KOMUNIKATY – ANNOUNCEMENTS

Acta Militaria Mediaevalia XVI Kraków–Sanok–Wrocław 2020, 205-224. DOI: 10.48280/AMMXVI.2020.010.

Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina*

SWORD FROM KRASN͡IANKA. COMPLEX OF TRADITIONS AND TECHNOLOGIES1

Abstract: A precious early medieval sword was found in 1900 near the village of Krasn͡ianka in the Luhansk region of . A.N. Kirpichnikov included the sword in his typology of Old Russian sword hilts, the sword scabbard chape was included in P. Paulsen’s typology, and the blade was examined by metallography. The technology of the decoration of the hilt, however, has not yet been studied in detail and has been described incorrectly in most works. This article contains a comprehensive review of this unique archaeological find.

Key words: sword, scabbard chape, Old Rus’, technology, typology.

Received: 06.03.2020; Accepted: 02.07.2020; Revised: 25.09.2020.

Citation: Shchedrina A. Yu. 2020. Sword from Krasn͡ianka. Complex of traditions and technologies. “Acta Militaria Mediaevalia” XVI, 205-222. DOI: 10.48280/AMMXVI.2020.010.

In 1900, a precious early medieval sword with The exhibition album, compiled by Egor a scabbard chape was accidentally found at the K. Redin (Redin 1903, 6, Pl. IV:8), contains a photo bottom of a well near the village of Krasn͡ianka, of the sword and the scabbard chape lying nearby Kup͡iansk oblast’, Kharkov province of the Russian (Fig. 1). Empire, currently the territory of Luhansk Oblast of Following the Archaeological Congress, the Ukraine (Shramko 1962, 353; Kirpichnikov 1966a, items were transferred to the Museum of Fine 35). Both items were displayed in the exhibition Arts and Antiquities of the Imperial Kharkov of the XII Archaeological Congress, held in 1902 University. In 1920, the Museum of Sloboda in Kharkov and were included in the exhibition Ukraine was founded in Kharkov (later renamed catalogue under the numbers 1232 and 1233: into Kharkov Historical Museum), where some 1232. Мечъ желѣзныĭ, или скорѣĭ одна of the items from the University collection were рукоять меча (выш. 17 стм.) съ обломкомъ лезвiя, transferred, including, apparently, the sword with шириноĭ въ 6 стм. Рукоять соединяется съ a scabbard chape.2 Sadly the museum’s collections лезвiемъ широкою полосою и заканчивается were severely damaged during World War II. Some полукруглою головокою. Рукоять желѣзная, но items were unsuccessfully evacuated in October вся покрыта серебряною накладкою и тонкою 1941 and suffered severe damage due to the серебряною нитью. Мечъ этотъ несомнеѣнно direct hit of the railway carriage they were being Х. в., заслуживаетъ вниманiя по своеĭ сохранности transported in by the Luftwaffe air bomb. Another и красотѣ, рѣдкоĭ для Россiи. part of collection remained in the occupied city 1233. Бронзовыĭ наконечникъ отъ ноженъ and was plundered partly spontaneous, partly by того же меча съ прокладкою серебра the subdivision of the Reichsleiter Rosenberg и лилiеобразными наконечниками (Katalog... Taskforce, and later burned when the Germans left 1902, 119) the city in February 1943 (Babenko 2011, 7-9).

* State University, Department of Archaeology, Moscow, Russia; ORCID: 0000-0002-9464-9788; e-mail: shedr. [email protected]. 1 The preparation of the paper was financed by the Author. 2 No documents about the transfer of collections were preserved. I am grateful to Stanislav A. Zadnikov (V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University) and Leonyd I. Babenko (M. F. Sumt͡sov Kharkiv Historical Museum) for the consultation. 206 Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina

the crossguard is 3.4 × 1.7 cm. The height of the crossguard in the center is 2.8 cm, length is 9.6 cm, and width is 3.1 cm. The crossguard (Fig. 4) has a virtually straight base and a slightly curved upper edge. The side edges are rounded. From the horizontal view the crossguard has an oval shape. The crossguard is hollow, and its walls are 0.5 to 0.7 cm thick. The upper-guard (Fig. 5) is similar in shape to the crossguard, but is less wide. The pommel is semicircular from the front, with a wide rib stretching along its top and sides. The grip is oval in cross section, and tapers towards the centre (Fig. 6). All the parts are made of iron and covered with inlay. The decoration was applied by first hatching the surface of the iron with numerous tiny grooves, then thin wires of non-ferrous metal were hammered over the top. The wires were laid close together by forming a solid coating. By using wires of different colors – white silver and a reddish copper- based alloy,4 the craftsman created a polychrome composition. In addition to simple copper and silver wire, two different wires that had been twisted together were also used. The density of wire laying in different sections varies between 16 to 33 pieces 2 Fig. 1. Sword and the scabbard chape from Krasn͡ianka − archive photo per 1 cm , that is, each strip of the pattern has of 1902 (after Redin 1903, Pl. IV:8). a thickness of 0.3 to 0.6 mm. Given that the wire

Ryc. 1. Miecz i trzewik pochwy miecza z miejscowości Krasnânka − is flattened during the hammering process, its fotografia archiwalna z 1902 r. (wg Redin 1903, Pl. IV:8). original diameter was even smaller, possibly 0.2 to 0.4 mm. The inlay at the ends of the crossguard and the upper-guard was made using the same method, but the silver wire formed only the lines of The whereabouts of the sword and chape during the the pattern, while the background was left as iron. war is unknown, but fortunately the sword survived In addition to the inlay, the front surfaces these catastrophic events and is now stored in of the pommel, upper-guard and crossguard are the M. F. Sumts͡ ov Kharkiv Historical Museum.3 decorated with round indentations with a diameter Unfortunately the scabbard chape, was lost. of 3 mm and a depth of about 1.5 mm, into which copper-alloy inserts were placed. These inserts Hilt of the sword were most likely made by laying a piece of The most remarkable part of the sword is the thin copper-alloy sheet (slightly larger than the hilt (Fig. 2-3). It consists of the following four diameter of the indentation) over the indentation. parts: crossguard, grip, upper-guard and pommel. The sheet was then pressed inside, covering the All parts are secured to the tang, the tip of which is bottom and side walls of the indentation. riveted on top of the pommel. The dimensions are The indentations at the crossguard and the as follows: The total length of the hilt is 17 cm. The upper-guard are arranged in three rows: five and height of the pommel is 2.6 cm, length is 5.4 cm, four indentations in a row at the crossguard, width is 2.4 cm; the height of the upper-guard is and four and three at the upper-guard. The four 2.4 cm, length is 6.4 cm, and width is 2.7 cm. The indentations on the pommel are arranged into length of the grip is 9.4 cm, the pommel’s cross a rhombus. The background between the indentations section is 2.8 × 1.5 cm, the cross section in the is covered with silver, while the rings around each middle is 2.2 × 1.6 cm, and the cross section at indentation as well as the interlace or “wickerwork”

3 I am grateful to head of the Department of Archaeology, Viktor S. Aksenov, who has kindly provided the opportunity to study the item. 4 No special analyses have been carried out to define the composition of metal. Consequently the white wire will be conventionally defined as silver, and the reddish wire as copper. Sword from Krasn͡ianka. Complex of traditions and technologies 207 5 cm 0 10 cm 0

Fig. 2. Sword from Krasn͡ianka. Photo by A. Iu͡ . Shchedrina.

Ryc. 2. Miecz z miejscowości Krasnânka. Fot. A. Û. Ŝedrina.

design is of copper. All the parts of the hilt again a copper wire. The same strips divide the are framed at the edges by a peculiar strip with head of the pommel into three parts. The ends of a “herringbone” pattern. This decoration has been the crossguard and the upper-guard facing the hilt created by successively laying a copper wire; have the same ornament. That is a frame with copper/silver wire, twisted in one direction; a silver two longitudinal lines in the middle and parallel wire; a wire, twisted in the other direction; and diagonal lines that radiate symmetrically to the 208 Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina 5 cm 0

Fig. 3. Details of the sword from Krasn͡ianka. Drawing by A. Iu͡ . Shchedrina.

