20 CHAPTER 1
Based on his broad knowledge of Merovingian archaeology, Kiss con-
structed a theory concerning the mass continuity of the Gepids, whereby they
were deported from the Great Hungarian Plain to the western shore of the
Danube during the second half of the 6th century. He used the spatial dis-
tribution of particular artefacts (double-edged swords of Merovingian origin
(spathae), shield bosses, socketed arrowheads, wheel-turned stamped pottery,
bone combs, crescent-shaped hair-rings) known from both the ‘Gepid Period’
(455–567) of the Great Hungarian Plain and the Early Avar period (568–650) of
Eastern Pannonia to make direct ethnic identifications.103 However, Kiss also
examined artefact types of western Merovingian origin, with some types dat-
ing only to the second half of the 6th century, weakening his arguments on
continuity.
Despite this direct ethnic identification being severely criticised,104 Kiss’
research on artefacts of Merovingian origin in the Early Avar period has inspired
further research on this topic.105 The study of western contacts of the Early
Avar period has become more sophisticated in its methods: with the study of
particular artefacts of western origin being complemented by an analysis of
burial rites and reconstructions of costume;106 the study by Tivadar Vida of the
spatha belts and spatha suspension is a good example of this new approach.107
Research on Merovingian elements in Avar archaeological heritage is still a
popular topic, and while the continuity of the Transdanubian population still
awaits verification, the Gepid continuity in the Eastern part of the Carpathian
Basin along the Tisza river in shown by more evidence: in one ‘Gepid male’
burial from Tiszaroff (near Szolnok) a gold solidus of emperor Maurice came
Early Avar Period. The excavation of the Kölked cemetery (1970–1993) directly turned his
attention to ethnic questions of the Avar-age Germanic population (Kiss 1979b, 185–191).
103 The studies of Attila Kiss on the Transdanubian continuity of the Gepids: Kiss 1987b, 203–
278; Kiss 1992, 35–134; Kiss 1999/2000, 359–365; Kiss 1996; Kiss 2001.
104 Csanád Bálint (1995a, 309–310) criticised the methods of Attila Kiss using distribution
maps from two different periods for direct ethnical interpretation.
105 New methodological basis for the research of Avar-age Germanic population: Vida 1999a;
Vida 1999b, 563–574; Vida 1999/2000, 367–377; Vida 2000, 161–165; Vida 2004b, 435–442.
106 Tivadar Vida used mainly classification and distribution in studying the Early Avar Period
pottery, arguing for the continuity of Germanic and Romanised populations in Pannonia
(Vida 1999a). Later he used reconstructions of garments: women’s belt pendant (Vida
1996, 107–112; Vida 1999/2000, 367–377), amulet-capsulae (Vida 1995, 221–295), hair-pins
(Vida 1999b, 563–574), Christian items (Vida 2002, 179–209; Vida 2004a, 435–442) and sim-
ple artefacts of Byzantine origin used by the Romanised population (Vida 2009, 233–259).
107 Vida 2000, 161–175.