353Arheološki vestnik 76, 2025, 353–382; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/AV.76.15; CC BY-SA 4.0
Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement
as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement
and remains from the Early Iron Age
Dragomelj – naselje iz obdobja kulture žarnih grobišč
kot del podgoriško-dragomeljskega somestja
in starejšeželeznodobni drobci
Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
Izvleček 
V prispevku so predstavljeni rezultati raziskav naselja iz obdobja kulture žarnih grobišč v Dragomlju kot severnega 
dela naselbinske celote s Podgorico. Ob slabo ohranjenih ostalinah bivalnih hiš in stavb drugih namembnosti se na-
selje odlikuje po številnih predilno-tkalskih pripomočkih in raznovrstni lončenini, kar ga skupaj z radiokarbonskimi 
datacijami uvršča v horizont naselij Rogoza–Orehova vas, tj. v 12. in 11. st. pr. n. št. V tem obdobju je dragomeljski del 
naselja z dokumentirano predilno in tkalsko dejavnostjo ter s tezavriranim depojem I bakrenih in bronastih polizdelkov 
komplementaren z metalurško-proizvodnim podgoriškim delom južno od Pšate.
Po nekajstoletni vrzeli brez vidnih ostankov poselitve je v Dragomlju dokumentiranih 180 bronastih predmetov v 
sekundarni legi, ostankov depoja II tipa San Francesco (Bologna)–Šempeter, ki poleg drugih drobnih najdb dokazujejo 
poselitev v starejši železni dobi, v 7. oz. 6. st. pr. n. št., tudi severno od Pšate.
Ključne besede: Dragomelj; pozna bronasta doba; nižinska naselbina; predilna in tkalska dejavnost; starejša železna 
doba; depo
Abstract
The article presents the results of the investigations at Dragomelj, where habitation remains from the Urnfield period 
represent the northern part of a twin settlement together with the southern part at Podgorica. The unearthed residen-
tial and other buildings were poorly preserved, but did reveal numerous spinning and weaving implements, as well as 
a variety of pottery. Together with radiocarbon dates, they place the settlement in the Rogoza–Orehova vas horizon of 
the 12th and 11th centuries BC. They also show that its inhabitants engaged in spinning and weaving activities, as well 
as storing a hoard of copper and bronze semi-products (Dragomelj I hoard) as a complement to the metallurgy and 
production-oriented part at Podgorica, south of the Pšata stream.
After a centuries-long gap with no discernible traces of human presence, the area was again in use in the 7th–6th 
century BC. Evidence of this includes 180 bronze objects found in a secondary context. They are the remains of another 
hoard (Dragomelj II hoard), of the Bologna, San Francesco–Šempeter type. Together with other artefacts, it proves Early 
Iron Age use of the area also north of the Pšata.
Keywords: Dragomelj; Late Bronze Age; lowland settlement; spinning and weaving activities; Early Iron Age; hoard
354 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
The rescue investigations conducted between 
1997 and 2001 at Dragomelj, in advance of the 
motorway construction between Ljubljana and 
Maribor, covered a roughly 12,500 m² large 
area. The excavated remains include a lowland 
settlement from the Urnfield period and poorly 
preserved habitation remains from the Early Iron 
Age.1 The Late Bronze Age (LBA) settlement is 
the northern part of a twin settlement together 
with that excavated at Podgorica, south of the 
Pšata stream. Both sites were most densely in-
habited during the Urnfield period.2 Documented 
in the fertile fields east of Dragomelj (Fig. 1) 
was a disturbed topsoil followed downward by 
a variously preserved uniform cultural layer 
and underlying geology of yellowish clay with 
rare pockets of gravel deposits.3 The remains of 
residential buildings were discernible as cuts into 
the underlying geology. These sunken features 
comprised postholes for the wooden posts of LBA 
houses, storage pits, refuse pits and other large 
pits of unknown function (Fig. 2).
1  Many results of these investigations are summarized 
from the comprehensive publication in Turk, Svetličič, 
Pavlovič 2022, 49–125. The site also revealed habitation 
remains from the Late Stone Age, the Roman period and 
the Early Middle Ages (ib., 29–49, 125–139).
2  See Vojaković in this volume, Fig. 1.
3  Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 25–29, Fig. 26–32; 
Verbič 2022.
SETTLEMENT FROM THE LATE
BRONZE AGE
Houses and other
settlement structures
Most postholes were fairly regularly round or 
oval, with diameters ranging from 25 to 50 cm. 
They only survived to shallow depths as the top 
parts were predominantly destroyed. Many had 
packing stones along the perimeter. The postholes 
most frequently formed groups. However, the 
substantial number of postholes and the fact that 
not all could be identified and documented often 
made it impossible to reliably connect them into 
floor plans of rectangular buildings. Moreover, some 
groups of postholes (and pits of other functions) 
suggest initial construction, repair and rebuild-
ing of houses of different sizes and orientations 
on the same spots, which significantly hinders 
the identification of the original building plans.
The distribution of postholes allows us to 
identify the plans of 16 houses (Fig. 2). They 
had different orientations: NE–SW (Houses 1, 
2, 3, 12, 13, 16), NW–SE (Houses 5, 7 (Fig. 3), 
8, 9, 10, 15) and N–S (Houses 4, 6, 11 (Fig. 4), 
14). A slightly irregular fan-like arrangement of 
five houses in the central part of the excavation 
area (Fig. 2: Houses 8–12) suggests they were 
positioned around a central area, possibly a 
communal space or courtyard. The settlement 
Fig. 1: Aerial view of the archaeological site east of Dragomelj (eastward view prior to the excavations).
Sl. 1: Letalski posnetek območja arheološkega najdišča vzhodno od Dragomlja (pogled z zahoda pred izkopavanji).
355Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
Fig. 2: Dragomelj. Plan of the site with sunken and other features from the Urnfield period and the Early Iron Age.
Sl. 2: Dragomelj. Načrt vkopov v geološko osnovo ter drugih struktur iz obdobja kulture žarnih grobišč in iz starejše 
železne dobe.
356 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
would thus appear to be a dispersed village with 
individual houses or clusters of houses spaced 
15–20 meters apart (e.g., Houses 1–2, Houses 
3–4, Houses 6–7, groups of three Houses 8–10 
and 11–13, and Houses 14–15). 
However, the hypothesis of relatively rare and 
scattered houses is challenged by the fact that 
the highest density of postholes and other set-
tlement pits mostly corresponds with the areas 
of small depressions or unevenly sunken sections 
of the underlying geology, as shown in Fig. 3. 
This indicates an originally considerably denser 
habitations, of which only the deepest parts have 
survived. The large areas without sunken features 
therefore more likely represent destroyed sections 
of the settlement rather than communal spaces 
or courtyards.4
In addition to the sixteen identified house 
plans, concentrations of postholes in Dragomelj 
indicate further houses and associated outhouses 
(such as storerooms, stables and enclosures). The 
presumed multi-phase nature of these buildings, 
combined with their abundance, makes it dif-
4  Also cf. Gruškovnjak 2024, 114–116, Fig. 12: there 
is a considerable and clear difference between the locally 
elevated area east of Dragomelj, which has been heavily 
damaged in recent times, and the lower-lying area east 
of Podgorica, where fluvial sediments are much better 
preserved. 
ficult to precisely reconstruct their appearance 
(Fig. 2). We can conclude that the settlement at 
Dragomelj included more than 20 LBA houses 
in the excavated part.
Comparing the habitation remains from Dragomelj 
with those of contemporary settlements reveals 
marked similarities with nearby Podgorica5 and 
more distant Rogoza in the Podravje region.6 
Houses there also show different orientations 
5  Vojaković, Novšak 2022, 30–61, Fig. 18; Vojaković 
in this volume.
6  Črešnar 2010, 59–70, App. 2–3; Črešnar 2022, 
103–117, Fig. 86–89.
Fig. 3: Dragomelj. Houses 7 and 6 (the latter in the background), view of their postholes from the northwest.
Sl. 3: Dragomelj. Jame za stojke ter označena domnevna tlorisa hiš 6 (desno) in 7 (levo).
Fig. 4: Dragomelj. House 11, northward view of its postholes.
Sl. 4: Dragomelj. Jame za stojke in označen domnevni 
tloris hiše 11.
357Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
and an arrangement in clusters of houses and 
outhouses that together form farmsteads. A 
somewhat similar picture is observable in the 
contemporary settlement at Orehova vas in Po-
dravje, where houses are more densely arranged 
(in three clusters) than at Dragomelj, Podgorica 
and Rogoza.7 A considerably denser arrangement 
that is dissimilar to that of Dragomelj has been 
documented in the partly contemporary settlement 
at Pince in the Prekmurje region.8 Significantly 
different is the settlement excavated at Pobrežje 
near Maribor, which is partly contemporary in 
its beginning, but mainly later than Dragomelj, 
and where houses are arranged in a dense, almost 
rectilinear grid.9 Also significantly different are 
the proto-urban settlements at Ormož and at 
Tribuna in Ljubljana.10 The beginnings of these 
three settlements coincide with the decline of 
that at Dragomelj. They also share the orienta-
tion of houses that largely respects a dense grid 
of rectilinear pathways – streets – within which 
the large houses are oriented parallel or perpen-
dicularly to one another.
The size of the houses ranges from 10 to 21 
m2.11 Their lengths vary between 3.8 and 6.4 
meters, their widths from 2.4 to 3.9 meters. The 
sizes of the contemporary houses at Podgorica, 
Orehova vas and Rogoza are partly similar; most 
houses were of a similar size, though some were 
larger and exceeded 30 m2.12
Some of the houses contained the remains of 
hearth bases (Houses 4, 8, 9, and 13), House 5 also 
fragments of a firedog (Pl. 5: 4). Such firedogs are 
rare among the settlement finds from the Urn-
field period.13 Considering that all that remains 
of the houses at Dragomelj is the lower parts of 
their sunken features, it is likely that most or all 
were originally fitted with hearths. The limited 
number of diagnostic finds from House 5 and 
its immediate vicinity (Pl. 5: 1–5) reflects the 
generally poor preservation of household items.
7  Grahek 2021, 31–36, Fig. 1.
8  Kerman 2018, 47–55, Fig. 30a–b.
9  Kramberger, Črešnar 2021, 57–59, Fig. 2.
10  Dular, Tomanič Jevremov 2010, 88–94, Fig. 100, 102, 
105; Škvor Jernejčič, Vojaković 2020, 139–142, Fig. 2–3, 
Tab. 1; Vojaković 2023, 536–542, Fig. 4, Tab. 1.
11  Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 78, Fig. 101.
12  Vojaković, Novšak 2022, 30–61, Fig. 18; Grahek 
2021, 33–34, Fig. 2; Črešnar 2010, App. 3.
13  Grahek 2015, G235, G673, G700 (Orehova vas); 
Kramberger, Črešnar 2021, Pl. 13: 6 (Pobrežje).
The Dragomelj I hoard
of metal semi-products
The hoard comprising 13 biconical and 39 plano-
convex ingots was buried at the western edge of 
the excavated part of the settlement (Fig. 2).14 The 
biconical ingots indicate its dating to Horizon 3 of 
the south-eastern Alpine hoards, which corresponds 
to Ha B1. With over 86 kg of copper and copper 
alloy semi-products, it complements the casting 
activities at nearby Podgorica15 and shows that the 
twin settlement served as a collection, production 
and exchange centre on the transport routes from 
the chalcopyrite and polymetallic ore deposits in 
the eastern and southern Alps towards the south.
Spinning-weaving implements
The implements used in spinning and weaving 
are among the more interesting artefacts from 
Dragomelj. The conditions at the site did not 
allow for the preservation of organic remains, 
including those related to these two activities. 
Spindle whorls as parts of distaffs and ceramic 
loom weights are thus the only surviving evidence 
of textile production. Almost all were unearthed 
outside their original context either in the topsoil 
or in the LBA cultural layer.16 
There were altogether 18 loom weight preserved 
either complete or in fragments.17 They come in 
two basic forms: four-sided pyramidal weights with 
a quadrangular base (selection in Pl. 4: 2–7,11–
12,25,27,29) and conical weights (Pl. 4: 1,13,23), 
the latter being less numerous. Loom weights are 
common finds in the earlier and contemporane-
ous LBA settlements of the Oloris-Podsmreka and 
Rogoza-Orehova vas horizons, but are usually 
14  Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 93–113, G1226–G1277; 
for more details on the Dragomelj I hoard, see Turk, Heath, 
Zuliani in this volume.
15  Vojaković, Novšak 2022, 48–51, 60–66, G101, G166–
G171; see Vojaković in this volume.
16  The only exception is the fragments of three rings 
(Pl. 4: 30–31, 33) found among the numerous pottery sherds 
and pieces of charcoal and daub on the ground surface 
(SE 33 and SE 110) in Grid Squares 93 and 94 (Fig. 2: XI). 
Considering the spindle whorl and loom weights unearthed 
in the cultural layer nearby (Pl. 4: 28–29), these rings are 
seen as implements of the spinning-weaving Area XI.
17  Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 91, G632, G711, 
G747, G789, G801, G972–G977, G994, G1081–G1082, 
G1158–G1161.
358 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
found in smaller numbers than at Dragomelj.18 
The greatly predominant form is pyramidal, as 
evidenced at Oloris, Podgorica, Podsmreka, Rogoza, 
Orehova vas, Krog (Pod Kotom – sever), Nedelica 
near Turnišče, Sodolek and Šmarna gora.19 The 
complete loom weights range from 35 g (Pl. 4: 27) 
to 150 g (Pl. 4: 12), with a concentration around 
80 g and 105 g. This indicates that a single weight 
held multiple warp threads (the weights found 
together and presented in Pl. 4: 11–13 thus weigh 
107 g, 150 g and 67 g, the nearby ring (Pl. 4: 14) 
weighs 172 g). The proposed weight for a single 
warp thread is approximately 40 g, meaning that 
the loom weights would have supported between 
one and four threads each.20 Dragomelj revealed 
no large ceramic weights, while one is known from 
Rogoza and many from Oloris.21
Dragomelj also yielded twenty spindle whorls, 
either complete or in fragments. Although not 
numerous, they show great variety in shape and 
size (selection in Pl. 4: 9,16–17,19–22,24,26,28). 
They include two exceptionally small whorls (Pl. 
4: 28) and two that bear decoration.22 Similarly 
as loom weights, ceramic spindle whorls are com-
mon finds in the contemporary settlements of the 
Urnfield period, such as Rogoza and Orehova vas,23 
whereas they are very rare at nearby Podgorica.24 
The spindle whorls weigh between 4 g (Pl. 4: 28) 
and 33 g (Pl. 4: 22), most of them between 22 and 
26 g. We can thus infer they were primarily used 
for spinning yarn of shorter wool fibres, rather 
than raw wool or longer plant fibres.25 
18  In the settlements in Slovenia dating from the 15th 
to the 11th century BC, the largest number of ceramic 
weights (31 examples) came to light at Oloris in Prekmurje 
(Dular, Šavel, Tecco Hvala 2002, Pl. 2: 3; 9: 1; 22: 14–16; 
23: 2; 24: 13–14; 28: 5–10; 29: 1–8; 33: 11; 44: 19; 54: 20; 
59: 13; 65: 1–5).
