319 Arheološki vestnik 70, 2019, 319–334 Štajersko-panonska halštatska skupina. Uvodnik in kratek oris The Styrian-Pannonian Hallstatt Group. An introduction and brief outline Biba TERŽAN Izvleček Štajersko-panonska skupina je značilna predstavnica vzhodnohalštatskega kulturnega kroga. Pod tem terminom razu- memo kompleksen, večplasten kulturni fenomen, ki je obsegal prostrano območje od Štajerske (na slovenski in avstrijski strani), na zahodu do Koralp, na vzhodu je zajemal panonske nižave vzdolž rek Rabe, Mure, Drave. Nove raziskave, predstavljene na simpoziju, so prinesle novosti glede poselitvenih območij in njihovih značilnosti, ki se kažejo v tipih naselbin (višinske oz. nižinske), stavb (novost so zemljanke) ter v oblikah grobov in njihovih oznak (npr. gomile z mo- gočno grajeno grobno kamro in dromosom na eni strani ter na drugi strani grobovi, grobne parcele in gomile, obdane z jarki ipd.). Kljub skupnim kulturnim značilnostim, ki se izražajo predvsem v religiozni sferi, pa lahko v njenem okviru ugotavljamo tudi razlike med posameznimi regionalnimi skupnostmi. Ključne besede: Štajerska, Prekmurje, starejša železna doba, tipi naselbin, tipi grobov Abstract The Styrian-Pannonian group is a characteristic representative of the eastern Hallstatt cultural circle. This term refers to the complex, multi-strata cultural phenomenon that extended across a broad region from Styria (on both the Slovenian and Austrian sides), in the west to the Kor Alps, while in the east it encompassed the Pannonian plains along the Raab/ Rába, Mur/Mura, and Drau/Drava Rivers. New research presented at the symposium offered new information in terms of the settlement regions and their characteristics, as indicated by the types of settlements (in the heights or on low lying land), buildings (pit-dwellings represent a new element), and the forms of graves and their markers (e.g. tumuli with a possible grave chamber and dromos on the one hand, and on the other side graves, grave plots, and tumuli surrounded by a ditch, etc.) Despite mutual cultural characteristics, expressed primarily in religious terms, differences can also be perceived in its framework between individual regional groups. Keywords: Styria, Prekmurje, Early Iron Age, types of settlements, types of graves 320 Biba TERŽAN Štajersko-panonska skupina je značilna pred- stavnica vzhodnohalštatskega kulturnega kroga. Pod tem terminom razumemo kompleksen, več- plasten kulturni fenomen, kot sem ga podpisana pred dobrimi 30 leti opredelila v svoji disertaciji o starejši železni dobi na slovenskem Štajerskem. 1 Kot že ime pove, se je njeno osrednje območje razprostiralo na prostoru Štajerske (na slovenski in avstrijski strani), od Savinjske doline na jugu do gornjega porečja Mure na severu, na zahodu so jo omejevale Koralpe, na vzhodu pa je prehajala v panonske nižave vzdolž rek Rabe, Mure, Drave, kjer se je stikala z drugimi skupnostmi istega kul- turnega fenomena (sl. 1), ki pa ga zaradi političnih meja in zgodovine raziskav lokalni raziskovalci različno poimenujejo. Z uvedbo izraza “štajersko-panonska skupina” sem želela vpeljati ustreznejše in bolj nevtralno poimenovanje v primerjavi z označbo “skupina Wies-Martijanec”, kot jo je uvedel Stane Gabro- vec. Gabrovec se je pri tem na eni strani oprl na epohalno delo Richarda Pittionija (1954), na drugi strani pa na tedaj nove raziskave Ksenije Vinski Gasparini v Podravini (1961). Kasneje je ime spremenil, s tem da je nadomestil ime kraja Wies z imenom Klein-Glein oz. Kleinklein, 2 kjer so bile že v 19. st. odkrite slavne knežje gomile, od tod nova označba “skupina Kleinklein-Martijanec”. 3 Z novimi odkritji gomil v Kaptolu pri Slavonski Požegi, ki sta jih raziskovala in objavila Vera Vejvoda in Ivan Mirnik, 4 pa se je pokazalo, da je bila ta kulturna skupina razširjena še dlje proti vzhodu, zato je bilo dopolnjeno njeno ime v “skupino Kleinklein-Martijanec-Kaptol” . 5 Medtem je leta 1980 izšla nova monografija o najdbah z arheoloških izkopavanj gomil, ki so potekala konec 19. st. v neposredni okolici Wiesa oz. Kleinkleina. Njen avtor Claus Dobiat je v tem delu uporabil za to skupino zopet drugačno, novo poimenovanje, namreč “Sulmtaler-Gruppe”(“posolbska skupina”) po reki Sulm/Solbi, 6 kar je s stališča bogatega gradiva iz omenjenih gomil oz. nekropol upravi- 1 Disertacijo sem zagovarjala l. 1986, objavljena pa je bila l. 1990. V njej je obširno poglavje o zgodovini raziskav in razprave o posameznih regionalnih skupinah s citirano literaturo, na katero se sklicujem in je na tem mestu posebej ne navajam. 2 Prim. diskusijo Teržan 1987, 413. 3 Gabrovec 1964–1965, 25 s; Gabrovec 1980, 43–44. 4 Vejvoda, Mirnik 1971; Vejvoda, Mirnik 1973. 5 Gabrovec 1980, 30; Gabrovec 1987, 26–28; Vinski Gasparini 1987, 182–231; Šimek 2004. 6 Dobiat 1980. čeno, s stališča široke razprostranjenosti celotnega kulturnega fenomena, ki ne zajema le Posolbja in obrobja jugovzhodnih Alp, temveč tako rekoč celotno Štajersko ter zahodno in južno Panonijo, pa mnogo preozko. Vendar je treba na tem mestu poudariti, da se je izraz “Sulmtaler-Gruppe” uveljavil v nemško-avstrijsko-madžarski strokovni literaturi in da je še vedno v rabi (glej tu Egg, 336). Naše poimenovanje “štajersko-panonska kulturna skupina” je v svojih poznih delih prevzel tudi Gabrovec, 7 v novejšem času pa v svojem sintetičnem pregledu celotne prazgodovine na avstrijskem Štajerskem tudi Georg Tiefengraber. 8 Kot izredno posrečeno označbo za to skupino naj omenimo še tisto, ki jo je na osnovi figuralnih upodobitev na značilni keramiki te skupine predlagal Paul Gleirscher, 9 označil jo je namreč kot skupino “častilcev bika” (“Stierverehrer”), torej govedarjev, s čimer je posredno nakazano, da je morala biti živinoreja, verjetno celo govedoreja, njihova pomembna go- spodarska panoga. Čeprav na tem mestu nimam namena podati povzetka prispevkov s simpozija, naj le na kratko povzamem glavne značilnosti obravnavane skupine in opozorim na nove poudarke raziskav, prikazanih na “Gabrovčevem dnevu 2017” . Tako kot skoraj povsod na evropski celini so se tudi v vzhodnoalpskem-panonskem svetu v pre- hodnem obdobju iz pozne bronaste v porajajočo se starejšo železno dobo, katere pojav nikakor ni bil povsod sočasen in tudi ne nenaden, zgodile večje spremembe, ki so zadele skoraj vsa področja človekovega bivanja in delovanja. Arheološko se na eni strani kažejo v drugačni poselitvi prostora, kar se izbire krajev in njene organiziranosti tiče, na drugi strani pa v novih družbenih strukturah ter verovanjskih predstavah, kar je možno razbrati predvsem na osnovi proučevanja grobov oz. ne- kropol – načina pokopavanja, pogrebnih običajev in grobne arhitekture. V poselitveni sliki obravnavanega območja 10 se kaže z začetkom halštatskega obdobja v primerjavi s predhodno poznobronastodobno poselitveno strukturo kulture žarnih grobišč, prav tako raz- členjeno med številne večje ali manjše regionalne 7 Gabrovec 1999, 150–151, 178, sl. 1. 8 Tiefengraber 2015a. 9 Gleirscher 2001, 99, Abb. 12; Gleirscher 2002, 37, Abb. 6; Gleirscher 2006, 19–20. 10 Na tem mestu naj opozorim na odlično sintezo bronaste in železne dobe na območju avstrijske Štajerske izpod peresa Georga Tiefengraberja, glej Tiefengraber 2015a in 2015b. 321 Štajersko-panonska halštatska skupina. Uvodnik in kratek oris Sl. 1: Halštatske kulturne skupine v Sloveniji in sosednjih pokrajinah. Območje štajersko-panonske skupine (rumeno) in lega kompleksnih arheoloških najdišč, ki so obravnavana v prispev- kih simpozija. (DMR © 2004–2019, CGIAR-CSI SRTM) Fig.1: The Hallstatt cultural groups in Slovenia and neighbouring regions. The area of the Styrian-Pannonian group (yellow) with marked complex archaeological sites mentioned in the articles. (DEM © 2004–2019, CGIAR-CSI SRTM) 322 Biba TERŽAN skupine, občuten upad števila naselbin, kar je dobro razvidno prav v Pohorskem Podravju, med Rušami in Ormožem. V ečina nižinskih naselbin je bila na- mreč opuščenih. Za nove naselbine, ustanovljene ali pa le obnovljene v začetnih fazah nove dobe, so bile izbrane pretežno višinske postojanke na bolj ali manj strateško pomembnih vzpetinah ali osamelcih. Tako so se obdržale v starejšo železno dobo nekatere postojanke na dominantnih legah, ki so bile poseljene že v kulturi žarnih grobišč, kot npr. na Grajskem hribu v Gornji Radgoni, ki je obvladovala prehod čez reko Muro, pa na Grajskem griču na Ptuju, prav tako nad ugodnim prehodom čez Dravo, in v Ormožu, pa tudi na Brinjevi gori, umaknjeni na obronke Pohorja, ter na Rifniku na obrobju Kozjanskega. 11 Ob njih pa so nastale nove, npr. Poštela, 12 Burgstallkogel pri Kleinkleinu 13 in verjetno tudi Novine/Bubenberg pri Šentilju, katerih začetki, kot kažejo nove raz- iskave (glej tu Črešnar, Vinazza, 449 ss; Egg, 348; Mele, 357 ss), 14 segajo v 10./9. oz. 9./8. st. pr. n. št., torej že v časovni razpon stopnje Ha B. Te višinske naselbine so bile praviloma utrjene z zemljenimi okopi/nasipi in lesenimi palisadami, kot so pokazala izkopavanja na Pošteli 15 in v Ormožu, 16 ponekod so bile obdane tudi z obrambnimi jarki, npr. na Burgstallkoglu pri Kleinkleinu, 17 kar so potrdile tudi najnovejše raziskave na Novinah in na Čreti pri Slivnici (glej tu Črešnar, Vinazza, 448 ss). Pretežno gre za naselbine večjega obsega, katerih notranjost je bila razčlenjena s še danes ponekod dobro vidnimi umetno prirejenimi stavbnimi tera- 11 Teržan 1990, 36–54; Dular 2013. 