Ryc. 3. Detale miecza z miejscowości Krasnânka. Rys. A. Û. Ŝedrina. sides. The central part of the grip has been decorated decoration differing from samples of common with an X-shaped pattern with a circle in the center European forms (Kirpichnikov 1966a, 35-36, and scrolled ends. Wide bands at the edges of the N 82-86). In addition to the sword from Krasn͡ianka, grip are inlayed with alternating turns of twisted the swords from Glukhovtsy, Kiev, Karabchiev and copper/silver and silver wires. R͡iazan province were also referred to as the A-local Anatoliĭ N. Kirpichnikov suggested that the type of swords. Sergeĭ I͡ u. Kainov has already noted sword from Krasn͡ianka is a local Old Russian that these swords differ in morphology, material, product and attributed it to the A-local type. This manufacturing technology, and decoration of the type comprises five swords, whose hilts preserved parts which make up the hilt. The parts of the hilts some common European features [e.g., a three-part on the swords from Kiev, Karabchiev and R͡iazan pommel], but otherwise have an appearance and province are of cast copper-alloy, decorated with Sword from Krasn͡ianka. Complex of traditions and technologies 209

0 5 cm

Fig. 4. Crossguard of the sword from Krasn͡ianka. Photo by A. Iu͡ . Shchedrina.

Ryc. 4. Jelec miecza z miejscowości Krasnânka. Fot. A. Û. Ŝedrina. 5 cm 0

0 5 cm

Fig. 5. Pommel of the sword from Krasn͡ianka. Photo by A. I͡ u. Fig. 6. Grip of the sword from Krasn͡ianka. Photo by A. I͡ u. Shchedrina. Shchedrina. Ryc. 6. Okładzina rękojeści miecza z miejscowości Krasnânka. Fot. Ryc. 5. Głowica miecza z miejscowości Krasnânka. Fot. A. Û. Ŝedrina. A. Û. Ŝedrina. 210 Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina 5 cm 0

Fig. 7. Hilt of the sword from Glukhov͡tsi (Ukraine). Photo by A. Iu͡ . Shchedrina.

Ryc. 7. Rękojeść miecza z miejscowości Glukhovci (Ukraina). Fot. A. Û. Ŝedrina. niello and have similar morphology. Currently more ornament, as well as geometric ornament of small than two-dozen swords of this group are known rings and dots). Most of the finds are concentrated (Kazakevičius 1992a; Kainov, Stefutin 2012; in the territory of Kievan Rus’ and their local origin Androshchuk 2013, 88-90; 2014, 95-98). Fedir has been recognized by most researchers. It is this A. Androschuk divided them into two variants, while characteristic group of swords with cast hilt parts S. I͡ u. Kainov suggested four variants depending that should be referred to as A-local type. on the features of the decoration (braided floral Concerning the sword from Glukhovtsy5 ornament, Byzantine style floral ornament, ribbon (Fig. 7-8), only the bronze grip belongs to the

5 The village of Glukhovtsi is located in Vinnytsia͡ Oblast of Ukraine. The sword is displayed in the exhibition of National Museum of the History of Ukraine in Kiev, Inv. No. B2190. Sword from Krasn͡ianka. Complex of traditions and technologies 211

is 9 cm, the cross section of the pommel is 2.2 × 1.4 cm, the cross section of the crossguard is 2.9 × 1.6 cm, and the height of the crossguard in the center is 2.3 cm, length is 8.8 cm, width is 2.6 cm. The decoration on the front surfaces is formed by niello-filled grooves applied over silver inlay. Among Scandinavian swords this is typical for J. Petersen’s T-1 type (Shchedrina 2018). A pattern with intertwining ribbons is visible on the crossguard and the upper-guard. The ends are decorated with an oblique grid. The inlay coating on the pommel is poorly preserved. Therefore, neither A-local type swords with bronze hilt parts, nor the sword from Glukhovtsy are close analogies of the sword from Krasn͡ianka. However, some separate sword parts were found in the territory of Rus’, which probably belong to swords of the same type. There is the crossguard from Sarkel (Bela͡ia Vezha),7 the crossguard from the Poltava region (Fig. 9:3), the pommel from the Sumy region (Fig. 10:1), as well as upper-guards and two pommels from the territory of Ukraine, the find locations of which are unknown (Fig. 9:1-2, 10:2-3). Despite the similarity of the parts, the proportions and ornamentation of the pommels are slightly different. The example from the Sumy region (Fig. 10:1) is interesting due to the number Fig. 8. Hilt of the sword from Glukhov͡tsi (Ukraine) (after Androshchuk of indentations not only in the central, but also in 2013, Fig. 51). the side parts (three on each side). One of the Ryc. 8. Rękojeść miecza z miejscowości Glukhovci (Ukraina) (wg Ukrainian pommels, whose find location is unknown Androshchuk 2013, Fig. 51). (Fig. 10:3), was decorated with geometric patterns. These differ from the sword from Krasn͡ianka as they comprise simple V-shaped lines on the sides, A-local type. It differs stylistically from other parts and a “stepped” braid on the wide rib. In addition, of the sword’s hilt and most likely originally belongs the indentations in the pommel are not flat, but to a different set.6 The upper-guard, pommel and feature a point at the center. crossguard were made of iron and covered with The sword from the Ratchino 1 burial ground inlay. A. N. Kirpichnikov described the shape of in Leningrad oblast’,8 has a grip similar to the the sword as similar to the sword from Krasn͡ianka. sword from Krasn͡ianka (Fig. 11:2). The central Indeed, both swords have a semicircular pommel part it is also decorated with an X-shaped pattern as well as a slightly curved crossguard and upper- with a circle in the center and scrolls. The bands guard, however there are a number of differences. at the edges of the grip are inlayed with vertical From the horizontal view the parts of the sword bands of silver and copper. However, this is the from Glukhovtsy are not oval, but boat-shaped. The only part of the sword which is similar. The pommel is convex, without a rib, and is divided into upper-guard and crossguard of the sword from three parts by thin grooves. Overall the hilt is not Ratchino has no indentations, but are covered as large as on the Krasn͡ianka sword: the height of with plant designs. The ends of each part are the pommel is 2.3 cm, length is 5.9 cm, width is decorated with an oblique grid. The pommel has 2.4 cm; the height of the upper-guard is 2.2 cm, three sections, with the high central and low length is 6.5 cm, width is 2.5 cm; length of the grip lateral parts separated by paired grooves with

6 The installation of the copper-alloy grip that was not originally included in the set of parts of the hilt has been also observed on the sword from the Chernaia͡ Mogyla (Black Grave) burial mound in (Kainov 2019, 136-137). 7 The find has been published in an uncleaned state. The type has been apparently defined on the basis of an X-ray image (Sil’chenko, Sorokin 1959, 201, Fig. 3). 8 The sword was found during the plundering excavations (Stasi͡uk 2017, 122, Fig. 1). It is currently in the private collection of Laird Landmann and displayed at the Gallery of the Art Institute of Chicago (Tavares 2019, 251-252, Fig. 5). 212 Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina

1

0 5 cm (2-3)

2 3

Fig. 9. Parts of the hilts of the swords. Accidental finds: 1-2 – Ukraine; 3 – Poltava region (Ukraine) (1-3 – photos from the Author’s archive).