19  Cf. previous note; Vojaković, Novšak 2022, G291, 
G292; Murgelj 2013, G833, G862, G917, G960–G961, 
G1048, G1061; Črešnar 2022, 98–102, G27, G102, G634, 
G713, G980, G1047–G1048, G1051–G1052, G1106, G1167; 
Grahek 2015, G213, G280, G460, G505–G506, G540, G702, 
G982; Kerman 2011, G72, G317–G318; Šavel, Sankovič 
2013, G77, G364, G450–G453 in G846; Kavur 2018, G376, 
G590, G613–G621; Murgelj, Nadbath 2014, Fig. 20.6: 19.
20  Belanová Štolcová, Grömer 2010, 17, Fig. 3.10.
21  Črešnar 2022, G1047; Dular, Šavel, Tecco Hvala 
2002, Pl. 22: 15–16; 28: 6–10; 29: 3,7–8; 65: 4–5. 
22  Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 91, G749, G524, G1080.
23  Črešnar 2022, 99–101; Grahek 2015, G332–G333, 
G345, G455, G535, G549, G703, G979–G981 etc.
24  Vojaković, Novšak 2022, G94.
25  Črešnar 2022, 101. Also cf. the exceptional collec-
tion of 2,200 Iron Age spindle whorls from the hillfort at 
Ceramic rings served either as hearth pot 
stands or loom weights.26 For the examples from 
Dragomelj, the latter function is more likely given 
that they were found in direct proximity to other 
weaving implements (Pl. 4: 8,10,14–15,18,30–33). 
Of the 33 recovered rings, only nine were complete 
or well-preserved.27
The relatively numerous loom weights at 
Dragomelj occasionally appear in groups of three 
or four (Pl. 4: 1–4,5–7,11–13). We observed alto-
gether eleven groupings of weights, spindle whorls 
and rings – loom weights across the excavation 
area (cf. Fig. 2: I–XI and Pl. 4: I–XI). Most were 
near houses (Grouping II near House 11, III near 
House 9, V near House 12, VIII near House 5, 
X near House 4, XI near Houses 1 and 2), while 
some appear to be located away from any building 
remains (Groupings I, VI and IX). The latter con-
firm the poor preservation or even destruction of 
the residential and other buildings at Dragomelj,28 
as it is difficult to imagine an activity requiring 
a dry environment not taking place indoors.29 
With this in mind, we can conclude that the re-
constructed floor plans of houses and additional 
roofed structures (Fig. 2) are incomplete, and 
further structures may be expected in areas with 
groupings of textile-related implements.30
The groupings of weights, spindle whorls and 
rings between Houses 7–12 (Fig. 2: II–VI) sug-
gest the existence of a special spinning-weaving 
area. This may in turn hint at a possibility that 
the textile production at Dragomelj, during the 
Urnfield period, exceeded self-sufficiency and 
was rather an artisanal activity that produced a 
surplus intended for trade.31
Molpir near Smolenice, where the most common weights 
are likewise concentrated between 6 and 26 g (Belanová 
Štolcová, Grömer 2010, 12–13, Fig. 3.5). Spindle whorls of 
these weights are suitable for producing woolen threads with 
a thickness between 0.3 and 0.7 mm (Grömer 2010, 90–97).
26  Cf. e.g., Teržan 1996, Fig. 7: 8–13; Črešnar 2022, 101.
27  Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 91–92, G898, G981–
G982, G1090–G1092, G1206, G1208–G1209.
28  Cf. Note 4 above.
29  Cf. Grömer 2010, 227–228. Artisanal activities in the 
partially contemporary settlement at Tribuna in Ljubljana 
– during its Phase I in the 11th/10th century BC – were 
mostly carried out within the houses (Škvor Jernejčič, 
Vojaković 2020, 139–142, Fig. 2–3, Pl. 1–2; Vojaković 
2023, 536–542, Tab. 1, Fig. 4).
30  Cf. Harding 2000, 258–260.
31  Karina Grömer, specialist in prehistoric textile 
production, distinguishes between the self-sufficient 
concept of Haushandwerk and Heimindustrie, which was 
359Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
Pottery
The pottery unearthed at Dragomelj includes 
a few sherds that indicate the site was already in-
habited in the Middle Bronze Age, or in the early 
part of the LBA at the latest.32 Most of the 36,000 
documented pottery sherds, however, date to the 
Early and transition to the Late Urnfield period.33 
A selection of chronologically and culturally diag-
nostic pottery from this time is presented below 
(Pl. 1–3, 5).
Large jars
These vessels (Pl. 1) were likely primarily used 
for storing different grains.34 Most of the well-
preserved examples were found in storage pits, the 
size of which corresponded with the size of the 
individual jars (Fig. 2, 5). Only two of the seven 
such jars were located inside houses (Houses 2 and 
3), while others were presumably placed under a 
roof in immediate proximity to the houses (Houses 
5 and 9) or in spots where postholes – similarly 
to those near spinning and weaving implements – 
were so scarce or damaged that it was not possible 
to identify any buildings.
They come in two basic shapes. The first com-
prises biconical jars with either a rounded (Pl. 1: 
1) or a sharp upper-to-lower body junction (Pl. 
1: 2,3,8). They are the largest vessels found at 
Dragomelj, with a height ranging from 40 to 50 
cm and a diameter between 40 and 60 cm. The 
preserved sherds show an everted rim, sometimes 
with facets on the interior. Parallels come from the 
contemporary Urnfield period settlements of the 
Podravje region, such as Rogoza, Spodnje Hoče, 
Pobrežje and Brinjeva gora.35 Parallels from burial 
contexts also come from Podravje, more precisely 
the Ruše I and Pobrežje cemeteries,36 as well as 
also intended for trade and can be observed in a few cases 
in central Europe from the Middle Bronze Age onward 
(Grömer 2010, 227–232).
32  Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 53–55, Fig. 61.
33  Mixed among the LBA pottery (cf. Turk, Svetličič, 
Pavlovič 2022, 80–93) are several sherds from the Early 
Iron Age (ib., 113–116).
34  Kramberger, Janežič, Novšak 2021, 19, Note 6.
35  Črešnar 2010, 35–38, Fig. 15: L5–L7, Pl. 1: 1; Kramberger, 
Janežič, Novšak 2021, G2 (the storage jar from Spodnje Hoče 
has a cylindrical neck, but is very similar to the jar in Pl. 1: 
1 in its rounded biconical form and height); Kramberger, 
Črešnar 2021, 65–66, Fig. 7: Pi3; Oman 1981, Pl. 2: 2.
36  Müller-Karpe 1959, Pl. 108C; 109K: 5; 111J: 4; 114A: 
1; 114L; 115D: 4; Pahič 1972, Pl. 1: 15; 2: 1; 5: 1; 19: 1; 27: 
1; Koprivnik, Teržan 2021, Pl. 7: 4; 11: 4.
from Dobova in the Posavje region and the urn-
field cemetery at Dvorišče SAZU in Ljubljana.37
The second form comprises jars with an evenly 
rounded, more or less globular body, short neck and 
a vertical or slightly everted rim (Pl. 1: 4–7,9–10). 
This form was in use longer. Parallels come from 
contemporary settlements at nearby Podgorica,38 
those in the Podravje region (Rogoza, Pobrežje, 
Brinjeva gora and Orehova vas),39 as well as at 
Pince near Lendava and Oloris near Dolnji Lakoš 
in the Prekmurje region.40 
Standing out among the large jars is an example 
with an inverted rim and a pair of grips at maxi-
mum diameter (Pl. 1: 11). Roughly similar jars 
can be found among the urns from the cemeter-
ies at Dobova and Dvorišče SAZU in Ljubljana.41 
Parallels are also among the settlement finds of 
the Oloris-Podsmreka horizon.42
Jars and beakers
The most common form among the pottery 
from the Dragomelj settlement are high oval jars 
(Pl. 2: 2–3,5–6). They commonly have a slightly 
37  Stare 1975, Pl. 22: 8; 23: 7; 35: 2; Stare 1954, Pl. 54: 
1; Puš 1971, Pl. 26: 8; Puš 1982, Pl. 12: 7; 24: 1; also cf. 
Škvor Jernejčič 2014, 29–30, Fig. 4.17, 4.18.
38  Vojaković, Novšak 2022, G108.
39  Črešnar 2010, 33, Fig. 14: L2–L3; Kramberger, 
Črešnar 2021, 63, Fig. 6: Pi2; Oman 1981, Pl. 2: 1; 14: 1; 
Grahek 2015, 33, Fig. 27: L1.
40  Kerman 2014, Fig. 1.12: 4, 8: Pit SE 302, dated to 
the 12th–11th century BC; Dular, Šavel, Tecco Hvala 2002, 
145, Fig. 4: L1–L2, 5: L6.
41  Stare 1975, Pl. 60: 1; Puš 1971, Pl. 24: 1.
42  Dular, Šavel, Tecco Hvala 2002, 145, Fig. 4: L2 first 
two examples; also cf. Škvor Jernejčič 2014, 48–50.
Fig. 5: Dragomelj. Storage pit and cattle mandible in Pit 
SE 1115 east of House 9.
Sl. 5: Dragomelj. Shrambni lonec in spodnja čeljustnica 
goveda v jami 1115 vzhodno od hiše 9 med izkopavanjem.
360 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
everted rim, elongated oval body and decoration 
consisting of different impressions on the lip and 
cordons with impressions on the body. Parallels 
from the Urnfield culture settlements come from 
Šmarna gora, Brinjeva gora, Orehova vas and 
Rogoza.43 Some were also unearthed in cemeter-
ies, where they were predominantly used as urns, 
for example at Dobova, Žadovinek, the Ruše I and 
II cemeteries,44 and in the urnfield cemetery in 
Ljubljana.45
Less numerous are the oval-ovoid jars with an 
inverted rim (Pl. 2: 7). Their parallels are rela-
tively rare, known from Rogoza and among the 
later finds from Pince.46 As urns, they are also 
known in the cemeteries at Gorice (Prekmurje) 
and Dobova (Posavje).47
Beakers differ from the jars above in their size, 
as well as a shorter and more ellipsoid or biconical 
body (Pl. 2: 1,4). Parallels come from the contem-
porary settlements at Podgorica, Šmarna gora, 
Pince and Rogoza,48 as well as from contemporary 
cemeteries at Dobova, Žadovinek, Pobrežje, Ruše 
I and Ruše II.49
The biconical beakers (Pl. 2: 8–11) have parallels 
in contemporary settlements at Orehova vas and 
Pince.50 They also frequently occur as grave goods 
in the earliest part of the Late Urnfield period, 
unearthed in the cemeteries in Ljubljana, Dobova, 
Žadovinek, Ruše, Pobrežje and Brinjeva gora.51
A vessel of an interesting form is a jar with a 
conical upper part and a rounded carination at 
43  Murgelj, Nadbath 2014, Fig. 20.5: 1; 20.6: 1; Oman 
1981, Pl. 1: 12; 7: 2; Grahek 2015, 34–35, Fig. 27: L3–L4; 
Črešnar 2010, 34–35, Fig. 14: L4; 18: b–c.
44  Stare 1975, Pl. 46: 6; 56: 1; Pavlin, Bavec 2017, Pl. 
2: 4; Müller-Karpe 1959, Pl. 114M; Črešnar 2006, 121, 
Fig. 27: L9–L10.
45  Puš 1971, Pl. 30:7; Puš 1982, Pl. 1: 1–2; cf. Škvor 
Jernejčič 2014, 50–52, Fig. 4.44.
46  Črešnar 2010, 33–34, Fig. 14: L2 – G551; Kerman 
2014, Fig. 1.12: 5.
47  Plestenjak 2010, G99; Stare 1975, Pl. 6: 15; 8: 5.
48  Vojaković, Novšak 2022, G99; Murgelj, Nadbath 
2014, Fig. 20.6: 2; Kerman 2014, Fig. 1.12: 2, 13; Črešnar 
2010, 27, Fig. 9: Sk2b.
49  Stare 1975, Pl. 16: 5; 18: 16; 22: 2; 26: 4; Pavlin, Bavec 
2017, Pl. 3: 2; Pahič 1972, Pl. 24: 9; Müller-Karpe 1959, 
Pl. 108N: 3; Črešnar 2006, 123, Fig. 27: L14.
50  Grahek 2015, 36–37, Fig. 30: amphorae; Kerman 
2014, Fig. 1.12: 2–3.
51  Puš 1982, Pl. 23: 10; Stare 1975, Pl. 12: 2; 15: 7; 25: 
10; 60: 6; Pavlin, Bavec 2017, Pl. 1: 5; 2: 1; Müller-Karpe 
1959, Pl. 108O: 1; 108P: 2; 110C: 2; Črešnar 2006, 119, 
Fig. 25; Pahič 1972, Pl. 3: 3; 6: 1; 15: 18; Koprivnik, Teržan 
2021, Pl. 6: 7; 7: 5; 8: 1–2 etc.
the lower-to-upper body junction (Pl. 2: 12). The 
disposition of the two surviving handles suggests 
there were originally three or four. Such vessels 
are particularly common in the Podravje region 
and the lower Posavje region, documented in the 
settlements at Orehova vas, Pobrežje and Rogoza,52 
as well as in the cemeteries at Hajdina, Pobrežje, 
Brinjeva gora, Žadovinek and Dobova.53 They are 
dated to the initial horizon of the Late Urnfield 
period.
Dishes
Two primary forms of dishes have been iden-
tified, one with a more or less inverted rim and 
rounded shoulder (Pl. 3: 14–19) and the other 
with a straight (Pl. 3: 9–13) or slightly everted 
rim (Pl. 3: 7–8). These dishes most typically bear 
two types of decoration, namely oblique grooves 
on the rim (Pl. 3: 16) and horizontal faceting at 
maximum diameter (Pl. 3: 18–19).
Dishes with an inverted rim are among the most 
widespread vessel types of the LBA, appearing as 
early as the Rogoza-Orehova vas horizon. We thus 
only offer a limited list of parallels, unearthed in 
settlements. The geographically closest come from 
Podgorica, Tribuna in Ljubljana and Šmarna gora 
in the Ljubljana basin.54 They are also frequent at 
Orehova vas, Rogoza, Spodnje Hoče, Pobrežje and 
Brinjeva gora in Podravje,55 as well as in the late 
phase at Pince in Prekmurje.56
Less numerous from the contemporary settle-
ments are the parallels for the dishes with an 
everted rim, known from Rogoza, Orehova vas, 
Pobrežje and Brinjeva gora in Podravje.57
52  Grahek 2015, 36–37, Fig. 30: G169; Kramberger, 
Črešnar 2021, 74, Fig. 9: A2; Črešnar 2010, 30–31, Fig. 
13: A1c.
53  Müller-Karpe 1959, Pl. 117: 38; Pahič 1972, Pl. 5: 
10; 15: 14; 22: 3; 26: 9; 29: 4; Koprivnik, Teržan 2021, Pl. 
1: 17; 3: 2; Pavlin, Bavec 2017, Pl. 2: 7; Stare 1975, Pl. 4: 
8; 5: 13; 12: 5; 29: 10; 32: 1; 42: 10; 50: 1,9; 57: 7.
54  Vojaković, Novšak 2022, G70, G72, G80–G85, G105, 
G153–G163; Vojaković 2023, Pl. 1: 2–5; Murgelj, Nadbath 
2014, Fig. 20.4: 3–4; 20.5: 6–7; 20.6: 3–6.
