<figure><img src="image_150.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 6.10: Blejski otok, stolpčni grafikon kartografskih azimuthov grobov (zgoraj) in načrt jasno izraženih skupin grobov: 1 – 76° ± 1°; 2 – 89° ± 1°; 3 – 94° ± 1°; 4 – ostalo; 5 – robne vrednosti; 0 – ni podatka (avtor B. Štular).</figcaption></figure>

<caption>Fig. 6.10: Bled Island, graph of cartographic azimuths of graves (above) and below map of selected groups : 1 – 76° ± 1°; 2 – 89° ± 1°; 3 – 94° ± 1°; 4 – other; 5 – marginal values; 0 – no data (by B. Štular).</caption>

največja proti koncu zime (Brown 1983). Pričakovana distribucija orientacij bi torej imela izrazit južni odklon od vzhoda. Če bi bila največja umrljivost na primer v januarju in februarju, bi to na Bledu pomenilo orientacije približno med 104° in 121° (prim. Škerlj 1952, 113). Izmerjene vrednosti imajo, nasprotno, izrazit severni odklon. Tudi brez podrobnejše analize, ki bi upoštevala

have taken place in the summer and no people would have been buried towards the end of the winter. Therefore, even without a more detailed analysis of declinations, the solar azimuth hypothesis can be ruled out with some certainty for the Bled Island cemetery (Fig. 6.7).

The second null hypothesis is that the graves are oriented towards the east in general and that any deviations are the consequence of the inaccuracy of the mourners.
deklinacije, lahko hipotezo solarnega azimuta v primeru grobišča na Blejskem otoku zanesljivo ovržemo (sl. 6.7).

Druga ničelna hipoteza je, da so grobovi orientirani splošno proti vzhodu, morebitna odstopanja pa so pósledica nenatančnosti pogrebcev. Pričakovane vrednosti orientacij, ki bi to hipotezo potrdile, bi bile razporejene v obliki pravilne zvončaste oziroma Gaussove krivulje z vrhom pri 90°. Vendar dejanske vrednosti tudi tokrat pomenljivo odstopajo od pričakovanih, saj imajo tri vrhove: 76°, 89° in 94°. Dodatno je razpon vrednosti prevelik, da bi ga bilo mogoče razložiti s površnostjo pogrebcev. S tem pade hipoteza, da so grobovi na Blejskem otoku orientirani splošno proti vzhodu z večjimi in manjšimi merskimi napakami.

Zato postavimo hipotezo, ki je alternativna ničelnima hipotezama: na grobišču Blejski otok so pogrebci pokope orientirali zavestno (a ne proti sončnemu vzhodu na dan pogreba in ne splošno proti vzhodu).

Orientacije grobov na Blejskem otoku imajo 3 jasno izražene smeri, ki sledijo:

- kardinalnemu vzhodu (89° ± 1°),

- smeri grobnih vrst (94° ± 1°) in

- orientaciji cerkve (76° ± 1°).

Deset grobov ima orientacijo 89° ± 1°. Ob upoštevanju merske napake 1° lahko rečemo, da so ti grobovi orientirani kardinalnemu vzhodu. Z eno izjemo (G3: 65a) so to grobovi iz zgodnjesrednjeveške stratigrafske faze 1 (G1: 10a, 29, 30, 32a, 40, 42, 49, 51, 60), ki je starejša od najstarejše cerkvene stavbe. Ker noben izmed teh grobov ne sodi med stratigrafsko najstarejše, lahko rečemo, da gre za grobove iz mlajše stopnje najstarejše stratigrafske faze.

Hkrati so ti grobovi orientirani tudi geografsko: 5,4 km od cerkve Marijinega vnebovzetja na Blejskem otoku v smeri kardinalnega vzhoda leži cerkev Marijinega vnebovzetja v Lescah. Slemeni današnjih cerkvenih stavb imata isto orientacijo, obe cerkvi sta posvečeni isti zavetnici in obe sta bili v visokem srednjem veku romarski cerkvi. Za leško cerkev v začetku 12. stoletja izvemo, da je bila kot lastniška zgrajena v davnih časih v čast sv. Marije, da so se vanjo stekali romarji od blizu in od daleč ter da je njihove darove obdržal zemljiški gospod (Bizjak 2012, 38 z navedbo virov; prim. Hoffler 2016a, 216). Neposredno južno od srednjeveške je v Lescah stala poznorimska zgodnjekrščanska cerkev, o kateri priča skromno ohranjen mozaik (Božič 1995). Vendar za zdaj arheoloških sledi leške cerkve v zgodnjem srednjem veku ne poznamo, zato neposredne povezave z grobovi z Blejskega otoka še ni mogoče dokazati. Je pa obstoj kraja posebnega pomena verjeten; le stežka si namreč predstavljamo uveljavljeno romarsko središče sredi 11. stoletja (glej pogl. 8.1) brez tradicije na istem prostoru v drugi polovici 10. stoletja.

The expected values of orientations confirming this hypothesis would have a normal or Gaussian distribution with a peak at 90°. However, the actual values again deviate significantly from the expected values, for the largest peak is 76°. Moreover, the span of values ± 21° is too big to be explained by the measurement error (keeping in mind that these people were able to navigate themselves in the landscape using the sun). This refutes the hypothesis that the graves on Bled Island are oriented to the east in general and that the deviations are measurement errors.

Having refuted both null hypotheses, an alternative hypothesis must be set: in the Bled Island cemetery, the mourners oriented the burials consciously either astronomically or geographically.

The graves on Bled Island demonstrate three spikes in orientation (Fig. 6.10):

- true east (89° ± 1°);

- the direction of the rows of graves (94° ± 1°); and

- the orientation of the church (76° ± 1°).

The orientation of ten graves is 89° ± 1°. These graves are oriented astronomically towards true east within the measurement error of 1°. With one exception (G3: 65a), all graves belong to the Early Medieval stratigraphic Phase 1 (G1: 10a, 29, 30, 32a, 40, 42, 49, 51, 60) and are hence earlier than the earliest church building. More specifically, all of these graves belong to the later sub-phases of the early medieval G1 cemetery.

At the same time, these graves have a geographical orientation: 5.4 km from the Church of the Assumption on Bled Island in the direction of true east, there is the Church of the Assumption in the town of Lesce. The ridges of the present-day churches have the same orientation, both churches are dedicated to the same patron saint and both were pilgrimage churches in the High Middle Ages. According to sources from the beginning of the 12th century, the church in Lesce was built as a proprietary church long ago in honour of St Mary, it attracted pilgrims from near and far and their donations were kept by the feudal lord (Bizjak 2012, 38 with sources; cf. Höfler 2016a, 216). In Lesce, adjacent to the medieval church, the existence of a Late Roman Early Christian church is evidenced by a poorly preserved mosaic (Božič 1995). Nevertheless, no archaeological remains of an Early Medieval church in Lesce have been found so far and a direct connection to the graves on Bled Island cannot be proven. It is, however, very likely that there was a place of special meaning in Lesce in Early Medieval period; it is hard to imagine an established pilgrimage centre in the mid-11th century (see Chapter 8.1) with no tradition from the second half of the 10th century in the same location.

The graves on Bled Island with the azimuth of 89° ± 1° can therefore be interpreted as astronomically oriented towards true east and, likely, geographically towards Lesce. While the precise cultural interpretation of this orientation remains unknown, this piece of information
<figure><img src="image_151.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 6.11: Blejski otok, načrt grobov v vrstah na prostoru severno od sedanje cerkve: sivo – cerkvena stavba; rdeče – idealiziran potek grobnih vrst s kartografskim azimutom 4°; modra puščica – grob 38 (avtor B. Štular; vir: arhiv NMS AO Rn 222/4–5).</figcaption></figure>

<caption>Fig. 6.11: Bled Island, map of graves in lines north of the present-day church: grey – present-day church building; red – idealized lines of graves with cartographic azimuth 4°; blue arrow – Grave 38 (by B. Štular; source: NMS archive AO Rn 222/4–5).</caption>

Grobove na Blejskem otoku z azimutom 89° ± 1° torej interpretiramo kot astronomsko orientirane glede na kardinalni vzhod. Natančne kulturne interpretacije te usmeritve za zdaj ne poznamo, ima pa ta podatek izjemno metodološko vrednost. Dokazuje namreč obstoj astronomskega znanja, primerljivega znanju, ki ga izkazuje Beda Venerabilis (glej pogl. 6.2.2).

Druga skupina grobov ima orientacijo 94° ± 1°. Vsi grobovi so iz zgodnjesrednjeveške stratigrafske faze 1 (G1: 6, 12, 20a, 22, 35, 54). V tem primeru gre za smer grobnih vrst. Na grobišču je namreč v severnem delu že Šribar prepoznal grobne vrste (1966, 222; glej pogl. 8.2.1). Te vrste so od smeri sever-jug odklonjene približno za 4° proti vzhodu. Grobovi z orientacijo 94° ± 1° so orientirani pravokotno na vrste in s tem najbolj natančno sledijo sistemu vrst. Vendar kar dve tretjini grobov v vrstah od orientacije 94° odstopata za več kot ± 3° (sl. 6.11). To kaže, da v pogrebnem ritualu teh grobov orientacija ni bila pomembna, temveč je le stranska posledica vrstnega reda oziroma gre za tako imenovano ekvifinalnost (za izraz prim. Dincauze 2000, 31). Kako so bile orientirane vrste, ne vemo, vendar to

has significant methodological value. Indeed, it proves the existence of astronomical knowledge, comparable to the knowledge evidenced by Bede the Venerable (see Chapter 6.2.2).

The orientation of the second group of graves is 94° ± 1°. All the graves are from the Early Medieval stratigraphic Phase 1 (G1: 6, 12, 20a, 22, 35, 54). In this case, the orientation follows the direction of the rows of graves. Šribar was the first to identify rows of graves in the northern part of the cemetery (1966, 222; see Chapter 8.2.1). These rows deviate for about 4° to the east from the north-south direction. Graves with the orientation of 94° ± 1° are oriented perpendicularly to these rows, which means that they follow the system of rows the most closely. Nevertheless, no less than two thirds of the graves in the rows deviate from the orientation of 94° for more than ± 3° (Fig. 6.11). This indicates that orientation was not a significant factor in the burial ritual of these graves, but rather a side effect of the rows, as a case of so-called equifinality (for the expression, cf. Dincauze 2000, 31). We do not know towards which point the rows were oriented, but it was not the Gradiška hilltop as previously inferred by Pleterski (1996, 173–174).
ni orientacija na vrh Gradiška kot je domneval Pleterski (1996, 173–174).

Največ grobov (14) je orientiranih vzporedno s
cerkveno stavbo. Imajo azimut 76° ± 1° oziroma deklina-
cijo vzhajališča Sonca 11° ± 1°. 1 grob je iz stratigrafske
faze 1 (G1), 2 sta iz faze 2 (skupina G3), 9 jih sodi v fazo
3 (6 iz skupine G4 in 3 iz skupine G5), preostala grobova
sodita v posrednjeveški fazi 4 in 5 (G6 in G7).

Usmeritev edinega zgodnjesrednjeveškega groba je izjemno pomenljiva in jo obširneje obravnavamo na drugem mestu (glej pogl. 7.2.1). Posrednjeveška grobova ležita tik ob steni cerkve in tako drugačna usmeritev niti ni bila mogoča. Grobovi (67, 71 in 118) ležijo ob vsakokratnem vhodu v najstarejše tri cerkvene stavbe in že z umestitvijo v prostor jasno kažejo tesno povezavo s cerkveno stavbo; rigorozno upoštevanje orientacije je posledica tega.

Najštevilčnejši in hkrati tudi najpomembnejši grobovi te usmeritve sodijo v skupino G2, ki je stratigrafsko umeščena v stratigrafski fazi 2 in 3. Grobne jame te skupine so bile vsekane v živo skalo in uporabljene za več zaporednih pokopov. Gre torej za grobnice, v izdelavo katerih je bilo vloženo razmeroma veliko dela. Natančna orientacija glede na cerkveno stavbo dokazuje, da je bila primerljiva tudi skrb pri polaganju pokojnikov v grobnico. Gre torej za natančno načrtovan in skrbno izveden pogreb z jasnimi navezavami na cerkveno stavbo. Te so jasen in neposreden arheološki dokaz, da gre za krščanske pokope.

Kot zapisano, je bila cerkvena stavba orientirana
astronomsko proti sončnemu vzhodu na velik šmaren
po julijanskem koledarju, zato imajo seveda tudi ti
grobovi astronomsko orientacijo. Je torej mogoče, da
gre za grobove, orientirane astronomsko (ali vsaj tudi
astronomsko)? Ne, na ravni interpretacije pogreba je
astronomska orientacija naključna. Zagotovo to velja za
posrednjeveške grobove, saj Sonce na veliki šmaren po
gregorijanskem koledarju ni več vzhajalo v osi cerkve.
Drugače velja za grobove (G2, G3), ki sodijo v roman-
sko oziroma visokosrednjeveško stratigrafsko fazo.
Takratni pogrebci so cerkev obiskovali tudi na veliki
šmaren, praznik cerkvene zavetnice, in so astronomsko
orientacijo cerkve zagotovo poznali izkustveno. Litur-
gični pomen te orientacije, kot se zdi glede na izjemno
majhen delež romanskih cerkva, orientiranih na veliki
šmaren (glej pogl. 6.2.1), tedaj ni bil več v ospredju.
Ravno zaradi izkustvenega poznavanja astronomske
usmeritve cerkve se zdi mnogo prepričljivejša razlaga,
da so v praksi vsakokraten pokop orientirali vzporedno
z obstoječo cerkveno stavbo in ne z vsakokratno izmero
astronomske smeri. Tudi če bi bil namen pogrebnega
obreda astronomska orientacija, je to v praksi mnogo
enostavneje izvedljivo s posnemanjem usmeritve cerkve.

Pomembna je tudi ugotovitev, da nobena skupina
grobov, ki je stratigrafsko sočasna cerkvi, ne izkazuje

The largest number of graves (14) is oriented paral-
lel to the church building. Their azimuth is 76° ± 1° and
the declination of the sun is 11° ± 1°. One grave is from
stratigraphic Phase 1 (G1), two are from Phase 2 (group
G3), nine are from Phase 3 (six from the G4 group and
three from the G5 group) and the remaining two graves
are dated to the Late Medieval Phases 4 and 5 (G6 and G7).

The orientation of the only Early Medieval grave is extremely significant and will be discussed further (see Chapter 7.2.1). The two Late Medieval graves are positioned immediately next to the church wall and could not have had a different orientation. Graves 67, 71 and 118 are positioned next to the entrances to the earliest three churches and their locations clearly indicate a close connection with the church buildings; indeed, their rigorous compliance with the orientation is a consequence of it.

The most numerous and at the same time the most
important graves with this orientation belong to the G2
group, dated to the stratigraphic Phases 2 in 3. Grave pits
of G2 graves were carved into the bedrock and used for
several consecutive burials. Consequently, these graves
are reminiscent of tombs, the making of which required
considerable work. The precise alignment of their ori-
entation with the church building demonstrates that the
deceased were placed in the tomb with similar attentive-
ness. G2 therefore consists of a meticulously planned and
carefully conducted burial with clear connection to the
church building. The latter represents direct archaeologi-
cal evidence that these are Christian burials.

As mentioned above, the church building was ori-
ented astronomically towards the sunrise on the day of
the Assumption according to the Julian calendar, which
means that all of these graves also have an astronomical
orientation. Is it therefore possible that these graves are
astronomically oriented (or at least astronomically to
a degree)? No. On the level of the interpretation of the
burial, the astronomical orientation is coincidental. This
is certainly true of the post-Medieval graves, because the
sun no longer set in the axis of the church on the day of
the Assumption according to the Gregorian calendar. The
situation differs with the graves (G2, G3) belonging to the
Romanesque or High Medieval stratigraphic phase. The
mourners of the time would visit the church on the day
of the Assumption, the feast day of the patron saint of the
church. Therefore, they possessed empirical knowledge
of the astronomical orientation of the church, that is, they
were able to observe the sunrise first-hand. The liturgical
significance of this orientation seems to have no longer
represented a major issue at the time of the G2 burials, judg-
ing by the small percentage of contemporary Romanesque
churches oriented with respect to the day of the Assump-
tion (see Chapter 6.2.1). Given this empirical knowledge
about the astronomical orientation of the church, a much
more likely explanation is that in practice each burial was
oriented parallel to the existing church building and that the
astronomical direction was not measured each time. Even
<figure><img src="image_152.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 6.12: Blejski otok, stolpčni grafikon kartografskih azimutov grobov, ki so stratigrafsko sočasni cerkveni stavbi: rdeče – zelo natančno usmerjeni grobovi (76° ± 1°), rumeno – natančno usmerjeni grobovi (76° ± 3°), sivo – ostali (avtor B. Štular).</figcaption></figure>

<caption>Fig. 6.12: Bled Island, graph of cartographic azimuths of graves that are contemporary to church buildings: red – very precise orientation (76° ± 1°), yellow – precise orientation (76° ± 3°), grey – others (by B. Štular).</caption>

sistematičnega trenda orientacije, ki bi bila drugačna od
cerkvene. Povedano drugače, vsi grobovi ob cerkvi ali v
njej bolj ali manj natančno sledijo orientaciji cerkve. S
tem podatkom lahko preverimo tudi natančnost: polo-
vica vseh grobov (brez skrajnih vrednosti) je usmerjenih
zelo natančno (± 1°), tri četrtine odstopa minimalno
(± 3°). Izmed preostalih ima večina južni odklon, a
je število grobov premajhno za morebitne nadaljnje
raziskave tega pojava (sl. 6.12). S tem smo dobili meto-
dološko pomemben podatek o natančnosti orientacije
pokopov v primeru, ko vemo, da so pogrebci pokope
zavestno usmerjali glede na jasno oznako v prostoru.
Vse interpretacije, ki razpon orientacij za več kot ± 3°
razlagajo z napako oziroma nenatančnostjo pogrebcev,
so torej vsaj vprašljive, če že ne ovržene.

Omenili smo že grobove s skrajnimi orientacijami.
Gre za 4 grobove (št. 38, 72, 113, 119), ki statistično
značilno odstopajo od glavnine.

Grob 38 ima kartografski azimut 111° ± 1°. Gre za enega izmed grobov v vrstah in njegova orientacija že na prvi pogled močno odstopa od sosednjih grobov (sl. 6.11). Usmeritev groba se ujema z interpretacijo o urejanju grobiščnega prostora z orientacijskimi osmi (glej pogl. 6.2.3). Vendar ker gre za osamljen primer in ker natančne povezave med konkretnimi pokopi in omenjeno ureditvijo še ne poznamo, ne moremo izključiti naključja.

Grob št. 72 ima kartografski azimut 57° ± 1° in
de v vseh pogledih edinstven. Leži izolirano od ostalih
sočasnih grobov, tik ob klesanem zelenem kamnu, ki je
v času pokopa označeval lokacijo starejše jame. Stratig-
rafsko je starejši od najstarejše cerkvene stavbe, saj leži
pod najstarejšo apsido (glej pogl. 4.2). Orientacija ni

if astronomical orientation was the intention of the burial
ritual, in practice this was much more easily achievable by
following the orientation of the church.

Importantly, the findings also show that the graves
that are stratigraphically contemporary to the church
demonstrate a systematic trend of orientation parallel to
the church. This can be used as a test of accuracy: half of
the graves contemporary to the church (outliers excluded)
are oriented very precisely parallel to the church building
(± 1°) and three quarters exhibit small deviation (± 3°).
The rest of the graves mostly have a southern declination,
but their number is too low for any further analysis of the
phenomenon of southern versus northern declination
(Fig. 6.12). This gives us a methodologically significant
indication of the accuracy of the orientation of burials in
cases where it is known that the mourners consciously
oriented burials in accordance with a clear landmark (in
this case, a church building). All interpretations accord-
ing to which a greater than ± 3° range of orientations is
explained as an error or inaccuracy of the mourners are
therefore questionable, if not downright refuted.