Ryc. 9. Elementy rękojeści mieczowych. Znaleziska przypadkowe: 1-2 – Ukraina; 3 – obw. połtawski (Ukraina) (1-3 – fot. z archiwum autorki). a wide band in-between.9 The central part of the Europe, mostly in Sweden (39) and Norway (38) pommel has a braided rhombus with loops at the (Jakobsson 1992, 209; Janowski, Kotowicz, corners. Judging by the two striped bands, the Michalak 2008; Kainov 2012, 20-21; Androshchuk sword from the 27th burial of Pavirvite-Gudai in 2013, 50-51; 2014, 52-54). At least 17 swords Lithuania may also have had a grip similar to the were found in Old Rus’ territory.10 A limited sword from Ratchino (Jērums 2013, 81, Fig. 3:5). series of especially richly decorated swords with However, the important for our comparison larger indentations, between which a twisted silver decoration in the central part of the grip has not wire was laid, was made in the second half of the been preserved (Fig. 11:3). The burial dates to 10th century in Scandinavia. The entire surface of the 11th century. the hilts of these swords has been covered with The tradition of decorating sword hilts with silver inlay, niello decoration and gold inserts rows of round indentations dates back to E-type (Shchedrina 2018). Jan Petersen has found only swords of J. Petersen’s typology, which were four such swords among the Norwegian material widespread in Scandinavia in the 9th-10th centuries. and classified them to the first group of type T At least 122 swords of this type were found in (Petersen 1919, 150). Some swords of this type

9 Pommel heads of a similar shape are known in Estonia (Jets 2013, Fig. 33:1-2, 4-5). 10 In 2012 S. Iu.͡ Kainov counted 15 swords (Kainov 2012, 21). Another two were found in Gnëzdovo in 2017 to 2018. Sword from Krasn͡ianka. Complex of traditions and technologies 213

1

2

3

Fig. 10. Sword’s pommels. Accidental finds: 1 – Sumy region (Ukraine); 2-3 – Ukraine (without the scale). (1-3 – photos from the Author’s archive).

Ryc. 10. Głowice mieczowe. Znaleziska przypadkowe: 1 – obw. sumski (Ukraina); 2-3 – Ukraina (bez skali) (1-3 – fot. z archiwum autorki). also came to Rus’. Swords decorated with round the parts of the hilt have a lens-shaped profile indentations dating to the second half of the 11th and the lateral edges are not rounded. Additionally, and 12th centuries are also known in the eastern the indentations are rarely placed and there are Baltic (Mandel 1991, 116, 131; Kazakevičius 1996, no silver wire therein. The decoration on these 107-112, Fig. 44; Tomsons 2018, 58-61, 83-85, swords was not made by combining silver inlay 88-89, Fig. 25, 48, 53). These swords were with niello, but by multi-coloured wire inlay. There very different from the Scandinavian swords of is no doubt that these examples are evolved regional Peterson’s T-1 group. At the Baltic examples, types coinciding with other Baltic swords and 214 Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina

3

1 2

Fig. 11. Swords with the iron overlaid grips: 1 – Krasn͡ianka; 2 – Ratchino 1 (Russia); 3 – Pavirvite-Gudai, grave No. 27 (Lithuania) (1 – photo by A. Iu͡ . Shchedrina; 2 – after Tavares 2019, Fig. 5; 3 – after Jērums 2013, Fig. 3:5).

Ryc. 11. Miecze z żelaznymi, zdobionymi okładzinami rękojeści: 1 – Krasnânka; 2 – Ratčino 1 (Rosja); 3 – Pavirvite-Gudai, grób nr 27 (Litwa) (1 – fot. A. Û. Ŝedrina; 2 – wg Tavares 2019, Fig. 5; 3 – wg Jērums 2013, Fig. 3:5). decorated weapons of the 11th-13th centuries in terms this type are an “intermediate” type between of their style and morphology (Androshchuk 2013, the disappearance of T-1 type swords and the 72; 2014, 76; Kulakov 2016; Tomsons 2018, 79-96). wide spread of Baltic swords featuring indented As we can see therefore, the sword from decoration in the second half of the 11th century. Krasn͡ianka is something of an intermediate Given the “prototypes” available in the between the Scandinavian T-1 type and the swords territory of Rus’ – Scandinavian swords of the of Balts. The shape of the upper-guard and T-1 type (Kirpichnikov 1966a, 28; Shchedrina 2018) crossguard is similar to that of the Scandinavian – the local manufacture of parts of the hilt of the T-1 type, in that they have an oval profile and sword from Krasn͡ianka seems quite likely. The rounded edges. The lack of wire inside the fact that the Old Russian craftsmen mastered indentations and the use of wire of different the technique of covering iron items with non- colours associates it with the Baltic swords. ferrous metals by inlaying is substantiated by the However, the pattern itself, consisting of paired discovery of the axe from the plowed barrow of lines connecting rings around the indentations, the Shekshovo-9 burial ground in the Suzdal Opol’e coincides with the Scandinavian swords of T-1 (Fig. 12; Makarov, Zaĭtseva, Krasnikova 2013). type. It seems that the maker of the sword from The axe head belongs to Kirpichnikov’s type IV Krasn͡ianka had seen and used as a sample (Kirpichnikov 1966b, 36-37, Fig. 7). Its length is a Scandinavian sword of the T-1 type and borrowed 13.5 cm, width is 9.4 cm, and weight is about the idea of the decoration, but adapted it to a local 240 g. Axes of type IV are one of the first Old style and applied familiar technologies. The swords Russian types of weapons. According to S. Iu͡ . of the T-1 type in Scandinavia are traditionally dated Kainov, they appeared in the second half, and to the second half of the 10th century, but in Rus most likely the last quarter, of the 10th century territory they could have continued in use a little (Kainov 2014, 100). In the 11th century they became longer; in this case, the sword from Krasn͡ianka the most widespread type of battle axes in Rus’ can be dated no later than the first half of the (Kirpichnikov 1966b, 36). The sides, butt and upper 11th century. It is possible that the swords of end of the axe head are inlaid with silver and copper. Sword from Krasn͡ianka. Complex of traditions and technologies 215

0 5 cm

Fig. 12. Axe head from the plowed barrow in the burial ground Shekshovo-9 in Suzdal vicinity (Russia) (after Makarov, Zaĭtseva, Krasnikova 2013, ris. 1).

Fig. 12. Żeleźce topora z rozoranego kopca na cmentarzysku Šekšovo-9 w okolicach Suzdala (Rosja) (wg Makarov, Zaĭtseva, Krasnikova 2013, ris. 1).

One side has a two-pronged mark (bident) with (Beletskiĭ 2014). The decorated weapon with a triangular protrusion at the base and prongs bent Princes’ emblems was a symbol of the special outwards. The other side has a cross on a long leg. status of the owner and demonstrated his On both sides of the socket there is the geometric belonging to an elite group. It is highly likely that knot, and on the butt there are two arrows. The such pieces were produced in the best Old Russian upper end has a trident with a triangle at the base workshops. Perhaps the parts of the hilt of the and V-shaped lines. The most interesting fact is that Krasn͡ianka sword were made there at around the the entire decorative composition is framed with same time. a “herringbone” stripe, exactly the same as on all the parts of the hilt of the Krasn͡ianka sword. Blade of the sword Furthermore, the sword and the axe have the same The blade of the sword is only partially decor combination. Their front surfaces have a copper preserved. At the time of discovery its length was pattern on a silver background, while the end about 18 cm, but currently12 it is 14 cm. The width surfaces have a silver pattern on a steel background. of the blade near the crossguard is 5.2 cm, but Nikolaĭ A. Makarov et al. referred the Princes’ judging by the slot for the blade in the lower end of emblems – namely bident and trident – to the range the crossguard, its original width was probably of emblems of the late 10th to early 11th centuries 6 cm. A 2.3 to 2.5 cm wide fuller is visible on and dated the axe head to this time period both sides of the blade. (Makarov, Zaĭtseva, Krasnikova 2013, 441). The sword was examined metallographically S. V. Beletsky suggested that the emblems could in the 1980s (Gopak, D’͡iachenko 1984). The relate to Sv͡iatopolk Ia͡ ropolchich and Vsevolod sample was taken from the cross section of the Vladimirovich, and the creation of the axe with blade near the break (Fig. 13:1). The width of a set of two emblems could be associated with the blade at the sampling point was 47 mm, with their conspiracy against Prince Vladimir at the a maximum thickness of 4 mm, and a minimum beginning of the second decade of the 11th century11 thickness of 2 mm (in the center of the fuller).