12 Na nastanek Poštele v Ha B v Müller-Karpejevem smislu nakazujejo predvsem novoodkriti žgani grobovi na območju Habakuka, zlasti tu objavljeni grob 19 (glej tu Črešnar, Vinazza, t. 2: 5–9). Žara in dvoročajna posoda, kantharos, okrašeni s psevdovrvičastim okrasom, še zlasti pa motiv girland, sodijo med značilne tipe ruške skupine Ha B: glej Müller-Karpe 1959, 116 ss, Taf. 114: D2; 115: B; 120: 1–2,7–8,12; 121: 16; T omanič-Jevremov 1988–1989, t. 9: 3. Kot kažejo geofizikalne meritve, naj bi šlo na Habakuku za obsežno plano žgano grobišče. 13 Dobiat 1990; Smolnik 1994. 14 Za avstrijsko Štajersko glej tudi Tiefengraber 2015a in 2015b. 15 Teržan 1990, 25–30, 256–306, sl. 5, 9–11, 35–39. 16 Perc 1962–1963; Dular, Tomanič-Jevremov 2010, 84–85, sl. 97–98. Izkopavanja Ivana Žižka (Pokrajinski muzej Ptuj - Ormož) leta 2000 so pokazala, da je bila ormoška zemljena utrdba grajena s pomočjo lesenega kasetnega opaža, med katerim je bila zbita ilovnata zemlja. Rezultati teh izkopavanj žal še niso objavljeni. 17 Dobiat 1990, 40–42, 46–48, 65–69, Abb. 20, 23–24. sami, kar dovoljuje oceno o njihovi dokaj intenzivni poseljenosti. 18 Pri tem je treba omeniti, da so bili v zadnjem času pri raziskavah na nekaterih najdi- ščih uporabljeni tudi novi tehnološki postopki pri odkrivanju arheoloških sledov, kot so geofizikalne meritve in lidarsko snemanje zemeljske površine, ki odpirajo nove možnosti in vidike proučevanja poseljenosti in izrabe prostora, ne le naselbin, temveč tudi njihove okolice, kar bo omogočilo boljše razumevanje oblikovanja kulturne krajine (glej tu Črešnar, Vinazza, 439 ss). Ob tem je prišlo, kar se poselitvene slike ož- jega obravnavanega območja tiče, tj. Pohorskega Podravja in Prekmurja, do nepričakovanih novih odkritij. Arheološka izkopavanja v zadnjih dveh desetletjih, zlasti tista, ki so spremljala gradnjo avtocest, so namreč pokazala, da so v starejši železni dobi obstajale poleg utrjenih višinskih naselbin sočasne naselbine, predvsem manjši zaselki, tudi v dolinah oz. nižavah. Zanimivo je, da so ti nastali povečini prav tako v začetnem halštatskem obdobju, v stopnji Ha C0–C1, kot je razvidno iz radiokarbonskih datacij 19 in analiz keramičnega gradiva (glej tu Gerbec, 478 ss, in Kerman, 384 ss). Takšen tip naselbine je bil npr. odkrit ob vznožju Slovenskih Goric pri Hajndlu, 20 v bližini utrjene naselbine v Ormožu, pa v Hotinji vasi 21 na zahodnem obrobju Dravskega polja tik pod Pohorjem, od koder se omenjajo še nekatere druge halštatske keramične najdbe, ki bi jih lahko imeli za pokazatelje sledov nižinske poselitve ob vznožju Pohorja v bližini Poštele. 22 Številnejše 18 Npr. Teržan 1990, 256–260, sl. 3–4. 19 Za radiokarbonske datacije glej Kerman 2014a, 113–115; Kerman 2014b, 123–139; Jereb, Sankovič, Šavel 2014, 155–157; Šavel, Sankovič 2014, 68–77; Gerbec 2014a, 283–286; Teržan, Črešnar 2014,709–713, sl. 37–38. 20 O tem arheološkem najdišču, na katerem je vodil izkopavanja I. Žižek, so na Oddelku za arheologijo FF UL nastale tri diplomske naloge izpod peres M. Meleta (2003), O. Kovača (2004) in A. Magdiča (2006) ter doktorsko delo M. Meleta (2009), a žal še niso bili objavljeni, so pa v pripravi. Delne rezultate svojih študij je objavil le Mele, glej npr. Mele, Mušič 2007; Mele 2014, 183–188, sl. 15–17. Posebnost tega najdišča je v gradnji stavb. Nekatere izmed njih so bile temeljene z lesenimi bruni, položenimi v jarke, ter s stebri/koli kot nosilci lesene stavbne konstrukcije. Takšen tip stavb doslej pri nas še ni bil poznan. 21 Celostno študijsko obdelavo gradiva s tega najdišča je predložila T eja Gerbec v okviru svojega doktorskega dela (2014b). Za objavo najdišča glej tudi Gerbec 2014a; Gerbec 2015; objava znanstvenih rezultatov pa je v pripravi za tisk. 22 O njih je poročal B. Kramberger na strokovnem srečanju “Dan bronaste dobe” 5. decembra 2018. Gre za najdišča pri Slivnici in Malečniku. 323 Štajersko-panonska halštatska skupina. Uvodnik in kratek oris nižinske naselbine so prišle na plan v Prekmurju. Kot je razvidno iz preglednega prispevka Branka Kermana (glej tu Kerman, 382 ss), je obstajala v rahlo valoviti pokrajini južno od Murske Sobote in v bližini Lendave vrsta zaselkov, razporejenih razmeroma blizu drug drugemu, kar kaže na neke vrste razpršeno organiziranost poselitve v tako imenovanih dolgih gručastih vaseh. Zanimivo je, da prevladujejo v teh ravninskih zaselkih nekoliko drugače grajene stavbe kot na višinskih utrjenih naselbinah, kar npr. dobro ilustrira primerjava hiše – brunarice s kamnitimi temelji, ki jo je raziskal Marko Mele na Burgstallkoglu pri Kleinkleinu (glej tu Mele, 359 ss, sl. 5−8), 23 s tistimi v Hotinji vasi, kjer prevladujejo zemljanke (glej tu Gerbec, 474 ss, sl. 2−4). Na prekmurskih najdiščih, kot npr. Kotare – Baza, so poleg zemljank obstajale stavbe s stojkami za leseno nadzemno konstrukcijo (glej tu Kerman, 384 ss, sl. 3), ki so znane prav tako iz prve faze poselitve na Pošteli 24 in verjetno tudi prve na Novinah (faza Ia) (glej tu Črešnar, Vinazza, 450 ss, sl. 14a). Zdi se nam pomenljivo, da z arheološkimi izkopavanji doslej niso bili odkriti sledovi, na podlagi katerih bi bilo možno sklepati, da so bile te nižinske naselbine na kakršenkoli način varovane, niti z jarki niti z ogradami ali palisadami. Zato se ponuja razlaga, da bi lahko omenjene razlike v tipu naselbin glede na lego (višinske/nižinske) in na obstoj/neobstoj obrambnih struktur pa tudi morda v tipu stavb razumeli v povezavi z različno “upravno/funkcionalno” vlogo in z različnimi go- spodarskimi podstatmi enih oz. drugih naselbin ter posledično z globoko družbeno razslojeno- stjo. Kaže, da imamo v zgodnji železni dobi na obravnavanem prostoru, podobno kot v mnogih drugih deželah, opraviti s sinkretističnim mode- lom poselitve, ko nastanejo naselbine centralnega tipa, ki obvladujejo območja svoje širše okolice kot del svojega ruralnega gospodarskega zaledja s “kmečkim” prebivalstvom. V tem pogledu se zdijo zanimive nove raziskave dobro utrjene naselbine Königsberg pri Heimshuhu nad sotesko reke Sulm/Solba, za katero Mele meni, da je šlo le za občasno postojanko na strateško pomembni točki, ki naj bi kontrolirala pomem- ben in edini dostop do Burgstallkogla z vzhodne 23 Na isti tip gradnje sklepamo na osnovi starih, Schmidovih izkopavanj na Pošteli, glej T eržan 1990, 28–29, 273–277, in novih raziskav na Novinah (faza Ib) (glej tu Črešnar, Vinazza). 24 Glej Teržan 1990, 25–30, 274–276, sl. 14. smeri, s strani reke Mure (glej tu Mele, 367 ss, sl. 13, 14). Glede na to podmeno bi se dalo sklepati na teritorialno organiziranost ozemlja, ki je po vsej verjetnosti pripadalo skupnosti s središčem na Burgstallkoglu pri Kleinkleinu. 25 Ali smemo na osnovi tega primera domnevati o podobni or- ganiziranosti v drugih regijah štajersko-panonske skupine, je stvar nadaljnjih raziskav. Druga značilnost štajersko-panonske skupine je religioznega značaja, ki odseva v žganih pokopih pod gomilami. Sežiganje umrlih stoji nedvomno v tradiciji kulture žarnih grobišč, medtem ko go- mila kot nadgrobni spomenik pomeni pomembno novost konotativnega značaja, s katerim sta bila označena status in družbena vloga preminulega za časa njegovega življenja, hkrati pa je bila pomnik skupnosti v smislu njenega nadaljnjega obstoja, ozemeljske in kulturne identitete. Obsežne nekro- pole, ki jih pogosto sestavljajo v gručah ali vrstah razporejene gomile, so ležale v večji ali manjši oddaljenosti od naselbin, pogosto ob njihovem vznožju. Lahko so štele tudi več sto ali celo tisoč gomil, kot kaže npr. obširna nekropola v okolici naselbine na Burgstallkoglu s številnimi skupinami gomil ter knežjo nekropolo v dolini pri Kleinkleinu (glej tu Egg, sl. 2, in Mele, sl. 1) 26 ali pa gomile na različnih lokacijah pod Poštelo, od tistih na pohorski terasi na Habakuku oz. Lepi ravni do tistih v dolini med Razvanjem in Pivolo (glej tu Črešnar, Vinazza, sl. 2). Od gomil dolenjskega tipa (rodovno-družinske gomile s skeletnimi pokopi) drugačne so za štajersko-panonsko skupino oz. za celoten vzhodnohalštatski kulturni krog značilne gomile, v katerih so bili pokopani praviloma le posamezniki z eventualnim (žrtvovanim) sprem- stvom ene ali več oseb, vsi pa so bili sežgani (glej npr. tu Egg, 352). Večje zemljene gomile prekri- vajo običajno iz kamna in/ali lesa grajene grobne kamre, praviloma pravokotne ali kvadratne oblike in usmerjene glede na strani neba; okrogle kamre so le redke izjeme, kot npr. tista v Črnolici pod Rifnikom. 27 Do grobne kamre pogosto vodi posebej ograjen in tlakovan hodnik – dromos, ki je bil ob zaključku pogrebnega obreda lahko tudi zazidan oz. pregrajen, včasih celo s človeško žrtvijo (glej tu 25 Za vpogled v celotno območje, ki je bilo verjetno podrejeno naselbini na Burgstallkoglu, in za ostale pomembne naselbine na avstrijskem Štajerskem, kot so bile v Lipnici/ Leibnitz, Wildonu, Gradcu (Graz) itd., glej Tiefengraber 2015a, 492–521. 26 Glej tudi Tiefengraber 2015a. 27 Vrenčur 2011, sl. 3–5. 324 Biba TERŽAN Egg, sl. 3; Potrebica, sl. 3). 