Graves with outlying orientations have already been
mentioned above. Four graves (38, 72, 113, 119) demon-
strate a statistically significant deviation from the majority.

Grave 38 has a cartographic azimuth of 111° ± 1°. It is one of the graves in rows and it is apparent that its orientation deviates strongly from the rest of the contemporary and adjacent graves (Fig. 6.11). The orientation of the grave corresponds to the interpretation that the area of the cemetery was planned in accordance with orientation axes (see Chapter 6.2.3). However, given that this is an isolated case and a clear connection between actual burials and the above-mentioned cemetery planning is not yet known, coincidence cannot be ruled out.

Grave 72 has a cartographic azimuth of 57° ± 1° and
is unique in every respect. Isolated from contemporary
graves, it is positioned immediately next to the green stone
marking the location of an earlier pit that was ancient at
the time of burial. Lying under the earliest church apse, it
is stratigraphically earlier than the earliest church building
(see Chapter 4.2). Its orientation is not contingent on the
terrain, it is not astronomical and it is not in accordance
with other features in the Bled Island cemetery. Rather,
it is related to the mortuary landscape.

The mortuary landscape (cf. William 2006, 179–214) of the Bled area is composed of five contemporary Early Medieval cemeteries: Spodnje Gorje, Rečica, Pristava, Želeče and Bodešče. All of these cemeteries are positioned on the line of vision connecting the Višelnica midsummer bonfire site and the Šmarjetna gora hill above the town of Kranj (Pleterski 2014, 274–276). Out of the listed cemeteries, the cemetery in Bodešče deviates the most from the above-mentioned line of vision: 25 m. This is just ⅓° observed from Višelnica. Furthermore, the western edge of the sixth cemetery, Na Sedlu under Bled Castle, is less than 40 m from this line of vision.
pogojena s terenom, ni astronomska in se ne navezuje na objekte na otoškem grobišču, temveč je navezana na grobiščno pokrajino.

Grobiščno pokrajino (prim. William 2006, 179–214) v Blejskem kotu sestavlja pet sočasnih zgodnjesrednjeveških grobišč: Spodnje Gorje, Rečica, Pristava, Želeče in Bodešče. Vsa našteta grobišča ležijo na vizuri kresišče Višelnica–Šmarjetna gora nad Kranjem (Pleterski 2014, 274–276). Izmed naštetih od vizure najbolj odstopa grobišče v Bodeščah, in sicer za 25 m, kar ob opazovanju z Višelnice pomeni približno 1/3°. Ob tem je zahodni rob še šestega grobišča, Na Sedlu pod Blejskim gradom, od omenjene vizure oddaljen manj kot 40 m.

Dodaten element, ki nas utrjuje v interpretaciji nenaključnosti, je podatek, da 4 izmed naštetih grobišč ležijo na razmeroma ravnem polju, ki je ponujal širok izbor enakovrednih lokacij. Ob upoštevanju merske natančnosti 1° je statistična verjetnost, da 4 kulturno izbrane točke v ravnini ležijo na isti liniji po naključju, zgolj 0,003 % (prim. Pleterski 2014, 115–116). Hkrati analiza vidnosti potrjuje, da so iz opazovališča na kresišču Višelnica vidna vsa grobišča razen Rečice ter seveda Šmarjetna gora (sl. 6.13).

Navedeno dokazuje, (i) da lokacije zgodnjesrednjeveških grobišč v Blejskem kotu niso bile izbrane naključno temveč načrtno in sicer (ii) z viziranjem iz lokacije kresišče Višelnica. Rezultat je bil zavestno urejena grobiščna pokrajina, del celostne prostorske ureditve Blejskega kota (prim. Pleterski 2014, 236–285).

Za analizo grobišča na Blejskem otoku je najpomembnejši podatek, da je kresišče Višelnica predstavljalo eno izmed ključnih mest grobiščne pokrajine v Blejskem kotu. Grob 72 na Blejskem otoku je namreč orientiran pravokotno na to mesto, ki je z otoka tudi neposredno vidno. S tem je grob – in simbolno celotno grobišče – navezan na opisano sočasno grobiščno pokrajino (sl. 6.14).

Grob št. 113 ima kartografski azimut 132° ± 1°. Gre za enega v skupini grobov (št. 111, 112, 114 in 117), vkopanih v skalni kotanji. Orientacija je torej posledica geomorfoloških danosti in ne kulturne izbire. Ta skupina grobov je stratigrafsko sočasna tistim grobovom v vrstah, pri katerih orientacija prav tako ni imela posebne vloge.

Grob 119 ima kartografski azimut 173° ± 1°. Gre za novoveški grob, ki je mlajši od zahodnega prizidka cerkve, tako imenovane vhodne lope. Orientiran je pravokotno na cerkveni zid, kar najverjetneje kaže na to, da je imel prvotno v cerkveno steno vzidan nagrobnik, kakršni so značilni za čas od 16. stoletja (Rodwell 1989, 177; Mytum 2006, 97).

An additional element confirming the interpretation that the locations of the cemeteries are not random is the fact that four of the listed cemeteries are positioned on a relatively flat plain offering a wide selection of equivalent locations. If the accuracy of the measurements is 1°, the statistical probability that four culturally selected places on a flat terrain are positioned in line by coincidence is only 0.003% (cf. Pleterski 2014, 115–116). At the same time, visibility analysis confirms that all of the cemeteries except Rečica are visible from the viewpoint at the Višelnica bonfire site and on a clear day so is Šmarjetna gora (Fig. 6.13).

This proves conclusively that (i) the locations of Early Medieval cemeteries in the Bled area are meaningful and were not chosen randomly and (ii) that these locations could be identified by simple sighting from the Višelnica bonfire site. This was a conscious organization of the mortuary landscape and part of the more complex organization of the Bled area's archaeological landscape (see Part 3).

For the Bled Island cemetery, it is important to know that the Višelnica bonfire site was one of the key places of the mortuary landscape in the Bled area. Grave 72 on Bled Island is oriented perpendicularly to the Višelnica bonfire site, which is visible from its location. Thus, the grave – and symbolically the entire cemetery – are linked to the above-described contemporary mortuary landscape (Fig. 6.14).

Grave 113 has a cartographic azimuth of 132° ± 1°. It belongs to the group of graves (111, 112, 114, 117) dug into a rocky hollow. Their orientation is therefore the consequence of geomorphological factors, not cultural selection. This group of graves is stratigraphically contemporary to the graves in rows, for which orientation played no particular role.

Grave 119 has a cartographic azimuth of 173° ± 1°. It is a post-Medieval grave later than the westernmost extension of the church. It is oriented perpendicularly to the church wall, which likely indicates that it was marked by a tombstone built into the church wall, as was typical from the 16th century on (Rodwell 1989, 177; Mytum 2006, 97).

## INTERPRETATION

The analysis of the metric data has thus confirmed the hypothesis that in the Bled Island cemetery, the orientation of the burials was a conscious choice. This means that the orientation of the graves mirrors (for the expression, see Klejn 1987, 41) cultural information. Three remaining hypotheses for the orientation of medieval burials must be explored: parallel to the church building; astronomical orientation; and geographical orientation in accordance with a place in the landscape. All three are represented in the Bled Island cemetery.
<figure><img src="image_153.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 6.13: Blejski kot, lokacija arheološko dokumentiranih grobišč in analiza vidnosti iz lokacije kresišče Višelnica: 1 – kresišče Višelnica; 2 – Blejski otok; 3 – grobišča na vizuri; 4 – ostala grobišča; 5 – vizura kresišče Višelnica-Blejski otok (grob št. 72); 6 – vizura kresišče Višelnica-Šmarjetna gora nad Kranjem; 7 – območje vidno iz kresišča Višelnica (avtorja: E. Lozić, B. Štular).
Fig. 6.13: Bled area, early medieval archaeological sites and viewshed from Višelnica bonfire: 1 – Višelnica bonfire; 2 – Bled Island; 3 – cemeteries on line; 4 – other cemeteries; 5 – Višelnica bonfire-Bled Island (grave No. 72) line; 6 – Višelnica bonfire-Šmarjetna gora above Kranj line; 7 – Višelnica bonfire viewshed (authors: E. Lozić, B. Štular).</figcaption></figure>

## INTERPRETACIJA

Z analizo merskih podatkov smo torej potrdili hitotezo, da so na grobišču Blejski otok pogrebci pokope orientirali zavestno. To pomeni, da orientacija grobov odseva (za izraz glej Klejn 1987, 41) kulturno informacijo. Najpogostejše interpretacije srednjeveških pokopov so astronomska orientacija, orientacija glede na točko v pokrajini ali orientacija vzporedno s cerkveno stavbo. Na grobišču na Blejskem otoku so prisotne vse 3.

(i) The church on Bled Island is oriented astronomically in accordance with the sunrise on the day of the patron saint of the church, St Mary of Assumption. This is the orientation of the majority of the graves that are contemporary to the church. In our case, the orientation of these graves is therefore a chronological indicator.

(ii) Some of the graves that are earlier than the church are oriented towards true east. This provides evidence of a high level of astronomical knowledge of the Bled mourners, comparable to the knowledge of the
<figure><img src="image_154.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 6.14: Blejski kot, lokacija arheološko dokumentiranih grobišč (legenda kot sl. 6.13) in grob 72; grob ni v merilu, orientacija je kartografska (avtor B. Štular).</figcaption></figure>

<caption>Fig. 6.14: Bled area, map of Early Medieval cemeteries (as Fig. 6.13) and Grave 72; grave not at scale but in correct cartographic orientation (by B. Štular).</caption>

(i) Cerkev na Blejskem otoku je orientirana astronomsko glede na sončni vzhod na dan cerkvene zavetnice, Marije Vnebovzete. Tej orientaciji sledi večina grobov, sočasnih cerkvi. Orientacija teh grobov je v našem primeru torej kronološki pokazatelj.

(ii) Del grobov, starejših od cerkve, je orientiran glede na kardinalni vzhod; to za blejske pogrebce dokazuje stopnjo astronomskega znanja, primerljivo tistemu, ki ga približno 2 stoletji prej popisuje Beda Venerabilis pri Anglih.

Angles described about two centuries earlier by Bede the Venerable.

(iii) Orientation was not an important factor in the rites of the remaining burials, but their orientation still reflected a tendency inter in rows.

(iv) Extremely important for the interpretation of the Early Medieval part of the cemetery is the orientation of Grave 72. Indeed, it clearly expresses the intention of the mourners to include this grave – and with it probably
(iii) V pogrebnem ritusu preostalih grobov orientacija ni bila pomembna; kljub temu orientacija odseva težnjo k pokopavanju v vrstah.

(iv) Izjemnega pomena za interpretacijo zgodnjesrednjeveškega dela grobišča je orientacija groba 72: ta jasno izraža namen pogrebcev vtkati grob – in s tem verjetno celotno grobišče – v sočasno grobiščno pokrajino z navezavo na točko v prostoru.

Širši metodološki pomen analize orientacij grobov na Blejskem otoku je dvojen. Najpomembnejši je dokaz, da z metodološko rigorozno analizo zgodnjesrednjeveških grobišč lahko pridobimo kulturne informacije, predvsem o grobnem ritusu. Drugi pomemben zaključek je, da ne gre iskati enotne razlage za orientacijo pokopov, saj je bilo že na enem grobišču lahko hkrati uporabljenih več različnih sistemov orientacij.

### 6.2.3 ORIENTACIJSKE OSI GROBIŠČA G1

V grobiščni skupini G1 je na podlagi materialnih arheoloških sledov mogoče prepoznati orientacijski osi, namenjeni urejanju prostora grobišča. Osi določajo lokacije studenca, ognjišča in označevalca prostora ob vznožju groba (št. 72) v obliki zelenega kamna. Slednji točki sta dokazani z materialnimi arheološkimi sledmi, ki so stratigrafsko nedvoumno sočasne uporabi grobišča G1 (glej pogl. 4.2 in 4.7).

Vlogo manjšega izvira arteške vode oziroma studenca<fnref n="9" /> na Blejskem otoku utemeljujemo z erudicijo srednjeveških virov. Ti razmeroma pogosto pričajo o poganskem oziroma nekrščanskem češčenju studencev (Dowden 2000, 39-45; Kajkowski, Kuczkowski 2017, 22), na primer:

- Sv. Martin iz Brage (+ 580), na današnjem Madžarskem rojeni škof iz Galicije, je v svoji pridigi predkrščanske bogove videl kot demone in v njih opisu med drugim navaja, da bivajo v morju, rekah, studencih ali gozdovih in ljudje, ki ne poznajo Boga, jim žrtvujejo in jih častijo kot bogove.<fnref n="10" />

- Izidor Sevilski (+ 636) v poglavju o svetih stavbah pravi: stari so pripovedovali, da so imela svetišča očiščevalne studence pred vhodom; da so v nje-

the entire cemetery – into the contemporary mortuary landscape by orienting it geographically.

The wider methodological significance of the analysis of grave orientations on Bled Island is twofold. The most important finding is the evidence that a methodologically rigorous analysis of Early Medieval cemeteries can result in cultural information, especially about burial rites. The second important conclusion is that we should not seek a uniform explanation for the orientation of burials, for several different orientation systems might be used in a single cemetery at the same time.

### 6.2.3 ORIENTATION AXES OF THE G1 CEMETERY

In the G1 cemetery group, two orientation axes used in the organization of the cemetery area can be identified based on material archaeological evidence. The axes are defined by the locations of the spring, the fireplace and the green stone marking the foot of Grave 72. The latter two locations are evidenced by archaeological material evidence and are undoubtedly stratigraphically contemporary to the use of the G1 cemetery (see Chapters 4.2 and 4.7).

The role of a small spring of artesian water<fnref n="9" /> on Bled Island can be interpreted based on medieval written sources in which the pagan or non-Christian worship of springs is mentioned relatively often (Dowden 2000, 39-45; Kajkowski, Kuczkowski 2017, 22), for example:

- St Martin of Braga (+ 580), a bishop in Gallaecia, born in present-day Hungary, would view pre-Christian gods as demons; he stated (among other things) that those demons live in the sea, in springs or in forests and that people who do not know God sacrifice to them or worship them as gods.<fnref n="10" />

- Isidore of Seville (+ 636) says in the chapter on sacred buildings that old people claimed that sanctuaries had cleansing springs in front of the entrances and that in his time, there were buildings with sacred springs where believers were cleansed.<fnref n="11" />

<footnote n="9">⁹ Pojem studenec uporabljamo v pomenu manjši izvir vode. Ta pojem izvira iz indoevropske baze *steud v pomenu postati mrzel. Vsi uporabljeni latinski viri navajajo izraz *fons, fontis*, ki ima več pomenov: studenec, izvir ali vodnjak.</footnote>

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ Praeter haec autem multi daemones ex illis qui de caelo expulsi sunt aut in mare aut in fluminibus aut in fontibus aut in silvis praesident, quos similiter homines ignorantes deum quasi deos colunt et sacrificant illis (Correctione 8). Podobno tudi na drugem mestu: Post diluvium ... (a)lii adorabant solem, alii lunam vel stellas, alii ignem, alii aquam profundam vel fontes aquarum, credentes haec omnia non a deo esse facta ad usum hominum, sed ipsa ex se orta deos esse (Correctione 6).</footnote>

<footnote n="9">⁹ In Latin sources, the word *fons*, *fontis* is used.</footnote>

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ Praeter haec autem multi daemones ex illis qui de caelo expulsi sunt aut in mare aut in fluminibus aut in fontibus aut in silvis praesident, quos similiter homines ignorantes deum quasi deos colunt et sacrificant illis (Correctione 8). Podobno tudi na drugem mestu: Post diluvium ... (a)lii adorabant solem, alii lunam vel stellas, alii ignem, alii aquam profundam vel fontes aquarum, credentes haec omnia non a deo esse facta ad usum hominum, sed ipsa ex se orta deos esse (Correctione 6).</footnote>

<footnote n="11">¹¹ Delubra veteres dicebant templa fontes habentia, quibus ante ingressum diluebantur; ... Ipsa sunt nunc aedes cum sacris fontibus, in quibus fideles regenerati purificantur: ... (Orig. XV.4).</footnote>
govern času stavbe s svetimi studenci, v katerih se verniki čistijo.<fnref n="11" />

- Karel Veliki (+ 814) ukazuje vsem, naj uničijo svete gaje, kamne in studence, pri katerih se izvajajo rituali.<fnref n="12" />

- V seznamu grehov (*penitentiae*), zbranih okoli leta 1000, katerih domnevni prvotni avtor je canterburyjski nadškof Teodor (+ 669), je navedeno, naj se kaznujejo vsi, ki darujejo drevesom, studencem, kamnom ali ogradam.<fnref n="13" />

- Škof Thietmar iz Merseburga (+ 1018) povzema starejše vire o Slovanih, ki častijo studenec ob Labi (Nemčija).<fnref n="14" />

- Leta 1037 poreški škof Engilmar v komentarju spisov Arnolda o čudežu sv. Emerama Regensburškega omenja zdravilni studenec.<fnref n="15" />

- Benediktinec Herbord (+ 1168) v biografiji škofa Ota Bamberškega poroča o češčenju studenca v senci hrasta v Szczecinu (Poljska).<fnref n="16" />

- Helmold (+ po 1177) v Slovanski kroniki poroča, da Slovani kristjanom prepovedujejo dostop do njihovih svetih studencev in jezer, ker verujejo, da slednji postanejo nečisti, ko se jim približa kristjan.<fnref n="17" />

- Charlemagne (+ 814) orders everybody to destroy the sacred groves, stones and springs where rituals were held.<fnref n="12" />

- The list of sins (*penitentiae*), collected around the year 1000, whose alleged original author was Archbishop Theodore of Canterbury (+ 669), states that all who offer sacrifices to trees, springs, stones or enclosures should be punished.<fnref n="13" />

- Bishop Thietmar of Merseburg (+ 1018) summarizes earlier sources on the Slavs, who worshipped a spring near the River Elbe (Germany).<fnref n="14" />

- Bishop Engilmar of Poreč mentions a healing spring in 1037 in his commentary on the writings of Arnold about the miracle of St Emmeram of Regensburg.<fnref n="15" />

- In his biography of Bishop Otto of Bamberg, Bendictine monk Herbord (+ 1168) mentions the worship of a spring in the shadow of an oak in Szczecin (Poland).<fnref n="16" />

- Helmold (+ after 1177) writes in his *Chronicle of the Slavs* that Slavs do not allow Christians to come to their sacred springs and lakes because they believe that the waters would become unclean if a Christian approached them.<fnref n="17" />

- The same author writes about Bishop Vicelinus, who allegedly observed the worship of forests, springs and other superstitions among the Slavs along the Elbe.<fnref n="18" />

- This author also writes in a chapter on the conversion of Pribislav that after the consecration of the church,

<footnote n="11">¹¹ Delubra veteres dicebant templa fontes habentia, quibus ante ingressum diluebantur; ... Ipsa sunt nunc aedes cum sacris fontibus, in quibus fideles regenerati purificantur: ... (Orig. XV.4).</footnote>

<footnote n="12">¹² Item de arboribus vel petris vel fontibus, ubi aliqui stulti luminaria vel alias observationes faciunt, omnino mandamus, ut iste pessimus usus et Deo execrabilis, ubicumque inveniatur, tollatur et distruatur (Capit. I., p. 59 c. 65).</footnote>

<footnote n="13">¹³ Siquis ad arbores, vel ad fontes, vel ad lapides sive ad cancellos, vel ubicunque excepto in ecclesia Dei, votum voverit aut exsolverit, iii. annos poeniteat (Paen. Theo. XXVII, 18).</footnote>

