585Arheološki vestnik 73, 2022, 585–600; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/AV.73.15; CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 Jelenšek nad Godovičem. Gradišče in grobišče iz starejše železne dobe Jelenšek above Godovič (Slovenia). Hillfort and cemetery from the Early Iron Age Patricija BRATINA, Boštjan LAHARNAR, Drago SVOLJŠAK Izvleček Na sedlu severno od gradišča na Jelenšku nad Godovičem pri Idriji sta iskalca “ajdovskega zaklada z Jelenška” naletela na železnodobne grobove z bogatimi pridatki. Odkritju je leta 1993 sledilo zaščitno arheološko izkopavanje. Raziskanih je bilo 37 planih žganih grobov. Grobni pridatki kažejo zelo uniformno podobo in grobišče datirajo v mladohalštatski stopnji Sv. Lucija IIb2 in IIc. Med pokopanimi so bili bojevniki, rokodelec (livar), ženske in morda otroci. V članku kratko predstavljamo način pokopa in grobne pridatke ter utemeljujemo datacijo najdišča na primeru fibul. Sledi pred- stavitev nekaterih opažanj in izhodišč za analizo pomena najdišča v starejši železni dobi, ko je bil Jelenšek na meji dveh zahodnoslovenskih halštatskih skupin, posoške (svetolucijske) in notranjsko-kraške. Ključne besede: Posočje; Godovič nad Idrijo; Jelenšek; starejša železna doba; Sv. Lucija IIb2–IIc; gradišče; grobišče; arheološke najdbe Abstract The saddle north of the hillfort on Jelenšek, an elevation above Godovič near Idrija, is the site where two seekers of a ‘pagan treasure from Jelenšek’ stumbled upon Iron Age burials with rich goods. This discovery was followed by rescue archaeological excavations in 1993 that unearthed 37 flat cremation burials. The goods are quite uniform and date to the Late Hallstatt phases of Sv. Lucija IIb2 and IIc. The interred individuals were warriors, one a craftsman (foundryman), women and possibly also children. The article briefly presents the burial rite, grave goods and dating of the site based on fibulae. This is followed by a discussion on the significance of the site in the Early Iron Age, when Jelenšek lay at the border between two Hallstatt groups of western Slovenia, namely the Posočje (Sveta Lucija) and Notranjska-Kras groups. Keywords: Posočje; Godovič above Idrija; Jelenšek; Early Iron Age; Sv. Lucija IIb2–IIc; hillfort; cemetery; archaeo- logical finds Jelenšek je dominantna vzpetina (vrh na 817 m n. v.) nad Godovičem (sl. 1), razloženo vasjo v severozahodnem izteku Notranjskega podolja in dobrih 6 kilometrov zračne črte jugovzhodno nad Idrijo. Na vrhu Jelenška je prazgodovinsko gradiš- če. Njegovo obzidje je ohranjeno kot ruševinska groblja in oklepa 0,65 ha velik prostor. Dostop v gradišče je bil na zahodni strani, vodil je med južnim pobočjem hriba in vrhom večje vrtače, ki leži zahodno od gradišča. Vhodna ulica je bila utrjena z vzporedno potekajočima zidovoma in morda stolpom. V notranjosti gradišča se razvrščajo terase, na katerih je razbrati sledove stavb (sl. 2). Iskalca zaklada, ki naj bi bil po ljudski pripovedi zakopan v ajdovski trdnjavi na Jelenšku, sta aprila leta 1993 z iskalnikom kovin na sedlu severno 586 Patricija BRATINA, Boštjan LAHARNAR, Drago SVOLJŠAK od gradišča (sl. 2) naletela na grobove iz starejše železne dobe. Izkopala sta več pridatkov, ki sta jih prinesla v Narodni muzej Slovenije. Odkritju je poleti 1993 sledilo reševalno arheološko izko- pavanje ekipe Narodnega muzeja Slovenije (NMS) in Zavoda za varstvo kulturne dediščine, območna enota Nova Gorica,1 ki sta ga vodila Drago Svoljšak in Patricija Bratina.2 Sistematično so bili raziskani najbolj ogroženi in izpostavljeni deli grobišča,3 skupno okoli 160 m2 površine, z večjim, 6 m × 24 m velikim izkopom in petimi manjšimi izkopi, kjer je bil predhodno zaznan intenzivnejši signal z detektorjem za kovine.4 Raziskanih je bilo 37 planih žganih grobov. Štiri sta prekopala že iskalca zaklada. Med izkopavanji ali med pripravami nanje so neznani tatovi izpraznili še dva grobova, iz groba 12 (grob livarja s kalupi in brusi)5 (sl. 5) pa so odtujili sulično ost in sekiro. Doslej so bile o najdišču objavljene v strokov- ni literaturi krajše notice.6 Predstavljeni so bili rezultati arheobotaničnih raziskav, ki temeljijo na 359 primerkih oglja iz 17 grobov.7 Na stalni arheološki razstavi v NMS in spremnih katalogih 1 Takrat je bil to Zavod za varstvo naravne in kulturne dediščine Nova Gorica. 2 Pri raziskavah sta pomagali Jana Šubic Prislan in Beatriče Žbona Trkman iz Goriškega muzeja. 3 Bratina 1994b, 46. 4 Svoljšak 1997. 5 Laharnar, Turk 2017, 123, sl. 141. 6 Bratina 1994a; ead. 1994b, 45–46; ead. 1997; Svoljšak 1997; id. 2001, 131, sl. 2; Mlinar 2018, 57, sl. 8. 7 Culiberg 2020, 251–252. je prikazan izbor predmetov iz dveh grobov. Med njimi so orožje, nakit, kamniti brus in kamniti livarski kalupi.8 Objavljene so tudi slikovite foto- grafije izbranih grobnih najdb Tomaža Lauka in spremno besedilo Draga Svoljšaka.9 Celovito objavo grobišča pripravljamo avtorji tega članka. Tukaj kratko predstavljamo način pokopa, grobne pridatke in datacijo najdišča po fibulah. Sledi predstavitev nekaterih opažanj in izhodišč za analizo pomena najdišča v starejši železni dobi, ko je bil Jelenšek na meji dveh zahodnoslovenskih halštatskih skupin, posoške (svetolucijske) in notranjsko-kraške. NAČIN POKOPA Vsi grobovi so bili žgani. Grobne jame so bile vkopane skozi tanek sloj humusa, največkrat v ru- menkasto ilovnato prst med rebri žive skale. Včasih so za grobno jamo izluščili nekaj lahko lomljive apnenčaste skale ali pa so jo vanjo vklesali (sl. 3). V tlorisu so bile grobne jame praviloma okrogle ali ovalne oblike (t. 1–3) s premeri od 0,18 do 0,90 m in globinami od okoli 0,15 do 0,36 m. Grobne jame so bile v sedmih primerih obložene s kamni v obliki (kamnitega) venca ali pa so bili ti založeni ob stene grobne jame. 8 Laharnar, Turk 2017, 123, sl. 140–141. 