Harshegyi P. and Ottomanyi K. Imported A PDF

Imported and local pottery in late roman Pannonia
Piroska Hárshegyi and Katalin Ottományi
Abstract
In Late Roman Pannonia, local pottery was produced in small, local centres,
but on a more limited scale than before the 4th c., in the region. A dense
network of pottery workshops operated at the time of Valentinian in the
Danube bend, which was an important section of the limes. In most of
these examples, pottery kilns, situated in villae and rural settlements in the
hinterland of the province, manufactured only one pottery type. The larger
workshops, situated in more favourable geographical positions, produced
not only coarse ware but glazed and burnished wares, as well. Local artisans
tried to imitate the decreasing amount of imported terra sigillata, metal and
glass vessels, by adopting new techniques and decorative elements. Imported
pottery now consisted of only a few types, such as: African Red Slip ware,
small numbers of amphorae, lamps, occasional Argonne Ware, and some
eggshell type cups. It can be shown that in parallel with the increasing pro-
duction of hand-made, coarse and burnished ware pottery, imports ceased
in the province around the second decade of the 5th c. A.D.
Introduction
The main aim of this paper is to give the reader a basic idea of the volume
of trade and local manufacture of pottery in the Pannonian provinces
from the end of the 3rd to the beginning of the 5th c. A.D. Our knowledge
about local and long distance trade is very fragmentary in this Late Roman
period; the published material is only accessible largely through interim
reports and catalogues of individual excavations. No comprehensive pub-
lication exists concerning the Late Roman pottery of Pannonia, although
É. Bónis published some short articles in the 1980s, and there have been
some longer site reports that analyse the material from limes forts.1 The
1 Short articles: Bónis (1980); Bónis and Gabler (1990). Limes Forts: Intercisa/Dunaújváros:
Póczy (1957); Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Grünewald (1979), Gassner et al. (1993),
Petznek (1998–99); Ad Statuas/Ács-Vaspuszta: Ottományi (1989).
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2013 DOI: 10.1163/22134522-12340040

L. Lavan (ed.) Local Economies? Production and Exchange of Inland Regions in Late Antiquity
(Late Antique Archaeology 10 – 2013) (Leiden 2013), pp. 471–528
472 piroska hárshegyi and katalin ottományi
Danube bend area is particularly well-researched.2 The research situation

for the inner fortresses and towns is different, as it is often the case that
the pottery is not published in detail, even from sites where large excava-
tions were taking place.3 The older publications on villa sites were mainly
interested in the masonry structures, but thanks to more recent work, the
material from several vici and villas has become better known.4 Many
more Late Roman cemeteries have been published than settlements, but
often without a detailed analysis of the pottery.5
The finds of imported wares are very scattered, their rarity and unique
state are underlined in every publication. A general overview, which
interpreted these imports, was published in the Manual of Archaeology
of Pannonia (Pannonia Régészeti Kézikönyve) by D. Gabler in 1990.6 In
his publications he described most of the African Red Slip ware finds in
Pannonia.7 Lamp finds in Late Roman contexts are very rare, and were
given the collective label ‘Early Christian’ by D. Iványi, writing in 1935;
she grouped them together as the ‘Iványi XII type’. In a few cases, such
as at Carnuntum or Vindobona, the more recent typology of Hayes was
used, but in those places, as the lamps were often in a very fragmentary
state, a more precise grouping couldn’t be done.8 In the case of ampho-
rae, research started mainly from the 1980s with the work of M. Kelemen,
T. Bezeczky and O. Brukner.9 At the same time, the reason for the appear-
ance of imported Argonne Ware—a pottery group first recognised in the
2 Soproni (1985); Tokod: Lányi (1981b); Leányfalu: Ottományi 1991; Cirpi/Dunabogdány:

Ottományi 1999; Budakalász-Luppacsárda: Ottományi (2004); Visegrád-Gizellamajor:
Ottományi (2012b).
3 Keszthely-Fenékpuszta: Müller (1979), Horváth (2011); Savaria/Szombathely: Ottományi
and Sosztarits (1998); Arrabona/Győr: Szőnyi (1984) and Tomka (2004); Vienna-Leopoldau:
Friesinger (1984).
4 E.g. Aquincum/Budapest, Kaszásdűlő: Zsidi (1991); Komló-Mecsekfalui út: Katona
Győr (1994); Páty: Ottományi (2007); Biatorbágy: Ottományi (2008b); Vicus Teuto/Budaörs:
Ottományi (2012a).
5 Lányi (1972); Keszthely area: Sági (1960); Intercisa/Dunaújváros: Vágó and Bóna
(1976); Tokod: Lányi (1981a); Csákvár: Salamon and Barkóczi (1970); Somogyszíl: Burger
(1979); Ulcisia Castra/Szentendre: Maróti and Topál (1980); Aquincum/Budapest, Gazda-
grét: Zsidi (1987); Solva/Esztergom: Kelemen (2008); Klosterneuburg: Neugebauer-Maresch
and Neugebauer (1986).
6 Gabler (1990).
7 Gabler (2012a); Gabler (2012b).
8 Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Alram-Stern (1989). Vindobona/Vienna: Neumann
(1967).
9 Kelemen (1987); Kelemen (1988); Kelemen (1990); Kelemen (1993); Bezeczky (1987);
Bezeczky (1994); Brukner (1981).
imported and local pottery in late roman pannonia 473
region at the end of the 1970s by D. Gabler—has not been answered.10 The
corpus of material in Pannonian contexts consists of only a few pieces,
which is simply not enough for a proper interpretation of them. The same
can be said about the thin-walled (eggshell) cups, which were collected
by K. Sági in 1960.11
Pottery and pottery production, in the southern part of Pannonia, has
been tackled in only a cursory fashion since two major works in the 70s
and 80s provided attempts at a comprehensive analysis.12 The situation
is better for pottery like glazed and burnished wares. É. Bónis discussed
the production of glazed pottery, and the typology of the material in the
Danubian provinces has been formulated by T. Cvjetiċanin.13 Several con-
ference volumes and exhibition catalogues have been published as well.14
When A. Alföldi first looked at the burnished ware material, he believed it
was from the Hunnic period.15 Later, it was thought to be characteristic of
the foederati groups, who settled in the province in A.D. 380.16 However,
detailed examination of particular types showed that while the forms and
design of burnished ware could be found in Late Roman pottery, there was
no connection between the two.17 Hence, various foreign ethnic groups
may have influenced the appearance of burnished ware.18
Handmade pottery has been looked in some detail in the neighbour-
ing Germanic regions, and a typology of Late Roman pottery kilns has
been put together by Henning.19 In Pannonia, É. Bónis looked at the pot-
tery production centres, and Vikić-Belančić has collated the workshops
of southern Pannonia.20 Those kilns which have been found in the last
20 years, though, have only been published in short excavation reports.21
Detailed publications of the extensive rural and urban excavations of the
last few decades are still lacking, making one of the important tasks for
10 Gabler (1978).

11 Sági (1960).
12 Brukner (1981); Vikić-Belančić (1970); Horváth (1999); Jelinčić (2011).
13 Glazed pottery: Bónis (1990); Bónis (1991); see also Arthur and Williams (1981);
Gassner (1991); Nádorfi (1992). Typology: Cvjetiċanin (2006).
14 Bánki (1992); Magrini and Sbarra (2009).
15 Alföldi (1932).
16 Soproni (1985); Salamon and Barkóczi (1978).
17 Ottományi (1982); Ottományi (1996).
18 Tóth (2005); Vagalinski (1997).
19 Handmade pottery: Pollak (1980). Kilns: Henning (1978).
20 Bónis (1990); Vikić-Belančić (1970).
21 Ottományi and Sosztarits (1998); Kern (2000); Palágyi (2004).
future research—the formulation of a Late Roman pottery typology for

the province—a very difficult project.
Before we begin, a brief word on the forms of the kilns themselves that
were used to make this Pannonian pottery, is worthwhile. A simple form
of pottery kiln was used in the Early Roman period, originating from the
La Tène D tradition. It was a circular kiln, whose grate was supported by
a lateral (e.g. Balatonaliga 1st kiln), or a central mud block (e.g. Balaton-
aliga 2nd kiln, Csorna). This kiln type was modified with other stone or
brick elements from the period of the High Empire. The central column
which supported the grate was built either from stones luted with mud
(as at Pilismarót-Malompatak), or from bricks (as at Tokod). The grate
could also be supported by four brick stands (e.g. Szombathely-Fő tér).
The grate itself could be a perforated adobe table, or constructed from
radial positioned clay sticks (e.g. Tokod, Carnuntum), or mud bricks (as
at Szombathely-Kőszegi u.). The walls and dome were constructed from
mud bricks, and later from bricks. Double kilns with a common stokehold
are frequent, as seen at Bátaszék and Pilismarót.22
Imported Wares (Map 1)
African Red Slip Ware (Terra Sigillata Chiara)

Terra sigillata vessels arrived in huge quantities from the workshop of
Westerndorf into Pannonia at the beginning of the 3rd c. A.D., but this
production centre perished after the Alemannic invasion of the region.
Trading routes and trade itself became insecure. The other terra sigil-
lata workshop, at Pfaffenhofen, which was closer to Pannonia, served the
Danubian limes, albeit with lower quality products, until A.D. 259/60.
This situation prepared the way for the appearance of North African Red
Slip ware in the Pannonian provinces after the middle of the 3rd c. A.D.,
through the Adriatic trading routes. Due to the distances between its pro-
duction sites and Pannonia, the cost of these vessels was probably very
high, which could explain the small amount of finds of this type in our
region.23 After coin circulation ends in Pannonia in the 380s, ARS finds
are very important for dating Late Roman contexts.
22 Bónis and Gabler (1990) fig. 24.

23 Lassányi and Vámos (2011) 160; Gabler (1988) 30.
Map 1. Distribution map of Late Roman imported wares and lamps in the
Pannonian provinces.
The earliest north African terra sigillata find from Pannonia was found
in Vindobona/Vienna, and dates to the middle of the 2nd c. A.D., another
from Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg dates to the second half of the
2nd c. A.D.24 These finds can be regarded as private items, and hence
cannot be taken as proof of a direct trade link between North Africa and
Pannonia. Another important reason for their appearance could be mili-
tary movements, in connection with the Marcomannic wars of Marcus
Aurelius. A vexillatio of the legio III augusta from Lambaesis was stationed
in the Danube bend during the war.25 It could also be significant that
Septimius Severus, born in Leptis Magna, and commander of the legions
24 Vindobona/Vienna: Hayes 2 and 3 forms, see: Donat (1999) 211. Carnuntum/Bad

Deutsch-Altenburg: Hayes 34 bowl, see: Jilek (1994) 391, Abb. 9.40.
25 Mócsy (1974) 194, 230; Di Vita-Evrard (1994).
in Pannonia, was proclaimed emperor by his soldiers in Carnuntum in

A.D. 193. The number of ARS vessels begins to increase in the archaeo-
logical contexts from the second quarter-middle of the 3rd c. A.D.26 The
C1–C2 wares were produced in central Tunisian factories, for example at
Henchir el Guellal and Sidi Marzouk Tounsi.27 ARS reached the Pannonian
markets most probably via the Adriatic, Italy and Noricum until the early
4th c. A.D.28 It is very likely that these imported vessels arrived with other,
probably agricultural, goods into these provinces, for example grain.
Terra sigillata chiara C ware is found in contexts dating from the sec-
ond quarter to the middle of the 3rd c. A.D., but is rare in Pannonia.29
Pannonian terra sigillata chiara finds dated to the 4th c. A.D., like Hayes
45 large bowls, are published from Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg,
Aquincum/Budapest and Babarc Roman villa.30 A Hayes 46 large bowl
also came to light from this site.31 The Hayes 50 type large dish is the most
frequent type in Noricum and Pannonia.32 Fragments of this type are
known from Savaria/Szombathely, Vienna-Oberlaa, Visegrád-Gizellam-
ajor, Nemesvámos-Balácapuszta, Balatonalaki-Ságpuszta, Nagykanizsa-
Inkey kápolna, Ad Statuas/Ács-Vaspuszta and Intercisa/Dunaújváros.33
26 Gabler (1978) 123; Gabler (2004) 147; a Hayes 31 dish found at Páty, dated to the
beginning of the 3rd c. A.D.: Gabler (2007) 259. Also fragments from Intercisa/Dunaújváros:
Gabler (1988) Abb. 4.9. Hayes 44 and 45A type bowls and Hayes 49 type plate from
Vindobona/Vienna, dated to the first half of 3rd c. A.D. and a Hayes 42 dish fragment dated
between A.D. 220–40/50: Donat (1999) 214.
27 Mackensen (2006) 110–21.
28 The trade route can be traced from the findspots, from Aquileia to Emona, and
in Noricum. For this and a detailed bibliography, see: Gabler (2012b) 129; Modrijan and
Milavec (2011) 125. For the date of this horizon, see: Pröttel (1996) 110.
29 Hayes 171 fragment from Vindobona/Vienna: Kronberger (2009) 59. Hayes 45 plate
from Intercia/Dunaújváros: Gabler (1988) 36, Cat. No. 20. Hayes 48A plate from Nagy
kanizsa-Inkey kápolna: Gabler (1983) 29, 32. Hayes 173 and Hayes 174 type jugs from Aquin
cum/Budapest: Hayes 173 type: Lassányi and Vámos (2011) 156, Cat.No. 7; Hayes 174 type:
Lassányi and Vámos (2011) 157, Cat. No. 12; Topál (2003) 83–84, Grave 30/6. Hayes 173 and
Hayes 174 type jugs from vicus Teuto/Budaörs: Gabler (2012a) 443, Cat. No. 249. Fragment
from Zalabaksa Roman villa: Redő (2005) 301, dated A.D. 250–60.
30 Hayes 45: Hayes (1972) 65 dates these variants between A.D. 230 and 240–320.
Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Hayes 45A (C ware): Gabler (1988) 34, Cat. No. 1, without
a precise date; Gabler (1982) n.21, Abb. 2.3. Aquincum/Budapest: Gabler (1982) 322, dated
between A.D. 360 and 420. Babarc Roman villa: Pintér (2007) 104, Cat. Nos. 29, 31–32 and
Hayes 45A Cat. No. 33.
31 Hayes (1972) 65, dates it to the last quarter of the 3rd c.–first quarter of the 4th c.
Pintér (2007) Cat. No. 30.
32 Hayes (1972) 73, dates the different variants to between A.D. 230/40 and 400. Gabler
(2004) 147.
33 Savaria/Szombathely: Gabler (1982) 316, n.30, Abb. 1.5; Fülöp (2004) 145–46, Cat.
No. 25. Vienna-Oberlaa: Adler-Wölfl (2010) n.619. Visegrád-Gizellamajor: D. Gabler and
A Hayes 50A piece from Vindobona/Vienna has been discovered, and a

Hayes 50B type vessel was found in Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg.34
Again at Carnuntum, a Hayes 42/51(?) type dish, a Hayes 52B small bowl
with an applied boat decoration, and part of a Hayes 55 (?) dish with
an applied representation of the goddess Roma/Constantinopolis was
unearthed.35 Hayes 53A bowl fragments with an applied motif of a hind
(?), and another with leaf decoration, are published finds from Vindo-
bona/Vienna.36 Numerous fragments of Hayes 52B and 53A dishes also
came to light in Siscia/Sisak.37 It is worth mentioning that these products,
albeit sporadically, reached the Barbaricum, close to the area of Carnun-
tum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg.38
Terra sigillata chiara D1–D2 was manufactured in the north Tunisian
pottery centres, from the middle of the 4th c. A.D.39 A Hayes 56 plate,
a unique, relief-decorated example, came to light in Carnuntum/Bad
Deutsch-Altenburg (Circe-plate).40 A sherd from a Hayes 58 (?) flat based
dish is known from Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg.41 Hayes 59A
plates date from 320/340 to 380–400/420 A.D.,42 and pieces are known from
Salla/Zalalövő, Vindobona/Vienna, Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg,
K. Ottományi (pers. comm.); dated A.D. 320–80; 4 sherds of different plates were found
in the destruction layer of the fortlet. Nemesvámos-Balácapuszta: Gabler (2004) 138, Cat.
Nos. 146–47. Balatonalaki-Ságpuszta: Csirke et al. (2006) 34, Nr 4.2.4. Nagykanizsa-Inkey
kápolna: Gabler (1983) 30–33. Ad Statuas/Ács-Vaspuszta: Gabler (1989) 465. Intercisa/
Dunaújváros: Gabler (1988) 35, Cat. Nos. 15–18; 37, Cat. No. 40.
34 Hayes 50A: Ladstätter (2007) n.230. Hayes 50B: Ladstätter (2007) 256, Cat. Nos. 2–3.
35 Hayes 42/51(?) and Hayes 52B: Hayes (1972) 78, dates it to between A.D. 280/300 and
the early 5th c. Mackensen (2003) Tab. 2, dates them to between A.D. 275 and the early 5th
c. Hayes 55 dating: Hayes (1972) 83, dates it to between the second half of the 4th–first half
of the 5th c. The so-called ‘Roma dish’: Gabler (1988) 34, Cat. No. 7; Gabler (1988) 34, Cat.
No. 8, probably dates to the second half of the 4th c. A.D. Gabler (1988) 34–35, Cat. No. 9,
dates to the last third of the 4th c. A.D.
36 Hind? decoration: Hayes (1972) 82, dates the A-variant A.D. 350–430; Mackensen
(2003) Tab. 2, dates them to between A.D. 310/20 and 430/50. Leaf decoration: Gabler
(1978) K114–115, dated to the second half of the 4th–first third of the 5th c.
37 Makjanić (1995) Pl. 72.
38 Hayes 45 fragment from Cífer-Pác and a small sherd from Bratislava-Dúbravka,
see: Kuzmová (1997) 45, Cat. No. 13/45, Cat. No. 16a/24–26, dated to the first half of the
4th c. A.D.
39 Mackensen and Schneider (2002) 125–30.
40 Hayes (1972) 91, proposes an ovarall date-range of A.D. 360–430. Groller (1908) 71–74;
Hayes (1972) 90–91; Gabler (1998) 365, dates to the end of the 4th c. A.D., more likely
between A.D. 360–90.
41 Hayes (1972) 96, dates it to between A.D. 290/300 and 375. Rauchenwald (1996) 166,
Cat. No. 318, dates it between the end of the 3rd c.–third quarter of the 4th c.
42 A.D. 340 date: Mackensen (1993) 399.; A.D. 380–400 marks the end of the production:
Mackensen (1993) 401.
Gorsium/Tác, and Sopianae/Pécs.43 The Hayes 59B type is of the same

date, and fragments are known from Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg,
Vindobona/Vienna, and Aquincum/Budapest, with possible Hayes 59
plate fragments from Savaria/Szombathely and Matrica/Százhalombatta.44
From the beginning of the 5th c. A.D., African Red Slip ware could not
reach the territory of the province of Valeria any more.
The distribution of the ARS types that date to this period, demonstrates
very well the chaotic situation along the Danube bend: this is the period
of the Hunnic invasions, which led to the surrender of Valeria around
A.D. 425. and the transfer of Pannonia Prima to the Huns in A.D. 433. For
this later period of imported wares, only a few scarce finds can be listed:
a Hayes 61A dish fragment was found at Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Alten-
burg, with Hayes 61B dishes being known from Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-
Altenburg, Sirmium/Sremska Mitrovica, and Rittium/Surduk.45 A Hayes
63 dish is also known from Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg.46 Hayes
73 fragments have been published from Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Alten-
burg and Vindobona/Vienna.47 Hayes 89A and 91A fragments are known
from Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg.48
For the later 5th c. A.D., a Hayes 69B dish from Sirmium/Sremska
Mitrovica, and a plate fragment with ‘A’ style decoration (El Mahrine I.2/
1–2), from the legionary camp of Vindobona/Vienna, have to be mentioned.49
It is also worth noting that a fragment of a Hayes 63 type terra sigillata
43 Salla/Zalalövő: Gabler (1977) Cat. Nos. 106, 243. Vindobona/Vienna: Gabler (1978)
K112–113a, dated to mid 4th c.–early 5th c. Adler-Wölfl (2010) n. 619. Carnuntum/Bad
Deutsch-Altenburg: Gabler (1988) 35, Cat. No. 10; Rauchenwald (1996) 166, Cat. No. 319.
Gorsium/Tác: Gabler (1982) 320; Bánki (1990) Cat. Nos. 125, 103. Sopianae/Pécs: Gabler
(1982) 320.
44 Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Gabler (1982) 320, Abb. 2.2. Vindobona/Vienna:
Ladstätter (2007) n. 230. Aquincum/Budapest: Gabler (2012b) 128, 7.13. Savaria/Szom-
bathely: Gabler (1982) 332. Matrica/Százhalombatta: Kovács (2000) 36, Cat. No. 10: without
date.
45 Hayes 61A at Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Ladstätter (2007) 256, Cat. No. 4.
Hayes 61B: Hayes (1972) 107, dates it A.D. 400–50. The Hayes 61 A and B type vessels
appeared at the end of the 4th c. A.D. in the Southeastern Alps: Modrijan and Milavec
(2011) 127. Hayes 61B at: Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Grünewald (1979) Taf. 11.4;
Grünewald (1986) Taf. 2.3, dated to the beginning of the 5th c. A.D. Ladstätter (2007) 256,
Cat. No. 7. Sirmium/Sremska Mitrovica: Gabler (1982) 322. Rittium/Surduk: Brukner (1981)
T.50.12.
46 Ladstätter (2007) 256, Cat. No. 8.
47 Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Ladstätter (2007) 256, Cat. No. 9. Vindobona/
Vienna: Ladstätter (2007) n.230.
48 Ladstätter (2007) 256, Cat. No. 10; Ladstätter (2007) 256, Cat. No. 11.
49 Sirmium/Sremska Mitrovica: Gabler (1982) 322. Vindobona/Vienna: Adler-Wölfl
(2010) Tab. 386, KE2785, T.96.
chiara D vessel was found in the Tiszaföldvár Sarmatian settlement.50 The

precise date of the small sherds of the ARS vessels is not always clear, but
it is worth mentioning these finds so as to get a good idea of their distri-
bution. These include: Hayes 45A and B plate fragments from Savaria/
Szombathely, Gorsium/Tác and Vindobona/Vienna.51 Also, Hayes 45A
plate fragments came from Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg.52 Other
finds include: Hayes 45, Hayes 50 and Hayes 53 (?) fragments from Brige-
tio/Komárom-Szőny;53 Hayes 45A and Hayes 50 plate fragments from
Aquincum/Budapest; Hayes 50 plate fragments from vicus Teuto/Budaörs;
Hayes 50 or 59 plate fragment from Páty; a Hayes 50 plate fragment from
Campona/Nagytétény; a Hayes 50 or 48 fragment from Matrica/Százha-
lombatta; a Hayes 50B plate fragment from Siscia/Sisak; and Hayes 45A
and Hayes 50 plate fragments from Salla/Zalalövő.54 Some unidentifiable
fragments were recorded from Vindobona/Vienna, Gorsium/Tác, Inter-
cisa/Dunaújváros and Gerulata/Rusovce.55 Unidentified, undatable, frag-
ments have to be mentioned as well from: Siscia/Sisak; Carnuntum/Bad
Deutsch-Altenburg; Cirpi/Dunabogdány; Ulcisia Castra/Szentendre; Cam-
pona/Nagytétény; Érd; and Intercisa/Dunaújváros.56
50 Gabler and Vaday (1986) 67–69.

