Introduction 59
The chronology of the Avar Age became an international reference point
for early medieval studies in drawing comparisons with Merovingian archae-
ology, such as those by Frauke Stein and Max Martin. Stein aimed to identify
the archaeological heritage of 8th century ‘nobility’ in Germany,251 and there-
fore she mainly focused on chronological links between the Late Avar and late
Merovingian—early Carolingian periods.252 Max Martin made some notes
on Avar chronology in relation to the Környe cemetery253 and on inlayed iron
belt-sets of the Kölked A cemetery.254 Martin’s chronology was based on the
belt-sets from male burials, which, according to this view, are chronologically
parallel in the Merovingian area and Avar Qaganate, and therefore dated the
beginning of Middle phase to 630s. He associated the burials of the Bócsa hori-
zon with its first sub-phase.255
Avar chronology also attracted the attention of Soviet archaeologists.
Anatolij Konstantinovich Ambroz tried to create a uniform chronological sys-
tem for early medieval Eastern Europe by synchronizing various local chrono-
logical schemes using the Crimea and Carpathian Basin as starting points.256
Although his system is much debated,257 it was the first chronological overview
of Eastern Europe on a wider scale. He was followed in this approach by his
student Igor Gavritukhin: he first surveyed the Eastern European chronology in
his study on the Gaponovo hoard, which comprised a part of the Martynovka
horizon,258 and later paralleled the Middle phase of the Avar Age with early
Khazar archaeology.259 Similarly to Max Martin he considered that the Bócsa –
Pereshchepina horizon belonged to the Middle phase, beginning in 620–30s,
while the chronological horizon known as ‘Igar – Ozora – Dunapentele’, tra-
ditionally accepted as ‘Middle Avar’, represented only the second half of his
Middle Avar period.260
251 Stein 1967, 74–84, 104–111.
252 Stein 1968, 233–242.
253 Martin 1973, 110–112; Martin 1989, 65–90.
254 Martin 1996, 346–361.
255 Martin 2008, 143–173.
256 Ambroz 1968, 10–83; Ambroz 1973, 289–294; Ambroz 1971, 106–134.
257 Later he refined and revised his original model (Ambroz 1981; Ambroz 1988; Ambroz
1995).
258 Gavritukhin – Oblomskij 1996, 69–76.
259 Gavritukhin 2001, 45–162; Gavritukhin 2005, 378–426.
260 Gavritukhin 2001, 154–155. He paralled the Bócsa horizon with Pereshchepina find
and Ozora – Igar horizon with the Voznesenka – horizon (Gavritukhin 2005, 406–411;
Gavritukhin 2008, 82–85).