Grippe, Kamm

und
Eulenspiegel
Festschrift fur
Elmar Seebold zum 65. Geburtstag

Herausgegeben von
Wolfgang Schindler und Jurgen Untermann

Walter de Gruyter Berlin New York

1999
 TINEKE LooIJENGA, Groningen

Who wrote the Breza futhark, and why?

In 1930 remnants of a late antique building were excavated at Breza, a village on 1,'
, I
the river Stavnja, about 25 kms North of Sarajevo (Bosnia). Among the debris a
fragment of a semi-circular half-column (marl, not marble, as abusively stated in
runic literature) was found, which bears a nearly complete futhark. Another col-
umn has a Latin alphabet. A third important find was a delicately ornamented
bronze shieldboss (probably Germanic, 6th c.). The building itself may have been
an early Christian church, and the date may be early sixth century.
Another early Christian church ruin was excavated in 1913 near Breza. This
church contained Latin inscriptions and grafitti as well. In literature this church
is referred to as Breza I; the one excavated in 1930 is called Breza II. Here only
Breza II will be discussed, therefore I simply call it Breza.
The present author inspected the fragment with the futhark on the 11th of
October 1998, in the Museum at Sarajevo. 1 During the recent war in Bosnia and
Hercegowina and the siege of Sarajevo, the contents of the showcases and a great
many more or less portable objects had to be evacuated into the cellars of the
museum. Not yet all objects have been recovered and put back to their original
places. Therefore I could not inspect the column with the Latin alphabet. Also, I
have not seen the fragments that would bear runelike signs (for d and j:J?).

Findhistory
According to the early records of the find, published by Cremosnik and Sergejev-
ski in 1930, several pieces of one or more pillars were found in a field. One of
these fragments appeared to have a futhark-inscription. The fragment is 56 cm
high and 30 ems in cross-section. The runes are of the older futhark of24 charac-
ters; they run right; the four last runes are missing because an edge of the stone
has broken away. The runes are between 0,5 and 2,6 ems high. The h is double
barred, which indicates a West-Germanic origin.

I would like to thank the Director of the Zemalski Museum at Sarajevo Dr. D. Buturovic, and
curator Dr. Lidija Fekefa for their friendly co-operation and for giving me the opportunity
to study the Breza runic object. I am also grateful to the Netherlands Association for Scienti-
fic Research (NWO) for assigning me a travel-grant.
 264 Tineke Looijenga

Besides the futhark, other runelike signs were detected on different stone
pieces. Arntz reproduced photos of these signs and of the part of the stone with were
the futhark (Arntz/Zeiss 1939, Taf. VII). Also Krause (1966) presents the same Suvo
photo of the inscription. This photo makes the impression of being taken from a fumis
cast. It does not give any idea of the object in which the inscription was cut. limest
However, the representation of the runes is according to reality, and in this respect was fi
the photo gives a reliable impression. Sergej
ofac
Apart from the futhark and the Latin alphabet, some fragments bore Latin
grafitti. jevski
walls,
colu
The building 1943:
During 1930 and 1931 an excavation of the field where the columns were found T
revealed the basis of a 27 m. long and 19 m. wide building. The orientation was ofac
North-South. The building had an apse and a long nave flanked by two rectangu- blyde
lar corridors (see illustration 1). 144).
whos
illustration 1: plan of the building proba
B
into a
which
nextp
umns,
with
On th
entran
the pr
janovs
opus i
could
layers
ever fl
was fl
seem1
were fl
before
destro
T
duced
the pill
The rooms were separated by inner walls. The first impression was that it was a
after n
church, as there had been found similar plans of basilicas in Bosnia (see for seve-
lars fr
ral plans Sergejevski 1960: 564 and 566). But significant items such as an altar
schnitt
 Who wrote the Breza futhark, and why? 265