51 Savaria/Szombathely: Gabler (1982) 316, dated to the second half of the 4th c. A.D.
Gorsium/Tác: Gabler (1982) 316. Vindobona/Vienna: Adler-Wölfl (2010) 276, Tab. 386,
KE2468 and KE2985.
52 Hayes 45A: Grünewald (1979) Taf. 11.1; Kandler-Zöchmann (2001) 96, Cat. Nr. 610,
dated 230–350; Hayes 45 A/C (?): Rauchenwald (1996) 166, Cat. No. 317, dated second half
of the 3rd–mid 4th c. A.D.
53 Beck (2004) 248, without further dating.
54 Aquincum/Budapest: Hayes 45A: Gabler (1982) 316; Lebegyev and Márton (2003) 154,
dated between A.D. 230/240 and 320. Hayes 50: Gabler (2002), Cat. No. 8, dated to the sec
ond quarter of the 3rd–first quarter of the 4th c. vicus Teuto/Budaörs: Gabler (2012a) Cat.
No. 250 and 251, dated to the second quarter of the 3rd–early 4th c. A.D. Small fragments
with unidentified type: Gabler (2012a) Cat. Nos. 252–53 are dated to the mid 3rd–early 4th
c. Páty: Ottományi and Gabler (1985) 201. Campona/Nagytétény: Gabler (1988) 35, Cat. No.
12, dated to the early 4th c. A.D. Matrica/Százhalombatta: Gabler (1988) 35, Cat. No. 14.
Siscia/Sisak: Makjanić (1996) Cat. No. 92. Salla/Zalalövő: Hayes 45A: Gabler (1989b) 456,
Cat. No. 115; Hayes 50: Gabler (2005) 36, 46.
55 Vindobona/Vienna: Gabler (1978) K115, second half of the 4th-first third of the 5th
c. Gorsium/Tác: Bánki (1990) Cat. No. 126, 103; Bánki (1990) Cat. No. 359, 125. Intercisa/
Dunaújváros: Gabler (1988) 36, Cat. Nos. 23 and 26, dated to the beginning of the 4th c.
Gabler (1988) 36, Cat. Nos. 22, 24–25, 27–39. Gerulata/Rusovce: Varsik et al. (1996) 218,
Nr. 17, Taf. 2.
56 Siscia/Sisak: Vikić-Belančić (1968) 517. Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Gabler
(1988) 34, Cat. Nos. 2–6; Rauchenwald (1996) 166, Cat. Nos. 321–22; Kandler-Zöchmann
(1997) 109. Cirpi/Dunabogdány: Gabler (1988) 35, Cat. No. 11. Ulcisia Castra/Szentendre:
Gabler (2012b) 129. Campona/Nagytétény: Gabler (1988) 35, Cat. No. 13. Érd: Gabler (2012b)
129. Intercisa/Dunaújváros: Gabler (1988) 36, Cat. Nos. 19, 21, 24–25.
Some fragments from the imitations of north African sigillata produc-

tion are also known in the Pannonian provinces from this time, but their
places of origin are not known. These include: a Hayes 45 imitation from
Ad Statuas/Ács-Vaspuszta, and imitations of Hayes 45, 59B and 61B from
Keszthely-Fenékpuszta.57 Unidentifiable pieces were recorded from Car-
nuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg and Sirmium/Sremska Mitrovica.58 Imita-
tions were also found in Höflein (Bruck an der Leitha) and Dombóvár.59
North African Lamps (Iványi XII = Atlante VIII/X)

The Iványi XII type lamps are imports into Pannonia from North Africa.60
Their shape is oval, and the motifs on their shoulder and on the disc
are very variable; examples include: a Chi-Rho, mythological or biblical
scenes, busts, rosettes, palms, running animals or vases.61 These are rare,
unique finds in Pannonia, and can be dated from the middle of the 4th to
the early 5th c. A.D.62 Hayes I/Atlante VIII lamps, in turn, were produced
in central and northern Tunisia from the middle of the 4th c. to the begin-
ning of the 6th c. A.D.63 Fragments of this type have been discovered in
Savaria/Szombathely, Vindobona/Vienna, Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Alten-
burg, Ad Flexum/Mosonmagyaróvár, Arrabona/Győr, Brigetio/Komárom-
Szőny, Vetus Salina/Adony, Intercisa/Dunaújváros, Szekszárd; Siscia/Sisak
and Mursa/Osijek.64
57 Ad Statuas/Ács-Vaspuszta: Gabler (1989) 470. Keszthely-Fenékpuszta: Gabler (1988)

37, Cat. No. 41; Horváth (2011) 601; Gabler (1988) 38, Cat. No. 42; Gabler (1988) 38, Cat. Nos.
43–44.
58 Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Bónis (1942) Taf. XXI.24. Sirmium/Sremska
Mitrovica: Brukner (1981) Taf. 66.25.
59 With further bibliography in: Horváth (2011) 602; Groh and Sedlmayer (2002)
181–85.
60 Alram-Stern (1989) 51.
61 Bonifay (2004) 371–415.
62 Szőnyi (2002) 44.
63 Hayes (1972) 313.
64 Savaria/Szombathely: Iványi (1935) Cat. Nos. 973, 986. Vindobona/Vienna: Neumann
(1967) 24, Cat. Nos. 257–58. Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Iványi (1935) Cat. Nos.
979, 982, 1173; Grünewald (1986) Taf. 10.16; Alram-Stern (1989) 51, Cat. Nos. 572–81; Ladstät
ter (2007) 257, Cat. Nos. 14–15. Ad Flexum/Mosonmagyaróvár: Iványi (1935) Cat. No. 971.
Arrabona/Győr: Iványi (1935) Cat. Nos. 969, 989; Szőnyi (2002) 43–44. Brigetio/Komárom-
Szőny: Iványi (1935) Cat. Nos. 977, 990. Vetus Salina/Adony: Iványi (1935) Cat. No. 970.
Intercisa/Dunaújváros: Pongrácz (2006) Cat. No. 452; Iványi (1935) Cat. No. 972. Szekszárd:
Iványi (1935) Cat. No. 980. Siscia/Sisak: Iványi (1935) Cat. Nos. 978, 981, 988, 993; Vikić-
Belančić (1968) Taf. 10.40. Mursa/Osijek: Iványi (1935) Cat. No. 983.
The production of Hayes IIA/Atlante X form is likely to have begun

only around the end of the 4th c., and continued up to ca. A.D. 520.65 This
type is known from Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg, Baden bei Wien,
Brigetio/Komárom-Szőny and Siscia/Sisak.66 The Hayes IIB variant was
produced in north Tunisian centres from the second third of the 5th to the
7th c. A.D., but has not been found in the Pannonian provinces yet. A pre-
cise typology cannot be easily formulated in every case, as their state of
preservation is very poor.67 A small fragment from Intercisa/Dunaújváros,
and another from Vindobona/Vienna, can be identified as Atlante VIIIB =
Bonifay type 43, on the basis of its shoulder decoration.68 These were pro-
duced very probably in Henchir es-Srira, in central Tunisia, and are pres-
ent in early 5th c. A.D. contexts.
A piece from Aquincum/Budapest came to light from a late antique
cemetery, but its precise context is not known.69 A very similar lamp was
found in Carthage, grouped as ‘Atlante X group D2 variante A’, and dated
to the end of the 5th to the beginning of the 6th c. A.D.70 This seems to be
a very late date for the Aquincum lamp, if the recorded findspot is correct,
because it is unlikely that such an import could have reached the Middle
Danubian area after the beginning of the 5th c. A.D.
It is not surprising, that the Iványi XII type lamps have a very similar
distribution to that seen with African Red Slip ware (Terra Sigillata Chiara)
vessels. Probably the same trade route can be drawn for both of these rare
finds, through the Adriatic and northern Italy.71 It is assumed, though, that
north African lamp imitations were manufactured in Ravenna and Aquil-
eia, from the middle of the 5th c. A.D. to the middle of the 7th c. A.D.72
Yet, such imitations may have also have been produced in Pannonia.73
65 Hayes (1972) 313; beginning of this type from ca. A.D. 400: Mackensen (1993) 159;
Pröttel (1996) 79. Production of Atlante X tardif/Bonifay type 70 ends around the end of
the 7th c. A.D., see: Bonifay (2004) 415.
66 Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Iványi (1935) Cat. Nos. 1171, 1175; Alram-Stern
(1989) 52, Cat. Nos. 580, 582–83. Baden bei Wien: Iványi (1935) Cat. No. 985. Brigetio/
Komárom-Szőny: Iványi (1935) Cat. No. 994. Siscia/Sisak: Iványi (1935) Cat. No. 1172.
67 E.g. from Cibalae/Vinkovci and Sirmium/Sremska Mitrovica:Vikić-Belančić (1968)
517; Rubright (1973) No. 50.
68 Pongrácz (2006) No. 451; Neumann (1967) Cat. No. 258; Bonifay (2004) 358, fig.
201.7–8.
69 Iványi (1935) Cat. No. 984; Nagy (1938) 66, fig. 31.
70 Bonifay (2004) 401, fig. 221.29.
71 Modrijan and Milavec (2011) 130–31. Examples from Poetovio/Ptuj and Emona: Subić
(1975) Taf. 5.19 and 21; Iványi (1935) Cat. Nos. 974–75, 987, 991–92, 995–96. From Celeia/
Celje: Lazar (1997) Taf. 1.7.
72 Pröttel (1996) 107. nn. 21–23, 108.
73 Alram-Stern (1989) 51; a piece from Aquincum/Budapest: Zsidi et al. (2009) Cat.
No. 1335.
Argonne Ware (Argonnen sigillata)

These are very rare finds in 4th c. Pannonia. They arrived from workshops
in the Forêt Argonne, between Reims and Verdun.74 Officinae are known
or are believed to have existed in Lavoye (E and Z kilns), Aubréville(?),
Avocourt, Pont-des-quatre-enfants, Les Allieux-Vauquois, Vauquois(?), La
Verdunaise and Châtel-Chéhéry.75 The workshops in the Argonne-zone
started producing this sigillata type around A.D. 320, and continued until
the 6th c.76 It is questionable whether these workshops were the continu-
ation of the East Gaulish terra sigillata production, for example at Lavoye,
or whether they were newly established.77 These workshops manufactured
plain and so-called ‘Rädchensigillaten’ vessels with roller-stamped deco-
ration.78 The most frequent type is the Chenet 320 bowl with stamped
motifs, but also plates, cups, beakers and jugs can be found. The eight
groups of known stamps had varied ornamental or geometric motifs in
squares.79 The variations of these small stamps creating a muster, which
can help us date the vessel more precisely. Various imitations of this ware
are also known.80
The distribution area of Argonne Ware is very wide, and consists of the
regions of modern southern England, France, Belgium, Luxemburg, the
Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, western Hungary and north-
ern Italy.81 The findspots are usually Roman military sites.82 The published
fragments from Pannonia belong to the Chenet 320 type bowls, and have
been found in Vindobona/Vienna, Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg
and Keszthely-Fenékpuszta.83 We should also mention a small sherd from
the Barbaricum, found at Nitra-Parovské Háje, in a Germanic settlement,
74 Bakker et al. (2005) 171.

75 Lavoye: Chenet (1941) 24; Hübener (1968) 245–48. Aubréville(?): Chenet (1941) 29.
Avocourt: Chenet (1941) 31–32. Pont-des-quatre-enfants: Chenet (1941) 32; Hübener (1968)
252. Les Allieux-Vauquois: Chenet (1941) 35–38; Hübener (1968) 253–56. Vauquois(?):
Chenet (1941) 38; Hübener (1968) 248. Verdunaise: Chenet (1941) 38–39. Châtel-Chéhéry:
Chenet (1941) 39–41; Hübener (1968) 252–53.
76 Gabler (1988) 24; Gabler (1998) 364; Bakker et al. (2005) 171.
77 Bakker et al. (2005) 171; Gabler (1998) 364.
78 Gabler (1998) 364; Bakker et al. (2005) 171.
79 Hübener (1968) 257–68; Bakker et al. (2005) 172.
80 Bakker et al. (2005) 173.
81 Bakker et al. (2005) 173.
82 Bakker et al. (2005) 174.
83 Vindobona/Vienna: Gabler (1978) K116; Gabler (1988) 38, dated to middle of the 4th
c. Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Gabler (1988) 38. Keszthely-Fenékpuszta: Gabler
(1988) 38.
north of Brigetio/Komárom-Szőny and dated to the second half of the

4th c.84 A small sherd from the Roman villa at Hosszúhetény, which was
published as Argonne Ware, does not fit into this classification.85 Argonne
Ware perhaps had some influence on the decoration of locally made,
Pannonian, lead-glazed pottery, and inspired its motifs from the mid-
dle of the 4th c.86 Examples of this local ware were found in Quadrata/
Barátföldpuszta Roman fortlet, Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg and
Vindobona/Vienna.87
Thin-Walled White Fineware (Late Roman Eggshell Ware)

These thin-walled, fine textured, whitish-grey cups with a foot ring made
of pipe clay, and sometimes decorated with brownish paint, are very rare
finds in the Pannonian provinces. Finds, which belong to this group, and
are dated to the 4th c., are known from Intercisa/Dunaújváros, Keszthely-
Dobogó, Bacincum/Batina (Kiskőszeg), Tamási and Brigetio/Komárom-
Szőny.88 Two cups can probably be cited here as similar finds from
Bosnia-Herzegovina, from graves at Puticevo and Rogatica.89 The vessel
from Brigetio/Komárom-Szőny, and its parallel from Puticevo, have elon-
gated bodies. These have been described as the products of pottery work-
shops in Trier or Cologne;90 however, they are now thought to originate
from elsewhere.91 Their fabric is very like that of the North Gaulish (Gallo-
Belgic) White wares, and the shape of the first variant of thin-walled pipe
clay cups resembles that of the Barkóczi 35 type or Rütti AR 98.C type
glass cups.92 The elongated body form of the second variant is also a long-
lasting one; it can be found in glass in the 1st c. A.D. (Barkóczi 32 type),
84 Kuzmová (1997) 31.

85 Thomas (1964) Taf. CLXXVIII.7; Gabler (1988) 23.
86 Gabler (1988) 28.
87 Quadrata/Barátföldpuszta: Gabler (1988) Abb. 9.1–2, Abb. 10. Carnuntum/Bad
Deutsch-Altenburg and Vindobona/Vienna: Grünewald (1979) Taf. 69.5; Gabler (1988) 29.
88 Intercisa/Dunaújváros: Alföldi (1957) Taf. XX.17. Keszthely-Dobogó: Sági (1960) 212,
Abb. 42,22. Bacincum/Batina (Kiskőszeg): Sági (1960) 246, Abb. 58.13. Tamási: Sági (1960)
246, Abb. 64.11. Brigetio/Komárom-Szőny: Sági (1960) 246, Abb. 64.12.
89 Puticevo: Truhelka and Patsch (1895) fig. 28a, with elongated body. Rogatica: Fiala
(1897) Taf. LXVII.3, from a grave dating to the 4th c.
90 Gabler (1990) 199.
91 We are very grateful to Dr. Constanze Höpken (Universität zu Köln, Philosophische
Fakultät, Archäologisches Institut) for this information.
92 Fabric: NOG WH 01 or NOG WH 03, see: http://www.molas.org.uk. Shape: Barkóczi
(1988) 73–74, see especially: Cat. No. 71.b, Taf. LXXII, dated to the second half of the 4th c.;
Rütti (1991) 79, dated to the 2nd c. A.D.
and also in later contexts with a somewhat taller variant (Barkóczi 43

type), which date to the last third of the 3rd–4th c. A.D.93 A unique ex-
voto terracotta with the same paste, is known from grave Nr. 2. at Gödre-
keresztúr, depicting the goddess Juno Lucina, which dates to A.D. 341–7594
There is a theory that the person buried in this grave, as well as the other
nine people found in the small cemetery, arrived from the Rhine area in
the early 4th c.95
Amphorae
Very few amphora finds have been published from this region that can
be dated to after the time of Diocletian, and only scattered finds can be
found along the Pannonian limes. The decline in trading activity is par-
ticularly perceptible in the amphorae, when we compare its volume with
earlier periods.96 However, some amphora types, which appear around the
time of the Marcomannic wars, and are present in 3rd c. contexts as well,
could also be dated to the beginning of the 4th c. These are the Kapitän
II, and the Zeest 90 forms, from the Aegean/western Asia Minor area, or
the Almagro 51 type from Lusitania.97 Some forms undoubtedly arrived
in Pannonia in the 4th c. A.D.: Spatheion 1 (Keay 26) fragments were
found in Vindobona/Vienna, and a sherd of this date was unearthed in
Sirmium/Sremska Mitrovica.98 These vessels arrived from North Africa,
most probably from Tunisia, with their contents likely to be olive oil, wine
or fish-based products.99
Other north African amphora sherds are also known from 4th c. A.D.
Pannonian contexts, although usually they are found in a very fragmen-
tary state, so their identification is very problematic. The fragments from
Keszthely-Fenékpuszta were dated to the second half-end of the 4th c., and
93 Barkóczi 32 type: Barkóczi (1988) 71–72, see specially: Cat. No. 65, Taf. VI. Barkóczi 43
type: Barkóczi (1988) 78, Cat. No. 86, Taf. VIII.
94 Burger (1968) 14, 27.
95 Burger (1968) 27.
96 Bezeczky (1987); Bezeczky (1994); Kelemen (1987); Kelemen (1988); Kelemen (1990);
Kelemen (1993); Hárshegyi (2008).
97 Kapitän II: Hárshegyi (2004) 116; Hárshegyi (2008) 173–74; Gabler et al. (2009) 63.
With petrographic research: Menchelli et al. (2008) 255–61. Zeest 90: Hárshegyi (2004)
116–18; Hárshegyi (2008) 174; Gabler et al. (2009) 64. Almagro 51: Brukner (1981) Taf. 163.80,
identified by T. Bezeczky: Bezeczky (1994) 165, n. 41.
98 Vindobona/Vienna: Bonifay (2004) 125; Bezeczky (2005) Nos. 105–106. Sirmium/
Sremska Mitrovica: Brukner (1981) Taf. 163.79.
99 Bezeczky (2005) 66.
were identified as Peacock-Williams 35 forms.100 Fragments of Almagro 54

(LR 4) type amphorae from the 4th c., produced in Gaza/Ashkelon to
transport its famous wine, are present on a few Pannonian sites.101 These
include a fragment from the legionary camp at Aquincum/Budapest, a
piece from Gorsium/Tác, and another at Sirmium/Sremska Mitrovica,
which can be dated to the 4th c. A.D.102 The finds from Keszthely-Fenék-
puszta are very likely to be from the end of the 5th c. A.D. or later.103 An
Agora G199 type fragment from Sirmium/Sremska Mirovica should also
be mentioned here, although nothing is known about its context.104 This
type comes from Cilicia or Paphos, and was most probably used for the
transportation of wine (passum cilicium).105 It was produced some time in
the first third of the 4th c. A.D.106
LR 1 is a long-lived type with many variants, and was produced in sev-
eral centres on Rhodes, Cyprus and Cilicia from the middle of the 3rd to
the 7th c. A.D., for wine transportation.107 The only Pannonian finds of
this type that have been published are from Sirmium/Sremska Mitrovica
and can be dated typologically to between the second quarter of the 5th–
6th c. A.D.108 Amphorae of later date are known only from a few Avar
elite graves in the Carpathian Basin, but these are not the topic of the
present paper.109
The amphorae trading route was similar to that of the other imports of
the 4th–5th c.: they arrived via the Adriatic, from Dalmatia or northern
Italy.110 Spatheion (Keay 26) type amphorae are also known from Poet-
ovio/Ptuj and Fluvio Frigido/Ajdovščina.111 A Keay 35B type, produced in
the Zeugitana region, and used for transporting fish sauce, is known from
100 Horváth (2011) Abb. 2.4.–5. 599.

