54 CHAPTER 1
The chronological limits of the present study are framed by the migration
and settling of the Avars in the Carpathian Basin (567–568)223 and their dis-
appearence from written sources during the first half of 9th century.224 The
weapons of the Carolingian culture in the western periphery of the area are
not studied, since they mainly belong to the second half of the 9th century
and as the heritage of Frankish colonisation they cannot be considered as a
continuation of the Avar tradition.225
The chronology of the Avar Age is basically historical,226 as a number of
chronological markers can be related to historical events, some of which
(like the arrival of the Avars in the Carpathian Basin) cannot be overlooked
although the intention is to use periods and phases based strictly on archaeo-
logical sources.
The Avar Age can be periodised relatively easily due to the great number of
richly furnished burial assemblages. The ‘Avar’ archaeological culture of the
7th–8th century Carpathian Basin was closely connected to neighbouring cul-
tures (western: Merovingian and early Carolingian; eastern: Eastern European
steppes; southern, Mediterranean: Byzantium and Italy). In what follows, the
Avar chronology will also be examined in its external connections, by relat-
ing the internal chronology of the ‘Avar’ culture to neighbouring chronological
systems.
The chronological framework of the Avar Age is its tripartite subdivision
into Early, Middle and Late phases known also as the Early, Middle and Late
223 For written sources of the appearance of the Avars, see: Kollautz – Miyakawa 1970;
Avenarius 1974, 67–84; Szádeczky – Kardoss 1992, 32–35, for history of events: Pohl 2002,
52–57.
224 The end of Avar Age is still debated: the end of Avar Qaganate is related to the Frankish-
Avar wars (791–799) and the campaign of the Bulgarian khan Krum against them (803–
804). Some archaeologists assume the termination of workshops making cast belt mounts
(Daim 1987, 155; Friesinger 1972a, 156–158; Friesinger 1972b, 43–45; Friesinger 1971–74;
Friesinger 1975–77 and Friesinger 1984; Szameit 1987, 166), while others accepting this
premise, used the method of double dating (distinguishing the date of manufacture and
deposition on the basis of the age of the deceased) (Szalontai 1991, 463–481; Szalontai
1995, 127–143; Szalontai 1996, 145–162). A historical interpretation was used in the val-
ley of Zala river in Western Hungary where Béla Miklós Szőke supposed a continuous
Avar population until the foundation of Mosaburg in 840 (Szőke 1991, 9–17; Szőke 1992a;
Szőke 1992b, 841–968; Szőke 1994a; Szőke 2004; Szőke 2007; Szőke 2008b, 52), while Alán
Kralovánszky (1957, 175–186) dated the end of ‘Avar’ cemeteries in the 10th century.
225 The weapons of the Carolingian period represent a new age in the Carpathian Basin char-
acterised by strong western influences, thus Carolingian weapons will only be mentioned
where they were found in Avar burials.
226 Bóna 1988.