erent stone were not found (which occurred more often, for instance at the church ruin of
stone with Suvodol, according to Sergejevski 1943: 174). It may have been, though, that the
ts the same furnishings were made of wood (Sergejevski 1943: 172). Many fragments of
lken from a limestone and marl pillars and capitals were found scattered around, not one piece
m was cut. was found in situ. The first excavators, Dr. Gregor Cremosnik and Demetrius
this respect Sergejevski, stated that the column with the runes may have stood in or in front
of a church, which was destroyed by fire. In a later publication, of 1943, Serge-
! ii
bore Latin jevski stated that the fragments of the columns were found lying across the inner I
! I
walls, which prompted him to suppose that there were low walls upon which the
columns stood, or walls that were ornamented with half-columns (Sergejevski I
1943: 172). On one of those the futhark was carved.
There is some confusion about the nature of the building; some sources speak
were found of a church built by Goths, others call it merely an early Christian church, proba-
ntation was bly destroyed by fire as a result of a Byzantine or Slavic attack (Arntz/Zeiss 1939:
ro rectangu- 144). Arntz quotes a certain Oelmann, who saw the pillars himself in 1935, and
who said that they were too small to have belonged to the church; the pillars were
probably part of a canopy, perhaps situated inside the church.
Basler (1993: 28) describes the building in detail. The building was divided
into a narthex, a nave and a semi-circular apse, and surrounded by a porticus, I:
which ended in two small chambers or chapels on either side (see illustration 2, I

next page). On the front and on both sides the porticus was decorated with col- ii
umns, topped with rare square capitals. The apse was decorated on the outside
with massive sculptured wild boars' and rams' heads, which had been painted red.
On the east-side may have been a kind of triumphal arch. On the front was an
entrance as well. Some steps on the inner side of the western wall might point to
the presence of an upper chamber, a platform (Basler 1993: 28), or a tower (Bo-
janovski/Celic 1969: 12, 25). The floor was tiled. The walls were stone-built in
opus incertum, and traces of opus spicatum (stones layed in herringbone motif)
could be seen. The building may have had a wooden roof. Deducing from the
layers of ashes on the floor, the building has indeed been destroyed by fire. What-
ever furniture there was has been burned. Amid the debris a skeleton of a man
was found. With him were the 6th century shieldboss and some antique and
seemingly "barbaric" potsherds. Above the burning-layer some slavic ceramics
were found, which indicate that the walls may have still stood for some time
before collapsing (Basler 1975: 260). Basler suggests also that the building was
destroyed during the gothic wars of about 5 35.
The relatively small marl pillars were shaped on a lathe, which can be de-
duced from the grooves, the rings and the slight convexity (entasis), which gives
the pillars the appearance of a somewhat stretched barrel (see illustration 3, page
that it was a after next). Sergejevski observes that in this respect they remind of the two pil-
see for seve- lars from Monkwearmouth. The capitals are worked in woodcut-style (Kerb-
:h as an altar schnitt). The builders also used spolia of antique buildings, and in doing so, they
266 Tineke Looijenga

preserved some stones bearing important Latin inscriptions (Cremosnik/Serge- illustration 3: p

jevski 1930: 2).

illustration 2: front view and side view of the building

VLPIAE f -
]ROCUL[AN
IIVALENS V
F-PRINCEPS
ET AELIAIVS
]CENO[P?
 Who wrote the Breza futhark, and why? 267

mo8nik/Serge- illustration 3: photo of a pillar

.--i
'O'I
1
~-~~~rki~---n ~
E
_J~;_
~~ , ~
:~ '~: .. >Y

For instance, on one side of the apse, a large grave cippus was found, face down,
with a long inscription:

VLPIAE r - F
]ROCUL[ AN-XX
II V ALENS VARRON
F-PRINCEPS DESITIATI
ET AELIA IVSTA
]CENO[P? (after Cremosnik/Sergejevski 1930: 8).
 268 Tineke Looijenga