101 Piéri (2005) 110–14.
102 Aquincum/Budapest: Unpublished. Gorsium/Tác: Unpublished. Sirmium/Sremska
Mitrovica: Brukner (1981) Taf. 161.56.
103 Kelemen (1993) figs. 1.11–12.; Horváth (2011) 597, Abb. 2.1–3.
104 Brukner (1981) Taf. 157.27; Bezeczky (1994) 169.
105 Anemurium: Williams (1989) 90–95. Paphos: Daszkiewicz et al. (1997). Majcherek
(2007) 23.
106 Rauh (2004) 330; Reynolds (2005) 564.
107 Piéri (2005) 69–85.
108 Brukner (1981) Taf. 164.86–88; Reynolds (2005) Plate 4.
109 Csiky and Hárshegyi (forthcoming).
110 Modrijan and Milavec (2011) 139–58.
111 Poetovio/Ptuj: Bezeczky (1987) Plate 12.313. Fluvio Frigido/Ajdovščina: Vidrih Perko
and Žbona Trkman (2005) 282–83; Tonovcov grad: Modrijan and Milavec (2011) 143–44.
Poetovio/Ptuj, and dates to the 5th c.112 LR 1 amphorae were also widely
distributed in modern day Slovenia and in northern Italy.113 The Almagro
54 (LR 4) type is also known from Poetovio/Ptuj, on the north Istrian coast
and in northern Italy.114
Local Pottery Production
The circumstances of pottery production changed in the Late Roman

period. The large workshops in the urban centres of the High Empire,
which supplied the whole province with bulk goods, had mostly disap-
peared. Small, local workshops, not only in towns and camps, but also in
larger villae, vici, and around fortlets and watchtowers, took over produc-
tion (Map 2). Their role was twofold: on the one hand they manufactured
coarse ware used for cooking, while on the other, they tried to make up
for, and imitate, the decreasing volume of imports with local material.
Metal, glass and terra sigillata vessel types were reproduced using new
techniques and ornamentation. These new decorative elements and tech-
niques became popular in the second half of the 4th c. A.D., and evolved
separately from those of the imported wares. An example of this new type
of fine pottery is the glazed ware, which imitates the metallic glow of
metal vessels in different colours. Glazed wares formed the greater part of
the tablewares of the second third of the 4th c. A.D. Another surface treat-
ment, which became fashionable from the beginning of the 4th c., was
polishing. Burnished wares, with glossy and matt decoration, increased
from the last third of the century as well. Variants of the same vessel types,
but with different surface techniques, were made in the small, local pot-
tery workshops.
Local pottery was only distributed regionally. It can be shown that,
for example, in the Danube bend, a string of small officinae—connected
to various military buildings in the Valentinian period—were erected.
Their distance from one another, and also the radius of their consuming
112 Bonifay (2004) 135; Bezeczky (1987) Plate 12.312.; Keay 35A variant finds from modern
day Slovenia, see: Modrijan and Milavec (2011) 144.
113 Modrijan and Milavec (2011) 150, with detailed bibliography.
114 Poetovio/Ptuj: Vidrih Perko and Lovenjak (2001) Taf. 1.3. North Istrian coast: Vid
rih Perko and Župančič (2005) figs. 7.7–9, 8.5–6, 10.18. North Italy: Aquileia: Bueno et al.
(2012) 163. Around Venice: Cottica and Toniolo (2012) 199. Modern day Slovenia: Vidrih
Perko (2006) 106. Tonovcov grad (with further bibliography for this region): Modrijan and
Milavec (2011) 153. Emona: Vidrih Perko (2006) pl. 83.5.
Map 2. Late Roman pottery workshops in the Pannonian provinces.
territory, varied between 5 and 10 km, and sometimes 20 km, which meant
there were many similarities in the characteristics of these products.115
The distance between the glazed pottery production centres of Tokod and
Pilismarót was approximately 20 km, for example.116 The next nearest pro-
duction site for glazed ware was in Visegrád-Gizellamajor, approximately
4 km east of Pilismarót. Leányfalu lies approximately 20 km to the east
of Visegrád-Gizellamajor, and between these two lies the camp of Cirpi/
Dunabogdány, where there is probably a third workshop. Glazed and
coarse ware production can also be argued to have taken place next to
the Budakalász watchtower, half way between Leányfalu and Aquincum/
Budapest. (Map 3)
Less evidence is available for burnished pottery production sites. On the
military sites of Pilismarót and Leányfalu, the production of this ware is
detectable, but between these two sites, in Visegrád, it cannot be proved.
115 Ottományi (1991) 45–48; Ottományi (1999a).

116 Between these two places, there is the military camp of Solva/Esztergom, where no
evidence for pottery production has been found, yet.
Map 3. Pottery workshops of the Danube bend in the Valentinian period

(after Soproni (1985)).
The production centres for coarse ware (Tokod, Visegrád and Leányfalu)
lay 20–25 km from each other. In the hinterland of the Pannonian prov-
inces, in modern-day County Zala, in rural settlements, kilns for coarse
ware were discovered at 10 km distances from each other.117 Along the
southern shore of Lake Balaton, two pottery kilns, at Balatonalmádi and
Balatonaliga, were documented, which are 25 km from each other.118
In our review of Late Roman pottery production within the Pannonian
provinces, we will look at: the glazed ware, which imitated imported pot-
tery; the polished and burnished wares; and the largest surviving group,
the grey coarse pottery. At the end of the paper the relatively scarce finds
of hand-made or slow-wheel made vessels will be discussed. The distribu-
tion of these regional wares was very different in the Late Roman period,
and also varied for brief periods within the 4th c.119 In all cases, the house-
hold, coarse pottery was found in the highest quantities, with the number
117 Horváth and Frankovics (2009) 28, 42–43. Rigyác and Letenye: round kilns with
radial grids found, but are unpublished.
118 Palágyi (2004) 55–56; Bónis (1994).
119 Sometimes decorative techniques are mixed, like inner glazed dishes decorated with
horizontal burnished lines on the outer surface (Grünewald (1979) Taf.68.4), or the rim of
inner glazed mortaria are painted: Ottományi (2011) fig. 3.1; Cvjetiċanin (2006) 23, LRG 1.
Dish with painted horizontal rim: Bónis (1991) Abb. 1.1.
of finds continuing to increase at the turn of the 5th c. A.D. Among the
finds from the Late Roman military camps, watchtowers and inner forts,
from the time of Constantius II/Valentinian up to A.D. 430, 51–67% of the
finds belong to this coarse ware type. The polished ware comprises a rela-
tively high percentage of the finds as well (12–23%), while glazed pottery
is somewhat less frequent (5–13%) within these contexts. The proportion
of the burnished ware is very variable, depending on if it was made locally
(5–27%) or distributed within a smaller region (1–3%). The percentage of
hand-made and slow wheel-made vessels is usually between 4 and 10%.120
On those sites where Roman continuity can be seen into the 5th c., at
Tokod, Visegrád- Gizellamajor, Biatorbágy -FS.9, and Savaria/Szombathely-
Fő tér, much more grey coarse pottery has been found (72–82%), while the
percentage of burnished ware (6–10%) and glazed ware decreases (3–6%),
and is similar to the proportion of hand-made vessels (3–10%).121 Some
typical sites can be discussed in more detail, like Pilismarót-Malompatak
or Savaria/Szombathely-Fő tér, where burnished wares were manufac-
tured, and where this ware was found in higher proportions (27.6% and
13–19%). However, in the vicinity of the military watchtower at Leányfalu,
burnished material makes up only 6% of what has been found, compared
with the locally made glazed ware, which makes up 19% of the material.
The high quantity of glazed pottery in Budakalász-Luppacsárda (46.5%)
suggests that this ware was manufactured at this site, although no kiln
has been found.
Glazed Ware
Lead-glazed ware is a common discovery in Late Roman contexts in
Pannonia.122 Manufacturers perhaps tried to imitate imported vessels, to
compensate for their recent decline. Dishes with flat, horizontal rims had
antecedents among African Red Slip ware, and jug forms originated from
glass and metal types.123
120 Ottományi (2008b) Taf.7.; Ottományi (1991) 44, Taf. 3c; Ottományi and Sosztarits
(1998) 148, Tab. 1; Ottományi (1999b) 362, fig. 2.
121 Tokod: Lányi (1981b) 85.
122 For the origins of glazed ware in the Early Roman period, and for a summary of its
transition into the ‘High Empire’, see: Bónis (1990) 25–29 and Gassner (1991) 36–40.
123 Detailed publications on the Pannonian material: Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Alten
burg: Grünewald (1979) 67–74; Tokod: Bónis (1991); Leányfalu: Ottományi (1991) 14–23;
Gorsium/Tác: Bánki (1992); Budakalász-Luppa-csárda: Ottományi (2004) 268–72; vicus
Teuto/Budaörs: Ottományi (2011); Keszthely-Fenékpuszta: Horváth (2010); Horváth (2011)
602–14. Conference: Magrini and Sbarra (2009).
1. Forms and Decoration ( figs. 1–2)

All the forms of the glazed ware are typically Roman.124 Several of them
were in use for four centuries, and were manufactured with a new sur-
face treatment from the 4th c. Among the forms, the traditional mortaria
can be mentioned. Its rim became simpler with a narrower collar, with a
thinner and steeper body, in the 4th c., and its decoration also changed.
Sometimes the rim was still painted, but the glazing of the pebbles proves
that the original function of the dish had changed with time. This is the
most frequent form that is found, together with jugs, among the mate-
rial from settlement sites.125 However, bowls with inverted or ribbed rims,
and bowls with a biconical body with horizontal or ribbed rims, are also
found.126 Narrow-necked jugs with a straight or curved rim, is a frequent
form found on all findspots from the middle of the 4th c. to the begin-
ning of the 5th c. A.D.127 Cups with three handles were also present in
the material.128
The other forms of glazed ware are also typical Late Roman types,
copying metal and glass wares: like cups with a horizontal rim, or shallow
bowls with a horizontal rim, which is a long-lasting form.129 Their rim is
sometimes wavy; on the latest variants, cut decoration with wavy lines
also appears. Cups with handles originated in the eastern Mediterranean
(skyphos), with only glazed, two or three-handled variants known from
124 For a recent typology of glazed forms, see: Cvjetiċanin (2006). For typological tables
of forms for Pannonian products, see: Arthur and Williams (1981); Bónis and Gabler (1990)
182, figs. 31.1–7; Bónis (1980) figs. 66.20–25, figs. 67.1–15. Vessels found in cemeteries, col
lected and grouped: Nádorfi (1992) Tafs. I–II.
125 Arthur and Williams (1981) fig. 30.1; Bónis (1991) 123–42; Cvjetiċanin (2006) LRG 1–18;
Horváth (2010) figs. 4–5.
126 Inverted or ribbed rims: Ottományi (1991) Tab. 1.5–8, 2.11–12a; Bónis (1991) Abb. 15.3;
Magrini and Sbarra (2005) Tav. XXX–XXXI.1; Cvjetiċanin (2006) 57–63. The forms of coarse
ware also appear in a burnished and glazed variant in the 4th c. Biconical body with hori
zontal or ribbed rims: Cvjetiċanin (2006) LRG 28–31; Bónis (1991) Abb. 9/10. A common
form in the material of the watch-tower at Budakalász-Luppacsárda: Ottományi (2004)
figs. 1.2–4, 6–7, 2.2–6.
127 Grünewald (1979) Tafs. 64.8–9, 65.4–8; Arthur and Williams (1981) fig. 30.3; Ottományi
(1991) 18, Taf. 17.17; Groh and Sedlmayer (2002) 241, Abb. 146.1169 (in the camp of Favianis/
Mautern in Noricum: A.D. 350/60–420); Nádorfi (1992) Taf. I.
128 Cvjetiċanin (2006) 86, LRG 143; Horváth (2011) 612, Abb. 6.12–13; Ottományi (2011) fig.
4.2; Bónis (1980) fig. 67.9; Nádorfi (1992) 50, Taf. II/ 4a–c (coins dated A.D. 341–63); Magrini
and Sbarra (2005) 49, Tav. XXXVI–XXXVIII.
129 Horizontal rim: Horváth (2011) 609–11 (with further analogies); Ottományi (1991)
Taf. 21; Bónis (1991) 143. Sometimes stands on high foot, e.g. from Leányfalu and Tokod:
Ottományi (1991) 16, Taf. 10; Bónis (1991) Abb. 6.8. Shallow bowls with horizontal rim:
Arthur and Williams (1981) fig. 30.2/32; Ottományi (1991) Taf. 11–12; Horváth (2011)
Abb. 4,8–9.
Fig. 1. Glazed dishes. Budaörs (1, 17) (after Ottományi (2011)); Leányfalu (2, 4,
9–10, 14) (after Ottományi (1991)); Visegrád-Gizellamajor (3, 5, 7–8, 13, 15–16) (after
Ottományi (2012)); Budakalász-Luppacsárda (6) (after Ottományi (2004)); Tokod
(11) (after Bónis (1991)); Páty (12) (after Ottományi (2007)).
Fig. 2. Glazed jugs, beakers and pots. Budaörs (1, 5–7) (after Ottományi (2011));
Páty (2–4) (Ottományi (unpublished)); Leányfalu (8–12) (after Ottományi (1991));
Budakalász-Luppacsárda (13) (after Ottományi (2004)).
Pannonia. These are decorated with dense rouletting motifs, and were
present in the Pannonian provinces from the first third of the 4th to the
beginning of the 5th c.130 Jugs with funnel rims are known from settle-
ments that date between the second half/end of the 4th to the beginning
of the 5th c.131 These jugs appear in graves dated, by coins, to A.D. 320–30,
and remained in use until the beginning of the 5th c.132
Two-handled jugs with a collared rim and glazed surface are rare finds,133
and mainly occur on sites where they were manufactured locally.134 A
unique piece from Visegrád-Gizellamajor is a glazed flask.135 Glazed mugs
and pots are also rare finds, occurring primarily in production centres.136
The spectrum of forms found in settlements is wide. Glazing appears
both on tablewares (dishes, plates, and sometimes beakers and cups)
and vessels for preparing food (mortaria, strainers).137 This diversity had
been lessened by the beginning of the 5th c., and only a few basic forms
remained in use. Among grave goods, tableware was commonly found,
mainly jugs.138 Their decoration can indicate a chronology: the earliest
vessels have a prominent crescent, or horseshoe-shaped decoration. This
130 Bónis (1980) figs. 66.23, 67.7; Bánki (1992) 42–43, Abb. 6; Nádorfi (1992) Cat. No. 68;
Bónis (1991) 131–32, Abb. 10, Abb. 18.2; Ottományi (2011) figs. 2.7–9, 6, fig. 3 (coins: A.D.
351–75).
131 Grünewald (1979) 70, Abb. 83.3; Ottományi (1991) Taf. 17.18; Horváth (2011) 613, Abbs.
6.9–11; Friesinger and Kerchler (1981) Abb. 8/1; Cvjetiċanin (2006) 59–60, LRG 80–82.
132 Lányi (1972) Abb. 38.17; Nádorfi (1992) 45.They are often decorated with an attache
at the edge of the rim and the handle, imitating the glass, and bronze variants. It is also
typical on the burnished wares.
133 Bónis (1991) 135, Abb. 8.13, Abb. 27; Ottományi (1991) 19, Taf. 20.29, Taf. 16.9. (two-
handled jug with cylindrical body); Ottományi (2004) fig. 3.4, nn. 37–40; Nádorfi (1992) 50,
Taf. II/ 2b; Cvjetiċanin (2006) LRG 127 (second half of the 4th c.); Liesen-Pirling (1998) Abb.
3.1–4. This form is the imitation of glass ware produced along the Rhine.
134 Tokod: Bónis (1991) 135, Abb. 7.1, 17.1–5. Half of the glazed jugs from the watch-tower
at Leányfalu had collared rims: Ottományi (1991) 17–20, Taf. 17.14, Taf. 32.63. In the fortlet at
Visegrád-Gizellamajor, jugs with collared rims appear among glazed, burnished and coarse
wares: Ottományi (2012b) fig. 13. They also appear on sites in the Pannonian Plain, where
there was commercial activity with the Barbaricum, e.g. Apátfalva: Vári (2011) fig. 3.
135 Ottományi (2012b) fig. 8.2. Parallels can be found at Krefeld-Gellep: Liesen and
Pirling (1998) Abb. 3.6a–b.
136 Glazed mugs: Lányi (1972) Abb. 40.8; Zsidi (1987) fig. 12/92.1 (with coins dated to
A.D. 335–61.); Ottományi (2011) fig. 4.1. Production centres: Leányfalu: Ottományi (1991)
20, types 28–32, 39b, 42, 50a, 60, 63. Among the finds from Visegrád-Gizellamajor with a
so-called Leányfalu type, ribbed surface, is: Ottományi (2012b) fig. 11.1. Its form, paste and
thin walled body resembles coarse ware, with squashed or poured glazing at Budakalász-
Luppacsárda: Ottományi (2004) Taf. IV.1, 5, Taf. VI.1.
137 Grünewald (1979) 70, Tafs. 36.6 and 65.14–15, 66.2; Ottományi (2011) fig. 2.5 (with
coins dated to A.D. 355–61).
138 Bónis (1990) 35; Nádorfi (1992).
ordered decoration appears mainly on beakers, mugs, vase-form vessels

and one-handled jugs.139
The later productions were decorated with incised, wavy lines and cuts
by the late 4th–early 5th c. The latter occurs on dishes with horizontal
rims, on the shoulders of one-handled jugs, and also on pots with a biconi-
cal body.140 Rouletting is typical on three-handled cups in the earlier
period. The intended ‘Faltenbecher’ body type is rare, but is sometimes
combined with a stamped and applied mask-decoration, like on a unique
piece found at vicus Teuto/Budaörs.141 Polished lines are visible on the
body of a mug found in the Sarmatian Barbaricum.142 The colour of the
glaze of these examples does not suggest any date but it can signify a par-
ticular workshop.143 However, sometimes there is a connection between
the colour and the form.144 Its brilliance or baldness can be the result of
use.
2. Distribution and Workshops

Glazed ware occurs mainly in the Pannonian and Danubian provinces, and
in the south-eastern Alps area (Noricum, Raetia, Dacia Ripensis, Moesia).145
Outside this zone only scattered finds are known. Very similar glazed
139 Grünewald (1979) 69, Taf. 64/14–15; Arthur and Williams (1981) figs. 30.6/30–32;
Ottományi (1991) 20–21; Bónis (1991) 133–35, Abb. 16/7, 26/1–3; Szőnyi (1984) 345–50, Abb. 6.
140 It is a strong feature among the finds from Leányfalu: Ottományi (1991) 21, Taf. 10–12,
Taf. 18.21, Taf. 20, Taf. 21.33; from Visegrád-Gizellamajor: Ottományi (2012b) figs. 9.2, 7, 9.
It is typical for coarse pottery found in both places, just like in the fortlet of Tokod: Bónis
(1991) 144. From a house in Intercisa/Dunaújváros, which burned down ca. A.D. 430: Bóna
(1993) figs. 67.7–8. In Late Roman cemeteries e.g.: Zsidi (1987) fig. 5, grave no. 15, fig. 7,
grave no. 34; Vágó and Bóna (1976) 140, Taf. XVII/2–4.
141 ‘Faltenbecher’ type: On dish with horizontal rim e.g. Visegrád-Gizellamajor:
Ottományi (2012b) fig. 7.4; Brigetio/Komárom-Szőny: Miklósity Szőke (2006–2008) 163,
T.II. Coarse ware jug from Leányfalu: Ottományi (1991) Taf. 18.22. vicus Teuto/Budaörs:
Ottományi (2011) 270–73, figs. 5.1–2.
142 Csongrád-Vendelhalom: Vári (2011) fig. 5, Kat. 7.
143 Ottományi and Sosztarits (1998) 155–58, n. 63. The products of Tokod display a light
yellowish-green, or light olive green glaze; those from Leányfalu are green, those made in
Savaria/Szombathely-Fő tér are greenish-brown. But the workshop of Favianis/Mautern
(Noricum) can also be cited here, with its olive green-mid brown glazes.
144 On the Late Roman settlement of vicus Teuto/Budaörs the colour of plates with
inverted rims are yellowish-green or shiny brown: Ottományi (2011) 274. Light colours
are also typical on cups with rouletted decoration, and on three-handled vessels. Darker
colours often appear on dishes with horizontal rims. The incised and stabbed-decorated
jugs are typical of the later period and were produced with green glazing. The yellowish-
brown glaze is typically found on dishes and jugs, and dark green glaze appears mainly
on mugs and pots, in the material from the watch-tower at Budakalász-Luppacsárda, built
under Valentinian I: Ottományi (2004) 268–72.
145 Grünewald (1979) 67; Cvjetiċanin (2006) figs. 21–27 (distribution maps).
pottery was also manufactured in Krefeld-Gellep and in northern Italy, in

