Introduction 27
burials with weapons, ornamented belts and horses, studying their distribu-
tion and chronology.148
The concept of ‘ostentatious graves’ in Avar archaeology was elaborated on
by Csanád Bálint who drew attention to the spontaneity of nomadic societies
and the significance of the exceptions in his social analysis.149
Much international (mainly Merovingian) research also studied the social
relations of weaponry, but it had little or no impact on Avar archaeology. In
what follows, my intention is to present some of the main approaches which
can be applied to the Avar archaeological heritage.
The first summary on the Merovingian weapon burial rite was written by
Joachim Werner, who had already made some social-historical assumptions
based on weapon combinations found in burials.150 Parallel to Werner, a sig-
nificant development occured in the methodology of social studies in archae-
ology, such as that of Heiko Steuer who questioned the validity of using legal
categories for weapon burials containing various weapon combinations and
emphasised that the analysis of archaeological sources should not be influ-
enced by written sources much later than the studied cemeteries. The relation
between armament and society or armament and fighting methods was the
major topic of this research. He drew attention to the fact that the deposition
of weapons in burials is not a result of the legal but rather the social status of
the deceased.151 During his research on the relationship of armament and war-
fare he made the observation that the strategies of fighting in groups or duels
alternated in the history of early medieval wars.152
The studies of Wolfgang Hübener drew attention to the analysis of individ-
ual weapon types and their functions showing that similar weapons can be
used in very different ways (such as the hitting and throwing function of axes).153
A special distortion factor in the study of weapon combinations is dem-
onstrated by wooden weapons, as studied by Torsten Capelle, showing the
importance of taphonomical loss.154 However, this is not the sole cause of the
148 The study shows significant changes in time and space in the costume of ornamented
belts and weapon depositions in burials (Zábojník 1995, 205–336).
149 According to his view the ornamented belt and weapon deposition does not mean auto-
matically infer the elite position of the deceased (Bálint 2006a, 147–150).
150 Werner 1968, 95–108.
151 Steuer 1968, 18–87.
152 Steuer 1970, 348–383.
153 Hübener 1977, 510–527.
154 The notion of taphonomical loss was first used by Gyula László for the absence of bows
from some weapon burials (László 1944, 37).