9 Koledar Prostovoljnega gasilskega društva in Kra- jevne skupnosti Godovič za leto 2014 (Dokumentacija Arheološkega oddelka NMS). Sl. 1: Jelenšek nad Godovičem, gradišče. Pogled z jugozahoda. Fig. 1: Jelenšek above Godovič, the hillfort. View from the southwest. 587Jelenšek nad Godovičem. Gradišče in grobišče iz starejše železne dobe Petindvajset grobov je imelo kamnit pokrov, največkrat iz ploščatih apnenčastih lomljencev, izluščenih iz okoliške skalne osnove, ki so posamič ali v skupinah grobne jame pokrivali le deloma, nikoli v celoti. V grobne jame je bila nasuta žganina, mešanica ostalin grmade in sežganih pokojnikov oz. njihovih nedogorelih kosti. V nekaterih primerih so bile te skrbno zbrane, največkrat v kepicah, v drugih so bile razsute po grobni jami. Med nedogorelimi človeški- mi kostmi so bili v nekaj grobovih tudi nedogorele živalske kosti in zobje, kar nakazuje običaj sežiganja žrtvovane živali na grmadi ali grobno pojedino. Pridatke je vsebovalo 35 grobov. Tisti, ki so ožgani in poškodovani od ognja, so bili verjetno sežgani skupaj z umrlimi, drugi so bili položeni v grob med pogrebom. Pridatki so bili večinoma zbrani v skupini, največkrat skupaj z izbranimi nedogorelimi človeškimi kostmi, včasih pomešani mednje ali nanje položeni (sl. 3; t. 1–3). Redko so bili pridatki razpršeni po zasutju grobne jame. GROBNI PRIDATKI Med raziskanimi grobovi sta bila brez pridatkov le dva. V ostalih so bili fibule in drugi predmeti noše (zapestnice, uhani, prstani in obročki, kalo- tasti gumbi, košaričasti obeski, steklene in jantarne jagode), orožje in orodje (sl. 3–6; t. 1–3). V enem grobu so bili odlomki najmanj dveh bronastih kultnih palic (žvenkljač ali sceptrov). Keramična posoda ali odlomki keramike so bili v 11 grobovih (npr. v gr. 19: t. 1: 18–19). Iz keramike je tudi zo- omorfna figurica s poglobitvijo na hrbtu in izlivno luknjico (t. 2: 9). Orožje je bilo pridatek v 18 grobovih (sl. 3; 4; t. 2: 7–8; 3: 2). Največkrat v kombinaciji sulične osti in sekire. Sekire so na uho, tulaste ali plavutaste z dvojnimi ali enojnimi plavutmi (sl. 3; 4; t. 2: 8; 3: 2). Med grobovi z orožjem izstopajo grob 10 z enoreznim mečem (mahairo), uhato sekiro, sulično Sl. 2: Jelenšek nad Godovičem. Prikaz digitalnega modela reliefa po lidarskih podatkih z interpretacijo arheoloških sledov. Fig. 2: Jelenšek above Godovič. LiDAR-derived DEM and the interpretation of the archaeological traces. (Vir/ Source: portal eVode ©MOP RS) Sl. 3: Jelenšek nad Godovičem. Grob 17 med izkopavan- jem. Uhata sekira in certoška fibula, položeni na žganino s prežganimi človeškimi kostmi (glej t. 3). Fig. 3: Jelenšek above Godovič. Grave 17 during excavation. The shaft-hole axe and Certosa fibula were placed on top of the ashes with cremated human remains (see Pl. 3). 588 Patricija BRATINA, Boštjan LAHARNAR, Drago SVOLJŠAK ostjo in suličnim kopitom, grob 12 s sulično ostjo, sekiro, kamnitimi kalupi in brusi (sl. 5) ter grob 16 z dvema suličnima ostema, tulasto sekiro, sekiro z enojnimi plavutmi in bronasto negovsko čelado. Ta je bila poškodovana od ognja in razkosana (110 odlomkov). Med ženskimi grobovi oziroma grobovi brez orožja (npr. grob 19, t. 1) posebno mesto pripa- da osebi iz groba 1, ki je bila pokopana s petimi fibulami, uhani, desetinami odlomkov trakastih zapestnic, košaričastim obeskom ter orodjem – nožem, šilom, dletcem in kopačo. Poseben status je morala imeti tudi ženska z razkošno opravo in kultnima palicama iz groba 18. Ugotavljamo, da so bili na Jelenšku pokopani odrasli predstavniki obeh spolov in verjetno tudi otroci.10 Iz pridatkov sklepamo o bojevnikih raz- ličnih rangov in ženskah s pomembnim družbenim položajem. DATACIJA Celostna tipološka in kronološka analiza grobnih pridatkov bi presegla okvir tega prispevka, zato bomo predlagano datacijo grobov z Jelenška v mladohalštatski stopnji Sv. Lucija IIb–c11 oziroma 10 Antropološka analiza Petre Leben Seljak (Arhiv Arheološkega oddelka NMS). 11 Bratina 1994a, 110. Sl. 4: Jelenšek nad Godovičem. Izbor železnega orožja iz grobov: uhati in tulasti sekiri, sekira z obojestranskimi plavutmi in sulične osti. Fig. 4: Jelenšek above Godovič. Selection of iron weapons from graves: shaft-hole, socketed and winged axes, as well as spearheads. 589Jelenšek nad Godovičem. Gradišče in grobišče iz starejše železne dobe stopnjo Sv. Lucija IIc12 kratko utemeljili zgolj na primeru fibul. Fibule so bile pridatek v 27 grobovih. V 24 gro- bovih so bile to certoške fibule (z enim do tremi primerki v grobu, sl. 6: 3–7; t. 3: 1), v treh grobovih trortaste fibule (sl. 6: 1), v enem grobu čolničasta fibula s samostrelno peresovino (sl. 6: 2; t. 1: 1) in v enem odlomek železne fibule nedoločljive vrste. Prevladujejo certoške fibule. S po enim primer- kom je zastopana vrsta VIIa,13 XI. vrsta nastopa z dvema, XIII. vrsta s petimi, X. vrsta z devetimi in XII. vrsta z desetimi primerki. Vse oblike to- 12 Bratina 1997; Svoljšak 1997; id. 2001, 131. 