<footnote n="14">¹⁴ Glomuzi est fons, non plus ab Albi quam duo miliaria positus, qui unam de se paludem generans, mira, ut incolae pro vero asserunt oculisque approbatum est a multis, sepe operatur. Cum bona pax est indigenis profutura, suumque [haec] terra non mentitur fructum, idem tritico et avena ac glandine refertus, laetos vicinorum ad se crebro confluentium efficit animos. Quando autem seva belli tempestas ingruerit, sanguine et cinere certum futuri exitus indicium premonstrat (Thietmar I.3).</footnote>

<footnote n="15">¹⁵ Hic quoque dum Ratisbonne constitutus apud Sanctum Emmerammum scripta meae parvitatis videret et legeret atque probaret, die quadam stans iuxta puteum seu fontem, per quem recordabatur ibi sanam olim redditam fuisse fontem, vocavit me, et occasionem sumens ex eodem fonte, dixit quod scri; ... (Ann. Car. Sax. II.54; Kos 1911, št. 100).</footnote>

<footnote n="16">¹⁶ Erat praeterea ibi quercus ingens et frondosa, et fons subter eam amoenissimus, quam plebs simplex numinis aliquius inhabitatione sacram aestimans, magna veneratione colebat (Herbord II.32).</footnote>

<footnote n="17">¹⁷ Usque hodie profecto inter illos, cum cetera omnia communia sint cum nostris, solus prohibetur accessus lucorum et fontium, quos autumant pollui Christianorum accessu (Helmoldi I.1).</footnote>

<footnote n="12">¹² Item de arboribus vel petris vel fontibus, ubi aliqui stulti luminaria vel alias observationes faciunt, omnino mandamus, ut iste pessimus usus et Deo execrabilis, ubicumque inveniatur, tollatur et distruatur (Capit. I., p. 59 c. 65).</footnote>

<footnote n="13">¹³ Siquis ad arbores, vel ad fontes, vel ad lapides sive ad cancellos, vel ubicunque excepto in ecclesia Dei, votum voverit aut exsolverit, iii. annos poeniteat (Paen. Theo. XXVII, 18).</footnote>

<footnote n="14">¹⁴ Glomuzi est fons, non plus ab Albi quam duo miliaria positus, qui unam de se paludem generans, mira, ut incolae pro vero asserunt oculisque approbatum est a multis, sepe operatur. Cum bona pax est indigenis profutura, suumque [haec] terra non mentitur fructum, idem tritico et avena ac glandine referus, laetos vicinorum ad se crebro confluentium efficit animos. Quando autem seva belli tempestas ingruerit, sanguine et cinere certum futuri exitus indicium premonstrat (Thietmar I.3).</footnote>

<footnote n="15">¹⁵ Hic quoque dum Ratisbonne constitutus apud Sanctum Emmerammum scripta meae parvitatis videret et legeret atque probaret, die quadam stans iuxta puteum seu fontem, per quem recordabatur ibi sanam olim redditam fuisse fontem, vocavit me, et occasionem sumens ex eodem fonte, dixit quod scriRIA; ... (Ann. Car. Sax. II.54; Kos 1911, št. 100).</footnote>

<footnote n="16">¹⁶ Erat praeterea ibi quercus ingens et frondosa, et fons subter eam amoenissimus, quam plebs simplex numinis alicuius inhabitatione sacram aestimans, magna veneratione colebat (Herbord II.32).</footnote>

<footnote n="17">¹⁷ Usque hodie profecto inter illos, cum cetera omnia communia sint cum nostris, solus prohibetur accessus lucorum et fontium, quos autumant pollui Christianorum accessu (Helmoldi I.1).</footnote>

<footnote n="18">¹⁸ Nam lucorum et fontium ceterarumque supersticionum multiplex error apud eos habetur (Helmoldi I.47).</footnote>
- Isti poroča o škofu Vincelinu, ki da je pri Slovanih ob Labi med drugim opazil, da so med njimi razširjena češčenje gozdov in studencev ter druga vraževerja.<fnref n="18" />

- Isti v poglavju o Pribislavovi spreobrnitvi poroča, da so se Slovani v Oldenburgu po posvetitvi cerkve vzdržali priseg v gozdovih ob studencih in skalah.<fnref n="19" />

- Frančiškan Franciscus de Clugia v listini, izdani leta 1331, v pohvalo in priznanje udeležencu pohoda proti Kobaridu navaja, da so tam med gorami nešteti Slovani častili neko drevo in studenec, ki je bil pri koreninah drevesa, kot Boga.<fnref n="20" />

Našteti so izbrani srednjeveški primeri, a češčenje studencev in izvirov je širši fenomen. Najstarejši pisni vir v regiji je Strabonov (+ ok. 24 pr. n. št.) opis Diomedovega svetišča na območju izvirov Timave (Lacus Timavi):

> Na skrajnem koncu Jadranskega zaliva je Diomedovo svetišče, ki se imenuje Timavon (Timauon) in je vredno omembe. Svetišče ima pristanišče, čudovit sveti gaj in pet izvirov rečne vode, ki se v široki in globoki reki takoj izlivajo v morje (Šašel Kos 1999, 255).

Med mlajšimi manifestacijami tega fenomena je zagotovo najznamenitejši studenec v Lurdu, ki je bil razglašen za čudežnega 18. januarja 1862 in je takoj potal eno najpriljubljenejših romarskih središč Slovencev.

Srednjeveški viri zrcalijo tudi težave, ki jih je imela Cerkev z izkoreninjenjem tega češčenja. Tovrstni in podobni poganski običaji, ki jih je pravilneje razumeti kot odsev multipolarnosti srednjeveške kulture, so se obdržali vsaj do konca srednjega veka (Geary 2001). Kot nakaže že Izidor Sevilski, je bil eden izmed načinov spopadanja s tem problemom – tisti, ki je sledil napotkom o pokristjanjevanju papeža Gregorija I (+ 604) (npr. Demacopoulos 2008) in bil v uporabi do vključno 10. stoletja (Geary 2001, 190) – postavljanje cerkva ob češčenih studencih (Kajkowski, Kuczkowski 2017, 23; prim. Vlasto 1970, Geary 2001, 192; Štular, Hrovatin 2002, 45–46). V širši regiji poznamo več tako zgrajenih srednjeveških cerkva, na primer bamberško katedralo (Nemčija, Bavarska), cerkev sv. Mihaela v Olomoucu (Češka Republika, Moravska) in cerkev sv. Jana pod skalo (Češka Republika, Češka) (Pleterski 2017, 38). Cerkev je te gradnje pogosto razlagala kot mesta pri-

the Slavs in Oldenburg abstained from swearing oaths in forests and near springs and rocks.<fnref n="19" />

- A document from 1331 issued by Franciscan monk Franciscus de Clugia as a commendation of a participant of a campaign to Kobarid states that in the mountains, countless Slavs worshipped a tree and a spring there as God.<fnref n="20" />

The list above includes selected examples from the Middle Ages, but the worship of springs is a wider phenomenon. The earliest written source in the region is Strabo's (+ ca. 24 BCE) description of the sanctuary of Diomedes in the area of the sources of the Timavo (Lacus Timavi):

> At the very end of the Adriatic Gulf, there is a sanctuary of Diomedes called Timavon (Timauon), which is worth mentioning. The sanctuary has a port, a wonderful sacred grove and five springs of river water, which immediately flows to the sea as a wide and deep river (after Šašel Kos 1999, 255).

The most famous among the later manifestations of this phenomenon is the spring of Lourdes, which was declared miraculous on 18 January 1862 and immediately became one of the most popular pilgrimage destinations in Europe.

Medieval sources reflect the problems the Church encountered in eradicating such worship. These and similar pagan traditions – which are more correctly understood as a reflection of the multipolarity of medieval culture – survived at least until the end of the Middle Ages (Geary 2001). As implied by Isidore of Seville, one way of addressing this problem – the one that followed Pope Gregory I's (+ 604) guidance on Christianization (e.g. Demacopoulos 2008) and was followed up to and including the 10th century (Geary 2001, 190) – was building churches near the springs that were worshipped (Kajkowski, Kuczkowski 2017, 23; cf. Vlasto 1970, Geary 2001, 192; Štular, Hrovatin 2002, 45–46). In the wider region, there are several medieval churches that are known to have been built in this way, for instance the Cathedral of Bamberg (Bavaria, Germany), the Church of St Michael in Olomouc (Moravia, the Czech Republic) and the Church of St John under the Cliff (Bohemia, the Czech Republic) (Pleterski 2017, 38). The Church often explained such constructions as the sites of apparitions of Mary and these churches regularly became pilgrimage churches (Kajkowski, Kuczkowski 2017, 22–23). Two such exam-

<footnote n="18">¹⁸ Nam lucorum et fontium ceterarumque superstitionum multiplex error apud eos habetur (Helmoldi I.47).</footnote>

<footnote n="19">¹⁹ Et inhibiti sunt Slavi de cetero iurare in arboribus, fontibus et lapidibus, sed offerebant criminibus pulsatos sacerdoti ferro vel vomeribus examinandos (Helmoldi I.83).</footnote>

<footnote n="20">²⁰ ... usque ad locum de Cavoreto, ejusdem Dyocesis, ubi inter montes Sciavi innumerabiles arborem quandam et fontem, qui erat ad radices arboris, venerabant pro Deo; ... (Bianchi 1845, št. 699).</footnote>

<footnote n="19">¹⁹ Et inhibiti sunt Slavi de cetero iurare in arboribus, fontibus et lapidibus, sed offerebant criminibus pulsatos sacerdoti ferro vel vomeribus examinandos (Helmoldi I.83).</footnote>

<footnote n="20">²⁰ ... usque ad locum de Cavoreto, ejusdem Dyocesis, ubi inter montes Sciavi innumerabiles arborem quandam et fontem, qui erat ad radices arboris, venerabant pro Deo; ... (Bianchi 1845, no. 699).</footnote>
kazovanj Device Marije in neredko so te cerkve postale romarske (Kajkowski, Kuczkowski 2017, 22–23). Takšni sta na primer cerkev Marijinega rojstva na Homškem hribu (Štular, Hrovatin 2002, 54) in cerkev sv. Žalostne Matere Božje, prvotno Marije Vnebovzete, v Leskovcu pri Krškem (Rihter 2018, 7).

Pisni viri torej jasno dokazujejo češčenje studencev skozi ves srednji vek, od poganskega zgodnjega do s krščansko mistiko prežetega visokega in poznega srednjega veka. Manifestacije tega češčenja se v naštetih virih izrisujejo v obliki bežnih namigov: obredno umivanje (regenerati purificantur), zdravilna moč (sanam ... fuisse fontem), mesto priseg (iurare), tabuizacija za neverujoče (pollui Christianorum accessu), izolirana lega zunaj naselbin (in arboribus), nadlokalen pomen (innumerabiles ... venerabant). Vendar moramo upoštevati, da so navedeni viri nastajali skoraj tisočletje vsak sebi, in to izključno s sovražnega stališča, pri čemer so jih pisci razumeli v kontekstu Stare zaveze (Vlasto 1970, 145–146), izrazito zgodnejša avtorja sta sv. Martin iz Brage (deos colunt et sacrificant) in Teodor iz Yorka (votum voverit). Poleg tega vemo, da aktivnosti ob češčenju v studencih ali tik ob njih niso puščale neposrednih arheoloških sledov, na primer v obliki odloženih predmetov ali gradnje objektov (Kajkowski, Kuczkowski 2017, 22). Posreden materialen odsev češčenih studencev pa so cerkve, zgrajene ob teh studencih. Na podlagi teh lahko s tako imenovano metodo proxi (angl. proxy method; prim. Dincauze 2000, 30) prepoznamo konkretne studence, ki so jih častili v predkrščanskem zgodnjem srednjem veku.

In zdi se, da imamo dovolj podatkov, da v studencu na Blejskem otoku prepoznamo enega izmed njih. Bližnja cerkev namreč obsega 3 naštete elemente oziroma proxy podatke:

- stoji v neposredni bližini studenca (studenec je oddaljen 33,3 m od oltarja najstarejše cerkve),

- posvečena je Mariji (Vnebovzeti) in

- bila je romarska (glej pogl. 8.1).

Trije izmed zgornjih virov (Karel Veliki, canterburyjski nadškof Teodor in Helmold o Pribislavu) med objekti češčenja hkrati s studencem navajajo kamne oziroma skale (*petris*, *lapidibus*). To dokazuje, da sta studenec in kamen objekta istega sistema češčenja, kar potrjujejo nekatere novejše raziskave predkrščanskih zgodnjesrednjeveških religij (npr. Hook 2010, 31–46 z navedbo virov; Szczepanski 2015, *passim*). Klesanec iz zelenega groha na Blejskem otoku je torej zagotovo imel ne le funkcijo označevalca, temveč je bil tudi objekt češčenja.

Na grobišču G1 na Blejskem otoku so torej obstajala 3 mesta, ki so jih pogrebci in drugi obiskovalci jasno prepoznavali: studenec, kamen in ognjišče. Prva os je povezovala studenec in ognjišče ter je služila kot orientacija za določanje lege in orientacije treh grobov

ples in Slovenia are the Church of the Nativity of Mary on the hill of Homec (Štular, Hrovatin 2002, 54) and the Church of Our Lady of Sorrows, originally St Mary of the Assumption, in Leskovec near Krško (Rihter 2018, 7).

Written sources clearly contain evidence of the worship of springs throughout the Middle Ages, from the pagan Early Middle Ages to the Christian mysticism-charged High and Late Middle Ages. In the listed sources, the manifestations of this worship appear as slight hints: as ritual ablutions (*regenerati purificantur*), healing power (*sanam ... fuisse fontem*), sites of oaths (*iurare*), taboo for unbelievers (*pollui Christianorum accessu*), isolated locations outside of the settlements (*in arboribus*) and with supra-local significance (*innumerabiles ... venerabant*). We must not forget, however, that the origins of these sources span over nearly a millennium, that they were written solely from an antagonist viewpoint and that they were understood by their authors in the context of the Old Testament (Vlasto 1970, 145–146). Among the sources cited, St Martin of Braga (*deos colunt et sacrificant*) and Theodore of Canterbury (*votum voverit*) are the earliest. Furthermore, we know that worship activities in or near springs left no direct archaeological traces such as deposited objects or constructions (Kajkowski, Kuczkowski 2017, 22). Indirect material reflections of the springs that were worshipped are churches that were built near these springs. These churches can therefore be used as proxy data (cf. Dincauze 2000, 30) to identify the specific springs that were worshipped in the pre-Christian Early Middle Ages.

There seem to be enough data to identify the spring on Bled Island as one of them, as the nearby church includes three of the listed elements:

- it is located in the immediate vicinity of the spring (the distance between the spring and the altar of the earliest church is 33.3 m);

- it is dedicated to Mary (of the Assumption); and

- it used to be a pilgrimage church (see Chapter 8.1).

In addition to springs, stones or rocks (*petris*, *lapidibus*) are mentioned as objects of worship by three of the above-listed sources (Charlemagne, Bishop Theodore of Canterbury, Helmold's writing on Pribislav). This is evidence that the spring and the green stone on Bled Island were objects of the same worship system. This is further confirmed by the more recent research of Early Medieval pre-Christian religions (e.g. Hook 2010, 31–46 citing the sources; Szczepanski 2015, *passim*). Therefore, the cut piece of green tuff on Bled Island must have not only had the function of a marker, but was also the object of worship.

The G1 cemetery on Bled Island therefore had three locations that were clearly recognized by the mourners and other visitors: the spring, the stone and the fireplace. The first axis connects the spring and the fireplace and
<figure><img src="image_155.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 6.15: Blejski otok, levo mesta s posebnim pomenom (1 – vodni izvir; 2 – zeleni kamen; 3 – ognjišče; 4 – grob umeščen v prostor glede na os; 5 – os; 6 – pravokotnica), desno grobovi orientirani glede na os studenec – ognjišče (avtor B. Štular).</figcaption></figure>

<caption>Fig. 6.15: Bled Island. Left: meaningful places (1 – water spring; 2 – green stone; 3 – fireplace; 4 – grave oriented with regard to the line; 5 – line; 6 – normal). Right: graves oriented in regards of the line spring – fireplace (by B. Štular).</caption>

(št. 1, 27, 38). V podaljšku te osi leži edini otroški grob z ženskimi zgodnjesrednjeveškimi pridatki (št. 83). Druga os povezuje studenec s kamnom. Kot med opisanima osema je 23° (sl. 6.15; prim. pogl. 10.3).

Podoben sistem je urejal prostor ostalih grobišč
Blejskega kota v 9. in 10. stoletju (Žale pri Zasipu:
Pleterski 2014, 250–255; Dlesc pri Bodeščah: Pleterski
2014, 259–261; Pristava: Pleterski 2014, 264–274) in še
na dveh primerljivih grobiščih (Mali grad v Kamniku:
Sagadin 2001, Štular 2007, Pleterski 2014, 290–293 in
Puščava pri Starem trgu: Pleterski 2014, 354–356).

would have served as guidance for determining the posi-
tions and orientations of three graves (1, 27, 38). On the
extension of this axis lies another grave with female Early
Medieval grave goods (83). The second axis connects the
spring and the stone. The angle between these two axes is
23° (Fig. 6.15; cf. Chapter 10.3).

Other 9th/10th century cemeteries in the Bled area
were organized under a similar system (Žale near Zasip:
Pleterski 2014, 250–255; Dlesc near Bodešče: Pleterski
2014, 259–261; Pristava: Pleterski 2014, 264–274), and
the same is true of two other comparable cemeteries (Mali
Grad in Kamnik: Sagadin 2001, Štular 2007, Pleterski
2014, 290–293 and Puščava near Stari Trg: Pleterski
2014, 354–356).
# 7. KRONOLOGIJA

# 7. CHRONOLOGY

Benjamin ŠTULAR

## 7.1 UVOD

Na obravnavanem najdišču je razmeroma malo artefaktov ali arhitekturnih elementov, ki bi jih bilo mogoče natančno kronološko opredeliti. Zaradi arhivske narave izkopavanj so tudi možnosti za uporabo metod radiometričnega datiranja – na primer analize radioaktivnega ogljika (v nadaljevanju C14) – omejene. Na celotnem najdišču je v zgodnji srednji vek možno tipokronološko opredeliti 30 artefaktov iz grobov in pogojno 3 arhitekturne elemente. Pridobili smo tudi dve dataciji C14, od katerih je ena zgodnjesrednjeveška.

S stališča arheološke metodologije je najmanj zanesljivo datiranje arhitekturnih elementov v smislu razmejevanja ostankov cerkvene arhitekture na predromanski in romanski slog. Sploh pri našem najdišču, kjer je eno temeljnih znanstvenih vprašanj prav datiranje posameznih cerkvenih faz. Zato slogovne opredelitve arhitekture v nadaljevanju ne uporabljamo kot podatek za datiranje.

Orodja za datiranje so torej stratigrafija, dataciji C14 in tipokronološka opredelitev nakitnih predmetov iz grobov. Glede na stanje raziskav sta po natančnosti slednji metodi primerljivo šibki in omogočata datiranje približno na stoletje natančno. Glede C14 (in ostalih radiometričnih datacij) je namreč treba upoštevati natančnost meritev (npr. Scott, Cook, Naysmith 2007) in predvsem matematično dejstvo, da je možnost dejanske datacije povsem enaka znotraj celotnega razpona (npr. Michczyński 2007; prim. Pleterski 2010a, 86). Tudi sicer je glede datiranja posameznih grobov treba upoštevati metodološke omejitve (splošen pregled z navedeno literaturo Lozić, Štular 2007; Fahlander, Oestigaard 2008; o datiranju Pleterski 2013aa, 300–312 in tam navedena literatura). Z besedami Parkerja Pearsona (1999, 29):

> Morda se zdi, da je arheologija enoznačen postopek od odkritja do opisa, vendar je na vsakem koraku pospremljena z interpretacijo. Interpretacija temelji na teoriji – racionalizaciji lastnih izkušenj sveta – da bi osmislila, kako in zakaj so ljudje v preteklosti ravnali s svojimi pokojnimi, kako so ravnali z njihovimi posmr-

## 7.1 INTRODUCTION

Relatively few artefacts or architectural elements in the studied site can be precisely dated. Due to the archival nature of the excavations, the use of radiometric dating methods – for example radiocarbon analysis (henceforward C14) – is of limited potential. Two C14 dates were acquired, one of which is dated to the Early Middle Ages. In the entire site, there are only 30 artefacts from graves and three architectural elements that can be typo-chronologically attributed to the Early Middle Ages.