28 Poleg velikih gomil so na posameznih nekropolah običajne tudi manjše gomile, ki pogosto gručasto obkrožajo večje oz. velike gomile (glej npr. tu Črešnar, Vinazza, sl. 3, 8) 29 in tako že na prvi pogled kažejo na družbeno diferenciacijo v okviru posameznih skupnosti, čeprav je tudi v manjših zaslediti ostaline lesenih ali kamnitih grobnih konstrukcij. Med značilne pridatke v gomilah sodi predvsem bogato in raznoliko posodje, od shrambnih posod do jedilnih in pivskih servisov, običajno namenjenih za pogostitev več oseb, torej za simpozije (glej tu Egg, sl. 6−9). Tudi posebne vrste kultnih posod in idolov niso nobena redkost. Čeprav so kovinski pridatki noše pogosto skupaj s pokojnikom v ognju uničeni do nerazpoznavnosti, so bili v grobove pridani tudi nepoškodovani predmeti. V moških grobovih sta pogosta orožje (sekire, sulice, meči) in konjska oprema, v izstopajočih bojevniških grobovih še čelade, oklepi in ščiti, mestoma tudi konjske žrtve (glej tu Egg, sl. 4, 9), kar kaže, da so bili tudi tu na vrhu hierarhične lestvice predvsem bojevniki – konjeniki. 30 Doslej izstopajo po izjemnosti in bogastvu grobnih pridatkov še vedno najbolj slavne gomile štajersko- -panonske skupine iz Kleinkleina in Strettwega, katerih bogastvo verjetno lahko povezujemo z izkoriščanjem bližnjih rudnih ležišč v rudno bogatih Vzhodnih Alpah ter s trgovanjem s surovinami, kot so baker, železo in sol. 31 Te gomile so bile odkrite že sredi 19. st., prve znanstvene objave izpod peresa Walterja Schmida so doživele v tridesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja, 32 velika zasluga Markusa Egga pa je, da so bile najdbe iz teh gomil v restavrator- skih delavnicah Rimsko-germanskega centralnega muzeja v Mainzu (Römisch-Germanisches Zentral- museum) na novo restavrirane in v monografijah istega muzeja tudi vzorčno objavljene. Kot prvo je Egg leta 1996 objavil gomilo iz Strettwega, 33 v soavtorstvu z Dietherjem Kramerjem sta sledili še impozantni objavi knežjih gomil iz Kleinkleina, najprej gomile Kröllkogel (2013), nato pa še go- mil Hartnermichelkogel 1 in 2 ter Pommerkogel (2016) 34 (glej tu Egg, sl. 9). Posebno dragocene 28 Glej npr. Patek 1976, 21, Fig. 16: 1 (Sopron-V arhely/ Burgstall, tumulus 215/1975); Vadácz 1983, 51, Abb. 4, 9 (Süttő). 29 Glej tudi Teržan, Črešnar, Mušič 2015. 30 Prim. npr. Teržan 2011. 31 Glej npr. Lippert 2004, 205 ss, Abb. 2–4. 32 Schmid 1933; Schmid 1934. 33 Egg 1996. 34 Egg, Kramer 2013; Egg, Kramer 2016. podatke za razumevanje grobne arhitekture in pogrebnih ritualov je prineslo revizijsko izkopa- vanje gomile Kröllkogel, ki ga je leta 1995 izvedel D. Kramer. S temi objavami, v katerih so predsta- vljene poglobljene študije o posameznih sklopih grobnih najdb ter raziskave različnih materialov, se je odprl spekter novih podatkov in pogledov, pa tudi novih znanstvenih vprašanj, ki zadevajo gospodarske, politične in kulturne aspekte tako v okviru štajersko-panonske skupine kot tudi njenih stikov s sosednjimi in bolj oddaljenimi skupnostmi, še zlasti z italskimi oz. sredozemskimi deželami. Iz analiz grobnih najdb in načina pokopa obširne gomilne nekropole iz okolice Kleinkleina, vključ- no z omenjenimi knežjimi gomilami, je mogoče sklepati na kompleksno družbeno razslojenost, v okviru katere pa se nam ne zdi sporno, da lahko v tipu in časovnem zaporedju knežjih gomil, kot so Hartnermichelkogel, Pommerkogel in Kröllkogel, vidimo dinastične grobove kleinkleinške vladarske hiše (glej tu Egg, 352, sl. 9). 35 Poleg revizijskega izkopavanja gomile Kröllkogel in objav knežjih gomil iz Kleinkleina so izjemno pozornost vzbudile nove raziskave v Strettwegu pri Judenburgu, ki jih vodita Georg in Susanne Tiefengraber. Rezultati, čeprav doslej le preliminar- ni, so frapantni! Geofizikalne meritve so namreč pokazale, da gomila s slovitim kultnim vozičkom ni bila edina in osamljena na ravnici Aichfeld ob Muri s “kuliso” visokih gora v ozadju, kot je veljalo do nedavna, temveč se je tam razprostirala obširna gomilna nekropola, ki pa je bila v teku stoletij pov- sem izravnana. Ker so se anomalije geofizikalnih meritev kazale v obliki krožnih obrisov, so začeli izkopavanje enega izmed njih. Izkazalo se je, da gre dejansko za ostaline grobne gomile, obdane s krožnim jarkom in s pravokotno, iz kamnov zidano grobno kamro. Zato so izkopavanja nadaljevali in odkrili več gomil, ki izkazujejo enak način grobne arhitekture z osrednjo, iz kamna zidano kamro ter dromosom. Raziskovalci so imeli celo takšno srečo, da jim je eno izmed gomil uspelo identificirati kot tisto, iz katere izvirajo dragocene najdbe z vključno slavnim kultnim vozičkom. 36 35 Dobiat 1980; T eržan 1990, 124 ss, sl. 27–32; Brosseder 2004, 309–313, Abb. 194–195; Gleirscher 2001; Egg, Kramer 2013; Egg, Kramer 2016. 36 Tiefengraber, Tiefengraber, Moser 2013; Tiefengraber 2015, 544–551. Pri tem naj omenimo, da ni bilo odkrito le obsežno grobišče, temveč tudi pripadajoča naselbina na Falkenbergu pri Strettwegu ter več drugih naselbin ob zgornjem toku reke Mure – glej Tiefengraber, Tiefengraber 2015; Tiefengraber 2015a, 527–555; Tiefengraber 2015c. 325 Štajersko-panonska halštatska skupina. Uvodnik in kratek oris Nova arheološka izkopavanja so potekala tudi v Podravini, kjer moramo poleg Martijanca pose- bej omeniti izkopavanja gomil v Jalžabetu. Prvo gomilo, ki je bila že skoraj povsem uničena, je v devetdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja raziskala Marina Šimek. 37 Pokazalo se je, da je bila gomila oz. grobna kamra postavljena na posebej pripra- vljenem, s praprotjo in prodniki prekritem pro- storu. Čeprav je bila gomila že pred izkopavanjem skoraj povsem uničena, je bil spodnji del grobne kamre z leseno konstrukcijo in kamnitim zidom ter dromosom razmeroma dobro ohranjen, veliko slabše pa grobni pridatki. Med njimi izstopajo predmeti skitskega izvora, kot luskinast oklep in morda tudi luskinast ščit ter puščične osti, doslej nepoznani v repertoarju orožja v štajersko-panon- ski skupini. V neposredni bližini prve stoji druga ogromna gomila, za katero se je dozdevalo, da je še nedotaknjena. A se je pred nedavnim izkazalo, da je bila predmet roparskih posegov, kar je lani privedlo do izkopavanja, ki ga vodi Saša Kovačević. Zato z velikim zanimanjem pričakujemo rezultate teh zelo zahtevnih izkopavanj! Nove raziskave so stekle tudi na Kaptolu v Požeški kotlini, kjer so se pod vodstvom Hrvoja Potrebice najprej lotili izkopavanj več gomil, nato pa še naselbine (glej tu Potrebica, 490 ss). Ker so raziskave še v teku, so bili na simpoziju predstavljeni preliminarni izsledki in nekaj najbolj reprezenta- tivnih odkritij, kot je gomila III na nekropoli Kap- tol- Čemernica z impozantno ohranjeno kamnito grobno kamro z dromosom, a baje izpraznjeno. Splošni vtis, ki so ga posredovale nove raziskave, je, da se kaptolske gomile po velikosti in grobni arhitekturi ne razlikujejo od tistih na štajerskih nekropolah, kar nedvoumno govori o enotnem kulturnem prostoru. Le kar se grobnih pridatkov tiče, so vidne nekatere razlike v materialni kul- turi. Kot že v šestdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja raziskanih gomilah z grško-ilirsko in korintsko čelado ter muskulaturnimi golenicami grškega tipa itd. 38 so tudi pri teh prišle do izraza povezave s sosednjim zahodnobalkanskim prostorom, zlasti v O svojih izkopavanjih je G. Tiefengraber poročal tudi na Gabrovčevem dnevu 2017 (Neue Forschungen auf dem Falkenberg bei Strettweg und in seinen Gräberfeldern), a prispevka ni oddal za tisk v tem zvezku Arheološkega vestnika. 37 Šimek 1998; Šimek 2004, 80 ss, sl. 17, 20, 27, 29, 30, 35–36, 39–41. 38 V ejvoda, Mirnik 1971; V ejvoda, Mirnik 1973; T eržan 1990, 145–152, sl. 34–35; Teržan 1995, 87–89, Abb. 5–6, 11; Potrebica 2013, 106–109, sl. 53–54. oborožitvi, npr. meči tipa Kostel (glej tu Potrebi- ca, sl. 2; 8), 39 a hkrati tudi vpetost v gospodarski sistem vzhodnohalštatskega kulturnega kroga, kot nakazujejo v eni izmed gomil pridani železni ražnji kot predmonetarno sredstvo pri izmenjavi ali trgovini prestižnih dobrin. 40 Od teh “klasičnih” gomilnih nekropol štajer- sko-panonske skupine, ki jim lahko sledimo od Strettwega ob gornjem toku Mure do Kaptola v osrednji Slavoniji, odstopajo novoodkrita grobišča v Prekmurju, ki sodeč po najdbah prav tako sodi- jo v isti časovni razpon v okviru starejše železne dobe, tj. v čas stopnje Ha C1–D1. Najobširnejše je bilo odkrito na najdišču Nova tabla pri Murski Soboti, kjer so potekala obsežna izkopavanja pod vodstvom Mitje Guština, 41 podobne strukture so bile odkrite tudi na najdiščih Kotare – Krogi pri Murski Soboti 42 in Tri Mlini/Pri Muri pri Lenda- vi 43 ter na Novinah (glej tu Črešnar, Vinazza, 454, sl. 15). Na Novi tabli je bilo odkritih okrog 100 grobov, razporejenih v več skupin, nekateri izmed njih oz. nekatere skupine grobov so bile obdane s krožnimi ali pa pravokotnimi jarki, ki pa so ostali povečini nesklenjeni (glej tu Tiefengraber, 431 ss, sl. 2, 4, 5). 44 Ti nenavadno speljani in oblikovani jarki dajejo vtis, da je bilo grobišče razdeljeno na različne grobne parcele. A zakaj nekateri grobovi ležijo znotraj njih, drugi pa izven omenjenih z jarki označenih parcel, še ni razjasnjeno. Zaradi popolne izravnanosti terena na Novi tabli, ki je verjetno posledica intenzivnega poljedelstva, tudi ni bilo mogoče ugotoviti, ali so bili te krožne in oglate parcele oz. grobovi v njih prekriti z gomilami ali ne. Čeprav so bili podobni razprti krožni jarki odkriti tudi na najdiščih Kotare – Krogi pri Murski Soboti in Tri Mlini/Pri Muri pri Lendavi ter na Novinah, ne pripomorejo k razrešitvi omenjenega problema. Če kot možne analogije pritegnemo s krožnimi jarki obdane gomile, izkopane v Rogozi pri Mariboru, 45 ter gomile na poštelskem grobišču na Habakuku, kjer je bilo z geofizikalnimi meri- 39 Prim. Potrebica 2013, 100–101, sl. 46–47; Gavranović 2017, 97 ss, Abb. 7: 1; 12. 