Edged Weapons 279
The third variant of P-shaped suspension loops is characterised by a shaft
that is longer than the length of the semicircular head (S.4.c): the projections
of this type are usually long, rectangular or trapezoid and their heads are short
and semicircular (fig. 102).499
The examples from Kiszombor500 (fig. 102/6) and Deszk501 (fig. 102/7) are
close analogies for one another based on their similar decoration: their char-
acteristic feature being the pearl-frame and hemispherical cabochon framed
by pearl-wire, suggesting a common workshop. However, most examples
of this type are plain and undecorated, being composed of two sheets, the
obverse and reverse sheets. The reverse is a metal sheet covering the whole
surface, while the obverse only covers the outer edge of the loop. The loop was
reinforced by a band onto the scabbard.502 Some loops were covered with sil-
ver foil on the obverse and with copper alloy on their reverse.503 On a single
example only the edges of the loop were decorated with a copper alloy cover-
ing of U-shaped cross section.504
499 Aradac–Mečka grave No. 31 (Nađ 1959, 58, Tab. VIII/1; Dimitrijević – Kovačević – Vinski
1962, 10, Abb. 4; Mrkobrad 1980, 98. 152. LXXIX/6; Simon 1991, 286); Biatorbágy–Hosszúrétek
(MO PM 016 site) grave No. 35 (Horváth – Reményi – Tóth 2004, 30–31, 7–8. kép); Deszk G
grave No. 8 (Csallány 1939, 127. 129. I. t. 2–2a, 2. kép 2–2a; Simon 1991, 291, 16. kép 6. Lőrinczy
1994, 113–114); Gátér–Vasútállomás, stray find (Fettich 1926a, 7; Pl. X/24–24a; Simon 1991,
- kép 1–2); Győr–Téglavető-dűlő grave No. 755 (Börzsönyi 1906, 320–321; Fettich 1943,
38–39. XIV); Iváncsa–Szabadság utca 20 (Bóna 1970, 243; 251. 8/5); Kecskemét–Ballószög–
Karácsonyi szőlő grave No. 1 (Szabó 1939, 185–187. Taf. I. Abb. 1); Kiszombor O grave No.
2 (Csallány 1939, 125–126, I. t. 1–1a, 2. kép 1; Csallány 1972, 23; Simon 1991, 295. 16. kép 5;
Garam 1992, 142, Taf. 35–36); Kunpeszér–Felsőpeszéri út grave No. 27 (H. Tóth 1984, 12;
Simon 1991, 299); Novi Kneževac (Törökkanizsa) (Hampel 1900, 170–175; Hampel 1905,
357–360; Vinski 1958, 11. tab. IV. 1–12; Dimitrijević – Kovačević – Vinski 1962, 23, Abb 3;
Mrkobrad 1980, LXXIX/1; Simon 1991, 303, 16. kép 4); Szárazd (Fettich 1926a, 7. X. t. 1; Bóna
1982–83, 126–127. 11. j.; Simon 1991, 305. 16. kép 3; Kovács 2001, 185. 187–190, 7. kép 10).
500 Csallány 1939, 125–126, I. t. 1–1a, 2. kép 1; Simon 1991, 295. 16. kép 5; Garam 1992, 142, Taf.
35–36.
501 Csallány 1939, 127. 129. I. t. 2–2a, 2. kép 2–2a; Simon 1991, 291, 16. kép 6.
502 Similar undecorated examples: Biatorbágy–Hosszúrétek grave No. 35 (Horváth – Reményi
- kép 1–2); Győr–Téglavető-dűlő grave No. 755 (Börzsönyi 1906, 320–321; Fettich 1943,
- Tóth 2004, 30–31, 7–8. képek); Győr–Téglavető-dűlő grave No. 755 (Börzsönyi 1906,
320–321; Fettich 1943, 38–39, XIV); Iváncsa–Szabadság utca 20 (Bóna 1970, 243; 251. 8/5);
Kecskemét–Ballószög–Karácsonyi szőlő grave No. 1 (Szabó 1939, 185–187, Taf. I, Abb. 1)
Most of them are dated to the Middle phase.
503 Iváncsa–Szabadság utca 20 (Bóna 1970, 243; 251. 8/5); Kecskemét–Ballószög–Karácsonyi
szőlő grave No. 1 (Szabó 1939, 185–187. Taf. I. Abb. 1). Both pieces are dated to the Middle
phase.
504 The loops from grave No. 43 of Aradac are problematic because they were found in a
female burial, and it probably belonged to a purse and not a sword (Nađ 1959, 59). This