The inscription is dated into the second century AD. The name DESITIATI would
point to a tribe living somewhere along the upper part of the river Bosna, and
eastwards to the Drina, according to the above mentioned authors. Some other
fragments of pillars show Latin grafitti, such as ]AULINUS and ]CORDIA.
In 1959-1962 a second excavation was executed by D. Sergejevsk:i. Unfortu-
nately, Sergejevsk:i never published the results of this second excavation. On the
11th international Congress of Byzantinists in Mfulchen in 195 8, he discusses
some of the abnormalities of the Breza basilica. He mentions the possible pres- gowina
ence of an upper room and the deviating orientation of the building (North-South of ado
instead of East-West). He gives a survey of more than twenty ruins of early style wa
Christian basilicas, and Breza does not differ fundamentally from the others (cf. to Bojan
Sergejevski 1960: 564 f.). He enumerates four points of interest: 1. the basilicas ofKlobu
ondhalf
all are built after the same plan; 2. this plan is original, i.e. it does not look like
Serg
plans of basilicas in other countries; 3. the Bosnian basilicas are too small to
place in
contain many people; 4. the buildings did not serve any other purpose than that
tised mai
of a church (Sergejevski 1960: 565). These points concern Breza as well.
basilicas
Sergejevski is said to have retracted his earlier statement that the building
at the en
was a church, according to Basler (1975 and 1993). Basler suggests that its pur-
ofmissio
pose may have been profane, because of (I) the North-South orientation, (2) the
To date t
absence of both an altar and a sepulcher, and (3) the presence of a futhark. Espe-
cording t
cially the fact that runes were carved on one of the pillars would point to a "bar-
have hin
baric" use of the building. This I would like to contradict; it appears that the co-
24 early
existence of a Latin alphabet and a futhark in the same building may point to an
early Christian consecration ritual (see below). Ac tu

Dating and Christianity

The dating of the building is a point of interest taken up by several authors. The
first excavators, Cremoilnik/Sergejevski (1930), based their dating on the pres- tions, but
ence of the futhark. It would have been carved in the soft marly surface by the 1962: 80)
Ostrogoths, who, according to them, reigned Dalmatia from 493-555 AD. Also dated tot
the typical Kerbschnitt style of the capitals prompted them to assign the building
to the Ostrogoths. They even called the style "gothic", comparing it to the much
later medieval gothic cathedrals. But in his 1943 publication, page 173, Serge-
jevski launched another proposition: the sculptures should be compared to do- Basler (1
mestic art, i.e. Illyric, an idea that is taken up by Bojanovski/Celic (1969: 25). The during the
latter authors, and Sergejevski as well, also focused on other aspects. They pro- of one of
posed to compare the building to Syrian basilicas. In doing so, the Breza basilica maybe a
should be dated later, to the time of the East-Roman emperor Justinianus, at any at Split, o
rate after the Ostrogoths had left Dalmatia (already in 471/2 part of them left for the mosai
Italy; and from 493-526 their king Theoderic reigned in Italy. However, the Goths
continued to claim Dalmatia. Thus they were regularly engaged in wars with
 Who wrote the Breza futhark, and why? 269

