Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology. The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity

STUDIEN ZUR ARCHÄOLOGIE EUROPAS 14 Frühgeschichtliche Zentralorte in Mitteleuropa herausgegeben von Jiří Macháček Šimon Ungerman Habelt-Verlag · Bonn Studien zur Archäologie Europas Band 14 herausgegeben von Joachim Henning, Achim Leube und Felix Biermann Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH · Bonn 2011 Frühgeschichtliche Zentralorte in Mitteleuropa Internationale Konferenz und Kolleg der Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung zum 50. Jahrestag des Beginns archäologischer Ausgrabungen in Pohansko bei B7eclav, 5.–9.10.2009, B7eclav, Tschechische Republik herausgegeben von Ji7í Machá+ek 1imon Ungerman Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH · Bonn 2011  Gedruckt mit Unterstützung der Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung, der Grantagentur der Tschechischen Republik, Projekt Nr. 404/09/J014 und dem Forschungsvorhaben der Masaryk-Universität, Nr. MUNI/4/0929/20 Umschlag: B7eclav-Pohansko, Luftbild. (Foto: Martin Gojda) ISBN 978-3-7749-3730-7 Ein Titeldatensatz ist bei der Deutschen Bibliothek erhältlich. (http://www.ddb.de) Copyright 2011 by Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn  Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity∗ Ivo Štefan Abstract (e.g. Wihoda 2005) had its noteworthy reflection also The collapse of the polity which Byzantine Emperor Con- in the archaeological sources – the main rich centres stantine VII Porphyrogennetos called ‘megale Moravia’ on the River Morava with several thousand inhabitants is undoubtedly one of the most noteworthy problems of were quickly abandoned, their fortifications were not re- Central European history of the Early Middle Ages i.a. newed, the numerous sacral buildings disappeared. The also because it has no equivalent wide and far. How is it ‘Great Moravian’ polity shows ‘a sudden, pronounced possible that the still recently prospering society could en- loss of an established level of sociopolitical complex- tirely disintegrate in a short timeframe? Through a struc- ity’, and we can thus justifiably speak of its ‘collapse’ tural analysis of the Great Moravian polity, the author (Tainter 1988, 193). What is interesting is that the ex- attempts to show that the collapse at the beginning of the tent of this phenomenon – perhaps with the exception of tenth century was closely tied to its fragile socioeconomic the Avar Kaganat –  was unparalleled  in early medieval foundations and endeavours to offer an explanation for Europe. Yet on what ideological, social and economic the subsequent resignation on the renewal of the ‘Great principles was the coherence of Great Moravian society Moravian project’ as well. At the end, the study asks the founded in the period of its flowering that it could have question of what level of complexity Great Moravia actu- entirely disintegrated so quickly? What was hence its ally attained, to what extent its structure built on foreign proverbial Achilles’ heel? Should we already consider models and what legacy it left in Central Europe. ‘Great Moravia’ as an early medieval state (e.g. Třeštík 2000b) or rather only as an advanced form of ‘chief- Keywords: Great Moravia; early medieval State; collapse dom’ (Macháček 2009)? I believe that precisely its sud- of complex societies. den collapse could reveal much more on the principle of the functioning of Great Moravia than is usually thought and conversely a structural analysis of the individual ar- eas of the socioeconomic system might help understand Introduction the causes of its decline. In 883, Moravian dux Svatopluk (Zwentibald) and his army, which he had gathered from all of the Slavonic How Did Great Moravia ‘Function’? lands, attacked Pannonia, administered by Duke Ar- nulf of Carinthia, and levelled it to the ground. When he repeated this campaign already the following year, There is hardly anything that can be said of Great Mora- his army was allegedly so large – as mentioned by the via truly for certain. The unpleasant specifics of the rela- displeased author of the Annales Fuldenses – that ‘at tively extensive collection of written reports relating to one place it was possible to see his army marching from Moravia of the ninth and early tenth centuries are well- sunrise to sunset’. Svatopluk’s conceit was justified: four known. Although we have the almost annual information years before, he had received an archbishopric headed of the Frankish annals available on the situation on the by Methodius for his regnum from Pope John VIII and ‘hot border’ between the Moravians and the East Frank- was addressed as unicus fillius by the papal letter, which ish Empire for the second half of the ninth century, their at least formally accorded him equal rights with the authors did not express interest in the internal social and emperor. In the course of his life, he managed to gain economic structure (cf. Bílková – Fiala – Karbulová control of a large part of Central Europe. Already to four 1967). With the exception of two legal texts copying decades later at the time of the invasion of the Magyars most likely Byzantine models (Charvát 1987), domestic into Central Europe, however, the powerful regnum Ma- writings which would regulate the relations between in- ravorum suddenly disappeared from the political map of dividual groups of the populace either did not exist at all Europe approximately after a century of existence1. The or have not been preserved. It has not been possible so sudden lack of interest of the period authors in Moravia far to date the archaeological sources (with a few excep- tions) more precisely and thus create a dynamic picture, ∗ Devoted to Prof. Jan Klápště and Prof. Petr Sommer on their sixtieth which must have changed very distinctly in the course birthdays. The study was created within the project The Archaeolo- of the ninth century. Hence, there is no alternative but gy of Přemyslid Bohemia (GAČR P405/10/0556) and research plan Czech Lands in the Centre of Europe in the Past and Today (MSM to work with a kind of ‘ideal Great Moravia’, let us say 0021600827). under the reign of Svatopluk in the period of its greatest 1 For an outline of the history of ‘Great Moravia’, see e.g. Třeštík prosperity and coherence. 2000a; Poláček 1999a. 333  Ivo Štefan Social Structure and Warfare Although the Moravian ruler appeared on an international scale as a sovereign in most cases, his power sprang from the possibility to activate the resources within his own From no later than the 830s until the end of the existence society. A key role in that was undoubtedly played by the of the Great Moravian system, it was led by sovereigns elite, which asserted and legitimised the sovereign’s au- from one dynasty usually referred to by the Frankish thority. There has already been a lot written on the Great sources neutrally as ducis or only exceptionally regis2. For Moravian elite surrounding the sovereign, referred to in the entire time of its existence, so-called Great Moravia the Latin sources only generally as optimates, primates, retained two cores: the first, which played the main role, or nobiles viri, or exceptionally principes; unfortunately, was in today’s South Moravia; the second, with its main none of the preserved sources mentions the essential: on centre in Nitra, was constituted in today’s western Slova- what its power was based. While researchers very happily kia and its administration seems to have been predomi- study Pannonia or Eastern Mark, where there cannot be nantly ensured by non-ruling members of the ‘Mojmír’ any doubt of the private land ownership of the nobility, dynasty (Fig. 1). With great likelihood, the exclusive and they are always forced to admit in the end that it says – as far as we know – never disputed position of the rul- very little about the situation on the territory of today’s ing family relied upon the sacral legitimisation connected Moravia and Slovakia in the ninth century (e.g. Havlík with Christian ideology from the 830s (Třeštík 2000b, 1978, 46; Charvát 1987). We also discover nothing about 118–119). The close connection of the cohesion of the the number of the elite and internal segmentation. Was it Moravian polity with the ‘Mojmír’ dynasty is rendered primarily the original ‘pre-state’ elite, which only recog- well by an episode with Priest Slavomar, a relative of the nised the sovereignty of the ruler but continued to base ruling Svatopluk, who was even involuntarily installed at its own power on its own resources, or did it derive its the head of the Moravians during his Frankish captivity in power already predominantly from services to the king 871. If we thus assess the Moravian polity in terms of the or in direct concert with him? We shall turn our attention continuity of the central authority, we can hardly fulfil the to the testimony of archaeology. The starting point for requirements of one of the most common cultural-anthro- further considerations is the archaeological localisation pological characteristics of ‘chiefdom’, i.e. the permanent of the residences and burials of this social group. Already competitive tension between the local leaders aspiring to for a number of years, attention has been paid to two find central government (e.g. Cohen 1978, 55–57; Earle 1991, categories which are closely connected: to the socially 13; Yoffee 2005, 22–30). The competitive struggles al- defined buildings and the richly furnished graves. ready took place in Moravia only within the dynasty, like The most distinctive buildings are naturally churches, which it was with the later Central European states, but we can with the exception of Ducové (Ruttkay 2005, 230–243) are unfortunately only speculate about the beginnings of the concentrated only at the main castles and in their immediate so-called Mojmír dynasty before the 830s. vicinity and which are most commonly considered to be private sanctuaries (‘Eigenkirchen’) of the ruler and the highest elite. Their clear functional and social interpretation, however, is considerably complicated by several factors. In the case of private churches, we would expect a spatial connection with clearly separated courts (curia), which we have not been able to identify so far3. Our idea of the Moravian society being strongly differ- entiated in terms of property has relied mainly on the considerable differences in the grave goods. High so- cial status was primarily demonstrated by the presence of items associated with mounted warriors, with women then expensive silver or gold jewellery. The great expec- tations that are often connected with a detailed social analysis of burial grounds, however, most likely some- what overestimate the potential of the testimony of this type of source. While relatively considerable differences in the grave goods generally speak of substantial property differentiation, there certainly is not any direct propor- 3 With the exceptions of Pohansko near Břeclav, Staré Město-Špitálky and Ducové, we encounter an absence of distinctive remnants of their enclosure. However, if we accept a justified reconstruction of Fig. 1. Fortified settlements in the core of Great Moravia the regular structures of the buildings inside the walls of Pohansko (after Staňa 1985, modified). near Břeclav (Macháček 2007a, Abb. 84–94; 2007b, fig. 11, 12), we allow for an easier way of demarcating residential units, which has not left traces that could be clearly identified by archaeology. The absence of a distinctive enclosure itself therefore cannot serve as a 2 On the social structure based on the written sources, see esp. Graus clear proof against the connection of churches with residences of 1966, 172–195; Bílková 1967; Havlík 1978; Třeštík 1997, 287–296. the elite. 334  Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology. The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity tionality between a social position and the form of the Krohn 2003)6. Unlike Bohemia of the ninth century, we grave furnishing, which would allow a sharp division of also do not know of any exceptionally furnished ‘ducal’ the property and legal social classes as was believed in graves from Moravia and Slovakia (with the exception of earlier research (e.g. Hochmanová-Vávrová 1962). The an old and disputable find from Blatnica) outside of the grave goods were simply not a military uniform (cf. e.g. most important castles. Brather 2008). A good example is provided by the finds In the Frankish Empire of the ninth century, the custom of swords, thus an exceptionally expensive artefact with of equipping the deceased with objects had already been a clear social significance: in Mikulčice, we know six- abandoned to a large extent. The burial customs of the teen items of the more than 2,300 graves (Košta 2005); at Moravians thus are much more reminiscent of the Merov- the two rural burial grounds on the cadastre of Nechvalín ingian Period of the sixth and seventh centuries. In the with 160 examined graves, they accompanied four of the tendency towards distinctive post-mortal pomposity, we deceased (Klanica 2006). It seems that in many cases the can see a reflection of a society with institutions that have logic of the grave goods followed rather the principle of not yet stabilised, where it is necessary on every occasion pars pro toto (Klápště 2009, 530). For the expression of to demonstrate in a conspicuous way the attained or de- the deceased’s belonging to the highest ranks, it appar- sired social status. Through the play with status symbols, ently sufficed to have exquisitely decorated spurs or belt the bereaved exhibit to the funeral public especially their strap ends of non-ferrous metals (with some exceptions, right to assume the position of the deceased. Wherever we know of both categories only from the centres). The social ranks begin to change into a relatively closed class limited testimony of the goods is most explicitly illus- and stabilised institutions are formed, grave goods recede trated by a comparison of the burials in the interiors of the into the background (Steuer 1982, 421, 525–528; 1995, churches, which we can certainly attribute to the absolute 89–95; Böhme 1996; Brather 2008). We can thus con- peak of society, and the burials around them: we cannot sider Moravia of the ninth and early tenth centuries as a identify any clear interpretable differences (Schulze-Dörr­ typical rank society. The axes or spurs from the children’s lamm 1993, 613–614). Moreover, the deposition of grave graves furnished with