11 Vladimir Sviatoslavich͡ of the dynasty, called the Great, was ruler of Kievan Rus’ from 980 to 1015. Vsevolod was Vladimir’s son, Sviatopolk͡ was his nephew and adopted son, and became Grand Prince of Kiev after Vladimir (1015-1019). Each Prince of the Rurik dynasty had his own emblem. 12 After sampling for metallographic analysis described below. 216 Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina 1.5 cm 10 cm 0 0 - a 3 1 - b 2

Fig. 13. Metallographic examination of the blade of a sword from Krasn͡ianka: 1 – sampling location; 2 – structure of the blade; a – iron; b – steel; 3 – microstructure around the weld, 200x (after Gopak, D’͡iachenko 1984, Figs. 1-3).

Ryc. 13. Wyniki badań metaloznawczych głowni miecza z miejscowości Krasnânka: 1 – miejsca próbek; 2 – struktura głowni; a – żelazo; b – stal; 3 – mikrostruktura w miejscu zgrzewu, 200x (wg Gopak, D’͡iachenko 1984, ris. 1-3).

The blade has a welded structure. Two structural areas are clearly visible on the microslice: steel and iron (Fig. 13:2-3). A narrow steel strip covers the iron core on one side and forms the cutting edges. The steel has a fine needle-shaped troostite structure with a microhardness of 383-572 HV. Fine strips of random welds could be found in some places of the steel area. The microstructure of the core of the blade consists mainly of ferrite and has a microhardness of 135-151 HV. Structural areas have a clear border and are separated by a fine weld line. The welding is of high-quality and there are no delaminations or areas of incomplete fusion along the weld. There is practically no inclusion of flux residues. The structure of the blade allows us to reconstruct the blade manufacturing process as follows: an elongated bar of iron was welded to a thin steel plate, before the ends of the plate were bent and welded to the iron. Then the resulting blade was worked to achieve its final shape (Fig. 14). The strip of steel following the profile of the one of preserved fullers, shows that the fullers of the blade were not ground, but were produced during the forging procedure. Afterwards the blade was subjected to hardening and tempering. Thereby the craftsman managed to obtain a high-quality Fig. 14. Manufacturing of the sword from Krasn͡ianka. Drawing by blade with a high impact resistant iron core and A. Iu͡ . Shchedrina (after Gopak, D’͡iachenko 1984, Fig. 4). hard cutting edges made of hardened steel. Ryc. 14. Sposób wykonania głowni miecza z miejscowości Krasnânka. It should be noted that this blade structure is Ryc. A. Û. Ŝedrina (wg Gopak, D’͡iachenko 1984, ris. 4). not typical for European swords of the early Middle Sword from Krasn͡ianka. Complex of traditions and technologies 217

Ages. Currently more than a hundred blades from of the Krasn͡ianka sword, which is not typical for more than a dozen countries have been examined European examples, is not a clear evidence of its by metallography,13 but no exact analogies to the local manufacture, but rather suggests it. sword from Krasn͡ianka have been found.14 The most popular blade structures are those with a single Scabbard chape or multi-layer core with welded steel edges; blades As was already mentioned, the scabbard chape with several longitudinal layers of iron and steel has not been preserved. The only visual evidence for and those which are entirely homogenous. All it is a photo from the album of the exhibition of swords found in the territory of Rus’, which were the XII Archaeological Congress (Redin 1903, 6, studied by metallography, were made using the Pl. IV:8), as well as a drawing made by T. Arne, same technologies.15 Some of the European swords who examined the item in the Museum of Kharkov show a structure similar, but not identical to that University during his visit to the Russian Empire of the sword from Krasn͡ianka. In these examples between 1912 to 1913 (Fig. 15:1; Arne 1913, the iron core has been completely wrapped in Fig. 25).17 a steel sheath formed by one or two steel plates. The scabbard chape was a bronze U-shaped This technology became widespread in Eastern cap with a small protrusion at the lower end. Its Europe from the 11th century,16 but it had its upper edge was decorated in the form of three drawback. For example, the weld stretches along palmettes: namely a central one with three petals the cutting edges, which can adversely affect their and smaller ones on the edges. The dimensions of quality. In addition, in some cases the outer steel the chape, recorded by T. Arne were 6.8 × 3.4 cm. sheets did not meet, resulting in the iron core being Plant-like decoration was applied to the front of exposed at the edges. By using a single steel sheet the chape, comprising two branches skirting the that was forged around the edge, the blacksmith palmette and curving to the sides. The lines of avoided such situations. the decoration were filled with niello. Until the end of the 10th century all the swords Gali F. Korzukhina identified the scabbard originating from the territory of Rus’ typologically chape as being Type IV. Since at that time there coincide with synchronous or slightly earlier were no known analogies from the territory of Rus’, Scandinavian material. The blades usually have she suggested that this type of chape had been Western European inlayed marks and are thereby made either in the Baltic states or in Gotland, but associated with North- and Western European influenced by an “Eastern” artistic style (Korzukhina manufacture. At the end of the 10th century, local 1950, 66-67, Pl. 1). P. Paulsen has classified the type sword hilts began to be produced on the chape from Krasn͡ianka and five similar chapes territory of Rus’ (Kainov, Stefutin 2012, 156; with a niello decoration to the “Varangian-Livian” Kainov 2014, 100). The question arises whether group of the “with a cross and whiskers” type this was also accompanied by the production of (Paulsen 1953, 103-107), which he dated to the end blades. Unfortunately, discoveries of blades together of the 10th to the beginning of the 11th centuries. with hilts of local types are extremely rare and P. Paulsen associated the appearance of this type have not been examined by metallography. So with the Christianization of Rus’ and the strengthening far, the assumption that Rus’ had its own blade influence of the Byzantine Imperial Court, as a result manufacturing workshops was confirmed by only of which the Byzantine-Greek culture begun to two Cyrillic inlayed marks on blades discovered spread through Kievan Rus’ to the Baltic and by A. N. Kirpichnikov (Kirpichnikov 1966a, 41-42, Scandinavia. One chape of this type was known Pl. XIV, XV; 1998). However not all researchers from Gotland (Arne 1913, 384) and another four agree with this interpretation of these marks from Latvia (Tomsons 2018, 149, Fig. 117:3-6, (Androshchuk 2003). In the author’s opinion blade Tab. 37:8-11). Arturs Tomsons has classified these

13 Detailed lists of publications of metallographic analyses of early medieval swords and general conclusions about their structure are present in the following works: Košta, Hošek (2014, 271-279), Moilanen (2015, 63-82) and Kainov, Shchedrina (2019, 74). 14 It is possible that the sword from a private British collection was made using similar technology (Williams 2009, 132, 163), but due to its poor preservation it is impossible to clearly understand the structure of the blade. 15 These are swords from the 10th century burial mounds of , Iaroslavl͡ Volga region and Southeast Ladoga region (Kolchin 1953, 130-139, Fig. 106; Kainov, Shchedrina 2019). These swords are undoubtedly of foreign origin and are associated with the Scandinavian presence in Rus’. 16 For instance, the swords from Płock, Węzina and Rogowo in Poland (Żabiński, Stępiński, Biborski 2014, Nos. 44, 72, 75), as well as the swords from the Czech Republic (Žákovský, Hošek, Sedláčková 2013). 17 It may seem that the shape of the item on the drawing differs from that on the photo. In fact, the scabbard chape on the photo was taken at an angle. One should rely on the drawing made by Ture J. Arne. 218 Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8

9 10

11 12 13

Fig. 15. Sword scabbard chapes: 1 – Krasn͡ianka; 2 – Ikšķiles Rumuļi (Latvia); 3 – Krimulda (Latvia); 4-6, 8-10 – Ukraine; 7 – Gotland (Sweden); 11 – Turaida (Latvia); 12 – Novgorod (Russia); 13 – sword from Karabchiev (Ukraine) (1, 7, 11 – after Arne 1913, Figs. 25, 27, 26; 2-3 – after Tomsons 2018, Figs. 117, 4, 5; 4-6, 8-10 – photos from the Author’s archive; 12 – after Varfolomeeva 1994, Tab. II:1; 13 – after Kirpichnikov 1966a, tabl. XII).