55  Grahek 2015, 39–40, Fig. 33; Črešnar 2010, 23–24, 
Fig. 8: Sk 1–4; Kramberger, Janežič, Novšak 2021, G1; 
Kramberger, Črešnar 2021, 76–77, Fig. 10: S5; Oman 1981, 
Pl. 3: 5,17,20; 4: 8,10; 5: 2; 8: 1–13; 10: 6,8.
56  Kerman 2014, Fig. 1.18: 17–18.
57  Črešnar 2010, 15–16, Fig. 6: So 1–6; Grahek 2015, 
39, Fig. 31: Sk 4, Sk 6; Kramberger, Črešnar 2021, 76–77, 
Fig. 10: S4; Oman 1981, Pl. 5: 1,3–4.
361Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
Bowls
The poorly preserved and very small sherds 
make distinguishing between dishes and bowls 
difficult, hence only three sherds have been iden-
tified as belonging to bowls (Pl. 3: 4–6). Similar 
vessels are known from contemporary cemeteries 
in Ljubljana, Dobova, Pobrežje, Ruše I and II, and 
Brinjeva gora.58 As at Dragomelj, bowls are also 
rare at Rogoza and Pobrežje settlements.59
Cups
The sherds ascribed to cups include those that 
indicate carinated examples (Pl. 3: 1–3). Parallels 
come from the earliest habitation phase at Tribuna 
in Ljubljana, at Šmarna gora, Brinjeva gora, Ore-
hova vas, Pobrežje, Rogoza and Pince.60
Baking lids
Some sherds also belong to baking lids (Pl. 5: 
6), or to handles (Pl. 5: 7–8) that may belong to 
baking lids based on the parallels from contem-
porary settlements at Podgorica, Rogoza, Orehova 
vas and Šmarna gora.61
The Podgorica-Dragomelj
twin settlement and similar settlements
from the Late Bronze Age
The nine radiocarbon dates available for the 
settlement indicate two chronological horizons 
within the Urnfield period. The first one spans 
from the mid-13th to the late 12th century BC, the 
second one from the mid-12th to the early 10th 
century BC (Fig. 6).62
58  Puš 1971, Pl. 48: 5; Puš 1982, Pl. 4: 6; 7: 10–11; 10: 1; 
Škvor Jernejčič 2021, 130–132, Fig. 12–13, with Grave 278 
containing two such bowls radiocarbon dated to the 11th 
century BC; Stare 1975, Pl. 25: 15; 45: 9; 59: 9; Pahič 1972, 
Pl. 1: 9; 3: 6; 6: 5; 9: 1,11,13 etc.; Müller-Karpe 1959, Pl. 108L: 
1–2; 108K: 2–3; 108M: 2; 109D: 1; 109E: 1 etc.; Črešnar 2006, 
118–119, Fig. 24; Koprivnik, Teržan 2021, Pl. 12: 10,12.
59  Črešnar 2010, 28, Fig. 9: Sk 3b, Pl. 18: 10; Kram-
berger, Črešnar 2021, 80, Fig. 11: Sk 1, Sk 3.
60  Vojaković 2023, Pl. 1: 13–14; Murgelj, Nadbath 2014, 
Fig. 20.5: 5; Oman 1981, Pl. 12: 5; Grahek 2015, 37–38, 
Fig. 30: G950; Kramberger, Črešnar 2021, 81–82, Fig. 11: 
Skd 1; Črešnar 2010, 20–21, Fig. 7: Sv 1; Kerman 2014, 
Fig. 1.18: 7–8,15.
61  Vojaković, Novšak 2022, G63; Črešnar 2010, 39, 43, 
Fig. 16, 21: R2f; Grahek 2015, 40; Murgelj, Nadbath 2014, 
Fig. 20.4: 5–6,10; 20.5: 10–12; 20.6: 8,11.
62  Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 140–143, Fig. 168, 
178–186.
The pottery shows some elements that could 
already date to the transition from the Middle to 
the LBA. These include trapezoidal handles with 
a knee-shaped bend (Pl. 5: 12) and a triangular 
handle (Pl. 5: 11).63 A similar date may be suggested 
for the rare examples of round groove-encircled 
knobs (Pl. 5: 18)64 and body sherds with applied 
knobs enclosed with concentric (semi)circular or 
horseshoe-shaped grooves (Pl. 5: 16,19), with par-
allels in the settlements of the Oloris-Podsmreka 
horizon.65
It is thus likely there was at least limited settle-
ment of the Dragomelj area before the 12th century 
BC. The chronologically relatively consistent as-
semblage of pottery and the range of radiocarbon 
dates within two standard deviations (2σ), however, 
suggests the main occupation of the settlement was 
limited to roughly a century and a half at most, 
from the mid-12th to the late 11th century BC (Fig. 
6).66 Within this span, the four early C14 dates and 
the five slightly later ones are evenly distributed 
across the excavation area and do not allow us to 
clearly identify earlier or later habitation areas.67 
The LBA radiocarbon dates from Dragomelj and 
their ranges are very similar to those from nearby 
Podgorica and from the contemporary settlements at 
Rogoza and Orehova vas in Podravje.68 In addition 
to the striking similarities in pottery, this aspect 
confirms the place of Dragomelj and Podgorica 
within the Rogoza-Orehova vas horizon in the 
second half of the 12th and the 11th century BC.69
63  Cf. Cardarelli 1983, 96, Pl. 18: 113; 24: 17–18; 25: 
4; 26: 8.
64  E.g., Kerman 2014, 48, Fig. 1.15.2–4; Kerman 2018, 
70–71, G210, G653, G1526–G1528 (Pince near Lendava); 
Leghissa 2014, 335, Fig. 19.5.4 (Svetje near Medvode); 
Svetličič, Turk, Turk 2024, 59, G97, G554, G573 (Kamna 
Gorica near Ljubljana).
65  Murgelj 2013, 37, G1122.
66  Also cf. the select modelled dates from Dragomelj 
in Črešnar, Teržan 2014, Fig. 30.
67  The earliest LBA date (Fig. 6: Anal. No. Gro 10022) 
comes from the upper part of the cultural layer in Sector 
B, in the southernmost part of the excavation area, where 
buildings were poorly preserved. Also coming from this 
part of the excavation area are the radiocarbon dates for 
a fireplace (PN 133; Fig. 6: Anal. Nos. Gro 10025 and Kiel 
21321), which are more credible; the first date may be the 
result of the old wood effect (see Kim et al. 2019).
68  Vojaković, Novšak 2022, 64–66, Fig. 88; Vojaković 
in this volume, Fig. 9; Črešnar 2010, 72–73, Fig. 37; Gra-
hek 2014, 255–273, Fig. 14.1.12–14.1.24; Grahek 2015, 
345–348, Fig. 42–56.
69  Črešnar, Teržan 2014, 689–695; Teržan, Črešnar 
2021, 562–567, Fig. 3.
362 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
Fig. 6: Dragomelj. Radiocarbon dating of the habitation remains from the Late Bronze Age (from Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 
2022, 178–186, Fig. 168).
Sl. 6: Dragomelj. Radiokarbonske datacije naselbinskih ostalin iz pozne bronaste dobe (po Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 
178–186, sl. 168).
Lab sample no. / 
Št. lab. vzorca SU / SE
sector/sq. / 
sektor/kv.
14C age / 14C 
tarost (BP)
Calibrated date / 
Kalibriran datum           
(1σ – 68.3%)
Calibrated date / 
Kalibriran datum          
(2σ – 95.4%)
GRO 10022
388: LBA layer (upper part) / 
poznobronastodobna plast         
(zgornji del)
B/1 2990 ± 40
1283 (49.1%) 1187 cal. BC 
1181 (10.0%) 1156 cal. BC 
1148 (9.2%) 1127 cal. BC
1386 (9.0%) 1339 cal. BC  
1316 (84.1%) 1108 cal. BC 
1095 (1.2%) 1081 cal. BC 
1069 (1.1%) 1056 cal. BC
POZ 100041 916: posthole in House 7 /          jama za kol v hiši 7 19/456 2970 ± 40 1260 (68.3%) 1123 cal. BC
1376 (2.9%) 1351 cal. BC 
1301 (92.6%) 1049 cal. BC
Beta 201211 1266: posthole in House 15 /    jama za kol v hiši 15 26A/592 2970 ± 40 1260 (68.3%) 1123 cal. BC
1376 (2.9%) 1351 cal. BC 
1301 (92.6%) 1049 cal. BC
Beta 201206
534: pottery and daub                  
concentration in House 9 /              
zgostitev keramike in glinenega 
ometa v hiši 9
20/493 2950 ± 40
1224 (63.5%) 1109 cal. BC 
1092 (2.6%) 1085 cal. BC 
1065 (2.2%) 1059 cal. BC
1273 (95.4%) 1016 cal. BC
POZ 100042 1697: posthole near House 5 /  jama za kol v bližini hiše 5 23A/421 2890 ± 40
1155 (2.1%) 1149 cal. BC 
1126 (66.2%) 1007 cal. BC
1211 (92.7%) 976 cal. BC 
953 (2.8%) 935 cal. BC
GRO 10030 396: posthole in House 3 /         jama za kol v hiši 3 12/179 2890 ± 40
1155 (2.1%) 1149 cal. BC 
1126 (66.2%) 1007 cal. BC
1211 (92.7%) 976 cal. BC 
953 (2.8%) 935 cal. BC
GRO 10025 PN 133: fireplace in the LBA layer / kurišče v poznobronastodobni plasti B/2 2890 ± 40
1155 (2.1%) 1149 cal. BC 
1126 (66.2%) 1007 cal. BC
1211 (92.7%) 976 cal. BC 
953 (2.8%) 935 cal. BC
Kiel 21321 PN 133: fireplace in the LBA layer / kurišče v poznobronastodobni plasti B/2 2872 ± 23
1109 (10.4%) 1092 cal. BC 
1085 (11.9%) 1065 cal. BC 
1059 (45.9%) 1007 cal. BC
1125 (92.0%) 973 cal. BC 
955 (3.4%) 933 cal. BC
GRO 10028 327: posthole in House 4 /          jama za kol v hiši 4 14/204 2840 ± 40 1048 (68.3%) 930 cal. BC 1125 (95.4%) 899 cal. BC
a
b
363Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
At least 16 houses were identified at Dragomelj, 
arranged in several relatively dense clusters of 
residential and associated buildings (Fig. 2). These 
may indicate a series of crop and animal husbandry 
farmsteads forming a dispersed village, such as 
were established in the neighbouring settlement at 
Podgorica, south of the Pšata, as well as at Rogoza 
and Orehova vas in Podravje.70 Almost nothing is 
known of animal husbandry, as a single reliably 
identified animal bone was found, belonging to 
cattle (Fig. 5).71 The charred plant remains provide 
more insight, indicating the cultivation of barley, 
vetch, lentil, oats and millet.72 Of other activities, 
the numerous ceramic loom weights and spindle 
whorls suggest that spinning and weaving were 
highly important.
From this perspective, the economic activities 
in the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement ap-
pear complementary. The Podgorica part revealed 
considerable remains of metallurgical activities, 
but no evidence of textile production. The metal-
lurgical activities, which required copious amounts 
of water and posed an increased fire hazard, were 
conducted south of the Pšata and away from the 
Dragomelj part, where inhabitants practised spin-
ning, weaving and possibly storage of large quanti-
ties of food. Furthermore, we can see the location 
of the Dragomelj I hoard – of copper and bronze 
semi-products – as a storage area for materials 
needed in the metallurgical processing at a safe 
distance from unauthorized access.73
The seemingly enigmatic appearance of the 
Dragomelj-Podgorica twin settlement, with a self-
sufficient village life contrasted with the indications 
of metallurgical activities, becomes clearer when 
taking a closer look at the surviving remains of 
all the activities taking place here. This reveals a 
complementary economic unit with metallurgic work 
conducted at Podgorica, while textile production 
and storage facilities for metalworking and other 
materials existed at Dragomelj. The Podgorica–
Dragomelj twin settlement thus represented a large 
functional agglomeration with diverse subsistence 
and artisanal strategies.
To some extent, a similar dual functionality is 
observable at Rogoza in Podravje, where dispersed 
habitations forming a village is combined with 
70  Vojaković, Novšak 2022; Vojaković in this volume; 
Črešnar 2010, 59–71, App. 2–3; Grahek 2021, 31–36, Fig. 1.
71  Toškan 2022, 152, Fig. 90.
72  Tolar 2022, 146; Tolar, Pavlin 2022, 112–116, Tab. 2.
73  Cf. Turk, Zuliani, Heath and Vojaković in this volume.
the find of a copper plano-convex ingot similar 
to those in the Dragomelj I hoard.74
Among the settlements with pottery that indi-
cates occupation contemporaneous with Dragomelj, 
we should mention that at Pince near Lendava,75 
where as many as nine radiocarbon dates fall 
within the 12th and even 11th centuries BC (1σ 
range). Similarly, select radiocarbon dates from 
nearby Šmarna gora and the first phase of the 
settlement at Tribuna,76 the latter also supported 
by funerary finds, indicate that both settlements 
in the Ljubljana area were inhabited throughout 
the LBA. This evidence also suggests that the 
settlements, such as at Pince, were most intensely 
inhabited within the Oloris-Podsmreka horizon, 
but continued to exist at least into the early part 
of the Rogoza-Orehova vas horizon. Settlements 
such as Dragomelj-Podgorica, Orehova vas and 
Rogoza were inhabited in the 12th–11th centuries 
BC and abandoned in the late 11th or early 10th 
century BC. In contrast, there are other settle-
ments and cemeteries with numerous parallels 
in the pottery finds to Dragomelj, such as Ruše, 
Dobova and Ljubljana, which continued to be 
inhabited or used as burial grounds during the 
Late Urnfield culture. There are rare settlements 
from the transitional time of the 12th–11th century 
BC in central and eastern Slovenia,77 but do show 
settlement concentrations in Dravsko polje, central 
Ljubljana basin, lower Posavje and Prekmurje.
74  Črešnar 2010, 52–55, Fig. 27; Črešnar 2022, 55, G636.
75  Kerman 2014, Fig. 1.19; 1.23; 1.25–1.32; 1.34; Ker-
man 2018, 89, Fig. 53.
76  Murgelj, Nadbath 2014, 352–354; Vojaković 2023, 
535–536, Fig. 1.
77  Črešnar, Teržan 2014, 689–695, Fig. 31; Turk, Svetličič, 
Pavlovič 2022, 111–113, Fig. 146.
Fig. 7: Dragomelj. Pit SE 1774 from the Early Iron Age.
Sl. 7: Dragomelj. Starejšeželeznodobna jama 1774 med 
izkopavanji.
364 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
In contrast to the regionally oriented pottery 
characteristic of the Rogoza-Orehova vas horizon, par-
allels for the items in the Dragomelj I hoard, biconical 
ingots in particular, suggest supra-regional connections. 