Justinianus, who was emperor of Byzantium 527-565. In 536 Dalmatia was reuni-
rIATiwould
fied with the East Roman empire). If not by the Goths, the futhark would then
Bosna, and
have been carved by captured Germanic enemies, who were forced to take part
Some other
in the building activities of the church, according to Bojanovski and Celie (1969:
:oRDIA.
25). They point to two important features: (1) the architectural similarities with
ski. Unfortu-
Syrian and Asia Minor churches - and indigenous churches in Bosnia and Herce-
ation. On the
gowina as well -, and (2) the hybrid sculptural style, which resulted from a merger
he discusses
of a domestic style with late-antique and early-medieval styles. The Kerbschnitt
1ossible pres-
style was indigenous; known and used already for centuries in Bosnia, according
(N orth-South
to Bojanovski and Celie. Thus they compare Breza with other Bosnian basilicas,
uins of early
ofKlobuk, Dabravina and in a lesser degree Duvno, who all are dated to the sec-
he others (cf.
. the basilicas ond half of the 6th century.
Sergejevski (1960: 568) discusses the question of when Christianization took
not look like
place in the Dalmatian inlands. According to him, Christianity was at first prac-
too small to
tised mainly in cities, and may have arrived at a rather late date in Dalmatia. The
iose than that
basilicas of rural Bosnia seem to have been built all in the same period, starting
i.s well.
at the end of the 5th, or at the beginning of the 6th centuries, probably as result
t the building
of missionary activities on a large scale, perhaps during the reign of Justinianus.
ts that its pur-
To date the churches to the later 6th century would meet with difficulties, ac-
tation, (2) the
cording to Sergejevski, since the many wars with Goths, Avars and Slavs would
futhark. Espe-
have hindered such a large enterprise. At the time Sergejevski wrote this (1958),
oint to a "bar-
24 early Christian churches were already excavated in Bosnia.
rs that the co-
Actually, dating the Bosnian basilicas is difficult; only stylistic criteria can
1ay point to an
be used, since there are no documents, no inscriptions, no coins that may indicate
a date. An indication of a date for Breza may be offered by the presence of the 6th
c. shieldboss. The shieldboss is slightly dome-shaped, pearly-rimmed halfway the
dome and around the button. It is exquisitely decorated with zig-zag lines made
in tremolo-stitch technique. It is difficult to fmd a parallel with the same decora-
tl authors. The tions, but regarding its shape, it may be Langobardic (see for instance Werner
Lg on the pres- 1962: 80). In Alamannic regions this kind of shieldbosses have also been found,
surface by the dated to the early 6th c. (see for instance Die Alamannen, 1997: 209-218) .
.555 AD. Also
sn the building
The identity of the building
, it to the much
ge 173, Serge- Basler ( 197 5: 261) suggests that the Breza building may have been constructed
>mpared to do- during the Gothic era (ca. 490-535), because the front of the building reminds him
'.1969: 25). The of one of the palaces of Theoderic in Ravenna, on the Via Alberoni. The fronton
ects. They pro- may be a provincial, or "barbaric", imitation of the entry of the Diocletian palace
~ Breza basilica at Split, or rather the middle part of Theoderic's palace, such as it is presented on I,
tinianus, at any the mosaic in San Apollinare Nuovo at Ravenna (Basler 1975: 261 f.).
of them left for
rever, the Goths
d in wars with
 270 Tineke Looijenga