40 Glej Potrebica 2013, 121, sl. 63; T eržan 2004, 167–182, 189–191, Abb. 12. 41 Guštin, Tiefengraber 2001; Guštin et al. 2017. 42 Kerman 2011, 6–7, 20–21, 28–31; Kerman 2014a, 107–108, sl. 7.1.2. 43 Šavel, Sankovič 2011; Šavel, Sankovič 2014, 65 ss, sl. 2.2. 44 Glej še Guštin, Tiefengraber 2001, 110–114, sl. 3; Guštin et al. 2017. 45 Teržan, Črešnar, Mušič 2015, 63–66, Fig. 2. 326 Biba TERŽAN tvami ugotovljeno, da so bile obdane s krožnimi jarki (glej tu Črešnar, Vinazza, 443 ss, sl. 6), se zdi verjetno, da so bili tudi prekmurski grobovi, obdani s krožnimi ali oglatimi jarki in prekriti z gomilami (glej tu Tiefengraber, 406 ss). Torej bi po svojem zunanjem videzu ne odstopale od “klasičnih” gomil štajersko-panonske skupine. Zaključimo lahko z ugotovitvijo, da so prispevki na simpoziju, ki so predstavili nove raziskave na področju štajersko-panonske kulturne skupine, prinesli mnogo novosti. Na eni strani so ponovno prišle do izraza skupne kulturne značilnosti, na drugi strani pa tudi raznolikost in pestrost njenih pojavnih oblik, zadevajočih tako kulturo bivanja kot grobne običaje. V okviru te kulturne skupi- ne, ki je zajemala zelo prostrana in geografsko različna območja (sl. 1), so nedvomno obstajale regionalne, pa tudi povsem lokalne specifičnosti, ki upravičujejo, da v njenem okviru razlikujemo med različnimi regionalnimi skupnostmi. Zanje lahko pač še vedno uporabljamo “stare” izraze, kot so “Sulmtaler-Gruppe” (posolbska skupnost) s središčem na Burgstallkoglu in z vladavino dina- stije Kleinkleina, pa “kaptolska skupnost” , bivajoča v Požeški kotlini, ter “martijanska skupnost” v Varaždinski Podravini. Vendar takšno razparce- liranje štajersko-panonske skupine zahteva nova poimenovanja tudi za druge skupnosti, morda kot “gornještajerska ali strettweška skupnost” 46 ob gornjem toku Mure, pa “prekmurska skupnost” ob spodnjem toku Mure ter “podravska skupnost” 47 na območju Podravja med vzhodnim Pohorjem, Halozami in Slovenskimi goricami. 46 Tiefengraber, Tiefengraber 2015; Tiefengraber 2015a, 527–555; Tiefengraber 2015c; Tiefengraber, Tiefengraber, Moser 2013; Tiefengraber 2015, 544–551. 47 V pripravi je monografija o najdiščih/najdbah iz časa kulture žarnih grobišč in zgodnje železne dobe, predvsem gomil iz okolice Poštele, v kateri bodo obravnavane tudi lokalne posebnosti v materialni kulturi tega območja. BROSSEDER, U. 2004, Studien zur Ornamentik hallstatt­ zeitlicher Keramik zwischen Rhônetal und Karpaten­ becken. – Universitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Archäologie 106. DOBIAT, C. 1980, Das hallstattzeitliche Gräberfeld von Kleinklein und seine Keramik. – Schild von Steier, Beih. 1. DOBIAT, C. 1990, Der Burgstallkogel bei Kleinklein I. Die Ausgrabungen der Jahre 1982–1984. – Marburger Studien zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 13. DULAR, A. 2016, Bibliografija Staneta Gabrovca. – Arheo­ loški vestnik 67, 21–30. DULAR, J. 2013, Severovzhodna Slovenija v pozni bronasti dobi / Nordostslowenien in der späten Bronzezeit. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 27. DULAR, J., M. TOMANIČ-JEVREMOV 2010, Ormož. Utrjeno naselje iz pozne bronaste in starejše železne dobe / Befestigte Siedlung aus der späten Bronze­ und der älteren Eisenzeit. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 18. EGG, M. 1996, Das hallstattzeitliche Fürstengrab von Strett­ weg bei Judenburg in der Obersteiermark. – Römisch- Germanisches Zentralmuseum / Monographien 37. EGG, M., D. KRAMER 2013, Die hallstattzeitlichen Für­ stengräber von Kleinklein in der Steiermark: der Kröll­ kogel. – Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum / Monographien 110. EGG, M., D. KRAMER 2016, Die hallstattzeitlichen Für­ stengräber von Kleinklein in der Steiermark: die beiden Hartenermichelkogel und der Pommerkogel. – Römisch- Germanisches Zentralmuseum / Monographien 125. GABROVEC, S. 1964–1965, Halštatska kultura v Sloveniji (Die Hallstattkultur Sloweniens). – Arheološki vestnik 15–16, 21–63. GABROVEC, S. 1980, Der Beginn der Hallstattkultur und der Osten. – V / In: Die Hallstattkultur. Frühform europäischer Kultur. Internatione Ausstellung des Landes Oberösterreich 25. April bis 26. Oktober 1980, Schloß Lamberg, Steyr, 30–53, Linz. GABROVEC, S. 1987, Jugoistočnoalpska regija sa zapadnom Panonijom. – V / In: Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja 5. Željezno doba, 25–181, Sarajevo. GABROVEC, S. 1999, 50 Jahre Archäologie der älteren Eisenzeit in Slowenien / 50 let arheologije starejše že- lezne dobe v Sloveniji. – Arheološki vestnik 50, 145–188. GAVRANOVIĆ, M. 2017, Neue Schwertfunde aus Bosni- en – ein Beitrag zur Erforschung der bronzezeitlichen Bewaffnung im westlichen Balkan / Novi nalazi mačeva iz Bosne – prilog proučavanju brončanodobnog oružja s područja zapadnog Balkana. – Godišnjak 46 / Centar za balkanološka ispitivanja ANU BiH, 86–115. GERBEC, T. 2014a, Hotinja vas. – V / In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar (ur. / eds.), Absolutno datiranje bronaste in železne dobe na Slovenskem / Absolute Dating of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Slovenia, Katalogi in mono- grafije 40, 275–286. GERBEC, T. 2014b, Nižinska poselitev severovzhodne Slovenije v starejši železni dobi: primer Hotinja vas. – Doktorsko delo / PhD thesis, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani (neobjavljeno / unpublished). GERBEC, T. 2015, Hotinja vas pri Mariboru. – Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 45 [http://www. zvkds.si/sites/www.zvkds.si/files/uploads/files/publica- tion/45_hotinja_vas_pri_mariboru.pdf.pdf]. GLEIRSCHER, P. 2001, Norische Könige. Historische Quellen und archäologischer Befund. – Prähistorische Zeitschrift 76, 87–104. 327 Štajersko-panonska halštatska skupina. Uvodnik in kratek oris GLEIRSCHER, P. 2002, Das hallstattzeitliche Gräberfeld von Frög bei Rosegg. Texte und Bilder aus dem Urge- schichtszentrum Frög-Rosegg. − Rudolfinum. Jahrbuch des Landesmuseums Kärnten 2002 (2003), 35–64. GLEIRSCHER, P. 2006, Von wegen Illyrer in Kärnten. Zugleich: von der Beständigkeit lieb gewordener Lehr- meinungen. Rudolfinum. – Jahrbuch des Landesmuseums Kärnten 2006 (2008), 13–22. GUŠTIN, M., G. TIEFENGRABER 2001, Prazgodovinske najdbe z avtocestnega odseka Murska Sobota-Nova tabla (Vorgeschichtliche Funde aus dem Autobahnabschnitt bei Murska Sobota - Nova tabla). – Arheološki vestnik 52, 107–116. GUŠTIN, M. et al. 2017 = GUŠTIN, M., G. TIEFENGRA- BER, D. PAVLOVIČ, M. ZORKO, 2017, Nova Tabla pri Murski Soboti. – Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 52/1 [http://www.zvkds.si/sites/www.zvkds. si/files/uploads/files/publication/nova_tabla_-_pra- zgodovina_web.pdf]. JEREB, M., S. SANKOVIČ, I. ŠA VEL 2014, 7.3. Za Raščico. – V / In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar (ur. / eds.), Absolutno datiranje bronaste in železne dobe na Slovenskem / Ab­ solute Dating of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Slovenia, Katalogi in monografije 40, 141–157. KERMAN, B. 2011, Kotare­ Krogi pri Murski Soboti. – Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 20 [http:// www.zvkds.si/sites/www.zvkds.si/files/uploads/files/ publication/20_kotare-krogi_pri_murski_soboti.pdf]. KERMAN, B. 2014a, 7.1 Kotare-Krogi. – V / In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar (ur. / eds.), Absolutno datiranje bronaste in železne dobe na Slovenskem / Absolute Dating of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Slovenia, Katalogi in mono- grafije 40, 107–115. KERMAN, B. 2014b, 7.2 Kotare-Baza. – V / In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar (ur. / eds.), Absolutno datiranje bronaste in železne dobe na Slovenskem / Absolute Dating of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Slovenia, Katalogi in mono- grafije 40, 117–139. KOVAČ, O. 2004, Hajndl pri Ormožu – prazgodovinska naselbina, območje 1 (sektorji 1–6, 17–18, 24 in 25). – Diplomsko delo / MA thesis, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani (neobjavljeno / unpublished). LIPPERT, A. 2004, Bodenschätze, Handel und Besiedlung im inneren Ostalpengebiet während der Eisenzeit. – V / In: B. Hänsel (ur. / ed.), Parerga Praehistorica. Jubiläumsschrift zur Prähistorischen Archäologie – 15 Jahre UPA, Universitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Archäologie 100, 203–219. MAGDIČ, A. 2006, Prazgodovinska naselbina Hajndl pri Ormožu. Izkopavanje 1999/2000 – Območje 2. – Di- plomsko delo / MA thesis, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani (neobjavljeno / unpublished). MELE, M. 2003, Hajndl pri Ormožu – naselbina iz starejše železne dobe – območje 3 (sektorji 151, 152, 153, 158, 159, 160). – Diplomsko delo / MA thesis, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani (neobjavljeno / unpublished). MELE, M. 2009, Naselbini Hajndl in Ormož v pozni bronasti in zgodnji železni dobi. – Doktorsko delo / PhD thesis, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani (neobjavljeno / unpublished). MELE, M. 2014, Ormož in Hajndl – prispevek k raziskovanju kulturne krajine v zgodnji železni dobi / Ormož und Hajdl – ein Beitrag zur Erforschung einer Kulturland- schaft in der älteren Eisenzeit. – V / In: S. Tecco Hvala (ur. / ed.), Studia Praehistorica in Honorem Janez Dular, Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 30, 167–196. MELE, M., B. MUŠIČ 2007, Naselbinske strukture iz sta- rejše železne dobe na Hajndlu pri Ormožu – arheološka izkopavanja in geofizikalne raziskave / Prähistorische Siedlung Hajndl bei Ormož – Autobahnausgrabungen und Geophysik. – V / In: Scripta in honorem Biba Ter­ žan, Situla 44, 341–356. MÜLLER-KARPE, H. 1959, Beiträge zur Chronologie der Urnenfelderzeit nördlich und südlich der Alpen. – Rö- misch-Germanische Forschungen 22. PATEK, E. 1976, A Hallstatt Kultúra Sopron környéki cso- portja / Die Gruppe der Hallstattkultur in der Umgebung von Sopron. – Archaeologiai értesitő 103, 3–28. PERC, B. 1962–1963, K stratigrafiji žarnogrobiščne na- selbine v Ormožu (Zur Stratigraphie der urnenfelder- zeitlichen Ansiedlung in Ormož). – Arheološki vestnik 13–14, 375–381. PITTIONI, R. 1954, Urgeschichte des österreichischen Raumes. – Wien. POTREBICA, H. 2013, Kneževi željeznog doba. – Zagreb. SCHMID, W . 