A similar observation can be made for the objects 
made in the moulds unearthed at Podgorica,78 whose 
distribution is linked with the long-distance exchange 
of copper and bronze semi-products (Dragomelj), as 
well as finished products (Podgorica) reaching from 
the eastern Alps to central Italy.79
It is clear that the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin 
settlement played an important intermediary role 
in this network of connections, likely functioning 
as a trade hub. This interpretation is complemented 
by the two foundries and moulds from Podgorica, 
which show the twin settlement was not merely a 
centre of exchange, but also a production site. The 
settlement dynamics observed in the neighbour-
ing sites and cemeteries show that this role at the 
transition to the 10th century BC was increasingly 
taken over by the settlement in Ljubljana.80
SETTLEMENT REMAINS
FROM THE EARLY IRON AGE 
Settlement structures
Only rare finds unearthed at Dragomelj date to 
the Early Iron Age. They include a pit containing 
a serpentine fibula (SE 1774; Fig. 2, 7) and a stone 
paving (SE 1689; Fig. 2).81 Both are located in the 
part of the site previously covered by the local 
road from Dragomelj to Mala Loka, under which 
the prehistoric layers were better preserved. The 
pit contained burnt remains and in them several 
undiagnostic pottery sherds, a bow fragment of a 
serpentine fibula with a hole for inserting either a 
rosette or wings (Pl. 5: 25), as well as the jawbone 
of a domestic pig.82 The missing rosette/wings of 
the fibula hinders a precise identification of its 
type, though it certainly dates to a span of the 
late 7th–6th century BC.83
78  Cf. Vojaković in this volume.
79  Cf. Turk, Zuliani, Heath in this volume.
80  Škvor Jernejčič 2014; ead. 2021; Škvor Jernejčič, 
Vojaković 2020; Vojaković 2023.
81  Many results of the excavations of the Early Iron 
Age remains are summarized from the comprehensive 
publication in Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 113–125.
82  Toškan 2022.
83  Tecco Hvala 2014, 126–129, 144–146, 150–152, Fig. 
3a: 5–12; 5: 1–3; Maps 4 and 8 (Type IIIa4 or Va).
Found some 30 meters further south (Grid 
Square 148) was a pedestal fragment of a bowl 
with horizontal grooves (Pl. 5: 26), which closely 
resembles the pedestal bowl found in Grave 1 at 
nearby Podgorica.84 Scattered across the excava-
tion area were individual pottery sherds of a very 
coarse-grained fabric and a hardness level of 5 
(very hard). The shapes of these usually small 
sherds do not significantly differ from the usual 
vessel forms of the Urnfield period. They include 
body sherds with cordons, tongue-shaped grips 
with impressions, as well as some rim and base 
sherds.85 They were found in recently disturbed 
topsoil or in cultural layers, but not in the pits 
dug into the underlying geology. These modest 
finds suggest a settlement (or cemetery?) in this 
area in the second half of the 7th and/or the 6th 
century BC.
The Dragomelj II hoard
from the Early Iron Age
The most significant indication of Early Iron Age 
habitation at Dragomelj is a hoard of 180 bronze 
objects (selection in Pl. 6–7). Ploughing activities 
in the area disturbed the hoard and dispersed its 
contents across an area of 70×30 meters, with 
a concentration in a 3×3-meter large spot (Fig. 
2). Its composition, closely similar to that of the 
Hallstatt hoards of the Bologna, San Francesco–
Šempeter type,86 and its distribution show that 
these bronze items undoubtedly formed part of a 
hoard. The objects were not found in situ, making 
it impossible to reconstruct the original structure 
and number of items. 
Some of the items were already unearthed dur-
ing a metal-detector survey in 1995, but most were 
recovered during the rescue excavations in 2000. 
Their main characteristic is extreme fragmenta-
tion. Many items bear clearly visible cut marks 
that are often parallel to the fractures (e.g., Pl. 6: 
6,8, 7: 2–3,6,8–10,14), which indicate intentional 
breaking into smallest possible fragments. The 
hoard comprises the following items: two fragments 
84  Vojaković, Novšak 2022, 70, G175 (with parallels); 
see Vojaković in this volume.
85  Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 115–116; a distinctly 
Early Iron Age form can be identified, for example, in 
the rim of a large storage jar and a pedestal vessel (ib., 
G527, G608).
86  Turk 2018.
365Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
of ring jewellery (ribbed bracelet87 and knobbed 
torc88: Pl. 6: 1–2), five fragments of winged axes 
(Pl. 6: 3–6),89 one fragment of a socketed axe (Pl. 
6: 7),90 32 fragments of shaft-hole axes (Pl. 6: 8–16, 
7: 1–9),91 97 fragments of axe blades or flat ingots 
(Pl. 7: 10–16), a pin fragment, ten fragments of 
sheet metal, four fragments of bar ingots (Pl. 7: 
19–21),92 a rectangular ingot with a trapezoidal 
section (Pl. 7: 18) and 27 unidentifiable fragments, 
possibly ingots or pieces of raw material (Pl. 7: 17).
Another characteristic of the Dragomelj II hoard 
is the heavy wear of the fractures. More than two-
thirds of its 180 items have worn or very worn 
fractures. This is another point of similarity with 
the hoards of the Bologna, San Francesco–Šempeter 
type,93 which were deposited over an extended 
period that concluded deep into the Early Iron 
Age.94 In short, Dragomelj II belongs to this group 
because of its composition that includes numerous 
shaft-hole axes,95 the highly fragmented condition 
of its contents and the heavy wear of the fractures. 
The Bologna, San Francesco–Šempeter type hoards 
are found in settlements, composed exclusively of 
87  Such bracelets or anklets are common in the graves 
of women of the Dolenjska Hallstatt group (e.g., Gabrovec 
et al. 2006, Pl. 41: 1–2; 47: 8–11; 49: 2–3; 78: 11; 94: 4; 
Tecco Hvala 2012, 299–309, Fig. 111: 12–14; Tecco Hvala 
2017, 37, 41, Pl. 9: 1; 14A: 3–4).
88  Parallels come from the rich burials of women of the 
Stična and Serpentine phases in Dolenjska (Tecco Hvala 
2012, 270–272, Fig. 101: 7–10).
89  Three of the axes have a saddle-shaped widening at 
the body-blade junction (Pl. 6: 3, 5–6). This typological 
feature is characteristic of axes from the Early Hallstatt 
period in the eastern Alps and the Apennine peninsula (for 
Hallstatt and Hallein type axes, cf. Mayer 1977, 167–168, 
177–178; for the Treviso type axes and those with a saddle-
shaped body-blade junction, cf. Carancini 1984, 115–118); 
in Slovenia for the hoards from Šempeter (Furlani 1996, Pl. 
134: 36,42–43) and Mengeš (Pavlin, Turk 2014, 43, Pl. 7: 1).
90  Socketed axes are rare in the hoards similar to the 
Dragomelj II hoard (Furlani 1996, 83, Pl. 132: 27; Pavlin, 
Turk 2014, 43–44, Pl. 1: 2–3; Pavlin et al. 2024, Pl. 1: 9).
91  Cf. e.g., Trampuž–Orel, Heath 1998; Pavlin, Turk 
2014, 44–49, Fig. 10; Turk, Svetličič 2018, 28–30, Fig. 3; 
Nanut 2018, 139–148, Fig. 11; Pavlin et al. 2024, Pl. 1–4.
92  Select parallels: Furlani 1996, Pl. 135: 50,52,54–57 
(Šempeter); Pavlin, Turk 2014, 49, Pl. 6: 15,18 (Gobavica 
nad Mengšem I); Nanut 2018, 150, Pl. 1: 31 (Dolenje Ravne).
93  Pavlin, Turk 2014, 50–52, Pl. 1–2; Turk 2018, 399; 
Pavlin et al. 2024, 184.
94  Turk 2018, 402–403, Fig. 3; Pavlin et al. 2024.
95  In its relatively varied composition, the Dragomelj 
II hoard is similar to that found at Jelenov klanec in Kranj 
and to the Gobavica nad Mengšem I hoard (Pavlin et al. 
2024, Tab. 2).
bronze objects, as is the case at Dragomelj, and 
are present in central and western Slovenia, the 
Kvarner hinterland and north-eastern Italy.96
Both the Podgorica and Dragomelj parts of the 
twin settlement show an approximately 300-year 
gap without clear archaeological traces after the 
end of the LBA settlement, followed by habitation 
traces dating to the transition from the Early to 
the Late Hallstatt period, i.e., the late 7th and the 
6th century BC. Continuity from the LBA is only 
discernible in the great number of bronze shaft-
hole axes in the Dragomelj II hoard, with a broad 
usage spanning between the 11th/10th and 8th/7th 
centuries BC97 – precisely the span missing in 
other habitation finds from Dragomelj. In this 
respect, the Dragomelj II hoard is similar to the 
‘long-duration’ hoard from Šempeter near Gorica, 
which contains items datable from the 13th/12th to 
the 6th century BC.98 It is important to emphasize 
that the Dragomelj I and II hoards, with the de-
position for Dragomelj I ending around 1000 BC 
at the latest and for Dragomelj II around 600 BC, 
were located less than 10 meters apart (Fig. 2). The 
secondary position of most items in Dragomelj I99 
and of all items in Dragomelj II shows this was 
a highly disturbed part of the site. The answers 
regarding the possible settlement continuity from 
the LBA to the Iron Age likely lie in these disturbed 
and even more in the unexplored areas west of 
the motorway.
The time gap between the two hoards remains 
enigmatic. Their almost identical location sug-
gests that people were also present at Dragomelj 
during the transition from the Bronze to the Early 
Iron Age, a time for which we lack clear evidence 
with the exception of the shaft-hole axes. The 
reason for the hoards’ proximity thus remains as 
yet unexplained.
Translation: Andreja Maver
96  Turk 2018, 399, Fig. 3; Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 
2022, 124, Fig. 154.
97  Carancini 1984, 198–231; Furlani 1996, 84–85; cf. 
Pavlin et al. 2024, 184–185, for the shaft-holes axes of a 
similar time span in the recently published hoard from 
Jelenov klanec in Kranj; cf. Turk, Svetličič 2018, 28–30, 
Fig. 3: 1–2, for the hoard from Gorenje near Kranj and 
the early appearance of bronze shaft-hole axes in Slovenia 
as early as the 11th/10th century BC.  
98  Furlani 1996, 81–86.
99  Cf. Turk, Heath, Zuliani in this volume.
366 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
Plate 1
1. Jar with a high conical neck and two grips; two parallel 
grooves on the shoulder; red-yellow; coarse-grained; 
hard (4); h. 48.6 cm, r. d. 35 cm, maximum d. 61.4 cm, 
b. d. 16.4 cm; SE 57, GS 148, Inv. No. P 27163; G659.
2. Jar; light red-yellow; coarse-grained; hard (4); r. d. 
21.2 cm, maximum d. 41 cm, h. 38.5 cm; SE 9, GS 98, 
121, Inv. No. P 27011; G554.
3. Jar with two grips; brown exterior, yellow-brown to very 
dark grey-brown interior; coarse-grained with abundant 
grog; hard (3); h. 37.5 cm, b. d. 15 cm; SE 548, GS 810, 
Inv. No. P 27027; G468.
4. Jar; rim and body frg; cordon with impressions; su-
rface not preserved; red-yellow exterior, red-yellow 
and dark brown (mottled) interior; medium-grained 
with individual large mineral inclusions; hard (3); r. 
d. 29.2  cm, l. 6.1  cm, w. 7.8  cm; SE 520, GS 494, Inv. 
No. P 27025; G911.
5. Jar; body frg with a grip; cordon with impressions; grey 
to light brown exterior, very dark grey interior; medium-
-grained; hard (4); l. 12.6  cm, w. 22.2  cm; SE 600, GS 
640, Inv. No. P 26475; G1129.
6. Jar; rim and body frg; cordon with impressions; surface 
not preserved; red-yellow; coarse-grained; hard (4); d. 
29 cm, l. 13 cm, w. 14.3 cm; SE 394, GS 178, Inv. No. P 
26662; G639.
7. Jar; rim and body frg; cordon with impressions; surface 
coarsely smoothed; red-brown; coarse-grained with 
abundant grog; hard (4); r. d. 30 cm, h. 16 cm; SE 548, 
GS 810, Inv. No. P 27028; G 467.
8. Jar; rim and body frg with a handle; red; very coarse-
-grained; hard (3); d. 25 cm, h. 11 cm; SE 57, GS 148, 
Inv. No. P 26915; G658.
9. Jar; rim and body frg; surface not preserved; (mottled) 
pale brown and dark grey exterior, red-yellow interior; 
medium-grained; hard (3); r. d. 28  cm, l. 12.3  cm, w. 
9.2 cm; SE 74, GS 184, Inv. No. P 26928; G656.
10. Jar; rim and body frg; surface not preserved; red; very 
coarse-grained, hard (3); r. d. 25.6 cm, h. 18.4 cm; SE 
57, GS 148, Inv. No. P 26921 in P 27164; G657.
11. Jar with two grips; surface is preserved in traces; brown 
to red-brown; medium-grained; hard (4); reconstr. h. ca. 
26 cm, maximum d. 34 cm, r. d. 20 cm; SE 520, GS 403, 
403A, Inv. No. P 27029; G764.
CATALOGUE
The catalogue presents the typologically and chronologically diagnostic artefacts selected from the total of 778 pottery 
items from the Bronze Age, as well as a selection of the bronze items from the Dragomelj II hoard dating to the Early 
Iron Age (Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022). All artefacts are kept in the Narodni muzej Slovenije.
Pottery: basic definition, decoration, surface colour (using the Munsell soil color charts 1990), fabric grain size (see Turk, 
Svetličič, Pavlovič 1922, 219–220) and hardness (using the Mohs hardness scale). All pottery is hand-built, the surface is 
usually smoothed. Metal: basic definition and description, surface wear, special features and material. Numbers with the 
prefix ‘G’ refer to the catalogue numbers of objects in the primary publication (Turk, Svetličič, Pavlovič 2022, 298–495).
Abbreviations / Okrajšave:
Plate 2
1. Jar; rim frg; surface not preserved; red-yellow; coarse-
-grained; hard (3); d. 12 cm, l. 3.5 cm, w. 5.3 cm; SE 7, 
GS 121d, Inv. No. P 26862; G577.
2. Jar; rim frg; very dark grey-brown exterior (in traces), 
dark grey interior; coarse-grained; hard (3); l. 7.3 cm, 
w. 6.7 cm; SE 520, GS 403a, Inv. No. P 26442; G757.
3. Jar; rim frg; light yellow-brown exterior, very dark grey 
interior; medium-grained; hard (3); d. 12 cm, l. 5 cm, 
w. 5.2 cm; SE 520, GS 405b, Inv. No. P 26974; G723.
4. Jar; rim and body frg; thin impressions on the lip and 
cordon with impressions on the body; red-brown exte-
rior, light brown interior; medium-grained; hard (3); 
d. 16 cm, h. 8 cm; SE 57, GS 148, Inv. No. P 26918 in 
P 26919; G662.
5. Jar; rim and body frg; impressions on the lip and cordon 
with impressions on the body; (mottled) light yellow-
-brown to dark grey-brown; medium-grained with 
individual large mineral inclusions; hard (3); d. 22 cm, 
h. 13.4 cm; SE 1013, GS 587, Inv. No. P 27024; G1086.
6. Jar; rim and body frg; cordon with impressions with one 
preserved applique or grip; red-yellow exterior, dark 
grey-brown interior; medium-grained with individual 
large mineral inclusions; hard (4); l. 17 cm, w. 9.7 cm; 
SE 1456, GS 534, Inv. No. P 26386; G1021.
7. Jar; rim and body frg; two appliques with an impres-
sion; brown to dark brown exterior, dark red-grey to 
black interior; medium-grained; hard (4); l. 16 cm, w. 
20 cm, r. d. 18 cm, h. 16 cm; SE 520, GS 544, Inv. No. 
P 27048; G1030.
8. Jar with two handles; surface preserved in traces; red 
brown to dark red-grey exterior, yellow-brown interior; 
medium-grained; hard (3); r. d. 9 cm, maximum d. 12 cm, 
h. 9.5 cm; SE 1232, GS 525, Inv. No. P 26436; G1022.