Ryc. 15. Trzewiki pochew mieczowych: 1 – Krasnânka; 2 – Ikšķiles Rumuļi (Łotwa); 3 – Krimulda (Łotwa); 4-6, 8-10 – Ukraina; 7 – Gotlandia (Szwecja); 11 – Turaida (Łotwa); 12 – Nowogród Wielki (Rosja); 13 – miecz z miejscowości Karabčiev (Ukraina) (1, 7, 11 – wg Arne 1913, Figs. 25, 27, 26; 2-3 – wg Tomsons 2018, Figs. 117, 4, 5; 4-6, 8-10 – fot. z archiwum autorki; 12 – wg Varfolomeeva 1994, Tab. II:1; 13 – wg Kirpichnikov 1966a, tabl. XII). Sword from Krasn͡ianka. Complex of traditions and technologies 219 as type III-a-3 and suggested dating them to the For the sword from Karabchiev and some second half of the 11th to the beginning of the of the scabbard chapes of the “Varangian-Livian” 12th century by comparison with other types “with a group, S. I͡ u. Kainov suggested a possible Byzantine cross and whiskers”. This type of chape is not origin (Kainov 2014, 101), before their analogies found in other Baltic countries and it is often not were manufactured in the territory of Rus’. Recent classified as a separate type at all (Kazakevičius publications of Byzantine material (Aleksić 2010; 1992b; 1998; Asaris 1994; Sikora 2003; Janowski Yotov 2011; 2014; Baranov 2017) have provided 2006, 2012). Five scabbard chapes of this group clearer ideas about the shape and design of were found in the territory of Rus’: in Novgorod Byzantine swords, which are completely different (Kolchin, Khoroshev 1978, 146, Fig. 22:6; from the swords of Barbarian Europe, including Varfolomeeva 1994, 171, Tab. II:1), two in Kiev those of the A-local type. So, the sword from (Zo͡tsenko 1983, Fig. 4; the exposition of the Karabchiev combines two different traditions National Museum of the History of Ukraine), in namely the Byzantine art tradition (for decoration Stara͡ia Ryazan (Mongaĭt 1955, 158, Fig. 124), and and manufacturing techniques) and the Northern in Litvinovichi of the Gomel Region of Belarus European weapon tradition (for design and (Plavinskiĭ 2010, 506, Pl. I:5, Fig. 1:8). In addition, morphology). In my opinion, the issue surrounding at least 19 scabbard chapes were found using the place of production of the “Karabchiev” variant a metal detector in Ukraine and Russia and are swords18 of A-local type and the scabbard chapes in private collections. The most narrowly dated of the “Varangian-Livian” group has not yet been find is scabbard chape from Novgorod. Based on resolved. In case of production in the territory of a stratigraphic analysis, it dates to the second to Rus’, the decoration could have been borrowed fourth decade of the 11th century. The stratigraphic from Byzantine household goods, luxury objects or position of the chape from Kiev meant it could pieces used in Christian worship, the import of which be dated to the 11th century. The rest of finds could increased sharply in the 11th century (Darkevich 1975, be dated by analogy with other examples. 295-297). A more likely possibility though, is The decoration on all the scabbard chapes that the pieces were initially made by newly settled of this type was made in the form of grooves, in Rus’ Byzantine craftsmen, or in Byzantium, but which were originally filled with niello. In some specially for the elite warriors from Rus’. Subsequently, cases, the niello lines were complemented with such items became widespread. The map of the embossing or engraving. As a rule, only one side distribution of swords of A-local type and the of the chape was decorated. Among the decorations, scabbard chapes of the “Varangian-Livian” group the most characteristic are several variants of plant- suggests that at least part of them were produced in like ornaments in the Byzantine style (Fig. 15:1- the Middle Dnieper region, most likely in the princely 10), as well as a bird or beast in a medallion armorers’ workshops in Kiev. However, just like in (Fig. 15:11-12). the case of “high” silver scabbard chapes (Zo͡tsenko Two scabbard chapes from Latvia (the first 1999; Kainov, Oleĭnikov 2015), it is most likely that one was found in the 10th burial of the Ikšķiles there were several centers of manufacture, which Rumuļi burial ground /Fig. 15:2/, the second may have been located in other cities of Rus’, as one – in Krimulda /Fig. 15:3/), and three chapes well as in the South-Eastern Baltic. from Ukraine (Fig. 15:4-6) have the same plant- like decoration as on the scabbard chape from Conclusion Krasn͡ianka. Based on the consideration of all parts of the The scabbard chapes of the “Varangian-Livian” sword, taking into account their technological, group were made using the same technique as the morphological and decorative features, the sword hilt parts of the Old Russian swords of the A-local can be dated to the first half of the 11th century, most type highlighted above. Moreover, one of the variants likely to the first quarter. All the parts of the sword of the plant-like decoration on the scabbard chapes could have been produced in Old Russian armorers’ coincides with the decoration on the sword from workshops, which is particularly rare for examples Karabchiev (Fig. 15:9-10, 13). It clearly has of bladed weapons of this period. The precious hilt, Byzantine roots and is very similar to the patterns inlayed with silver and copper-alloy, together with of some of the frescoes and mosaics of St. Sophia’s a high-quality blade and a scabbard chape with Cathedral in Kiev (Orlova 2007, Fig. 314, 346-348; a niello decoration in the Byzantine style makes Androshchuk 2013, 89; 2014, 97). the sword from Krasn͡ianka one of the most striking

18 In addition to the sword of Karabchiev itself this variant includes a number of separate parts of the hilt came from unauthorized excavations. 220 Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina weapons of Kievan Rus’. Certain features of the The discovery of such weapons in Pooskol’e sword have parallels among the archaeological – that is, nomadic territory that was not a part of the material of Scandinavia and the Eastern Baltic, Old Rus’ state – confirms active Rus’-Pechenegs but their combination is unique. military interactions.

Bibliography (Transliteration)