13 Pri tipološki opredelitvi sledimo tipologiji certoških fibul po Bibi Teržan (1976, 318–341). rej pripadajo mlajšim oz. najmlajšim izvedbam certoških fibul. Najbolj “arhaična” in osamljena oblika med godoviškimi certoškimi fibulami je različica VIIa (sl. 6: 3), ki na Dolenjskem velja za novost v moški noši certoškega horizonta, a se pojavlja tudi še v negovskem horizontu.14 Med zgodnejšimi certoškimi fibulami na Jelenšku so certoške fibule XIII. vrste (sl. 6: 7). Te se na Mostu na Soči pojavljajo v grobovih stopnje Sv. Lucija IIb2.15 Fibuli XIII. vrste sta bili v grobu 2 na Pucarjevem robu na Mostu na Soči, ki je bil 14 Teržan 1976, 357, t. 11: 1–2; 60: 4; Tecco Hvala, Dular, Kocuvan 2004, t. 56: 1–2; Tecco Hvala 2012, 251. 15 Teržan 1976, 361, sl. 29: 3. Sl. 5: Jelenšek nad Godovičem. Grob 12 (‚grob livarja‘). Izbor pridatkov: kamniti kalupi in brusni kamen (po Laharnar, Turk 2017, 123, sl. 141). Fig. 5: Jelenšek above Godovič. Grave 12 (‘burial of a founder’). Select goods: stone moulds and whetstone (from La- harnar, Turk 2018, 123, Fig. 141). 590 Patricija BRATINA, Boštjan LAHARNAR, Drago SVOLJŠAK stratigrafsko jasno, okoli 30 cm nižje od groba 6 z orožjem, datiranega v stopnjo Sv. Lucija IIc.16 Certoška fibula XIII. vrste je bila na Jelenšku dvakrat v grobu skupaj s trortasto fibulo (sl. 6: 1). Pomembna oblikovna značilnost certoških fibul XIII. vrste je samostrelna peresovina,17 ki jo domnevamo tudi pri trortastih fibulah z Jelenška. To med dru- 16 Mlinar 2020, 17–19, 33, sl. 5; t. 3B: 1–2. 17 Teržan 1976, 338, sl. 5. gim nakazuje zaključek loka fibule iz groba 1 (sl. 6: 1). Ta je zapognjen v zanko, ki je najverjetneje služila namestitvi samostrelne peresovine. Po Mariji Ogrin so trortaste fibule s samostrelno peresovino označene kot vrsta XI.18 Že Ogrinova je na seznam posoških najdišč tovrstnih fibul uvrstila primerka s Koritnice ob Bači in iz Bodreža,19 ki smo ga 18 Ogrin 1998, 114–115. 19 Ogrin 1998, 115. Sl. 6: Jelenšek nad Godovičem. Fibule iz grobov: – trortasta (1; gr. 1); – čolničasta s samostrelno peresovino (2; gr. 19); – certoške fibule: vrste VIIa (3; gr. 21); X. vrste (4; gr. 17); XI. vrste (5; gr. 2); XII. vrste (6; gr. 16); XIII. vrste (7; gr. 33). Vse bron. M. = 1:2. Fig. 6: Jelenšek above Godovič. Fibulae from graves: – three-knobbed fibula (1; Gr. 1); – boat fibula with a crossbow spring (2; Gr. 19); – Certosa fibulae: Type VIIa (3; Gr. 21); Type X (4; Gr. 17); Type XI (5; Gr. 2); Type XII (6; Gr. 16); Type XIII (7; Gr. 33). All bronze. Scale = 1:2. 591Jelenšek nad Godovičem. Gradišče in grobišče iz starejše železne dobe dopolnili s fibulami z Berlotovega roba, Mosta na Soči, iz Jerovce na Šentviški planoti, Dernazzacca pri Čedadu, Paulara-Misincinis v Karniji in Goleka pri Vinici v Beli krajini.20 Klasične, velike certoške fibule X. vrste (sl. 6: 4) so značilne za stopnjo Sv. Lucija IIc.21 Godoviške primerke iz grobov z orožjem lahko prepričljivo uvrstimo tudi v t. i. bojevniški horizont najmlaj- šega halštatskega časa (Ha D3) na območju med Padom in Donavo.22 V isti časovni okvir sodijo certoške fibule XI. vrste (sl. 6: 5). Primerka z Jelenška sta bila, podobno kot na Magdalenski gori nad Šmarjem,23 v grobu s certoško fibulo X. vrste in orožjem. Najštevilnejše med certoškimi fibulami na Jelenšku so certoške fibule XII. vrste (sl. 6: 6). Zanje je značilen lok trikotnega preseka, ki je na najvišjem delu okrašen z bradavičastima izrastko- ma.24 Pojavljajo se v različno velikih in bolj ali manj okrašenih izvedbah25 od Posočja26 do Like in Sane.27 Na Dolenjskem označujejo zadnjo fazo negovskega horizonta,28 medtem ko je močno ožgan primerek iz hiše 7 na Mostu na Soči29 povezan s požarom v času Sv. Lucija IIc.30 Čolničasta fibula s samostrelno peresovino (sl. 6: 2) oz. različica Gurina vrste Villach po Gleirscherju31 ima v Posočju več primerjav32 in jo datiramo v 5. in 4. st. pr. n. št.33 JELENŠEK V STAREJŠI ŽELEZNI DOBI Celovita analiza arheoloških raziskav na Jelenšku še ni dokončana, kljub temu pa lahko nakažemo nekatere ugotovitve in izhodišča za razpravo o pomenu najdišča. 20 Laharnar, Mlinar 2013, 14–16, sl. 5; 8: 1. 21 Teržan 1976, 383, 393, sl. 31; Mlinar 2020, 71. 22 Teržan 1977, 9–21. 23 Tecco Hvala 2012, 254–255, sl. 94: 13–14; 97. 24 Teržan 1976, 337–338, t. 78: 3. 25 Laharnar 2018, 203–204, sl. 2. 26 Mlinar 2020, 71, t. 42B: 9. 27 Teržan 1976, 372, sl. 41. 28 Teržan 1976, 371. 29 Žbona Trkman, Svoljšak 1981, kat. št. 22; Svoljšak, Dular 2016, 77, t. 28: 1; Laharnar 2018, 204, sl. 2: 1. 30 Dular 2018, 151, sl. 2. 31 Gleirscher 2021, 86, 97, sl. 2, seznam A. 32 Glej v tej publikaciji Laharnar, Mlinar 2022 (Gradec pri Krnu, t. 3: 1). 33 Gleirscher 2021, 92. Grobišče na Jelenšku ni v celoti raziskano,34 zato njegovega obsega in časovnega razpona ne moremo povsem razložiti. Raziskani grobovi izkazujejo običaj pokopavanja sežganih ostankov umrlih in grmade ter pridajanja standardiziranih sestavov grobnih pridatkov. Certoška fibula vrste VIIa (sl. 6: 3), certoške fibule XIII. vrste (sl. 6: 7), trortaste fibule s samo- strelno peresovino (sl. 6: 1) in morda čolničasta fibula s samostrelno peresovino (sl. 6: 2; t. 1: 1) nakazujejo začetek grobišča v stopnji Sv. Lucija IIb2. Glavnino pridatkov datiramo v zadnje ob- dobje halštatske kulture v jugovzhodnoalpskem prostoru, ki sovpada s fazo Sv. Lucija IIc posoške in negovsko stopnjo dolenjske kulturne skupine. To velja predvsem za fibule, med katerimi pre- vladujejo pozne izvedbe certoških fibul X., XI. in XII. vrste (sl. 6: 4–6; t. 3: 1), pa tudi za orožje (sl. 4; t. 2: 7–8; 3: 2). Dejstvo je, da tako med grobnimi pridatki kot med posamičnimi najdbami izven grobov ni značilnih predmetov stopnje Sv. Lucija IIb1 (npr. zgodnjih oblik certoških fibul) niti latenskih predmetov. Prav orožje, ki je bilo v 18 grobovih, daje gro- bišču izrazit pečat. Kaže, da v pridatkih odseva vojaška hierarhija, na vrhu katere je bil bojevnik z negovsko čelado. Najdbe poljedelskega (kopače, t. 1: 11) in te- sarskega (verjetno masivnejše plavutaste sekire) orodja, šila (t. 2: 5–6), dletca, kamniti brusi in livarski pripomočki (sl. 5) nakazujejo samozado- stno skupnost. Sestavljali so jo moški in ženske, nekatere verjetno s pomembnim družbenim po- ložajem (grob 1 z razkošnim nakitom in grob 18 s kultnima palicama) ter po antropološki analizi tudi otroci. Jelenšek nad Godovičem prištevamo med naj- dišča posoške (svetolucijske) halštatske skupine.35 Leži na jugovzhodnem obrobju njenega območja. Morda ga lahko razumemo kot obmejno nadzorno postojanko v celostno zasnovani strategiji obrambe teritorija posoške skupine.36 Vsekakor se Jelenšek kaže kot mejna postojanka med svetolucijsko in notranjsko-kraško halštatsko skupino. S posoškimi grobišči ga povezujejo plani 34 Bratina 1994b, 46. 35 Bratina 1994a; ead. 1994b; ead. 1997; Svoljšak 1997; id. 2001, 131, sl. 2; Mlinar, Tecco Hvala 2022 – v tej publikaciji. 36 Svoljšak 1986, 50–54; id. 2001, 131–132, sl. 2. 592 Patricija BRATINA, Boštjan LAHARNAR, Drago SVOLJŠAK in žgani pokop, pokrivanje grobov s kamnitimi ploščami ter drobna materialna kultura. Vendar je plani žgani pokop značilen tudi za notranjska najdišča. Južno od Godoviča, v le do- brih 17 km zračne črte oddaljenem Šmihelu pod Nanosom, na grobišču Za Polšno, so bili v grobovih podobni pridatki – certoške fibule mlajših oblik, sulične osti, uhate sekire in mahaira.37 V tem oziru bo pomenljiva morebitna razjasnitev najdiščnih okoliščin posamičnih najdb in domnevnih grobov z Velikih bukev nad Logatcem, ki so zelo podobne gradivu z Jelenška.38 Zdi se, da so se graditelji gradišča na Jelenšku zgledovali po notranjskih gradiščih. Majhno, niti hektar veliko gradišče, utrjeno z obzidjem, 37 Guštin 1979, t. 51: 1–2,3; 52: 1,11,15; 53: 4,8,16; 54: 3; 55: 1–2,18; 56: 1–4 itd. 38 Švajncer 2018, 65–72, 81–84. V zbirki zasebnega muzeja v Logatcu naj bi bilo tudi nekaj najdb z Jelenška (Švajncer 2016, 46). naselbinskimi terasami in morda vkopanimi stav- bami (sl. 2), v osrednjem Posočju nima primerjav. Spominja pa na arhitekturo nekaterih notranjskih gradišč, npr. Zajčji vrh nad Grahovim blizu Cer- kniškega jezera.39 Na drugi strani železnodobnim gradiščem z mladohalštatskimi in zgodnjelatenskimi najdba- mi ter podobno arhitekturo sledimo od Jelenška proti severu, do Žirka nad Žirmi40 in Gradišča v Cerknem,41 ki verjetno nakazujeta smer svetolu- cijske kolonizacije. Kaže, da povezava s Posočjem ni vodila po strminah do Idrije in dalje ob reki Idrijci, saj v neposredni okolici Idrije in vzdolž Idrijce vse do Reke pri Cerknem doslej ne poznamo železnodobnih najdišč. 39 Laharnar 2022, 206–209, sl. 3.104–3.105. 40 Mlinar 2018, 57, sl. 9; Nanut 2021, sl. 1: 9; 2: 1; 3; Mlinar 2020, 71–72, sl. 48c. 41 Istenič 2015, 44–45, t. 1: 2–5. BRATINA, P. 1994a, Jelenšek nad Godovičem – prazgo- dovinska naselbina z nekropolo. – Idrijski razgledi 39, 109–110. BRATINA, P. 1994b, Jelenšek nad Godovičem. – V: J. Batič (ur.), Varstvo naravne in kulturne dediščine v Sloveniji v letu 1993, 45–46, Ljubljana. BRATINA, P. 1997, Godovič – Jelenšek. – Varstvo spome- nikov 36 (1994–1995), 146. CULIBERG, M. 2020, Arheobotanične raziskave na izbranih najdiščih posoške železnodobne skupnosti / Archaebo- tanical evidence from select sites of the Posočje Iron age community. – V: M. Mlinar, Most na Soči. Arheološke raziskave v letih 2000–2016 na levem bregu Idrijce / The 2000–2016 archaeological investigations on the left bank of the Idrijca, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 43, 243–260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/9789610504887 DULAR, J. 2018, Kronološka slika železnodobnega naselja Most na Soči / Chronology of the Iron Age settlement at Most na Soči. – V: J. Dular, S. Tecco Hvala (ur.), Železnodobno naselje Most na Soči. Razprave / The Iron Age settlement at Most na Soči. Treatises, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 34, 147–166. DOI: https://doi. org/10.3986/9789610501091 GLEIRSCHER, P. 2021, Kahnfibeln von Typ Villach. – Goriški letnik 45, 83–102. GUŠTIN, M. 1979, Notranjska. K začetkom železne dobe na severnem Jadranu / Zu den Anfängen der Eisenzeit an der nördlichen Adria. – Katalogi in monografije 17. ISTENIČ, J. 2015, Traces of Octavian’s military activities at Gradišče in Cerkno and Vrh gradu near Pečine / Sledovi Oktavijanovega vojaškega delovanja na Gradišču v Cerknem in Vrh gradu pri Pečinah. – V: J. Istenič, B. Laharnar, J. Horvat (ur.), Evidence of the Roman Army in Slovenia / Sledovi rimske vojske na Slovenskem, Katalogi in monografije 41, 43–74. LAHARNAR, B. 2018, Kovinske in steklene najdbe ter kamniti kalupi iz železnodobne naselbine na Mostu na Soči / Metal finds, glass finds and stone moulds from the Iron Age settlement at Most na Soči. – V: J. Dular, S. Tecco Hvala (ur.), Železnodobno naselje Most na Soči. Razprave / The Iron Age settlement at Most na Soči. Treatises, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 