164 CHAPTER 3
The spathae (double-edged swords of western origin) were not common
close combat weapons during the Late Avar period compared to that of the
Early phase, and can be regarded as a peripherical phenomenon during the 8th
century.35 The use of earlier spathae ceased with the end of the Early phase,
and these double-edged swords reappeared after a gap of at least two genera-
tions in a changed form (short crossguard and triangular pommel) during the
8th century, and there can be no connection between these spathae of Early
and Late phase. The small number and dispersed distribution of the late exam-
ples suggest that they did not become a common part of Late Avar weaponry.
The main reason for this was the popularity of single-edged weapons in Avaria
by that time, and as a consequence the Avars could integrate the long, single-
edged seaxes better into their armament repertoire than the double-edged
spathae.36
1.1.2 Double-edged Swords with Blades of Lenticular Cross section
(E.I.B)
The primary characteristic of these swords is the double-edged blade of
3.5–4 cm width, and which have a lenticular cross section. Most of these
weapons (62 examples) are dated to the Early phase, to which there are
only three exceptions, one of them being clearly dated to the Late phase37
and the remaining three being insecurely dated to this Late phase (map 28,
figs. 61–62).38 Crossguards are absent in most instances (58 swords, 89.2%),
while seven swords were equipped with these crossguards (fig. 62).39 Most of
these swords (32 examples, 61.53%) were found in the Great Hungarian Plain,
primarily in the Transtisia region (22 pieces, 68.75% of the swords from the
Great Hungarian Plain), while only 18 such swords were found in Transdanubia
35 Besides the 52 early spathae (E.I.A/1) and 25 late Avar seaxes (E.IV.D), the number of
double-edged swords in the Late phase are very few.
36 It was first observed by Béla Miklós Szőke (1992a, 95).
37 Čierny Brod I.–Homokdomb grave No. 2 (Čilinská – Točik 1978, 46; Točík 1992, 9–12. Obr.
7; Zábojník 1995, No. 19).
38 Elek–Kispél, homokbánya, Ottlakai szőlők (Csallány 1956, 110. 252. lelőhely; ADAM, 127);
Erzsébet–belterület ( Juhász 1897, 263; Hampel 1905. II. 332; Kiss 1977, 25).
39 Aradac–Mečka grave No. 85 (Nađ 1959, 62, Tab. XXVII/1); Čierny Brod I.–Homokdomb
grave No. 2 (Čilinská – Točik 1978, 46; Točík 1992, 9–12. Obr. 7); Keszthely–Fenékpuszta
grave No. 1 (Lipp 1885a, 9; Hampel 1894, 89–90; Bóna 1982–83, 117–119. 12. t. 1; Simon 1991,
- kép 6); Kiszombor E grave No. 29 (Csallány 1939, 137; Simon 1991, 295. 10. kép 5.
- kép); Kölked–Feketekapu A grave No. 259 (Kiss 1996, 75–76, Taf. 57); Szentes–Lapistó
(Csallány 1933–34, 207–208; Simon 1991, 307); Tolnanémedi, Szentpéteri szőlőhegy, stray
find (Nagy 1901a, 317. I/11. 3. 4; Fettich 1937, 128; Simon 1991, 309).