Carlino next to Aquileia. Several theories have been put forward in order
to understand the appearance of these vessels in this wider region, includ-
ing the movement of troops to the Rhine region and then into Italy, or a
single workman moving with the troops, etc., but none of these are con-
vincing. The products from the workshop in Carlino are likely to have a
strong resemblance to the eastern Alpine and Danubian glazed pottery,
because of its geographical position: it is just west of Aquileia.146
Glazed ware can be found on almost every Late Roman site in the Pan-
nonian provinces.147 The distribution of certain forms (like mortaria) has
been seen as defined by military movements. It is true, that these were
concentrated in military centres, but they are also found in towns next to
internal roads, and in civil settlements as well. They are rare finds in poorer
cemeteries and on rural sites. It is more likely that their distribution was
connected to the spread of Roman culture and eating habits, rather than
the presence of the troops. Several of the workshops were located next to
or inside military camps, fortlets and watchtowers, with only a few found
in towns, rural civil settlements or villas. However, many workshops have
been discovered in south Pannonian towns and cities, which are all eas-
ily accessible by river. This all suggests that the main trading routes that
helped the distribution of glazed ware were the Danube and the inland
roads. Glazed ware was also exported to the neighbouring Barbaricum, on
the other side of the Danube, where, in some cases, it had been manufac-
tured as well.148
146 Bónis (1991) 144; Liesen and Pirling (1998); Magrini and Sbarra (2005) 71–72; Magrini
and Sbarra (2009) 29, Plate 1.
147 Cvjetiċanin (2006) 177–79, 258–60, fig. 23. Pannonia Prima: 36 findspots, Valeria: 45
findspots, Pannonia Secunda: 23 findspots, Savia: 5 findspots. Thanks to the large surface
excavations of the last few decades, the list of findspots keeps growing. Examples from
Valeria: Ács-Öbölkúti-dűlő: Fűköh (2012) 166, settlement; Biatorbágy FS. 9: Ottományi
(2008b), settlement; Biatorbágy-Budapark: Maróti-Repiszky (2008), cemetery. Budaka
lász-Luppacsárda: Ottományi (2004) 268–72, watch-tower; Budaörs-Kamaraerdei-dűlő:
Ottományi (2011) and Ottományi (2012a) 258–62, vicus and cemetery; Solva/Esztergom:
Kelemen (2008) 82–84, cemetery; Páty-Malom-dűlő: Ottományi (2007) 200–202, settlement,
Ottományi (2008a) cemetery. Komló-Mecsekfalu út, Roman villa (not the same as the
Nr. 55. Komló-Mecsekjánosi Roman villa): Katona Győr (1994) 72. Visegrád-Gizellamajor:
Ottományi (2012b) fortlet; Mágocs: Gábor (1998), graves; Szakály: Gabler and Ottományi
(1990) 174, settlement. Pannonia Prima: Balatonlelle-Kenderföldek: Marton-Serlegi (2007)
143; Csorna: Szőnyi (2001) 140.
148 Friesinger and Kerchler (1981), 264–65; Tejral (1985) 118–22; Krekovič (1991) 150–51;
workshops at, for example, Wien-Leopoldau and Nitra-Parovske: Cvjetićanin (2006) 260–61.
It could have arrived at Sarmatian sites through commercial links from the workshops along
Glazed ware probably had more production centres than is archaeolog-

ically detectable. It was manufactured together with the traditional, pro-
vincial Roman coarse ware. In the later period, they are often found with
burnished ware produced in the same workshop.149 There were a series
of manufacturing centres along the limes,150 these were: Carnuntum/Bad
Deutsch-Altenburg, Castra ad Herculem/Pilismarót, Cardabiaca/Tokod,
Visegrád-Gizellamajor, Leányfalu, Aquincum/Budapest and Intercisa/
Dunaújváros.151 There are some possible workshops at: Vindobona/Vienna,
Arrabona/Győr, Ulcisia Castra/Szentendre, Budakalász-Luppacsárda, and
vicus Teuto/Budaörs.152 Workshops in the Pannonian hinterland include:
Gorsium/Tác, Savaria/Szombathely, the area of Keszthely-Fenékpuszta (?),
Komló-Mecsekfalu út Roman villa (?), Balatonalmádi-Vörösberény, and
the Roman limes, for example from Tokod to Jánosszállás in the Sarmatian Barbaricum:
Vári (2011) 105–108.
149 For a summary of the Pannonian workshops, with a detailed bibliography, see:
Bónis (1990) 29–33. Review of workshops of glazed and burnished wares: Ottományi and
Sosztarits (1998) 181–84; Horváth (2011) 605–606; Palágyi (2004) 51–56. In the neighbouring
provinces: glazed and burnished wares were also sometimes produced in the same work
shops in Noricum, see: Favianis/Mautern: Friesinger and Kerchler (1981).
150 Workshops can be reconstructed, not only on the basis of the existence of kilns
or wasters, but also based on certain unique vessel forms that are discovered, and their
quantity.
151 Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Grünewald (1979) 79; Bónis (1990) 33. Castra ad
Herculem/Pilismarót: a firing pit, firing channel and blistered glazed pottery came to the
light from the ruins of a house next to the wall of the fortlet, see: Bónis (1990) 30. Carda
biaca/Tokod: Bónis (1991): pottery kilns and wasters. Visegrád-Gizellamajor: Ottományi
(2012b) 384. The glazed wasters are unpublished. Glaze drops on coarse wares support
their production in the same workshops. Leányfalu: Ottományi (1991) 42–44: the existence
of a workshop could be suggested by the presence of wasters and unique vessel forms.
Aquincum/Budapest: Bónis (1990) 26, fig. 5 (Óbuda-Téglavető, deformed glazed jug). Inter
cisa/Dunaújváros: Bónis (1990) 33; Bónis (1991) 140, Abb. 27.2 (waster).
152 Vindobona/Vienna: Cvjetićanin (2006) 258; Chinelli (2009). Arrabona/Győr: Póczy
(1957) 75–76: local workshops believed to have existed on the basis of typological groups:
Intercisa/Dunaújváros, Savaria/Szombathely, Arrabona/Győr, Aquincum/Budapest. A work
shop producing anthropomorphic glazed ware can be argued for in the west Pannonia
region: Bónis and Gabler (1990) 182, figs. 30.7–8. Ulcisia Castra/Szentendre: Wasted, over-
fired shed of a jug from a grave, which could be a local product: Maróti and Topál (1980)
grave no. 82. Budakalász-Luppacsárda: Ottományi (2004) 271: the ratio of glazed ware is
very high (46.5%), and often types of forms that were glazed elsewhere remained undeco
rated here, producing vessels typically with splattered, poured glazing. They were, very
likely, products of a local workshop. vicus Teuto/Budaörs,Kamaraerdei-dűlő: Ottományi
(2012a) 375: coarse pottery with spotted glazing. Probably glazing was adhered during fir
ing. In another case, two vessles had stuck together during firing. They demonstrate also
that at Budaörs, glazed ware was manufactured locally in the second half of the 4th c.
A.D.
Várgesztes.153 South Pannonian workshops have been found at: Sirmium/

Sremska Mitrovica, Siscia/Sisak(?), Certissa, Taurunum, Cibalae/Vinkovci,
Mursa/Osijek and Poetovio/Ptuj (Noricum), and also at Emona.154
3. Dating
Glazed ware appeared in large quantities in Pannonia from the second
third of the 4th c. A.D., with mortaria belonging to the earliest group
of glazed products in the region. According to some scholars, it began
to be produced in the late 3rd-early 4th c. A.D.155 Among the material
from the Arrabona/Győr fortlet, E. Szőnyi dated the mortaria, and the
brown glazed beakers with horseshoe-like ornamentation, to this earlier
period.156 Glazed material appears in small quantities in the camps along
the limes in layers that date to the period of the Constantinian dynasty,
as at Ad Statuas/Ács-Vaspuszta.157 The finds from the vicus at Budaörs are
of a similar date; the earliest glazed dish found there can be dated, with
coins, to the period A.D. 321–37158 Their early appearance in Pannonian
153 Gorsium/Tác: Bónis (1990) 29 with further bibliography. In the layer of the palatium,
wasters were found; in the house No. XIII of the artisan quarter, a kiln and residues of
glaze slag were discovered. Savaria/Szombathely: Bónis (1990) 29. In the Járdányi Paulovics
Romkert, a Late Roman pottery kiln and some glazed ware were found in 1974. Its precise
date is uncertain. The other kiln was excavated at Szombathely-Fő tér is described in:
Ottományi and Sosztarits (1998) 155–58. The workshop can be dated to the second third
of the 5th c. Glazed, burnished and coarse ware production in the same workshop found
in Szombathely-Szent István tér: Bíró (2004) 87–88 (wasters from coarse ware and glazed
jugs, dated to the first half of the 4th c.). Keszthely-Fenékpuszta (?): Horváth (2011) 606.
Komló-Mecsekfalu út Roman villa (?): Bricks were found with glazing on one side (with
coins dated to A.D. 351–75.), in addition to that, more than the half of pottery finds were
glazed, and were often decorated with unique motifs, with glazing on both sides: Horváth
(2011) 606; Katona Győr (1994) 72 (lead smelting furnace), 77 (glazed vessels and bricks).
Balatonalmádi-Vörösberény: Palágyi (2004) 51–56: the vessels from the last firing were left
in the 4th c. kiln. They contained glazed, burnished, polished and coarse wares. Várgesztes:
Rescue excavation conducted by Julianna Cseh (pers. comm.) in 2002 (pottery kiln with
glazed and burnished ware vessels). It could have supplied the inner fortress at Környe
with pottery.
154 Bónis (1990) 30–32; Vikić-Belančić (1970) 30–31. In Siscia/Sisak and Cibalae/Vinkovci
workshops are only a possibility: Cvjetićanin (2006) 259–60. Neviodunum is listed among
the workshops in Bónis’ paper; Cvjetićanin does not support this, and, according to the
opinion of Vikić-Belančić, this could be an Early Roman workshop.
155 E.g. Poetovio/Ptuj: Cvjetićanin (2006) 23; Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg:
Gassner (2009) 52–53.
156 Szőnyi (1984), 346, Abb. 4.
157 Ottományi (1989) 538: The 7.5% of glazed pottery can be dated to the Constantinian
era, ca. 30% to the middle-second half of the 4th c., and another 30% to the Valentinian
period. Only 3% of the glazed finds belong to the beginning of the 5th c.
158 Ottományi (2011) 276.
cemeteries is supported by coin evidence as well.159 Glazed pottery appears

in graves from around the second third of the 4th c., according the termi-
nus post quem provided by the coins, becoming a common feature from
the time of Constantius II. Because of this, on most sites this pottery is
generally dated to the second half of the 4th c., as at Carnuntum/Bad-
Deutsch Altenburg.160
The peak of the production of this ware may have been the second
half of the 4th c., as it is still common in layers that date to the time of
Valentinian. This type of pottery was still in use in the first third of the
5th c., as it often found in the latest destruction layers of inner forts and
settlements in the region.161 Finds from cemeteries can certainly be dated
to before A.D. 375, thanks to the presence of Valentinian coins in the same
graves,162 but the continued use of glazed pottery after this is likely, as,
although coin evidence disappears after that time, this does not mean
the cemetery was abandoned. Also, glazed vessels often appear together
with grave goods that can be dated to around the end of the 4th c., such
as burnished ware, moss green glass vessels, bone combs, or crossbow
brooches decorated with pelta motifs. This is seen in only a few cemeter-
ies, however.163
The production of glazed ware ended before burnished ware first
appeared. It was more typical in the western parts of the province.164 It
159 Nádorfi (1992) 45–51.

160 Grünewald (1979) 72–74; Friesinger and Kerchler (1981) 264–65.
161 Occurs together with burnished ware in destruction layers of the Camps and fort-
lets along the Danubian limes, e.g.: Ulcisia Castra/Szentendre: Ottományi (2006); Visegrád-
Gizellamajor: Ottományi (2012b); Ad Statuas/Ács-Vaspuszta: Ottományi (1989) 537; Intercisa/
Dunaújváros: Bóna (1993) 237, fig. 67; Matrica/Százhalombatta: Kovács (1999) 65–67, figs.
12–15; Campona/Nagytétény: Kocsis (2000) 93; Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Grü
newald (1979). Inner fortresses, eg.: Keszthely-Fenékpuszta: Horváth (2011) 605. Vici, e.g.
Budaörs: Ottományi (2011) 276. Rural settlements, e.g. Biatorbágy: Ottományi (2008b)
167–68.
162 Nádorfi (1992) 52.
163 Csákvár: Salamon and Barkóczi (1970); at the south-eastern cemetery of Intercisa/
Dunaújváros, grave no. 157: Vágó and Bóna (1976) 12; Intercisa/Dunaújváros: Grave no. 35:
Póczy (1957) 72, Abb. 38.16. Cardabiaca/Tokod: Lányi (1981a) grave no. 48; Solva/Eszter
gom, Bánomi-dűlő, grave no. 149: Kelemen (2008) 60, 140; Somogyszíl, grave no. 148: Burger
(1979) 2, 17.
164 Glazed and burnished ware came to light from the 1a-1b phases, dated to after the
abandonment of the camp of Arrabona/Győr. Only one sherd of glazed ware is known
from its 2nd phase, together with larger quantities of burnished and hand-made vessels:
Tomka (2004) 390–91, Taf. 1–5. In the layers dated to after the 380s in Scarbantia/Sopron,
glazed and burnished wares occured together in the earlier phase, but in the later one the
burnished ware can be found together with the black, shiny Germanic type pottery: Bónis
(1991) 143–44. Glazed and burnished sherds were found together in the second occupa
continued to be made in the eastern half of Pannonia until the 430s, or the
mid 5th c., though in small quantities.165 When glazed ware production in
the Tokod fortlet ended is uncertain.166
4. Ethnicity
The use of glazed ware is clearly a feature of Romanisation. Consumers
of this imitation of the expensive imported vessels, could well have been
soldiers and the richer members of the middle classes.167 African Red Slip
ware also often appears with glazed ware, indicating that the same social
class was able to buy both.168 Glazed pottery is usually found in the richer
graves of Late Roman cemeteries in Pannonia, often together with coins
and crossbow brooches. The question is: who is using this ware by the
time it begins to be found alongside burnished material, and in layers that
date from after the Roman period? Could it belong to ‘barbarian’ troops
or non-Romanised peoples?
Polished Ware
The polishing technique became fashionable again, after the Early Roman
period, at the beginning of the 4th c. A.D. The surface can be totally pol-
ished or burnished with horizontal and vertical lines. This decoration
appeared on traditional Roman vessel types like dishes with everted rims,
dishes with a conical body, or one-handled jugs and mugs.169 Their dat-
ing value within this century is low; only by the paste of the pottery and
tion level (turn of the 4th–5th c.) and under the third level debris (first half of the 5th c.)
of the northern fortress gate of Keszthely-Fenékpuszta. Among the material within this
third level, only burnshed ware came to light: Müller (1979) 138–45, Taf. VI. 5–6, fig. 18. In
the camp of Intercisa/Dunaújváros, in an adobe house built next to the wall, and burned
down around A.D. 430, glazed and burnished wares were found together: Bóna (1993) 236.
The situation was similar in Visegrád-Gizellamajor, where these two wares were found
together in the last destruction level: Ottományi (2012b) 377.
165 Savaria/Szombathely-Fő tér, pottery workshop: Ottományi and Sosztarits (1998) 158
(coarse ware: 72%, burnished ware: 23%, glazed ware: 5%).
166 The end date of the Late Roman cemetery was the second half of the 5th c., sug
gested by V. Lányi. Several glazed vessels were found (Lányi 1981a). É. Bónis dated it to the
beginning of the 5th c., as, according to her, the Early Christian motif, which supported
the dating of V. Lányi, had appeared on earlier vessels. Thus, the chronology is uncertain:
Bónis (1991) 145.
167 Ottományi (2011) 277.
168 Campona/Nagytétény: Kocsis (2000) 93; Visegrád-Gizellamajor, fortlet: Ottományi
(2012b) 385; vicus Teuto/Budaörs: Ottományi (2011) 277.
169 Conical body: Friesinger and Kerchler (1981) Abb. 57. forms V–VI.
the quality of the polishing, can any groups be discerned. This surface
treatment was also used on hard-fired pottery, similar to coarse ware.170
Polished ware in still use in the early 5th c.171 A separate group in the
4th c., with shiny, dark polishing, consists of jugs with high handles and
mugs; some of which made on a slow-wheel.172 This shiny, black, polished
surface is typical of the latest group of this ware, dated to the turn of the
5th c., and is a technique that also appeared on the new vessel types of
this period, like bowls with biconical bodies, jugs with collared rims and
jugs with ribbed surfaces.173 A larger, two-handled, variant of the jug with
a collared rim was used as a storage jar.174 The burnishing technique was
often applied to these new forms as well.
Burnished Ware
Any continuity between the burnishing seen on Early Roman vessels
in the 1st c. A.D., and that seen on Late Roman types cannot be proven
in Pannonia. However, both the forms and motifs that were popular in
the late antique period, were also present in Late La Tène pottery. This
decorative treatment had been used continuously in the neighbouring
Barbaricum, where Roman influence had not diminished the La Tène tra-
ditions.175 Its reappearance in Late Roman Pannonia can be explained by
the settlement of peoples from the Barbaricum in the province, and by
the arrival of newcomers from the Steppe region (e.g. the Carpi).176 The
distribution of burnished ware is too wide to be explained by the pres-
ence of only one newly settled group.177 Different peoples are likely to
have arrived for nearly a century, in more than one wave, allowing this
ware to steadily take over from Roman pottery types. The provincial
170 Visegrád-Gizellamajor (wasters were found): Ottományi (2012b) fig. 5.4.

171 Ottományi (2009) Abb. 3.11; Ottományi (2012a) fig. 275 (in a burial, dug into a Roman
pit).
172 Tóth (1994) 134–36, Abb. 8; Horváth (2011) 639–41.
173 Ottományi (2009) Abb. 4.5.
174 Ottományi (2009) Abb. 5.1–2; Ottományi (2012b) fig. 13.1.
175 Bichir (1976) 77–78. Among the Sarmatians, they could be a sign of Dacian influence
or a rediscovery of La Tène traditions: Vaday (1989) 33–35.
176 ‘Barbarian’ settlement: Tóth (2005) 375–82. Sarmatians in Lussonium/Dunakömlőd:
Kiss (1994) 253; Favianis/Mautern (in Noricum): Groh and Sedlmayer (2002) 313–21. Steppe
peoples: eastern Gothic-Hun-Alanic foederati, the Gothic tribe of the Marosszentanna-
Csernyahov Culture, etc. Summary: Ottományi (1989) 530–36; Vagalinski (1997) 38–40;
Horváth (2011) 625–28.
177 Ottományi (1982) 88–119, Taf. XXVI–XXVIII. The number of findspots has became
more numerous in the last few years, but no recent summary is available.
Pannonian population seems to have been influenced by the new arrivals,

with local ‘Roman workshops’ starting to produce these burnished vessels,
but retaining the traditional Roman forms. This new decoration became a
general trend by the late 4th and early 5th c. in Pannonia, and in the entire
Carpathian Basin.
Sub-groups can be identified according to form (traditional, Roman or
new),178 arrangement of motif (individually or in frames), surface treat-
ment (matt grey or gloss black) and quality of the paste (well-prepared,
coarse, hard-fired, roughly finished).179 This grouping allows for a degree of
chronological separation as well, but the borders between the sub-groups
are not very sharp. Vessels produced with different techniques may be
present in the same contexts.
1. Group 1: Middle to Second Half/End of the 4th c.