Aleksić M. 2010. Some Typological Features of Byzantine Spatha. “Zbornik radova Vizantoloshkog instituta” XLVII, 121-136. Androshchuk F. A. 2003. The “Ljudota Sword?” (An Episode of Contacts Between Britain and Scandinavia in the Late Viking Age). “Ruthenica” 2, 15-25. Androshchuk F. A. 2013. Mechi vikingov. Kiev. Androshchuk F. A. 2014. Viking Swords: Swords and Social aspects of Weaponry in Viking Age Societies. Stockholm. Arne T. J. 1913. Einige Schwert-Ortbänder aus der Wikingerzeit. In: Opuscula Archaeologica Oscari Montelio Septuagenario dicata. Stockholm, 375-390. Asaris J. 1994. 11.-13. gs. zobena maksts bronzas uzgaļu tipi un to izplatība Kurzemē. “Arheoloģija un etnografijā” 17, 21-28. Babenko L. І. 2011 Korotkyĭ narys іstorії vіddіlu arkheolohії Kharkіvs’koho іstorichnoho muze͡iu. In: Vіddіl arkheolohії Kharkіvs’koho іstorichnoho muze͡iu (1991-2010): Bіblіografіchnyĭ pokazhchyk. Kharkіv, 5-16. Baranov G. V. 2017. Vizantiĭskie (sredizemnomorskie) mechi s perekrest’iami s muftoĭ IX-XI vv. “Materialy po Arkheologii i Istorii Antichnogo i Srednevekovogo Kryma. Arkheologiia, istoriia, numizmatika, sfragistika i ėpigrafika” 9, 248-283. Beletskiĭ S. V. 2014. Toporik iz Suzdal’skogo Opol’͡ia. “Stratum plus” 2014/6, 65-72. Darkevich V. P. 1975. Svetskoe iskusstvo Vizantii. Proizvedeni͡ia vizantiĭskogo khudozhestvennogo remesla v Vostochnoĭ Evrope X-XII veka. Moskva. Gopak V. D., D’͡iachenko A. G. 1984. Tekhnika izgotovleni͡ia klinkov drevnerusskikh mecheĭ basseĭna Severskogo Don͡tsa. “Sovetska͡ia arkheologi͡ia” 4, 252-255. Jakobsson M. 1992. Krigarideologi och vikingatida svärdstypologi. Stockholm. Janowski A. 2006. Brązowe i srebrne trzewiki pochew mieczy z X-XIII w. z terenu Polski. Uwagi o proweniencji i datowaniu. “Acta Militaria Mediaevalia” II, 23-50. Janowski A. 2012. Trzewiki pochew mieczy pochodzenia bałtyjskiego znalezione na współczesnych ziemiach polskich. “Pruthenia” VII, 7-35. Janowski A., Kotowicz P. N., Michalak A. 2008. Jeszcze o mieczu z Radymna. “Acta Militaria Mediaevalia” IV, 167-188. Jets I. 2013. Lahingu maod: Skandinaavia 9.-11. sajandi kunstistiilid Eesti arheoloogilistel leidudel. Tallinn. Jērums N. 2013. Divasmeņu zobeni zemgaļu apdzīvotajās teritorijās (5.-14. gs.). “Arheoloģija un etnogrāfija” 26, 74-104. Kainov S. Yu. 2012. Swords from Gnёzdovo. “Acta Militaria Mediaevalia” VIII, 7-68. Kainov S. I͡ u. 2014 Nachal’nye ėtapy formirovani͡ia drevnerusskogo kompleksa boevykh sredstv. In: Voinskie tradi͡tsii v arkheologicheskom kontekste: ot pozdnego latena do pozdnego srednevekov’͡ia. Tula, 97-101. Kainov S. I͡ u. 2019. «Bol’shoĭ» mech iz Chёrnoĭ mogily (predvaritel’nye itogi novogo ėtapa izucheni͡ia). In: Zeml͡ia nasha velika i obil’na... Sankt-Peterburg, 125-139. Kainov S. Iu.,͡ Oleĭnikov O. M. 2015. Model’ dlia izgotovleni͡ia detaleĭ nakonechnikov nozhen mecheĭ (Vlas’evskiĭ 2 raskop, Velikiĭ Novgorod). “Novgorod i Novgorodska͡ia zeml͡ia. Istori͡ia i arkheologi͡ia” 29, 217-225. Kainov S. Iu͡ ., Stefutin S. A. 2012. Navershie mecha iz sobrani͡ia Gosudarstvennogo Istoricheskogo muze͡ia. In: Obrazy vremeni. Iz istorii drevnego iskusstva. Trudy GIM 189. Moskva, 154-161. Kainov S. Iu.,͡ Shchedrina A. Iu.͡ 2019. Novye issledovani͡ia mecheĭ iz Gnёzdova. “Voenna͡ia arkheologi͡ia” 5, 65-99. Katalog... 1902. Katalog vystavki XII Arkheologicheskogo s’’ezda v g. Khar’kove. Otdel drevnosteĭ, dobytykh iz raskopok i sluchaĭnykh nakhodok, Khar’kov. Kazakevičius V. 1992a. The find of an East European sword quillon in a barrow in Visètiškès, Anykščiai district, Lithuania. “Fornvannen” 87, 175-179. Kazakevičius V. 1992b Sword Chapes from Lithuania. In: Die Kontakte zwischen Ostbaltikum und Skandinavien im frühen Mittelalter. Stockholm, 91-107. Kazakevičius V. 1996. IX-XIII a. Baltu Kalavijai. Vilnius. Kazakevičius V. 1998. Iš vėlovojo geležies amžiaus Baltų ginklų istorijos (kalavijų makštų galų apkalai). “Lietuvos Archeologija” 15, 287-332. Kirpichnikov A. N. 1966a. Drevnerusskoe oruzhie. Vyp. 1. Mechi i sabli IX-XIII vv. Arkheologiia͡ SSSR. Svod arkheologicheskikh istochnikov E1-36. Moskva–Leningrad. Kirpichnikov A. N. 1966b. Drevnerusskoe oruzhie. Vyp. 2. Kop’ia͡ , sulits͡ y, boevye topory, bulavy, kisteni IX-XIII vv. Arkheologiia͡ SSSR. Svod arkheologicheskikh istochnikov E1-36. Moskva–Leningrad. Sword from Krasn͡ianka. Complex of traditions and technologies 221