1933, Die Fürstengräber von Klein Glein in Steiermark. – Prähistorische Zeitschrift 24, 219–282. SCHMID, W . 1934, Der Kultwagen von Strettweg. – Führer zur Urgeschichte 12, Leipzig. SMOLNIK, R. 1994, Der Burgstallkogel bei Kleinklein II. Die Keramik der vorgeschichtlichen Siedlung. – V eröffen- tlichungen des Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars Marburg, Sonderband 9. ŠAVEL, I., S. SANKOVIČ 2011, Pri Muri pri Lendavi. – Zbirka Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 23 [http:// www.zvkds.si/sites/www.zvkds.si/files/uploads/files/ publication/23-pri_muri_pri_lendavi.pdf]. ŠAVEL, I., S. SANKOVIČ 2014, 2. Trimlini pri Lendavi. – V / In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar (ur. / eds.), Absolutno datiranje bronaste in železne dobe na Slovenskem / Ab­ solute Dating of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Slovenia, Katalogi in monografije 40, 65–77. ŠIMEK, M. 1998, Ein Grabhügel mit Pferdebestattung bei Jalžabet, Kroatien. – V / In: B. Hänsel, J. Machnik (ur. / eds.), Das Karpatenbecken und die osteuropäische Steppe. Nomadenbewegungen und Kulturaustausch in den vorchristlichen Metallzeiten (4000­500 v. Chr.) , Süd- osteuropa-Schriften 20 = Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa 12, 493–510. ŠIMEK, M. 2004, Grupa Martijanec-Kaptol. – V / In: D. Balen-Letunić (ur. / ed.), Ratnici na razmeđu istoka i zapada u starije željezno doba u kontinentalnoj Hrvatskoj / Warriors at the crossroads of East and West / Krieger am Scheideweg zwischen Ost und West, 80–129, Zagreb. TERŽAN, B. 1987, Claus Dobiat, Das Hallstattzeitliche Gräberfeld von Kleinklein und seine Keramik. Schild von Steier, Beiheft 1, Graz 1980 [mit Übersetzung]. – Arheološki vestnik 38, 413–433. 328 Biba TERŽAN TERŽAN, B. 1990, Starejša železna doba na Slovenskem Štajerskem / The Early Iron Age in Slovenian Styria. – Katalogi in monografije 25. TERŽAN, B. 1995, Handel und soziale Oberschichten im früheisenzeitlichen Südosteuropa. – V / In: B. Hänsel (ur. / ed.), Handel, Tausch und Verkehr im Bronze­ und Früheisenzeitlichen Südosteuropa, Südosteuropa-Schriften 17 = Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa 11, 81–159. TERŽAN, B. 2004, Obolos – mediterrane Vorbilder einer prämonetären “Währung” der Hallstattzeit? – V / In: B. Hänsel (ur. / ed.), Parerga Praehistorica. Jubiläumsschrift zur Prähistorischen Archäologie – 15 Jahre UPA, Uni- versitätsforschungen zur Prähistorischen Archäologie 100, 161–202. TERŽAN, B. 2011, Hallstatt Europe: some aspects of reli- gion and social structure. – V / In: G. R. Tsetskhladze (ur. / ed.), The Black Sea, Greece, Anatolia and Europe in the first millenium BC, Colloquia Antiqua 1. Suppl. Journal Ancient West & East , 233–264, Leuven–Pa- ris–Walpole, MA. TERŽAN, B., M. ČREŠNAR 2014, Poskus absolutnega datiranja starejše železne dobe na Slovenskem / Attempt at an absolute Dating of the Early Iron Age in Slovenia. – V / In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar (ur. / eds.), Absolutno datiranje bronaste in železne dobe na Slovenskem / Ab­ solute Dating of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Slovenia, Katalogi in monografije 40, 703–724. TERŽAN, B., M. ČREŠNAR, B. MUŠIČ 2015, Early Iron Age barrows in the eyes of complementary archaeological research. Case study of Poštela near Maribor (Podravje, Slovenia). – V / In: Ch. Gutjahr, G. Tiefengraber (ur. / eds.), Beiträge zur Hallstattzeit am Rande der Süd­ ostalpen. Akten des 2. Internationalen Symposiums am 10. und 11. Juni 2010 in Wildon (Steiermark / Öster­ reich), Internationale Archäologie. Arbeitsgemeinschaft. Symposium.Tagung. Kongress 19 – Hengist Studien 3, 61–82, Rahden/ Westf. TIEFENGRABER, G. 2015a, Eisenzeit. – V / In: B. Hebert (ur. / ed.), Urgeschichte und Römerzeit in der Steiermark, Geschichte der Steiermark 1, 485–682, Wien, Köln, W eimar. TIEFENGEABER, G. 2015b, Bronzezeit. – V / In: B. Hebert (ur. / ed.), Urgeschichte und Römerzeit in der Steiermark. Geschichte der Steiermark 1, 276–483, Wien, Köln, Weimar. TIEFENGRABER, G. 2015c, Eine augewählte Fundstelle: Der Falkenberg und die Fürstengräber von Strettweg. – V / In: B. Hebert (ur. / ed.), Urgeschichte und Römerzeit in der Steiermark, Geschichte der Steiermark 1, 541–551, Wien, Köln, Weimar. TIEFENGRABER, G., S. TIEFENGRABER 2015, Zum Stand der Erforschung hallstattzeitlicher “Zentralsied- lungen” in der Obersteiermark. – V / In: Ch. Gutjahr, G. Tiefengraber (ur. / eds.), Beiträge zur Hallstattzeit am Rande der Südostalpen. Akten des 2. Internationa­ len Symposiums am 10. und 11. Juni 2010 in Wildon (Steiermark / Österreich), Internationale Archäologie. Arbeitsgemeinschaft. Symposium.Tagung. Kongress 19 – Hengist Studien 3, 217–275, Rahden/Westf. TIEFENGRABER, G., S. TIEFENGRABER, S. MOSER 2013, Reiterkrieger? Priesterin? Das Rätsel des Kultwagengrabes von Strettweg bei Judenburg. – Judenburg. TOMANIČ-JEVREMOV , M. 1988–1989, Žarno grobišče v Ormožu (Das Urnengräberfeld von Ormož). – Arheološki vestnik 39–40, 277–304. VADÁSZ, E. V. 1983, Előzetes jelentés egy koravaskori halomsír feltárásáról Süttőn / Vorbericht über die Er- schließung eines früheisenzeitlichen Hügels in Süttő. – Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae 1983, 19–54. VEJVODA, V ., I. MIRNIK 1971, Istraživanja prethistorijskih tumula u Kaptolu kraj Slavonske Požege (Excavation of prehistoric barrows at Kaptol). – Vjesnik Arheološkog muzeja u Zagrebu III/5, 183–210. VEJVODA, V., I. MIRNIK 1973, Halštatski kneževski grobovi iz Kaptola kod Slavonske Požege (Early Iron Age Warror Graves from Kaptol near Slavonska Pože- ga). – Arheološki vestnik 24, 592–610. VINSKI GASPARINI, K. 1961, Iskopavanje kneževskog tumulusa kod Martijanca u Podravini / Ausgrabung eines hallstättischen Grabhügels bei Martijanec in Draugebiet. – Vjesnik Arheološkog muzeja u Zagrebu III/2, 39–66. VINSKI GASPARINI, K. 1987, Grupa Martijanec-Kaptol. – V / In: Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja 5. Željezno doba, 182–231, Sarajevo. VRENČUR, I. 2011, Črnolica pod Rifnikom. Bronastodobno grobišče in železnodobna gomila. – Diplomsko delo / MA thesis, Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulte- ta, Univerza v Ljubljani (neobjavljeno / unpublished). 329 The Styrian-Pannonian Hallstatt Group. An introduction and brief outline The Styrian-Pannonian group is a characteristic representative of the eastern Hallstatt cultural cir- cle. This term refers to the complex, multi-strata cultural phenomenon, as I described it some 30 years ago in my dissertation on the Early Iron Age in Slovenian Styria. 1 As the name itself indicates, its central area extended over the region of Stryia (both in Slovenia and Austria), from the Savinja River valley in the south to the upper course of the Mur/Mura River in the north, in the west it was bounded by the Kor Alps, while in the east it extended into the Pannonian plains along the Raab/ Rába, Mur/Mura, and Drau/Drava Rivers, where it came into contact with other groups of the same cultural phenomenon (Fig. 1), which are referred to by different names due to political boundaries and the history of research by local researchers. By introducing the term “Styrian-Pannonian group” , I wished to utilize a more appropriate and neutral term in comparison to the “Wies-Martijanec group” , which was first introduced by Stane Gabrovec. Gabrovec on the one hand was referring to the epochal work by Richard Pittioni (1954), and on the other to the then recent research carried out by Ksenija Vinski Gasparini in the Podravina region (1961). He later changed the name, replacing the place-name Wies with Klein-Glein or Kleinklein, 2 where famous princely tumuli had been discov- ered in the 19 th century, leading to the new term of the “Kleinklein-Martijanec group”. 3 With the newly discovered tumuli at Kaptol near Slavonska Požega, excavated and published by Vera Vejvoda and Ivan Mirnik, 4 it was shown that this cultural group had extended further towards the east, and hence the name was again changed to the “Klein- klein-Martijanec-Kaptol group”. 5 However, a new monograph was published in 1980 about the finds 1 I defended my dissertation in 1986, and it was published in 1990. It contains an extensive chapter on the history of research and discussions about individual regional groups with cited literature to which I refer but do not mention specifically here. 2 Cf. discussion Teržan 1987, 426. 3 Gabrovec 1964–1965, 25 f; Gabrovec 1980, 43–44. 4 Vejvoda, Mirnik 1971; Vejvoda, Mirnik 1973. 