34, 195–247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/9789610501091 LAHARNAR, B. 2022, From Ocra to Albion. Notranjska between prehistory and antiquity / Od Okre do Albijske gore. Notranjska med prazgodovino in antiko. – Katalogi in monografije 45. LAHARNAR, B., M. MLINAR 2013, Železnodobno grobišče v Jerovci. – Goriški letnik 35, 9–32. LAHARNAR, B., P. TURK 2017, Železnodobne zgodbe s stičišča svetov. – Ljubljana. LAHARNAR, B., P. TURK 2018, Iron Age stories from the crossroads. – Ljubljana. MLINAR, M. 2018, Starejšeželeznodobna naselja v Posočju in njihovi obrambni sistemi. – V: D. Vončina (ur.), Gra- dišča v zahodni in osrednji Sloveniji, 49–61, Gorjansko. MLINAR, M. 2020, Most na Soči. Arheološke raziskave v letih 2000–2016 na levem bregu Idrijce / The 2000–2016 archaeological investigations on the left bank of the Idrij- ca. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/9789610504887 NANUT, T. 2021, Živalske fibule zgodnjelatenske sheme: novoodkriti primerki iz delavnic svetolucijske skupine / Animal fibulae of Early La Tène construction: new 593Jelenšek above Godovič (Slovenia). Hillfort and cemetery from the Early Iron Age finds from the Sveta Lucija workshops. – Arheološki vestnik 72, 73–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/AV.72.03 OGRIN, M. 1998, Trortasta fibula v Sloveniji (Die Drei- knopffibel in Slowenien). – Arheološki vestnik 49, 101–132. SVOLJŠAK, D. 1986, Most na Soči in njegovi obrambni sistemi. – V: Odbrambeni sistemi u praistoriji i antici na tlu Jugoslavije, Materiali 22, 50–54. SVOLJŠAK, D. 1997, Godovič – Jelenšek. – Varstvo spo- menikov 36 (1994–1995), 235. SVOLJŠAK, D. 2001, Zametki urbanizma v železnodobni naselbini na Mostu na Soči (Zur Entstehung der Ur- banisation in der eisezeitlichen Siedlung von Most na Soči). – Arheološki vestnik 52, 131–138. SVOLJŠAK, D., J. DULAR 2016, Železnodobno naselje Most na Soči. Gradbeni izvidi in najdbe / The Iron Age Settlement at Most na Soči. Settlement Structures and Small Finds. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/9789612549367 ŠVAJNCER, J. J. 2016, Vojni muzej Logatec, zakladi zgo- dovine. – Logatec. ŠVAJNCER, J. J. 2018, Gradišče Velike bukve nad Logat- cem. – Logatec. TECCO HVALA, S. 2012, Magdalenska gora. Družbena struktura in grobni rituali železnodobne skupnosti / Social structure and burial rites of the Iron Age community. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 26. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.3986/9789612546007 TECCO HVALA, S., J. DULAR, E. KOCUVAN 2004, Železnodobne gomile na Magdalenski gori / Eisenzeit- liche Grabhügel auf der Magdalenska gora. – Katalogi in monografije 36. TERŽAN, B. 1976, Certoška fibula (Die Certosafibel). – Arheološki vestnik 27, 317–536. TERŽAN, B. 1977, O horizontu bojevniških grobov med Padom in Donavo v 5. in 4. stol. pr. n. št. / Horizon of Warrior Tombs found in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries B.C. in the Territory between the Po and the Danube. – V: M. Guštin (ur.), Keltske študije, Posavski muzej Brežice 4, 9–21. ŽBONA-TRKMAN, B., D. SVOLJŠAK 1981, Most na Soči 1880-1980 – Sto let arheoloških razikovanj. – Tolmin. Jelenšek is an elevation (summit at 817 m asl) dominating the area of Godovič (Fig. 1), a dis- persed village at the northwest end of the upland valleys of Notranjska and just over 6 kilometres southeast of Idrija. The summit of Jelenšek holds the remains of a prehistoric hillfort. The ruins of its stonework rampart enclose a 0.65 ha large interior accessed from the west. The access path leads between the south slope of the hill and the large depression west of the hillfort. The entrance was fortified with stonework ramparts flanking it on either side and possibly with a tower. The hillfort interior holds terraces and on them traces of buildings (Fig. 2). The seekers of the Jelenšek treasure, which the oral tradition says is buried in the pagan fort on Jelenšek, took up a metal detector in April 1993 and explored the saddle north of the hillfort (Fig. 2), stumbling upon graves from the Early Iron Age. They dug up several artefacts, which they brought to the National Museum of Slovenia. This led to a rescue archaeological investigation in the summer of 1993, conducted by a team of archaeologists from the National Museum (hereinafter NMS) and from the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage, Regional Office Nova Gorica,1 led by Drago Svoljšak and Patricija Bratina.2 The team systematically investigated the most endangered and exposed parts of the cemetery3 in the total area of roughly 160 m2. The inves- tigations comprised a large trench, measuring 6 m × 24 m, and five smaller trenches where the preliminary metal detector survey had indicated areas of intense signal.4 The trenches revealed 37 flat cremation burials, four of them already damaged by the metal-detectorists. During the investigations or during the preparation work, unidentified individuals robbed two other graves and took a spearhead and axe from Grave 12 (burial of a foundryman interred with moulds and whetstones)5 (Fig. 5). 1 Then Institute for the Protection of Natural and Cultural Heritage Nova Gorica. 2 Jana Šubic Prislan and Beatriče Žbona Trkman from the Goriški muzej assisted in the investigations. 3 Bratina 1994b, 46. 4 Svoljšak 1997, 235. 