miniature social attributes are usu- goods was most likely unevenly abandoned already at the ally considered to indicate a hereditary continuity of a time of the existence of Great Moravia. social position (Klápště 2009, 534). Yet, in my opinion, it In the interiors of churches, we encounter a few burials is difficult to decide whether it always was a real entitle- only at the main castle in Mikulčice, which most likely ment or rather only wishful thinking. testifies to the fact that in Moravia only members of the It is possible to join those authors who consider the ex- ruling dynasty successfully claimed the right to a burial on istence of a stabilised elite depending on extensive land the prestigious place (Schulze-Dörrlamm 1993, 618–619, ownership (Grundherrschaft) in Great Moravia as un- Tab. 1). The rich graves in the burial grounds around the likely (Třeštík 1997, 287; Klápště 2009, 538). The great- churches do not normally form separate groups but are est wealth manifestly concentrated in the main centers. distributed all over their area. Apparently, several groups For Moravia of the ninth century, the words of Norman would bury here concurrently, with each of them furnish- Yoffee, who considers urban centres in early states as ing only some of its members with weapons or exclusive ‘transformative social environments in which states were jewellery4. themselves created’ (Yoffee 2005, 45) might thus apply. Despite these complications, it is still possible to consider Precisely immediate contact with the sovereign, who cer- the connection of most of the small churches on the edges tainly travelled between the centres, was apparently the of agglomerations to residences of the highest elite as the best winning strategy for the top elite. However, we are most acceptable explanation. We list only for a compari- not able to assess the proportion of old pre-state elite and son the church of St Stephen, which Archbishop of Salz- the elite installed by the sovereign. The ruler’s influence burg Adalwin consecrated in 864 on the property of the must have decreased with the distance from the core of important member of the retinue of Pribina and Kocel the land. The only loosely and uncertainly attached buffer for many years, Wittmar, in close proximity to today’s zone was undoubtedly still controlled by the local elite. Zalavár (Moosburg)5. In any case, the considerable con- A key phenomenon for understanding the Great Moravian centration of these buildings in the main castles creates an society are undoubtedly the graves with militaria at the entirely different picture than we know from the Frankish burial grounds that are part of the common agrarian settle- Empire or precisely from the comitatus of Pribina and ments outside of the centres. A current map today counting Kocel in Pannonia, where we encounter sacral architec- 110 burial grounds in Moravia alone (Fig. 2) shows that in ture besides in the centres distributed to a great extent well-studied areas these graves come from almost every in the rural milieu, where it usually was a component of current cadastre (Fig. 3). The grave wholes with weapons the cores of the individual farmsteads (e.g. Böhme 1996; on the territory of today’s Moravia are concentrated in its southern part and the Olomouc region and cross this 4 Even where we could consider the Eigenkirchen of the elite, we thus either do not know how to identify the burials of the supposed own- 6 The courtyard in Ducové on the left bank of the River Váh, which ers among the others (e.g. church No. 6 in Mikulčice: Profantová is often mentioned as an example of a residence of a feudal lord de- – Kavánová 2003), or furnished graves have exceptionally not been pending on its own extensive landed property (Ruttkay 1997, 151– captured here, or they may have been robbed (e.g. churches No. 7, 152; 2005), is in principle nothing but a lightly fortified stronghold 8, 9 and 10 in Mikulčice – cf. Poulík 1975; Měřínský 2005). with a church. Whether the feudal lord here managed it at his own 5 Conversio, MMFH III, 319; on its possible archaeological identifi- expense or only administered an entrusted part of the upper River cation, see Müller 1995. Váh region for the sovereign cannot, however, be decided. 335  Ivo Štefan Fig. 2. Great Moravian burial grounds from the ninth and beginning of the tenth centuries with finds of militaria and spurs outside the centres on the territory of today’s Moravia. The finds of swords and spurs indicate the presence of mounted warriors in the rural milieu, but at most necropolises with mounted-unit’s equipment also graves with weapons typical for the infantry appear (developed by author). border only sporadically. The edges of their appearance In the women’s graves in the rural burial grounds, we then essentially overlap the border of the evidence of skeletal regularly find jewellery. Although simple bronze earrings burial grounds, which seems to correspond to the borders are predominant here, we know of also silver or gilded of the core of Moravia of the ninth and beginning of the exclusive exemplars from many localities. In the course tenth centuries7. The local context of the graves accom- of 10th century after the collapse of Great Moravia, graves panied by weapons is conclusive for the interpretation. with weapons entirely disappeared from the rural milieu9. Wherever the rural burial grounds have been excavated It is possible to distinguish between two main groups of in their entirety, we can (with some exceptions) consider equipment (Ruttkay 1982, 182): the kit connected with communities counting at most a few family units in each the infantry (an axe or spear) and weapons used by war- generation (Fig. 4). The proportion of men equipped with riors on horseback (spurs, a sword, or also a spear). At weapons fluctuates and we know also of localities where surprisingly many rural localities (52), the deceased is the weapons accompany as many as half of all the men8. accompanied by spurs or even swords, hence objects that 7 It would certainly be valuable to confront this map with the archaeo- 9 An important argument is above all a substantially lower represen- logical records of the settlements. Unfortunately, we are still lacking tation of spurs with a long prick as opposed to older Carolingian such a map for Moravia. pieces. On the contrary, spurs with a long prick are the most com- 8 E.g. Velké Bílovice (Měřínský 1985), Morkůvky (Měřínský – Un- mon type of 10th century spurs in other regions of Central Europe ger 1990). (most recently Kind 2002). 336  Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology. The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity Fig. 3. The current cadastre borders provide a rough idea of the great density of the burial grounds with finds of militaria in the central part of Great Moravia. The picture is understandably deformed by the regional differences in the intensity of archaeological activities (developed by author). are a clear sign that the buried had their own horse, which munities of which they were members. We would also means an animal that in the early medieval agricultural have difficulty explaining why the local elite gave up its cycle did not find a meaningful use. It prompts caution post-mortal pomposity so quickly after the collapse of in accepting literally the testimony of the part of the so- the Great Moravian system. 3) I think that we are fac- called Anonymous Arabic Account, which is related to ing to a great extent free Moravians, of whom also the the empire of Svatopluk and attributes the ownership of written sources speak (e.g. Havlík 1978, 56–58; Třeštík horses to only the duke and elite (Třeštík 1997, 290). 1997, 288–289; Procházka 2009, 91); said in the words of But who were these villagers to whom the weapons (in Heiko Steuer they were likely the ‘Bauernkrieger’ (peas- some cases quite expensive) buried with them certainly ant warriors), who corresponded to a class of free men belonged? In the existing literature, we find essentially that we know from the territory of the Frankish Empire three possible interpretations: 1) They were installed from in the Merovingian Period and with whom the graves the centre. I believe that the frequency of the evidence with weapons at row burial grounds are usually connect- of the phenomenon is in disagreement with this concep- ed (Steuer 1997, 283–284). It seems that these people tion; moreover, where would all of these people have were representatives of the local kin groups, who from originally come from? 2) It is the local elite relying on its this position naturally came into contact with the centre own landed property. Here we again encounter the great and who apparently retained at least formally a share in density of these graves and the small number of the com- power. Outside the centres, the personally free population 337  Ivo Štefan Fig. 4. The picture shows one of the two Great Moravian burial grounds examined in the cadastre of the municipality Nechvalín (in the Hodonín district). A part of the deceased in both places was accompanied by weapons and mounted- unit’s equipment. Burial there continued fluently even after the decline of Great Moravia, but militaria and exclusive jewellery entirely disappeared from the graves. The later graves are concentrated predominantly in the northeast part of the necropolis. The locality was separated from the nearest Great Moravian fortified settlement of Sv. Kliment near Osvětimany by 15 km as the crow flies (after Klanica 2006, modified). until then entirely predominated, and their exploitation by cial position was usually simultaneously the equivalent the sovereign apparatus was certainly strongly limited. In of a higher military position and vice versa, success in this, the structure of Moravia significantly differed from battle entailed the possibility of social ascent. It hence the structure of the neighbouring Frankish Empire, where was by no accident that the male funerary kit was pre- already in the eighth century most of the villagers had be- dominantly of a military character. If we thus wanted gun to become vassals, usually integrated into the mano- to reconstruct the structure of the Great Moravian army rial system of the landed authorities (e.g. Rösener 2006; (in detail, see Ruttkay 1982, 167–174), we would es- Heinzelmann 1977). Yet, what were weapons doing in the sentially (also with uncertainties) repeat what was said graves of Moravian villagers? above. According to the written sources, the Moravian Like the main enemy of the Moravians, Louis the Ger- sovereign was the almost exclusive commander of the man, also the Moravian sovereign undoubtedly derived Moravians. The core of his army was certainly the high- a substantial part of his legitimacy from his image as the est elite. However, already here we are faced with a fun- defender of his people. It clearly arises from the diction damental question. Were these nobiles viri the heads of of the Frankish sources of the ninth century that in the their own independent retinues with which they merely second half of the ninth century he had an exception- entered the sovereign’s service, or were these ties formed ally large and entirely competitive army at his disposal only from the sovereign’s commission? The first variant (Goldberg 2004, 68–70). It is confirmed also by archae- is attested by the presence of emigrants, who must have ology: not only the inhabitants of the centres but also taken refuge in Moravia also with a retinue (Ruttkay the villagers were equipped with ‘modern’ weapons, 1982, 171). Generalisation is however problematic. As which fully corresponded to the kit of the competing the archaeological research in Pohansko near Břeclav Carolingian armies (cf. Ruttkay 1982, 174; Last 1972). showed, also within the main agglomerations the ar- Regular military events were generally among the most migers were divided into two qualitative groups, who important integrating factors of early medieval forma- resided and buried in different places (Macháček 2007a, tions. In such an extent, they needed to act in a coordi- 348–350; 2007b). nated, hierarchically organised way, which called for a The rule over Moravia was closely connected with the functioning communication network within the society. control of important centers. Their capture was the main It is quite likely that the ‘necessity’ of regular military aim of the Frankish campaigns but was seldom success- defence and invasions was among the most important ful (Goldberg 2004, 69–70). The defence of the extensive arguments of the sovereign apparatus for the obligation fortifications must have been provided by predominantly of the construction of strongholds as well as their sub- professional units, permanently settled here. The armigers sequent supplying. dispersed all over the countryside could (perhaps besides In the Early Middle Ages, military science is insepara- reinforcing the stronghold garrisons) hardly have played ble from the political and social structure: a higher so- a larger role in the defence of the land. 338  Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology. The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity Fig. 5. An attempt at a model scheme of the barter-trade relations in Great Moravia. Within the society, non- market exchange mechanisms like redistribution and gift-giving are likely to have predominated. It can be assumed that the market transac- tions were implemented mainly in the sphere of long-distance trade, through which scarce and prestigious commodities entered Moravia and were further redistributed. War booty and tributes were another source of incomes (developed by author). At the very least in the second half of the ninth centu- already been subjected to a landed authority (Reuter 2006, ry, the Moravians organised probably annual invasions 262). Also the disappearance of weapons from the grave of the neighbouring regions. At the same time, we must inventory can be inter alia connected with subjugation not forget that the written sources capture predominantly (Steuer 1997, 283–284). The limited availability of good only those beyond the southern border. Other than the quality weapons is echoed also in the provisions of the professional units, also the armed free rural population Carolingian capitularies (Last 1972, 79). Military raids, undoubtedly participated to a great extent in these cam- always planned only to certain parts of the year, by far paigns. It did not, however, constitute only a second-rate did not have to burden the economic system to such an infantry but also a cavalry. It can thus be supposed that extent as it may seem. In the Frankish milieu, conscrip- the weapons outside of the centres were not connected tion related only to some members of the communities, primarily with local military conflicts but precisely with which can be justifiably assumed also in Moravia10. The participation in the large military operations of the Mora- side effect of regular participation in military campaigns, vian sovereign and his optimates. where figuratively speaking the centre intersected with The organisation of the military campaigns and training, the periphery, was primarily the formation of a network of without which an army comprised of farmers would not social relations which facilitated the spreading of cultural have been more than an unusable chaotic horde, required homogeneity, the sense of unity but perhaps also Christ­ at least a basic territorial organisation, likely based on the ianisation and the supply of the sovereign’s apparatus network of fortified settlements. The question of the de- with taxes. The local representatives could then derive gree of territorialisation of the rule – hence the division of their prestige in the domestic situation from the relation to the territory of Great Moravia into stable administrative the centre. However, did warfare also have any economic wholes with a castle centre – is however solvable only impact? with difficulty on the basis of archaeological sources (most recently, see Procházka 2009, 95). Through the participa- tion of the wider classes of the population in offensive operations, Moravians did not differ from their western neighbours. The difference can be seen in the fact that in the Carolingian Empire the army since the eighth century had been comprised of troops organised by the individual aristocrats or ecclesiastical institutions from their estates. 