From a methodological perspective, the least reliable method is dating architectural elements in the sense of dating the remains of church architecture as either pre-Romanesque or Romanesque. This is especially pertinent in this case, as one of the fundamental questions is to date different phases of the church. Therefore, the dating of architectural elements was not used.

The dating tools used were thus stratigraphy, the two C14 dates and typo-chronological analysis of the artefacts from the graves. Based on the state of research, the latter two methods are similarly weak in accuracy and enable dating with the precision of one century. With C14 (and other radiometric dating methods), the following should be taken into account: the accuracy of measurements (e.g. Scott, Cook, Naysmith 2007) and above all the mathematical fact that the possibility of the actual date is exactly the same over the entire time span (e.g. Michczyński 2007; cf. Pleterski 2010a, 86). In general, when dating individual graves, methodological limitations should be considered (for a general overview with cited literature, see Lozić, Štular 2007; Fahlander, Oestigaard 2008; on dating, see Pleterski 2013a, 300–312 and the literature cited therein). In the words of Parker Pearson (1999, 29):

> It might seem that archaeology is a straightforward process of discovery followed by description, yet it is accompanied by interpretation at every step. Interpretation draws on theory – our rationalizations of our experiences in the world – in order to make sense of how and why people

<footnote>* Translation Meta Osredkar.</footnote>
tnimi ostanki in na kakšen način so omogočali sobivanje mrtvih in živih.<fnref n="1" />

Na podlagi opisanih podatkov in ob upoštevanju navedenih omejitev smo lahko kronološko natančneje opredelili 3 grobiščne skupine (G1, G2, G4) in prve 3 cerkvene stavbe. O ostalih grobiščnih skupinah (G3, G5, G6 in G7) podatkov za kronološko opredelitev ni in jih zato na tem mestu ne obravnavamo.

## 7.2 TIPO-KRONOLOGIJA NAKITNIH PREDMETOV

Izjemno natančna arheološka analiza artefaktov je predstavljena v prvem delu knjige, na tem mestu nas zanima zgolj kar se da natančna tipokronološka opredelitev grobnih celot z namenom osmisliti in razložiti kronološki razvoj najdišča kot celote. Zato se opiramo zgolj na nakitne predmete, ki edini omogočajo opredelitev na vsaj stoletje natančno. Za to smo uporabili tipokronološko shemo, ki jo je na podlagi grobnih celot, datiranih z metodo C14, razvil Pleterski (2013) in na podlagi stratigrafske analize grobišča Župna cerkev v Kranju dogradil Rihter (2020).<fnref n="2" />

Na grobišču Blejski otok je bilo tako mogoče datirati 27 naglavnih obročkov in 3 prstane. Šestindvajset kronološko opredeljivih predmetov je iz grobiščne skupine G1, po 1 iz grobiščne skupine G2 in G4, 3 predmeti pa so bili dokumentirani izven grobov (sl. 7.1).

Razpon vseh datacij, vključno s C14-datacijo ($\sigma1$ 934 ± 38 n. št.) kosti skeleta (št. 72), je med letoma 800 in 1030. Srednja vrednost $\sigma1$ datacije C14 je leto 934, srednja vrednost vseh tipokronoloških datacij je leto 935.

### 7.2.1 SKUPINA G1

Tipokronološko najbolj izpovedna je skupina G1. V zgodnjesrednjeveški arheologiji najpogosteje uporabljamo presečno datacijo predmetov v grobu (sl. 7.2). Grob 4 nima presečne datacije; očitno je prstan v grobu tako imenovani *stari predmet*, torej predmet, pri katerem je od izdelave do odložitve v grob preteklo veliko časa. Ta grob torej datira najmlajši predmet.

Zgolj 14 grobov, datiranih s širokim razponom datacij, ne omogoča podrobne kronološke členitve.

of the past treated their dead, disposed of their remains, and provided ways for the dead to co-exist with the living.

Based on the above, we were able to date three cemetery groups (G1, G2, G4) and the first three church buildings. There were no available data for the dating of the remaining cemetery groups (G3, G5, G6, G7) and therefore these are not discussed here.

## 7.2 TYPO-CHRONOLOGY OF JEWELLERY

An extremely precise archaeological analysis of artefacts is presented in Part 1 of this book. Here, the main point of interest is a typo-chronological analysis of the grave inventories with as much accuracy as possible in order to explain the chronological development of the site as a whole. Its meaning and jewellery items were the only aspects that enabled dating with the precision of at least one century. Dating was based on the typochronological scheme developed by Pleterski (2013) for grave inventories dated with the C14 method and updated by Rihter (2020) on the basis of a stratigraphic analysis of the Župna cerkev cemetery in Kranj.<fnref n="1" />

In the Bled Island cemetery, 27 temple rings and three finger rings could be dated in this way. Twentieth-datable artefacts came from the G1 cemetery group, one artefact was from the G2 group, one was from the G4 group and three were recorded outside the graves (Fig. 7.1). All of the dates, including the C14 date ($\sigma1$ 934 ± 38 CE) of the skeleton from Grave 72, spanned between the years 800 and 1030. The $\sigma1$ mean value of the C14 date was the year 934, while the mean value of all typo-chronological dates was the year 935.

### 7.2.1 THE G1 CEMETERY GROUP

Typo-chronologically, the most informative group is the G1 group. In Early Medieval archaeology, the most commonly used date is the intersection of the dates of the objects in the grave (Fig. 7.2). Grave 4 has no intersection date; the finger ring in it seems to be a so-called *old object*, i.e. an artefact that was made a long time before it was deposited in a grave. This grave was therefore dated by the latest artefact.

Only 14 graves, dated to a wide time span, did not allow for a more precise chronological division. Another aggravating factor was that six out of 14 graves were dated on the basis of the temple rings with a single bulge (Type NO0100_0808), dated to a particularly wide time span. Nevertheless, some conclusions can be drawn about the G1 cemetery group on the basis of the above results.

<footnote n="1">¹ It might seem that archaeology is a straightforward process of discovery followed by description, yet it is accompanied by interpretation at every step. Interpretation draws on theory - our rationalizations of our experiences in the world - in order to make sense of how and why people of the past treated their dead, disposed of their remains, and provided ways for the dead to co-exist with the living (prevod avtor).</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Na tem mestu se zahvaljujem J. Rihterju, da mi je dovolil uporabiti izsledke svoje raziskave pred objavo.</footnote>

<footnote n="1">¹ The author would like to thank J. Rihter, who gave permission to use the findings of his research before the publication.</footnote>
<table><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Tip / Type</th><th colspan="2">Datacija / Date</th><th rowspan="2">Grob št. / Grave no.</th><th rowspan="2">Predmet št. / Artefact no.</th><th rowspan="2">Tabla / Plate</th><th rowspan="2">vir datacije / date source</th></tr><tr><th>od / from</th><th>do / to</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>NO0500_0610</td><td>840</td><td>960</td><td>1a</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0504_0610</td><td>840</td><td>960</td><td>1a</td><td>2</td><td>1</td><td>avtor / author</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>3a</td><td>3</td><td>1</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>3a</td><td>4</td><td>1</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0700_0810</td><td>990</td><td>1030</td><td>4a</td><td>6</td><td>1</td><td>Pleterski 2013a</td></tr><tr><td>PR0501_0000</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td>4a</td><td>7</td><td>1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>PR0201_0000</td><td>800</td><td>950</td><td>4a</td><td>8</td><td>1</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>PR0501_0000</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td>4a</td><td>10</td><td>1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>12</td><td>14</td><td>1</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO01mm_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>12</td><td>15</td><td>1</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_08mm</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>24</td><td>17</td><td>1</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO01mm_08mm</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>24</td><td>18</td><td>1</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0608</td><td>830</td><td>1000</td><td>27</td><td>19</td><td>1</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0608</td><td>830</td><td>1000</td><td>27</td><td>20</td><td>1</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>34a</td><td>22</td><td>1</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>36a</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0909</td><td>920</td><td>1000</td><td>36a</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>37</td><td>3</td><td>2</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>37</td><td>4</td><td>2</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>PR0105_0000</td><td>840</td><td>1010</td><td>37</td><td>5</td><td>2</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>38</td><td>6</td><td>2</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>PR0103_0000</td><td>870</td><td>1010</td><td>41</td><td>8</td><td>2</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>PR0103_0200</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td>45</td><td>10</td><td>2</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>NO1700_0610</td><td>870</td><td>970</td><td>45</td><td>11</td><td>2</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO1700_0610</td><td>870</td><td>970</td><td>45</td><td>12</td><td>2</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0506</td><td>830</td><td>1000</td><td>49</td><td>13</td><td>2</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>49</td><td>14</td><td>2</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>PR0103_0200</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td>58</td><td>20</td><td>2</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_mmmm</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td>59</td><td>21</td><td>2</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0607</td><td>830</td><td>950</td><td>83</td><td>9</td><td>3</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0708</td><td>900</td><td>1010</td><td>83</td><td>10</td><td>3</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>96</td><td>11</td><td>3</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0909</td><td>920</td><td>1000</td><td></td><td>15</td><td>3</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>NO0100_0808</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td></td><td>16</td><td>3</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>PR0201_0000</td><td>800</td><td>950</td><td></td><td>17</td><td>3</td><td>Rihter 2020</td></tr><tr><td>poseben / special</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>18</td><td>3</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

Sl. 7.1: Blejski otok, tipokronološka preglednica nakitnih predmetov iz grobov (avtor B. Štular).

Fig. 7.1: Bled Island, typo-chronological spreadsheet of grave jewellery (by B. Štular).
<table><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Grob št. /<br>Grave no.</th><th colspan="3">Presečna datacija /<br>Intersection date</th><th rowspan="2">Stratigrafija /<br>Stratigraphy</th></tr><tr><th>od /<br>from</th><th>do /<br>to</th><th>srednja /<br>mean</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1a</td><td>840</td><td>960</td><td>900</td><td>x</td></tr><tr><td>27</td><td>830</td><td>1000</td><td>915</td><td>1/2</td></tr><tr><td>45</td><td>870</td><td>970</td><td>920</td><td>1/2</td></tr><tr><td>83</td><td>900</td><td>950</td><td>925</td><td>x</td></tr><tr><td>72</td><td>895</td><td>972</td><td>934</td><td>x</td></tr><tr><td>38</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>935</td><td>1/2</td></tr><tr><td>37</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>935</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>41</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>935</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>49</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>935</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>3a</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>935</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>935</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>34a</td><td>870</td><td>1000</td><td>935</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>36a</td><td>920</td><td>1000</td><td>960</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>4a</td><td>990</td><td>1030</td><td>1010</td><td>4</td></tr></tbody></table>

Sl. 7.2: Blejski otok, preglednica datacij najmlajših predmetov iz posameznega groba od najstarejše srednje vrednosti zgoraj do najmlajše spodaj; stratigrafiska lega je navedena shematično v obliki pokolenja, za dejanska stratigrafska razmerja glej sl. 7.3 (avtor B. Štular).

Fig. 7.2: Bled Island, chronological spreadsheet of graves based on the youngest artefact in the grave in chronological order (according to the median date); stratigraphic position is simplified (for actual stratigraphic position see Fig. 7.3; by B. Štular).

Dodatna oteževalna okoliščina je, da je kar 6 grobov datiranih z naglavnimi obročki z enojno odebelitvijo (tip NO0100_0808), ki imajo posebno širok razpon datacij. Kljub temu na podlagi zgornjih rezultatov lahko izvedemo nekaj sklepov o grobiščni skupini G1.

Prvič, tipokronološko datiranje se ujema z relativnim stratigrafskim datiranjem, kar potrjuje pravilnost rezultatov.

Drugič, največ najdb izvira iz najmlajših grobov zato, ker so starejši grobovi prekopani, in ne zato, ker bi bilo v tem obdobju največ pokopov.

Tretjič, opredelimo lahko trajanje pokopavanja. (i) Največji možni časovni razpon je med letoma 830 in 1030, najmanjši med letoma 960 in 990. Razpon srednjih datacij med letoma 900 in 1010 se ujema z intuitivno opredelitvijo. (ii) Prevladujoč nakit so naglavni obročki z enojno odebelitvijo (tip NO0100_0808), ki se pojavljajo tako v stratigrafsko najstarejših kot najmlajših grobovih. Trajanje uporabe teh obročkov med letoma 870 in 1000 je zato indikator trajanja grobišča. (iii) Na grobišču ni naglavnih obročkov s kaveljčkom, ki so značilni predmet 9. stoletja, po prvem desetletju 10. stoletja pa

First, the typo-chronological dates match stratigraphic superposition, confirming that the results are correct.

Second, the reason why the majority of the finds are derived from the latest graves owes to the fact that the earlier graves were re-excavated and not because more graves belonged to the later period.

Third, it is possible to define the time span of the G1 cemetery: (i) The largest possible time span (range of dates) is between 830 and 1030 CE and the smallest (intersection of dates) is between 960 and 990 CE. The span of mean dates was between 900 and 1010 CE; the latter matches the intuitive dating. (ii) The prevailing type of jewellery comprises temple rings with a single bulge (Type NO0100_0808), occurring both in the stratigraphically earliest as well as the latest graves. The time of the use of these rings, between the years 870 and 1000, is therefore another indication for the duration of the cemetery. (iii) Also notable is the absence of temple rings with a hook, which were ubiquitous in the 9th century and occurred only exceptionally after the first decade of the 10th century (Rihter 2020; cf. Pleterski 2013a), hence their absence indicates that this cemetery was not used in the 9th century.<fnref n="2" /> On the basis of these three indications, it can be estimated that interring took place during the entire 10th century and in the first decade of the 11th century. Altogether, this is 11 decades. This chronology corresponds well to the results of the archaeological analysis of the artefacts in Part 1 of this book.

Fourth, the hypothesis that four generations were buried in the G1 cemetery group can be put forward. The stratigraphic analysis recorded three instances of triple reburials, indicating that four deceased (original burial plus three reburials) were buried successively in the same location. In cemeteries with marked graves, with an abundance of space and with clear rules when selecting burial locations, centuries could pass without a single reburial. In the Bled Island cemetery, however, none of these conditions were met and reburials were common, even a rule in the central part of the cemetery.

What remains is to answer the question of whether in the above-mentioned triple reburial a reburial took place in every single generation. If the answer is “yes”, the cemetery was in use only long enough to bury four generations. As determined above, the use of this cemetery spanned over 11 decades. How much time is therefore needed to bury four generations?

(i) The first clue can be derived from grave taphonomy, or more exactly, the observation of the disarticulation of the corpse (cf. Knüsel, Robb 2016, 667–668). Drawings of individual graves provide evidence that at every single reburial, the mourners moved individual bones – such bones lie each separately, for example the skull separately from the other bones – and not limbs

<footnote n="2">² The author would like to thank A. Pleterski for this information.</footnote>
se pojavljajo le izjemoma (Rihter 2020; prim. Pleterski 2013aa). Odsotnost teh predmetov je torej indic, da na tem grobišču v 9. stoletju niso pokopavali.<fnref n="3" /> Na podlagi teh 3 podatkov ocenjujemo, da so tu pokopavali skozi celo 10. stoletje in v prvem desetletju 11. stoletja, skupaj 11 desetletij, kar se ujema z rezultati celostne arheološke analize predmetov v 1. delu knjige.

Četrtič, postavimo lahko hipotezo, da so v grobiščni skupini G1pokopane 4 generacije pokojnikov. S strategirafsko analizo smo 3-krat dokumentirali 3-kratni prekop groba, ko so na istem mestu pokopani 4 pokojniki drug za drugim. Na grobiščih z označenimi grobovi, brez prostorske stiske in z jasnimi pravili določanja prostora pokopa lahko minejo stoletja brez enega samega prekopa. Vendar na obravnavanem grobišču noben izmed zgornjih pogojev ni bil izpolnjen, zato so bili prekopi pogosti, v osrednjem delu grobišča celo pravilo.

Odgovoriti pa moramo na vprašanje, ali so v omenjenih 3 primerih prav v vsaki generaciji izvedli prekop. Če to drži, je pokopavanje na obravnavanem grobišču trajalo le toliko časa, kolikor je potrebno za pokop 4 generacij. Kot smo pokazali, je pokopavanje na obravnavanem grobišču trajalo 11 desetletij. Koliko časa pa je potrebno za pokop 4 generacij pokojnikov?

(i) Prvi podatek je tafonomija grobov, natančneje opazovanje disartikulacije skeletov (prim. Knüsel, Robb 2016, 667–668). Arheološke risbe obravnavanih grobov dokazujejo, da so ob prav vsakem prekopu starejšega groba pogrebci premikali posamezne kosti – te ležijo vsaka zase, na primer lobanja ločeno od dolgih kosti – in ne udov ali delov trupla. To dokazuje, da je bila dekompozicija trupla že na stopnji dokončne skeletoizacije, saj izmed mehkih tkiv prav ligamenti nog razpadejo zadnji (Pinheiro 2006, 110–112). Trajanje tega procesa je odvisno od številnih dejavnikov in zgolj kot orientacijsko vrednost lahko navedemo, da skeletoizacija izpostavljenih trupel velikih sesalcev traja do 5 let (Hill, Behrensmeyer 1984; Rebmann, David, Sorg 2000, 126; prim. Clark, Worell, Pless 1997, 159–160). Vendar je ta proces pri pokopanih človeških truplih daljši in je odvisen od številnih dejavnikov (Daniell 1997, 109–121; Pinheiro 2006). Edini dejavnik, ki ga v našem primeru poznamo, so razmere po pokopu, ki jih določa prst v grobu. Ta je na Blejskem otoku ilovnata, kar proces skeletoizacije upočasnjuje (prim. Esteves da Silva et al. 2009). Na podlagi povedanega je naša groba ocena, da je na Blejskem otoku pri obravnavanih skeletih proces skeletoizacije trajal približno desetletje.

(ii) Vendar so po zgolj desetletju še ohranjeni na primer lasje in nohti, zaradi adipocere (glej pogl. 3.3.3) pa je še zaznati neprijeten vonj (prim. Parker Pearson 1999, 14). Ker je v srednjem veku veljalo, da duša zapusti telo šele, ko to popolnoma razpade (Daniel 1997, 62–64; prim. Williams 2006, 83–84), je tabu prekopavanja trajal nekoliko dlje. Posredno je takšna prepoved izpričana v

or body parts. This indicates that the decomposition of the body was already at the final skeletonization stage, as the leg ligaments are the last soft tissue to decompose (Pinheiro 2006, 110–112). The duration of this process depends on multiple factors, but to give an approximate example, the skeletonization of exposed bodies of large mammals takes up to five years (Hill, Behrensmeyer 1984; Rebmann, David, Sorg 2000, 126; cf. Clark, Worell, Pless 1997, 159–160). Nevertheless, with buried human bodies this process is longer and relies on multiple factors (Daniell 1997, 109–121; Pinheiro 2006). The only known factor in this case are soil conditions after burial. Clayey soils at Bled Island slow down the skeletonization process (cf. Esteves da Silva et al. 2009). Given the above, a rough estimate is that on Bled Island, the skeletonization process lasted up to a decade.