5 Laharnar, Turk 2018, 123, Fig. 141. Jelenšek above Godovič (Slovenia). Hillfort and cemetery from the Early Iron Age Translation 594 Patricija BRATINA, Boštjan LAHARNAR, Drago SVOLJŠAK There are several brief reports published on the site in the archaeological literature,6 also one that presents the results of the archaeobotanical analyses of the 359 charcoal samples taken from seventeen graves.7 In addition, a selection of goods from two of these graves is presented in the perma- nent archaeological exhibition in the NMS and in the accompanying catalogue. The exhibited items include weapons, jewellery, a whetstone and stone casting moulds.8 Also published are the excellent photographs that Tomaž Lauko took of some of the items and the text that Drago Svoljšak wrote to accompany the photographs.9 A comprehensive publication of the cemetery is in preparation, hence the authors in this con- tribution only briefly present the burial rite, grave goods and dating of the site using fibulae as basis. This is followed by considerations on the site with regards to its significance in the Early Iron Age, when it stood at the border of two Hallstatt groups of western Slovenia: the Posočje (Sveta Lucija) and Notranjska-Kras groups. BURIAL RITE All burials were cremations. The grave pits were dug through a thin layer of turf and, in most cases, into a yellowish loamy layer deposited between the ridges of the bedrock. In a few pits, some of the crumbly limestone bedrock was extracted to make the pit or it was entirely hewn into the bedrock (Fig. 3). The pits were usually round or oval in plan (Pl. 1–3), measuring between 0.18 and 0.90 m in diameter and roughly between 0.15 and 0.36 m in depth. Seven of the grave pits either had a ring of stones or stones were placed along the wall of the pit. Twenty-five graves had a stone cover, mostly made up of flat pieces of limestone extracted from the bedrock. The stones were placed on top either singly or in groups, covering the pit only in part, never completely. The pits were filled with ashes, combining the remains of the pyre and of cremated individuals 6 Bratina 1994a, 109–110; ead. 1994b, 45–46; ead. 1997; Svoljšak 1997, 235; id. 2001, 131, Fig. 2; Mlinar 2018, 57, Fig. 8. 7 Culiberg 2020, 251–252. 8 Laharnar, Turk 2018, 123, Fig. 140–141. 9 The 2014 calendar of the volunteer fire brigade and local community of Godovič. (Documentation of the Archaeological Department of the NMS). or their incompletely cremated bones. In some cases, the bone pieces were carefully collected, mostly in small heaps, in others strewn across the pit. Some grave pits revealed incompletely burned animal bones and teeth mixed among the human remains, suggesting either the custom of burning sacrificial animals on the pyre or a funerary feast. Thirty-five graves held goods. The burnt or fire-damaged goods had probably been placed on the pyre together with the deceased, others were deposited into the grave pit during burial. The grave goods were predominantly placed together in one spot, usually together with the collected incompletely cremated human bones, in some cases mixed among the bones or placed on top of them (Fig. 3; Pl. 1–3). There are also examples, albeit rare, of goods scattered on top of the fill of the pit. GRAVE GOODS Only two of the investigated burials were without grave goods. All others held fibulae and other pieces of costume (bracelets, earrings, rings and finger rings, domed buttons, basket-shaped pendants, glass and amber beads), as well as weapons and tools (Fig. 3–6; Pl. 1–3). One grave contained the fragments of at least two bronze cult rods (rattles or sceptres). Pottery vessels or their sherds were found in eleven graves (for example in Grave 19, Pl. 1: 18–19). Clay was also used for a zoomorphic figurine with a concave top and small pouring hole (Pl. 2: 9). Weapons were placed in eighteen graves (Fig. 3; 4; Pl. 2: 7–8; 3: 2), most frequently in the com- bination of a spearhead and an axe. The latter are shaft-hole, socketed or winged with either one- or two-sided wings (Fig. 3; 4; Pl. 2: 8; 3: 2). Standing out among the burials with weapons is Grave 10 with a single-edged sword (machaira), shaft-hole axe, spearhead and spear butt, but also Grave 12 with a spearhead, axe, stone moulds and whetstone (Fig. 5) and Grave 16 with two spearheads, socketed axe, axe with one-sided wings and bronze Negova type helmet; the helmet was fire-damaged and cut up (110 fragments). Among the burials of women or those without weapons (for example Grave 19, Pl. 1), Grave 1 stands out with the goods comprising five fibulae, earrings, tens of fragments of band bracelets, a basket-shaped pendant and tools – knife, awl, small 595Jelenšek above Godovič (Slovenia). Hillfort and cemetery from the Early Iron Age chisel and hoe. The woman buried with a lavish costume and two cult rods in Grave 18 must also have enjoyed a special status. The anthropological analysis revealed that adult individuals of both sexes and probably also chil- dren were buried at Jelenšek.10 The objects placed in their graves suggest warriors of different ranks and women that include those of an important social standing. DATING A comprehensive typological and chronologi- cal analysis of the grave goods would go beyond the scope of this article and the discussion here is limited to a brief study of the recovered fibulae, which showed that the graves from Jelenšek can be attributed to