Forms:
Traditional Roman types with a new surface treatment: bowls with
inverted rim, bowls with a conical body, pear-shaped jugs with everted
rim, one-handled mugs, and sometimes pots and storage jars with wavy
line decoration on their neck.180
Motifs:
Horizontal stripes (particularly on plates), vertical lines, stripes (on the
neck/shoulder of jugs and mugs), wavy lines and zigzags, sometimes tri-
angles and reticules. Motifs cover the upper third of the vessels, without
a frame.
Dating:
Burnished ware appears sporadically in the 340s in the first phase of the
fort at Heténypuszta, and in the destruction layer, dated with coins to 355,
178 For basic types of the Pannonian production see: Ottományi (1982); Bónis and
Gabler (1990) 182, fig. 32.
179 Three groups: Ottományi (1991) 36–37; Ottományi (2009) 430–34. Two groups: Tóth
(2005) 380–82.
180 Bowl with inverted rim and conical body: Groh and Sedlmayer (2002) Taf. 28/433,
435, 459: Favianis/Mautern camp fifth phase (dated A.D. 280–360). Elsewhere, datable to
the end of the 4th c.: Grünewald (1979) Taf. 72–73. Pear-shaped jugs with everted rims
and one-handled mugs: Ottományi (1982) VII. 7–8; Friesinger and Kerchler (1981) 256–28,
Abb. 57, forms II–III (dated A.D. 350–450). Pots and storage jars with wavy line decoration:
Ottományi (2009) Abb. 6.4.
at Ács-Vaspuszta.181 It appears in small quantities in the fifth phase at the

fort at Favianis/Mautern, in Noricum (dated A.D. 280–360), as well, and
became abundant by the end of the 4th c.182 Burnished ware frequently
appears with glazed ware.183 Fragments were also found in the cemeter-
ies near Keszthely, at Nagykanizsa, Intercisa/Dunaújváros and Aquincum/
Budapest etc., all in layers that date to the second third of the 4th c. A.D.,
by coins.184 These coins only give us a terminus post quem though; these
vessels could have got into the graves at any time in the mid-late 4th c.
Coins of Valentinian appear in contexts containing evidence for burnished
ware production; such coins could be in use up to the end of the 4th c.
Findspots and Ethnicity:

Fragments belonging to this pottery group mainly came from Late Roman
cemeteries and fortresses. They spread and became fashionable due to
foreign influences, but are found mixed together with objects produced
by the local population. Settled ‘barbarian’ populations can only be iden-
tified, perhaps, in the south-eastern part of Valeria; elsewhere they can
only be detected sporadically.185 Workshops for burnished ware existed
at: Balatonalmádi-Vörösberény and Balatonaliga (?).186
181 Heténypuszta: Tóth (2005) 378. Ács-Vaspuszta: Ottományi (1989) 514, 518, 525–30,
figs. 120/1–a–b–c, 125/28, 134/6, 135/4a etc.
182 Groh and Sedlmayer (2002) 313–21, cf. Gassner et al. (1993) 104. In the first phase
of the ditch of the camp of Favianis/Mautern (dated to the mid 4th c.), glazed ware was
found, but no burnished ware came to light. In the next layer above this, dated to the late
4th–early 5th c., both wares were present. When it ceased is debabatable.
183 Horváth (2011) 628; Arrabona/Győr, Scarbantia/Sopron, Visegrád-Gizellamajor:
Bónis (1991) 143–44; Tomka (2004) Taf. 1–8.
184 Ottományi (1982) 155–56.
185 Settled population: E. Tóth connected its presence to the settlement of the Carpi
in the southern part of Valeria at the end of the 3rd c. A.D.: Tóth (2005). But the appear
ance of this surface treatment in the A.D. 330/40s cannot be interpreted as caused by
this historical event, as it happened 30–40 years earlier. Nor could this be the case in the
northern part of Valeria, along the Danubian limes, see: Ottományi (2009) 430–31. Sporadic
population: E.g. Sarmatian influence can be detected among the material from Intercisa/
Dunaújváros, Lussonium/Dunakömlőd, from the camp of Matrica/Százhalombatta and
from the Late Roman cemeteries around Keszthely: Sági (1960) 79, 188, 206; Kiss (1994)
253; Kovács (2000) fig. 78/1.
186 Balatonalmádi-Vörösberény: Palágyi (2004) 55–56: last third of the 4th c. (polished
and burnished pottery, vessels decorated with horizontal and vertical lines). Balatonaliga
(?): Tóth (2005) 378, connected it to the settlement of the Carpi. However, the workshop
could also date to the late 4th–early 5th c., and a parallel can be found with the finds of
the Csernyahov-Culture and the pottery kiln at Ternitz: Bónis (1994) 175.
2. Group 2: Last Quarter of the 4th c. to the Beginning of the 5th c. A.D.187
(fig. 3)
Forms:
The forms of this later group can be seen in the earlier, traditional ves-
sel types (dishes, jugs and mugs), as well as being applied on new forms.
Dishes with inverted, thickened rims and dishes with a conical lower part,
with burnished horizontal lines and sometimes with a reticule motif on
the inner surface, are traditional types.188 Burnished decoration is found
on the neck of so-called S-profile bowls (wave or reticule motifs), also.189
Jugs with a funnel rim appear, with burnished decoration, imitating the
painted and glazed forms.190 Pots with a biconical body are another com-
mon form of this later group, as well as large storage vessels decorated
with stripes.191 Bowls with a biconical body, and jugs with a collared rim
are also typical forms, which originated from the East.192 The latter appear
frequently in two-handled, large-scale versions, too (fig. 4).193
Motifs:194
An increasing amount of reticule and pinewood ornaments can be seen in
this later group, and Murga-type motifs (vertical wavy lines or zigzags sep-
arated by vertical bands) appear. Decoration is mostly ordered, in lines, or
framed by ribs and incised lines.
187 E. Tóth dated the second group to after the end of Roman rule, A.D. 430–50, but the
third group was not separated in his paper: Tóth (2005) 382–85.
188 Grünewald (1979) Taf. 71, 74.9; Groh and Sedlmayer (2002) the sixth phase of the
camp at Favianis/Mautern; Friesinger and Kerchler (1981) Abb. 2., Abb. 57, forms II–III
and V–VI.
189 Ottományi (2008b) 156–57, fig. 14.5; Horváth (2011) 630–31, Abb. 18.
190 Decorated with vertical stripes and reticule motif: Ottományi (1982) 9, Table XXIX;
Ottományi (1991) 29–30; Ottományi (2012b) fig. 12.4, 6.
191 Grünewald (1979) 77, Taf. 80–81; Ottományi (1982) Taf. XI.1–5; Ottományi (1996)
104–105, Abb. 11–15; Ottományi (2009) Abb. 6.1–2.
192 Bowls with biconical body: Ottományi (1982) 62, Taf. XV.1; Ottományi (2008b) 157–60
(with detailed bibliography); Friesinger and Kerchler (1981), Abb. 43/5; Gudkova (1999) 149
(Csernyahov Culture); Horváth (2011) 631–33. Jugs with collared rim: This is the so-called
Murga-type jug: Ottományi (1991) 28–29, Taf. 15–17 (Leányfalu); Ottományi (1999b) 347–48,
e.g. VII/4 (Dunabogdány); Ottományi (2012b) 382, fig. 12. 7–8 (Visegrád-Gizellamajor); Tejral
(1985) Abb. 16/3, 8, Abb. 15/1a, 2, 14/1, 2, 5. etc. Starting with D2 phase (A.D. 400/10).
193 At vicus Teuto/Budaörs: Ottományi (2009) Abb. 5.3. and 8; Visegrád-Gizellamajor:
Ottományi (2012b) fig. 13.2; Vienna-Aspern: Friesinger and Kerchler (1981) Abb. 26.
194 The motifs of the first group were still in use on the vessels belonging to the second
group. Precise dating is not possible, but the change in the proportion of ornaments, and
the reduction of vertical and wavy lines without framing, can support a chronology.
Fig. 3. Burnished Ware/ Group nos. 2–3. Intercisa/Dunaújváros (1) (after

Ottományi (1987)); Ulcisia Castra/Szentendre (2) (after Ottományi (2006));
Pilismarót-Malompatak (5) (after Ottományi (1996)); Leányfalu (3–4, 7, 11) (after
Ottományi (1991)); Savaria/Szombathely, Fő tér (6) (after Ottományi and Sosz-
tarits (1998)); Mosonszentmiklós–Jánosházapuszta (8) (after Ottományi (1987));
Visegrád-Gizellamajor (9–10) (after Ottományi (2012)).
Fig. 4. Burnished Ware/storage vessels. Budaörs (1–2, 6) (after Ottományi (2009));

Ulcisia Castra/Szentendre (3) (after Ottományi (2006)); Visegrád-Gizellamajor (4)
(after Ottományi (2012)); Pilismarót-Malompatak (5) (after Soproni (1985)).
Paste:
The great majority of products are still well-prepared, but vessels with
rough surfaces, similar to grey coarse ware, had already begun to appear
by the end of this period (the early 5th c.). Examples of this are found at
Visegrád-Gizellamajor and Leányfalu.195
Workshops:
These have been found at Pilismarót-Malompatak, Leányfalu, and
Balatonaliga.196 There is some degree of uncertainty, but local produc-
tion can be said to come from Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg(?),
Savaria/Szombathely-Kőszegi utca, Visegrád-Gizellamajor, and Keszthely-
Fenékpuszta.197 Local production can also be argued to have taken place
on sites (towns, cities, fortlets, inner forts) where hundreds of fragments
are found, some of which are decorated with unique motifs, e.g. those
found at Gorsium/Tác, Intercisa/Dunaújváros, and Scarbantia/Sopron.198
An analogy from Favianis/Mautern (in Noricum) might be of interest here,
where very similar products were manufactured.199 In the neighbouring
Barbaricum, for example in Vienna-Leopoldau, Nitra-Parovska, Velké-
Nemcice, Sándorfalva-Eperjes, and Crvenka bei Vrsac, local workshops
were also detected.200
Findspots and Ethnicity:

This later group of burnished wares are usually found in the destruction
layers of Late Roman forts and watch-towers, and also in graves, where we
195 Ottományi (1991) 34; Ottományi (2012b) 383.

196 Pilismarót-Malompatak: Soproni (1985) Taf. 43–50; Ottományi (1996). Leányfalu:
Ottományi (1991) 43: no kiln was found, but the unique motifs suggest a local workshop
here. Balatonaliga: Bónis (1994) 14, fig. 6 (very deep, incised-like burnishing), dated to the
late 4th–early 5th c. Tóth (2005) connected it to the Carpi.
197 Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg(?): Grünewald (1979) 79. Savaria/Szombathely-
Kőszegi utca: Ottományi and Sosztarits (1998) 178: only wasters of coarse ware were found,
but fragments of burnished ware with the same paste were found around the kiln. Vise
grád-Gizellamajor: Ottományi (2012b) 384: wasters of coarse ware, fused glazed ware frag
ments and wasters of polished pottery were found. Wasters of burnished ware were not
found, so to understand its production we can only refer to the paste, that is similar to that
found on the course ware, and their unique decorations. Keszthely-Fenékpuszta: Horváth
(2011) 606: there is no archaeological evidence for pottery production, but a workshop next
to the fort can be argued for.
198 Ottományi (1982) 28–29.
199 Friesinger and Kerchler (1981) Abb. 2–14.
200 Friesinger (1984) 127–54; summarising with further bibliography: Ottományi and
Sosztarits (1998) 182–83.
find Roman and new types of grave goods, such as bone combs, earrings
with polyhedron ornaments and moss green glass bottles.201 This ware
was used by military troops with ‘barbarian’ elements, civil settlers who
lived next to forts, and the mixed population of rural settlements and vici,
at the end of the Late Roman period in Pannonia.202 This new pottery
tradition was established by the now settled ‘barbarian’ peoples, like the
eastern Gothic, Hunnic and Alan foederati communities, as well as by
the Vandals, who passed through Pannonia, and the Swebi, along with the
remaining, local, Romanised population.
3. Group 3: First Half/Second Third of the 5th c. A.D.203

Form:
Far fewer forms for this group are known to exist. The bowl with a biconi-
cal body was usually decorated with a reticule, or Murga-type motifs, and
jugs with collared rims are almost the only form of jug found in these later
contexts.204 The jug with vertical ribs on its body was already a frequent
product of the Roman workshops in earlier periods, but a shiny, black-
glazed variant became moretypical in the first half of the 5th c.205 How-
ever, it is not always possible to draw a sharp line between the dating of
these two groups.
201 Late Roman forts and watch-towers: Favianis/Mautern, sixth phase (A.D. 370–450):
Groh and Sedlmayer (2002). Visegrád-Gizellamajor, top layer: Ottományi (2012b) 337.
Graves: Ottományi (1982) 155–62; Salamon and Barkóczi (1978).
202 Bóna (1993) 236–37, fig. 67: a house within the fortress, next to the wall, but built in
a different orientation, and demolished in A.D. 430. Mixed Late Roman products of glazed,
burnished and coarse wares.
203 Its dating is similar to the second group of E. Tóth, but he lists the vessel types and
decorative motifs of our second group, as well. The burnished ware of the late 5th c. will
not be discussed in this paper, as it goes beyond the Roman period.
204 Reticule decoration: Ottományi and Sosztarits (1998) 161–63, Taf. IV. 6 and V.1–5,
Karte I (distribution map); Friesinger and Kerchler (1981) Abb. 34–44 (Ternitz: end of the
5th c.); Tejral (1985) 141 Abb. 24. Jugs with collared rims: typical of the Hun Period, in the
graves of the mid 5th c.: Bóna (1993) figs. 23, 42, 69 and 110.
205 Ottományi (1982) 48, 51–52, Taf VIII.11, IX.15b, XXV/10; Horváth (2011) 635–38 (last
third of the 4th c.). In graves of the Hun Period: Regöly, Lébény, Pölöske. These graves
were associated with both German and Alanic tribes, but some of the jugs can be con
sidered Roman productions due to their quality: Bóna (1993) 243, 17, fig. 20 (with further
bibliography).
Decoration:
Reticules, Murga-type zigzags and stripes, and firs with descended twigs
are common motifs found on this group of burnished ware.206 The bur-
nishing was mixed with incised or picked decoration, as well.207 Glossy
black polishing and burnishing appeared, that J. Tejral called Murga-type
pottery in the Moravian area, and dated it to the middle of the 5th c.208
Workshops:
Workshops for this group have been found at Savaria/Szombathely-Fő tér.
This kiln was dug into an already abandoned Roman building, and pro-
duced both glazed and burnished wares. The forms and decorations of the
vessels, the statigraphical contexts, and a 5th c. gold coin, also confirm
that an artisan quarter was still functioning, even in this period, in the
southern part of Savaria/Szombathely.209 There has been argued to have
been an active workshop of this date in Mursella as well.210 The quality of
some vessels is a bit coarser than average, and this may be due to the fact
that these vessels were manufactured by ‘barbarian’ craftsmen, who had
settled in the province.211 Workshops of this period are also known from
the neighbouring Barbaricum.212
Findspot and Ethnicity:

Findspots include: kilns dug into the Roman layers (e.g. Savaria/Szom-
bathely); houses (at Intercisa/Dunaújváros, Scarbantia/Sopron, Arrabona/
Győr); pits (at Ad Statuas/Ács-Vaspuszta, Visegrád-Sibrik domb, Matrica/
Százhalombatta, vicus Teuto/Budaörs) and from graves, with grave goods
206 Bóna (1993) 262, fig. 24. (Dunaszekcső), fig. 72. (Lengyeltóti), fig. 73 (Füzesgyarmat),
fig. 114 (Bakodpuszta).
207 E.g. at Ad Statuas/Ács-Vaspuszta, from a 5th c. storage pit: Ottományi (1989) fig.
122.19. Leányfalu: Ottományi (1991) Taf. 3.19. vicus Teuto/Budaörs: Ottományi (2009) Abb.
6.4 etc.
208 Glossy black polishing and burnishing: Ottományi (2008b) 164, fig. 15; Intercisa/
Dunaújváros: Bóna (1993), 236–37, fig. 67/11. Dating: Tejral (1985) 122, Abb. 12, 15, 21 (it had
been produced in Mušov for example).
209 Ottományi and Sosztarits (1998) Taf. IV.6–8 (burnished vessels with dotted
glazing).
210 Tomka (2001) 166, fig. 5: considers the vessel from the grave at Kisárpás, from the
Hunnic period, as a local production of the Mursella workshop.
211 Bóna (1993) 244, fig. 23: the jug from Győr was made by a Roman artisan, while the
other jug from Dör was made by a ‘barbarian’; fig. 69: the ‘barbarian’ variant of a Murga-
type jug.
212 E.g. Peigarten (also produces coarse ware): Kern (2000) Taf. 3/1; Mušov: Tejral
(1985).
dated to the Hunnic Period.213 The manufacturers and users of this later
group were the provincial population and the newly arrived eastern eth-
nic groups, who came into the region after Roman administration had
ended.214
Coarse Ware
This product was used for daily cooking and the serving of food. It was
present on most sites.
1. Forms215
These are similar to the types seen in glazed or burnished wares. The
diversity of the forms is smaller, however, compared with the earlier
imperial period (fig. 5), but consist of: dishes with inverted rims (the rim
becomes sharply undercut towards the end of the 4th c.); bowls with coni-
cal bases; one-handled jugs with narrow necks and variable rims; jugs with
trefoil rims; mugs with ribbon-shaped rims, with or without handles; and
small cups with everted rims and tight, flat bases.216 Other forms include:
pots with everted rims; storage jars; and lids with straight or undercut
rims. Some new forms were added to the traditional, former Roman, types
(fig. 6) at the end of the 4th c., such as bowls with an S-profile, bowls
with a biconical body, jugs with a funnel-shaped, collared rim, and the
so-called Tokod/Leányfalu-type mugs and pots.217
These pots, fired in a reduced environment, were mostly grey, and
almost totally displaced the oxidised, light yellow-brick red variant of the
‘High Empire’. At the end of the 4th c., a whitish-yellow, thin-walled ver-
sion appeared.218 Its paste is either well-prepared, micaceous or granular,
with small grits. The quality of the material increasingly deteriorates, into
213 Kilns, houses and pits: Gömöri (2001); Blay (2012); Tomka (2004) 390–91; Soproni
(1985) 44; Kovács (1999) 65–67; Ottományi (2009) 435–36. Graves: Bóna (1993).
214 Tóth (2005) 385–86: connected this late production to the Sarmatian tribes arriving
into Valeria from the Pannonian Plain. In the western part of Pannonia this type is not a
sign of any ethnic identity, as it was used both by the provincial Roman population and
by the newly arrived peoples.
215 A summary of the forms is still not published, but see: Ottományi (1987). Only
certain material from major sites was published. For finds from settlements, see: Póczy
(1957) 80–87; Grünewald (1979); Ottományi (1989) 497–523; Ottományi (1999) Tab. VIII–
XII. Tables of the material from cemeteries: Lányi (1972) Abb. 37–44 south Pannonian:
Brukner (1981).
216 Tóth (1994) figs. 6–8.
217 Lányi (1981b) Abb. 1–3, 8–15; Ottományi (1991) 7–14; Horváth (2011) 614–25.
218 Ottományi (2012b) 378–80, fig. 6.
Fig. 5. Traditional Roman Grey Coarse Ware. Budaörs (1–3, 8–9, 12–13) (after
Ottományi (2012a)); Páty (4–7, 10–11) (Ottományi (unpublished)).
Fig. 6. New types of Roman Grey Coarse Ware from the end of the 4th c. A.D.
Páty (1) (after Ottományi (2007)); Budaörs (2) (after Ottományi (2012a)); Tokod
(4–5, 8) (after Lányi (1981)); Visegrád-Gizellamajor (3) (after Ottományi (2012));
Budakalász (6) (after Ottományi (2004)); Leányfalu (7, 9–11) (after Ottományi
(1991)).
a rough, gravelly variant, toward the end of 4th c. The latest group, that
dates to the late 4th–early 5th c., is well-fired, thin-walled, and made of a
granular paste.219 This is typical of the pottery production of the Danubian
provinces in Late Antiquity.220 Such quality even appears in the Barbari-
cum, where local workshops manufactured it as well.221
2. Decoration
Pannonian coarse ware is generally undecorated. Sometimes a line on
the shoulder, or on the body, articulates the surface of the vessel. More
rarely, combed decoration appears on the shoulder of pots and storage
jars. Wheel marks are typically found on the body of mugs and pots, and
sometimes on dishes with an S-profile, produced at the end of the 4th c.
Cut and incised wavy-line decoration also appeared on coarse ware in this
late period. It is likely that potters tried to imitate fine pottery from the
available, local material.222
3. Workshops
The same local workshops that manufactured glazed and burnished wares,
also made this ware. The smaller workshops often produced only coarse,
kitchen ware, though. Workshops connected to military supply, in Tokod,
Pilismarót-Malompatak, Leányfalu and Visegrád-Gizellamajor, along the
Danubian limes, produced variable forms of coarse ware in the late 4th–
early 5th c.223 Workshops situated in the hinterland of the province (kilns
in rural settlements and villae) manufactured only a few, basic types, for
example at: Balatonalmádi-Vörösberény, Balatonaliga, Bátaszék, Sávoly-
219 Lányi (1981b) 73–87; Ottományi (1996) 78–94.