10 For Western Europe, see Innes 2000, 143–153; Halsall 2003, 71– The conscription also only concerned the liberi homines, 110; for Hungary of the eleventh century, see Krzemieńska – Třeštík whose number however greatly decreased and who had 1982. 339  Ivo Štefan Fig. 6. A comparison of the Great Moravian agglomerations with the important early medieval centres of Europe (after Galuška 2005; Poláček 2000; Dostál 1985; Čiháková – Havrda 2008; Codreanu-Windauer – Wintergerst 2000; von Carnap-Bornheim – Hilberg 2007; Janiak 1998; Trier 2002). Economic Sphere productivity of the period agriculture, which could fluc- tuate significantly depending not only on local natural conditions but also on the economic motivation of the An understanding of what kind of system Great Mora- producers. An argument for an endeavour for at least a via actually was is closely related to an understanding of partial subsistence self-sufficiency could be the agrarian the sense of the extensive central fortified Burgstädte – settlements included in the exceptionally large fortified certainly the cores of the political and symbolic integrity agglomeration of Staré Město-Uherské Hradiště (Galuška of the polity. With their size, they easily compete with 1998). Also the other centres were surrounded by dense the most important centres of the western part of Central networks of agrarian settlements (Poláček 2008; Dresler Europe and do not have any competitors in the western – Macháček 2008; Galuška 2008a), but we are not able to Slavonic milieu even later (cf. Fig. 6)11. The Great Mora- specify their property-legal relation to the centre. It can vian centres however did not follow one pattern and dif- be assumed that a relatively large role as labour force was fer significantly from one another. The first of a series played by persons who were not personally free, who had of questions (which is a contemporary hit in European been brought at least in part from foreign lands as war proto-urban studies) is the relation of the centres to the prisoners12. Especially during the reign of Svatopluk, a agricultural environs, hence to the rest of the Moravian certain role could have been played also by tributes lev- polity. Were they rather ‘islands’ of the elite independent ied from subjugated territories (apparently from Bohemia, in terms of subsistence or rather structures closely inter- Serbia and Lesser Poland). As shown by Timothy Reuter, linked with the surrounding rural milieu? And if so, based the amount of the tributes was usually not negligible and on what principles? the pre-monetary societies normally levied it in cattle or Unfortunately, significant unknowns come into play: horses (Reuther 2006, 231). 1) the social and professional profiles of the population It however definitely did not mean that the free rural pop- in the centres, i.e. how large the proportion of the peo- ulation was fully exempted from obligations to the central ple exempted from agricultural production was; 2) the power. The levy of a regular annual tax can justifiably be supposed (Třeštík 1997, 293–296); also a share in the 11 On the strongholds in general, see Staňa 1985; Procházka 2009; on building of fortifications comes into consideration, but Staré Město-Uherské Hradiště, see Galuška 1998; on  Mikulčice, for the above-mentioned reasons it is possible to doubt see Poláček 2007; 2008; on Pohansko near Břeclav, see Macháček the possibility of more distinctive organisational interven- 2007a; 2007b; on Nitra, see Bednár 2001, with the further literature in all of them. The estimates of the population numbers: Staré Město- Uherské Hradiště: 3,000–5,000 (Galuška 2008b, 95); Mikulčice: 12 In the written sources, see Havlík 1978, 51–54; on the archaeologi- 1,000–2,000 (Poláček 2008, 265); Pohansko near Břeclav: ca 1,000 cal identification at the burial grounds (special burials), see Dostál (Dresler – Macháček 2008). 1982, 197–198; Štefan 2009, 144. 340  Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology. The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity Fig. 7. The connection of Great Moravia within the network of long-distance routes (after McCormick 2001, modified). tions by the sovereign’s apparatus into the communities European routes certainly had fundamental importance: of free Moravians, which can also explain why the core the best information on the east-west Danubian route is of Great Moravia lacks specific professional toponyms provided by the Raffelstetten Customs Regulations (In- connected with the so-called service organisation, which quisitio de theloneis Raffelstettensis) in 904/905 focused we know from the later period from Bohemia, Poland and predominantly on retail trade in salt. According to it, not Hungary (Krzemieńska – Třeštík 1967; 1982). I would only small Bavarian merchants travelled up and down the therefore personally be sceptical of a hypothesis of large Danube heading ‘ad mercantum Marahorum’ but prima- violent shifts of the domestic population to the environs rily, as we read at the end of the document, the Danube of the centres (Dresler – Macháček 2008, 323). We can- was used as a means of transport also by Jews and other not rule out that also surpluses of the domestic populace professional merchants, who were to pay customs at Linz participated in the ‘urbanisation’ (cf. Cohen 1978, 42). ‘both from slaves and other things’ (MMFH IV, 114–119; All of the mentioned forms of supply are however consid- Koller 1995). The communication headed at the very least erably demanding in terms of organisation for the sover- in the second half of the ninth century further down the eign’s apparatus. A substantially more effective solution Danube, which arises from the diplomatic attempt of Ar- would have surely been a functioning market. What do nulf for an embargo on salt (892), which the Moravians we know of the forms of exchange in the Moravian pol- imported from the territory of the Bulgarians (Ann. Fuld., ity? A number of authors who have dealt with the top- MMFH I, 119). The route is likely to have continued fur- ic have simply joined two spheres of the movement of ther to the territory of the Bulgarians and to Byzantium commodities which could in reality be connected only (McCormick 2001; 553–557; 2002, 172). We unfortu- in a mediated way: long-distance and domestic trade. nately know very little of the Moravian contacts in the There cannot be the slightest doubt of the intensive in- east, although they could have played a quite significant tegration of Great Moravia into the network of medieval role. The other important route was taken by Constantine long-distance routes. For Moravia, connections to two and Methodius on their first departure from Moravia, or 341  Ivo Štefan by the captured priests in the Life of St Naum. It was ment of bans on the enslavement and sale of Christians. the old amber road, whose course has recently been re- The main outlet in the ninth century was Arab northern constructed by Michael McCormick on the basis of finds Africa and the Near East, where the unfortunates arrived of Byzantine and Arabic coins. The route began at the primarily through Venice (in detail, see McCornick 2001, most important Mediterranean market in Venice, whose 734–755; 2002; Třeštík 2001, 106–109; Galuška 2003)16. flo­wering depending on trade mediation between Europe The Raffelstetten Customs Regulations then clearly states and the blossoming Arab world started in the second half that slaves from Moravia also headed to the west. The of the eighth century, continued across the Julian Alps testimony of the rare (in the context of the time how- and in the Danube valley finished at Antique Carnuntum, ever relatively typical) written sources is complemented it connected to the River Danube, and its final destination by archaeological finds of shackles (Galuška 2003) and was, upstream on the Morava, precisely today’s Moravia. perhaps also the mentioned special burials, concentrat- It no longer continued further to the north (Fig. 7; Mc- ed in the main fortified settlements (Štefan 2009, 144). Cormick 2001, 369–384, Map 12.6, 12.7; 2002, 174ff.). The trade in human misfortune thus apparently played The intensive connection between Moravia and Venice the same role in Moravia as it did one century later in is convincingly proved by written sources (Leciejewicz Bohemia (Třeštík 2001). It is naturally possible to sup- 1997). The expansion of Svatopluk into Pannonia in the pose also other ‘primary’ export commodities like cattle, 880s might be connected inter alia also with the attempt horses and wax (Johanek 1987, 32–44), but they probably to control its course to a greater extent. played a lesser role. From this perspective, the strange higher density of the What was the counter-value? One of the most distinctive largest agglomerations of Great Moravia on the lower archaeological find categories in Moravia comprises jew- stream of the Rivers Morava and Dyje, thus the left-bank ellery of a specific style from non-ferrous metals. They tributaries of the Danube – which is disadvantageous in are found in large numbers primarily among the grave terms of administration – has its clear logic. All of them goods. A substantial part of them must have come from lay immediately on rivers, which were undoubtedly navi- the domestic workshops. However, as far as we know, gable in the Early Middle Ages13. The extensive Burg- neither silver, nor gold, nor copper nor even lead was städte thus certainly inter alia served, in the words of mined in Moravia (Galuška 1989, 432–434, 450)17. Un- Karl Polanyi (1968), as ‘ports of trade’14. The control of fortunately, mystery still hangs over the question of in long-distance routes is from the intercultural perspective what form non-ferrous metals came to Moravia. The hy- one of the universal features of early states and can also pothesis of the melting down of foreign coins has not yet be one of the main causes for the establishment of central been supported by any archaeological evidence. The only authority. Whoever controls the flow of exclusive objects thing that can be said with certainty is then that the non- can generate a client system or use military force in order ferrous metal entered the system exogenously. Further to ensure communication security with the consent of the proven imported commodities were expensive materials others (e.g. Cohen 1978, 44–45; Claessen 2006, 220). The like silk and brocade, exclusive weapons, glass vessels, homonymy of the name of the political unit with the name thus generally prestigious goods18. of the main communication artery for Moravia (in Czech, The main Moravian civitates however did not fulfil only the name of both the river and the political unit is Morava) the role of the end destination of long-distance trade but was thus apparently no accident. The area around Carnun- concentrated also a substantial part of the non-agrarian tum, or around today’s Bratislava, was a neuralgic point. production. Despite the fact that we can only with dif- Both European arteries entered the territory of Moravia ficulty judge the extent and organisation of the local craft here. In terms of archaeology, the importance of this point manufacture, we can safely prove the production of jewel- is clearly proven by the concentration of fortified settle- lery, weapons, metal and bone tools, exclusive ceramics ments on the cadastre of Bratislava and Děvín15 (Fig. 1). Although it seems that the extent of the Moravian trade in 16 According to the Life of St Naum, the priests of the Slavonic Rite people will never be possible to express, it can be justifi- were sold after the death of Archbishop Methodius in 885 in Mora- ably anticipated that the most important export item of the via to Jewish merchants, who took them to Venice and wanted to sell them again. Had it not been for a Byzantine diplomat who Moravians were slaves, acquired through the expansionist bought and freed them, they certainly would have headed further campaigns from the as yet unchristianised Slavonic areas for the markets of the Arab world. Information on the extent of the in the north and east. The demand for them began to rise at phenomenon is provided (certainly only generally) by the Life of St the end of the eighth century proportionally to the enforce- Methodius. The future archbishop supposedly requested the release of nine hundred prisoners in his first departure from Moravia from 13 As is clearly proved by the finds of boats in Mikulčice. The largest Rostislav and Kocel instead of reward. A letter of complaint from was almost 10 m long (Poláček – Marek – Skopal 2000, 302–307). the Bavaria episcopate from 900 speaks of the taking of the prison- The stone for the building of the fortification at Pohansko, which ers from Pannonia by the Moravians. had been quarried west of Mikulčice, was partially transported by 17 The Slovak literature sometimes counts with the exploitation of de- water. A qualified estimate expects the transport of 13,500 tonnes posits in Central Slovakia (e.g. Ruttkay 1997, 149, 153). It is however of stone to a distance of ca 45 km (Macháček – Doláková et al. a merely little likely opinion, not supported by anything. As far as we 2007). know, only the deposits in Harz were utilised in Central Europe in the 14 In this sense for Pohansko near Břeclav, see already Macháček Carolingian Period (Blanchard 2001, 514–516, 518). The renewal of 2007a, 354–361; 2007b, 488–491; ibid. a comparison of the struc- the Antique mining of silver in Transylvania is expected only from ture of Pohansko with the emporia. the twelfth or thirteenth centuries (Wollmann 1999). 