the Late Hallstatt phases of Sv. Lucija IIb–c11 or IIc.12 Fibulae were found in twenty-seven graves. Of these, twenty-four held Certosa fibulae (one, two or three examples per grave, Fig. 6: 3–7; Pl. 3: 1), three graves held three-knobbed fibulae (Fig. 6: 1), one a boat fibula with a crossbow spring (Fig. 6: 2; Pl. 1: 1) and one a fragment of an unidentifi- able iron fibula. Certosa fibulae clearly predominate. One exam- ple belongs to Type VIIa,13 two to Type XI, five to Type XIII, nine to Type X and ten to Type XII – all late or last versions of such fibulae. The most ‘archaic’ and isolated form among the Certosa fibulae from Jelenšek is that of Variant VIIa (Fig. 6: 3), which is deemed in Dolenjska to have been a novel item in the male costume of the Certosa Fibulae phase, though also worn in the Negova phase.14 The early Certosa fibulae from Jelenšek include those of Type XIII (Fig. 6: 7). At Most na Soči, they occur in the graves of the Sv. Lucija IIb2 phase.15 Two Type XIII fibulae were found in Grave 2 of the Pucarjev rob site, also in Most na Soči, which 10 Petra Leben Seljak conduced the anthropological analysis (Archives of the AO NMS). 11 Bratina 1994a, 110. 12 Bratina 1997; Svoljšak 1997; id. 2001, 131. 13 The typological identification follows the typology of Certosa fibulae proposed by Biba Teržan (1976, 318–341). 14 Teržan 1976, 357, Pl. 11: 1–2; 60: 4; Tecco Hvala, Dular, Kocuvan 2004, Pl. 56: 1–2; Tecco Hvala 2012, 251. 15 Teržan 1976, 361, Fig. 29: 3. was clearly roughly 30 cm lower than Grave 6 with weapons and dated to Sv. Lucija IIc.16 A Type XIII Certosa fibula was found at Jelenšek in two graves together with a three-knobbed fibula (Fig. 6: 1). An important formal feature of Type XIII is the crossbow spring,17 which can also be presumed for the three-knobbed fibulae from Jelenšek. Such a spring is indicated by the bow terminal of the fibula from Grave 1 (Fig. 6: 1), which is bent and most probably served as the catch for the crossbow spring. Marija Ogrin identified the three-knobbed fibulae with a crossbow spring as Type XI.18 In her list of sites that yielded such fibulae, Ogrin included the two examples from Koritnica and Bodrež.19 We can further add the fibulae from Berlotov rob, Most na Soči, Jerovca on Šentviška planota, Dernazzacco near Cividale del Friuli, Paularo-Misincinis in Carnia and Golek near Vinica in the Bela krajina region.20 The classic, large Certosa fibulae of Type X (Fig. 6: 4) are characteristic of the Sv. Lucija IIc phase.21 The examples from Jelenšek, found in the graves with weapons, can reliably be attrib- uted to the ‘warrior horizon’ of the last Hallstatt phase (Ha D3) in the area between the Rivers Po and Danube.22 The Certosa fibulae of Type XI belong to the same time frame (Fig. 6: 5). The two examples from Jelenšek were, similarly as on Magdalenska gora above Šmarje,23 found in a grave together with a Type X Certosa fibula and weapons. The most numerous among the Certosa fibulae from Jelenšek are those of Type XII (Fig. 6: 6). They are characterised by a triangular-sectioned bow decorated point with a pair of side knobs at the highest.24 Such fibulae of different sizes and either more or less decorated25 have come to light from Posočje26 to Lika and the River Sana.27 In Dolenjska, they mark the last phase of the Negova horizon,28 whereas the heavily burnt 16 Mlinar 2020, 17–19, 33, Fig. 5; Pl. 3B: 1–2. 17 Teržan 1976, 338, Fig. 5. 18 Ogrin 1998, 114–115. 19 Ogrin 1998, 115. 20 Laharnar, Mlinar 2013, 14–16, Fig. 5; 8: 1. 21 Teržan 1976, 383, 393, Fig. 31; Mlinar 2020, 71. 22 Teržan 1977, 9–21. 23 Tecco Hvala 2012, 254–255, Fig. 94: 13–14; 97. 24 Teržan 1976, 337–338, Pl. 78: 3. 25 Laharnar 2018, 203–204, Fig. 2. 26 Mlinar 2020, 71, Pl. 42B: 9. 27 Teržan 1976, 372, Fig. 41. 28 Teržan 1976, 371. 596 Patricija BRATINA, Boštjan LAHARNAR, Drago SVOLJŠAK example from House 7 at Most na Soči29 has been associated with a fire dated to Sv. Lucija IIc.30 The boat fibula with a crossbow spring (Fig. 6: 2), i.e. the Gurina variant of the Villach type after Gleirscher,31 has several parallels in Posočje32 and can be attributed to the 5th and 4th centuries BC.33 JELENŠEK IN THE EARLY IRON AGE The comprehensive analysis of the archaeologi- cal findings at Jelenšek pending, the preliminary results already allow us to draw certain conclusions pertaining to the significance of the site. The cemetery at Jelenšek has not been inves- tigated in its entirety,34 hence its full extent and span cannot be ascertained. Having said that, the investigated burials reveal the custom of crema- tion on a pyre, cremation burial and of burying the deceased with a standardised set of goods. The Certosa fibulae of Types VIIa (Fig. 6: 3) and XIII (Fig. 6: 7), the three-knobbed fibulae with a crossbow spring (Fig. 6: 1) and possibly the boat fibula with a crossbow spring (Fig. 6: 2; Pl. 1: 1) indicate that burial began here in the Sv. Lucija IIb2 phase. The bulk of the grave goods are attrib- utable to the last phase of the Hallstatt culture in the south-eastern Alpine area, which corresponds with Sv. Lucija IIc of the Posočje and the Negova phase of the Dolenjska cultural groups. It should be noted that this dating is based on fibulae that largely comprise the late versions of Certosa fibulae, i.e. Types X, XI and XII (Fig. 6: 4–6; Pl. 3: 1), but also on weapons (Fig. 4; Pl. 2: 7–8; 3: 2). The grave goods and the stray finds recovered outside the graves include neither objects char- acteristic of the Sv. Lucija IIb1 phase (such as the early forms of Certosa fibulae) nor La Tène items. It is the weapons, found in as many as eighteen graves, that particularly mark this cemetery. They appear to reflect a military hierarchy with the warrior buried with a Negova helmet at its peak. The finds of agricultural (hoes, Pl. 1: 11) and woodworking (presumably the large winged axes) 29 Žbona Trkman, Svoljšak 1981, Cat. No. 22; Svoljšak, Dular 2016, 77, Pl. 28: 1; Laharnar 2018, 204, Fig. 2: 1. 