9. Jar; rim with a handle, body and base frg; yellow-red 
to red-brown; medium-grained; hard (3); r. d. 17 cm, 
maximum d. 20 cm, h. 12 cm; SE 520, GS 528, Inv. No. 
P 26435; G1028.
10. Carinated vessel; body frg with a handle; brown; fine-
-grained; very hard (5); l. 6.4 cm, w. 4.7 cm, handle w. 
2.4 cm, th. 1.1 cm; SE 270, GS 242, Inv. No. P 26565; 
G1203.
11. Carinated vessel; body frg with a handle; five horizontal 
grooves flanked by a series of impressed dots above and 
below; very dark grey-brown; medium-grained; very 
b. = base / dno
d. = diameter / premer
frg = fragment / odlomek
h. = height / višina
inv. no. = inventory number / inventarna številka
l. = length / dolžina
r. = rim / ustje
GS = grid square / kvadrant
SE = stratigraphic unit / stratigrafska enota
th. = thickness / debelina
w. = width / širina
wt = weight / teža 
367Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
hard (5); l. 5.6  cm, w. 11.2  cm; SE 520, GS 408a, Inv. 
No. P 29235; G730.
12. Jar with a long neck and three or four handles on the 
shoulder; body and base edge frg; red-brown exterior, 
dark red-grey interior; medium-grained; hard (4); d. 
13.5 cm, h. 21.5 cm, l. 3 cm, w. 6.7 cm; SE 57, GS 148, 
Inv. No. P 26916; G660.
Plate 3
1. Carinated cup; body frg; surface not preserved; very pale 
brown exterior, black core; fine-grained; hard (3); l. 3.4 cm, w. 
3.3 cm; SE 7, GS 126 b, Inv. No. P 26881; G579.
2. Carinated cup; body frg; cordon with impressions; 
surface not preserved; red-brown exterior, red-yellow 
interior; coarse-grained; hard (4); l. 4.2 cm, w. 3 cm; 
SE 7, GS 203, Inv. No. P 26500; G701.
3. Carinated cup; rim frg; surface not preserved; pale brown 
exterior, very dark grey interior; medium-grained; hard 
(4); l. 2.6 cm, w. 3.7 cm; SE 360, GS 181, Inv. No. P 
26664; G641.
4. Bowl; rim and body frg with a handle; red-yellow; fine-
-grained; very hard (5); l. 5.8 cm, w. 4.8 cm; SE 520, 
GS 497, Inv. No. P 23899; G928.
5. Bowl; rim and body frg with a handle; brown exterior, 
yellow-brown interior; medium-grained; hard (3); d. 
13 cm, l. 12.6 cm, w. 9 cm; SE 59, GS 157, Inv. No. P 
26931; G648.
6. Bowl; rim frg; brown to dark brown exterior, red-brown 
interior; medium-grained; hard (4); l. 4.2 cm, w. 4.9 cm; 
SE 520, GS 403 a, Inv. No. P 26460; G763.
7. Rim frg of a dish or bowl; shallow impressions on the lip; 
brown exterior, red-brown interior; medium-grained; 
hard (3); l. 3.5 cm, w. 48 cm; SE 516, GS 803, Inv. No. 
P 26597; G497.
8. Rim frg of a dish or bowl; brown exterior, dark brown 
interior; medium-grained; hard (4); l. 3.4 cm, w. 4 cm; 
SE 520, GS 474, Inv. No. P 26487; G793.
9. Dish; rim frg; very dark grey-brown exterior, black in-
terior; fine-grained; very hard (5); l. 4.7 cm, w. 5.5 cm; 
no data, Inv. No. P 26598; G502.
10. Rim frg of a dish; surface is smoothed, preserved in 
traces; brown exterior, light yellow-brown interior; very 
coarse-grained; very hard (5); l. 7.7 cm, w. 4.2 cm; SE 
7, GS 64, Inv. No. P 26640; G516.
11. Rim and body frg of a dish; oblique grooves; dark 
brown; medium-grained; hard (4); l. 3.1 cm, w. 4 cm; 
SE 502, GS 499, Inv. No. P 23823; G837.
12. Dish; rim frg; red-yellow; medium-grained; hard (4); 
l. 4.7 cm, w. 10.4 cm, d. 24 cm; SE 520, GS 404a, Inv. 
No. P 26973; G722.
13. Rim frg of a dish; dark grey; medium-grained; hard 
(4); l. 4.4 cm, w. 5 cm; SE 502, GS 498, Inv. No. P 
23816; G839.
14. Rim and body frg of a dish with a perforated grip; 
oblique grooves; very dark grey to black; coarse-grained; 
hard (4); l. 3.1 cm, w. 4.1 cm; SE 201, GS 233, Inv. No. 
P 26531; G1178.
15. Dish; rim and body frg; very dark grey; medium-grai-
ned; hard (4); d. 19.5 cm, l. 6 cm, w. 9.5 cm; SE 616, 
GS 592, Inv. No. P 23928; G1093.
16. Dish; oblique grooves; light yellow-brown; medium-
-grained; hard (4); r. d. 18 cm, b. d. 6.5 cm, h. 8.5 cm; 
SE 520, GS 547, Inv. No. P 28349; G1029.
17. Dish; surface preserved in traces, smoothed; dark grey-
-brown exterior, brown interior; fine-grained; hard (3); 
d. 19 cm, h. 9, cm, b. d. 3.5 cm; SE 594, GS 461, Inv. 
No. P 27015; G999.
18. Dish; rim and body frg; faceted shoulder; brown; 
medium-grained; very hard (5); d. 20 cm, l. 7.3 cm, w. 
14.5 cm; SE 7, GS 135, Inv. No. P 26802; G528.
19. Dish; rim and body frg; faceted shoulder; surface not 
preserved; red-yellow; medium-grained; hard (4); l. 
4.2 cm, w. 5.7 cm, d. 20 cm; SE 386, GS 181, Inv. No. 
P 26665; G643.
Plate 4
1. Loom weight; red-yellow; medium-grained; hard (4); l. 
4.3 cm, w. 3.6 cm, h. 5.3 cm, wt 59 g; SE 1144, GS 643, 
Inv. No. P 23979; G1160.
2. Loom weight; red-yellow; fine-grained with individual 
large mineral inclusions; hard (3); h. 5.8 cm, d. 4.7 cm, 
wt 89 g; SE 616, GS 643, Inv. No. P 23990; G1161.
3. Loom weight; frg; dark brown; coarse-grained; hard (4); 
l. 5 cm, w. 4 cm, h. 5.1 cm, wt 81 g; SE 706, GS 653, 
Inv. No. P 23977; G1159.
4. Loom weight; dark brown; coarse-grained; hard (4); l. 
4.5 cm, w. 4.5 cm, h. 6.2 cm, wt 86 g; SE 706, GS 644, 
Inv. No. P 23978; G1158.
5. Loom weight; frg; surface not preserved; brown; coar-
se-grained; hard (4); h. 2.4 cm, w. 3.2 cm; SE 520, GS 
516, Inv. No. P 23843; G976.
6. Loom weight; frg; surface not preserved; red-brown; 
medium-grained; hard (3); h. 2.2 cm, w. 4.4 cm; SE 
520, GS 516, Inv. No. P 23842; G975.
7. Loom weight; frg; surface not preserved; red-yellow; 
fine-grained; hard (3); h. 2.4 cm, w. 3.5 cm; SE 520, 
GS 517, Inv. No. P 23849; G977.
8. Ring – loom weight; frg; surface not preserved; red-
-yellow; medium-grained; hard (3); l. 11.8 cm, th. 
4.4 cm; SE 520, GS 516, Inv. No. P 23853; G982.
9. Spindle whorl; frg; dark grey-brown; fine-grained; hard 
(4); h. 1.3 cm, w. 2.4 cm; SE 520, GS 494, Inv. No. P 
23845; G980.
10. Ring – loom weight; frg; surface not preserved; red-
-yellow; medium-grained; hard (3); l. 6.5 cm, w. 3.3 cm; 
SE 520, GS 494, Inv. No. P 23856; G983.
11. Loom weight; red-yellow; fine-grained; hard (4); h. 
6 cm, w. 5 cm, wt 107 g; SE 520, GS 497, Inv. No. P 
23839; G972.
12. Loom weight; red; medium-grained; hard (4); h. 7.5 
cm, w. 5 cm, wt 150 g; SE 520, GS 497, Inv. No. P 
23840; G973.
13. Loom weight; very dark grey; medium-grained; hard 
(4); h. 4.4 cm, w. 5.2 cm, wt 67 g; SE 520, GS 497, Inv. 
No. P 23841; G974.
14. Ring – loom weight; faceted; dark red-brown; fine-
-grained; very hard (5); d. 8 cm, th. 3.4 cm, wt 172 g; 
SE 520, GS 497, Inv. No. P 23855; G981.
15. Ring – loom weight; frg; surface not preserved; pale 
brown; medium-grained; hard (3); l. 3.4 cm, th. 3.3 cm; 
SE 520, GS 497, Inv. No. P 23854; G984.
368 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
16. Spindle whorl; red-yellow; coarse-grained; hard 
(4); d. 3.6 cm, h. 2.7 cm; SE 502, GS 500, Inv. No. P 
23834; G896.
17. Spindle whorl; dark brown; fine-grained; hard (4); d. 3.1 
cm, h. 1.9 cm; SE 502, GS 509, Inv. No. P 23835; G895.
18. Ring – loom weight; faceted; dark brown-grey; medi-
um-grained; hard (4); d. 8.2 cm, th. 2.5 cm, wt 175 g; SE 
502, GS 479, Inv. No. P 23833; G898.
19. Spindle whorl; frg; surface not preserved; light brown; 
fine-grained; hard (3); l. 2.7 cm, w. 1.7 cm, h. 2.2 cm; 
SE 502, GS 480, Inv. No. P 23799; G897.
20. Spindle whorl; red-yellow, very dark grey core; medi-
um-grained; hard (3); d. 3.6 cm, h. 2.8 cm; SE 520, GS 
431, Inv. No. P 26492; G802.
21. Spindle whorl; red-yellow; medium-grained; hard (3); d. 
3.4 cm, h. 2 cm; SE 520, GS 431, Inv. No. P 26493; G803.
22. Spindle whorl; dark grey-brown; medium-grained; 
hard (3); d. 3.7 cm, h. 3.7 cm, SE 520, GS 403 b, Inv. 
No. P 26995; G748.
23. Loom weight; surface not preserved; light brown; me-
dium-grained; hard (4); h. 5.5 cm, w. 4.8 cm, wt 75 g; 
SE 520, GS 403A, Inv. No. P 29234; G747.
24. Spindle whorl; pale brown; fine-grained; hard (4); d. 
3.2 cm, h. 2 cm; SE 7, GS 211, Inv. No. P 26507; G710.
25. Loom weight; frg; surface not preserved; red-yellow; 
fine-grained with individual large mineral inclusions; 
hard (4); l. 3.8 cm, w. 3.8 cm, h. 4.1 cm; SE 7, GS 201, 
Inv. No. P 26502; G711.
26. Spindle whorl; frg; red-yellow; fine-grained; hard (3); h. 
3 cm, w. 3.2 cm, SE 7, GS 184, Inv. No. P 26940; G693.
27. Loom weight; preserved up to the hole; red-yellow, very 
dark grey core; coarse-grained; hard (3); h. 4.5 cm, w. 
2.7 cm, wt 35 g; SE 7, GS 184, Inv. No. P 26930; G692.
28. Spindle whorl; brown; fine-grained; hard (4); d. 2 cm, 
h. 1.2 cm; SE 7, GS 93 b, Inv. No. P 26882; G630.
29. Loom weight; frg; round impression below the hole; 
brown; fine-grained; hard (4); l. 3.8 cm, w. 3 cm; SE 1, 
GS 94, Inv. No. P 26829; G632.
30. Ring – loom weight; frg; surface not preserved; red-
-yellow; fine-grained; hard (3); l. 4.8 cm, h. 3.3 cm, 
th. 2.2 cm; SE 033, GS 93 d, Inv. No. P 26844; G561.
31. Ring – loom weight; frg; surface not preserved; red-yellow 
in grey-brown; fine-grained; hard (3); l. 6.8 cm, h. 3.7 cm, 
th. 3.1 cm; SE 033, GS 93, Inv. No. P 26845; G560.
32. Ring – loom weight; frg; surface not preserved; brown-yellow; 
fine-grained; hard (3); l. 5 cm, h. 3.7 cm, th. 2.4 cm; SE 7, GS 
93, Inv. No. P 26899; G631.
33. Ring – loom weight; surface not preserved; red-yellow; 
fine-grained; hard (3); d. 10.8 cm, h. 4 cm, th. 3.9 cm; 
SE 110, GS 93, Inv. No. P 26851; G569.
Plate 5
1. Rim and body frg of a jar; red-brown exterior, very dark 
grey interior; medium-grained; hard (3); l. 5.3 cm, w. 
5.7 cm; SE 520, GS 412, Inv. No. P 29850; G792.
2. Body frg of a vessel; knob applique; black exterior, red-
-yellow interior; medium-grained; hard (4); l. 3.4 cm, w. 
4.4 cm; SE 520, GS 402, Inv. No. P 27018; G799.
3. Base frg of a vessel; yellow-brown; coarse-grained; hard 
4; l. 3 cm, w. 5.5 cm, h. 2.8 cm; SE 520, GS 412, Inv. 
No. P 26490; G800.
4. Firedog; frg; yellow-red; coarse-grained, very crumbly; 
hard (4); h. 16.6 cm, w. 15.4 cm; SE 520, GS 412, Inv. 
No. P 27019; G805.
5. Jar; brown; coarse-grained; hard (3); h. 28 cm, b. d. 15 cm; 
SE 520, GS 411, Inv. No. P 27020; G804.
6. Baking lid; rim and body frg; cordon with impressions; 
red-brown exterior, red-yellow interior; very coarse-
-grained with abundant grog; hard (4); d. 30 cm, l. 14.5 
cm, w. 11 cm; SE 520, GS 404A, Inv. No. P 26972; G754.
7. Large handle of a baking lid; frg; surface not preserved; red-
-yellow; very coarse-grained; hard (4); l. 10 cm, w. 3.1 cm, th. 
1.7 cm; SE 502, GS 459, Inv. No. P 23756; G890.
8. Large handle of a baking lid; frg; brown; fine-grained; 
hard (4); l. 8 cm, w. 4.7 cm, th. 2, cm; SE 520, GS 403C, 
Inv. No. P 26993; G753.
9. Handle of a vessel; brown; medium-grained with indivi-
dual large grog pieces; hard (3); l. 4.3 cm, w. 2 cm, th. 
1 cm; SE 168, GS 148, Inv. No. P 26937; G652.
10. Knee-shaped handle of a vessel; frg; surface not preserved; 
very dark grey; fine-grained; hard (3); l. 3.9 cm, w. 1.7 cm, 
th. 1.6-2 cm; SE 520, GS 404C, Inv. No. P 26990; G735.
11. Knee-shaped handle of a vessel; frg; surface not 
preserved; yellow-red; very coarse-grained; hard (4); 
l. 4.2 cm, w. 3.1 cm, th. 1.5 cm; SE 502, GS 449, Inv. 
No. P 23723; G877.