(ii) However, after only a decade, hair and nails remain preserved and adipocere (see Chapter 3.3.3) exudes an unpleasant smell (cf. Parker Pearson 1999, 14). Given that people in the Middle Ages believed that the soul leaves the body only when it is completely disintegrated (Daniel 1997, 62–64; cf. Williams 2006, 83–84), the reburial taboo must have lasted longer. Indirectly, such prohibition is evidenced in a spell from the end of the 15th or the beginning of the 16th century: *Die chunnen mir hewt als wenig geschaden als der man, der vor xxx Jaren ist pegrabenn* <fnref n="3" /> (Javor-Briški 1998, 9). This spell should be understood in the sense that after three decades, the remains in a grave lose the social status of the deceased person, while the remaining bones acquire a social status of things. Thus, the body of the deceased, which requires respectful treatment, becomes a mere object. In the Bled Island cemetery, the attitude of mourners towards the exhumed bones was, looking through the eyes of a modern observer, disrespectful. This indicates that the period of respectful taboo – 30 years in the above example – already passed at the time of the reburial.

(iii) The last element is the biological duration of a generation in a certain community, which can be calculated using various formulas (e.g. Bienvenu, Legender 2015). There are no precise data for the Early Medieval population of the Bled area, but in archaeological populations, the duration of a generation is usually given only as a rough estimate between 25 (e.g. Hazelwood, Steele 2004, 677) and 35 (e.g. Arnold 2002, 136) or 40 years (Pleterski 2013a).

It can therefore be concluded that there is direct evidence that the graves in the Bled Island cemetery were not exhumed for about a decade. Nevertheless, based on the duration of a generation and medieval taboos, we estimate that this period lasted approximately three decades. This means that the burial of four graves in direct stratigraphic superposition of generations required at least nine decades. However, all the members of the

<footnote n="3">³ Za informacijo se zahvaljujem A. Pleterskemu.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Today, they can hurt me as little as a man buried 30 years ago.</footnote>
zagovoru s konca 15. ali začetka 16. stoletja: *Die chunnen
mir hewt als wenig geschaden als der man, der vor xxx
Jaren ist pegrabenn*<fnref n="4" /> (Javor-Briški 1998, 9). Ta zagovor
razumemo tako, da po 3 desetletjih ostanki v grobu
izgubijo poseben družbeni status. Po tem času truplo
pokojnika, s katerim je treba ravnati spoštljivo, postane
samo predmet. Na obravnavanem grobišču je bil odnos
pogrebcov do kosti v prekopih, kot ga dojemamo skozi
oči današnjega opazovalca, nespoštljiv. Doba tabuja in
s tem spoštljivega odnosa do posmrtnih ostankov – ob
koncu srednjega veka 30 let – je ob prekopavanju ob-
ravnavanih grobov torej že minila.

(iii) Zadnji element je biološko trajanje generacije v določeni skupnosti, za izračunavanje katere veljajo različne formule (npr. Bienvenu, Legender 2015). Nathančnega podatka za zgodnjesrednjeveško populacijo v Blejskem kotu nimamo, a v arheoloških populacijah je trajanje generacije običajno podano zgolj kot groba ocena med 25 (npr. Hazelwood, Steele 2004, 677) in 35 let (npr. Arnold 2002, 136) ali 40 let (Pleterski 2013aa).

Zaključimo torej lahko, da za grobišče na Blejskem otoku neposredno lahko dokažemo neprekopavanje grobov za približno desetletje, a na podlagi trajanja generacije in srednjeveških tabujev ocenjujemo, da je to obdobje trajalo približno tri desetletja. To pomeni, da je za pokop 4 grobov v neposredni stratigrafski superpoziciji generacij potrebnih najmanj 9 desetletij. A vsi predstavniki 1. generacije na obravnavanem grobišču niso bili pokopani v istem letu, temveč – kolikor je soditi po razponu srednjih datacij s predmeti datiranih grobov 1. generacije (št. 1, 27, 45) – v razmiku 2 desetletij. Pričakovani dejanski čas pokopavanja 4 generacij na Blejskem otoku je 11 desetletij, kar je enako trajanju grobišča.

V grobiščni skupini G1 so bile torej v 10. stoletju in v 1. desetletju 11. stoletja pokopane 4 generacije pokojnikov.

V 1. pokolenju je bilo pokopanih vsaj 7 pokojnikov (št. 1b, 7b, 27, 38, 45, 61, 72). V 2. pokolenju je bilo verjetno pokopanih 14 pokojnikov (št. 1a, 7a, 13, 14, 15, 28, 31, 35, 37, 42, 46, 54, 57, 64b), vendar ločevanje med prvima generacijama zaradi premajhnega števila stratigrafskih odnosov ni natančno. Glede na ugotovljeno so ti grobovi nastali v 1. polovici 10. stoletja. Najstarejša izmed datiranih sta grobova (št. 1, 27), ki skupaj z večino grobov 1. pokolenja (št. 38, 45, 72) sestavljata homogeno skupino tako glede na lego v prostoru kot tudi glede na orientacijo. Že v času 2. pokolenja se uveljavi sistem pokopavanja v vrstah po celotnem grobišču (sl. 7.3).

V 3. pokolenju je bilo med 6. in 8. desetletjem 10. stoletja pokopanih najmanj 18 pokojnikov (št. 4b, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 16, 21, 23, 34b, 36b, 40, 41, 43, 56, 59, 62, 63).

V 4. pokolenje sodi najmanj 14 grobov (št. 3, 4, 18, 19, 22, 25, 30, 34a, 36a, 39a, 39b, 39c, 49, 60), ki so nastali v zadnjih 2 desetletjih 10. in v 1. desetletju 11. stoletja.

first generation are never buried in the same year. Judg-
ing by the span of the mean dates of the first-generation
graves dated with artefacts (1, 27, 45) in Bled Island's G1
cemetery, the burial of the first generation took place over
two decades. The expected time span of burials for four
generations on Bled Island is therefore 11 decades, which
matches the above chronology exactly.

It can consequently be said with some conviction
that in the G1 cemetery group, four generations were
buried in the 10th and in the first decade of the 11th
centuries. At least seven deceased were buried in the
first generation (1b, 7b, 27, 38, 45, 61, 72). The second
generation probably included 14 deceased (1a, 7a, 13,
14, 15, 28, 31, 35, 37, 42, 46, 54, 57, 64b), but due to the
insufficient number of stratigraphic relationships, distin-
guishing between the first two generations is not precise.
Considering the artefact chronology and the duration of
individual generations, these graves were dug in the first
half of the 10th century. The earliest of the dated graves
are 1 and 27, which together with the majority of the first-
generation graves (38, 45, 72), belong to a homogeneous
group both in terms of their location in the cemetery
and their orientation. During the second generation, the
system of interring in rows was established and the entire
G1 cemetery area was utilized (Fig. 7.3).

In the third generation, at least 18 deceased were
buried between the sixth and eighth decades of the 10th
century (4b, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 16, 21, 23, 34b, 36b, 40, 41, 43,
56, 59, 62, 63).

The fourth generation includes at least 14 graves (3, 4, 18, 19, 22, 25, 30, 34a, 36a, 39a, 39b, 39c, 49, 60), which date to the last two decades of the 10th century and the first decade of the 11th century.

By far the latest artefact in this cemetery group is a
temple ring (Type NO0700_0810) in Grave 4 (Pl. 1: 6)
dated between 990 and 1030 CE. The mean date is the
year 1010. This grave also differs from all other graves in
the G1 group by being the only grave oriented parallel to
the church building. This is a reliable indicator<fnref n="4" /> that at the
time of this burial, the church had already been erected
or at least its foundations had already been marked in the
ground so that the grave in question could be oriented
accordingly. If there were any graves in this group later
than Grave 4, their orientation would be the same. Grave 4
is therefore the latest grave in the G1 group. It is a mixed-
rite burial of a woman: the grave pit was dug parallel to
the church building, but the body was put into the grave
together with some head jewellery. This being the only

<footnote n="4">⁴ Te mi danes lahko tako malo škodijo, kot človek, ki je bil pokopan pred 30 leti.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Three quarters of the graves contemporary to the church building deviate from this orientation for less than three degrees. At the same time, none of the graves that are certainly earlier than the first church are oriented like this. In other words, apart from Grave 4, none of the other 65 graves with measured orientation are at the same time earlier than the church and oriented the same as church. The likelihood of this being an accidental occurrence is 1 : 65, or 1.5%.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_156.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 7.3: Blejski otok, levo Harrisov diagram grobiščne skupine G1, desno zgoraj načrt grobov 1. in desno spodaj 2. generacije grobiščne skupine G1 (avtor B. Štular).</figcaption></figure>

<caption>Fig. 7.3: Bled Island. Left: Harris matrix of cemetery group G1. Right above: plan of graves from first G1 generation. Right below: plan of graves from second G1 generation (by B. Štular).</caption>
Občutno najmlajši predmet v tej grobiščni skupini je naglavni obroček (tip NO0700_0810) v grobu 4 (t. 1: 6). Razpon datacij je med letoma 990 in 1030, srednja datacija je leto 1010. Ta grob se razlikuje od vseh ostalih v skupini G1 še po tem, da ima edini isto orientacijo kot cerkvena stavba. To je zanesljiv pokazatelj,<fnref n="5" /> da je v času tega pokopa cerkev že stala oziroma je bila vsaj njena lega že označena. Če bi v tej skupini obstajali še mlajši grobovi, bi bili orientirani enako. Grob 4 je torej najmlajši v skupini G1. Gre za biritualni pokop pokojnice: grobno jamo so pogrebci izkopali vzporedno s cerkveno stavbo, a truplo so v grob položili še z naglavnim nakitom. To je edini tovrstni grob na grobišču, kar dokazuje, da je biritualnost takoj zatem nadomestil pokop v skladu s takrat veljavnim krščanskim kanonom (ne nujno na Blejskem otoku). Dovolimo si celo domnevo, da so pokojnico pokopali po začetku gradnje, a pred posvetitvijo cerkve, ko so dovoljeni samo še pokopi brez pridatkov. Kot smo pokazali, se je to najverjetneje zgodilo v prvem desetletju 11. stoletja.

Za 18 grobov (št. 10, 11, 17, 20, 24, 26, 29, 32, 33, 44, 47, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, 58) ni kronoloških podatkov.

Sočasen grobiščni skupini G1 je otroški grob (št. 83) z naglavnima obročkoma. Prvi obroček (tip NO0100_0607; t. 3: 9) je datiran v čas med letoma 830 in 950 in drugi (tip NO0100_0708; t. 3: 10) med letoma 900 in 1010, presečna datacija groba je med letoma 900 in 950. Grob je torej sočasen prvima generacijama v skupini G1. Zato se zdi najverjetneje, da je grob sicer prostorsko ločen od skupine G1, a njej sočasen. Grob se namreč močno razlikuje od ostalih grobov sicer zelo homogene skupine G4, kjer med preostalimi 42 grobovi niti eden nima *in situ* pridatkov ali delov noše (glej pogl 7.2.3).

### 7.2.2 GROBIŠČNA SKUPINA G2

Iz te skupine imamo za datiranje na voljo le eno najdba, prstan iz groba 111 (t. 3: 13), ki je datiran v čas med letoma 840 in 1010. Najdba izvira iz zasutja in tudi provenienca groba ni zanesljiva. Kljub temu ta najdba potrjuje stratigrafsko opredelitev grobiščne skupine G2 kot sočasno skupini G1. Zaradi slabe ohranjenosti grobov in le 1 tipokronološko opredeljive najdbe kakršnankoli dodatna interpretacija ni mogoča.

such grave in the cemetery is evidence that mixed-rite burials were soon replaced by burials in accordance with the Christian canon of the time (albeit not necessarily on Bled Island). It might even be presumed that this woman was buried after the beginning of the construction, but before the consecration of the church. After the consecration of the church, only burials without grave goods would have been allowed. As demonstrated by the dating of the particular temple ring and of the G1 cemetery as a whole, this burial took place in the first decade of the 11th century. Eighteen G1 graves (10, 11, 17, 20, 24, 26, 29, 32, 33, 44, 47, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, 58) do not have any chronological data.

A child grave (83) with two temple rings is located in the G4 cemetery group area, but is contemporary to the G1 cemetery group. The first ring (Type NO0100_0607; Pl. 3: 9) is dated 830 to 950 CE and the second (Type NO0100_0708; Pl. 3: 10) 900 to 1010 CE, while the intersection date of the grave is 900 to 950 CE. The grave is therefore contemporary to the first two generations of the G1 group. It seems most likely that while the grave is spatially separated from the G1 group, it still belongs to the G1 cemetery. The grave largely differs from the rest of the graves in the otherwise very homogeneous G4 group, where none of the 42 graves contained grave goods or parts of attire documented *in situ* (see Chapter 7.2.3).

### 7.2.2 THE G2 CEMETERY GROUP

The only datable find from the G2 cemetery group is the ring from Grave 111 (Pl. 3: 13), which is dated 840 to 1010 CE. The find comes from the grave fill and it is not certain that it belongs to Grave 111 at all. Nevertheless, this find confirms that the G2 and stratigraphically contemporary G1 groups are indeed contemporary. Due to the poor preservation state of the G2 graves and the presence of only one typologically identifiable find, no further interpretation is possible.

### 7.2.3 THE G4 CEMETERY GROUP

Two graves, which together contain three temple rings, were recorded in the area of the G4 cemetery group. Grave 83 belongs to the G1 group (see Chapter 7.2.1). The fill of Grave 96 contains a temple ring with a double bulge (Type NO0100_0808; Pl. 3: 11). Such temple rings are the most common type of grave goods in the G1 group. The artefact can be interpreted as a residual find. The same goes for a small fragment – probably a fragment of the loop of a temple ring with a forged loop – from the fill of Grave 100.

In Grave 77a, also in a secondary position, a bronze ring was found. The ring has a rectangular cross-section and is decorated with a row of small dimples on the

<footnote n="5">⁵ Tri četrtrine grobov, ki so sočasni cerkveni stavbi, odstupa od orientacije te za manj kot 3 stopinje. Hkrati noben grob, ki je zanesljivo starejši od prve cerkve, nima takšne orientacije. Povedano drugače, poleg omenjenega noben drug izmed 65 grobov z izmerjeno orientacijo ni hkrati starejši od cerkve in orientiran enako kot cerkev. Možnost naključja je torej 1: 65 oziroma 1,5 %.</footnote>
### 7.2.3 GROBIŠČNA SKUPINA G4

Dva grobova s skupno tremi naglavnimi obročki sta bila dokumentirana na prostoru grobiščne skupine G4. Grob 83 sodi v skupino G1 (glej pogl. 7.2.1). V zasutju groba 96 je bil naglavni obroček z enojnima odebelitvama (tip NO0100_0808; t. 3: 11), kakršni so tudi sicer najpogostejši pridatek v skupini G1. Ta predmet interpretiramo kot rezidualno najdbo. Isto velja za droben odlomek iz zasutja groba 100, verjetno del zanke naglavnega obročka s kovano zanko.

V grobu 77a, prav tako v drugotni legi, je bil dokumentiran bronast sklenjen prstan pravokotnega preseka, na zunanji strani okrašen z nizom drobnih jamic (t. 3: 7). Prstani z masivnim pravokotnim presekom se na primer na grobišču Župna cerkev v Kranju – kjer predmetov v grobovih od prvih desetletij 11. stoletja ni – ne pojavljajo. Takšnih prstanov tudi ni na primer na poznosrednjeveškem grobišču ob eponimni cerkvi v Šentjerneju (Predovnik, Dacar, Lavrinc 2008). Stanje raziskav za ta tip prstanov torej trenutno omogoča zgolj ohlapno datiranje v visoki srednji vek in *terminus post quem*, prva desetletja 11. stoletja.

Za datiranje skupine G4 preostane le nehvaležno posredno datiranje s širšim kontekstom. Na podlagi analize pisnih virov je Höffler (2016a, 64) prepričljivo pokazal, da cerkev na Blejskem otoku v procesu statusnega urejanja lastniških cerkva, ki je potekal v času med koncem 10. in koncem 12. stoletja, sodi v skupino tistih lastniških cerkva, ki jih lastnik ni mogel preoblikovati v patronatno župnijo in je zdrsnila na raven podružnice ter s tem izgubila pravico pokopavanja. Najkasneje po koncu 12. stoletja torej obstoj grobišča na Blejskem otoku pravno ni bil več mogoč in vsi kasnejši pokopi so le posamezni pokopi v cerkvi ali tik ob njej (slednje so očitno pravno enačili s prvimi). Začetek 13. stoletja je torej *terminus ante quem* grobiščne skupine G4.

Na podlagi stratigrafske analize lahko določimo najkrajši možni čas pokopavanja z isto metodo kot pri skupini G1. V grobiščni skupini G4 je pokopano najmanj 6 generacij, saj je v eni od osrednjih grobnic nedvoumno dokazljivih 6 zaporednih pokopov (grobovi 81a, 82a, 82b, 102, 103, 104; sl. 6.2). Če privzamemo trajanje generacije 30 let in čas pokopavanja 20 let, kot v skupini G1 (glej pogl. 7.2.1), so torej tu pokopavali najmanj 170 let. Sto sedemdeset let oziroma slabi 2 stoletji pa je tudi čas med navedenima *post* in *ante* datumoma. Pokopavanje v grobiščni skupini G4 se je torej začelo nekako v drugi tretjini 11. stoletja in je trajalo do konca 12. stoletja:

- 1. pokolenje: 1030–1050,

- 2. pokolenje: 1050–1080,

- 3. pokolenje: 1080–1110,

- 4. pokolenje: 1110–1140,

- 5. pokolenje: 1140–1170 in

- 6. pokolenje: 1170–1200.

outside (Pl. 3: 7). Rings with a solid rectangular cross-section do not occur, for instance, in the Župna cerkev cemetery in Kranj, where there are no artefacts in graves after the first decades of the 11th century. Similarly, the Late Medieval cemetery near the church of St. Bartholomew in Šentjernej, for instance, contains no such rings (Predovnik, Dacar, Lavrinc 2008). At the current state of research (i.e. based on the absence of evidence), such finger rings can therefore only be loosely dated to the High Middle Ages, with the first decades of the 11th century as the *terminus post quem*.

In the absence of any *in situ* datable artefacts, there only remains the undesirable task of dating the G4 group on the basis of the wider context. Through the analysis of written sources, Höffler (2016a, 64) has convincingly demonstrated that in the process of the regulation of proprietary churches, which took place between the end of the 10th and the end of the 12th centuries, the church on Bled Island was among those proprietary churches whose owners could not transform them into benefices and it fell to the level of a filial church, losing the right of interring. After the end of the 12th century at the latest, the cemetery on Bled Island could no longer legally exist and all subsequent burials were only individual burials either in the church or immediately adjacent to it (the latter seems to have been legally equal to the former). The beginning of the 13th century is therefore the *terminus ante quem* for the G4 cemetery group.

Based on the stratigraphic analysis, the shortest possible duration of usage can be determined using the same method as with the G1 group. There is reliable evidence for six subsequent burials in one of the central tombs (Graves 81a, 82a, 82b, 102, 103, 104; Fig. 6.2), which means that at least six generations were buried in the G4 cemetery group. If the assumed duration of one generation was 30 years and the time of burying the first generation was 20 years like in the G1 group (see Chapter 7.2.1), the G4 cemetery was in use for at least 170 years. This period of slightly less than two centuries is also the time between the above-stated *post* and *ante* dates. In the G4 cemetery group, interment therefore started approximately in the second third of the 11th century and lasted until the end of the 12th century:

- First generation: 1030–1050,

- Second generation: 1050–1080,

- Third generation: 1080–1110,

- Fourth generation: 1110–1140,

- Fifth generation: 1140–1170, and

- Sixth generation: 1170–1200.