30 Dular 2018, 151, Fig. 2. 31 Gleirscher 2021, 86, 97, Fig. 2, List A. 32 See in this volume: Laharnar, Mlinar (Gradec near Krn, Pl. 3: 1). 33 Gleirscher 2021, 92. 34 Bratina 1994b, 46. tools, awls (Pl. 2: 5–6), chisels, whetstones and casting utensils (Fig. 5) suggest a self-sufficient community. It was composed of men and women, with some of the women likely enjoying a prominent social position (for example the women buried in Grave 1 with lavish jewellery and in Grave 18 with cult rods); the anthropological analysis also revealed children. Jelenšek above Godovič is a site attributed to the Posočje (Sveta Lucija) Hallstatt group,35 located at the south-eastern fringes of its territory. It may even be seen as a border control post functioning as part of a comprehensive defensive strategy of the group.36 Jelenšek was at the border of the Sveta Lucija group, on the one side, and the Notranjska-Kras Hallstatt group, on the other. It is linked to the cemeteries in Posočje by flat cremation burial, stone slabs used as grave covers and by the mate- rial culture. On the other hand, flat cremation burial is also characteristic of the sites in Notranjska. Only some 17 kilometres south of Godovič, the graves of the Za Polšno cemetery at Šmihel pod Nanosom held similar grave goods, namely Certosa fibulae of late forms, spearheads, shaft-hole axes and a machai- ra.37 A site that may prove vital in shedding light on the situation in the area is Velike bukve above Logatec, which yielded stray finds and presumed burials that closely resemble those from Jelenšek.38 The people who built the hillfort on Jelenšek must have modelled it on those of Notranjska, as the small hillfort, not even a hectare in interior surface, with a stonework rampart, habitation terraces and possibly sunken buildings (Fig. 2) is without parallels in central Posočje. In contrast, it is architecturally similar to some of the hillforts in Notranjska such as that on Zajčji vrh above Grahovo, in the vicinity of Lake Cerknica.39 Iron Age hillforts with Late Hallstatt and Early La Tène finds, as well as similar architecture can be traced from Jelenšek northwards, to Žirk above 35 Bratina 1994a; ead. 1994b; ead. 1997; Svoljšak 1997; id. 2001, 131, Fig. 2; see also in this volume: Mlinar, Tecco Hvala. 36 Svoljšak 1986, 50–54; id. 2001, 131–132, Fig. 2. 37 Guštin 1979, Pl. 51: 1–2,3; 52: 1,11,15; 53: 4,8,16; 54: 3; 55: 1–2,18; 56: 1–4 and others. 38 Švajncer 2018, 65–72, 81–84. The collection of the private museum in Logatec presumably also keeps several artefacts from Jelenšek (Švajncer 2016, 46). 39 Laharnar 2022, 206–209, Fig. 3.104–3.105. 597Jelenšek above Godovič (Slovenia). Hillfort and cemetery from the Early Iron Age Žiri40 and Gradišče in Cerkno,41 which presumably indicate the direction of the Sveta Lucija coloni- sation. The absence of known Iron Age sites in the immediate vicinity of Idrija, along the River Idrijca all to Reka near Cerkno suggests that the communication with Posočje did not lead along steep terrain to Idrija and further along the River Idrijca. Translation: Andreja Maver 40 Mlinar 2018, 57, Fig. 9; Nanut 2021, Fig. 1: 9; 2: 1; 3; Mlinar 2020, 71–72, Fig. 48c. 41 Istenič 2015, 44–45, Pl. 1: 2–5. Slikovno gradivo: Sl. 2 (izvedba Edisa Lozić, ZRC SAZU; Ida Murgelj, NMS). – Sl. 4 (foto: Tomaž Lauko, NMS). – Sl. 6; t. 1–3 (risba: Ida Murgelj, NMS). Illustrations: Fig. 2 (by Edisa Lozić, ZRC SAZU; Ida Murgelj, NMS). – Fig. 4 (photo: Tomaž Lauko, NMS). – Fig. 6; Pl. 1–3 (drawing: Ida Murgelj, NMS). Članek je nastal v okviru raziskovalnega programa Raziskave arheološke dediščine (P6-0283), ki ga je sofinancirala Javna agencija za raziskovalno dejavnost Republike Slovenije. The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Slovenian Research Agency (as a part of the P6-0283 research programme). Patricija Bratina Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine Območna enota Nova Gorica Delpinova 16 SI-5000 Nova Gorica patricija.bratina@zvkds.si Boštjan Laharnar Narodni muzej Slovenije Prešernova cesta 20 SI-1000 Ljubljana bostjan.laharnar@nms.si Drago Svoljšak Ledine 23 SI-5000 Nova Gorica drago.svoljsak@siol.net. 598 Patricija BRATINA, Boštjan LAHARNAR, Drago SVOLJŠAK T. 1: Jelenšek nad Godovičem. 1–7,15 bron; 9–14 železo; 8 jantar; 16,17 kamen; 18,19 keramika. M. = 1:2. Pl. 1: Jelenšek above Godovič. 1–7,15 bronze; 9–14 iron; 8 amber; 16,17 stone; 18,19 ceramics. Scale = 1:2. 599Jelenšek nad Godovičem. Gradišče in grobišče iz starejše železne dobe T. 2: Jelenšek nad Godovičem. 1–8 železo; 9 keramika. M. = 1:2. Pl. 2: Jelenšek above Godovič. 1–8 iron; 9 ceramics. Scale = 1:2. 600 Patricija BRATINA, Boštjan LAHARNAR, Drago SVOLJŠAK T. 3: Jelenšek nad Godovičem. 1 bron; 2 železo. M. = 1:2. Pl. 3: Jelenšek above Godovič. 1 bronze; 2 iron. Scale = 1:2.