5 Gabrovec 1980, 30; Gabrovec 1987, 26–28; Vinski Gasparini 1987, 182–231; Šimek 2004. The Styrian-Pannonian Hallstatt Group. An introduction and brief outline Translation from the archaeological excavations of the tumuli that had taken place at the end of the 19 th century in the immediate vicinity of Wies/Kleinklein. Its author, Claus Dobiat, used yet another different new name in his work for this group, calling it the “Sulmtaler-Gruppe” (“Sulm valley group”) after the Sulm River, 6 which from the point of view of the rich material from the above tumuli/cemetery was certainly justified, while from the viewpoint of the broad distribution of the entire cultural phenom- enon, encompassing not merely the Sulm River valley and the periphery of the southeastern Alps, but also practically all of Styria and western and southern Pannonia, it was considerably too narrow. However, it should be emphasized at this point that the term “Sulmtaler-Gruppe” has become widely established in the German-Austrian-Hungarian professional literature and is still in use (see Egg here, 336). Gabrovec also began to use the term the “Styrian-Pannonian cultural group” in his later works, 7 while in the recent period Georg Tiefen- graber has also utilized it in his synthetic overview of the prehistoric period in Austrian Styria. 8 As an extremely felicitous title for this group, we should mention also the name proposed by Paul Gleirscher on the basis of the figural representations on the characteristic pottery of this group, 9 designated as a group of “Stierverehrer” (“bull worshippers”), which indirectly indicated that livestock production, and probably cattle breeding, had to be an important economic branch. Although I do not intend to cite the contributions at the symposium, let me briefly summarize the main characteristics of the above group and draw attention to new highlights of research that were discussed at the “Gabrovčev dan 2017” (Gabrovec Day 2017). Similarly as almost everywhere throughout Europe, in the period of transition from the Late Bronze Age to the emerging Early Iron Age, whose appearance was certainly neither simultaneous nor sudden, in the Eastern Alpine-Pannonian world 6 Dobiat 1980. 7 Gabrovec 1999, 150–151, 178, Fig. 1. 8 Tiefengraber 2015a. 9 Gleirscher 2001, 99, Abb. 12; Gleirscher 2002, 37, Abb. 6; Gleirscher 2006, 19–20. 330 Biba TERŽAN major changes occurred that affected almost all areas of human existence and activity. They are archaeologically reflected on the one hand in a different spatial pattern of settlement, in terms of the choice of location and its organization, and on the other hand in new social structures and belief systems, which can be perceived primarily on the basis of studying the graves or rather cemeter- ies – the manner of burial, funerary customs, and the grave architecture. In the settlement image of the area under con- sideration 10 at the beginning of the Hallstatt period in comparison to the preceding Late Bronze Age settlement structure of the Urnfield Culture, also broken up into numerous large and small regional groups, a significant decline can be seen in the num- ber of settlements, which is particularly apparent in the Drava valley below Pohorje hills, between Ruše and Ormož. Most of the lowland settlements were abandoned. For new settlements, established or only renovated in the beginning phases of the new era, predominantly elevated positions were selected at more or less strategically important elevations or isolated peaks. Thus some stations on elevated positions that had been inhabited previously in the Urnfield Culture were retained into the Early Iron Age, such as Grajski hrib in Gornja Radgona, which controlled the crossing of the Mura River, and Grajski grič at Ptuj, similarly located at an easy crossing of the Drava, and also at Ormož, as well as Brinjeva gora, somewhat withdrawn onto the foothills of Pohorje, and Rifnik on the edges of the Kozjansko region. 11 New settlements also were created, such as Poštela, 12 Burgstallkogel near Kleinklein, 13 and probably also Novine/Bubenberg near Šentilj, where new research (see here Črešnar, 10 I would like to note the excellent synthesis of the Bronze and Iron Ages in the region of Austrian Styria from the pen of Georg Tiefengraber, see Tiefengraber 2015a and 2015b. 11 Teržan 1990, 36–54; Dular 2013. 12 The appearance of Poštela in the Ha B phase in the Müller-Karpe sense is indicated primarily by the newly discovered cremation graves in the Habakuk area, parti- cularly grave 19 published here (see here Črešnar, Vinazza, Pl. 2: 5–9). The urn and the two-handled vessel, kantharos, decorated with pseudo-corded impressions, and particularly the garland motif, are among the characteristic types of the Ruše Ha B group: see Müller-Karpe 1959, 116 ff, Taf. 114: D2; 115: B; 120: 1–2,7–8,12; 121: 16; Tomanič-Jevremov 1988–1989, Pl. 9: 3. As was indicated by the geophysical examination, an extensive flat cremation cemetery would have existed at Habakuk. 13 Dobiat 1990; Smolnik 1994. Vinazza, 464 ff; Egg, 336 f.; Mele, 373 ff), 14 has indicated beginnings extending into the 10 th –9 th or 9 th –8 th centuries BC, hence in the chronological range of the Ha B phase. These elevated settlements were as a rule fortified with earthen banks and ditches and wooden palisades, as was shown by the excavations at Poštela 15 and Ormož, 16 and some- times they were surrounded by defensive trenches, such as at Burgstallkogel near Kleinklein, 17 which was also confirmed by the most recent excavations at Novine/Bubenberg and Čreta near Slivnica (see here Črešnar, Vinazza, 463 ff). These were mostly large-scale settlements, whose interior was divided into artificially created building terraces, sometimes still visible today, which permits an assessment of their rather intensive settlement. 18 It should be noted here that in the recent period new technologi- cal procedures have been used in field research at certain sites to detect archaeological remains, such as geophysical examination and LIDAR scanning of the ground surface, which open up new possibilities and approaches to the study of settlement and the utilization of space, not merely at the settlements themselves, but also their surroundings, which will enable better understanding of the formation of the cultural landscape (see here Črešnar, Vinazza, 461). This has led to unexpected new discoveries in terms of the image of settlement in the narrow area under discussion, i.e. the Pohorje Podravje and Prekmurje regions. Archaeological excava- tions in the last two decades, especially those accompanying the construction of highways, have shown that in the Early Iron Age in addition to the fortified elevated settlements there also existed simultaneous settlements, primarily small hamlets, in valleys or lowlands as well. It is interesting that most of these originated exactly in the beginning Hallstatt period, in the Ha C0–C1 phase, as can be seen from the radiocarbon dates 19 and analysis 14 For Austrian Styria, also see Tiefengraber 2015a and 2015b. 15 Teržan 1990, 25–30, 256–306, Figs. 5, 9–11, 35–39. 16 Perc 1962–63; Dular, T omanič-Jevremov 2010, 84–85, Figs. 97–98. The excavations by Ivan Žižek Pokrajinski muzej Ptuj - Ormož (Regional Museum Ptuj - Ormož) in 2000, showed that the Ormož earthen fortification was built using wooden cassette cladding, between which clay soil was compacted. Unfortunately, the results of these excavations have still not been published. 17 Dobiat 1990, 40–42, 46–48, 65–69, Abb. 20, 23–24. 18 E.g. Teržan 1990, 256–260, Figs. 3–4. 19 For radiocarbon dates, also see Kerman 2014a, 113–115; Kerman 2014b, 123–139; Jereb, Sankovič, Šavel 331 The Styrian-Pannonian Hallstatt Group. An introduction and brief outline of the pottery material (see here Gerbec, 486, and Kerman, 398). Such types of settlement were, for example, discovered at the foothills of Slovenske Gorice near Hajndl, 20 near the fortified settlement in Ormož, and in Hotinja vas 21 on the western outskirts of the Drava plain just below Pohorje, where certain other Hallstatt pottery finds are men- tioned that could well be indicators for traces of a lowland settlement at the foot of the Pohorje hills near Poštela. 22 Numerous lowland settlements also came to light in the Prekmurje region. As is appar- ent from the overview presented here by Branko Kerman, in the slightly rolling landscape south of Murska Sobota and in the vicinity of Lendava, series of hamlets existed, arranged relatively close to one other, indicating some sort of diffuse organization of settlement in so-called long clustered villages. It is interesting to note that in these flatland hamlets a somewhat differently built structure predominates than in the elevated fortified settlements, as is well illustrated by the example of a building with stone foundations, which was excavated by Marko Mele at Burgstallkogel near Kleinklein (see here Mele, Figs. 5−8), 23 as compared to those at Hotinja vas, where pit-dwellings predominated (see here Gerbec, Figs. 2−4). At sites in Prekmurje, such as Kotare – Baza, in addition to pit-dwellings, there 2014, 155–157; Šavel, Sankovič 2014, 68–77; Gerbec 2014a, 283–286; Teržan, Črešnar 2014, 709–713, Figs. 37–38. 