12. Trapezoid handle of a vessel; frg; red; coarse-grained; 
very hard (5); l. 6.4 cm, w. 4.9–5.7 cm, th. 1.1 cm; SE 
502, GS 459, Inv. No. P 23757; G872.
13. Body frg with a tunnel-shaped handle of a vessel; li-
ght brown; medium-grained; very hard (5); l. 5.9 cm, 
w. 7.3 cm, handle w. 3 cm; SE 502, GS 488, Inv. No. P 
23805; G868.
14. Body frg with a twice perforated grip of a vessel; 
surface not preserved; red-yellow; medium-grained; 
hard (3); l. 2.7 cm, w. 4 cm; SE 520, GS 405A, Inv. No. 
P 26454; G774.
15. Body frg with an ear-like handle of a vessel; surface 
not preserved; dark grey-brown; fine-grained; hard 
(3); l. 2.2 cm, w. 3.5 cm; SE 502, GS 420, Inv. No. P 
23682; G869.
16. Body frg of a vessel with a knob applique enclosed with 
concentric grooves; very dark brown exterior, very dark 
grey interior; coarse-grained; hard (4); l. 12.8 cm, w. 
9.6 cm; SE 394, GS 178, Inv. No. P 26663; G640.
17. Body frg of a vessel with a knob applique; red-yellow; 
coarse-grained; hard (3); l. 4.2 cm, w. 5.3 cm; SE 7, GS 
64, Inv. No. P 26644; G521.
18. Body frg of a vessel with an incision-encircled knob 
applique; surface not preserved; grey-brown; medium-
-grained; hard (4); l. 3.1 cm, w. 3.3 cm; SE 502, GS 456, 
Inv. No. P 23734; G857.
19. Body frg of a vessel with concentric grooves; red-yellow 
exterior, grey-brown interior; coarse-grained; hard (3); 
l. 4.6 cm, w. 4.2 cm; SE 80, sek. 11/14, GS 185/202, Inv. 
No. P 26934; G654.
20. Body frg of a vessel with a handle; chevron impressions 
and two impressed dots; brown exterior, dark brown 
interior; medium-grained; very hard (5); l. 9.4 cm, w. 
8.8 cm; SE 1156, GS 483, Inv. No. P 23859; G903.
21. Body frg of a vessel; five parallel grooves flanked by 
impressions; surface preserved in traces; very dark grey; 
369Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
fine-grained; hard (3); l. 4.7 cm, w. 3.8 cm; SE 502, GS 
457, Inv. No. P 23743; G843.
22. Body frg of a vessel; chevron incisions; surface not 
preserved; dark grey-brown exterior, red-yellow interior; 
fine-grained; hard (3); l. 6.1 cm, w. 3.7 cm, SE 520, GS 
544, Inv. No. P 26379; G1047.
23. Body frg of a vessel with a part of a handle; ver-
tical incisions; brown; medium-grained; very hard 
6; l. 3.4 cm, w. 4.4 cm; SE 520, GS 497, Inv. No. P 
23915; G964.
24. Body frg of a carinated vessel; two preserved hatched 
triangles; very dark grey; fine-grained; hard (4); l. 2.1 cm, 
w. 2.3 cm; SE 1623, GS 532, Inv. No. P 26381; G1024.
25. Serpentine fibula; bow frg with a hole, bronze; l. 1.5 cm. 
SE 1774; Inv. No. P 22891; G1278.
26. Frg of a pedestal vessel; horizontal grooves; surface 
not preserved; red-yellow; medium-grained; hard (3); 
d. 14 cm, l. 6 cm, w. 5.3 cm, h. 4.6 cm; SE 7, GS 148, 
Inv. No. P 26938; G690.
Plate 6
1. Frg of a ring jewellery; two large and one small knob, 
round-sectioned; bronze; l. 2.4 cm, th. 0.6 cm, th. 0.4 cm, 
wt 3.3 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 22927; G1285.
2. Frg of a knobbed torc; parting line along the edges; 
bronze; l. 1.6 cm, d. 1.7 cm, wt 11.2 g; Hoard II; Inv. 
No. P 22882; G1286.
3. Frg of a winged axe; one side surface with wings and 
widened shoulder; fractures very worn; bronze; l. 4.4 cm, 
w. 2.5 cm, wt 108 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 19239; G1299.
4. Frg of a winged axe; one side surface with wings; bron-
ze; l. 3.8 cm, w. 2.9 cm, wt 65.6 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. 
P 22849; G1298.
5. Frg of a winged axe; one side surface with part of the 
wings and widened shoulder; fractures worn; bronze; 
l. 3.1 cm, w. 1.7 cm, wt 31.5 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 
22920; G1300.
6. Frg of a winged axe; one side surface with part of the 
wings and widened shoulder; fractures very worn; 
bronze; l. 2.9 cm, w. 2.2 cm, wt 37.3 g; Hoard II; Inv. 
No. P 22916; G1301.
7. Frg of a socketed axe; socket-blade junction; fractures 
worn; bronze; l. 3.9 cm, w. 2.8 cm, wt 81 g; Hoard II; 
Inv. No. P 22862; G1297.
8. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end with both side surfaces 
and an unpronounced butt extension; fractures very 
worn; bronze; l. 5.9 cm, w. 4.4 cm, wt 113 g; Hoard II; 
Inv. No. P 22855; G1305.
9. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end with one side surface and 
a butt extension; fractures very worn; bronze; l. 3.5 cm, 
wt 59.8 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. 19263; G1304.
10. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end with both side sur-
faces and missing butt extension; fractures very worn; 
bronze; l. 4.4 cm, w. 3.9 cm, wt 89 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. 
P 19228; G1303.
11. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end with both side surfaces, 
one with a parting line; fractures worn; bronze; l. 4 cm, 
w. 3.1 cm, wt 94 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 19236; G1310.
12. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end with one side surface, 
visible parting line; fractures worn; bronze; l. 3.5 cm, w. 
2.1 cm, wt 47.5 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 22835; G1309.
13. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end with one side surface, 
visible parting line; fractures very worn; bronze; l. 3.1 cm, 
w. 2.8 cm, wt 41.2 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 22866; G1306.
14. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end with both side surfaces, 
one with a parting line, and a raised hammer-like butt; 
fractures worn; bronze; l. 4.1 cm, w. 2.5 cm, wt 98.5 g; 
Hoard II; Inv. No. P 22940; G1307.
15. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end with a small part of 
one side surface and missing butt extensions; fractures 
very worn; bronze; l. 2.6 cm, w. 2.1 cm, wt 28.9 g; Hoard 
II; Inv. No. P 22860; G1308.
16. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end; fractures worn; 
bronze; l. 2.3 cm, w. 2 cm, wt 15.4 g; Hoard II; Inv. 
No. P 22885; G1311.
Plate 7
1. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end – blade junction with 
one side surface; bronze; l. 5.3 cm, w. 6.2 cm, wt 199.3 g; 
Hoard II; Inv. No. P 22893; G1329.
2. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end – blade junction with 
both side surfaces, one with a poorly visible parting 
line, the other with a triangular impression; faces show 
cut marks, one also a small square impression; fractures 
very worn; bronze; l. 5.1 cm, w. 4.5 cm, wt 174 g; Hoard 
II; Inv. No. P 19223; G1325.
3. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end – blade junction with 
one side surface that bears a triangular impression; one 
face shows cut marks; bronze; l. 3.8 cm, w. 3.3 cm, wt 
86.2 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 22919; G1326.
4. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end – blade junction with 
missing side surfaces; one of them very worn; bronze; 
l. 3.4 cm, w. 3.9 cm, wt 86.2 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 
22846; G1333.
5. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end – blade junction with 
one side surface; fractures worn; bronze; l. 3.3 cm, w. 
2.7 cm, wt 66 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 19237; G1331.
6. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end – blade junction with 
both side surfaces, one with a parting line; fractures 
partly worn; bronze; l. 5.9 cm, w. 4.1 cm, wt 222 g; 
Hoard II; Inv. No. P 19212; G1327.
7. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end – blade junction with 
one side surface that shows a parting line; fractures very 
worn; bronze; l. 2.8 cm, w. 2.8 cm, wt 63.6 g; Hoard II; 
Inv. No. P 22876; G1330.
8. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end – blade junction with 
one of the faces showing cut marks; fractures very worn; 
bronze; l. 2.9 cm, w. 2.3 cm, wt 48 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. 
P 19224; G1332.
9. Frg of a shaft-hole axe; haft-end – blade junction with 
both side surfaces, one of the faces shows cut marks; 
fractures unevenly worn; bronze; l. 6.2 cm, w. 4.4 cm, 
wt 168 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 19238; G1328.
10. Frg of an axe; blade with both side surfaces, one face 
shows cut marks; bronze; l. 5.8 cm, w. 5.6 cm, wt 156 g; 
Hoard II; Inv. No. P 19209; G1335.
11. Frg of an axe; blade with blunt cutting edge and both 
side surfaces, one of them showing a parting line; 
fracture worn; bronze; l. 7.3 cm, w. 5.2 cm, wt 166 g; 
Hoard II; Inv. No. P 19222; G1349.
370 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
12. Frg of an axe; blade with part of the cutting edge and 
one side surface; fractures very worn; bronze; l. 3.6 cm, 
w. 1.7 cm, wt 14.3 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 22868; G1356.
13. Frg of an ingot; two side surfaces, one of them with 
a parting line; bronze; l. 3.2 cm, w. 1.9 cm, wt 25.3 g; 
Hoard II; Inv. No. P 22843; G1423.
14. Frg of a flat ingot; one side surface and one of the faces 
showing a cut mark; fractures worn; bronze; l. 3.2 cm, 
w. 2.7 cm, wt 34 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 19251; G1363.
15. Frg of a flat ingot; one side surface and one face showing 
a triangular incision; bronze; l. 4.2 cm, w. 2.5 cm, wt 
34 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 19219; G1366.
16. Frg of a flat ingot; three preserved side surfaces; one 
fracture very worn; bronze; l. 4.5 cm, w. 4 cm, wt 57.4 g; 
Hoard II; Inv. No. P 22854; G1359.
17. Frg of a bronze object, possibly an ingot; fractures very 
worn; l. 3 cm, w. 1.8 cm, th. 1.4 cm, wt 32.4 g; Hoard 
II; Inv. No. P 22952; G1449.
18. Trapezoid ingot; bronze; l. 3 cm, w. 2 cm, th. 1.3 cm, 
wt 40.2 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 22847; G1448.
19. Frg of a trapezoid ingot; fracture very worn; bronze; l. 
2.7 cm, w. 1.4 cm, th. 1.2 cm, wt 28.1 g; Hoard II; Inv. 
No. P 22848; G1447.
20. Frg of a trapezoid ingot; two side surfaces; fractures 
very worn; bronze; l. 2.2 cm, w. 1.4 cm, th. 0.8 cm, wt 
9.7 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 22873; G1446.
21. Frg of a bar ingot; fractures very worn; bronze; l. 2.5 cm, 
w. 1.4 cm, th. 0.6 cm, wt 14.3 g; Hoard II; Inv. No. P 
22955; G1434.
BELANOVÁ ŠTOLCOVÁ, T., K. GRÖMER 2010, Loom-
-weights, Spindles and Textiles – Textile Production 
in Central Europe from the Bronze Age to the Iron 
Age. – North European Symposium for Archaeological 
Textiles 10, 9–20.
CARANCINI, G.L. 1984, Le asce nell‘Italia continentale 
II. – Prähistorische Bronzefunde 9/12.
CARDARELLI, A. 1983, Castellieri nel Carso e nell‘Istria: 
cronologia degli insediamenti fra media età del bronzo 
e prima età del ferro. – In: Preistoria del Caput Adriae, 
87–118, Trieste.
ČREŠNAR, M. 2006, Novi žarni grobovi iz Ruš in pogreb-
ni običaji v ruški žarnogrobiščni skupini / Die neuen 
Urnengräber aus Ruše und das bestattungsritual in 
der Ruše-Gruppe der Urnenfelderkultur. – Arheološki 
vestnik 57, 97–162.
ČREŠNAR, M. 2010, New research on the Urnfield period 
of Eastern Slovenia. A case study of Rogoza near Mari-
bor / Nova spoznanja o pozni bronasti dobi Slovenije 
na primeru naselja Rogoza pri Mariboru. – Arheološki 
vestnik 61, 7–119.
ČREŠNAR, M. 2022, Rogoza. – Arheologija na avtocestah 
Slovenije 100, Ljubljana. https://www.zvkds.si/wp-con-
tent/uploads/2024/04/aas_100_rogoza_1.pdf
ČREŠNAR, M., B. TERŽAN 2014, Absolutno datiranje 
bronaste dobe na Slovenskem / Absolute dating of the 
Bronze Age in Slovenia. – In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar 
(ed.) 2014, , 661–702.
DULAR, J., M. TOMANIČ JEVREMOV 2010, Ormož. 
Utrjeno naselje iz pozne bronaste in starejše železne dobe 
/ Ormož. Befestigte Siedlung aus der späten Bronze- und 
der älteren Eisenzeit. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici 
Sloveniae 18. https://doi.org/10.3986/9789612545659
DULAR, J., I. ŠAVEL, S. TECCO HVALA 2002, Bronastodobno 
naselje Oloris pri Dolnjem Lakošu / Bronzezeitliche Siedlung 
Oloris bei Dolnji Lakoš. – Opera Instituti Archaeologici 
Sloveniae 5. https://doi.org/10.3986/9789612544980
FURLANI, U. 1996, Depojska najdba iz Šempetra pri Go-
rici / Il ripostiglio di San Pietro presso Gorizia. – In: 
B. Teržan (ed.), Depojske in posamezne kovinske najdbe 
bakrene in bronaste dobe na Slovenskem II / Hoards and 
individual metal finds from the Eneolithic and Bronze 
Ages in Slovenia II, Katalogi in monografije 30, 73–88, 
t. 130–135.
GABROVEC et al. = S. Gabrovec, A. Kruh, I. Murgelj, B. 
Teržan 2006, Stična II/1. Gomile starejše železne dobe. 
Katalog / Stična II/1. Grabhügel aus der älteren Eisenzeit. 
Katalog. – Katalogi in monografije 37.
GRAHEK, L. 2014, Orehova vas. – In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar 
(ed.) 2014, 249–273.
GRAHEK, L. 2015, Orehova vas. – Arheologija na avto-
cestah Slovenije 46, Ljubljana. https://www.zvkds.si/
wp-content/uploads/2024/04/AAS-46_Orehova_vas.pdf
GRAHEK, L. 2021. Orehova vas pri Mariboru – naselbina 
iz pozne bronaste dobe (horizont Rogoza-Orehova vas) 
/ Orehova vas near Maribor – A settlement of the Late 
Bronze Age (Rogoza-Orehova vas horizon). – In: B. 
Teržan, M. Črešnar (ed.) 2021, 31–53.
GRÖMER, K. 2010, Prähistorische Textilkunst in Mitteleu-
ropa. Geschichte des Handwerkes und Kleidung vor den 
Römern. – Wien.
GRUŠKOVNJAK, L. 2024, Surveying along the Slopes: 
Evaluating the Impact of Geomorphic Processes on 
Field Survey’s Site Discovery Effectiveness. – Journal 
of Field Archaeology 50(2), 106–131. https://doi.org/1
0.1080/00934690.2024.2402112
HARDING, A.F. 2000, European societies in the Bronze 
Age. – Cambridge.