15 For the early medieval settlement of Carnuntum see Gugl – Kastler 18 For the archaeological identification of the imports, see Poláček 2007, 124–156, 496–501. 2007, 502–511. 342  Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology. The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity etc. here19. This picture is in contrast with the situation in not to say that exchange balancing the local surplus and the rural milieu, where the evidence of non-agricultural lack in agricultural or common crafts production did not activities is lacking with the exception of ironworking exist in Moravia in ninth century at all. Nevertheless, the (predominantly metallurgy)20. Yet we find all of the men- common populace certainly did not participate in the op- tioned categories of products in the countryside in large eration of the international ‘market of the Moravians’. It numbers. Through what exchange mechanism did they was organised and controlled by the sovereign through his thus come here from the centres? apparatus, just like the sphere of specialised crafts pro- The mentions of the ‘market of the Moravians’ in  the duction, which was concentrated in the centres, where the Raffelstetten Customs Regulations or the so-called products of the local workshops were partially consumed Anonymous Arabic Account are usually connected with- by the elites and partially went out. The common popu- out deeper analysis with a regular internal market (e.g. lace must have provided the sovereign’s apparatus with Třeštík 1973; Poláček 2007, 513). The well-known prob- regular taxes, which could also have been understood in lem, which however immediately stands in the way of this the sense of ‘gift’ (e.g. Curta 2006, 685; Claessen 1978, conception, is the absence of both domestic minting of the 552). The Great Moravian centres were thus not high me- ‘Mojmír’ dynasty and the fragmentary silver known from dieval towns linked with the agricultural environs through the northern part of Europe – thus generally a universal a market but the residences of the militarised elite, con- exchange medium. The idea that some ‘money’ simply trolling a complex system of redistribution. In this sense, must have existed has led archaeologists to seek ‘premo­ they were not however any rarity within Carolingian Eu- netary currencies’. What is usually interpreted this way rope. The supply of the ruling apparatus predominantly are the so-called axe-shaped ingots, which are concen- on the principle of the levy of taxes in kind took place trated at the fortified settlements (e.g. Bialeková 2000). even in the substantially more advanced West (Henning Nevertheless, their size varies considerably and they were 2007). Yet we are still quite a long way from a satisfactory much more likely an intermediate product intended for understanding of the complicated structure of the Mora- further treatment (Urbańczyk 2008, 156–157; Poláček vian civitates. 2008, 286). The usage of coins, however, was apparently A large part of the commodities – including certainly the quite limited in the ninth century also in the neighbour- prestigious ones in the first place – were thus apparently ing East Frankish Empire; full monetarisation here can be circulated within a ‘gift-giving economy’. We can say supposed only from the tenth century. The Great Moravi- that the basis of the sociopolitical integrity of the Great an sovereigns were thus not very stimulated to mint coins Moravian system was a complex transformation of war even from the outside21. Probably, no general exchange booty into prestigious items, which in return served to medium hence existed in Moravia. ensure the loyalty of the sovereign’s elites as well as the Economic anthropology as well as early medieval writ- common population, who apparently had retained a free ten sources have recorded an extensive sphere of the standing to a great extent until then. As a model, we can movement of commodities which did not function on the suppose that real market mechanisms applied to a great principle of supply and demand but on non-market prin- extent only within long-distance barter trade (Fig. 5). ciples like redistribution or gift-giving (with the second- The sovereign’s apparatus certainly derived a substan- ary literature, see Polanyi 1968; Steuer 1999; Moreland tial part of its legitimacy from the operation and control 2000; Curta 2006). We could find a whole range of such of the system23. From this perspective, the supposition examples in the Central European milieu alone22. This is that the later localities of the type of Pohansko were the sovereign’s attempt at emancipation and the creation of 19 A great extent of the treatment of iron as well as non-ferrous me­ their own capital is relatively likely (Macháček 2007a, tals can be supposed in Staré Město (Hrubý 1965; Galuška 1989; 362–368; 2007b), because the sovereign was otherwise 1992), it may further be expected in Mikulčice (Poláček 2008), Ni- condemned to permanent gift-giving to all sides inside tra (Bednár 2001) and Pobedim (Vendtová 1969), less in Pohansko his regnum. This extensive system worked if on the one near Břeclav (Macháček – Gregerová et al. 2007). hand the regular influx of booty from outside was ensured 20 Unfortunately, the topic of non-agrarian production outside of the and on the other hand its transformation into loyalty func- centres has not yet been devoted systematic attention. If we com- pare the records of the evidence in Moravia with the contempo- tioned. Great Moravia thus in this regard was apparently rary Frankish Empire, we can state that there is a clear difference. very similar to the first development stages of the other Precisely in the eighth and ninth centuries, the specialised crafts Central European states (cf. Žemlička 1995; Třeštík 1997, production here shifted from the former, ancient civitates to rural production centres connected with the manorial system (Henning Mieszko of Poland provided with clothing for the horses and ar- 2007, 14–17). mour; according to the Life of St Methodius, the future saint did 21 For a map of the Frankish mints of the ninth century, see e.g. Blan- not take gold, silver or any other things from Rostislav or Kocel chard 2001, Map 15.1. This is also reflected in the overall very small upon his departure but entrusted them with the word of the Gospels number of coin finds from the areas east of the Rhine. It can even without any profit. Many examples of this type for the Carolingian be anticipated that no regular monetary tributes had not been levied milieu have been most recently collected by F. Curta. The Carol- there as of then (with the secondary literature, see Hartmann 2002, ingian sovereigns regularly gave cloths, belts, silver, gold, horses, 245–251). For the exchange of plots of land, the important monas- jewellery and other prestigious commodities (Curta 2006). tery in Fulda still in 826 paid with eight swords, five items of cloth- 23 ‘Military power depended upon a chieftain’s ability to bind warriors ing, four cattle and two pairs earrings (Steuer 1999, 561). to himself by ties of loyalty. And this he could best achieve by liber- 22 We should mention the gifts to the retinue in the form of gold, silver ally sharing out of his wealth, thus committing those who accepted and expensive dresses mentioned in the earliest Czech legends, the it to make some repayment, be that in the form of reciprocal gifts, three-thousand-man army, which according to Ibrâhîm ibn Ya`qûb military service or something else’ (Hedeager 1993, 122). 343  Ivo Štefan 296; 2001; Sláma 2001). The transition to the systematic porary authors place the disappearance of the independent exploitation of internal sources did not happen here any Moravian regnum in 905 or 906. Gesta Hungarorum from more, because Great Moravia did not survive its first seri- the thirteenth century connects the subjugation of the land ous structural crisis. with Nitra; it can thus be assumed hypothetically that it might have been precisely here that the decisive battle oc- curred in which the core of the Moravian elite could have died and with it perhaps even Mojmír II (Třeštík 1987, Why Did Great Moravia Disappear? 41–42; 1991; Wihoda 2005). What is certain, the Mora- vians did not participate in the fateful battle at Bratislava (ad Brezalauspurc) in 907, where the Bavarians were The magnetism of the phenomenon of ‘decline and fall’ routed and which opened a scope for Magyar raids into functions just as reliably for Great Moravia as for other the centre of Europe. Moravia as a political unit with its societies that suddenly disappeared (cf. Tainter 1988; Yof- own representation disappeared and in the sources of the fee 2005, 131–160). All of the authors who have dealt tenth century it already appeared only as reminiscence. with Great Moravia naturally also expressed themselves Each of the cores of the original Moravia had a different on the question of its disappearance. In the indispensible fate awaiting it. Already in the course of the tenth century, characterisation of what we actually understand as the the eastern part with its centre in Nitra became an integral disappearance of Great Moravia, we can already refer to component of the Magyar estate, which after the battle a number of independent studies that have thoroughly at Lechfeld in 955 gradually transformed into an early analysed the available written as well as archaeological medieval state. Although the chronology as well as the sources24. specific forms of the penetration of the Magyars into the The overall tone of the written accounts is apparently best territory of today’s Slovakia can so far be specified only captured by the words of Regino of Prüm, who finished with difficulty, the main centres like Nitra or Bratislava his chronicle in 908: ‘Around that time also Svatopluk, fluently become part of the structures of the Magyar state King of the Moravian Slavs, died, the most prudent man and the relatively numerous grave finds testify to a grad- of the brightest spirit among his kind. His sons’ reign in ual settling of newcomers among the domestic population his kingdom was short and ill-fated, because the Magyars (Štefanovičová 2008; Nevizánsky 2008; Fusek 2008). ravaged everything to the foundations.’ Regino thus ex- The disappearance of the integrated Moravian polity for plicitly emphasises two moments: the death of Svatopluk good however must have been connected primarily with in 894 and the subsequent battles of succession between the fates of its western part in today’s Moravia. For the his sons, which in a short period deprive Moravia of all entire tenth century, we have at our disposal only a few of the results of the previous expansion. It gradually los- unclear written mentions, which do not allow a lucid es the formally controlled Bohemia, Pannonia, Sorbia as interpretation. The Moravian identity certainly did not well as the Tisza region; we know nothing of the posi- disappear altogether. Still before the definitive annexa- tion of the Vistula River area. In 899, Mojmír II managed tion of the territory to Bohemia at the beginning of the to defeat his brother and attempted to stabilise the situa- eleventh century, some kind of Moravians stand out from tion in Moravia. Through the papal legates, he renewed the darkness, but it evidently was a local elite without the domestic ecclesiastical organisation and might have central authority (Wihoda 2005). The drastic decline of asserted his influence in the Bavarian Eastern Mark as the geopolitical importance of Moravia corresponds to the well. Most of the contemporary authors attribute the main archaeological picture, which shows a distinctive reduc- share in the fall of Moravia to the Magyars, who from tion in the previous socioeconomic complexity. The most the 880s had been penetrating into the Carpathian Basin important indicator are the extensive agglomerations in and initially benefited from the manoeuvring between the the southern part of Moravia (Mikulčice, Staré Město- Moravians and the Franks. They appear to have begun to Uherské Hradiště, Pohansko). They all atrophy to small pose a real threat to the Moravians first in 901, when after rural settlements; the fortifications are not renewed; the many years a peace was again concluded with the Bavar- absolute majority of the ecclesiastical buildings disap- ians at the initiative of Mojmír II and a joint approach pear; evidence of the elite entirely disappears from the stabilised the situation in the Danube Basin for a short burial grounds (Měřínský 1986; 2008; Galuška 2008b). time. In 902, the Magyar attack on Moravia was repulsed. Yet the dynamics of the decline cannot be more precisely The Raffelstetten Customs Regulations was apparently expressed considering the problems with the chronology created in 904, from which we however discover about within the tenth century. Substantially smaller Přemyslid the situation at the core of Moravia only that the ‘market administrative centers are not founded at a small distance of the Moravians’ still existed and was joined through the from them until the eleventh century (Procházka 2009, Danube Basin with Bavaria. The majority of the contem- 99–108, 357–358; Jan 2005). Nevertheless, the agrarian environs of the former agglomerations do not exhibit any 24 For the most recent analysis of the written sources, see esp. Třeštík distinct signs of depopulation. With a number of settle- 1987; 1991; Wihoda 2005; Měřínský 2006, esp. 908–967; newly on ments as well as burial grounds, their fluent continuation today’s Austrian Danube Valley, see Zehetmayer 2007; Diesenber­ can be proven (Dostál 1966, 