20 This archaeological site, where the excavations were led by I. Žižek, was the subject of three MA theses at the Arheološki oddelek, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani (Department of Archaeology at the University of Ljubljana), written by M. Mele (2003), O. Kovač (2004), and A. Magdič (2006), and the doctoral dissertation of M. Mele (2009), but these studies have still not been published, although preparations are being made. Partial results of his studies were published by Mele, see e.g. Mele, Mušič 2007; Mele 2014, 183–188, Figs. 15–17. A special feature of this site is the construction of the buildings. Some of them had foundations of wooden logs placed in ditches, and with columns/beams that supported to wooden bu- ilding structure. Such a type of building was previously unknown in Slovenia. 21 A complete comprehensive study of the material from this site was made by Teja Gerbec in the framework of her doctoral thesis (2014b). For publication of the site, also Gerbec 2014a; 2015; 2019. 22 B. Kramberger gave a report on them at a professional meeting about the Bronze Age on the 5 th of December 2018 in Ljubljana. These were sites near Slivnica and Malečnik. 23 The same type of building is concluded on the basis of the earlier excavations by Schmid at Poštela, see Teržan 1990, 28–29, 273–277, and new investigations at Novine/ Bubenberg (phase Ib) (see here Črešnar, Vinazza). were also buildings with postholes for a wooden above-ground structure (see here Kerman, Fig. 3), which are also known from the first phase of settlement at Poštela, 24 and probably also the first phase (Ia) at Novine/Bubenberg (see here Črešnar, Vinazza, 464, Fig. 14a). It seems significant that archaeological exca- vations to the present have not uncovered any traces on the basis of which it would be possible to conclude that these lowland settlements were protected in any manner, either with ditches or fences or palisades. Hence an explanation can be offered that might explain the noted differences in the type of settlement in reference to their posi- tion (elevated/lowland) and the (non)existence of defensive structures, and perhaps even the type of buildings, in relation to varied “administrative/ functional” roles and different fundamental eco- nomic units or different settlement types leading to a deep social stratification. It seems that in the Early Iron Age in the area under consideration, as is the case in many other countries, a syncretistic model of settlement existed when central type set- tlements controlled their broader surroundings as part of their rural-economic hinterland occupied by a “peasant” population. In this respect, the new research into the well- fortified settlement of Königsberg near Heimshuh above the gorge of the Sulm River seems interesting, as Mele considers that it was merely an occasional post at a strategically significant point that would have controlled the important and single access to Burgstallkogel from the east, from the Mur River (see here Mele, Fig. 13). It would be possible to hypothesize about the territorial organization of this area, which most probably belonged to a community with its center at Burgstallkogel near Kleinklein. 25 In fact, whether it can be assumed on the basis of this example that a similar organization would have existed in other regions of the Styrian-Pannonian group will remain a question for further research. Another trait of the Styrian-Pannonian group is the religious character as reflected in cremation burials beneath tumuli. Incineration of the deceased is a known element in the tradition of the Urnfield Culture, while the tumulus as a funerary monument 24 See Teržan 1990, 25–30, 274–276, Fig. 14. 25 For an insight into the entire area, which was pro- bably subordinate to the settlements at Burgstallkogel, and for other important settlements in Austrian Styria, such as Leibnitz/Lipnica, Wildon, Graz, etc., see Tiefengraber 2015a, 492–521. 332 Biba TERŽAN represents an important new feature of connotative significance, with which the status and social role of the deceased during his or her lifetime was marked, while at the same time it was a commemoration of the community in the sense of its continuing exis- tence and territorial and cultural identity. Extensive cemeteries, which often consisted of clusters or rows of tumuli, lay at greater or lesser distances from the settlements, often at their base. Several hundred or even a thousand tumuli can be counted, such as, for example, the extensive necropolis in the vicinity of the settlement at Burgstallkogel with numerous groups of tumuli, and the princely necropolis in the valley near Kleinklein (see here Egg, Fig. 2 and Mele, Fig. 1), 26 or the mounds at various positions below Poštela, from those on the Pohorje terraces at Habakuk or Lepa Ravna to those in the valley between Razvanje and Pivola (see here Črešnar, Vinazza, Figs. 2, 3). The characteristic tumuli of the Styrian-Pannonian group, or rather the entire eastern Hallstatt cultural circle, are different from those of the Dolenjska type (clan-family tumuli with inhumation burials), since as a rule only in- dividuals were buried with eventual sacrificies of one or more persons, and all were cremated (see e.g. Egg, 339 ff). The larger tumuli usually cover a grave chamber made of stone and/or wood, as a rule rectangular or square and oriented to the cardinal directions; circular chambers are rare exceptions, such as at Črnolica below Rifnik. 27 A specially built and paved entranceway – a dromos often leads to the grave chamber, and could be walled off or enclosed at the end of the funerary rite, sometimes even with human sacrifices (see here Egg, Fig. 3; Potrebica, Fig. 3). 28 In addition to large tumuli, at individual cemeteries, smaller tumuli are also common, which often cluster around a larger tumulus (see e.g. Črešnar, Vinazza, Figs. 3, 8), 29 and thus at first glance indicate social differences in the framework of individual groups, although even in the smaller ones, traces can be noted of wooden or stone grave structures. The characteristic grave goods in the tumuli consist primarily of rich and varied vessels, from storage containers to dining and beverage sets, usually intended to serve several people, such as 26 Also see Tiefengraber 2015a. 27 Vrenčur 2011, Figs. 3–5. 28 See e.g. Patek 1976, 21, Fig. 16: 1 (Sopron-Varhely/ Burgstall, tumulus 215/1975); Vadácz 1983, 51, Abb. 4, 9 (Süttő). 29 See also Teržan, Črešnar, Mušič 2015. at a symposium (see here Egg, Figs. 6−9). Special types of cult vessels and idols are not at all rare. Although metal attire elements were often burned to an unrecognizable state along with the deceased individual, undamaged objects were also placed in the graves. Male graves often contain weapons (axes, spears, swords) and equestrian equipment, while outstanding warrior graves can also have helmets, armour, and shields, and sometimes even horse sacrifices (see here Egg, Figs. 4, 9), which indicates that warrior-horsemen were primarily at the top of the hierarchy. 30 So far still standing out for their exceptional and rich grave goods, and remaining the best known tumuli of the Styrian-Pannonian group are those from Kleinklein and Strettweg, whose abundance can most probably be related to exploitation of nearby ore sources in the ore-rich Eastern Alps, as well as trade in raw materials, such as copper, iron, and salt. 31 These tumuli were discovered in the middle of the 19 th century, the first scientific publication from the pen of Walter Schmid was written in the 1930s, 32 and thanks to Markus Egg, the finds from these tumuli were newly conserved in the restora- tion workshops of the Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum in Mainz, and published in the monograph series of the same museum. Egg first published the tumulus from Strettweg in 1996, 33 followed by even more imposing publications co- authored with Diether Kramer about the princely tumuli from Kleinklein, first the Kröllkogel tumulus (2013), followed by the Hartnermichelkogel 1 and 2 tumuli, and the Pommerkogel (2016) 34 (see here Egg, Fig. 9). Particularly valuable data for compre- hending that grave architecture and funerary rituals were contributed by the revisory excavations of the Kröllkogel tumulus, carried out in 1995 by D. Kramer. These new publications, which presented in-depth studies of individual sets of grave finds and research into various materials, opened an entire spectrum of new information and viewpoints, as well as new scientific questions concerning various economic, political, and cultural aspects, both within the framework of Styrian-Pannonian group, as well as its contacts with neighbouring and more distant communities, particularly Italic and Mediterranean countries. On the basis of analysis of grave finds and 30 Cf. e.g. Teržan 2011. 31 See e.g. Lippert 2004, 205 ff, Abb. 2–4. 32 Schmid 1933; Schmid 1934. 33 Egg 1996. 34 Egg, Kramer 2013; Egg, Kramer 2016. 333 The Styrian-Pannonian Hallstatt Group. An introduction and brief outline the burial ritual of the extensive tumulus cemeteries in the Kleinklein vicinity, including the mentioned princely tumuli, complex social stratification can be inferred, and in this context it does not seem a matter of debate that in the type and chronological sequence of tumuli such as Hartnermichelkogel, Pommerkogel, and Kröllkogel it is possible to see the dynastic graves of the Kleinklein ruling house (see here Egg, 347, Fig. 9). 