KAVUR, B. 2018, Sodolek. – Arheologija na avtocestah 
Slovenije 54. https://www.zvkds.si/wp-content/uplo-
ads/2024/03/54_sodolek_0.pdf
KERMAN, B. 2011, Pod Kotom – sever pri Krogu. – Arheo-
logija na avtocestah Slovenije 24. https://www.zvkds.si/
wp-content/uploads/2024/07/AAS-24_Pod_Kotom_se-
ver_pri_Krogu.pdf
KERMAN, B. 2014, Pince pri Lendavi. – In: B. Teržan, M. 
Črešnar (ed.), 2014, 31–63.
KERMAN, B. 2018, Pod Grunti – Pince pri Pincah. – Arhe-
ologija na avtocestah Slovenije 55. https://www.zvkds.
si/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/pod_grunti_-_pince.pdf
KIM et al. = J. Kim, D. K. Wright, J. Hwang, J. Kim, Y. 
Oh 2019, The old wood effect revisited: a comparison 
of radiocarbon dates of wood charcoal and short-lived 
taxa from Korea. – Archaeological and Anthropological 
Sciences 11, 3435–3448.
KOPRIVNIK, V., B. TERŽAN 2021, Gračič pod Brinjevo 
goro – nekropola kulture žarnih grobišč / Gračič below 
371Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
Brinjeva gora – A necropolis of the Urnfield Period. – 
In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar (ed.) 2021, 215–328.
KRAMBERGER, B., M. ČREŠNAR 2021, Pobrežje v Ma-
riboru – naselbina iz mlajše kulture žarnih grobišč / 
Pobrežje in Maribor – A settlement of the Late Urnfield 
Period. – In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar (ed.) 2021, 55–107.
KRAMBERGER, B., M. JANEŽIČ, M. NOVŠAK 2021, 
Spodnje Hoče. – Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 
90, Ljubljana. https://www.zvkds.si/wp-content/uplo-
ads/2024/03/aas_90_spodnje_hoce_web.pdf
LEGHISSA, E. 2014, Medvode. – In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar 
(ed.), 2014, 333–343.
MAYER, E.F. 1977, Die Äxte und Beile in Österreich. – 
Prähistorische Bronzefunde IX/9.
MÜLLER–KARPE, H. 1959, Beiträge zur Chronologie der 
Urnenfelderzeit nördlich und südlich der Alpen. – Römi-
sch-Germanische Forschungen 22.
MURGELJ, I. 2013, Podsmreka pri Višnji Gori. – Arheolo-
gija na avtocestah Slovenije 42. https://www.zvkds.si/
wp-content/uploads/2024/04/AAS-42_Podsmreka.pdf
MURGELJ, I., B. NADBATH 2014, Šmarna gora pri Lju-
bljani. – In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar (ed.), 2014, 345–354.
NANUT, T. 2018, Poznobronasto in železnodobni depojski 
najdbi iz Dolenjih Raven na Cerkljanskem in s Sv. Jakoba 
na Kanalskem Kolovratu (Late Bronze and Iron Age 
hoard finds from Dolenje Ravne near Cerkno and Sv. 
Jakob in the Kanalski Kolovrat Hills). – In: M. Črešnar, 
M. Vinazza (ed.), Srečanja in vplivi v raziskovanju bro-
naste in železne dobe na Slovenskem. Zbornik prispevkov 
v čast Bibi Teržan, Ljubljana, 137–161.
OMAN, D. 1981, Brinjeva gora – 1953 (obdelava prazgo-
dovinske keramike). – Arheološki vestnik 32, 144–216.
PAHIČ, S. 1972, Pobrežje. – Katalogi in monografije 6, 
Ljubljana.
PAVLIN, P., U. BAVEC 2017, Poznobronastodobno grobišče 
Žadovinek pri Krškem / The Late Bronze Age cemetery 
of Žadovinek near Krško, Slovenia. – Arheološki vestnik 
68, 85–104.
PAVLIN, P., P. TURK 2014, Starejšeželeznodobna depoja 
z Gobavice nad Mengšem / Two Early Iron Age hoards 
from Gobavica above Mengeš. – Arheološki vestnik 65, 
35–78.
PAVLIN et al. = P. Pavlin, P. Turk, R. Urankar, D. Josipovič 
2024, Starejšeželeznodobni depo z Jelenovega klanca v 
Kranju / The Early Iron Age hoard from Jelenov klanec 
in Kranj. – Arheološki vestnik 75, 151–212. https://doi.
org/10.3986/AV.75.06 
PLESTENJAK, A. 2010, Gorice pri Turnišču. – Arheologija 
na avtocestah Slovenije 12. https://www.zvkds.si/wp-con-
tent/uploads/2024/04/AAS-12_Gorice_pri_Turniscu.pdf
PUŠ, I. 1971, Žarnogrobiščna nekropola na dvorišču SAZU 
v Ljubljani / Nekropole der Urnenfelderkultur im Hof der 
slowenischen Akademis der Wissenschaften und Künste 
in Ljubljana. – Razprave SAZU VII/1.
PUŠ, I. 1982, Prazgodovinsko žarno grobišče v Ljubljani / 
Das vorgeschichtliche Urnengräberfeld in Ljubljana. – 
Razprave SAZU XIII/2.
STARE, F. 1954, Ilirske najdbe železne dobe v Ljubljani / 
Illyrische Funde aus der Eisenzeit in Ljubljana. – Dela 
SAZU 9/7.
STARE, F. 1975, Dobova. – Posavski muzej Brežice 2.
SVETLIČIČ, V., P. TURK, M. TURK 2024, Kamna Gorica 
pri Ljubljani. – Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 114. 
https://www.zvkds.si/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/
AAS-114_Kamna_Gorica.pdf
ŠAVEL, I., S. SANKOVIČ 2013, Nedelica pri Turnišču. – Ar-
heologija na avtocestah Slovenije 39. https://www.zvkds.
si/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/AAS-39_Nedelica.pdf
ŠKVOR JERNEJČIČ, B. 2014, Žarna nekropola v Ljubljani 
in preobrazba ljubljanske skupine na prehodu iz bronaste 
v železno dobo. – PhD Thesis / Doktorska disertacija, 
Oddelek za arheologijo, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze 
v Ljubljani (unpublished / neobjavljeno).
ŠKVOR JERNEJČIČ, B. 2021, Towards an Absolute Chrono-
logy at the Beginning of the Late Bronze Age in Slovenia. 
New Radiocarbon dates from Ljubljana. – Archaeologia 
Austriaca 105, 117–148.
ŠKVOR JERNEJČIČ, B., P. VOJAKOVIĆ 2020, Understan-
ding social relations through settlement vs cemetery 
records. Late Bronze Age social (in)equalities in the 
case of Ljubljana (Slovenia). – Quaternary International 
539, 138–157.
TECCO HVALA, S. 2012, Magdalenska gora. Družbena 
struktura in grobni rituali železnodobne skupnosti / 
Magdalenska gora. Social structure and burial rites of 
the Iron Age community. – Opera instituti archaeologici 
Sloveniae 26. https://doi.org/10.3986/9789612546007
TECCO HVALA, S. 2014, Kačaste fibule z območja Slo-
venije / Serpentine fibulae from Slovenia. – Arheološki 
vestnik 65, 123–186.
TECCO HVALA, S. 2017, Molnik pri Ljubljani v železni 
dobi / The Iron Age site at Molnik near Ljubljana. – 
Opera instituti archaeologici Sloveniae 36. https://doi.
org/10.3986/9789610503750
TERŽAN, B. 1996, Weben und Zeitmessen im südostalpinen 
und westpannonischen Gebiet. – In: E. Jerem, A. Lippert 
(ed.), Die Osthalstattkultur. Akten des Internationalen 
Symposiums (Sopron, 10. –14. Mai 1994), Archaeolingua 
7, 507–536.
TERŽAN, B., M. ČREŠNAR (ed.) 2014, Absolutno datira-
nje bronaste in železne dobe na Slovenskem / Absolute 
dating of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Slovenia, Katalogi 
in monografije 40.
TERŽAN, B., M. ČREŠNAR 2021, Pohorsko Podravje v 
pozni bronasti in starejši železni dobi / The Pohorsko 
Podravje region during the Late Bronze and Early Iron 
Ages. – In: B. Teržan, M. Črešnar (ed.) 2021, 561–583.
TERŽAN, B., M. ČREŠNAR (ed.) 2021, Pohorsko Podravje 
pred tremi tisočletji. Tradicija in inovativnost v pozni 
bronasti in starejši železni dobi / Pohorsko Podravje 
three Millennia ago. Tradition and innovation in the Late 
Bronze and Early Iron Ages, Katalogi in monografije 44.
TOLAR, T. 2022, Rastlinski makro ostanki. – In: Turk, P., 
V. Svetličič, D. Pavlovič 2022, 146–151.
TOLAR, T., P. PAVLIN 2022, The earliest finds of millet 
and possible associated changes in material culture in 
Slovenia. – In: W. Kirleis, M. Dal Corso, D. Filipović 
(ed.), Millet and what else? The wider context of the 
adoption of millet cultivation in Europe, Leiden, 107–127.
TOŠKAN, B. 2022, Živalski ostanki. – In: Turk, P., V. 
Svetličič, D. Pavlovič 2022, 152.
372 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
Z zaščitnimi izkopavanji smo pri Dragomlju (sl. 
1) raziskali ravninsko naselje iz pozne bronaste 
dobe – kulture žarnih grobišč (KŽG) in skromne 
poselitvene sledi iz starejše železne dobe. Naselje 
je severni del sočasne celote z naseljem v Pod-
gorici južno od reke Pšate. Pod slabo ohranjeno 
kulturno plastjo so se pojavljali v geološko plast 
vkopani ostanki jam za stojke ter shrambnih in 
odpadnih jam (sl. 2).
NASELBINA IZ
POZNE BRONASTE DOBE
Bivalne stavbe in druge
naselbinske strukture
Jame za stojke so tvorile skupine jam, ki jih 
predvsem zaradi slabe prepoznavnosti pogosto 
ni bilo mogoče povezati v tlorise stavb. Pri teh 
skupinah številnih stojk sklepamo tudi na gradnje, 
popravila in ponovne gradnje hiš različnih velikosti 
in usmerjenosti na istem mestu. To močno otežuje 
prepoznavanje njihovih prvotnih tlorisov.
Glede na pogojno rekonstruirane tlorise 16 hiš 
(sl. 2) je  njihova usmerjenost različna, od smeri 
SV–JZ (hiše 1, 2, 3, 12, 13, 16) in SZ–JV (hiše 5, 
7 (sl. 3), 8, 9, 10, 15) do usmerjenosti S–J (hiše 
4, 6, 11 (sl. 4), 14). Pahljačasta usmeritev petih 
hiš v osrednjem delu izkopnega polja (hiše 8–12) 
nakazuje njihovo razmestitev okrog osrednjega 
območja, morda nekakšnega dvorišča. Na prvi 
pogled gre za razpršeno vaško poselitev, pri kateri 
sta bili posamezna hiša oz. skupina hiš oddaljeni 
15–20 metrov od sosednje skupine hiš.
Podoba redke in razpršene razmestitve hiš je 
močno omajana ob dejstvu, da so se največje 
zgostitve jam za stojke in drugih naselbinskih 
jam ujemale z območji manjših depresij, neravnih 
poglobitev površine geološke osnove (sl. 3). To 
nakazuje prvotno mnogo bolj zgoščeno poselitev, 
ki se je ohranila le v globlje ležečih delih naselja. 
Pri obširnih predelih brez naselbinskih jam je torej 
mnogo verjetneje, da gre za uničene dele naselja, 
ne pa morebitna dvorišča.
Primerjava s sočasnimi naselji pokaže veliko 
podobnost z naseljema v bližnji Podgorici in v 
podravski Rogozi, kjer so hiše prav tako različnih 
usmeritev, a se razvrščajo v skupine hiš in dru-
gih objektov, ki predstavljajo gospodarske enote. 
Delno primerljivo razmestitev hiš je opaziti tudi 
v sočasnem podravskem naselju Orehova vas, kjer 
so hiše v treh poselitvenih skupinah razmeščene 
bolj gosto kot v Dragomlju, Podgorici in Rogozi. 
Velikosti dragomeljskih hiš se gibljejo od 10 do 
21 m2 ter so primerljive z velikostjo sočasnih hiš 
iz naselij Podgorica, Orehova vas in Rogoza, a so 
bile med temi tudi posamezne večje hiše.
V nekaterih hišah (4, 8, 9 in 13) so bili odkriti 
ostanki spodnjih delov ognjišč, v hiši 5 pa je bila 
Dragomelj – naselje iz obdobja kulture žarnih grobišč
kot del podgoriško-dragomeljskega somestja
in starejšeželeznodobni drobci
Povzetek
TRAMPUŽ OREL, N., D. J. HEATH 1998, Analysis of Heavily 
Leaded Shaft-Hole Axes. – In: B. Hänsel (ed.), Mensch 
und Umwelt in der Bronzezeit Europas, Kiel, 237–248.
TURK, P. 2018, Early Iron Age Hoards from central and 
western Slovenia. – In: E. Borgna, P. Cassola Guida, S. 
Corazza (ed.), Preistoria e Protostoria del Caput Adriae, 
Studi di preistoria e protostoria 5, 397–406.
TURK, P., V. SVETLIČIČ 2018, Nenavadna prazgodovina 
uhatih sekir (Unusual prehistory of shaft-hole axes). – 
In: M. Črešnar, M. Vinazza (ed.), Srečanja in vplivi v 
raziskovanju bronaste in železne dobe na Slovenskem. 
Zbornik prispevkov v čast Bibi Teržan, Ljubljana, 25–38.
TURK, P., V. SVETLIČIČ, D. PAVLOVIČ 2022, Dragomelj. 
– Arheologija na avtocestah Slovenije 106. https://www.
zvkds.si/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/aas_106_drago-
melj_splet.pdf
VERBIČ, T. 2022, Geološka in geomorfološka podoba naj-
dišča. – In: P. Turk, V. Svetličič, D. Pavlovič 2022, 8–13.
VOJAKOVIĆ, P. 2023, Prazgodovinska Ljubljana: urbano 
trgovsko središče na stičišču poti / Prehistoric set-
tlement in Ljubljana: an urban trading centre at the 
crossroads. – Arheološki vestnik 74, 531–590. https://
doi.org/10.3986/AV.74.19 
VOJAKOVIČ, P., M. NOVŠAK 2022, Podgorica. – Arhe-
ologija na avtocestah Slovenije 97. https://www.zvkds.
si/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/aas_97_podgorica_pe-
tra_vojakovic_matjaz.pdf
373Dragomelj – naselje iz obdobja kulture žarnih grobišč kot del podgoriško-dragomeljskega somestja ...
fragmentirana ognjiščna koza (t. 5: 4). Ker so 
ohranjeni le spodnji deli vkopanih konstrukcijskih 
elementov hiš, je verjetno, da so bila ognjišča nekoč 
v večini hiš ali celo v vseh hišah.
Depo s kovinskimi polizdelki
Dragomelj I
Na zahodnem robu izkopnega polja je bil za-
kopan depo I iz Ha B1 (gl. tu članek Turk, Heath, 
Zuliani). Z več kot 86 kg bakrenih in bronastih 
polizdelkov je komplementaren z livarskimi de-
javnostmi v Podgorici.