Of interest is further that he mentions two richly decorated capitals showing

both a cross within ranks, whereas one of the capitals was ornamented with a liturgy
cross in a mandorla. These crosses point to Christianity. one qu
the pra
The similarity to the Theoderican palaces causes Basler to think of a public
function of the Breza building, perhaps for administrative or juridical purposes. well as
in the
He suggests that it was a curtis with an aula, used by a comes. The most impor-
contai
tant problem is then, in how far the King's palace at Ravenna could influence the
Roman
building style in a far-off province, according to Basler (197 5: 263 ). The inscribed
Franki
futhark on one side of the corridor and the Latin alphabet on the other side would
time, a
point to certain rights of the indigenous civilians. In that way, Basler states (1993:
differe
28 f.), visitors of the building could find their way in the written documents. The
tice. Fu
Ostrogoths could read the Roman script and the Romans could encipher the script
of the Ostrogoths, i.e. the runes(!). ofChri
As
Would the Ostrogoths have written their documents with runes?
interm
Very unlikely, I would say. I propose another solution for the presence of
both a Latin and a runic alphabet, c.q. futhark. Benedi
who ad
There may be a connection between the alphabets and the so-called crux de-
pal obj
cussata. This is an imaginary diagonal cross, connecting the four comers of a
influen
church, thus referring to the .cosmos. In the Middle Ages, the crux decussata
in Brita
played a role during inauguration rites and also when designing the lay-out of the
cant. T
church. During the consecration rites of a new church, the bishop wrote on one
empero
post the Greek alphabet and on the other the Latin alphabet (Mekking 1988: 28).
proved
A consecration ritual for a new church (ordo quomodo aecclesia debeat dedicari)
i.e. Leu
is described in the Egbert Pontifical, i.e. a book of special services for the use of
gro nea
a bishop. The name Egbert refers to the first archbishop of York (732-766). The
The
manuscript, with the name Egbert Pontifical, is kept in Paris, MS Lat. 10575. In
Breza b
it, the ritual (f. 46v) is described, in which the bishop takes his staff and in the
consecr
dust and ashes on the floor draws the alphabet in the form of a great St. Andrew's
church.
cross from one comer of the church diagonally to the other, and again joining the Christi
two remaining comers.
least on
Deinde incipit pontifex de sinistro ab oriente, scribens per pauimentum com cam- and it w
buta sua. A.B.C.darium. usque in dextro angulo occidentalis. et ad dextro. an- North-S
gulo. orientalis scribat similiter. A.B.C.darium. usque in sinistro angulo basilice oldest b
occidentalis. deinde ueniens ad altare dicat. Deua in adiutorium meum intende.
domine as adiuuandum me festina. cum Gloria absque Alleluia.
The origins of the Egbert Pontifical are not known. Banting (1989: xxxvi) con-
cludes that "the scribe seems to have drawn on a source from Northern France
and Normandy in particular, adding material found in Anglo-Saxon England. ( ... )
The Pontifical could have been written in Wessex in the mid tenth century". The
rituals go back to older sources. In the Dictionnaire d'Archeologie Chretienne et
Liturgie, H. Leclercq (1907: 58) states that the crux decussata belongs to roman
 Who wrote the Breza futhark, and why? 271 : I
r l
apitals showing liturgy, a sacramentaire gregorien which contains virtually the same text as the
amented with a one quoted above from the Egbert Pontifical. This rite evidently is derived from
the practice used by the agrimensores oflatin antiquity, according to Mekking as
hink of a public well as Leclercq. Benz (1956: 64 ff.) discusses two liturgical texts, written down
idical purposes. in the 9th century, but actually reflecting older texts. Both texts are ordines that
'he most impor- contain rules of how to dedicate a church. One of the two texts is called Ordo
1ld influence the Romanus XLI, which, according to Benz, is of "gallikanischer Herkunft", i.e.
I). The inscribed Frankish (Benz 1956: 94 f.). The alphabet ritual appears in ORXLI forthe first
>ther side would time, according to Benz (1956: 97). He mentions several authors who suggest
ler states (1993: different sources for the alphabet ritual, among which the Roman surveying prac-
::locuments. The tice. Furtheron he discusses the significance of the X-form symbolising the name
cipher the script of Christ, and the alphabet itself as an elaboration of alpha-omega.
As to how the liturgical texts came to France and England, we may think of
nes? intermediating pilgrims who came back from Rome. Especially important were
the presence of Benedictine monks in furthering this process, according to Banting (1989: xxvii), Ii!

who adds that "the forms ofliturgy used in St Peters in the Vatican were a princi-
-called crux de- pal object of interest" to the pilgrims. Banting points also to the fact that "the
1ur comers of a influence of St Peter's and the church in Rome had, however, been considerable
crux decussata in Britain since the seventh century". The Benedictine connection may be signifi-
ie lay-out of the cant. The order had had some influence in 6th century Dalmatia as well, since
'P wrote on one emperor Justinianus apparently maintained contacts with St Benedict (480-547),
:king 1988: 28). proved by the fact that the emperor granted him some possessions in Dalmatia,
iebeat dedicari) i.e. Leusinium (on the river Trebisnica in South Bosnia), Salluntum (in Montene-
~s for the use of gro near Danilovgrad) and Baloe (see Basler 1993: 18).
(732-766). The The occurrence of a runic alphabet and a Roman alphabet side by side in the
;Lat.10575.In Breza building presents a unique situation. If the alphabets played a part in the
staff and in the consecration ritual such as is described above, Breza may after all have been a
:at St. Andrew's church. For once the function of a complete futhark would be clear, albeit in a
gain joining the Christian context. Moreover, the futhark proves a special significance among at
least one Germanic tribe; it evidently was known and in use in a religious context,
and it was considered equal to the Roman alphabet. Remains the problem of the
ntum com cam-
, ad dextro. an-
North-South orientation. This is very unusual, but all sorts of orientations of the
oldest basilicas seem to have occurred in Rome (Leclercq 1936: 2665-2666).
angulo basilice
meum intende.