35 In addition to the revisory excavation of the Kröllkogel tumulus and the publication of the princely tumuli from Kleinklein, exceptional atten- tion was drawn to the new excavations at Strettweg near Judenburg, directed by Georg and Susanne Tiefengraber. The results, although so far only preliminary, are astonishing! On the basis of geo- physical measurement it has in fact been shown that the tumulus with the famous cult wagon was not the only one, isolated in the plain of Aichfeld on the Mur River with a “scene” of high mountains in the background, as had been thought until recently, rather an extensive tumulus cemetery spread there, that had been entirely flattened over the course of time. As anomalies in the geophysical measure- ments appeared in the form of circular outlines, they started with the excavation of one of them. It turned out to actually be the remains of a funer- ary tumulus, surrounded by a circular ditch, and with a rectangular grave chamber built of stone. They continued with the excavations and so far have discovered more tumuli that exhibit exactly the same type of grave architecture with a central, stone built chamber and a dromos. The excavators even had the luck to succeed in identifying one of the tumuli as the one from which valuable finds had originated, including the famous cult wagon. 36 New archaeological excavations were also per- formed in the Croatian Podravina region (along the Drava River), where in addition to Martijanec, the excavation of the tumuli at Jalžabet must be men- tioned. The first tumulus, which was almost entirely destroyed, was investigated in the 1990s by Marina 35 Dobiat 1980; Teržan 1990, 124 ff, Figs. 27–32; Bros- seder 2004, 309–313, Abb. 194–195; Gleirscher 2001; Egg, Kramer 2013; Egg, Kramer 2016. 36 Tiefengraber, Tiefengraber, Moser 2013; Tiefengraber 2015, 544–551. It should be noted that not only was a large cemetery discovered, but also an associated settlement at Falkenberg near Strettweg, along with several other settlements along the upper course of the Mur River – See Tiefengraber, Tiefengraber 2015; Tiefengraber 2015a, 527–555; Tiefengraber 2015c. Šimek. 37 It was shown that the tumulus, or rather the grave chamber, had been placed in a specially prepared area covered with bracken and pebbles. Although the tumulus was almost completely de- stroyed prior to excavation, the grave chamber with a wooden and stone structure and the dromos were relatively well preserved, as opposed to the poor condition of the grave goods. Standing out among them were objects of Scythian origin, such as scaled armour, and perhaps a shield and arrowheads, so far unknown in the repertory of weapons in the Styrian-Pannonian group. A second enormous tumulus is located in the immediate vicinity of the first one, considered to still be untouched. It was recently the site of an attempted robbery, which led to excavations being undertaken last year, led by Saša Kovačević. Therefore, we await the results of these very difficult excavations with great interest! New excavations were again begun at Kaptol in the Požega valley, where under the leadership of Hrvoje Potrebica they first started excavating several tumuli, and later also the associated settlements (see here Potrebica, 506 ff). As research is still underway, at the symposium only preliminary discoveries and some of the most representative discoveries were presented, such as tumulus III at the necropolis of Kaptol-Čemernica with an imposing preserved stone grave chamber with a dromos, but pretendedly quite empty. The general impression gained from the new research is that the Kaptol tumuli do not differ in terms of size and grave architecture from those in the Styrian cemeteries, which clearly speaks of a unified cultural space. Only in terms of the grave goods are there several differences in the material culture. Similarly to the tumuli excavated in the 1960s with Greco-Illyrian and Corinthian helmets, and “musculature” greaves of the Greek type, etc., 38 once again connections were emphasized with the neighbouring Western Balkan region, particularly in terms of weaponry, such as swords of the Kostel type (see here Potrebica, Figs. 2; 8), 39 but at the same time so was inclusion in the economic system of the eastern Hallstatt cultural circle, as is indicated by the grave goods in one tumulus of iron bars as 37 Šimek 1998; Šimek 2004, 80 ff, Figs. 17, 20, 27, 29, 30, 35–36, 39–41. 38 V ejvoda, Mirnik 1971; V ejvoda, Mirnik 1973; T eržan 1990, 145–152, Figs. 34–35; Teržan 1995, 87–89, Abb. 5–6, 11; Potrebica 2013, 106–109, Figs. 53–54. 39 Cf. Potrebica 2013, 100–101, Figs. 46–47; Gavranović 2017, 97 ff, Abb. 7: 1; 12. 334 Biba TERŽAN pre-monetary elements utilized in exchange or trade in prestigious goods. 40 Deviating from these “classic” tumulus cemeter- ies of the Styrian-Pannonian group, which can be traced from Strettweg along the upper course of the Mur River to Kaptol in central Slavonia, are the newly discovered cemeteries in the Prekmurje region, which judging by the finds also belong to the same chronological span in the framework of the Early Iron Age, i.e. in the period of the Ha C1−D1 phase. The most extensive discoveries were at the site of Nova tabla near Murska Sobota, where systematic excavations took place under the direction of Mitja Guštin, 41 while similar structures were also discovered at the sites of Kotare – Krogi near Murska Sobota 42 and Tri Mlini/Pri Muri near Lendava, 43 as well as at Novine/Bubenberg (see here Črešnar, Vinazza, 464 f, Fig. 15). At Nova tabla, around 100 graves were uncovered, arranged into several groups, and some of them, or several groups of graves were surrounded by circular or even rectangular ditches, which were left open (see here Tiefengraber, 400 ff, Figs. 2, 4, 5). 44 These unusually oriented and shaped ditches give the impression that the cemetery was divided into various grave plots. Why certain graves are located within and others outside the plots designated by the ditches remains unexplained. Given the complete levelling of the terrain at Nova tabla, which is probably the result of intensive agriculture, it was also not possible to determine whether these circular and square plots or rather the graves in them had been covered by tumuli or not. Although similar open circular ditches were also discovered at the sites of Kotare – Krogi near Murska Sobota and Tri Mlini/Pri Muri near Lendava and also at Novine/Bubenberg, they do not aid in solving this problem. If possible analogies are considered to be the tumuli surrounded by circular ditches excavated at Rogoza near Maribor, 45 and the tumuli at the Poštela cemetery at Habakuk, where it was established through geophysical examination that they were surrounded by circular ditches (see here Črešnar, Vinazza, 462 ff, Fig. 6), it then seems possible that the graves in Prekmurje region sur- 40 See Potrebica 2013, 121, Fig. 63; Teržan 2004, 167–182, 189–191, Abb. 12. 41 Guštin, Tiefengraber 2001; Guštin et al. 2017. 42 Kerman 2011, 6–7, 20–21, 28–31; Kerman 2014a, 107–108, Fig. 7.1.2. 43 Šavel, Sankovič 2011; Šavel, Sankovič 2014, 65 ff, Fig. 2.2. 44 Guštin 2001, 110–114, Fig. 3; Guštin et al. 2017. 45 Teržan, Črešnar, Mušič 2015, 63–66, Fig. 2. rounded by circular or angular ditches had been also covered by tumuli (see here Tiefengraber, 406 ff). Hence in terms of their physical appearance they would not deviate from the “classic” tumuli of the Styrian-Pannonian group. W e can conclude by noting that the contributions to the symposium that presented new research in the area of the Styrian-Pannonian cultural group introduced many new features. On the one hand, mutual cultural characteristics were again empha- sized, while on the other hand the diversity and variety of its manifestation became apparent, af- fecting both the lifestyle and the burial customs. In the framework of this cultural group, which covered a vast and geographically varied region (Fig. 1), there undoubtedly existed regional as well as purely local specific features that justify making a distinction between the various regional commu- nities. For these, we can still use the “old” terms, such as the “Sulmtaler-Gruppe” with its center at Burgstallkogel ruled by the Kleinklein dynasty, and the “Kaptol group”, inhabiting the Požega valley, and the “Martijanec group” in the area of Varaždin along the Drava River. However, such a splitting of the Styrian-Pannonian group would require new names for other communities, perhaps something on the lines of the “Upper Styrian or Strettweg group” 46 along the upper Mur River, and the “Prekmurje group” along the lower Mura River, and the “Podravje group” 47 in the Pohorje Podravje region between the eastern Pohorje hills, Haloze, and Slovenske gorice hills. Translation: Barbara Smith Demo Biba Teržan Univerza v Ljubljani Filozofska fakulteta Oddelek za arheologijo Zavetiška 5 SI-1000 Ljubljana ljubinka.terzan@ff.uni-lj.si 46 Tiefengraber, Tiefengraber 2015; Tiefengraber 2015a, 527–555; Tiefengraber 2015c; Tiefengraber, Tiefengraber, Moser 2013; Tiefengraber 2015, 544–551. 47 A monograph is being prepared about the sites and finds in this area from the period of the Urnfield Culture and the Early Iron Age, particularly the tumuli from the Poštela vicinity, where local special features in the material culture of this area will also be considered.