It needs to be emphasized, however, that the accuracy of these dates is much lower than for the G1 cemetery group and hence should be understood merely as a chronological framework.
Vendar je treba poudariti, da je natančnost tega datiranja mnogo manjša kot za grobiščno skupino G1 in jo je treba razumeti zgolj kot kronološki okvir.

## 7.3 CERKVENE STAVBE

Datiranje cerkvenih stavb je bil eden osnovnih ciljev Šribarjevih izkopavanj in tudi pričujoče analize. Žal lahko ponudimo le delne odgovore v obliki posrednega datiranja na podlagi neposrednih in posrednih povezav med cerkvenimi stavbami in grobišči. Možnosti za občutno izboljšanje kronologije brez novih podatkov, na primer v obliki neposrednega datiranja malte, ni.

Neposreden *terminus post quem* za čas nastanka **1. predromanske cerkvene stavbe** v fazi 2a ponuja grob 72, ki je po metodi C14 datiran v čas zanesljivo po letu 779 n. št. oziroma s 94,2-odstotno verjetnostjo v čas med letoma 869 in 1013 (glej pogl. 4.2). Kronološko oprijemljivejši podatek ponuja grob 4 s tako imenovanim astragalnim naglavnim obročkom tipa (NO0700_0810; t. 1: 6), ki so jih po dosedanjih dognanjih v grobove pridajali med letoma 990 in 1030. Če drži navedena interpretacija, da gre za zadnji pokop na grobišču G1 in da je ta pokop sočasen z graditvijo cerkve (glej pogl. 7.2.1), so 1. predromansko cerkev zgradili v **1. desetletju 11. stoletja**.

Okvirno kronološko umestitev **2. predromanske cerkvene stavbe** v fazi 2b v zaključek zgodnjega srednjega veka poleg arhitekture narekujeta 2 odlomka zgodnjesrednjeveške lončenine, najdena na sloju, ki je ločil obe najstarejši apsidi (glej pogl. 4.3). Dodatni kronološki indici temeljijo na interpretaciji stratigrafije in datiranju grobiščne skupine G4. Najjužnejši grob skupine G4 namreč ne presega južne stene 2. predromanske cerkve (sl. 6.2). Natančnost ujemanja komajda dopušča možnost naključja, navaja pa na misel, da je bil prostor grobišča G4 določen še v času te cerkve in so torej starejši grobovi sočasni cerkvi 2b. *Terminus post quem* je torej začetek pokopavanja na grobišču G4, okvirno po letu **1030**.

Na drugi strani lega grobov skupine G4, ki se z nogami skorajda dotikajo zahodne stene **romanske cerkve** faze 3, dokazuje najmanj to, da so ob gradnji romanske cerkve faze 3 grobove še spoštovali. To interpretacijo potrjujejo in natančneje opredeljujejo drobci ometa in malte v zasutju mlajših grobov skupine G4 (št. 77a, 82a, 84, 87, 88, 93a, 101). Stratigrafsko najstarejši grob z drobci te malte, ki lahko izvira le iz zahodne stene romanske cerkve faze 3 (glej pogl. 6.1.2), je grob 93a. Umeščen je na sredino stratigrafske verige petih grobov in torej sodi bodisi v 3. bodisi v 4. pokolenje grobišča G4 (sl. 7.4). Okvirni *terminus ante quem* te cerkve je torej **1140** oziroma širše med letoma 1080 in 1140.

## 7.3 CHURCH BUILDINGS

Dating the church buildings was one of the main goals of both Šribar's excavations and this analysis. Unfortunately, we can offer only partial answers in the form of indirect dating, based on direct and indirect stratigraphic relations between the church buildings and the cemeteries. Without new data – for example dating of the mortar in existing church walls – there are no possibilities for a substantial improvement of the chronology.

A direct *terminus post quem* for the construction of the **first pre-Romanesque church building** in Phase 2a is provided by Grave 72, dated by the C14 method to after 779 CE, or with 94.2% probability between 869 and 1013 CE (see Chapter 4.2). More substantial chronological information is provided by Grave 4, which contained the so-called astragal temple ring of Type NO0700_0810 (Pl. 1: 6). According to the findings so far, such temple rings were used between 990 and 1030 CE. If the above interpretations that this was the last burial in the G1 cemetery and that it was contemporary to the construction of the church (see Chapter 7.2.1) are correct, then the first pre-Romanesque church was built in the **first decade of the 11th century**.

The dating of the **second Pre-Romanesque church building** of Phase 2b roughly to the end of the Early Middle Ages is supported not only by the architecture but also by two fragments of Early Medieval pottery, discovered on the layer separating the earliest two apses (see Chapter 4.3). Additional chronological indications are based on the interpretation of the stratigraphy and the dating of the G4 cemetery group: the southernmost grave of the G4 group is not positioned beyond the southern wall of the second pre-Romanesque church (Fig. 6.2). The accuracy of alignment leaves little possibility for coincidence and leads to the consideration that the area of the G4 cemetery had already been selected in the time of this church and that the earlier graves were contemporary to the 2b church. The *terminus post quem* is therefore the beginning of burying in the G4 cemetery after approximately the year **1030**.

On the other hand, the positions of the graves of the G4 group, whose legs almost touch the western wall of the **Romanesque church** of Phase 3, prove at least that these graves were still respected during the construction of the Romanesque church. This interpretation is further confirmed and clarified by mortar fragments in the fill of the later graves of the G4 group (77a, 82a, 84, 87, 88, 93a, 101). Stratigraphically, the earliest grave with these mortar fragments – which could only have originated in the western wall of the Romanesque church of Phase 3 (see Chapter 6.1.2) – is Grave 93a. Being in the middle of a stratigraphic chain of five graves, it belongs either to the third or fourth generation of the G4 cemetery (Fig. 7.4). The *terminus ante quem* for this church is roughly the year 1140, or more widely, between 1080 and **1140** CE.
G4

<figure><img src="image_157.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 7.4: Blejski otok, zgoraj Harrisov diagram grobiščne skupine G4, spodaj vse hipotetične možnosti umestitve groba 93a z malto (rumeno) v pokolenja grobiščne skupine G4 (avtor B. Štular).</figcaption></figure>

<caption>Fig. 7.4: Bled Island. Above: Harris matrix of cemetery group G4; below all possible stratigraphic positions within G4 of the grave with mortar No. 93a (yellow) (by B. Štular).</caption>

## 7.4 OSTALO

Kot smo že zapisali, najdbe izven grobov med izkopavanji na najdišču Blejski otok niso bile dokumentirane sistematično (glej pogl. 3.2). Hkrati glede na izjemno skromno količino inventariziranih najdb na primer iz plasti novoveških izravnalnih nasutij sklepamo, da so med izkopavanji izvajali selekcijo najdb. V luči teh dejstev podrobnejša tipološka analiza lončenine iz obdobij po zgodnjem srednjem veku (t. 8; 9) ni smiselna. Ta lončenina je izpovedna le toliko, da potrdi neopredeljive aktivnosti na prostoru najdišča v celotnem visokem (npr. t. 6; 7: 2–6; 10: 1–5) in poznem srednjem veku (npr. t. 8). Ugotovitev, ki je ob še danes stoječi cerkveni stavbi z jasno izraženimi romanskimi temelji larpurl artistična.

Podobno velja za zoglenela žitna zrna (inv. št. S 1963) ječmena (*Hordeum vulgare*) in prosa (*Panicum miliaceum*; sl. 2.19), dokumentirana v profilu pod zidom. Eno zrno je bilo datirano z metodo C14 v laboratoriju Póznanjski radiokarbonski laboratorij<fnref n="6" /> v čas 775 ± 30 BP. Datuma, kalibrirana s programom OxCal v4.2.3 (Bronk Ramsey, Lee 2013) po kalibracijski krivulji IntCal13 (Reimer idr. 2013) znotraj enega standardnega odklona od srednje vrednosti (σ1), sta med letoma 1225 in 1233 (13,4-odstotna verjetnost) in med letoma 1243 in 1272 n. št. (54,8-odstotna verjetnost). Kalibrirani datum znotraj

## 7.4 OTHER

As claimed before, finds from outside the graves were not systematically recorded during the excavations on Bled Island (see Chapter 3.2). At the same time, the very small quantity of inventoried finds, stemming for example from the post-Medieval ground levelling accumulations, leads to the assumption that the finds underwent a rigorous selection process during or after the excavation. In the light of these facts, a more detailed typological analysis of pottery from the periods after the Early Middle Ages is not useful (Pls. 8; 9). The existence of this pottery only confirms unidentifiable activities in the area of the site during the entire High (e.g. Pls. 6; 7: 2–6; 10: 1–5) and Late Middle Ages (e.g. Pl. 8). Such a finding is meaningless considering the still-standing church building with clear Romanesque foundations.

Something similar might be said regarding the charred grains (inv. no. S 1963) of barley (*Hordeum vulgare*) and millet (*Panicum miliaceum*), recorded in the section under the wall (Fig. 2.19). One grain was dated by the C14 method in the Poznań Radiocarbon Laboratory<fnref n="5" /> to 775 ± 30 BP. The dates, calibrated with OxCal v4.2.3 software (Bronk Ramsey, Lee 2013) using the IntCal13 calibration curve (Reimer et al. 2013) within one standard deviation (σ1) from the mean value, are 1225 to 1233 CE

<footnote n="6">⁶ Laboratorijska številka Poz-107997.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Lab. no. Poz-107997.</footnote>
dveh standardnih odklonov od srednje vrednosti (σ2) je med letoma 1215 in 1282 (95,4-odstotna verjetnost) oziroma 1249 ± 33 n. št. Slednji datum je torej *terminus post quem* za steno prizidka, ki se je prislanjal na severno pročelje cerkvene stavbe, zgrajene v gotskem slogu. Glede na dvojno prekinitev med datiranim zrnom in cerkveno stavbo – (i) čas, po katerem je bil postavljen prizidek, zgrajen (ii) pozneje kot cerkev – je interpretacijska vrednost te absolutne datacije zelo omejena: cerkev je bila zgrajena prej kot prizidek, ki je bil zgrajen kadarkoli po letu 1249 ± 33 n. št.

Zaradi metode izkopavanja o kronologiji obdobij po zgodnjem srednjem veku zatorej ostajamo pri ugotovitvah stratigrafske analize (glej pogl. 4.5 in 4.6).

(13.4% probability) and 1243 to 1272 CE (54.8% probability). The calibrated date within two standard deviations from the mean value (σ2) is 1215 to 1282 CE (95.4% probability), i.e. 1249 ± 33 CE. The last date is therefore the *terminus post quem* for the extension wall, which leaned against the northern façade of the Gothic-style church building. When the double hiatus between the dated grain and the church building is considered – the C14 date offers the time (i) after which the extension was built, which was (ii) later than the church – the interpretation value of this absolute date appears to be very limited: the church was built prior to the extension that was built any time after 1249 ± 33 CE. Therefore, the chronology of the periods after the Early Middle Ages revealed by stratigraphic analysis cannot be further elaborated (see Chapters 4.5 and 4.6).
# 8. BLEJSKI OTOK V SREDNJEM VEKU

## 8. BLED ISLAND IN THE MIDDLE AGES

Benjamin ŠTULAR

### 8.1 INTERPRETACIJA NAJDIŠČA

#### 8.1.1 PISNI VIRI

Za cerkev Marijinega vnebovzetja na Blejskem otoku smo doslej domnevali, da je nastala med 2. polovico 9. stoletja in 3. čeptrtino 10. stoletja. Nastala naj bi kot lastniška cerkev blejskega župana, a naj bi se je že pred letom 1004 polastil vzhodnofrankovski vladar (Pleterski 2011, 152; prim. Höfler 2016b, 212). Po mnenju Höflerja (2015, 50; 2016b, 212) je cerkev skupaj s posestvom po letu 1004 pripadla briksenskim škofom, ki naj bi jo takrat tudi obnovili in pri njej ustanovili duhovniško službo, sicer naj bi si kasneje ne mogli lastiti njenih patronatskih in drugih pravic. Kraljeva darovnica iz leta 1004 cerkve na otoku ne omenja, temveč zgolj sumarno našteje elemente infrastrukturno urejene posesti: cerkve (aecclesiis), kastele, poslopja, mline, nesvobodnjake, različna obdelana in neobdelana zemljišča, pravice in dohodke. Formula se ponovi tudi v diplomatično zelo podobni listini iz leta 1011. Takšne pertinenčne formule so v podarilnih listinah bolj ali manj formalizirane (Štih 2004, 22–23; Štih 2011, 14–19 z viri). Zanimivo, Štih v analizi listine iz leta 1004 meni, da takšne formule vsaj nekoliko upoštevajo naravne, gospodarske in tudi družbene danosti podarjene posesti (Štih 2004, 22), za listino iz leta 1011 pa, da je formula smatrati za povsem in samo formalni element (Štih 2011, 23).

Cerkev na Blejskem otoku je v pisnih virih prvič omenjena kot Marijina kapela s proštom (prepositi sanctę Marię in lacu Veldes) leta 1185 (Bizjak 2006, 59–60; Höfler 2015, 49–50; prevod: Gornik 1990, 150–152; vsi z viri). S to listino je briksenski škof Henrik II. (škof 1178–1196) proštiji potrdil njena posestva, skupaj 18 kmetij, fevd, mlin v Mlinem in 4 njive v Zaki. Posestva so izvirala od briksenskih in različnih zasebnih darovalcev ter so ležala raztresena v Mlinem, Koritnem, Bodeščah, Bitnjah, Zaki in Mostah pri Žirovnici. Vse daritve so se zgodile po letu 1140, začenši z briksenskim škofom Hartmannom (Štih 2004, 22; Bizjak 2006, 59–60; Pleterski 2011, 158 in *passim*). Pred tem je proštija – pravno telo, ki obsega cerkev in posest – verjetno

### 8.1 SITE INTERPRETATION

#### 8.1.1 WRITTEN SOURCES

Until now it has been assumed that the Church of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary on Bled Island was first constructed between the second half of the 9th century and the third quarter of the 10th century. It was supposedly founded as a proprietary church of the local landlord, župan, but came into the hands of the East Frankish lords before 1004 (Pleterski 2011, 152; cf. Höfler 2016b, 212). According to Höfler, the church and the estate became the property of the bishops of Brixen soon after 1004; they allegedly rebuilt the building and stationed a provost. This retrograde interpretation is based on the fact that in 1185 the bishops of Brixen owned the right of patronage and other rights to the island church (Höfler 2015, 50; 2016b, 212). The king's charter bestowing the Bled estate to the Brixens in 1004 – the earliest written document mentioning Bled – does not list the church on the island. The charter does however list a summary of the infrastructural elements of the estate: churches (aecclesiis), buildings, mills, non-free inhabitants, various arable and non-arable plots of land, rights and sources of income. The same formula appears on a very similar document from 1011. Such formulae (*pertinentio*) were more or less formalized in similar charters of the time (Štih 2004, 22–23; Štih 2011, 14–19 with sources). Interestingly, according to Štih's analysis of the document from 1004, such formulae at least somewhat observe the natural, economic and social realities of the estate that was given (Štih 2004, 22), while when he writes about the document from 1011, produced in accordance with the same *pertinentio*, the formula should be understood as an entirely formal element (Štih 2011, 23).

The church on Bled Island was first mentioned in written sources in 1185 as the Chapel of St Mary with a provost (prepositi sanctę Marię in lacu Veldes) (Bizjak 2006, 59–60; Höfler 2015, 49–50; translation from Latin to Slovenian: Gornik 1990, 150–152; all with sources). With this document, Brixen Bishop Henry II (bishop

<footnote>* Translation Meta Osredkar.</footnote>
obsegala le Blejski otok s cerkvijo in manjšo ledino,
imenovano Vadiše, vendar je med njene dohodke treba
prištevati tudi darove božjepotnikov. Analiza v virih
izpričanih lastniških razmerij kaže, da je bila cerkev na
Blejskem otoku romarska verjetno že leta 1004 (Gor-
nik 1967, 146; Gornik 1990, 173–176; Pleterski 2011,
87–88; prim. Štih 2004, 21–22). Romarji so, kolikor
lahko sodimo po zgledu bližnje leške kapele Marijega
vnebovzetja (Bizjak 2012 z viri), ob Marijinih praznikih z
veliko gorečnostjo in darovi prihajali od blizu in od daleč.

Nenadno priljubljenost darovanja proštiji in s
tem posredno briksenskim škofom po letu 1140 lahko
razumemo kot posledico aktivne politike slednjih, da
bi dušebrižništvo posameznikov (Pleterski 2011, 158)
izkoristili za vzpostavitev proštijske posesti in širše za
nadaljnjo ozemeljsko konsolidacijo svojega blejskega
zemljiškega gospostva. Ena od poti do dosego tega cilja
bi bil lahko cerkveni gradbeni program, kakršnega
prepoznamo na primeru že omenjene kapele Marijine-
ga vnebovzetja v le nekaj km oddaljenih Lescah. Tam
je bila lesena kapela zgrajena že vsaj sredi 11. stoletja.
Potem ko je preteklo veliko časa (post multorum vero
cursum temporum), sta oglejski arhidiakon Dietmar
(tržaški škof 1121–1145) in rodinski župnik Herwig
lastnika opomnila, naj podre leseno cerkev in namesto
nje zgradi kamnito, ki jo bo mogoče posvetiti. Lastnik,
briksenski ministerial Nantwin, je to storil. Cerkev
je bila posvečena ob pomoči obeh prej omenjenih
oseb (presidio eorum), torej zelo verjetno z uradno
intervencijo pri patriarhu, in z dovoljenjem oglejskega
patriarha Ulrika I. (patriarh 1085–1121). Posvetil jo je
patriarhov vikar, škof Eberhard, kar je izpričano v listini,
izdani med letoma 1115 in 1121 (Bizjak 2012). V tem
primeru prepoznamo kar nekaj elementov, ki jih lahko
označimo za gradbeni program nadomeščanja starih
lesenih cerkva s kamnitimi: začetni impulz prihaja od
regionalne (cerkvene) uprave, gradnjo izvede lastnik, ki
hkrati predstavlja “lokalno upravo”, izvedbo nadzoruje in
z aktom posvetitve potrdi regionalna (cerkvena) uprava.

Naslednji pomemben vir govori o posvetitvi neke
cerkve na blejskem ozemlju s strani oglejskega patriarha
Pelegrina I. (1131–1161) leta 1142 (Gornik 1990, 153;
Štih 2004, 22 z viri). Ker je cerkev posvetil patriarh
sam – običajno leško cerkev je posvetil patriarhov vikar,
škof – se kot možni ponujata le župna cerkev sv. Martina
in cerkev na Blejskem otoku. Patriarhov gradbeni pro-
gram in sočasna prizadevanja za rast proštijske posesti
seveda ne izključujejo župne cerkve, precej prostora pa
dajejo domnevi, da je bila 11. decembra 1142 posvečena
cerkev na Blejskem otoku, in sicer ob odprtju iz kamna
zidane cerkve, zgrajene na mestu lesene predhodnice.
Pri tem je treba opozoriti, da je gradnja takšne cerkve
lahko trajala od nekaj let do več desetletij (prim. Štular
2013, 138; Trueman 2019). Morda se je zidava otoške
in leške cerkve začela sočasno v 2. desetletju 12. stoletja,
a dokončanje prve – morda zaradi mnogo ambicioz-

1178–1196) confirmed the estates of the provostry, com-
prising 18 farms, a fee, a mill in Mlino<fnref n="1" /> and four fields in
Zaka. These estates originated from the Brixen bishops
and from various private donors from the nearby villages
of Mlino, Koritno, Bodešče, Bitnje, Zaka and Moste near
Žirovnica. All of the listed donations took place after 1140,
starting with the Brixen Bishop Hartmann (Štih 2004, 22;
Bizjak 2006, 59–60; Pleterski 2011, 158, *passim*). Before
the 1140s, the provostry – a legal body encompassing the
church and the estate – probably only included Bled Island
with the church and a small non-arable plot of land called
Vadiše, but its income likely also included donations from
pilgrims. Namely, the analysis of property ownership as
described in the sources indicates that in 1004, the church
on Bled Island was probably already a pilgrimage site
(Gornik 1967, 146; Gornik 1990, 173–176; Pleterski 2011,
87–88; cf. Štih 2004, 21–22). Judging by the example of the
nearby Lesce Chapel of the Assumption of Mary (Bizjak
2012 with sources), the pilgrims eagerly flocked with gifts
to the church on Marian feast days from near and far.