220 So-called ‘Horreumkeramik’ has a granular paste and was well-fired. Some forms of
pot, and their incised wavy-line decoration, are similar to the products from the Pannonian
provinces, but is distinguishable by the stamps on the base and the combed decoration:
Gattringer and Grünewald (1981); Rodriquez (1997): Passau, Traismauer, Klosterneuburg.
221 Kulcsár and Mérai (2011): workshop at Üllő. For workshops in Moravian territory,
see: Tejral (1985) (Jiřikovice, Kyjov etc.).
222 Tokod: Lányi (1981b) Abb. 3–7, 11–13. Leányfalu: Ottományi (1991) Types 15.2, 17, 16,
18, 22 (jug with ‘Faltenbecher’ technique), 23 (mugs). Intercisa/Dunaújváros: Bóna (1993)
67, figs. 1–6, 9. According to Tejral, the incised wavy-line decoration, that appeared on
Roman vessel types, reflects a foreign, Germanic taste: Tejral (1985) 140, Abb. 19/7, 7/6
(Jiřikovice, Velké Nemčice).
223 Kiln at Cardabiaca/Tokod: Lányi (1981b); kiln at Pilismarót-Malompatak: Soproni
(1985) Abb. 6–16; Ottományi (1996); wasters at Leányfalu: Ottományi (1991) 42–43, Taf. IV.1;
waster at Visegrád-Gizellamajor: Ottományi (2012b) figs. 5.3–4. Similar dishes also manu
factured in Favianis/Mautern (Noricum) in this period: Friesinger and Kerchler (1981) Abb.
8.13.
Kerekeskút, and Csorna.224 Workshops of this ware are rarely found in

larger towns, cities and forts, but more may have existed.225 Evidence for
coarse ware production in the mid 5th c. is only found at a few sites.226
Hand-Made Pottery
As a result of the deterioration of the technical conditions, and the opera-

tion of many small local workshops at the same time, the quantity of slow
wheel-made and hand-made pottery increased in the second half of the
4th c. This indigenous technique was constantly used, although mainly
on rural sites, throughout the Roman Period in Pannonia, but was over-
shadowed by uniform Roman mass production from the middle of the
2nd c. A.D. Slow wheel-made and hand-made products increased after the
breakdown of the Roman pottery industry in the second half of the 4th c.
The local forms—dishes and plates with inverted rims, small cups with
conical bodies and pots and mugs with everted rims—were mixed with
new barbarian variants and decoration, as we see on Suebic pots, and on
vessels with oblique ribbing, or with incised and cut decoration (fig. 7).227
Such pottery was produced from rough, gravel paste, and was also made
with a polished surface. It was very likely to have been manufactured
locally, but it is rarely found with kilns.228 The increase in hand-made
pottery reflects the changing taste and ‘barbarisation’ of the population
along the Danubian limes, at the end of the 4th c.
224 Balatonalmádi: Palágyi (2004) 51–56, fig. 16 (mugs); Balatonaliga: Bónis (1994) pots;
Bátaszék-Kövesdpuszta: Roosner (1977); Sávoly: Nagy and Szabó (2012) 309 (situated in
Pannonia Prima, 10 km from Keszthely-Fenékpuszta); Csorna: Szőnyi (2001) 140: coarse
ware from the kiln, glazed pottery around the site. In western Hungary, in County Zala,
two Late Roman pottery kilns were excavated during the construction of the M7 motor
way at Letenye-Korongi tábla and Rigyác-Csikény-dűlő (unpublished). For the preliminary
report, see: Horváth and Frankovics (2009) 28, 42–43. Findspots with kilns along the Drava
river: Virovitica: Jelinčić (2011); Bilje: Horváth (1999) 226.
225 Savaria/Szombathely-Kőszegi u. (wasters and kiln): Ottományi and Sosztarits (1998)
175–79, Taf. VIII; Savaria/Szombathely-Szent István tér: Bíró (2004) 87–88 (waster); Ciba
lae/Vinkovci: Bónis (1990) 33 (kiln); Emona, Sirmium/Sremska Mitrovica: Vikič-Belančič
(1970) 30–38; Carnuntum/Bad Deutsch-Altenburg: Grünewald (1979) 79 assumes, on the
basis that similar forms were produced in glazed, burnished and coarse wares, that were
manufactured in the same workshop.
226 Ottományi and Sosztarits (1998) 147–55, Taf. I–IV. In the neighbouring Barbaricum,
e.g. at Jiříkovice, similar dishes were manufactured: Tejral (1985) 116.
227 E.g. Leányfalu, Visegrád-Sibrik domb, Nógrádverőce: Ottományi (1991) 51, Taf. 5a.,
35; Soproni (1985) 46, Taf. 13; Tomka (1986) 480: Suebic pottery, for example from Győr,
Csorna and Csót.
228 Ságvár-Ali-rét: Tóth (2005) 371: one-handled mug, a so-called ‘Dacian’ type, from the
kiln, together with 4th c. pottery.
Fig. 7. Hand-made and slow wheel-made pottery. Keszthely-Fenékpuszta (1, 7)

(after Ottományi (1987)); Visegrád-Gizellamajor (2, 4, 8) (after Ottományi (2012));
Cirpi/Dunabogdány (3) (after Ottományi (1999)); Ságvár (5) (unpublished);
Budaörs (6, 9) (after Ottományi (2012a)); Leányfalu (10–11) (after Ottományi
(1991)).
Conclusion
Under Diocletian (A.D. 284–305) the provinces of Pannonia Superior and

Pannonia Inferior were reorganised, and new provinces were set up. These
were: Pannonia Prima, Savia, Valeria and Pannonia Secunda.229 One of
the most important Roman colonia, Poetovio/Ptuj was transferred to the
territory of Noricum Mediterraneum, but retained its significance as an
important trading link between the Adriatic, Noricum and the Pannonian
provinces. The borders between the Pannonian provinces (for example on
the territory northwards of the Lake Balaton) are not clear, but it is very
likely that the boundary between Pannonia Prima and Valeria followed
the 3rd c. border between Pannonia Superior and Inferior.230 The civil-
ian population of the Pannonian provinces moved closer to the forts and
fortlets from the second half of the 4th c. due to the continuous barbarian
attacks from the Pannonian Plain, and from the northern Barbaricum.231
Gradually, these incursions into Roman territory, helped by the Huns and
their auxiliaries, meant the forts and fortlets of the Danube bend, and
even the inner fortress of Gorsium/Tác, were given up, and the province
of Valeria had to be evacuated by the military sometime after 425.232
The aim of this paper was to collate and understand the real volume
of the imported, and locally manufactured pottery and trade in this tur-
bulent period in the Pannonian provinces, from the end of the 3rd to the
5th c. The distribution of African Red Slip ware, Late Roman amphora
types and also north African lamps, support the hypothesis that the
Amber Route, and the routes next to the Drava and Sava rivers, became
the main military and civilian trading pathways again in the 4th c. This
era can be regarded as the final prosperous period in ancient Pannonian
history.233 The continuing strong connection between Pannonia and the
north African provinces, and the eastern part of the later Roman empire,
is clear from the finds.
Pottery from those places can be explained by some military activity
(e.g. movements of military troops) but also by the political and commer-
cial relationships between members of the provincial upper-classes.234 The
229 Mócsy (1974) 273, fig. 59; for a summary of the political and military situation after
the tetrarchy: Kovács (2004).
230 Mócsy (1976) 32.
231 Kovács (2004) 119.
232 Kovács (2004) 120 with further bibliography.
233 Mócsy (1974) 297.
234 Reynolds (1995) 106–12; Modrijan and Milavec (2011) 139.
introduction of the annona and several administrative reforms enhanced

this process,235 for example, imported pottery from North Africa, could
arrive as a secondary cargo with grain.236 The appearance of very rare
Argonne Ware and Late Roman eggshell vessels, from the Gallo-Belgic
region, has been interpreted as movements of small groups of the civilian
population, but more evidence is needed to verify this. Direct imitations
of these imported wares occurred in small numbers in Pannonia, but their
place of origin is still unknown. Imported wares into the Pannonian prov-
inces ceased around the early 5th c.
Trade, such as commodities transported in amphorae, was largely car-
ried out by the Roman military, most probably officers of high rank, but
also still by civilian elites in the 4th c., as in earlier periods. The steady dis-
appearance of these consuming groups made any ’luxury trade’ unprofit
able, meaning no state-organised supply of olive oil or wine was available
(or needed) in most of the Pannonian region from the late 4th–early 5th c.
The smaller, local pottery workshops supplied isolated communities,
like villages, vici, rural settlements, or watch-towers. These should be
regarded separately from the larger pottery centres, which were found
at important road junctions and river crossings. Settlements at these
river crossings usually had better commercial connections, and they
were generally linked to the military, for example to the forts along the
limes (e.g. Tokod), or were connected to inner fortresses (e.g. Keszthely-
Fenékpuszta).237 At these sites, alongside African Red Slip ware (terra sig-
illata chiara) finds, imitations of the imported wares can also be found.238
A similar pattern of finds is apparent in provincial capitals, which had
favourable geographic positions and extensive trade links, such as at
Sirmium/Sremska Mitrovica, Savaria/Szombathely, and Sopianae/Pécs.239
In Savaria/Szombathely several pottery workshops came to light, which
produced coarse and glazed wares and burnished wares from the early
4th to the mid 5th c.240 No workshop of this period has been discovered
in Aquincum/Budapest—the military headquarters of the province of
Valeria—however, although glazed pottery waste fragments have been
235 Fulford and Peacock (1984) 256–57., Reynolds (2010) 74, 81.

236 Bonifay (2004) 479.
237 At another important findspot, in Keszthely-Fenékpuszta, there is no clay quarry,
and therefore no local pottery production can be argued for. However, at the nearby vil
lage of Egregy, potters settled here, because of its good quality clay: Sági (1960) 232.
238 Bónis (1991) 147; Horváth (2011) 601.
239 Bónis (1990) 31.
240 Bónis (1990) 29; Ottományi and Sosztarits (1998) 178–79; Bíró (2004) 87–88.
found. Nevertheless, it is very likely that pottery took place in the villa
estates around the town. These local production centres supplied a terri-
tory with a radius of ca. 10–20 km.
The locally manufactured pottery of Late Roman Pannonia can be
divided into four main groups. Glazed ware appeared in large quantities
in the Pannonian provinces from the second third of the 4th c.; its forms
are traditionally Roman (mainly storage vessels), and imitate metal, glass
and African Red Slip ware dishes. Its consumers were from the Romanised
middle and upper classes, both from the military and the general pop-
ulation. The second main group is grey coarse ware, which is the most
numerous find both in settlements and cemeteries. Its quality decreases
steadily towards the end of the 4th c., and its paste becomes more gravelly
and rough.
The third group contains polished and burnished wares. Polished sur-
faces appear on vessels in the early 4th c., while burnished decoration
becomes fashionable in the second half/end of the century in the region.
Initially these techniques were used on traditional Roman forms, but new,
interregional types display them by the late 4th–early 5th c. The polished
surface technique is clearly a foreign, ‘barbarian’ idea (Carp, Sarmatian
and eastern Gothic), but both polished and burnished wares were also
used by the remaining Romanised population as well as the new incom-
ers, until the mid 5th c. The fourth and final group of locally made vessels
is hand-made pottery. The increasing amount of it indicates the decline
of the traditional pottery manufacture centres, as well as changes in the
composition of the population. It also shows increasing non-Roman cul-
tural penetration from the second half of the 4th c.
The causes of these changes in local pottery production, due to the
increasing ‘barbarian’ influence, can be characterised in a number of ways.
On the one hand, it was the result of the impact of neighbouring tribes
(the Quadi, Sarmatians and Suebi), whose products could come into the
province in peaceful ways, such as by trade or marriage; although there
is also evidence for settled ‘barbarian’ groups in the region at the end of
the 4th c. Another factor was the arrival of new peoples from the East
that appeared along the limes at this time.241 These new ethnic groups
brought with them new vessel forms and production techniques. This is
241 Tóth (2005) 370, with further bibliography for the East Gothic-Hun-Alanic foederati
tribes that settled in A.D. 379/80; Soproni (1985) 48–52; Salamon and Barkóczi (1978); cf.
Kovács (2000) 129–47.
shown largely by the increasing number of hand-made vessels, but also

the renewed fashion for burnished decoration, at the end of the Roman
period.
Lots of similarities can be found in the Late Roman pottery of the Dan-
ubian provinces, both in the west and south-east, in the 4th and 5th c.
A.D.242 This is due to the fact that a major trade course, the river Danube,
links them all, as do several inland trade routes. The glazed pottery is the
earliest group in this late material, and appears sporadically from the early
4th c. (as at Poetovio), but the peak of its production is around the second
third of the 4th c. Its spectrum of forms varies depending on the region,
for example in Raetia almost only mortaria are found. Although this Late
Roman pottery is mostly found along the limes, leading many scholars to
relate it to the military, the same types and forms also spread to the pro-
vincial interior, both in military and civil sites and cemeteries. So-called
‘Horreumkeramik’—very granular, hard-burned pottery, often decorated
with incised or cut decoration—appeared at the end of the 4th c., and was
used throughout the 5th c. Polished and burnished decoration became
popular only in the later period throughout the Danubian region.
All these wares appeared not only in the Danubian provinces, but also
in the surrounding Barbaricum, such as Sarmatia and Suebia. Glazed
ware only reached these groups in small quantities though, as imported
or donated commodities. These groups also manufactured Roman coarse
ware vessels in their own pottery workshops. The roots of the polished
and burnished wares can be found among these eastern tribes. The limi-
nal nature of the Danube faded, in socio-political terms, in the 5th c. A.D.,
so we begin to see similar pottery types appearing on both sides of the
river. The only difference that remains is that in the Barbaricum more
hand-made pottery was used, while in what had been Pannonia, glazed
and coarse wares remained in use.
Acknowledgements
We wish to thank Péter Vámos (Aquincum Museum, Budapest), Zsolt

Magyar (University of Kent), and Michael Mulryan (University of Kent) for
their help.
242 That is: Pannonia, Noricum, Raetia, Moesia Prima, Dacia Ripensis, Dacia Mediter
ranea and Dardania.
Bibliography
AA.VV. (2001) Régészeti Kutatások Magyarországon 1998 (Archaeological Investigations in

Hungary 1998) (Budapest 2001).
Adler-Wölfl K. (2010) “Keramik”, in Die römischen Kasernen im Legionslager Vindobona. Die
Ausgrabungen am Judenplatz in Wien in den Jahren 1995–1998, ed. M. Mosser (Monogra-
fien der Stadtarchäologie Wien 5 Band I–II.) (Vienna 2010) 267–508.
Alföldi M. R. (1957) ed. Intercisa II. (Dunapentele). Geschichte der Stadt in der Römerzeit
(Archaeologia Hungarica 36) (Budapest 1957).
Alföldi A. (1932) Leletek a hunkorszakból és etnikai szétválasztásuk. (Funde aus der Hunnen-
zeit und ihre ethnische Sonderung) (Archaeologia Hungungarica 9) (Budapest 1932).
Alram-Stern E. (1989) Die römischen Lampen aus Carnuntum (Der römische Limes in
Österreich 35) (Vienna 1989).
Arthur P. and Williams D. (1981) “ ‘Pannonische glasierte Keramik’: an assessment”, in
Roman Pottery Research in Britain and North-West Europe (BAR-IS 123) (Oxford 1981)
481–510.
Bakker L., Dijkman W. and van Ossel P. (2005) “Die Feinkeramik ‘Argonnensigillata’. Leit-
fund spätantiker Siedlungsplätze in den Provinzen Galliens: Germaniens und Rätiens”,
in Imperium Romanum. Römer, Christen, Alamannen - die Spätantike am Oberrhein. Aus-
stellungskatalog Badisches Landesmuseum Karlsruhe 2005–2006 (Stuttgart 2005) 171–76.
Bánki Zs. (1992) “Beiträge zum pannonische spätrömischen glasierten Siedlungsmaterial”,
in Glasierte Keramik in Pannonien, ed. Zs. Bánki and V. Cserményi (Székesfehérvár 1992)
36–44.
—— (1990) “Keramik. Forschungen in Gorsium in den Jahren 1985/86”, Alba Regia 24
(1990) 101–35.
Barkóczi L. (1988) Pannonische Glasfunde in Ungarn (Studia Archaeologica 9) (Budapest
1988).
Beck T. (2004) “Terra sigillata”, in The Autonomous Towns of Noricum and Pannonia II, edd.
M. Šašel-Kos and P. Scherrer (Situla 42) (Ljubljana 2004) 242–49.
Bezeczky T. (2005) “Roman amphorae from Vindobona”, in Vindobona. Beiträge zu aus-
gewählten Keramikgattungen in ihrem topographischen Kontext, ed. F. Krinzinger
(Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 328.
Archäologische Forschungen 12) (2005) 35–83.
—— (1994) “Roman amphora trade in Pannonia”, in La Pannonia e l’Impero Romano. Atti
del convegno internazionale ‘La Pannonia e l’Impero Romano’. Accademia d’Ungheria e
l’Istituto Austriaco di Cultura. Roma, 13–16 gennaio 1994, ed. G. Hajnóczi (Roma 1994)
155–75.
—— (1987) Roman Amphorae from the Amber Route in Western Pannonia (BAR-IS 386)
(Oxford 1987).
Bichir Gh. (1976) Archaeology and History of the Carpi (BAR-IS 16.1.2) (Oxford 1976).
Bíró Sz. (2004) “Savaria nyugati temetője (Das westliche Gräberfeld von Savaria)”, Savaria
28 (2004) 63–134.
Blay A. (2012) “Késő római ház Scarbantiában” (A Late Roman house in Scarbantia),
Soproni Szemle 66.1 (2012) 20–30.
Bóna I. (1993) A hunok és nagykirályaik (The Huns and Their Kings) (Budapest 1993).
Bonifay M. (2004) Études sur la céramique romaine tardive d’Afrique (BAR-IS 1301) (Oxford
2004).
Bónis É. (1994) “Császárkori telep Balatonaligán (Siedlung aus der Kaiserzeit in Balatona-
liga)”, Veszprém megyei Múzeumok Közleményei 19/20 (1993/1994) 157–76.
—— (1991) “Glasierte Keramik der Spätrömerzeit aus Tokod”, ActaArchHung 43 (1991)
87–150.
—— (1990) “A mázas kerámia Pannoniában. Előzmények és gyártási központok (Die gla-
sierte Keramik in Pannonien. Entwicklungsgang und Erzeugungszentren)”, Archaeolo-
giai Értesítő 117 (1990) 24–38.
—— (1980) “Pottery”, in The Archaeology of Roman Pannonia, ed. A. Lengyel and G. T. B.