~9: xxxvi) con-

rorthem France
m England.( ... )
h century". The
e Chretienne et
longs to roman
272 Tineke Looijenga

The runes
illustration 4: the runes

fu th a r k q w h n IJ i p z s t e m
The futhark is just below a groove, which runs under the upper brim of the col-
umn's fragment, on the right hand top comer. When seen from front, the runes run
from about the centre of the column to the right. The inscription would have run
all the way to the columns end, but the edge of the stone is broken away, and the
four last runes have disappeared with it. The sequence is that of the older futhark
until t. Then follows e m I. Thus, b ing d o are lacking. The broken-away piece
agrees precisely with the space those four runes would have occupied.
The runes are very neatly, but inconspiciously, carved into the soft marly sur-
face with a sharp instrument. They have not been chiseled, but cut with a knife,
for instance. It is difficult to see the inscription if one does not know it is there. Rema
In that respect the runes resemble runes on small metal or wooden objects; 2 they The
are quite unlike the runic inscriptions on stones in Scandinavia. If only therefore rune
it is unlikely that the runes would have had a public function for referendary use cm hi
for the reading of Gothic documents, such as is suggested by Basler (see above). groov
A function in a consecration rite, such as is described above, could on the other to be
hand be imaginable. In that case it is not so much the reading of the letters that 0
matters, but the fact that they are all there, the whole futhark, as well as the whole
that b
alphabet. Since the column with the runes is only 56 ems high, one must presume
fork
that the columns were situated on low walls, otherwise one could not even see the
bract
inscriptions.
Aubi
When scrutinizing the whole surface of the column, there are many scratches,
West
also across the runes. It seems that there were at least two more inscriptions that
Beuc
have been deliberately scraped off. One runs horizontally on the left hand top, at
stena-
the same heigth as the futhark and another runs vertically on the left side of the
terem
column. This inscription ends in a clear X Some strokes, perhaps the rests of
If
letters (Roman cursive?) can be seen. If something meaningful was written is
mscn
Gothi
or W
Aqui
2 The shaping on a lathe of the columns and the cutting of runes with a knife, or another sharp Pforz
instrument, points to artisans who where used to working with wood instead of stone. Also the
Kerbschnitt style is really a woodcutting-style, however also used in metal. These features may shape
suit better Germanic artisans, more than it would antique artisans. ceive
 Who wrote the Breza futhark, and why? 273

uncertain; it may as well have been script-imitation. A deliberate hand-made cut

runs from top to bottom, on the left side of the vertical inscription.
A little below the futhark, near the centre of the stone, is a carving of a kind
of flower. It has five leaves (see illustration 5). The flower is 4 ems high; the
leaves are all about 2 ems.

illustration 5: drawing of the flower

t e m
brim of the col-
ont, the runes run
i would have run
en away, and the
the older futhark
oken-away piece
cupied.
ie soft marly sur-
cut with a knife,
know it is there. Remarks:
len objects; 2 they The runes are between 0,5 and 2,6 ems high; most of them are about 2 ems. Each
If only therefore rune occupies a space of about one cm. width. The rune for k is very small: 0,5
r referendary use cm high. The runes p z s t are all over 2 ems high; they run up to the rim of the
tsler (see above). groove. p and z are the largest; respectively 2,4 and 2,6 ems high. The last rune
mld on the other to be seen is I, which misses its side twig in the break.
)f the letters that One would expect the rune for b following upon t, but here one must suppose
well as the whole that b was one of the four runes which have disappeared in the break. The rune
ne must presume for k has the shape of a roof, also found in Pforzen, Dischingen, Watchfield, the
l not even see the bracteates Raum K0ge-C and Borringe-C; and it occurs perhaps in Mi.inchen-
Aubing nm?k and Neudingen Baar klefila}J. The runeform for p occurs also in
: many scratches, Westeremden B, in the sequence up. The runeform for j occurs in Bergakker,
inscriptions that Beuchte, Bezenye I, and three bracteates: Darum (V)-C, Skodborghus-B, Vad-
: left hand top, at stena-C. These inscriptions date from the 5th and 6th centuries, except for Wes-
.e left side of the teremden B, which is from a much later date.
b.aps the rests of If the double-barred b rune is indeed diagnostic for the West Germanic runic
il was written is inscriptions, the conclusion is that this inscription cannot be assigned to the
Gothic runic tradition, but should be considered in the light of other Continental
or West-Germanic inscriptions. Geographically nearest are the runic items of
Aquincum, Bezenye and Pforzen, at least that is where they were found. Breza,
ife, or another sharp Pforzen and Bezenye have some runeforms in common. One may be the roof-
ad of stone. Also the
. These features may shaped k (Pforzen, and perhaps Bezenye, although only one stroke can be per-
ceived). Others are j (Bezenye), the double-barred h (Breza, Pforzen and Bezen-
274 Tineke Looijenga