The sudden popularity of donations to the provostry – and indirectly to the bishops of Brixen – after 1140 can be understood as a consequence of the active policy of the diocese, who sought to exploit individuals’ concerns for souls (Pleterski 2011, 158) in order to establish the estate of the provostry as well as in a wider context for further land consolidation in their Bled domain. One way to reach that goal might have been a church construction programme, such as can be identified in the case of the above-mentioned Chapel of the Assumption of Mary in Lesce, just a few kilometres away. There, a wooden chapel was built in the middle of the 11th century at the latest. After a long time had passed (post multorum vero cursum temporum), Dietmar, Archdeacon of Aquileia (bishop of Trieste 1121–1145), and Herwig, parish priest of Rodine, prompted the owner to tear down the wooden church and instead build a stone building that could be consecrated. The owner, Brixen’s ministerialis (local lord) Nantwin, did so. The church was consecrated with the assistance of the aforementioned persons (presidio eorum), which very likely meant a formal appeal to the patriarch as well as the permission of the patriarch Ulrich I of Aquileia (patriarch 1085–1121). The church rebuilt in stone was consecrated by Bishop Eberhard, the patriarch’s vicar, as evidenced in a document issued between 1115 and 1121 (Bizjak 2012). In this case, several elements can be understood as this action constituting part of a wider scheme of replacing early wooden churches with stone ones: the appeal was initiated by the regional (ecclesiastical) administration, the construction was conducted by the proprietor (who at the same time represented the local administration) and the execution was overseen and confirmed by the act of consecration by the regional (ecclesiastical) administration.

<footnote n="1">¹ *Mlino* is a derivative of a Slovenian word for *mill*.</footnote>
nejše arhitekture - se je zavleklo za več kot 2 desetletji. Trenutek posvetitve s strani patriarha pa moremo obravnavati predvsem kot političen dogodek, ki ima morda vsaj toliko kot z dokončanostjo cerkvene stavbe opraviti z začetkom ambiciozne kariere briksenskega škofa Hartmanna (škof 1141–1163).

Iz zgodovine cerkve na Blejskem otoku sledi omemba v popisu dajatev za oglejski patriarhat iz leta 1247, kjer je cerkev navedena v skupini samostanov in proštij (ecclesia Valdensis). Podobno je v desetinskem seznamu iz leta 1296 navedena kot proštija (prepositura Insule, prepositura de Veldis). Ti navedbi laže razumemo v kontekstu instalacijske listine iz leta 1309, s katero oglejski patriarh potrdi imenovanje rektorja kapele, ki so ga nastavili briksenski škofje. Iz listine je jasno razvidno, da so že prej bili spori med Oglejem in Briksnom glede jurisdikcije pri cerkvi. Höfler položaj v 13. stoletju interpretira tako, da so si enkrat med letoma 1185 in 1247 oglejski patriarhi pridobili cerkev na otoku z vsemi pravicami. Vendar je 2 stoletji kasneje, leta 1459, papeško sodišče v Rimu znova potrdilo vse pravice pri otoški cerkvi briksenskim škofom. Ob koncu srednjega veka so torej briksenski upravljali svetišče kot svojo lastniško cerkev s polno jurisdikcijo, a spor se je končal šele s sporazumom med briksensko in ljubljansko škofijo (slednja je nastopala kot naslednica oglejskih patriarhov) leta 1688 (Gornik 1990, 195–204; Höfler 2015, 50 z viri).

Na kratko se kaže pomuditi še pri zavetnici otoške cerkve. Danes je cerkev posvečena Marijinemu vnebovzetju, srednjeveško gradivo pa navaja le, da gre za cerkev sv. Marije (sancte Marie in lacu Veldes). Höfler (1988, 224–225) na podlagi zabeležke iz 16. ali 17. stoletja (tri četrt **tisočletja** po nastanku cerkve) v radovljiški matrikuli meni, da je bil prvotni patrocinij Marijino rojstvo, ki je značilen za čas okoli leta 1004 (Höfler 2016b, 212), najstarejše Marijine cerkve pa so bile posvečene Marijinemu vnebovzetju. Vendar orientacija cerkve prepričljivo priča, da je Marijino vnebovzetje prvotni patrocinij, marginalija iz časa tri četrt tisočletja po nastanku cerkve in stoletje pred rojstvom modernega zgodovinopisja pa ostaja zanimiva kurioziteta.

A zgornjo interpretacijo pisnih virov moramo razumeti v luči dejstva, da sta prošt in s tem posredno cerkev na Blejskem otoku prvič omenjena šele leta 1185, sledita pa dve skromni omembi v 13. stoletju. Zavedati se moramo, da so vse interpretacije na podlagi pisnih virov za čas pred letom 1185 zgolj to – interpretacije. Dodatno so vse navedene interpretacije pisnih virov razen Gornikovih nastale pod vplivom Šribarjevih interpretacij arheološkega gradiva, ki je predmet te analize. Povedano drugače: obstoja cerkve na otoku pred letom 1185 ne moremo dokazovati s pisnimi viri, temveč zgolj z arheološko analizo, sicer zapademo v krožno dokazovanje: sledimo interpretacijam pisnih virov, ki

The next document pertinent to Bled Island mentions the consecration of a church in the Bled area by the patriarch Pellegrinus I of Aquileia (1131–1161) in 1142 (Gornik 1990, 153; Štih 2004, 22 with the sources). Given that the church was consecrated by the patriarch himself – in contrast to the ordinary church of Lesce, which was consecrated by a bishop, the patriarch's vicar – this must have been either the parish church of St Martin in Bled or the church on Bled Island. The above conjectured patriarch's construction programme and the simultaneous efforts of the bishops of Brixen to expand the property of the Bled Island provostry do not fully rule out the parish church. However, these two arguments speak strongly for the inference that the stone church in the place of a wooden predecessor, consecrated on 11 December 1142, was the Bled Island church. In this respect it should be noted that the construction of such a church may have lasted between a few years and a few decades (cf. Štular 2013, 138; Trueman 2019). Perhaps the constructions of the church on the island and the church in Lesce began at the same time, in the second decade of the 12th century, but the completion of the former – perhaps due to having much more ambitious architecture – took place over two decades. The consecration by the patriarch could be seen primarily as a political event, related as much to the start of the ambitious career of Bishop Hartmann of Brixen (bishop 1141–1163) as to the completion of the church building.

The next mention of the church on Bled Island is in a tithe list of the Patriarchate of Aquileia from the year 1247, where the church is listed together with monasteries and other provostries (ecclesia Valdensis). Similarly, it is mentioned as a provostry in a tithe list from 1296 (prepositura Insule, prepositura de Veldis). These two references can be better understood in the context of an installation document from 1309, by which the patriarch of Aquileia confirmed the nomination of a chapel rector, installed by the bishops of Brixen. The document clearly shows that there had been earlier disputes between Aquileia and Brixen about jurisdiction over the church. Höfler's interpretation of the situation in the 13th century is that between 1185 and 1247, the Aquileian patriarchs acquired the church on the island with full rights. Nevertheless, two centuries later in 1459, the papal court in Rome reaffirmed all the rights concerning the island church for the bishops of Brixen. This means that at the end of the Middle Ages, the Brixen bishops administered the church as their proprietary church with full jurisdiction, but the dispute only ended with an agreement between the dioceses of Brixen and Ljubljana (the latter as the successor of the Aquileian patriarchs) in 1688 (Gornik 1990, 195–204; Höfler 2015, 50 with sources).

A short commentary should be made regarding the patron saint of the church. While the present-day church is dedicated to the Assumption of Mary, the medieval sources only mention it as a church of St Mary (sancte
vključujejo predhodne interpretacije arheoloških virov, ki jih na tem mestu ponovno interpretiramo.

Na drugi strani pa pisni viri dobro osvetljujejo pravni status cerkve Marijinega vnebovzetja na Blejskem otoku od konca 12. stoletja. Cerkev je ostala na ravni proštijske kapele. V procesu statusnega urejanja lastniških cerkva, ki je potekal med koncem 10. stoletja in 12. stoletjem, sodi v skupino tistih lastniških cerkva, ki jih lastnik ni mogel preoblikovati v patronatno župnijo in so zdrsnile na raven podružnice ter s tem izgubile pravico pokopavanja (Höffler 2016a, 64).

## 8.1.2 ARHEOLOŠKA INTERPRETACIJA NAJDIŠČA BLEJSKI OTOK V SREDNJEM VEKU

ZGODNJESREDNJEVEŠKO GROBIŠČE BREZ CERKVE (glej načrt na str. 392)

Stratigrafsko grobiščno skupino G1 predstavljajo grobovi v vrstah in gručah, ki večidel ležijo severno od današnje cerkvene stavbe.

Začenši od zahoda prvo vrsto predstavlja 6 grobov (št. 54, 55, 59–62). Iz urejene vrste deloma izstopata stratigrafsko mlajša grobova neodraslih oseb. Na severnem delu te vrste ostaja neizkoriščen prostor za 2 do 3 grobove. Ta prostor je bil, kolikor je mogoče presoditi na podlagi dokumentacije (sl. 8.1), sicer primeren za pokopavanje.

Druga vrsta je najštevilčnejša. Ostanki 19 grobov (št. 3–17, 25, 34, 56, 57) z najmanj 24 pokojniki so razporejeni v nepravilni vrsti. Ta se na sredini zalomi, vendar je tendenca ustvarjanje vrste ob prilagajanju terenu jasna. Značilni za to vrsto so prekopi, ki so številčnejši kot v sosednjih vrstah. Medsebojna lega jasno kaže, da ob kasnejših pokopih pogrebci niso poznali natančne lega predhodnih grobov. To je neposredni arheološki dokaz, da grobovi niso bili trajno označeni.

V 3. vrsto lahko zanesljivo umestimo le 3 grobove (št. 49–51), verjetno pa sem sodita še ostanka 2 grobov (št. 44, 53). Na severni strani je vrsta, kot ostale, omejena s skalnim hrbtom, na južni pa ni bila v celoti izkopana. Ob upoštevanju lokacije groba 44, ki dokazuje, do kod grobovi te vrste zanesljivo še segajo, in gostote pokopavanja v tej vrsti lahko na neraziskani površini domnevamo še najmanj 1 grob (morda grob št. 48, ki risarsko ni bil dokumentiran).

Obstoj 4. in 5. vrste, kot ju je določil Šribar (1972, 390–391), je vprašljiv. Pokopavanju v vrstah zanesljivo niso sledili grobovi okoli ognjišča. Tako bi v morebitno 4. vrsto sodili 4 grobovi (št. 35–37, 45) z neizkoriščenim prostorom v osrednjem delu. V morebitno 5. vrsto bi lahko razvrstili 6 grobov (št. 1, 20, 22, 29, 30, 38). Tudi tu se praznine izmenjujejo z območji velike gostote pokopavanja v nekakšnem vzorcu šahovnice, česar v prvih

*Marie in lacu Veldes)*. Based on a note in the margins written in the 16th or 17th century in the *Matricula of Radovljica*, Höfler (1988, 224–225) suggests that the church was originally dedicated to the Nativity of Mary, as was typical of the time around 1004 (Höfler 2016b, 212), while the earliest churches of St Mary were dedicated to the Assumption. However, the orientation of the church convincingly shows that its original dedication was to the Assumption of Mary, while the note in the margins, dated three quarters of a millennium after the construction of the church and a century before the birth of modern historiography, should remain an interesting curiosity.

The above interpretation of written sources must be understood in the light of the fact that the provost and with him indirectly the church on Bled Island were first mentioned only in 1185, which was followed by two modest notes in the 13th century. It is important to acknowledge that before 1185, all inferences based on written sources are no more than that: inferences. Furthermore, all the above-mentioned interpretations of written sources, except those by Gornik, were influenced by Šribar's interpretations of the same archaeological data that form the subject of this analysis. In other words, before 1185, the existence of the church on the island cannot be proven by written sources; only by archaeological analysis. Otherwise, circular reasoning ensues: interpretations of written sources incorporating earlier interpretations of archaeological data influence the archaeological interpretation of the same archaeological data.

In contrast, written sources provide a good illustration of the legal status of the Church of the Assumption on Bled Island since the late 12th century. The church never rose above the level of a provostry chapel. In the process of the regulation of proprietary churches, which took place between the end of the 10th century and the 12th century, it was among those proprietary churches whose owners were unable to transform them into benefices and it fell to the level of a filial church, hence losing the right of interment (Höffler 2016a, 64).

## 8.1.2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION OF THE BLED ISLAND SITE IN THE MIDDLE AGES

EARLY MEDIEVAL CEMETERY WITHOUT A CHURCH (see Cemetery plan on p. 392)

The Early Medieval cemetery without a church is represented by the stratigraphic cemetery group G1. This group is formed by graves in rows and clusters, mostly lying north of the present-day church building. Starting from the west, the first row contains six graves (54, 55, 59–62). Two stratigraphically later graves of non-adult persons partly stand out from the orderly row. To the
<figure><img src="image_158.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 8.1: Blejski otok, dokumentarna fotografija izkopavanja severno od sedanje cerkvene stavbe (severozahodni vogal je na fotografiji zgoraj levo); omenjeni neizkoriščen prostor za pokopavanje je na fotografiji zgoraj desno (vir: arhiv NMS OA negativ št. 8541). Fig. 8.1: Bled Island, view of the excavation in progress north of the present-day church building (north-western corner is top left); the unused potential cemetery area mentioned in text is top right (source: NMS archive OA film No. 8541).</figcaption></figure>

3 vrstah ni. Ključni element, ki govori proti obstoju 4. in 5. vrste, pa je medsebojno prekrivanje: grobovi 4. vrste z nogami sekajo grobove 5. vrste. Če bi šlo za dve vrsti, bi bila 4. vrsta v celoti mlajša od 5.

Zato pa so opazne gruče, morda grobiščne parcele (sl. 7.3). Najmanj 13 pokojnikov je magnetenih ob sočas-
nem ognjišču v južni gruči (grobovi št. 18, 19, 28, 39,
40–43, 46, 63). Druga gruča, šteto od juga proti severu,
je sestavljena iz dveh dokumentiranih grobov (št. 20, 38)
in skromnega ostanka še 1 predhodnega pokopa (št. 20).
Opazna je velika razlika (17°) v orientaciji med starejšim
in mlajšim grobom. V 3. gruči je bilo pokopanih najmanj
5 pokojnikov (grobovi št. 35–37, 45). Tudi v tem primeru
je v enem primeru razlika v orientaciji med starejšim in
mlajšim pokopom velika (19°). V najsevernejši gruči je
8 grobov (št. 21–23, 27, 29–31, 33), ki izkazujejo vsaj
4-kratno pokopavanje na istem mestu.

Severno od naštetih gruč ležita še 2 posamezna
grobova (št. 1, 24), vsak z najmanj 2 zaporednima
pokopoma.

V ta sklop sodi tudi stratigrafska grobiščna skupi-
na G2, gruča 11 grobov (št. 111–117, 121–124) 8,1 m
vzhodno od G1. V zgodnjem srednjem veku je ta gruča
ležala na majhni terasi na vzhodnem pobočju približno
3 višinske metre nižje od ravninice z grobovi skupine

north of this row is some unused space, large enough for
two or three graves. As far as it can be said on the basis
of the documentation (Fig. 8.1), the unused space was
suitable for interment.

The second row contains the largest number of graves. The remains of 19 graves (3–17, 25, 34, 56, 57) with at least 24 deceased are arranged in an irregular row. Whereas the row is broken in the middle, the tendency to form a row while adjusting to the configuration of the terrain is clear. Typical for this row are reburials, which are more numerous than in the neighbouring rows. The positions of the graves with respect to each other clearly show that the diggers of the later graves did not know the exact locations of the earlier graves. This is direct archaeological proof that the graves were not permanently marked.

Although only three graves (49–51) can be attrib-
uted to the third row with certainty, it probably contained
the remains of two more graves (44, 53). To the north,
this row is, like the other rows, limited by a rock ridge,
while to the south it was not fully excavated due to the
later pavement. Taking into account the density of burials
in the row and the location of Grave 44, which provides
evidence of how far the graves of this row reach, at least
one more grave may be presumed in the unexplored area
(perhaps the undrawn Grave 48).
<figure><img src="image_159.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 8.2: Blejski otok, lega grobiščnih skupin G1 (modro) in G2 (rdeče) prikazana na rekonstruirani geomorfologiji otoka pred srednjeveškimi posegi (avtor B. Štular).</figcaption></figure>

<caption>Fig. 8.2: Bled Island, location of cemetery groups G1 (blue) and G2 (red) and reconstructed geomorphology of the island before medieval building processes (by B. Štular).</caption>

G1 (sl. 8.2). Grobovi skupine G2 so bili vkopani v ozko kotanjo (prim. Šribar 1972, 390), ki je pogojevala tudi smer pokopa (prim. pogl. 6.2.2.4). Ti grobovi so stratigrafsko starejši od cerkvenih stavb in torej, vsaj okvirno, sočasni zgoraj opisanim. Sočasnost potrjuje tudi prstan iz zasutja groba (št. 111; t. 3: 13). Zdi se, da gre za gručo, podobno zgornjim, ki pa je bila zaradi geomorfologije nekoliko odmaknjena.

Nekoliko vstran južno od omenjene terase je ležal osamljen verjetno najpomembnejši grob na tem grobišču (št. 72). Postavljen je bil na prostor, ki je imel za pogrebce poseben pomen, tik ob zelenem klesanem kamnu (glej pogl. 4.7).

Podobno lego izoliranega groba na robu sočasnega grobišča poznamo na dveh bližnjih grobiščih iz 9. in 10. stoletja (Žale pri Zasipu – moški grob 55; Pleterski 2013a, 39, Fig. 2.3.4 – in Dlesc pri Bodeščah – kenotaf grob 14; Pleterski 2013a, 51, Fig. 2.3.16) ter bolj izrazito

The existence of the fourth and fifth rows identified by Šribar (1972, 390–391) is questionable. The graves around the fireplace were certainly not arranged in rows. The potential fourth row may have contained four graves (35–37, 45) with some unused space in the centre. Six graves (1, 20, 22, 29, 30, 38) could have been placed in the potential fifth row. Here, gaps also alternate with areas of high burial density in a sort of a chessboard pattern, which does not occur in the first three rows. The key argument against the existence of the fourth and fifth rows is overlapping: the legs of the graves of the fourth row intersect the graves of the fifth row. If there were indeed two rows, the entire fourth row would be later than the fifth.

Instead, clusters of graves, perhaps cemetery plots, can be identified (Fig. 7.3). At least 13 deceased were packed near the contemporary fireplace in the southern cluster (Graves 18, 19, 28, 39, 40–43, 46, 63). The second cluster from the south is comprised of two recorded graves (20, 38) and a meagre remainder of another earlier burial (20). There is a big difference (17°) in the orientations of the earlier and the later graves. The third cluster contained at least five deceased (35–37, 45). In one case, the difference in orientation between an earlier and a later grave is again very prominent (19°). There are eight graves (21–23, 27, 29–31, 33) in the northernmost cluster and they contain a case of at least four subsequent burials in the same spot.