92–94; Ungerman 2010). Yet ger 2007. For an analysis of the primarily archaeological sources, see Měřínský 1986; Ruttkay 1997; Kouřil 2003; 2008; Nevizánsky even here the militaria and more demanding jewellery 2008; Štefanovičová 2008. All of them include sources and second- entirely disappear. The only important Great Moravian ary literature. fortified settlement not to have experienced a dramatic 344  Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology. The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity decline of its central functions in the tenth century was Magyars, we are lacking convincing evidence for that at Olomouc, lying further in the north, where also the centre Pohansko and in Staré Město-Uherské Hradiště25. of the certainly sharply weakened ecclesiastical admin- It is relatively likely that the Magyars conquered at least istration apparently shifted (Bláha 2001; Jan 2005, 21). some of the Moravian centres at the beginning of the tenth In central and south-western Moravia, thus outside the century, but it is quite certain that they did not endeavour original core, even some of the other, smaller fortified for their long-term control and not at all for the annexa- settlements survived (often in a reduced form; for a list, tion of today’s Moravia to their domain. Graves with a see newly Měřínský 2008; Kouřil 2008, 123; Procházka significant inventory which would testify to their longer 2009, 97–99). activity here are entirely lacking (Kouřil 2003; 2008, 131; The elementary textbook claim that the disappearance of Měřínský 2008). The core of Moravia was thus appar- Moravia was connected in some way with the expansion ently among the zones from which they wanted through of Magyars into the Danube Basin can hardly be doubted. plunder only to ensure an alliance and the regular influx However, it has a similar explication value to the claim of tribute (cf. Diesenberger 2007, 34–35). The liquida- that the disappearance of the Western Roman Empire was tion of the entire structure of Moravia hence was not in somehow connected with the barbarian invasions. Just their interest. Short-term attacks, of which Moravia expe- like every historical phenomenon, also the definitive col- rienced a great number, thus in and of themselves cannot lapse of regnum Moravorum must have been the conse- satisfactorily explain why the ‘Moravian project’ was not quence of more factors, which appeared at various times renewed at least to a more limited degree. and altogether composed a complicated causal chain. We shall thus attempt a consideration of their importance and mutual interconnectedness. Liquidation of the Elites Conquest of the Centres The main integrating component of the Moravian polity was undoubtedly the highest elite around the sovereign. At the beginning of the tenth century, the association of As has already been said, the written sources say hardly central authority with Mojmír’s dynasty, ruling already anything about what actually happened in Moravia in the for the fourth generation, must have moreover been deep- fateful years of 905 or 906. The majority of scholars today ly engrained. The liquidation of the core of the Moravian hypothetically divide the supposed military defeat of the identity thus could have meant for the whole system the Moravians by Magyar units into two acts. In the first, the same as the battle near Bratislava did for the Austrian Moravian elite allegedly died in a direct battle somewhere Danube Basin one year later; the slaughter of a large part near Nitra; in the second, the aggression of the Magyars of the Bavarian aristocracy and the subsequent raids re- is supposed to have turned against the main centres in sulted in a disintegration of the territory and the with- the Morava Basin. This construction has its logic. The drawal of the Bavarian border to the west (Zehetmayer massively fortified Great Moravian centres had success- 2007, 28–29). Another scenario with a similar effect is fully resisted the regular, well-organised Frankish cam- the evident massacre of the Moravian representation in paigns for entire decades (cf. Goldberg 2004). The sud- the capture of the main centers. den surrender of all of the strongholds to nomads armed While the mythic battle ‘somewhere near Nitra’ sank roots primarily with bows and arrows thus seems to have been solidly in our historiography, it is precisely for that reason preceded by some weakening. The absence so far of the that it is worth remembering occasionally that it is based finds of militaria connected with the Magyars in Slovak on sources which are under other circumstances consid- localities has led some authors to the hypothesis that the ered as little trustworthy. Nor do we know anything of the result of the assumed conflict at Nitra might have been further fates of Mojmír’s dynasty. For the time being, the brought about by a preceding voluntary capitulation of archaeological finds do not testify to mass murder at the the Nitra elite, which would have subsequently weakened very least in Staré Město and at Pohansko. The picture of the units arriving from the Morava Basin (Štefanovičová the raid-weakened country adrift in battles over the legacy 2008, 140–141; Kouřil 2008, 117). It is however only an interconnected series of speculations. 25 We know of eighty of them from Mikulčice, where they are con- From Moravian fortified settlements, unlike from Slo- centrated at the entrances to the fortified settlement (purportedly predominantly in the destruction layers); extensive research at Po- vakia, it has been possible to accumulate a relatively hansko provided only nine pieces, and we know only two uncertain numerous collection of militaria that are put into direct items from Staré Město-Uherské Hradiště. Rhombic arrows are connection with the conquest of the Moravian fortified known also from some other smaller fortified settlements. An  in- settlements by Magyar units at the beginning of the tenth dispensible interpretational starting point is naturally the exclusive century (Kouřil 2003; 2008). The most numerous compo- connection of these types of arrow with the Magyar attackers. Al- nent comprises rhombic and deltoid arrowheads connect- though the rhombic type is not among the dominant ones in Mora- via, it appears also in some standard graves for which there is no ed with a reflex bow; the other artefacts are only solitary. reason to connect them with the Magyars (Dostál 1966, 73; Kouřil The presence of arrowheads in individual central locali- 2003, note 10). The dispersion of simple rhombic pieces without the ties varies considerably however. Whereas in the case of tip being offset is relatively wide in the West Slavonic milieu (cf. Mikulčice, it is justifiable to consider a conquest by the Kempke 1991, 25–27, Abb. 15, Karte 7). 345  Ivo Štefan of the slaughtered elite will always remain one of the main the beginning of the tenth century. Under normal circum- favourites, but there is again the question of what the reason stances, the tie to the Danube route certainly richly coun- for the resignation on the renewal of the system was. terbalanced the short-term ecological risks. Ecological Factors Disintegration as a Result of the Emergence of ‘Grundherrschaft’ All three of the most extensive agglomerations of Great Moravia (Mikulčice, Staré Město-Uherské Hradiště and Besides the economic difficulties, some scholars seek the Pohansko) were located in flat, alluvial terrain on large causes of the weakening of the Moravian polity in the last water flows (with the secondary literature, see Poláček decades of its existence also in other systemic factors. Al- 1999b; Macháček – Doláková et al. 2007). For the con- exander Ruttkay attributes the inoperability of the Moravian centrated political core of the Moravian society, exten- army in the defensive against the Magyars to a previous sive or repeated floods could have been an undistributed disintegration of the Moravian elite. It was to have occurred risk. Archaeological evidence of flood sediments date- primarily as a result of the allocation of land ownership able to the ninth century comes from all three localities. by the sovereign to individual members of the elite, who In  Mikulčice, one of the branches of the Morava was systematically began to develop their own economic envi- even entirely flooded in the tenth century or already in the rons and military units. They thus became independent of century before. Were these floods however the immedi- the sovereign and in the decisive moment could deny him ate cause of the definitive abandonment of these centres, military support (e.g. Ruttkay 1997, 161; 2005, 248). which resulted in the disruption of the entire socioeco- For more reasons, the hypothesis can be considered as un- nomic system of Great Moravia as Jiří Macháček thinks substantiated. Neither the written nor the archaeological (Macháček – Doláková et al. 2007, 306–309)? sources testify for the existence of a landed aristocracy in First, let us say that no clear evidence of cataclysmic Great Moravia (cf. above). Even if we however hypotheti- floods that would have destroyed these centres at the turn cally conceded that the elite began to settle on its own of the tenth century has been presented so far26. However, property, it would have apparently had rather a cementing what is much more important is the view of the history effect for the internal consistency of the Moravian polity, of settlement from the long-term perspective: if flooding because it would have intensified the utilisation of the had complicated life repeatedly in the flood plain of the internal sources. It suffices to glance quickly at the Caro- Morava and Dyje, it can be expected that the population lingian Frankish Empire or the Bohemian and Hungarian from these areas would have gradually shifted to higher kingdoms of the thirteenth century, where private land placed regions, but we have not observed anything of the ownership of the elite was the basic organisational unit at sort. On the contrary. Not only did settlement linger in the the local level. We will see that the existence of Grund- former centres in a rusticated form, but near Pohansko a herrschaft definitely was not in conflict with the concept new Přemyslid centre, Břeclav, was created in the eleventh of central governance. century, located in the flood plain nearly at the same alti- tude as Pohansko, which changed in the thirteenth century into a medieval town living to this day (Procházka 2009, 115–116). On the so-called Island of St George (Ostrov Economic Factors sv. Jiří) in the middle of the flood plain in the former Great Moravian agglomeration of Staré Město-Uherské Hradiště, an important royal town was set up in the thir- I believe that it is possible to tend towards those authors teenth century. If life had really been risky in the flood who connect the fateful weakening of Great Moravia at plain, the town would have apparently been placed at a the beginning of the tenth century predominantly with its higher location, of which there are enough in the environs fragile socioeconomic layout based on permanent expan- of Uherské Hradiště. Continuity can be observed also with sion (esp. Třeštík 1987; on Bohemia, see Žemlička 1995). the surrounding rural settlements. We add that natural sci- Nevertheless, I think that on the basis of the existing find- entists connect regular flooding predominantly with river ings it is possible to proceed even a step further and at- basin deforestation, which increased only in the thirteenth tempt to offer an explanation for a definitive resignation and fourteenth centuries (Opravil 1983, 70–74). on the renewal of the ‘Great Moravian project’ as well. Undoubtedly, high water was an unpleasant ‘visitor’ of In the course of the more-than-twenty-year reign of the Great Moravian centres. It can evidently be assumed Svatopluk (871–894), the relatively small domain of the that it complicated life there in the short term (Poláček first members of the Mojmír’s dynasty in today’s south 1999b, 230), but it could hardly be in and of itself the Moravia and west Slovakia temporarily transformed into immediate cause of their collective dramatic collapse at a large unit including an extensive part of Central Europe. All of the territorial gains, however, were freely connect- 26 E.g. at Pohansko, flood sediments have been recorded on the out- ed independent polities at a relatively low level of social er side of the wall but not inside of the fortified settlement, see organisation. In other words: the sphere of the territorial Macháček – Doláková et al. 2007, 308. hegemony of the Moravians significantly enlarged; the 346  Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology. The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity area of sovereignty, whose building in the Early Middle this and other problems connected with the presence of Ages required enormous investments into the infrastruc- Magyars in the Danube Basin with the peace with the ture (e.g. Urbańczyk 2007), could however not expand in Bavarians in 901, who had been afflicted by Magyar pil- such a short time. Yet even the formal dominion over an laging already a year before. The Raffelstetten Customs extensive territory was conditioned by an organisation- Regulations shows that the connection of Moravia to ally demanding maintenance of a large army, whose pro- Bavaria through the Danube route was still in operation fessional part undoubtedly settled predominantly at the around 904, but that was to end very soon. The decisive fortified settlements in the core of Moravia. Its task was battle at Bratislava in 907 led to the direct control over to eliminate the centrifugal tendencies on the peripheries today’s Wienerwald and a distinct decline of the entire and implement further expansion27. Also members of the central Danube Basin all the way to the River Enns (Ze- rural communities in the core of the land were engaged hetmayer 2007, 28–29). in the conquests and the supply of the centres; for their As we have shown above, precisely the area around Bra- loyalty, however, the sovereign apparently still had to pro- tislava at the confluence of the Morava and Danube had vide quid pro quo. It seems that what we can call Great fundamental importance for the connection of the main Moravia was thus concentrated in several large civitates, Moravian centres with the world, but in 907 the influx of which were simultaneously the central barracks, work- all of the prestigious commodities flowing there from the shops, the centres of the ecclesiastical