Kirpichnikov A. N. 1998. O nachale proizvodstva mecheĭ na Rusi. In: Trudy VI Mezhdunarodnogo kongressa slavi͡iaanskoĭ arkheologii. Vol. 4. Moskva, 246-251. Kolchin B. A. 1953. Chernai͡a metallurgii͡a i metalloobrabotka v drevneĭ Rusi (Domongol’skiĭ period). Materialy i issledovaniia͡ po arkheologii SSSR 32. Moskva. Kolchin B. A., Khoroshev A. S. 1978. Mikhaĭlovskiĭ raskop. In: Arkheologicheskoe izuchenie Novgoroda. Moskva, 135-173. Korzukhina G. F. 1950. Iz istorii drevnerusskogo oruzhii͡a XI veka. “Sovetskai͡a arkheologii͡a” XIII, 63-94. Košta J., Hošek J. 2014. Early Medieval Swords from Mikulčice. Studien zum Burgwall von Mikulcice X. Brno. Kulakov V. I. 2016. Prusskie derivaty skandinavskoĭ militaria. “Acta Militaria Mediaevalia” XII, 25-33. Makarov N. A., Zaĭtseva I. E., Krasnikova A. M. 2013. Paradnyĭ toporik s kniazheskimi znakami iz Suzdal’skogo Opol’͡ia. In: Fundamental’nye problemy arkheologii, antropologii i ėtnografii Evrazii. Novosibirsk, 435-444. Mandel M. 1991. Eesti 8.-13. sajandi mõõkade tüpoloogiast ja dateerimisest. In: Muinasaja teadus I. Arheoloogiline kogumik. Tallin, 101-133. Moilanen M. 2015. Marks of Fire, Value and Faith. Swords with Ferrous Inlays in Finland during the Late Iron Age (ca. 700–1200 AD). Archaeologia medii aevi Finlandiae XXI. Turku. Mongaĭt A. A. 1955. Materialy i issledovaniia͡ po arkheologii drevnerusskikh gorodov. T.4: Star͡ia R͡iazan’. Materialy i issledovaniia͡ po arkheologii SSSR 49. Moskva. Orlova M. A. 2007. Ornament v zhivopisi kont͡sa X – serediny XI veka. In: Istori͡ia russkogo iskusstva. Tom 1. Iskusstvo Kievskoĭ Rusi IX – pervoĭ chetverti XII veka. Moskva, 325-358. Paulsen P. 1953. Schwertortbander der Wikingerzeit. Stuttgart. Petersen J. 1919. De Norske vikingesverd. En typologisk-kronologisk studie over vikingetidens vaaben. Kristiania. Plavinskiĭ N. A. 2010. Nakonechniki nozhen mecheĭ X-XIII vv. s territorii Belorussii. In: Slaviano-russkoe iu͡ velirnoe delo i ego istoki. Sankt-Peterburg, 505-515. Redin E. K. 1903. Al’bom vystavki XII arkheologicheskogo s’’ezda v g. Khar’kove. Moskva. Shchedrina A. Iu͡ . 2018. Novyĭ vzglia͡ d na detal’ mecha iz kollekts͡ ii Khar’kovskogo istoricheskogo muzeia͡ . “Khar’kovskiĭ istoriko-arkheologicheskiĭ sbornik” 23, 18-32. Shramko B. A. 1962. Drevnosti Severskogo Dont͡sa. Khar’kov. Sikora P. 2003. Frühmittelalterliche Ortbänder bei West- und Ostslawen. Versuch einer typologisch-chronologischen Einordnung. “Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters” 31, 11-38. Sil’chenko T. N., Sorokin S. S. 1959. Rentgenograficheskie issledovaniia͡ zheleznykh izdeliĭ iz Sarkela-Beloĭ Vezhi. In: Trudy Volgo-Donskoĭ arkheologicheskoĭ ėkspedits͡ ii II. Materialy i issledovani͡ia po arkheologii SSSR 75. Moskva–Leningrad. Stasiu͡ k I. V. 2017 K probleme izucheniia͡ rannego drevnerusskogo obshchestva na severo-zapadnoĭ granitse Novgorodskoĭ zemli. In: Élite ou Égalité… Severnai͡a Rus’ i kul’turnye transformats͡ ii v Evrope VII-XII vv. Sankt-Peterburg, 116-123. Tavares J. J. 2019. Medieval Arms and Armor at the Art Institute of Chicago. “Acta Militaria Mediaevalia” XIV, 249-266. Tomsons A. 2018. Zobeni Latvijas teritorijā no 7. līdz 16. gadsimtam. Riga. Varfolomeeva T. S. 1994. Metallicheskie detali kozhanykh futlia͡ rov XI-XV vv. iz raskopok v Novgorode. “Novgorod i Novgorodskaia͡ zemlia.͡ Istoriia͡ i arkheologiia”͡ 8, 166-182. Williams A. 2009. A Metallurgical Study of some Viking Swords. “Gladius” XXIX, 121-184. Yotov V. 2011. A new Byzantine type of swords (7th-11th centuries). “Nish i Vizantiјa” IX, 113-124. Yotov V. 2014. The Kunágota sword-guard, and two bronze matrices for sword-hilt manufacture from Iran. In: L. Doncheva-Petkova, C. Balogh, A. Türk (eds.), Avars, Bulgars and Magyars on the Middle and Lower Danube, Sofiia–Piliscsaba, 125-132. Żabiński G., Stępiński J., Biborski M. 2014. Technology of sword blades from the La Tène Period to the early Modern Age: the case of what is now Poland. Oxford. Žákovský P., Hošek J., Sedláčková L. 2013. Meče 11.-13. století z území Moravy. “Archaeologia Historica” 38, 219-270. Zots͡ enko V. N. 1983. Eksport zbroї Ki͡ieva v Pіvdenno-Skhіdnu Prybaltyku. “Arkheologі͡ia” 44, 47-61. Zots͡ enko V. N. 1999. Vysokie nakonechniki nozhen mecheĭ konts͡ a X – nachala XI vv. In: Rannesrednevekovye drevnosti Severnoĭ Rusi i ee sosedeĭ. Sankt-Peterburg, 35-48.

Bibliography

Aleksić M. 2010. Some Typological Features of Byzantine Spatha. “Zbornik radova Vizantoloshkog instituta” XLVII, 121-136. Androshchuk F. A. 2003. The “Ljudota Sword?” (An Episode of Contacts Between Britain and Scandinavia in the Late Viking Age). “Ruthenica” 2, 15-25. Андрощук Ф. А. 2013. Мечи викингов. Киев. Androshchuk F. A. 2014. Viking Swords: Swords and Social aspects of Weaponry in Viking Age Societies. Stockholm. 222 Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina

Arne T. J. 1913. Einige Schwert-Ortbänder aus der Wikingerzeit. In: Opuscula Archaeologica Oscari Montelio Septuagenario dicata. Stockholm, 375-390. Asaris J. 1994. 11.-13. gs. zobena maksts bronzas uzgaļu tipi un to izplatība Kurzemē. “Arheoloģija un etnografijā” 17, 21-28. Бабенко Л. І. 2011. Короткий нарис історії відділу археології Харківського історичного музею. In: Відділ археології Харківського історичного музею (1991-2010): Бібліографічний покажчик. Харків, 5-16. Баранов Г. В. 2017. Византийские (средиземноморские) мечи с перекрестьями с муфтой IX-XI вв. “Материалы по Археологии и Истории Античного и Средневекового Крыма. Археология, история, нумизматика, сфрагистика и эпиграфика” 9, 248-283. Белецкий С. В. 2014. Топорик из Суздальского Ополья. “Stratum plus” 2014/6, 65-72. Даркевич В. П. 1975. Светское искусство Византии. Произведения византийского художественного ремесла в Восточной Европе X-XII века. Москва. Гопак В. Д., Дьяченко А. Г. 1984. Техника изготовления клинков древнерусских мечей бассейна Северского Донца. “Советская археология” 4, 252-255. Jakobsson M. 1992. Krigarideologi och vikingatida svärdstypologi. Stockholm. Janowski A. 2006. Brązowe i srebrne trzewiki pochew mieczy z X-XIII w. z terenu Polski. Uwagi o proweniencji i datowaniu. “Acta Militaria Mediaevalia” II, 23-50. Janowski A. 2012. Trzewiki pochew mieczy pochodzenia bałtyjskiego znalezione na współczesnych ziemiach polskich. “Pruthenia” VII, 7-35. Janowski A., Kotowicz P. N., Michalak A. 2008. Jeszcze o mieczu z Radymna. “Acta Militaria Mediaevalia” IV, 167-188. Jets I. 2013. Lahingu maod: Skandinaavia 9.-11. sajandi kunstistiilid Eesti arheoloogilistel leidudel. Tallinn. Jērums N. 2013. Divasmeņu zobeni zemgaļu apdzīvotajās teritorijās (5.-14. gs.). “Arheoloģija un etnogrāfija” 26, 74-104. Kainov S. Yu. 2012. Swords from Gnёzdovo. “Acta Militaria Mediaevalia” VIII, 7-68. Каинов С. Ю. 2014. Начальные этапы формирования древнерусского комплекса боевых средств. In: Воинские традиции в археологическом контексте: от позднего латена до позднего средневековья. Тула, 97-101. Каинов С. Ю. 2019. «Большой» меч из Чёрной могилы (предварительные итоги нового этапа изучения). In: Земля наша велика и обильна... Санкт-Петербург, 125-139. Каинов С. Ю., Олейников О. М. 2015. Модель для изготовления деталей наконечников ножен мечей (Власьевский 2 раскоп, Великий Новгород). “Новгород и Новгородская земля. История и археология” 29, 217-225. Каинов С. Ю., Стефутин С. А. 2012. Навершие меча из собрания Государственного Исторического музея. In: Образы времени. Из истории древнего искусства. Труды ГИМ 189. Москва, 154-161. Каинов С. Ю., Щедрина А. Ю. 2019. Новые исследования мечей из Гнёздова. “Военная археология” 5, 65-99. Каталог... 1902. Каталог выставки XII Археологического съезда в г. Харькове. Отдел древностей, добытых из раскопок и случайных находок. Харьков. Kazakevičius V. 1992a. The find of an East European sword quillon in a barrow in Visètiškès, Anykščiai district, Lithuania. “Fornvannen” 87, 175-179. Kazakevičius V. 1992b Sword Chapes from Lithuania. In: Die Kontakte zwischen Ostbaltikum und Skandinavien im frühen Mittelalter. Stockholm, 91-107. Kazakevičius V. 1996. IX-XIII a. Baltu Kalavijai. Vilnius. Kazakevičius V. 1998. Iš vėlovojo geležies amžiaus Baltų ginklų istorijos (kalavijų makštų galų apkalai). “Lietuvos Archeologija” 15, 287-332. Кирпичников А. Н. 1966a. Древнерусское оружие. Вып. 1. Мечи и сабли IX-XIII вв. Археология СССР. Свод археологических источников E1-36. Москва–Ленинград. Кирпичников А. Н. 1966b. Древнерусское оружие. Вып. 2. Копья, сулицы, боевые топоры, булавы, кистени IX-XIII вв. Археология СССР. Свод археологических источников E1-36, Москва–Ленинград. Кирпичников А. Н. 1998. О начале производства мечей на Руси. In: Труды VI Международного конгресса славянской археологии. Vol. 4. Москва, 246-251. Колчин Б. А. 1953. Черная металлургия и металлообработка в древней Руси (Домонгол'кий период). Ма- терялы и исследованния по археологии СССР 32. Москва. Колчин Б. А., Хорошев А. С. 1978. Михайловский раскоп. In: Археологическое изучение Новгорода. Москва, 135-173. Корзухина Г. Ф. 1950. Из истории древнерусского оружия XI века. “Советская археология” XIII, 63-94. Košta J., Hošek J. 2014. Early Medieval Swords from Mikulčice. Studien zum Burgwall von Mikulcice X. Brno. Кулаков В. И. 2016 Прусские дериваты скандинавской militaria. “Acta Militaria Mediaevalia” XII, 25-33. Макаров Н. А., Зайцева И. Е., Красникова А. М. 2013. Парадный топорик с княжескими знаками из Суздальского Ополья. In: Фундаментальные проблемы археологии, антропологии и этнографии Евразии. Новосибирск, 435-444. Mandel M. 1991. Eesti 8.-13. sajandi mõõkade tüpoloogiast ja dateerimisest. In: Muinasaja teadus I. Arheoloogiline kogumik. Tallin, 101-133. Moilanen M. 2015. Marks of Fire, Value and Faith. Swords with Ferrous Inlays in Finland during the Late Iron Age (ca. 700–1200 AD). Archaeologia medii aevi Finlandiae XXI. Turku. Sword from Krasn͡ianka. Complex of traditions and technologies 223