Radan (Budapest 1980) 357–79.
—— (1942) Die kaiserzeitliche Keramik von Pannonien, ausser den Sigillaten. I: Die Materi-
alien der frühen Kaiserzeit (Dissertationes Pannonicae 2.20) (Budapest 1942).
Bónis É. and Gabler D. (1990) “Fazekasság” (Pottery), in Pannonia Régészeti Kézikönyve,
edd. A. Mócsy and J. Fitz (Budapest 1990) 166–84.
Brukner O. (1981) Rimska keramika u jugoslovenskom delu provincije Donje Panonije
(Roman Ceramic Wares in the Yugoslav Part of the Province of Lower Pannonia) (Belgrade
1981).
Bueno M., Novello M. and Mantovani V. (2012) “Progetto Aquileia: casa delle Bestie Ferite.
Commercio e consumo ad Aquileia. Analisi delle anfore tardoantiche alla luce di alcuni
contesti”, Acta Rei Creariae Romanae Fautorum 42 (2012) 159–68.
Burger A. (1979) Das spätrömische Gräberfeld von Somogyszil (Budapest 1979).
—— (1968) “Terrakotta ex-voto Gödrekeresztúrról” (Ex-voto terracotta sculpture from
Gödrekeresztúr), Archaeologiai Értesítő 95 (1968) 13–28.
Chenet G. (1941) La céramique gallo-romaine d’Argonne du IVe siècle et la terre sigillée
decorée à la molette (Fouilles et documents d’archéologie antique en France 1) (Mâcon
1941).
Chinelli R. (2009) “Late Roman glazed pottery production in the eastern alpine area and
Danubian provinces: the case of Vindobona (Austria)”, in Late Roman Glazed Pottery in
Carlino and in Central-East Europe: Production, Function and Distribution: Proceedings of
the Second International Meeting of Archaeology in Carlino (March 2009), edd. C. Magrini
and F. Sbarra (BAR-IS 2068) (Oxford 2010) 41–50.
Cottica D. and Toniolo L. (2012) “La circolazione del vasellame ceramico nella laguna nord
di Venezia tra I sec. d.c. e VI sec. d.c.”, Acta Rei Creariae Romanae Fautorum 42 (2012)
195–204.
Csiky G. and Hárshegyi P. (forthcoming) “Wine for the Avar elite? Amphorae
from Avar period burials in the Carpathian basin”, in Fifth International Congress on
Black Sea Antiquites. The Danubian Lands between the Black, Aegean and Adriatic Seas
(7th Century BC–10th Century AD) (Belgrade–17–21 September 2013) (forthcoming).
Csirke O., Gabler D. and K. Palágyi S. (2006) Terra sigillata edények a veszprémi Laczkó
Dezső Múzeum gyűjteményéből (Terra sigillata—Gefässe des Museums ‘Lackó Dezső’ von
Veszprém) (Veszprém 2006).
Cvjetiċanin T. (2006) Late Roman Glazed Pottery: Glazed pottery from Moesia Prima, Dacia
Ripensis, Dacia Mediterranea and Dardania, (Archaeological Monographies 19) (Bel-
grade 2006).
Daszkiewicz M., Meyza H. and Schneider G. (1997) “A preliminary study of amphorae of the
Mau XXVII/XXVIII type”, in Polish Archaeology in the Mediterranean 8 (1997) 132–38.
Di Vita-Evrard G. (1994) “Legionnaires africains en Pannonie au IIe s. ap. J. C.”, in La Panno-
nia e l’impero Romano. Atti del convegno internazionale: la Pannonia e l’impero Romano.
Accademia d’Ungheria e l’Istituto Austriaco di Cultura. Roma, 13–16 gennaio 1994, ed.
G. Hajnóczi (Roma 1994) 97–114.
Donat P. (1999) “Zur Herkunft der Terra Sigillata von der Augsgrabung Michaelerplatz”,
Fundort Wien 2 (1999) 210–15.
Fiala F. (1897) “Römische Brandgräber bei Rogatica”, Wissenschaftlichen Mitteilungen aus
Bosnia und Herzegowina 5 (1897) 259–62.
Friesinger H. (1984) “Bemerkungen zu den frühgeschichtlichen Grab und Siedlungsfunden
von Wien–Leopoldau”, ArchAustr 68 (1984) 127–54.
Frisinger H. and Kerchler H. (1981) “Töpferofen der Völkerwanderungszeit in Niederöster-
reich. Ein Beitrag zur völkerwanderungszeitlichen Keramik (2. Hälfte 4.–6. Jahrhundert
n. Chr.) in Niederösterreich, Oberösterreichund dem Burgenland”, ArchAustr 65 (1981)
193–266.
Fulford M. G. and Peacock D. P. S. (1984) Excavations at Carthage: the British Mission, vol.
1.2: The Avenue du Président Habib Bourguiba, Salammbo: the Pottery and other Ceramic
Objects from the Site (Sheffield 1984).
Fülöp E. N. (2004) “Terra sigillata leletek Savariából, a Perint patak nyugati oldaláról”
(Terra Sigillata Befunde aus Savaria, an/vor der westlichen Seite des Perint Baches—
Szombathely, Dózsa György Str. 4.), Savaria 28 (2004) 139–58.
Füköh D. (2012) “Ács, Öbölkúti-dűlő”, Régészeti Kutatások Magyarországon 2010 (2012) 166–67.
Gabler D. (2012a) “A budaörsi terra sigillaták” (Samian Ware found at Budaörs), in Római
vicus Budaörsön (Roman Vicus at Budaörs), ed. K. Ottományi (Budapest 2012) 409–54.
—— (2012b) “Terra sigillaták Aquincum legkorábbi táborából és annak helyén emelt
későbbi római épületekből (A Víziváros leletei)” (Samian Ware from the earliest fort of
Aquincum), Budapest Régiségei 45 (2012) 111–50.
—— (2007) “Terra sigillaták a pátyi telepen. (Terra Sigillaten in der römischen Siedlung
Páty-Malom-fur)”, Studia Comitatensia 30 (2007) 239–75.
—— (2005) “Kereskedők Sallában” (Commercianti di Salla), in Hereditas Sallensis 3.
(Zalalövő öröksége 3.) ed. F. Redő (Zalalövő 2005).
—— (2004) “A balácai II. épület terra sigillatái” (Sigillaten aus dem Gabäude II. von Baláca),
Balácai Közlemények 8 (2004) 123–63.
—— (2002) “Terra sigillatak az aquincumi canabaeból” (Terra Sigillaten aus den canabae
legionis von Aquincum), Budapest Régiségei 35.1. (2002) 227–65.
—— (1998) “Terra sigillata”, in Bevezetés az ókortudományba I, edd. L. Havas and I. Tegyey
(Debrecen 1998).
—— (1990) “Kereskedelem” (Trade), in Pannonia régészeti kézikönyve (Manual of Archaeol-
ogy of Pannonia), edd. A. Mócsy and J. Fitz (Budapest 1990) 185–209.
—— (1989a) ed. The Roman Fort at Ács-Vaspuszta (Hungary) on the Danubian limes (BAR-
IS 531) (Oxford 1989).
—— (1989b) “Die Sigillaten von Salla (Zalalövő). Grabungen 1982–1983”, ActaArchHung
41 (1989) 435–75.
—— (1988) “Spätantike Sigillaten in Pannonien”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 1988 (1989) 9–40.
—— (1983) “Terra sigillata chiara tálak Nagykanizsáról (Terra sigillata chiara found at
Nagykanizsa)”, Zalai Gyűjtemény 18 (1983) 27–44.
—— (1982) “Nordafrikanische Sigillaten in Pannonien”, Savaria 16 (1982) 313–33.
—— (1978) “Die Keramik von Vindobona”, in Vindobona. Die Römer im Wiener Raum: 8.
Dez. 1977 bis 9. April 1978 (Sonderausstellung des Historischen Museums der Stadt Wien
52) (Vienna 1978) 118–35.
—— (1977) “Terra sigillata. Römische Forschungen in Zalalövő 1975”, ActaArchHung 29
(1977) 230–43.
Gabler D., Hárshegyi P., Lassányi G. and Vámos P. (2009) “Eastern Mediterranean import
and its influence on local pottery in Aquincum”, ActaArchHung 60 (2009) 51–72.
Gabler D. and Ottományi K. (1990) “Későrómai házak Szakályban” (Late Roman houses in
Szakály), Archaeologiai Értesítő 117 (1990) 161–88.
Gabler D. and Vaday A. (1986) Terra Sigillata im Barbaricum zwischen Pannonien und
Dazien (Fontes Archaeologici Hungariae) (Budapest 1986).
Gábor O. (1998) “Későantik sírok Mágocson (Late antique graves from Mágocs)”, Janus
Pannonius Múzeum Évkönyve 43 (1998) 113–30.
Gassner V. (2009) “Late Roman lead-glazed pottery at Carnuntum. Contexts and chronol-
ogy”, in La ceramica invetriata tardoromana nell’arco alpino orientale e nelle province
danubiane. Atti del I incontro Internazionale di Archeologia a Carlino, 14–15 dicembre
2007, edd. F. Sbarra and C. Magrini (Carlino 2009) 51–62.
—— (1991) “Mittelkaiserzeitliche glasierte Keramik aus Pannonien. Mit einem Beitrag von
Roman Sauer”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 1990 (1991) 5–65.
Gassner V., Ertel Ch., Cech B., Schweder B. and Winkler E. M (1993) “Archäologie und
Denkmalpflege in Mautern”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 1992 (1993) 93–119.
Gattringer A. and Grünewald M. (1981) “Zur Typologie der ‘Horreumkeramik’ ”, Bayerische
Vorgeschichtsblätter 46 (1981) 199–210.
Gömöri J. (2001) “Von Scarbantia zu Sopron. Die Frage der Kontinuität”, in Zwischen
Römersiedlung und mittelalterlicher Stadt. Archäologische Aspekte zur Kontinuitätsfrage
(Beiträge zur Mittelalterarchäologie in Österreich 17) (Vienna 2001) 223–31.
Groh S. and Sedlmayer H. (2002) Forschungen im Kastell Mautern-Favianis. Die Grabungen

der Jahre 1996 und 1997 (Der römische Limes in Österreich 42) (Vienna 2002).
Groller M. (1908) “Die Grabungen in Carnuntum”, in Der römische Limes in Österreich 9
(Vienna 1908) 1–80.
Grünewald M. (1986) Die Ausgrabungen im Legionslager von Carnuntum (Grabungen 1969–
1977). Keramik und Kleinfunde 1976–1977 (Der römische Limes in Österreich 34) (Vienna
1986).
—— (1979) Die Gefäßkeramik des Legionslagers von Carnuntum (Der römische Limes in
Österreich 29) (Vienna 1979).
Gudkova A. V. (1999) “Die grautonige Keramik der Siedlung von Kozyrka in der Umge-
bung von Olbia (Zum Problem der Protočernjachov-Keramik)”, in Die Sîntana de
Mureş-Černjachov-Kultur. Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums in Caputh vom 20. bis
24. Oktober 1995, ed. G. Gomolka-Fuchs (Bonn 1999) 143–54.
Hárshegyi P. (2008) “Roman amphorae from the East along the Ripa Pannonica”, Acta Rei
Creariae Romanae Fautorum 40 (2008) 173–78.
—— (2004) “Roman amphorae from the civil town of Brigetio/Szőny-Vásártér 1992–2001”,
Communicationes Archaeologiae Hungaricae (2004) 113–21.
Hayes J. W. (1972) Late Roman Pottery (London 1972).
Henning J. (1978) “Zur Frage der technologischen Tradition der spätkaiserzeitlichen Töp-
ferwerkstätten im Karpatenraum”, Ethnographisch-archäologische Zeitschrift 19 (1978)
445–60.
Horváth F. (2011) “Das spätantike Keramikspektrum in Keszthely-Fenékpuszta—erste
Ergebnisse”, in Keszthely-Fenékpuszta im Kontext spätantiker Kontinuitätsforschung zwi-
schen Noricum und Moesia, ed. O. Heinrich-Tamáska (Rahden 2011) 597–652.
—— (2010) “Glazed pottery of Keszthely-Fenékpuszta in the spectrum of the ceramics of
the Late Roman fortress”, in Late Roman Glazed Pottery in Carlino and in Central-East
Europe: Production, Function and Distribution: Proceedings of the Second International
Meeting of Archaeology in Carlino (March 2009), edd. C. Magrini and F. Sbarra (BAR-IS
2068) (Oxford 2010) 93–102.
Horváth J. (1999) “Roman provincial archaeology in Slovenia following the year 1965: set-
tlement and small finds”, Arheološki Vestnik 50 (1999) 215–57.
Horváth L. and Frankovics T. (2009) ed. Régészeti feltárások az M7–M70 autópálya Zala
megyei nyomvonalán. Összefoglaló jelentés az 1999–2008 között végzett feltárásokról
(Archaeological Investigations along the Route of the M7–M70 Motorway in Zala County.
Reports on the Excavations between 1998 and 2008) (Zalaegerszeg 2009).
Hübener W. (1968) “Eine Studie zur spätrömischen Rädchensigillata (Argonnensigillata)”,
Bonner Jahrbuch 168 (1968) 241–98.
Iványi D. (1935) Die Pannonischen Lampen (Dissertationes Pannonicae 2.2) (Budapest
1935).
Jilek S. (1994) “Eine Zerstörungshorizont aus der 2 Hälfte des 2 jhs. n. Ch im Auxiliarkastell
von Carnuntum”, in Die Markomannenkriege. Ursachen und Wirkungen, edd. H. Friesin-
ger, J.Tejral and A. Stuppner (Brno 1994) 387–405.
Jelinčić K. (2011) “Gruba rimska keramika s lokaliteta Virovitica—Kiškorija jug” (Roman
coarse pottery from the site of Virovitica—Kiškorija South)”, Zbornik 31.8 (2011) 307–14.
Kandler-Zöchmann Ch. (2001) “Die Terra Sigillata der ‘Steilhang-Grabung’ 1971–1972 in
Petronell”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 2000 (2001) 47–159.
—— (1997) “Terra sigillata der Grabungskampagne 1993”, in Das Auxiliarkastell Carnun-
tum 2. Forschungen seit 1989, ed. M. Kandler (Österreichisches Archäologisches Institut
Sonderschriften 30) (Vienna 1997) 101–71.
Katona Győr Zs. (1994) “Római villaépület Komló, Mecsekfalui úton” (Excavation of a
Roman Villa at Komló, Mecsekfalui út ), Janus Pannonius Múzeum Évkönyve 38 (1993)
67–94.
Kelemen M. (2008) Solva. Esztergom későrómai temetői. (Die spätrömischen Gräberfelder
von Esztergom) (Libelli Archaeologici n.s. 3) (Budapest 2008).
—— (1993) “Roman amphorae in Pannonia IV”, ActaArchHung 45 (1993) 45–73.

—— (1990) “Roman amphorae in Pannonia III”, ActaArchHung 42 (1990) 145–93.
—— (1988) “Roman amphorae in Pannonia II”, ActaArchHung 40 (1988) 111–50.
—— (1987) “Roman amphorae in Pannonia”, ActaArchHung 39 (1987) 3–45.
Kern A. (2000) “Ein völkerwanderungszeitlicher Töpferofen aus Peigarten, VB Hollabrunn
(NÖ)”, in Gentes Reges und Rom. Auseinandersetzung, Anerkennung, Anpassung: Fest-
schrift für Jaroslav Tejral zum 65. Geburtstag (Brno 2000) 221–35.
Kiss M. (1994) “Adatok a Murga-típusú korsók kérdéséhez” (Daten zur Frage den Krü-
gen von Murga), in A kőkortól a középkorig (Von der Steinzeit bis zum Mittelalter), ed.
G. Lőrinczy (Szeged 1994) 249–56.
Kocsis L. (2000) “Nagytétény—Campona”, Aquincumi Füzetek 6 (Budapest 2000) 91–101.
Kovács P. (2004) “The Late Roman army in Pannonia”, Acta Antiqua Academiae Scien-
tiarum Hungaricae 44.1 (2004) 115–22.
—— (2000) Matrica—Excavations in the Roman Fort at Százhalombatta (1993–1997) (Pilis-
csaba-Budapest 2000).
—— (1999) “The principia of Matrica”, Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungaricae
(1999) 49–74.
Krekovič E. (1991) “Glasierte Keramik im Mitteleuropaeischen freien Germanen”, Acta Rei
Creariae Romanae Fautorum 29–30 (1991) 149–56.
Kronberger M. (2009) Vindobona: das römische Wien. Kurzführer. Daueraustellung im
Römermuseum (Vienna 2009).
Kulcsár V. and Mérai D. (2011) “Roman or Barbarian? Provincial models in Sarmatian pot-
tery. Centre on the Danube frontier”, in The Roman Empire and Beyond: Archaeological
and Historical Research on the Romans and Native Cultures in Central Europe, edd. E. C.
de Sena and H. Dobrzanska (BAR-IS 2236) (Oxford 2011) 61–80.
Kuzmová K. (1997) Terra sigillata im Vorfeld des nordpannonische Limes (Südostslowakei)
(Nitra 1997).
Ladstätter S. (2007) “Afrikanische Importe im Legionslager von Carnuntum und seinem
näheren Umfeld”, in Legionslager von Carnuntum. Ausgrabungen 1968–1977, edd. C. Gugl
and R. Kastler (Der römische Limes in Österreich 45) (Vienna 2007) 254–57.
Lányi V. (1981a) “Das spätrömische Gräberfeld”, in Die spätrömische Festung und das Grä-
berfeld von Tokod, ed. A. Mócsy (Budapest 1981) 169–221.
—— (1981b) “Die graue spätrömische Keramik von Tokod”, in Die spätrömische Festung
und das Gräberfeld von Tokod, ed. A. Mócsy (Budapest 1981) 73–120.
—— (1972) “Die spätantiken Gräberfeld von Pannonien”, ActaArchHung 23 (1972) 53–213.
Lassányi G. and Vámos P. (2011) “Two North African jugs from Aquincum”, ActaArchHung
62 (2011) 147–61.
Lazar I. (1997) “Poznorimske najdbe iz Celja” (Spätrömische Funde aus Celje), Arheološki
Vestnik 48 (1997) 325–31.
Lebegyev J. and Márton A. (2003) “Újabb terra sigillata leletek az aquincumi katonavárosi
canabae területéről. A Lajos utca-Nagyszombat utcasarok és a Bokor utca- Galagonya
utca 9–es telek ásatásának terra sigillata anyaga” (New Samian Ware finds from the ter-
ritory of the Canabae Legionis of Aquincum. The material from the excavations at Lajos
Street-Nagyszombat Street and at Bokor Street-Galagonya Street no. 9.), Archaeologiai
Értesítő 128 (2003) 125–76.
Liesen B. and Pirling R. (1998) “Glasierte spätrömische Keramik aus Krefeld-Gellep”, Ger-
mania 76 (1998) 721–46.
Mackensen M. (2006) “The study of 3rd century African Red Slip ware based on the evi-
dence from Tunisia”, in Old Pottery in a New Century: Innovating Perspectives on Roman
Pottery Studies (Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi, Catania, 22–24 Aprile 2004),
edd. D. Malfitana, J. Poblome and J. Lund (Monografie dell’Istituto per i beni archeo-
logici e monumentali) (Catania 2006) 105–24.
—— (2003) “Production of 3rd century sigillata A/C (C1–2) or el-Aouja ware and its transi-
tion to sigillata C3 with appliqué decoration in central Tunisia”, Acta Rei Creariae Roma-
nae Fautorum 38 (2003) 279–86.
—— (1993) Die spätantiken sigillata- und Lampentöpfereien von el Mahrine (Nordtunesien):

Studien zur nordafrikanischen Feinkeramik des 4. bis 7. Jahrhunderts (Münchner Beiträge
zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte 50) (Munich 1993).
Mackensen M. and Schneider G. (2002) “Production centres of African Red Slip ware (3rd–
7th c.) in northern and central Tunisia: archaeological provenance and reference groups
based on chemical analysis”, JRA 15 (2002) 121–58.
Magrini C. and Sbarra F. (2009) edd. La ceramica invetriata tardoromana nell’arco alpino
orientale e nelle province danubiane / (Late Roman Glazed Pottery Productions in Eastern
Alpine Area and Danubian Provinces) First Results of an International Project (Carlino
2009).
—— (2005) Le Ceramiche invetriate di Carlino. Nuovo contributo allo studio di una produzi-
one tardoantica (Ricerche di Archeologia Altomedievale e Medievale 30) (Florence 2005).
Majcherek G. (2007) “Aegean and Asia Minor amphorae from Marina el-Alamein”,
in Amphores d’Égypte de la Basse Époque à l’Époque Arabe, edd. S. Marchand and
A. Marangou (Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Cahiers de la Céramique Égyp-
tienne 8.1.) (Cairo 2007) 9–31.
Makjanić R. (1995) “Terra sigillata”, in Siscia. Pannonia Superior, edd. R. Koščević and
R. Makjanić (BAR-IS 621) (Oxford 1995).
Maróti É. and Repiszky T. (2008) “Bronze vessels from a Roman cemetery at Biatorbágy”, in
Perspectives on the Past. Major Excavations in County Pest, ed. K. Ottományi (Szentendre
2008) 62–63.
Maróti É. and Topál J. (1980) “Szentendre római kori temetője” (Das römerzeitliche Grä-
berfeld von Szentendre), Studia Comitatensia 9 (1980) 95–172.
Marton G. and Serlegi G. (2007) “Balatonlelle-Kenderföld”, in Gördülő idő. Régészeti feltárá-
sok az M7–es autópálya Somogy megyei szakaszán Zamárdi és Ordacsehi között (Rolling
Time. Excavations along the M7 Motorway Section in County Somogy between Zamárdi
and Ordacsehi), edd. K. Belényesy, Sz. Honti and V. Kiss (Budapest 2007) 139–46.
Menchelli S., Genovesi S., Sangriso P., Hárshegyi P., Cabella R., Capelli C., Piazza M. (2008)
“La villa di Ercole ad Aquincum: la terra sigillata e le anfore”, Studi Classici ed Orientali
54 (2008) 234–80.
Miklósity Szőke M. (2006–2008) “Késő római mázas kerámia Brigetio legiotáborából” (Late
Roman Glazed Ware from the legionary camp in Brigetio), Komárom-Esztergom megyei
Múzeumok Közleményei 12 (2006–2008) 159–96.
Mócsy A. (1976) “Provinciahatárok a Balatontól északra” (Provinzgrenzen nördlich vom
Plattensee), Archaeologiai Értesítő 103 (1976) 29–32.
—— (1974) Pannonia and Upper Moesia. A History of the Middle Danubian Provinces of the
Roman Empire (London 1974).
Modrijan Z. and Milavec T. (2011) Poznoantična utrjena naselbina Tonovcov grad pri
Kobaridu: Vol. 2. Najdbe/Late Antique Fortified Settlement Tonovcov Grad near Kobarid:
Vol. 2: Finds (Opera Instituti Archaeologici Sloveniae 24) (Ljubljana 2011).
Müller R. (1979) “A Keszthely–Fenékpusztai erőd északi kapujának feltárása 1971–ben.
Ásatási jelentés” (Die archäologische Erschließung des Nordtores der Befestigung von
Keszthely-Fenékpuszta im Jahre 1971. Ausgrabungsbericht), Veszprém megyei Múzeumok
Közleményei 14 (1979) 123–56.
Nádorfi G. (1992) “Glasierte Keramik in spätrömischen Gräberfeldern Pannoniens”, in
Glasierte Keramik in Pannonien, edd. Zs. Bánki and V. Cserményi (Székesfehérvár 1992)
45–51.
Nagy B. and Szabó D. (2012) “A Sávoly–Kerekeskúti-és Basa-réti-dűlői késő római telep
2009 évi megelőző feltárásának bemutatása az éremanyag tükrében” (Review of the res-
cue excavations of 2009 at the Late Roman settlement of Sávoly–kerekskúti-dűlő and
Basa-réti-dűlő through its coin assemblage), in Évkönyv és jelentés a K.Ö.SZ. 2009. évi
feltárásairól, ed. J. Kvassay (Budapest 2012) 309.
Nagy L. (1938) “Pannonia Sacra”, in Szent István emlékkönyv I., ed. J. Serédi (Budapest 1938)
31–148.
Neugebauer-Maresch Chr. and Neugebauer J. W (1986) “Ein Friedhof der römischen Kai-
serzeit in Klosterneuburg”, ArchAustr 70 (1986) 317–83.
Neumann A. (1967) Lampen und andere Beleuchtungsgeräte aus Vindobona (Der römische
Limes in Österreich 22) (Vienna 1967).
Ottományi K. (2012a) “Római vicus Budaörsön” (Roman vicus at Budaörs), in Római vicus
Budaörsön I, ed. K. Ottományi (Budapest 2012) 9–407.
—— (2012b) “A Visegrád-Gizellamajori erőd Ny/I. helyiségének késő római kerámiája”
(Veränderungen des Töpferhandwerks in der ersten Hälfte 5. Jhs. auf Grund des Kera-
mik von Befestigung Visegrád–Gizellamajor), in FiRKák II (Fiatal Római Koros Kutatók II.
Konferenciakötete), ed. Sz. Bíró and P. Vámos (Győr 2012) 375–418.
—— (2011) “Késő római mázas kerámia a budaörsi telepen” (Late Roman glazed pottery in
the Budaörs settlement), Arrabona 49.1 (2011) 263–90.
—— (2009) “Eingeglättete Gefässe aus der letzten Periode der Siedlung von Budaörs”, in
Ex officina . . . Studia in honorem Dénes Gabler (Győr 2009) 411–42.
—— (2008a) “A Roman cemetery at Páty”, in Perspectives on the Past. Major Excavations
in County Pest, ed. K. Ottományi (Szentendre 2008) 72–73.
—— (2008b) “Késő római–kora népvándorlás kori település részlet Biatorbágyról” (Ein
Siedlungsteil von Biatorbágy aus der späten Römer- und frühen Völkerwanderungszeit),
Archaeologiai Értesítő 133 (2008) 133–97.
—— (2007) “A pátyi római telep újabb kutatási eredményei” (Die neue Forschungsergeb-
nisse der römischen Siedlung von Páty), Studia Comitatensia 30 (2007) 7–238.
—— (2006) “a szentendrei tábor besimított díszítésű kerámiája” (Burnished Ware from
the Roman military camp at Szentendre), Specimina Nova 20 (2006) 121–46.
—— (2004) “A Budakalász–Luppa csárdai őrtorony késő római kerámiája” (Die spätrö-
mischen Keramiken des Wachtturmes von Budakalász–Luppacsárda), Studia Comitat-
ensia 28 (2004) 265–94.
—— (1999a) “Későrómai kerámiagyártás a Dunakanyarban” (Late Roman pottery work-
shops in the Danube bend), Kutatások Pest megyében. Tudományos Konferencia II 1998
(Researches in Pest County. II. Conference 1998) (Pest Megyei Múzeumi Füzetek 5) (Szen-
tendre 1999) 25–47.
—— (1999b) “Late Roman pottery in the Dunabogdány Camp”, Antaeus 24 (1997–98)
333–73, 726–38.
—— (1996) “Eine Töpferwerkstatt der spätrömische Keramik mit Glättverzierung von
Pilismarót–Malompatak”, ActaArchHung 48 (1996) 71–134.
—— (1991) “Későrómai kerámia a leányfalui őrtoronyból (Die Keramik von Burgus in
Leányfalu)”, Studia Comitatensia 22 (1991) 5–144.
—— (1989) “Late Roman pottery”, in The Roman Fort at Ács-Vaspuszta (Hungary) on the
Danubian Limes, ed. D. Gabler (BAR-IS 531 ) (Oxford 1989) 318–86, 492–570.
—— (1987) A későrómai telepkerámia főbb típusai Pannoniában. Ács-Vaspuszta, Dun-
abogdány, Dunaújváros, Tokod, Leányfalu, Pilismarót-Malompatak, Budakalász-Lupa-
csárda, Keszthely-Fenékpuszta anyaga alapján (The Types of Late Roman Local Pottery in
Pannonia. Materials Collected from Ács-Vaspuszta, Dunabogdány, Dunaújváros, Tokod,
Leányfalu, Pilismarót-Malompatak, Budakalász-Lupacsárda, Keszthely-Fenékpuszta)
(Ph.D. diss., Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE) 1987).
—— (1982) Fragen der spätrömischen eingeglätteten Keramik in Pannonien (Dissertationes
Archaeologicae 2.10) (Budapest 1981).
Ottományi K. and Gabler D. (1985) “Római telepek Herceghalom és Páty határában (A
pátyi terra sigillata)” (Römische Siedlungen in der Gemarkung von Herceghalom und
Páty (Die Sigillaten aus Páty)), Studia Comitatensia 17 (1985) 185–272.
Ottományi K. and Sosztarits O. (1998) “Spätrömische Töpferofen in südlichen Stadteil von
Savaria”, Savaria 23.3 (1998) 145–216.
Palágyi Sz. (2004) “Veszprém megyei leletmentések publikálatlan római kori kemencéi”
(Unpublished Roman period kilns from Veszprém County excavations), Veszprém
Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei 23 (2004) 49–72.
Parović-Pešikan M. (1973) “Excavations of a Late Roman villa at Sirmium. Part 2.”, in