organisation, of south and the west was completely cut off for a number the long-distance trade as well as of redistribution, and of long decades. The socioeconomic system of Moravia the magnificent residences of the sovereign and the high- based on the complicated transformation of war booty into est elite. The construction and maintenance of the centres loyalty thus collapsed. The extensive civitates connected required, in the words of Joseph Tainter (1988), an in- to the Danube suddenly lost their justification and began crease in the investments into complexity. The yields of to atrophy. It did not even require the constant presence of the investments however were satisfactory so far for all of the Magyars. It was hypothetically not a problem to con- the participating parties. The first serious turbulence must tinue to hunt for slaves somewhere in the catchment basin have been the breakaway of loosely connected territories of the Vistula, but there was no one to sell them to. While and the succession battles after the death of Svatopluk. the old elite controlling the flow of exclusive commodi- It severely limited the influx of tributes, but the size of ties (if it really had been slaughtered) could have been the military garrisons and of the administrative apparatus replaced by another aristocracy, there was not anything to dimensioned originally for a substantially larger unit re- control any longer. The prolonged internal conflicts after mained the same. The cessation of the influx of external the death of Svatopluk as well as the presupposed battles sources could have evoked dissatisfaction not only among with the Magyars are likely to have deprived Moravia of those warriors dependent on the duke but also among the the majority of its reserves allowing it to cope with a short free Moravians for whom cooperation with the ‘state’ crisis29. The prospects of a reversal of the negative eco- was no longer profitable. Mojmír II apparently managed nomic balance were however far away in 907. Investment to stabilise the situation to a certain extent, and it can in the ‘Great Moravian project’ was no longer profitable be supposed that sooner or later – were it not for further either for the integrating elite or for the common popu- events – expansion would have been renewed. If that had lace, in whose eyes the elites had lost their legitimacy. not happened, Moravia would apparently have soon faced The collapse of the energy-consuming administrative and a structural crisis similar to the other early Central Eu- military structures in this situation could have even been ropean states. It could have been overcome only by the a liberation for it (Tainter 1988, 197–199). The overall transition to the systemic exploitation of its own sources restructuring of the entire system simply already lacked (Třeštík 1987; Žemlička 1995). both means and motivation. It can be believed that the omen of the definitive end for The members of the retinue of the Moravian sovereign Moravia were already the events of 899/900. The Mag- certainly did not share a single fate. As arises from the yars then undertook two campaigns into Italy and terribly diction of some of the sources, some of them could have pillaged it. There is no doubt that they were travelling gone over to the side of the Magyars already before along the former amber road, which through their subse- 906/907. A part might have strengthened the retinues of quent settling in Pannonia they made impassable for sev- the Bohemian dukes, certainly of the Central Bohemian eral subsequent decades (McCormick 2001, 372; 2002, Přemyslids predominantly, who maintained close contacts 177–178)28. This closed the artery connecting Moravia with the Moravian sovereign already in the 880s. The ar- with the Venetian market. Mojmír II attempted to resolve chaeological reflection of the intensive contacts is the ex- clusive jewellery of the ‘Great Moravian’ style, found in 27 For the time being, several available dendrodates indicate that the the burial grounds belonging to the main strongholds (e.g. majority of the fortified settlements apparently acquired the resultant Šolle 1966; Smetánka 1994). Those who remained shifted appearance with massive wood-and-clay fortifications with a stone the centre of Moravia further to the north of the land. The front screen only in the last third of the ninth century (Procházka flowering of Olomouc in the tenth century apparently was 2009, 274). not accidental – it can be supposed that it lay on a new 28 Also smaller military operations evidently could successfully close the traditional communication routes. This was experienced e.g. by the Frankish envoys headed to the Bulgarians in 892, who because 29 We should mention the serious, but short-term, crisis at the turn of of Svatopluk’s blockade of their usual route had to travel along the the 870s, which was finished by the accession of Svatopluk and the Sava (MMFH I, 122). subsequent expansion. 347  Ivo Štefan trans-European trade artery emerging in the tenth century, comparable for instance with the Carolingian Frankish connecting the Spanish caliphates with the east through Empire or with Bohemia or Hungary in the eleventh and Prague and Cracow. Its lords, however, were no longer the twelfth centuries. The sovereign so far had only limited Moravians but the Prague dukes (Třeštík 2001). sources of his own available; in the economic sphere, re- distributive principles and gift-giving preponderated; the integrity of the polity depended on permanent expansion and not on systemic exploitation of the internal resources. Chiefdom or State? A State of the ‘Central The available sources, however, do not allow a more pre- European Type’? cise expression of a number of such important aspects as the developmental stage of the territorial administration or the proportion of the old ‘pre-state’ elite, still requi- We would naturally search in vain for the terms ‘state’ and sitioning a share in the power, and the new ‘state’ elite, ‘chiefdom’ in the vocabulary of early medieval people. controlled by the sovereign. Yet even if these character- Both are modern taxonomic constructs of the social sci- istics were connected with a chiefdom, Great Moravia in ences, serving predominantly for the characterisation of terms of the stability of the sovereign’s power certainly the level of complexity of a given society. The number of was not a ‘cyclic’ chiefdom (unless however we under- the definitions of ‘chiefdom’ and ‘statehood’ is approxi- stand the whole of its existence as one cycle). Sovereign mately the same as the number of the scholars who have power is hereditary; the ruler is the guarantor of interna- endeavoured to define them. Moreover, the terms do not tional agreements and the addressee of papal correspond- come from the same workshop. European historiography ence. The adoption of Christianity by the elite is – as far has been working with the category of ‘state’ already since as we know – permanent and relies on its own ecclesi- the nineteenth century, whereas ‘chiefdom’ has entered astical organisation. Just for comparison: such stability the historical sciences relatively recently from cultural an- was not achieved by the Scandinavian societies until the thropology in order to characterise societies with lower eleventh century (e.g. Sawyer 2004). In the East Frank- complexity, traditionally called ‘tribes’ or more recently ish sources of the second half of the ninth century, also ‘gens societies’. The term, however, has not become much Moravia no longer appears as gens but regnum (Bílková domesticated in Central Europe so far. Nonetheless, con- – Fiala – Karbulová 1967, 290–293). Hence, whether we troversy is evoked even by the term ‘state’ today, which can call Moravia in the ninth century an ‘early state’ or a some authors reject for the labelling of early medieval ‘chiefdom’ depends only on which features we consider units as an anachronism and propose the neutral labels to be authoritative. For most of cultural anthropologists, of Herrschaft, or Herrschaftsverband (for an overview, it would likely fulfil the criteria for a typical ‘early state’ see Jarnut 2004; Pohl 2006). Cultural anthropology uses without difficulty (cf. e.g. Claessen 1978). both terms primarily for the purpose of a multicultural comparison of recent societies. However, if we compare In the 1960s, the so-called model of a ‘state of a Central e.g. the classic texts of Timothy Earle (1987) and Ronald European type’ appeared in historiography. It was based Cohen (1978), the first of whom tries to define the typical on a claim of the basic structural similarity of Bohemia, signs of a chiefdom and the latter the signs of an early Hungary and Poland in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. state, we discover that the characteristics in many regards Its characteristics could be summarised in three points: 1) overlap. For the ‘borderline societies’, individual authors the sovereign is the supreme owner of people and land; are then assisted by specifying adjectives like ‘complex’ the aristocracy does not own much land; the elite in fact chiefdom, or ‘inchoate’ state (synoptically, see e.g. Taint- overlaps with the sovereign’s administrative apparatus; 2) er 1988, 22–38). The search for the precise placement of the territorial administration is based on a system of castles Great Moravia on some absolute scale of complexity can administered by ducal castellans; 3) the sovereign’s appa- thus be only a game without clearly given rules. Such a ratus is ensured by a so-called service organisation based classification becomes valuable only in comparison with on the duke’s free subjects, who are burdened with specific other specific societies. services and taxes; people of one specialisation often con- Jiří Macháček, inspired by the categorisation of the English centrate in one settlement, which is reflected in its name31. processual archaeologist Richard Hodges, recently char- The mutual similarity of the states has led the authors of acterised Great Moravia as a cyclic chiefdom (Macháček the model to seek a common ‘model’. This ‘missing link’ 2007a, 362–368; 2009)30. On the basis of the previous is usually found precisely in Great Moravia, which was to analysis, it is of course possible to agree (and also other mediate the structure of the Carolingian Frankish Empire, authors – e.g. Třeštík 1997, 296 – have been fully aware which it had adopted apparently in the ninth century, for the of it) that Moravia of the ninth century was not a unit later systems (e.g. Třeštík 1999, 168; 2000b, 123; Žemlička 2000). At this point, we are not attempting to assess the 30 Richard Hodges characterised such a stage as a cyclic chiefdom in ‘Central European model’ as such but to point out the basic which the early Anglo-Saxon sovereigns - ‘chieftains’ were attempt- inconsistencies related to Great Moravia. ing to assert their authority perpetually through usurping the sur- It is necessary predominantly to warn that whatever was pluses of society and mobilising their own sources. These attempts, supposed to have been adopted by Great Moravia and however, have had only temporary success so far (Hodges 1982, 187–188). On the phenomenon of the cyclic alternation of the cen- tralisation and disintegration of central power from the perspective 31 Synoptically, see e.g. Krzemieńska – Třeštík 1967; 1982; Třeštík of cultural anthropology, see e.g. Earle 1991, 13; Cohen 1978, 56). 2000b; critically, see e.g. Jan 2005; Klápště 2005, 301–315). 348  Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology. The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity subsequently by the later Central European units from the ice organisation to a great extent relies from around the Carolingian Frankish Empire has not been more closely main centres in the Morava Basin (Třeštík 1997, 292), specified in any study and the individual works even con- and it cannot be proved even in today’s Slovakia that their tradict each other in that32. For us to see that ‘copying’ the origin would have reached all the way to the ninth cen- Carolingian models lacks any deeper justification, a brief tury (e.g. Kučera 1974, 377–381). We thus cannot exclude confrontation of the ‘Central European model’ with the even that the only thing that remained of it – other than a basic features of the Carolingian West suffices: Ad 1) The scattered spiritual legacy – was the story of the powerful basic organisational principle of the Carolingian Empire Duke Svatopluk, whose army could once be seen at one was clearly delimited private land ownership by the king, place marching from sunrise to sunset. aristocracy and ecclesiastical institutions, which became the object of sale and gift-giving. While the sovereign was a formal hegemon, his direct influence was limited only to his own properties33. Ad 2) The territorial administra- Conclusion tion of the Frankish Empire was based on a number of diverse principles in the Carolingian period (e.g. Innes 2000, 77–82), but we do not find any dominion over the Great Moravia of the ninth century can be characterised land through a closed system of castles (let alone of the as a rank society with institutions that were little stabi- sovereign’s castles) there. Ad 3) The same can be said lised as yet but with an already undoubted and continual of the so-called service organisation, which we do not sovereign authority. A substantial part of the legitimacy know from the Frankish Empire in the form in which it is of the sovereign and the elite most likely relied upon the reconstructed in the Central European states. Supplying conquests of military expansion. An integrating role was the sovereign’s (but also the aristocratic and ecclesiasti- played by the extensive centres ‘gleaming with gold and cal) residences relied primarily on the manorial system silver’ organised by the sovereign apparatus, which were (Heinzelmann 1977; Binding 1996, 39–45). However, the connected by a waterway with the long-distance trade routes creators of the Central European model themselves do in the Danube Basin. Along them, exclusive objects and not agree that its distribution in the Czech lands was pos- scarce raw materials entered Moravia from the south and sible (Třeštík – Žemlička 2007, 134–136). The so-called west. It can be believed that while the sovereign entirely service organisation thus had only the levy of taxes in the controlled the flow of exclusive commodities, this was not form of specific services and products in common with the case with the economic surpluses