ye). The brooches from Bezenye, or Pallersdorf, as the site is called, are consid-
ered Langobardic (included in Werner 1962). The Aquincum runic brooch may
be Langobardic; and it has a variant of the Breza k rune: A.
Arntz/Zeiss (1939) date the inscription on the basis of a possible presence of
Langobards or Alamanni in the area. They suggest Alamanni or Langobards as
possible makers. Antonsen (1975) lists Breza as an East Germanic inscription.
Opitz (1977) lists Breza among his Siidgermanische Runeninschriften. To Krause
(1966: 19 f.) it was not clear how Lango bards could have gotten in the region near
Breza.
A short survey of the history of the Langobards may explain how they got to
the Balkan. The Langobards migrated in the 4th c. from the lower Elbe to the
upper Elbe. Around 430 they arrived in Bohemia. After Odoaker defeated the
Rugii in 488, the Langobards settled in lower Austria, from 489-526. In 526 they
invaded upper Pannonia, which had just been deserted by the Ostrogoths. After
the murder of Amalasuntha, Theoderics daughter and heiress, in 535, combat
arose concerning the former Gothic possessions in Dalmatia. Emperor Justinianus
(527-565) succeeded in 536 to incorporate Dalmatia in the East Roman empire.
The Goths, under their new king Vitigis (536-540), waged battle against Justinia-
nus and recaptured Salona. In the meantime the Dalmatian borders were left un-
watched. Thus the Langobards and Gepides could enter the area. The Lango bards
occupied the North of Bosnia and the region between the rivers Bosna and Drina,
which is exactly the area in which Breza lies!
Vitilas successor, king Totila (541-552), tried in vain to win back Dalmatia.
He offered Justinianus peace in 551, under the condition that he could keep his
possessions in Italy. Justinianus, in return, sent his commander Narsus to Italy,
who definitely defeated the Goths in 555. One may presume that somehow
Justinianus succeeded in building the Breza church in between the turmoils of
successive barbaric invasions.
The bad relations between Langobards and Gepides led them to war. Helped
by the A vars the Langobards succeeded in dispelling the Gepides from Pannonia,
leaving the area to the A vars. The Gepides successively were defeated. Audoins
son Alboin led the Langobards away to North Italy in 567, leaving the Langobard
parts of Dalmatia to the A vars and the Slavs.
It therefore seems that the Lango bards lived in the Breza region from around
535 until 567, some thirty years. They are, I think, the most eligible to have cut
this futhark in the column.
The Bosnian churches were built before or during the period the Langobards
settled in the area, so it may be that part of the Lango bards became Christians
during their stay in Bosnia. Krause even states that the Langobards were Christi-
anized at the end of the 5th c. (Krause/Jankuhn 1966: 310, no source given).
The building of the church need not coincide with the cutting of the futhark,
but as terminus ad quern the destruction of the building may be taken, which has
 Who wrote the Breza futhark, and why? 275

ailed, are consid- happened in the 6th century (based for instance on the presence of the 6th c.
unic brooch may shieldboss, buried under the layers of ashes). The consecration of the church,
during which the futhark and the Latin ABC were cut on two pillars, may be
;sible presence of considered as a Christian - Langobardic cooperation, perhaps preceding the bapti-
)r Langobards as cism of a group ofLangobards. That there existed friendly terms between Justini-
ianic inscription. anus and the Langobards may be proved by the fact that the Langobardic king
iriften. To Krause Audoin got parts of South-Pannonia and Noricum in 546.
in the region near
i I