Sirmium 3, edd. V. Popović and E. L. Ochenschlager (Belgrade 1973) 1–44.
Petznek B. (1999) “Römerzeitliche Gebrauchskeramik aus Carnuntum. Ausgrabungen des
Bundesdenkmalamtes 1971 bis 1972. Teil 2”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 1998 (1999) 261–404.
—— (1998) “Römerzeitliche Gebrauchskeramik aus Carnuntum. Ausgrabungen des
Bundesdenkmalamtes 1971 bis 1972. Teil 1”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 1997 (1998) 167–323.
Piéri D. (2005) Le commerce du vin oriental: à l’époque byzantine (Ve–VIIe siècles). Le témoi-
gnage des amphores en Gaule (Bibliothèque Archéologique et Historique 174) (Beirut
2005).
Pintér G. (2007) “Keramik: terra sigillata”, in Die römische Siedlung bei Babarc, Komitat
Baranya (Ungarn). Die Prospektionsarbeiten in den Jahren 1988–1991 und die Ausgrabun-
gen der Jahre 1996–1999, edd. F. Fazekas, T. S. Burns and Zs. Visy and H. Bender (Passauer
Universitätsschriften zur Archäologie 12) (Rahden 2007) 100–108.
Póczy K. (1957) “Keramik”, in Intercisa II. (Dunapentele) Geschichte der Stadt in der Römer-
zeit (Archaeologia Hungarica 36) (Budapest 1957) 30–139.
Pollak M. (1980) Die germanischen Bodenfunde des I–IV. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. im nördlichen
Niederösterreich (Denkschriften der philosophisch-historischen Klasse 147) (Vienna
1980).
Pongrácz Zs. (2006) Az Intercisa Múzeum római kori gyűjteményének mécsesei. (Die römer-
zeitlichen Lampen des Intercisa Museums) (Az Intercisa Múzeum kincsei 3) (Dunaújváros
2006).
Pröttel Ph. M. (1996) Mediterrane Feinkeramikimporte des 2. bis 7. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. im
oberen Adriaraum und in Slowenien (Kölner Studien zur Archäologie der römischen Pro-
vinzen 2) (Espelkamp 1996).
Rauh N. K. (2004) “Pirated knock-offs: Cilician imitations of internationally traded ampho-
ras”, in Transport Amphorae and Trade in the Eastern Mediterranean. Acts of the Interna-
tional Colloquium at the Danish Institute at Athens, September 26–29, 2002, edd. J. Eiring
and J. Lund (Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens 5) (Athens 2004) 329–36.
Rauchenwald A. (1996) “Die Funde der Ausgrabungen 1986–1990 in der Zivilstadt Carnuntum-
Insula VI”, Carnuntum Jahrbuch 1995 (1996) 61–226.
Redő F. (2005) “The investigation of the Roman villa at Zalabaksa”, Antaeus 28 (2005)
285–306.
Reynolds P. (2010) Hispania and the Roman Mediterranean, A.D. 100–700. Ceramics and
Trade (London 2010).
—— (2005) “Levantine amphorae from Cilicia to Gaza: a typology and analysis of regional
production trends from the 1st to 7th centuries”, in LRCW 1: Late Roman Coarse Wares,
Cooking Wares and Amphorae in the Mediterranean: Archaeology and Archaeometry, edd
J. M. Gurt i Esparraguera, J. Buxeda i Garrigós and M. A. Cau Ontiveros (BAR-IS 1340)
(Oxford 2005) 563–611.
—— (1995) Trade in the Western Mediterranean, AD 400–700: the Ceramic Evidence (BAR-IS
604) (Oxford 1995).
Roosner Gy. (1977) “Bátaszék, Kövesdpuszta”, Régészeti Füzetek 1.30 (1977) 16.
Rodriquez H. (1997) “Die Zeit vor und nach der Schlacht am Fluvius Frigidus (394 n Chr.)
im Spiegel der südostalpinen Gebrauchskeramik”, Arheološki Vestnik 48 (1997) 153–78.
Rubright J. C. (1973) Lamps from Sirmium in the Museum of Sremska Mitrovica (Sirmium
3) (Belgrade 1973).
Rütti B. (1991) Die römischen Gläser aus Augst und Kaiseraugst. Band 1–2. (Forschungen in
Augst 13.1–2) (Augst 1991).
Sági K. (1960) “Die spätrömische Bevölkerung der Umgebung von Keszthely”, ActaArch-
Hung 12 (1960) 187–256.
Salamon Á. and Barkóczi L. (1978) “Régészeti adatok Pannonia késő római periodizá-
ciójához (376–476)” (Archäologische Angaben zur spätrömischen Periodisation Panno-
niens 376–476), Archaeologiai Értesítő 105 (1978) 189–205.
Salamon Á and Barkóczi L. (1970) “Bestattungen von Csákvár aus dem Ende des 4. und
dem Anfang des 5. Jh”, Alba Regia 11 (1970) 35–76.
Soproni S. (1985) Die letzten Jahrzehnte des pannonischen Limes (Munich 1985).
Szőnyi E. (2002) “Altchristliche Funde im Xántus János Museum, Győr”, Zalai Múzeum 11
(2002) 43–50.
—— (2001) “Csorna, Kisméh-töltés”, Régészeti Kutatások Magyarországon 1998 (2001) 140.
—— (1984) “Die Keramik des 4. und 5. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. aus Arrabona”, ArchAustr 68
(1984) 345–50.
Subić Z. (1975) “Rimske oljenke v Sloveniji” (Römische Lampen in Slowenien), Arheološki
Vestnik 26 (1975) 82–99.
Tejral J. (1985) “Spätrömische und völkerwanderungszeitliche Drehscheibenkeramik in
Mähren”, ArchAustr 69 (1985) 105–45.
Thomas E. B. (1964) Die Römische Villen in Pannonien (Budapest 1964).
Tomka P. (2004) “Kulturwechsel der spätantiken Bevölkerung eines Auxiliarkastells: Fall-
beispiel Arrabona”, in Zentrum und Peripherie—Gesellschaftliche Phänomene in der
Frühgeschichte, edd. H. Friesinger and A. Stuppner (Vienna 2004) 389–409.
—— (2001) “Az árpási 5. századi sír” (The grave of Árpás from the 5th century), Arrabona
39 (2001) 160–88.
—— (1986) “Der hunnnische Fürstenfund von Pannonhalma”, ActaArchHung 38 (1986)
423–88.
Topál J. (2003) Roman Cemeteries of Aquincum, Pannonia. The Western Cemetery, Bécsi
Road II (Budapest 2003).
Tóth E. (2005) “Karpen in der Provinz Valeria. Zur Frage der spätrömischen eingeglät-
teten Keramik in Transdanubien”, Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungaricae (2005)
363–91.
—— (1994) “Későrómai sír Tihanyból (Spätrömisches Grab aus Tihany—Zur Typologie
der Zwiebelknopffibeln aus Bronzblech)”, FolArch 43 (1994) 127–77.
Truhelka C. and Patsch C. (1895) “Römische Funde im Lašvathale, 1893”, Wissenschaftlichen
Mitteilungen aus Bosnia und Herzegowina 3 (1895) 227–47.
Vaday A. (1989) Die sarmatischen Denkmäler des Komitats Szolnok (Antaeus 17–18) (Buda-
pest 1989).
Vagalinski L. (1997) “Der Zustand der Forschungen nach der spätrömischen und völkerwan
derungszeitlichen Drehscheibenkeramik mit eingeglaetteter Verzierung in Europa”,
Archaeologia. Bulgarica 1 (1997) 38–46.
Vágó E. and Bóna I. (1976) Die Gräberfelder von Intercisa. Der spätrömische Südostfriedhof
(Budapest 1976).
Vári A. (2011) “Néhány római mázas kerámia a Dél-Alföldön” (Römische glasierte Keramik
in der Südlichen Tiefebene), A Békés Megyei Múzeumok Közleményei 34 (2011) 93–122.
Varsik V., Kuzmová K. and Schmidtová J. (1996) “Archäologische Untersuchungen bei
der Bautätigkeit in Rusovce”, in Gerulata 1, edd. K. Kuzmová and J. Rajtár (Nitra 1996)
205–43.
Vidrih Perko V. (2006) “Amfore/Amphorae”, in Emonski Forum/Emona Forum, ed. Lj.
Plesnićar-Gec (Koper 2006) 99–108.
Vidrih Perko V. and Lovenjak M. (2001) “Amfore iz III. mitreja na Ptuju in Serapisu posvečeni
napis?” (Amphoras from the III. Mithreum in Ptuj and the inscription dedicated to
Serapis)”, in Ptuj v rimskem cesarstvu. Mitraizem in njegova doba / Ptuj im römischen
Reich. Mithraskult und seine Zeit / Ptuj in the Roman Empire. Mithraism and its Era, edd.
M. Vomer Gojkovič and N. Kolar (Arhaeologia Poetovionensis 2) (Ptuj 2001 ) 179–89.
Vidrih Perko V. and Žbona Trkman B. (2005) “Ceramic finds from Ajdovščina—Fluvio
Frigido, an Early Roman road station and Late Roman fortress castra”, Acta Rei Creariae
Romanae Fautorum 39 (2005) 277–86.
Vidrih Perko V. and Župančič M. (2005) “Amphorae in western Slovenia and in northern
Istria”, in LRCW 1: Late Roman Coarse Wares, Cooking Wares and Amphorae in the Medi-
terranean: Archaeology and Archaeometry, edd. J. M. Gurt i Esparraguera et al. (BAR-IS
1340) (Oxford 2005) 521–36.
Vikić-Belančić B. (1970) “Beitrag zur Problematik der keramischen Werkstätten in Südpan-
nonien in der römischen Kaiserzeit”, ArchIug 11 (1970) 29–44.
—— (1968) “Keramika i njen udio u trgovinskom prometu južne Panonije u rimsko carsko
doba” (Die Keramik und ihr Anteil im Handel des südlichen Pannoniens zur Zeit des
römischen Kaiserreichs), Arheološki Vestnik 19 (1968) 509–34.
Williams C. (1989) Anemurium. The Roman and Early Byzantine Pottery (Subsidia Mediae-
valia 16) (Toronto 1989).
Zsidi P. (1991) “Újabb villa az aquincumi municipium territoriumán (Bp.III.ker. Kaszás
dűlő-Csikós utca)” (New data on a villa building in the territory of the civil town of
Aquincum (Bp. 3rd dist. Kaszás dűlő-Csikós utca)), Budapest Régiségei 27 (1991) 143–53.
—— (1987) “A Budapest XI. kerületi Gazdagréten feltárt 4–5. századi temető” (Das auf dem
Gazdagrét /Budapest XI.Bez. freigelegte Gräberfeld aus dem 4–5. Jahrhundert), Commu-
nicationes Archaeologicae Hungaricae (1987) 45–82.
Zsidi P., Hárshegyi P. and Vámos P. (2009) edd. Visual Store at Aquincum. The Permanent
Exhibition of the Aquincum Museum (Aquincumi látványraktár. A Budapesti Történeti
Múzeum Aquincumi Múzeumának állandó kiállítása) (Budapest 2009).
List of Maps and Figures
Map 1. Distribution map of Late Roman imported wares and lamps in the Pannonian
provinces.
Map 2. Late Roman pottery workshops in the Pannonian provinces.
Map 3. Pottery workshops of the Danube bend in the Valentinian period (after Soproni
(1985)).
Fig. 1. Glazed dishes. Budaörs (1, 17) (after Ottományi (2011)); Leányfalu (2, 4, 9–10, 14)
(after Ottományi (1991)); Visegrád-Gizellamajor (3, 5, 7–8, 13, 15–16) (after Ottományi
(2012)); Budakalász-Luppacsárda (6) (after Ottományi (2004)); Tokod (11.) (after Bónis
(1991)); Páty (12) (after Ottományi (2007)).
Fig. 2. Glazed jugs, beakers and pots. Budaörs (1, 5–7) (after Ottományi (2011)); Páty (2–4)
(Ottományi (unpublished)); Leányfalu (8–12) (after Ottományi (1991)); Budakalász-Lup-
pacsárda (13) (after Ottományi (2004)).
Fig. 3. Burnished Ware/ Group nos. 2–3. Intercisa/Dunaújváros (1) (after Ottományi
(1987)); Ulcisia Castra/Szentendre (2) (after Ottományi (2006)); Pilismarót-Malompatak
(5) (after Ottományi (1996)); Leányfalu (3–4, 7, 11) (after Ottományi (1991)); Savaria/
Szombathely, Fő tér (6) (after Ottományi and Sosztarits (1998)); Mosonszentmiklós–
Jánosházapuszta (8) (after Ottományi (1987)); Visegrád-Gizellamajor (9–10) (after
Ottományi (2012)).
Fig. 4. Burnished Ware/storage vessels. Budaörs (1–2, 6) (after Ottományi (2009)); Ulci-
sia Castra/Szentendre (3) (after Ottományi (2006)); Visegrád-Gizellamajor (4) (after
Ottományi (2012)); Pilismarót-Malompatak (5) (after Soproni (1985)).
Fig. 5. Traditional Roman Grey Coarse Ware. Budaörs (1–3, 8–9, 12–13) (after Ottományi
(2012a)); Páty (4–7, 10–11) (Ottományi (unpublished)).
Fig. 6. New types of Roman Grey Coarse Ware from the end of the 4th c. A.D. Páty (1)
(after Ottományi (2007)); Budaörs (2) (after Ottományi (2012a)); Tokod (4–5, 8) (after
Lányi (1981)); Visegrád-Gizellamajor (3) (after Ottományi (2012)); Budakalász (6) (after
Ottományi (2004)); Leányfalu (7, 9–11) (after Ottományi (1991)).
Fig. 7. Hand-made and slow wheel-made pottery. Keszthely-Fenékpuszta (1, 7) (after
Ottományi (1987)); Visegrád-Gizellamajor (2, 4, 8) (after Ottományi (2012)); Cirpi/Dun-
abogdány (3) (after Ottományi (1999)); Ságvár (5) (unpublished); Budaörs (6, 9) (after
Ottományi (2012a)); Leányfalu (10–11) (after Ottományi (1991)).

Harshegyi P. and Ottomanyi K. Imported A PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Harshegyi P. and Ottomanyi K. Imported A PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Harshegyi P. and Ottomanyi K. Imported A PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Imported and local pottery in late roman Pannonia

Piroska Hárshegyi and Katalin Ottományi

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2013 DOI: 10.1163/22134522-12340040

Danube bend area is particularly well-researched.2 The research situation

2 Soproni (1985); Tokod: Lányi (1981b); Leányfalu: Ottományi 1991; Cirpi/Dunabogdány:

10 Gabler (1978).

future research—the formulation of a Late Roman pottery typology for

Imported Wares (Map 1)

African Red Slip Ware (Terra Sigillata Chiara)

22 Bónis and Gabler (1990) fig. 24.

24 Vindobona/Vienna: Hayes 2 and 3 forms, see: Donat (1999) 211. Carnuntum/Bad

in Pannonia, was proclaimed emperor by his soldiers in Carnuntum in

A Hayes 50A piece from Vindobona/Vienna has been discovered, and a

Gorsium/Tác, and Sopianae/Pécs.43 The Hayes 59B type is of the same

chiara D vessel was found in the Tiszaföldvár Sarmatian settlement.50 The

50 Gabler and Vaday (1986) 67–69.

Some fragments from the imitations of north African sigillata produc-

North African Lamps (Iványi XII = Atlante VIII/X)

57 Ad Statuas/Ács-Vaspuszta: Gabler (1989) 470. Keszthely-Fenékpuszta: Gabler (1988)

The production of Hayes IIA/Atlante X form is likely to have begun

Argonne Ware (Argonnen sigillata)

74 Bakker et al. (2005) 171.

north of Brigetio/Komárom-Szőny and dated to the second half of the

Thin-Walled White Fineware (Late Roman Eggshell Ware)

84 Kuzmová (1997) 31.

and also in later contexts with a somewhat taller variant (Barkóczi 43

were identified as Peacock-Williams 35 forms.100 Fragments of Almagro 54

100 Horváth (2011) Abb. 2.4.–5. 599.

Local Pottery Production

The circumstances of pottery production changed in the Late Roman

Map 2. Late Roman pottery workshops in the Pannonian provinces.

115 Ottományi (1991) 45–48; Ottományi (1999a).

Map 3. Pottery workshops of the Danube bend in the Valentinian period

1. Forms and Decoration ( figs. 1–2)

ordered decoration appears mainly on beakers, mugs, vase-form vessels

2. Distribution and Workshops

pottery was also manufactured in Krefeld-Gellep and in northern Italy, in

Glazed ware probably had more production centres than is archaeolog-

Várgesztes.153 South Pannonian workshops have been found at: Sirmium/

cemeteries is supported by coin evidence as well.159 Glazed pottery appears

159 Nádorfi (1992) 45–51.

170 Visegrád-Gizellamajor (wasters were found): Ottományi (2012b) fig. 5.4.

Pannonian population seems to have been influenced by the new arrivals,

1. Group 1: Middle to Second Half/End of the 4th c.

at Ács-Vaspuszta.181 It appears in small quantities in the fifth phase at the

Findspots and Ethnicity:

Fig. 3. Burnished Ware/ Group nos. 2–3. Intercisa/Dunaújváros (1) (after

Fig. 4. Burnished Ware/storage vessels. Budaörs (1–2, 6) (after Ottományi (2009));

Findspots and Ethnicity:

195 Ottományi (1991) 34; Ottományi (2012b) 383.

3. Group 3: First Half/Second Third of the 5th c. A.D.203

Findspot and Ethnicity:

219 Lányi (1981b) 73–87; Ottományi (1996) 78–94.

Kerekeskút, and Csorna.224 Workshops of this ware are rarely found in

As a result of the deterioration of the technical conditions, and the opera-

Fig. 7. Hand-made and slow wheel-made pottery. Keszthely-Fenékpuszta (1, 7)

Under Diocletian (A.D. 284–305) the provinces of Pannonia Superior and

introduction of the annona and several administrative reforms enhanced

235 Fulford and Peacock (1984) 256–57., Reynolds (2010) 74, 81.