of the society. The the manorial system. It is not necessary to derive from this ‘Great Moravian project’ hence was to a large extent based concord any genetic affiliation. They are simply differ- on the fragile principle of mutually advantageous volun- ent strategies of how to cope with the insufficient supply tary cooperation. Whether we will consider the Moravian function of the market by means of a system of payments polity of the ninth century as still rather a ‘chiefdom’ or in kind (for the Carolingian period, see Henning 2007). already as a ‘state’ depends solely upon our definitions of There is no doubt that in many areas the lifestyle of the these terms. For most cultural anthropologists, however, Frankish aristocracy was imitated in Moravia in the ninth it would evidently already meet the basic prerequisites for century. On the basis of what we know, however, it does definition as an ‘early state’ without any problem. not seem very likely that its sovereigns would have been The study has attempted to show that the collapse of Great able in a short time to implement a ‘total reform’ worthy Moravia at the beginning of the tenth century was the of enlightened sovereigns. result of the interplay of several factors, in which the tra- Also the question of the legacy of Great Moravia hence ditionally accentuated violent invasions of the Magyars remains problematic. The only argument for its having did not have to play a decisive role. The battles of suc- left some mark in the structure of later polities was pre- cession and the long-term suspension of expansion after cisely the ‘service organisation’, which the later states the death of Svatopluk divested the society with a high (after a substantial time interval) were gradually to have proportion of people released from agricultural produc- ‘adopted’. It is, however, well-known that we do not tion of its reserves and caused a negative economic bal- know the specific toponyms on which the model of serv- ance creating internal tension, which did not allow the implementation of necessary structural changes. Great 32 Once we read that: ‘...Central European states reached an entirely Moravia of the ninth century was an extensive ‘organ- different solution to ensuring their existence than that which was ism’ which took advantage of its position on the boundary applied in the Frankish Empire’ (Krzemieńska – Třeštík 1978, 152); of the Christianised West and the as-yet unchristianised later (without having presented any argumentation) the author says that the ‘service organisation’ supposedly existed in Bavaria in the Slavonic world. The definitive occupation of the central eighth century, from where it was evidently brought to Moravia. Danube Basin by the Magyars in 907 entirely destroyed ‘Yet we do not have solid proof of the existence of the service or- the Carolingian ‘ecosystem’, from which Moravia in the ganisation in Great Moravia’ (Třeštík 1997, 291–292); elsewhere ninth century had grown. It can be supposed that the rapid we can read that the Central European state was a ‘common, Late disintegration of the polity was connected mainly with the Antique-Carolingian model, only somewhat adapted and comple- inability of the large agglomerations in the new circum- mented with real domestic novelties as was for example the so- called service organisation’ (Třeštík 1999, 168). stances to fulfil one of their basic functions: transforming 33 Attention was drawn to it already by Libor Jan (2005, 20). For an the war booty into loyalty. outline of the Frankish Empire, see e.g. Rösener 1991, 29–46; Goetz 2003, 183–188, 315–319; Innes 2000. English by Sean Mark Miller and Kateřina Millerová. 349  Ivo Štefan References Claessen, Henri, 1978: The Early State. A structural Approach, in: H. Claessen – P. Skalník (Ed.), The Early State, The Hague, 533–596. Sources Claessen, Henri, 2006: War and State Formation: What is the Connection?, in: T. Otto – H. Thrane – H. Vandkilde (Ed.), MMFH: D. Bartoňková – L. Havlík – Z. Masařík – R. Večerka Warefare and Society. Archeological and Social Anthropologi- (Ed.), Magnae Moraviae fontes historici I–V, Praha – Brno cal Perspectives, Aarhus, 217–226. 1966–1977. Codreanu-Windauer, Silvia – Wintergerst, Eleonore, 2000: Re- gensburg – eine mittelaterliche Großstadt an der Donau, in: A. Wieczorek – H.-M. Hinz (Hrsg.), Europas Mitte um 1000, Band Literature 1, Stuttgart, 179–183. Bednár, Peter, 2001: Sídlisková štruktúra Nitry v  9. storočí Cohen, Ronald, 1978: State origins: a reappraisal, in: H. Claes- (Siedlungsstruktur von Nitra im 9. Jahrhundert), in: L. Galuška sen – P. Skalník (Ed.), The Early State, The Hague, 30–76. – P. Kouřil – Z. Měřínský (Ed.), Velká Morava mezi východem a západem, Brno, 29–39. Curta, Florin, 2006: Merovignian and Carolignian Gift Giving, in: Speculum, 81, 671–699. Bialeková, Darina, 2000: Eisenbarren, in: A. Wieczorek – H.- M. Hinz (Hrsg.), Europas Mitte um 1000, Band 1, Stuttgart, Diesenberger, Maximilian, 2007: Baiern, das Ostfränkische 201–202. Reich und die Ungarn bis zur Schlacht von Pressburg 862–907, in: R. Zehetmayer (Hrsg.), Schicksalsjahr 907. Die Schlacht Bílková, Libuše – Fiala, Zdeněk – Karbulová, Marie, 1967: Alt- bei Pressburg und das frühmittelalterliche Niederösterreich, mährische Terminologie in den zeitgenössischen lateinischen St. Pölten, 31–43. Quellen und ihre Bedeutung, in: Byzantinoslavica, 28, 289–335. Dostál, Bořivoj, 1966: Slovanská pohřebiště střední doby Binding, Günter, 1996: Deutsche Königspfalzen von Karl dem hradištní na Moravě (Slawische Begräbnisstätten der mittleren Grossen bis Friedrich II. (765–1240), Darmstadt. Burgwallzeit in Mähren), Praha. Bláha, Josef, 2001: Olomouc im 10.–11. Jahrhundert. Topogra- Dostál, Bořivoj, 1982: Drobná pohřebiště a rozptýlené hroby phie und die Frage der Kontinuität eines frühmittelalterlichen z Břeclavi-Pohanska (Kleine Gräberfelder und zerstreute Gräber Zentrums, in: P. Sommer (Hrsg.), Boleslav II. Der tschechische von Břeclav-Pohansko), in: Sborník prací filosofické fakulty Staat um das Jahr 1000. Colloquia mediaevalia Pragensia 2, brněnské university, řada E, 27, 135–201. Praha, 325–362. Dostál, Bořivoj, 1985: Břeclav-Pohansko III. Časně slovanské Blanchard, Ian, 2001: Mining, Metallurgy and Minting in the osídlení (Břeclav-Pohansko III. Frühslawische Besiedlung), Middle Ages, Vol. 1., Stuttgart. Brno. Böhme, Horst, 1996: Adel und Kirche bei den Alamannen der Dresler, Petr – Macháček, Jiří, 2008: The hinterland of an Early Merowingerzeit, in: Germania, 74, 477–507. Medieval centre at Pohansko near Břeclav, in: L. Poláček (Hrsg.), Das wirtschaftliche Hinterland der frühmittelalrlichen Zentren. Brather, Sebastian, 2008: Kleidung, Bestattung, Identität. Die Internationale Tagungen in Mikulčice VI, Brno, 313–325. Presäntation sozialer Rollen im frühen Mittelalter, in: S. Brather (Hrsg.), Zwischen Spätantike und Frühmittelalter. Archäologie Earle, Timothy, 1987: Chiefdoms in archaeological and ethno- des 4. bis 7. Jahrhunderts im Westen. Ergänzungsbände zum Re- logical perspective, in: Annual Rewiew of Anthropology, 16, allexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde 57, Berlin – New 279–308. York, 237–273. Earle, Timothy, 1991: The evolution of chiefdoms, in: T. Earle (Ed.), von Carnap-Bornheim, Claus – Hilberg, Volker, 2007: Recent Chiefdoms: Power, Economy and Ideology, Cambridge, 1–15. archaeological research in Haihabu, in: J. Henning (Ed.), Post- Roman Towns, Trade and Stettlement in Europe and Byzantium, Fusek, Gabriel, 2008: Osídlenie Nitry v 10. storočí. Kontinuita Vol. 1, Berlin – New York, 199–218. alebo diskontinuita? (Settlement of Nitra in 10th century. Conti- nuity or discontinuity?), in: T. Štefanovičová – D. Hulínek (Ed.), Charvát, Petr, 1987: K otázce soukromého vlastnictví půdy na Bitka při Bratislave v roku 907 a jej význam pre vývoj stredného Velké Moravě (On the question of private property of land in Podunajska, Bratislava, 295–304. Great Moravia), in: Archeologické rozhledy, 39, 672–679. Galuška, Luděk, 1989: Výrobní areál velkomoravských Čiháková, Jarmila – Havrda, Jan, 2008: Malá Strana v raném klenotníků ze Starého Města-Uherského hradiště (Das Erzeu- středověku. Stav výzkumu a rekapitulace poznání (Malá Strana gungsareal der großmährischen Juweliere aus Staré Město- in Prague in the Early Middle Ages. The current status of archeo- Uherské Hradiště), in: Památky archeologické, 80, 405–454. logical excavations), in: Archeologické rozhledy, 60, 187–228. 350  Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology. The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity Galuška, Luděk, 1992: Dvě velkomoravské kovárny s depoty Heinzelmann, Martin, 1977: Beobachtungen zur Bevöl­ ze Starého Města (Two Great Moravian Forging Shops with kerungsstruktur einiger grungherrschaftlicher Siedlungen im Hoards from Staré Město), in: Acta musei Moraviae, Časopis karolingischen Bayern, in: Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 11, Moravského muzea – vědy společenské, 77, 123–161. 202–217. Galuška, Luděk, 1998: Die grossmährische Siedlungsagglo­ Henning, Joachim, 2007: Early European towns. The develop- meration Staré Město-Uherské Hradiště und ihre Befestigungen, ment of the economy in the Frankish realm between dynamism in: J. Henning – A. T. Ruttkay (Hrsg.), Frühmittelalterlicher and deceleration AD 500–1100, in: J. Henning (Ed.), Post-Ro- Burgenbau in Mittel- und Osteuropa, Bonn, 123–137. man Towns, Trade and Stettlement in Europe and Byzantium, Vol. 1, Berlin – New York, 233–269. Galuška, Luděk, 2003: O otrocích na Velké Moravě a okovech ze Starého Města, in: J. Klápště – E. Plešková – J. Žemlička Hochmanová-Vávrová, Věra, 1962: Das Grossmährische (Ed.), Dějiny ve věku nejistot. Sborník k příležitosti 70. naro- Gräberfeld in Staré Město „Na Valách“ – Die Grabungen in den zenin Dušana Třeštíka, Praha, 75–86. Jahren 1957–1959, in: Časopis Moravského musea v Brně – vědy společenské, 47, 257–270. Galuška, Luděk, 2005: Staré Město, in: Reallexikon der Germa- nischen Altertumskunde 29, Berlin – New York, 525–530. Hodges, Richard, 1982: Dark age economics. The origins of towns and trade AD 600–1000, Bristol. Galuška, Luděk, 2008a: Contribution to the structure and char- acter of the landscape of the Great Moravian agglomeration Hrubý, Vilém, 1965: Staré Město. Velkomoravský Velehrad (Ein Staré Město – Uherské Hradiště, in: L. Poláček (Hrsg.), Das Zentrum des großmährischen Reiches), Praha. wirtschaftliche Hinterland der frühmittelalrlichen Zentren. In- ternationale Tagungen in Mikulčice VI, Brno, 249–256. Innes, Matthew, 2000: State and Society in the Early Middle Ages: the middle Rhine Walley, 400–1000, Cambridge. Galuška, Luděk, 2008b: Staré Město – Veligrad v  období mezi zánikem Velké Moravy a založením nového Velehradu – Jan, Libor, 2005: Strukturelle Veränderungen – zwischen Uherského hradiště (Staré Město – Veligrad in der Zeitspanne Altmähren und dem frühpřemyslidischen Staat, in: P. Kouřil zwischen dem Untergang Großmährens und der Gründung des (Hrsg.), Die frühmittelalterliche Elite bei den Völkern des östli- neuen Velehrad – Uherské Hradiště), in: L. Galuška – P. Kouřil chen Mittelaeuropas. Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR – J. Mitáček (Ed.), Východní Morava v 10. až 14. století, Brno, Brno 25, Brno, 19–24. 95–116. Jan, Libor, 2006: Václav II. a struktury panovnické moci (Wen- Goetz, Hans-Werner, 2003: Europa im frühen Mittelalter 500– zel II. und die Strukturen der landesherrlichen Macht), Brno. 1050, Stuttgart. Janiak, Tomasz, 1998: Gniezno – stołeczny ośrodek monarchii Goldberg, Eric J., 2004: Ludwig der Deutsche und Mähren. Eine wczesnopiastowskiej, in: T. Janiak (Ed.), Civitates Principales. Studie zu karolingischen Grenzkriegen im Osten, in: W. Hartmann Wybrane ośrodki władzy w Polsce wczesnośredniowiecznej, (Hrsg.), Ludwig der Deutsche und seine Zeit, Darmstadt, 67–94. Gniezno, 17–21. Graus, František, 1966: L’Empire de Grande-Moravie, sa situ- Jarnut, Jörg, 2004: Anmerkungen zum Staat des frühen Mittela- ation dans l’Europe de l’epoque et sa structure intérieure, in: F. lters: Die Kontroverse zwischen Johannes Fried und Hans-Wer­ Graus – J. Filip – A. Dostál (Hrsg.), Das Grossmährische Reich, ner Goetz, in: D. Hägermann – W. Haubrichts – J. Jarnut (Hrsg.), Praha, 133–220. Akkulturation. Probleme einer germanisch-romanischen Kul- tursynthese in Spätantike und frühen Mittelalter, Berlin – New Gugl, Christian – Kastler, Raimund, 2007: Legionslager Car- York, 504–509. nuntum: Ausgrabungen 1968–1977, Wien. Johanek, Peter, 1987: Der fränkische Handel der Karolingerzeit Halsall, Guy, 2003: Warfare and Society in the Barbarian West im Spiegel der Schriftquellen, in: K. Düwel – H. Jankuhn – H. 450–900, New York. Siems – D. Timpe (Hrsg.), Untersuchungen zu Handel und Verkehr der vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Zeit in Mittel und Nord­ Hartmann, Winfried, 2002: Ludwig der Deutsche, Darmstadt. europa, Teil IV. Der Handel der Karolinger- und Wikingerzeit, Göttingen, 7–68. Havlík, Lubomír, 1978: Morava v 9. – 10. století. K problem- atice politického postavení, sociální a vládní struktury a or- Kempke, Torsten, 1991: Starigard/Oldenburg. Hauptburg der ganizace (Moravia in the 9th and 10th Centuries. On the Prob- Slawen in Wagrien III. Die Waffen des 8.–11. Jahrhunderts. Offa- lems of Moravia’s Political Situation, Social and Governmental Bücher 73, Neumünster. Structure and Organization), Praha. Kind, Thomas, 2002: Archäologische Funde von Teilen der Reit­ Hedeager, Lotte, 1993: The creation of Germanic identity. A ausrüstung aus Europa und ihr Beitrag zur Kultur- und Sozial- European origin-myth, in: P. Brun – S. E. van der Leeuw – C. geschichte der Ottonenzeit, in: J. Henning (Hrsg.), Europa im R. Whittaker (Ed.), Frontières d’Empire. Nature et Signification 10. Jahrhundert. Archäologie einer Aufbruchszeit, Mainz am des Frontières Romaines, Nemours, 121–131. Rhein, 283–299. 