n how they got to Bibliography I I

ower Elbe to the

Antonsen, E.H. (1975): A Concise Grammar of the Older Runic Inscriptions. Ttibingen. p. 77.
iker defeated the
Arntz, H./Zeiss, H. (1939): Die einheimische Runendenkmaler des Festlandes. Leipzig. pp. 14?-
1
-526. In 526 they
154.
)strogoths. After Banting, H.M.J. (ed.) (1989): Two Anglo-Saxon Pontificals (the Egbert and Sidney Sussex Pon-
, in 535, combat tificals). London.
iperor Justinianus Basler, D. (1975): Die "Basilika II" in Breza bei Sarajevo. ln: Ziva antika, Antiquite vivante,
Actes du X!Ile congres International d'etudes anciennes, organise par le Comite "Eirene"
;t Roman empire.
- Dubrovnik 7-12 act. 1974. Skopje, 259-264.
~against Justinia-
Basler, D. (1993): Spatantike und Frilhchristliche Architektur in Bosnien und der Herzegowina,
:lers were left un- Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Schriften der Balkan-Kommission, anti-
. The Langobards quarische Abteilung nr. 19. Wien.
Bosna and Drina, Benz, S. OSB, (1956): Zur Geschichte der romischen Kirchweihe nach den Texten des 6.-7.
Jahrhunderts. In: Enkainia, Gesammelte Arbeiten zum 800 jahrigen Weihegedachtnis der
Abteikirche Maria Laach am 24. August 1956. 1956, DUsseldorf.
n back Dalmatia. Bojanovski, l./Dzemal, C. (1969): Kasnoanticka Bazilika u Brezi, Problem i konzervacija. In:
1e could keep his Nase Starine, godisnjak zavoda za zastitu spomenika kulture Bosne i Hercegovine XII. Sara-
:r Narsus to Italy, jevo, 7-25.
ie that somehow Cremosnik, G./Sergejevski, D. (1930): Gotisches und romisches aus Breza bei Sarajevo. In: Novi-
tates Musei Saravoensis, nr. 9. Sarajevo, 1-9.
n the turmoils of
Die Alamannen (1997): Archaologisches Landesmuseum Baden-Wilrttemberg. Stuttgart.
Krause, W./H. Jankuhn (1966): Die Runeninschriften im alteren Futhark. Gottingen, 19-20.
m to war. Helped Leclercq, H. (1907): Abecedaire, in: Dictionnaire d'Archeologie Chretienne et de Liturgie, tome
:s from Pannonia, premier, l'e partie A-Amende. Paris.
lefeated. Audoins Leclercq, H. (1936): Orientation, in: Dictionnaire d'Archeologie Chretienne et de Liturgie, tome
douzieme, deuxieme partie Noirmoutier-Orvieto. Paris.
ng the Langobard Mekking, A.J .J. (1988): Een kruis van kerken rond Koenraads hart. In: Utrecht kruispunt van de
Middeleeuwsekeik. Eds. Stadhoudeis, K./Mekking, A., Zutphen, 21-53.
gion from around Opitz, S. (1977): Siidgermanische Runeninschriften im alteren Futhark aus der Merowingerzeit.
igible to have cut 2. Auflage. Kirchzarten. pp. 12-13; 202-204.
Sergejevski, D. (1943): Archaologische Forschungen in Bosnien in den Jahren 1920-1940. In:
Siidost - Forschungen, nr. 8. Milnchen, Wien, 156-177.
d the Langobards Sergejevski, D. (1960): Plan der Frilhchristlichen Basiliken Bosniens. In: Akten des XI. lnterna-
ecame Christians tionalen Byzantinistenkongresses Milnchen 1958. Eds. Franz Dolger und Hans-Georg Beck.
rrds were Christi- Milnchen, 563-568.
source given). Werner, J. (1962): Die Langobarden in Pannonien, Beitriige zur Kenntnis der langobardischen
ng of the futhark, Bodenfunde var 568. A. Textteil. B. Tafelteil. Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften,
Phil.-Hist. Klasse. Abh. Neue Folge, Heft 55 A & B. Milnchen.
taken, which has