Predilno-tkalski pripomočki
Predilno-tkalski pripomočki so bili večinoma 
odkriti brez ohranjenega konteksta. Med 18 
utežmi za statve so zastopane štiristrane pira-
midaste uteži (t. 4: 2–7,11–12,25,27,29) in manj 
številne stožčaste uteži (t. 4: 1,13,23). Uteži so v 
drugih naseljih horizontov Oloris-Podsmreka in 
Rogoza-Orehova vas večinoma manj številne kot 
v Dragomlju. V celoti ohranjene keramične uteži 
so kot obtežilni deli statvenih niti težke med 35 g 
(t. 4: 27) in 150 g (t. 4: 12). Na posamezne uteži 
statev je bilo verjetno navezano večje ali manjše 
število osnovnih statvenih niti (skupaj najdene 
uteži na t. 4: 11–13 tako tehtajo 107 g, 150 g in 
67 g, bližnji svitek (t. 4: 14) pa 172 g). Glede 
na predlagano težo za eno statveno nit 40 g so 
uteži verjetno obteževale od ene do štiri niti. V 
Dragomlju niso bile odkrite masivne keramične 
uteži, kakršne se v nekaj primerih pojavljajo v 
Rogozi in Olorisu.
Odkritih je bilo 20 celih ali fragmentiranih 
keramičnih vretenc za obtežitev preslice (t. 4: 
9,16–17,19–22,24,26,28). V sočasnih naseljih so 
keramična vretenca pogosta najdba, a se v bližnji 
Podgorici pojavljajo le izjemoma. Po teži med 4 
g (t. 4: 28) in 33 g (t. 4: 22) so med lažjimi. Ver-
jetno so bila namenjena izdelavi preje iz krajših 
volnenih vlaken, ne pa preje iz surove volne ali 
daljših rastlinskih vlaken.
Keramične svitke so uporabljali kot ognjiščne 
podstavke za posode ali kot uteži za statve. Ta 
druga namembnost je verjetna v primerih, ko so 
bili odkriti v neposredni bližini drugih tkalskih 
pripomočkov (t. 4: 8,10,14–15,18,30–33).
Uteži za statve se v nekaj primerih zgoščajo v 
skupine (t. 4: 1–4,5–7,11–13). Če na izkopnem 
polju opazujemo vse zgostitve uteži, vretenc in 
svitkov, naštejemo 11 mest njihovih zgostitev (sl 
2: I–XI in t. 4: I–XI). Večina jih je v bližini hiš, 
nekatere pa delujejo oddaljeno od ostankov stavb 
(zgostitve I, VI in IX). Prav zgostitve predilno-
-tkalskih pripomočkov zunaj hiš nakazujejo slabo 
ohranjenost in celo uničenost arheoloških sledov 
bivalnih in drugih stavb v Dragomlju. Težko si je 
namreč predstavljati, da bi dejavnost, ki zahteva 
suho okolje, potekala na odprtem. Tudi s tega 
vidika so tlorisi rekonstruiranih bivalnih hiš 
(sl. 2) pomanjkljivi in jih predvidevamo tudi na 
mestih z zgoščenimi sledovi predilno-tkalskih 
dejavnosti.
Za strnjene predele pojavljanja uteži, vretenc in 
svitkov med hišami 7–12 (sl. 2: II–VI) se zdi, da 
označujejo nekakšno predilno-tkalsko območje. 
V obdobju KŽG bi tekstilna dejavnost v Drago-
mlju lahko presegla lokalno samozadostnost in 
se približala obrtni dejavnosti, namenjeni tudi 
izmenjavi.
Keramično posodje
Maloštevilni odlomki keramike nakazujejo 
poselitev že v začetku pozne bronaste dobe (t. 5: 
11, 12, 16,18,19), večina pa sodi v čas starejše in 
prehoda v mlajšo KŽG (t. 1–3). Lonci različnih 
velikosti, sklede, skodele in skodelice izkazujejo 
oblikovne sorodnosti s posodjem iz naselij hori-
zonta Rogoza-Orehova vas, predvsem iz bližnje 
Podgorice, s Šmarne gore, iz najstarejše poselitvene 
faze na Tribuni v Ljubljani, iz podravskih Rogoze, 
Pobrežja, Brinjeve gore in Orehove vasi, a tudi s 
prekmurskih Pinc pri Lendavi.
Podgoriško-dragomeljsko
“somestje” in primerljive naselbine
iz pozne bronaste dobe
Na podlagi devetih radiokarbonskih datacij se 
v dragomeljskem naselju v času KŽG nakazujeta 
dva časovna horizonta, prvi v razponu od sredine 
13. do konca 12. st. pr. n. št., drugi pa od sredine 
12. do začetka 10. st. pr. n. št. (sl. 6).
Skromne sledi človekove prisotnosti je zaslediti 
že pred 12. st. pr. n. št., a je glede na kronološko 
enovitost večine lončenine ob razumevanju časov-
nega razpona radiokarbonskih datacij v obsegu 
dveh standardnih deviacij (2 σ) zelo verjetno, 
da je naselje živelo krajše obdobje v razponu od 
374 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
sredine 12. do konca 11. st. pr. n. št. Štiri starejše 
in pet mlajših datacij C14 je enakomerno razpore-
jenih po celotnem izkopnem polju in ni mogoče 
prepoznati starejših ali mlajših območij poselitve. 
Radiokarbonske datacije so zelo podobne tistim 
iz bližnje Podgorice ter iz sočasnih podravskih 
naselij Rogoza in Orehova vas. Poleg izjemnih 
podobnosti v keramičnem gradivu sta tudi s tega 
vidika Dragomelj in Podgorica sestavni del hori-
zonta Rogoza-Orehova vas.
Rekonstruirane hiše bi lahko tvorile gospodarstva, 
kakršna so ugotovljena tudi v sosednjem naselju 
Podgorica južno od Pšate ter v Rogozi in Orehovi 
vasi v Podravju. Ob upoštevanju številnih najdb 
keramičnih uteži in vretenc je bila pomembna 
predilno-tkalska dejavnost. Zogleneli rastlinski 
ostanki kažejo na pridelavo ječmena, grašice, leče, 
ovsa in prosa.  
Gospodarske dejavnosti v podgoriško-dragomelj-
skem “somestju” se v obdobju KŽG dopolnjujejo: v 
Podgorici so močni sledovi metalurških dejavnosti, 
v Dragomlju pa predilno-tkalske dejavnosti. Tod 
so morda tudi shranjevali večje zaloge živil. Tukaj-
šnji depo I z bakrenimi in bronastimi polizdelki 
lahko opazujemo kot varno skladišče predmetov, 
namenjenih metalurški predelavi.
Na prvi pogled enigmatično dvojno naselje 
Dragomelj - Podgorica z njunimi dejavnostmi, z 
metalurško v Podgorici ter tekstilno in metalur-
ško-skladiščno v Dragomlju, deluje kot komple-
mentarna gospodarska celota. Somestje torej tvori 
večjo funkcionalno aglomeracijo z raznovrstnimi 
preživetvenimi in obrtnimi strategijami.
Primerjave za dvokonične ingote iz dragomeljskega 
depoja I in za podgoriške kalupe so v nasprotju z 
lokalno obarvanostjo poselitve, kot jo predstavlja 
keramični inventar, nadregionalne. Njihov doseg 
je povezan z izmenjavo bakrenih in bronastih 
polizdelkov (Dragomelj) ter končnih izdelkov 
(Podgorica) na dolge razdalje od vzhodnih Alp 
do osrednjega dela Apeninskega polotoka.
V tej mreži povezav je imelo podgoriško-dra-
gomeljsko naselje pomembno posredniško in 
izmenjalno vlogo. Metalurški območji s kalupoma 
iz Podgorice dokazujeta tudi proizvodno vlogo 
dvojnega naselja.
Naselja, kot so Dragomelj - Podgorica, Orehova 
vas in Rogoza, živijo v 12.–11. st. pr. n. št. in za-
mrejo ob koncu 11. ali v začetku 10. st. pr. n. št. 
V naseljih oz. na grobiščih, ki izkazujejo številne 
primerjave s keramičnim gradivom iz Dragomlja 
(Ruše, Dobova, Ljubljana), se po drugi strani po-
selitev oz. pokopavanje v mlajši KŽG nadaljuje.
SLEDOVI POSELITVE
IZ STAREJŠE ŽELEZNE DOBE
Naselbinske strukture
Med redkimi ohranjenimi sledmi iz starejše 
železne dobe sta jama s kačasto fibulo in kamnito 
tlakovanje (sl. 2, 7). Odlomka fibule zaradi neo-
hranjenih krilc oz. rozet ni mogoče natančneje 
uvrstiti (t. 5: 25), a sodi v čas med koncem 7. in 
razponom 6. st. pr. n. št.
Posamezni keramični odlomki, npr. del noge 
keramičnega ciborija z vodoravnimi žlebovi (t. 
5: 26), odkriti v ornici ali v kulturni plasti, ne pa 
v jamah, vkopanih v geološko osnovo, kažejo na 
močno uničeno naselbinsko poselitev, morda pa 
na grobišče (?) v razponu druge polovice 7. oz. v 
6. st. pr. n. št.
Starejšeželeznodobni depo Dragomelj II
Ostanki depoja II s 180 bronastimi predmeti (iz-
bor na t. 6–7) so z oranjem popolnoma razmeščeni 
na območju obsega 70 × 30 metrov in zgoščeni na 
ožjem območju obsega približno 3 × 3 metrov (sl. 
2). Vpogled v prvotno stanje depoja tako glede lege 
predmetov in situ kot glede njihovega prvotnega 
števila ni mogoč.
Osnovna značilnost predmetov je izredna fragmenti-
ranost. Na številnih so vidne sledi udarcev, najpo-
gosteje vzporednih s smerjo odlomljene površine 
(npr. t. 6: 6,8, 7: 2–3,6,8–10,14), zato sklepamo 
na namerno razbijanje. V depoju II so zastopani 
odlomki uhatih (t. 6: 8–16, 7: 1–9) in plavutastih 
sekir (t. 6: 3–6), tulaste sekire (t. 6: 7), rezil sekir ali 
ploščatih ingotov (t. 7: 10–16), obročastega nakita 
(t. 6: 1–2), igle, pločevine, paličastih ingotov in 
ingotov trapezastega preseka (t. 7: 18–21).
Odlomljene površine so pri predmetih iz depo-
ja II močno obrabljene. Poleg sestave se tudi po 
tem depo II uvršča med depoje tipa San France-
sco (Bologna)–Šempeter. Gre za depoje dolgega 
trajanja, katerih deponiranje se konča globoko v 
starejši železni dobi. Depoji tega tipa so naselbinski 
depoji, v katerih so tako kot v Dragomlju zasto-
pani izključno bronasti predmeti. Razširjeni so v 
osrednji in zahodni Sloveniji, v zaledju Kvarnerja 
in v severovzhodni Italiji.
Tako v podgoriškem kot v dragomeljskem delu 
“somestja” je po približno tristoletni vrzeli brez jasnih 
arheoloških sledi poselitev izpričana na prehodu 
iz starejšega v mlajši halštatski čas, tj. ob koncu 7. 
375Dragomelj – naselje iz obdobja kulture žarnih grobišč kot del podgoriško-dragomeljskega somestja ...
oz. v razponu 6. st. pr. n. št. V Dragomlju je edina 
prepoznavna kontinuiteta iz pozne bronaste dobe 
veliko število bronastih uhatih sekir v depoju II, 
s širokim časovnim razponom rabe med 11./10. 
in 8./7. st. pr. n. št. – prav tisto časovno vrzeljo, 
ki je ne prepoznamo med drugim dragomeljskim 
naselbinskim gradivom. Depoja I in II, pri katerih 
konec deponiranja pri prvem datiramo najpozne-
je v čas okoli leta 1000 pr. n. št. in pri drugem 
okoli leta 600 pr. n. št., sta odkrita v oddaljenosti 
manj kot 10 m drug od drugega (sl. 2). Glede na 
sekundarno lego večjega dela predmetov iz pr-
vega in vseh predmetov iz drugega depoja gre za 
močno uničen del najdišča. V teh uničenih delih 
in predvsem v neraziskanih predelih zahodno od 
trase avtoceste je iskati odgovor na vprašanje o 
morebitni kontinuiteti iz poznobronastodobne v 
železnodobno poselitev.
Časovna razlika med depojema ostaja enigmatična. 
Njuna skoraj identična lokacija bi lahko pomenila, 
da so v Dragomlju določene dejavnosti potekale 
tudi na prehodu iz bronaste v železno dobo, v ča-
su, ko zanje razen uhatih sekir iz drugega depoja 
nimamo drugih prepoznavnih datacijskih opor. 
Vprašanje o razlogih za nenavadno bližino obeh 
depojev torej ostaja odprto.
Illustrations: ‒ Fig. 1 (photo: Damjan Snoj). ‒ Fig. 2 (elaborated by: Nives Zupančič, Vanja Celin). ‒ Fig. 3–5, 7 (photo: 
Aleš Ogorelec). ‒ Fig. 6 (elaborated by Elena Leghissa). ‒ Pl. 1‒7 (drawing: Uroš Stiškovski, Vesna Svetličič, Ida Murgelj).
Slikovno gradivo: ‒ Sl. 1 (foto: Damjan Snoj). ‒ Sl. 2 (računalniška izdelava: Nives Zupančič, Vanja Celin). ‒ Sl. 3–5, 7 
(foto: Aleš Ogorelec). ‒ Sl. 6 (računalniška izdelava: Elena Leghissa). ‒ T. 1‒7 (risbe: Uroš Stiškovski, Vesna Svetličič, 
Ida Murgelj).
The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency (research program 
P6–0283).
Članek je nastal v okviru raziskovalnega programa P6–0283, ki ga sofinancira Javna agencija za znanstvenoraziskovalno 
in inovacijsko dejavnost Republike Slovenije.
Peter Turk
Narodni muzej Slovenije
Prešernova 20
SI-1000 Ljubljana
peter.turk@nms.si
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1995-0113
Vesna Svetličič
Narodni muzej Slovenije
Prešernova 20
SI-1000 Ljubljana
vesna.svetlicic@nms.si
376 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
Pl. 1: Dragomelj, pottery. Scale = 1:8.
T. 1: Dragomelj, keramika. M. = 1:8.
377Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
Pl. 2: Dragomelj, pottery. Scale = 1:4.
T. 2: Dragomelj, keramika. M. = 1:4.
378 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
Pl. 3: Dragomelj, pottery. Scale = 1:4.
T. 3: Dragomelj, keramika. M. = 1:4.
379Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
Pl. 4: Dragomelj, pottery. Scale = 1:4.
T. 4: Dragomelj, keramika. M. = 1:4.
380 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
Pl. 5: Dragomelj, 1–24, 26 pottery, 25 bronze. Scale 1–24,26 = 1:4; 25 = 1:2.
T. 5: Dragomelj, 1–24, 26 keramika, 25 bron. M. 1–24,26 = 1:4; 25 = 1:2.
381Dragomelj – an Urnfield period settlement as part of the Podgorica-Dragomelj twin settlement and remains ...
Pl. 6: Dragomelj, bronze. Scale = 1:2.
T. 6: Dragomelj, bron. M. = 1:2.
382 Peter TURK, Vesna SVETLIČIČ
Pl. 7: Dragomelj, bronze. Scale = 1:2.
T. 7: Dragomelj, bron. M. = 1:2.