna 1984a, 325–327;
Bóna 2000a, 28).
94 Bálint 2004b, 35–65; Bálint 2008, 29–61.

Free download pdf