Монгайт А. А. 1955. Материалы и исследования по археологии древнерусских городов. Т.4: Старая Рязань. Материалы и исследования по археологии СССР 49. Москва. Орлова М. А. 2007. Орнамент в живописи конца X – середины XI века. In: История русского искусства. Том 1. Искусство Киевской Руси IX – первой четверти XII века. Москва, 325-358. Paulsen P. 1953. Schwertortbander der Wikingerzeit. Stuttgart. Petersen J. 1919. De Norske vikingesverd. En typologisk-kronologisk studie over vikingetidens vaaben. Kristiania. Плавинский Н. А. 2010. Наконечники ножен мечей X-XIII вв. с территории Белоруссии. In: Славяно-русское ювелирное дело и его истоки. Санкт-Петербург, 505-515. Редин Е. К. 1903. Альбом выставки XII археологического съезда в г. Харькове. Москва. Щедрина А. Ю. 2018. Новый взгляд на деталь меча из коллекции Харьковского исторического музея. “Харьковский историко-археологический сборник” 23, 18-32. Шрамко Б. А. 1962. Древности Северского Донца. Харьков. Sikora P. 2003. Frühmittelalterliche Ortbänder bei West- und Ostslawen. Versuch einer typologisch-chronologischen Einordnung. “Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters” 31, 11-38. Сильченко Т. Н., Сорокин С. С. 1959. Рентгенографические исследования железных изделий из Саркела- Белой Вежи. In: Труды Волго-Донской археологической экспедиции II. Материалы и исследования по археологии СССР 75. Москва–Ленинград. Стасюк И. В. 2017. К проблеме изучения раннего древнерусского общества на северо-западной границе Новгородской земли. In: Élite ou Égalité… Северная Русь и культурные трансформации в Европе VII-XII вв. Санкт-Петербург, 116-123. Tavares J. J. 2019. Medieval Arms and Armor at the Art Institute of Chicago. “Acta Militaria Mediaevalia” XIV, 249-266. Tomsons A. 2018. Zobeni Latvijas teritorijā no 7. līdz 16. gadsimtam. Riga. Варфоломеева Т. С. 1994. Металлические детали кожаных футляров XI-XV вв. из раскопок в Новгороде. “Новгород и Новгородская земля. История и археология” 8, 166-182. Williams A. 2009. A Metallurgical Study of some Viking Swords. “Gladius” XXIX, 121-184. Yotov V. 2011. A new Byzantine type of swords (7th-11th centuries). “Nish i Vizantiјa” IX, 113-124. Yotov V. 2014. The Kunágota sword-guard, and two bronze matrices for sword-hilt manufacture from Iran. In: L. Doncheva-Petkova, C. Balogh, A. Türk (eds.), Avars, Bulgars and Magyars on the Middle and Lower Danube, Sofiia–Piliscsaba, 125-132. Żabiński G., Stępiński J., Biborski M. 2014. Technology of sword blades from the La Tène Period to the early Modern Age: the case of what is now Poland. Oxford. Žákovský P., Hošek J., Sedláčková L. 2013. Meče 11.-13. století z území Moravy. “Archaeologia Historica” 38, 219-270. Зоценко В. Н. 1983. Експорт зброї Києва в Південно-Східну Прибалтику. “Археологія” 44, 47-61. Зоценко В. Н. 1999. Высокие наконечники ножен мечей конца X – начала XI вв. In: Раннесредневековые древности Северной Руси и ее соседей. Санкт-Петербург, 35-48.

Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina

MIECZ Z KRASNÂNKI. ZESPÓŁ TRADYCJI I TECHNOLOGII

Streszczenie

Cenny miecz wczesnośredniowieczny odnale- ficznie w l. 80. XX w. Ma ona strukturę skuwaną, ziony został w 1900 r. w pobliżu wsi Krasnânka z dwoma obszarami strukturalnymi – stalowym w rejonie ługańskim na Ukrainie. Wszystkie części i żelaznym. Wąska warstwa stali pokrywa z jednej rękojeści wykonano z żelaza, a następnie w całości strony rdzeń żelazny i tworzy ostrza. Struktura pokryto je inkrustacją ze srebra i miedzi. A. N. Kir- głowni zapewnia jej wytrzymałość, choć takie roz- pičnikov zaklasyfikował miecz do typu A-miej- wiązanie nie jest typowe dla mieczy europejskich scowy. Zdaniem autorki miecz z Krasnânki należy wczesnego średniowiecza. Wraz z mieczem odna- jednak wydzielić z tego typu i uznać za typ osobny. leziono także trzewik pochwy, zdobiony dekoracją Głownia miecza została przebadana metalogra- niello w stylu bizantyjskim. 224 Alexandra Yu. Shchedrina

Biorąc pod uwagę wszystkie części miecza wśród znalezisk ze Skandynawii i strefy wschodnio- i uwzględniając ich cechy technologiczne, morfologiczne bałtyckiej, lecz ich kombinacja jest unikatowa. oraz ornament, miecz datować można na pierwszą Odkrycie takiej broni w rejonie rzeki Oskoł, czyli połowę XI w., najprawdopodobniej na jego pierwszą na terytorium koczowniczym niebędącym częścią ćwierć. Wszystkie części miecza mogły zostać wy- państwa dawnej Rusi, potwierdza aktywne interakcje konane w produkujących broń warsztatach dawnej wojenne między Rusią a Pieczyngami. Rusi, co jest szczególną rzadkością dla broni siecznej w tym okresie. Niektóre cechy miecza mają analogie Tłumaczył Grzegorz Żabiński