351  Ivo Štefan Klanica, Zdeněk, 2006: Nechvalín, Prušánky. Čtyři slovan- Macháček, Jiří, 2007a: Pohansko bei Břeclav. Ein frühmittelal- ská pohřebiště, Díl I, II. (Nechvalín, Prušánky. Vier slawische terliches Zentrum als sozialwirtschaftliches System, Bonn. Nekropolen. Teil I, II.). Spisy Archeologického Ústavu AV ČR Brno 28, Brno. Macháček, Jiří, 2007b: Early medieval centre in Pohansko near Břeclav/Lundenburg: munitio, emporium or palatium of the rul- Klápště, Jan, 2005: Proměna českých zemí ve středověku, Praha. ers of Moravia?, in: J. Henning (Ed.), Post-Roman Towns, Trade and Settlement in Europe and Byzantium, Berlin – New York, Klápště, Jan, 2009: Die Frühzeit der böhmischen Adels aus der 473–498. Sicht eines Archäologen, in: S. Brather – D. Geuenich – Ch. Huth (Hrsg.), Historia archaeologica. Festschrift für Heiko Steuer zum Macháček, Jiří, 2009: Disputes over Great Moravia: chiefdom or 70. Geburtstag, Berlin – New York, 527–546. state? The Morava or Tisza River?, in: Early Medieval Europe 17, No. 3, 248–267. Koller, Heinrich, 1995: Die Raffelstetter Zollordnung und die mährischen Zentren, in: H. Brachmann (Hrsg.), Burg – Burgstadt Macháček, Jiří – Doláková, Nela – Dresler, Petr – Havlíček, – Stadt, Berlin, 283–295. Pavel – Hladilová, Šárka – Přichystal, Antonín – Roszková, Alena – Smolíková, Libuše, 2007: Raně středověké centrum na Košta, Jiří, 2005: Kollektion frühmittelterlicher Schwerter aus Pohansku u Břeclavi a jeho přírodní prostředí (Early Medieval dem großmährischen Zentrum in Mikulčice, in: P. Kouřil (Hrsg.), centre at Pohansko near Břeclav and its natural environment), in: Die frühmittelalterliche Elite bei den Völkern des östlichen Mit- Archeologické rozhledy, 59, 278–314. telaeuropas. Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno 25, Brno, 157–191. Macháček, Jiří – Gregerová, Miroslava – Hložek, Martin – Hošek, Jiří, 2007: Raně středověká kovodělná výroba na Pohansku (Früh- Kouřil, Pavel, 2003: Staří Maďaři a Morava z pohledu arche- mittelalterliche metallverarbeitende Produktion in Pohansko bei ologie, in: J. Klápště – E. Plešková – J. Žemlička (Ed.), Dějiny Břeclav), in: Památky archeologické, 98, 129–184. ve věku nejistot. Sborník k  příležitosti 70. narozenin Dušana Třeštíka, Praha, 110–146. McCormick, Michael, 2001: Origins of the European economy, Cambridge. Kouřil, Pavel, 2008: Archeologické doklady nomádského vli- vu a zásahu na území Moravy v závěru 9. a v 10. století (Ar- McCormick, Michael, 2002: Verkehrsvege, Handel und Sklaven chaeological evidence of Nomad influence and impact within zwischen Europa und dem Nahen Osten um 900: Von der Ge­ territory of Moravia in end of 9th and in 10th century), in: T. schichtsschreibung zur Archäologie?, in: J. Henning (Hrsg.), Eu- Štefanovičová – D. Hulínek (Ed.), Bitka při Bratislave v roku ropa im 10. Jahrhundert. Archäologie einer Aufbruchzeit, Mainz 907 a jej význam pre vývoj stredného Podunajska, Bratislava, am Rhein, 171–180. 113–135. Měřínský, Zdeněk, 1985: Velkomoravské kostrové pohřebiště Krohn, Niklot, 2003: Von der Eigenkirche zur Pfarrgemeinschaft: ve Velkých Bílovicích. K problematice venkovských nekropolí Kirchenbauten und Kirchengräber der frühmittelalterlichen Ala- 9.–10. století na Moravě (Das grossmährische Skelettgräberfeld mannia als archäologische Zeugnisse für nobilitäre Lebensweise bei Velké Bílovice), Praha. und christliche Institutionalisierung, in: G. Helmig (Ed.), Centre – Region – Periphery. Medieval Europe, Hertingen, 166–178. Měřínský, Zdeněk, 1986: Morava v 10. století ve světle archeo- logických nálezů (Mähren im 10. Jahrhundert im Lichte archäol- Krzemieńska, Barbara – Třeštík, Dušan, 1967: Zur problematik ogischen Funde), in: Památky archeologické, 77, 18–80. der Dienstleute im frühmittelalterlichen Böhmen, in: F. Graus et al. (Hrsg.), Siedlung und Verfassung Böhmens in der Frühzeit, Měřínský, Zdeněk, 2005: Mikulčice – das Gräberfeld bei der Wiesbaden, 70–103. IX. Kirche. Verlauf der Forschung und Fundsachlage, in: P. Kouřil (Hrsg.), Die frühmittelalterliche Elite bei den Völkern Krzemieńska, Barbara – Třeštík, Dušan, 1982: Hospodářské des östlichen Mittelaeuropas. Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV základy raně středověkých států ve střední Evropě (Economic ČR Brno 25, Brno, 115–136. Foundations of the Early Medieval State in Central Europe), in: Hospodářské dějiny, 1, 149–225. Měřínský, Zdeněk, 2006: České země od příchodu Slovanů po Velkou Moravu II, Praha. Kučera, Matúš, 1974: Slovensko po páde Veľkej Moravy. Štúdie o hospodárskom a sociálnom vývine v 9.–13. storočí (Die Slowakei Měřínský, Zdeněk, 2008: Morava v  10. a na počátku 11. sto- nach dem Fall des Grossmährischen Reiches. Studie über die wirt- letí (Moravia in 10th through beginning of 11th century, in: T. schaftliche und soziale Entwicklung im 9.–13. Jhr.), Bratislava. Štefanovičová – D. Hulínek (Ed.), Bitka při Bratislave v roku 907 a jej význam pre vývoj stredného Podunajska, Bratislava, 79–112. Last, Martin, 1972: Die Bewaffnung der Karolingerzeit, in: Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, 41, 77–93. Měřínský, Zdeněk – Unger, Josef, 1990: Velkomoravské kostro- vé pohřebiště u Morkůvek, okr. Břeclav (Ein grossmährisches Leciejewicz, Lech, 1997: Great Moravia and Venice in the 9th Skelettgräberfeld bei Morkůvky), in: V. Nekuda (Ed.), Pravěké century, in: D. Čaplovič – J. Doruľa (Ed.), Central Europe in a slovanské osídlení Moravy. Sborník k 80. narozeninám Josefa 8th–10th Centuries, Bratislava, 115–120. Poulíka, Brno, 360–401. 352  Great Moravia, Statehood and Archaeology. The ‘Decline and Fall’ of One Early Medieval Polity Moreland, John, 2000: Concepts of early medieval economy, Profantová, Naďa – Kavánová, Blanka, 2003: Mikulčice – in: I. N. Hansen – C. Wickham (Ed.), The long eight century, pohřebiště u 6. a 12. kostela (Mikulčice – Gräberfeld bei der 6. Leiden, 1–34. und 12. Kirche), Brno. Müller, Róbert, 1995: Ein karolingerzeitlicher Herrenhof in Za- Reuter, Timothy, 2006: Medieval Polities and Modern Mentali- laszabar (Ungarn, Komitat Zala), in: Sborník prací filosofické ties, Cambridge. fakulty brněnské university, řada E, 40, 91–100. Rösener, Werner, 1991: Grundherrschaft im Wandel. Untersu­ Nevizánsky, Gabriel, 2008: Aktuálne problémy výskumu pamia- chungen zur Entwicklung geistlicher Grundherrschaften im süd- tok staromaďarského etnika na území dnešného Slovenska (Cur- westdeutschen Raum vom 9. bis 14. Jahrhundert, Göttingen. rent problems of research of monuments of old Magyar ethnic groups within territory of today’s Slovakia), in: T. Štefanovičová Rösener, Werner, 2006: Vom Sklaven zum Bauern. Zur Stel- – D. Hulínek (Ed.), Bitka při Bratislave v roku 907 a jej význam lung der Hörigen in der frühmittelalterlichen Grundherrschaft, pre vývoj stredného Podunajska, Bratislava, 265–278. in: B. Kasten (Hrsg.), Tätigkeitsfelder und Erfahrungshorizonte des ländlichen Menschen in der frühmittelalterlichen Grund- Opravil, Emanuel, 1983: Údolní niva v době hradištní (Die Tal­ herrschaft (bis ca. 1000), München, 71–89. aue in der Burgwallzeit), Brno. Ruttkay, Alexander, 1982: The organization of troops, warfare Pohl, Walter, 2006: Staat und Herrschaft im Frühmittelalter: and arms in the period of the Great Moravian state, in: Slovenská Überlegungen zum Forschungstand, in: S. Airlie – W. Pohl – H. archeológia, 30, 165–193. Reimitz (Hrsg.), Staat im frühen Mittelalter, Wien, 9–38. Ruttkay, Alexander, 1997: Großmähren: Anmerkungen zum Poláček, Lumír, 1999a: Großmährisches Reich, in: Reallexikon der gegenwärtigen Forschungstand über die Siedlungs- und Germanischen Altertumskunde 13, Berlin – New York, 78–85. sozialökonomischen Strukturen, in: P. Urbańczyk (Ed.), Origins of Central Europe, Warsaw, 143–170. Poláček, Lumír, 1999b: Talaue der March und die Erforschung der großmährischen Machtzentren, in: L. Polaček (Hrsg.), Pro­ Ruttkay, Alexander, 2005: Frühmittelalterliche gesellschaftli- bleme der mitteleuropäischen Dendrochronologie und naturwis- che Eliten im Gebiet der Slowakei und ihre Sitze, in: P. Kouřil senschaftliche Beiträge zur Talaue der March. Internationale (Hrsg.), Die frühmittelalterliche Elite bei den Völkern des östli- Tagungen in Mikulčice V, Brno, 227–232. chen Mitteleuropas. Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV ČR Brno 25, Brno, 225–254. Poláček, Lumír, 2000: Terénní výzkum v Mikulčicích. Mikulčice – průvodce, svazek 1, Brno. Sawyer, Brigitte & Peter, 2004: The making of the Scandina- vian kingdoms, in: W. Pohl (Hrsg.), Die Suche nach den Ur- Poláček, Lumír, 2007: Ninth-century Mikulčice: the “market of sprüngen. Forschungen zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 8, Wien, Moravians”? The archaeological evidence of trade in Great Mora- 259–269. via, in: J. Henning (Ed.), Post-Roman Towns, Trade and Settle- ment in Europe and Byzantium, Berlin – New York, 499–524. Schulze-Dörrlamm, Mechthild, 1993: Bestattungen in der Kirch- en Grossmährens und Böhmens während des 9. bis 10. Jahrhun- Poláček, Lumír, 2008: Das Hinterland des frühmittelalterlichen derts, in: Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmu­ Zentrums in Mikulčice – Stand und Perspektiven der Forschung, seums Mainz, 40, 557–620. in: L. Poláček (Hrsg.), Das wirtschaftliche Hinterland der früh- mittelalterlichen Zentren. Internationale Tagungen in Mikulčice Sláma, Jiří, 2001: Der ökonomische Wandel im Přemyslidenstaat VI, Brno, 257–297. unter der Herrschaft der Nachfolger Boleslavs II., in: P. Sommer (Hrsg.), Boleslav II. Der tschechische Staat um das Jahr 1000. Poláček, Lumír – Marek, Otta – Skopal, Rostislav, 2000: Holz- Colloquia mediaevalia Pragensia 2, Praha, 139–152. funde aus Mikulčice, in: L. Poláček (Hrsg.), Studien zum Burg- wall von Mikulčice 4, Brno, 177–302. Smetánka, Zdeněk, 1994: Archaeological Excavations in the Lumbe Garden of Prague Castle and their Implications for the Polanyi, Karl, 1968: The economy as instituted process, in: E. Study of the Culture of the Early Czech State, in: 25 Years of E. LeClair – H. K. Schneider (Ed.), Economic Anthropology. Archaeological Research in Bohemia. Památky archeologické – Reading in Theory and Analysis, New York, 122–134. Supplementum 1, 162–167. Poulík, Josef, 1975: Mikulčice. Sídlo a pevnost knížat velko- Šolle, Miloš, 1966: Stará Kouřim a projevy velkomoravské moravských (Mikulčice – Sitz und Feste der Grossmährischen hmotné kultury v Čechách (Alt Kouřim und die großmährische Fürsten), Praha. Kultur in Böhmen), Praha. Procházka, Rudolf, 2009: Vývoj opevňovací techniky na Moravě Staňa, Čeněk, 1985: Mährische Burgwälle im 9. Jahrhundert, in: a v českém Slezsku v raném středověku (Die Entwicklung der H. Friesinger – F. Daim (Hrsg.), Die Bayern und ihre Nachbarn Befestigungstechnik in Mähren und Tschechisch-Schlesien im II, Wien, 157–208. Früh- und Hochmittelalter), Brno. 353  Ivo Štefan Štefan, Ivo, 2009: Frühmittelaterliche Sonderbestattungen in Třeštík, Dušan – Žemlička, Josef, 2007: O modelech vývoje Böhmen und Mähren. Archäologie der Randgruppen?, in: Eth- přemyslovského státu (On the Development of the Przemyslid nographisch-archäologische Zeitschrift, 50, 139–162. State), in: Český časopis historický, 105, 122–164. Štefanovičová, Tatiana, 2008: Slovensko v 10. storočí (Slovakia Trier, Marcus, 2002: Köln im frühen Mittelater: Zur Stadt des in 10th century A.D.), in: T. Štefanovičová – D. Hulínek (Ed.), 5. bis 10. Jahrhunderts aufgrund archäologischer Quellen, in: J. Bitka při Bratislave v roku 907 a jej význam pre vývoj stredného Henning (Hrsg.), Europa im 10. Jahrhundert. Archäologie einer Podunajska, Bratislava, 137–148. Aufbruchszeit, Mainz am Rhein, 301–310. Steuer, Heiko, 1982: Frühgeschichtliche Sozialstrukturen in Ungerman, Šimon, 2010: Počátky mladohradištních pohřebišť Mittelaeropa, Göttingen. na Moravě (Die Anfänge der jungburgwallzeitlichen Gräber- felder in Mähren), in: Š. Ungerman – R. Přichystalová (Ed.), Steuer, Heiko, 1995: Mittelalterarchäologie und Sozialge­ Zaměřeno na středověk. Zděňkovi Měřínskému k 60. naroze­ schichte. Fragestellungen, Ergebnisse und Zukunftsaufgaben, ninám, Praha, 220–239, 814–817. in: Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters – Beiheft, 9, 87–104. Urbanćzyk, Przemysław, 2007: Herrschaft und Politik im frühen Mittelalter, Frankfurt am Main. Steuer, Heiko, 1997: Krieger und Bauern – Bauernkrieger. Die gesellschaftliche Ordnung der Alamannen, in: K. Fuchs et al. Urbańczyk, Przemysław, 2008: Trudne początki Polski, Wro­ (Hrsg.), Die Alamannen, Stuttgart, 275–287. cław. Steuer, Heiko, 1999: Handel, in: Reallexikon der Germanischen Vendtová, Viera, 1969: Slovanské osídlenie Pobedima a okolia Altertumskunde 13, Berlin – New York, 503–574. (Die slawische Besiedlung von Pobedim und Umgebung), in: Slovenská archeológia, 17, 119–232. Tainter, Joseph A., 1988: The Collapse of Complex Societies, Cambridge. Wihoda, Martin, 2005: Mährische Eliten als Problem der Kon- tinuität (oder Diskontinuität?) der böhmischen Geschichte, in: Třeštík, Dušan, 1973: „Trh Moravanů“ – ústřední trh Staré P. Kouřil (Hrsg.), Die frühmittelalterliche Elite bei den Völkern Moravy (Der „Markt der Mährer“ – der Zentralmarkt Altmäh- des östlichen Mitteleuropas. Spisy Archeologického ústavu AV rens), in: Československý časopis historický, 21, 869–894. ČR Brno 25, Brno, 9–17. Třeštík, Dušan, 1987: Pád Velké Moravy, in: J. Žemlička (Ed.), Wollmann, Volker, 1999: Der siebenbürgische Bergbau seit der Typologie raně feudálních slovanských států, Praha, 27–76. ungarischen Landnahme, in: R. Slartton (Hrsg.), Silber und Salz in Siebenburgen, Band 1, Bochum, 35–40. Třeštík, Dušan, 1991: Kdy zanikla Velká Morava? (Wann ist Grossmähren untergegangen?), in: Studia mediaevalia Pragen- Yoffee, Norman, 2005: Myths of the Archaic State. Evolution of sia, 2, 9–27. the Earliest Cities, States, and Civilisations, Cambridge. Třeštík, Dušan, 1997: Počátky Přemyslovců, Praha. Zehetmayer, Roman, 2007: Zur Geschichte des niederöster- reichischen Raums im 9. und in der ersten Hälfte des 10. Jahr- Třeštík, Dušan, 1999: Mysliti dějiny, Praha – Litomyšl. hunderts, in: R. Zehetmayer (Hrsg.), Schicksalsjahr 907. Die Schlacht bei Pressburg und das frühmittelalterliche Niederös- Třeštík, Dušan, 2000a: Anfänge zur Gestaltung des slawischen terreich, St. Pölten, 17–30. Reiches: Großmähren, in: A. Wieczorek – H.-M. Hinz (Hrsg.), Europas Mitte um 1000, Band 1, Stuttgart, 298–303. Žemlička, Josef, 1995: Expanze, krize a obnova Čech v letech 935–1055 (K systémovým proměnám raných států ve střední Třeštík, Dušan, 2000b: Von Svatopluk zu Boleslav Chrobry. Evropě). Die Expansion, Krise und Erneuerung Böhmens in den Entstehung Mitteleuropas aus der Kraft des Tatsächlichen und Jahren 935–1055 (Zu den Systemveränderungen der frühen Staat- aus einer Idee, in: P. Urbańczyk (Ed.), The Neighbours of Po- en in Mittelaeuropa), in: Český časopis historický, 93, 205–222. land in the 10th Century, Warsaw, 111–145. Žemlička, Josef, 2000: Gemeinsame Züge der mitteleu- Třeštík, Dušan, 2001: „Eine große Stadt der Slawen namens ropäischen Staaten, in: A. Wieczorek – H.-M. Hinz (Hrsg.), Prag“ (Staaten und Sklawen in Mitteleuropa im 10. Jahrhun- Europas Mitte um 1000, Band 2, Stuttgart, 830–833. dert), in: P. Sommer (Hrsg.), Boleslav II. Der tschechische Staat um das Jahr 1000. Colloquia mediaevalia Pragensia 2, Praha, 93–138. 354