To the north of the above-listed clusters are two individual graves (1, 24), each with at least two subsequent burials. The stratigraphic cemetery group G2 belongs here as well: a cluster of 11 graves (111–117, 121–124) 8.1 m east of G1. In the Early Middle Ages, this cluster lay on a small terrace on the eastern slope, about 3 m below the small flat area with the graves of the G1 group (Fig. 8.2). The graves of the G2 group were dug into a narrow hollow (cf. Šribar 1972, 390), which conditioned the orientation of the burial (cf. Chapter 6.2.2.4). These graves are stratigraphically earlier than the church buildings and therefore at least roughly contemporary to the above-described burials. This is further evidenced by a finger ring from the fill of Grave 111 (Pl. 3: 13). This seems to have been a cluster similar to the above-described clusters and isolated only due to the geomorphological situation.

Slightly further south from the terrace lay an isolated grave, probably the most important grave of the site (72). It was located in the spot that had special significance for the mourners, immediately next to the large green stone (see Chapter 4.7).

Similar isolated graves at the edge of contemporary cemeteries are known in two nearby cemeteries from the 9th and 10th centuries (Žale near Zasip – male Grave 55; Pleterski 2013a, 39, Fig. 2.3.4 – and Dlesc near Bodešče – Grave 14 (cenotaph); Pleterski 2013a, 51, Fig. 2.3.16) and more prominently in the cemetery of Mali Grad in Kamnik from the end of the 10th and the beginning of the 11th century (Grave 23; Štular 2007, 28, Fig. 4).
na grobišču iz konca 10. in začetka 11. stoletja Mali grad v Kamniku (grob 23; Štular 2007, 28, sl. 4).

Podobno velja za otroški grob z ženskim nakitom (št. 83). Grob leži na eni izmed orientacijskih osi grobišča G1 (glej pogl. 6.2.3) in je stratigrafsko pod grobovi skupine G4. Od groba je bilo ohranjeno zgolj lobanjsko dno, obročka sta – domnevno *in situ* – ležala levo in desno ob ostanku lobanje. Primerljiva grobišča imajo pogosto ločen otroški del, na primer na Malem gradu (Sagadin 2001; Štular 2007) ter na grobiščih Žale pri Zasipu (Pleterski 2014, 250–256 in slika 3.3.6.17 ter tam navedena literatura) in Dlesc pri Bodeščah (Pleterski 2014, 259–261 in slika 3.3.6.31 ter tam navedena literatura).

Vendar je obravnavani grob (št. 83) osamljen in se zato ne zdi edini ostanek otroškega dela pokopališča. Je pa zelo podoben otroškemu grobu z ženskim nakitom (št. 41) z grobišča Dlesc pri Bodeščah, ki je bil pokopan v 1. pokolenju, kasnejši grobovi pa se mu izogibajo (Pleterski 2014, 259). Tudi grob 83 z Blejskega otoka je 3,7 m oddaljen od najbližjega groba grobiščne skupine G1 in bi bil glede na pridatke lahko sočasen 1. pokolenju. Najprepričljivejša se torej zdi razlaga, da je grob 83 izoliran grob skupine G1, morda enega izmed grobov 1. pokolenja. V tem primeru bi ležal na podaljšku osi med vodnim izvirom in ognjiščem, ki je narekovala smer in lego večine grobov 1. in 2. pokolenja (sl. 7.3).

Zgodnjesrednjeveško grobišče torej predstavljajo grobovi v vrstah in gručah na največjem razmeroma ravnem arealu na Blejskem otoku ter na nekoliko nižji terasi. Dva grobova sta ležala ločeno od osrednjega prostora grobišča.

Na tem grobišču so bile v neoznačenih grobovih pokopane 4 generacije (glej pogl. 7.2.1), skupaj najmanj 71 pokojnikov. Homogena spolna in starostna struktura pokojnikov dokazuje, da je na tem grobišču ena skupnost pokopavala vse ali vsaj večino svojih pokojnih. Ta skupnost torej poleg nedoraslih otrok ni nikoli štela več kot približno 20 ljudi.

Že v času 2. pokolenja se vzpostavi sistem pokopavanja v vrstah po celotnem grobišču, ki je obveljal skoraj do konca. Dodatno so nekatere grobove pogrebci skrbno orientirali v smeri kardinalnega vzhoda, s čimer so posredno izkazali razmeroma dobro astronomsko znanje (glej pogl. 6.2.2.1). Pomena natančnega orientiranja grobov ne poznamo, a zavestno orientiranje grobov je na tem grobišču nedvoumno dokazano.

Sočasno, torej v času pokopavanja 2., 3. in 4. pokolenja, je eno izmed torišč pogrebnih običajev postalo ognjišče v osrednjem delu grobišča, ki je bilo kurjeno vsaj 4-krat v času pogreba. To dokazujejo drobci oglja, ki se na celotnem grobišču pojavijo le v 4 grobovih (št. 18, 22, 46, 63), najdlje 2,95 m od omenjenega ognjišča. Medsebojna bližina ognjišča in grobov z drobci oglja v zasutju na eni strani ter na drugi strani osrednja lega ognjišča, ki se mu grobovi izogibajo, ne puščajo mnogo možnosti za

An analogous situation applies to Grave 83, a child's grave containing female jewellery. This grave is positioned on one of the orientation axes of the G1 cemetery (see Chapter 6.2.3) and is stratigraphically below the graves of the G4 group. Only the cranial base survived and the rings lay (presumably *in situ*) left and right of the remains of the skull. Comparable cemeteries often included a separate area for children, for example Mali Grad (Sagadin 2001; Štular 2007), Žale near Zasip (Pleterski 2014, 250–256 and Figure 3.3.6.17, and the literature cited therein) and Dlesc near Bodešče (Pleterski 2014, 259–261 and Figure 3.3.6.31, and the literature cited therein).

However, Grave 83 is isolated and does not seem to be the sole remainder of the children's part of the cemetery. Nevertheless, it is very similar to the grave of a child with female jewellery (Grave 41) from the Dlesc cemetery near Bodešče, who was buried in the first generation and was avoided by later graves (Pleterski 2014, 259). Grave 83 from Bled Island, too, is 3.7 m from the closest grave of the G1 cemetery group and, judging by its grave goods, it could be contemporary to the first generation. The most convincing explanation is therefore that Grave 83 is an isolated grave of the G1 group, perhaps being one of the first generation graves. In this case, it was positioned on the extension of the axis between the spring and the fireplace, which dictated the directions and positions of most of the graves of the first and second generations (Fig. 7.3).

The Early Medieval cemetery therefore contains graves in rows and clusters in the largest relatively flat area on Bled Island and on a slightly lower terrace. Two graves are separated from the central area of the cemetery. Four generations (see Chapter 7.2.1) were buried in unmarked graves in this cemetery, altogether at least 71 deceased. The homogeneous gender and age structure of the deceased offers evidence that in this cemetery, a single community buried all (or most) of their deceased. Children excluded, this community never amounted to more than approximately 20 people.

Already in the second generation, a system of interring in rows had been established across the entire cemetery and survived almost until the end. In addition, some graves were carefully oriented towards true east, which indirectly demonstrates a certain level of astronomical knowledge (see Chapter 6.2.2.1). While the significance of the precise orientation is not known, the fact that in this cemetery it was performed consciously is proven beyond doubt.

Contemporarily (i.e. in the time of the burials of the second, third and fourth generations), the fireplace in the central part of the cemetery became one of the focal points of funerary rites and it was lit at least four times during funerals. This is evidenced by charcoal fragments that appear in only four graves (18, 22, 46, 63) of the entire cemetery, no further than 2.95 m from the fireplace. The vicinity between the fireplace and the graves with charcoal fragments in their fills on the one hand and the position
<figure><img src="image_160.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 8.3: Blejski otok, rezultat statistične analize hladnih (modro), nevtralnih (rumeno) in vročih (rdeče) mest grobiščne skupine G1 (v odstotkih je izražen interval zaupanja; metoda v Achino idr. 2019) dokazuje, da je bila največja gostota pokopavanja tik ob ognjišču (zeleno) (avtor B. Štular).</figcaption></figure>

<caption>Fig. 8.3: Bled Island, hotspot analysis (red – hot, yellow – neutral, blue – cold) of cemetery group G1 burial density (percentage referes to the confidence level; method after Achino et al. 2019) confirms that interment was most intensive around the fireplace (green) (by B. Štular).</caption>

drugačno interpretacijo. Debelina prežgane zemlje od 6 do 15 cm (glej pogl. 1.4) priča o visokih temperaturah in posledično o veliki grmadi. Zaradi majhnosti grobišča in metode izkopavanj žal nimamo podatkov o tem, ali je bilo ognjišče kurjeno ob vsakem pogrebu ali zgolj ob pokopih v neposredni bližini ognjišča. Da je bila lokacija v bližini ognjišča prestižna dokazuje prostorska analiza vročih in hladnih mest (za metodo glej Achino idr. 2019), ki na tem mestu kaže največjo gostoto pokopov (sl. 8.3). Dodaten argument je sekundarni pokop lobanjskih in dolgih kosti v neposredni bližini (grob 39). Lega teh kosti dokazuje, da so bile disartikulirane kosti zložene v pravokotni recipient iz organske snovi, najverjetneje zaboj. Ponovni pokop zloženih dolgih in lobanjskih kosti spominja na visokosrednjeveške kostnice in na zgodnjesrednjeveških grobiščih ni običajen.

Zadnji pokop na tem grobišču je bil pokop ženske v 1. desetletju 11. stoletja (št. 4). Grob ima isto orientacijo kot cerkvena stavba, ki je v času tega pokopa že stala oziroma je bila vsaj njena lega že označena. Pokop je biritualen in združuje predkrščanski (pridatek) in krščanski (usmeritev glede na cerkveno stavbo) element.

of the fireplace avoided by the graves on the other does not leave many options available for an alternative interpretation. The thickness of the burnt soil, being between 6 and 15 cm (see Chapter 1.4), testifies to high temperatures and a large fire. Due to the small size of the cemetery and the excavation method, there are unfortunately no data on whether a fire was lit during every funeral or only during funerals in the immediate vicinity of the fireplace. Locations in the vicinity of the fireplace were considered prestigious, as proven by a spatial analysis of hot and cold spots (for the method, see Achino et al. 2019), indicating the highest density of burials in this spot (Fig. 8.3). An additional argument is a secondary burial of cranial and long bones in the immediate vicinity (Grave 39). The position of the bones proves that disarticulated bones were placed in a rectangular recipient of organic matter, probably a box. The secondary burial of long and cranial bones is reminiscent of High Medieval ossuaries and was uncommon in Early Medieval cemeteries.

The last burial in this cemetery was the burial of a woman in the first decade of the 11th century (Grave 4). The orientation of the grave matches the orientation of the church building, which was already present at the time of this burial, or at least its position was already marked.
Zgodnjesrednjeveško grobišče na Blejskem otoku je bilo torej v uporabi v 10. stoletju in v 1. desetletju 11. stoletja. V tem času se je pogrebni običaj spremenil trikrat:

1. Prvo pokolenje pokojnikov so pokopali v prvih treh desetletjih 10. stoletja v skladu z orientacijsko osjo, torej po ritualu, ki ga poznamo na primerljivih grobiščih od 8. do konca 10. stoletja.

2. Pri večini ostalih grobov starih pravil umeščanja v prostor niso več upoštevali, temveč so izkoristili ves razpoložljivi prostor. Pri tem so skušali slediti urejanju grobnih vrst ali gruč, nekatere izmed grobov so skrbno orientirali proti kardinalnemu vzhodu.

3. Zadnji grob na tem grobišču je bil izkopan v 1. desetletju 11. stoletja in že kaže elemente krščanskega kanona s tem, da je usmerjen glede na cerkveno stavbo.

Celotno grobišče je torej triritualno, pri čemer si spremembe v pogrebnem obredu sledijo kronološko in, kot kaže, niso sočasne.

## PREDROMANSKI CERKVI IN ČUVARJI VHODA

Novo stratigrafsko fazo označuje gradnja prve lesene cerkve v predromanskem slogu, ki so jo posvetili Mariji Vnebovzeti. Notranjost s površino ladje 35,9 m² je bila ravno dovolj velika, da bi lahko sprejela člane majhne skupnosti, kakršna je pokopavala na starejšem grobišču. A to je lahko zgolj naključje, saj ne vemo, katera skupnost je uporabljala grobišče ter kdo in za koga je zgradil cerkvico. Vemo pa, da so bili pri postavljanju te cerkve pozorni na številne podrobnosti. Cerkev so usmerili natančno v smeri, v kateri je takrat vzhajalo sonce na koledarski praznik zavetnice cerkve. Usmeritev je morda služila učinku, da med bogoslužjem na praznik cerkvene zavetnice sonce posveti na oltar, kar bi v obdobju skromne umetne razsvetljave naredilo močan vtis na udeležence bogoslužja. Stavbo so načrtovali v skladu s tedanjimi arhitekturnimi pravili tako, da naj bi notranjost izražala razmerje 1 : √2. To namero so zaradi težavnega terena opustili, saj so natančen prostor cerkve izbrali tako, da se je najsvetejši del cerkve – apsidalni prostor z oltarjem – naslanjal na najpomembnejši grob starejšega grobišča. To se nam morda dandanes zdi nenavadno ali celo uničevalno, a v zavesti srednjeveških ljudi je šlo za nekaj običajnega. V pisnih virih je izpričano prepričanje, da kosti pomembnega človeka prinašajo dodatno zaščito. Na Irskem, denimo, poznamo več primerov, ko je bila srednjeveška cerkev zgrajena čez osrednji grob starejšega grobišča (Fry 1999, 67–68). Na prvi pogled skromna cerkev je imela močno simbolno vlogo. Združila je aspekt demonstracije moči nove vere – navidezna sposobnost nadzorovanja sončne svetlobe – ter tudi opiranja na predkrščansko moč – črpanje zaščite kosti pomembnega človeka. Dodaten element kontinuitete ob postavitvi 1. cerkve je omenjeni grob 4.

This was a mixed-rite burial, combining a pre-Christian (a grave goods item) and a Christian (orientation in accordance with the church building) element.

The Early Medieval cemetery on Bled Island was therefore used in the 10th century and in the first decade of the 11th century. During this time, the funerary ritual changed three times:

1. The first generation of the deceased were buried in the first two decades of the 10th century in accordance with the orientation axis, i.e. following the rite known from comparable cemeteries from between the 8th and the end of the 10th centuries.

2. The graves of the second through the fourth generations no longer observed that order of placement and all available space was used. Some effort was spent to arrange the graves in rows or clusters and some of the graves were carefully oriented towards true east.

3. The last grave in this cemetery was dug in the first decade of the 11th century and already manifested elements of the Christian canon by being aligned with the church building.

The entire cemetery is therefore a mixed-rite cemetery with three different rites. Changes in burial rituals follow each other chronologically and do not seem to overlap in time.

## THE PRE-ROMANESQUE CHURCHES AND THE GUARDIANS OF THE ENTRANCE

A new stratigraphic phase was marked by the construction of the first wooden church in the pre-Romanesque style, dedicated to St Mary of the Assumption. The interior with a nave area of 35.9 m² was just large enough to accommodate the members of a small community, such as the one that used the earlier cemetery. Nevertheless, this might be a coincidence, for it is not known which community used the cemetery and who built the church and for whom. We do know, however, that many details were considered in the construction of this church. The church was oriented precisely in the direction of the sunrise on the calendar day of the patron saint of the church. The orientation possibly served a purpose: during the service on the day of the patron saint, the sun lit the altar, which in an era of modest artificial lighting made a strong impression on the participants. The building was planned in accordance with contemporary architectural guidelines, so that the interior reflected the 1 : √2 ratio. This intent was abandoned due to the difficult terrain and the precise position of the church was selected so that the most sacred part of the church – the apsidal area with the altar – leaned on the most important grave of the earlier cemetery. What might seem unusual or even destructive through today's eyes, was normal to medieval people. In written sources, there is evidence for the belief
Cerkvico je bilo kmalu, morda po nekaj desetletjih, treba nadomestiti. Zgradili so le malo večjo stavbo s skupno površino 52,3 m². Notranjost je bila poslikana s freskami. Stavba je bila simetrična in razmerje stranic ladje se približuje za predromanski slog značilnemu razmerju √3 : 2. Na zahodni strani je bila ladja naknadno podaljšana z ožjim prostorom s tlorisom v obliki nepravilnega trapeza.

V ta čas sodita grobova, vkopana tik ob vsakokratni predromanski cerkvi, grob 71 ob prvi in grob 67 ob drugi. Analiza tlorisa in pisne dokumentacije je pokazala, da je bil najprej izkopan in uporabljen grob 71; grob je bil naknadno izpraznjen in zasut, o pokopu pričajo le izredno majhni fragmenti človeških kosti. Sledil je izkop grobne jame (št. 67) približno pol m južneje, pri čemer je bil s tem izkopom v severnem delu presekan tedaj že izpraznjen in zasut grob 71. To sta edina grobova, v zasutju katerih je bil dokumentiran pesek. Pokojnik v grobu 67 je edini na celotnem grobišču pokopan zrokama na prsih, torej sklenjenima v molitvi. Pomenljiva je predvsem lega obeh grobov: starejši (71) je ležal tik zunaj starejše in mlajši tik zunaj mlajše predromanske cerkve, oba na najverjetnejšem mestu vsakokratnega vhoda (sl. 4.6; drugače Šribar 1972, 391).

Čez oba je bil položen estrih, ki je v spodnjem delu vseboval veliko odlomkov lončenine in drobcev živalskih kosti (glej pogl. 4.3). To pomeni, da je estrih neposredno prekril ostanke dejavnosti, ki je potekala tik po zasutju groba 67 ali kmalu po njem in je vključevala manipuliranje s hrano. Takšne dejavnosti so izpričane v srednjeveških pisnih virih (Fry 1999, 93–94) in jih opisujemo s pojmom pogrebna pojedina (za izraz glej Makarovič 1995, 152).

Grobova se torej od vseh ostalih na Blejskem otoku ločujeta po zasutju (pesek), drži rok, ostankih pogrebne pojedine in legi pod pragom.

Vzorec ponavlja še grob 118 iz 3. stratigrafske faze: vklesan v živo skalo leži tik pred vhodnim pragom v romansko cerkev, izkazuje sledove večkratnega pokopavanja in je prekrit s tlakom, vezanim z malto (prim. Šribar 1966a, 173–174, 228). Že Šribar (1966, 231) ugotavlja, da je ta grob nujno povezan s funkcionalnostjo jugozahodnega vhoda v cerkev.

Našteti grobovi (št. 67, 71 in 118) imajo tako naslednje značilne elemente:

- grob ni del sočasnega grobišča (vezan je izključno in neposredno na sočasno cerkveno stavbo),

- lega tik pred vhodom,

- elementi obrednih dejanj v procesu prekrivanja groba (lončenina in živalske kosti),

- lega groba je označena (z edino zaplato estriha zunaj cerkvene stavbe) in

- večkratna manipulacija z ostanki trupla (izkop trupla).

that the bones of an important person provided protection. In Ireland, for instance, there are several examples of medieval churches built above the central graves of earlier cemeteries (Fry 1999, 67–68). The seemingly modest church had a powerful symbolic role. It combined a demonstration of the power of the new religion (the apparent ability to control the sunlight) with a reliance on the pre-Christian power (drawing protection from the bones of an important person). An additional element of continuity in the construction of the first church is the above-mentioned Grave 4.

Soon, perhaps after only a few decades, the little church had to be replaced. A slightly larger building with an area of 52.3 m² was constructed. The interior was painted with frescoes. The building was symmetrical and the ratio of the sides of the nave comes close to a ratio of √3 : 2, typical of the pre-Romanesque style. On the western side, the nave was subsequently prolonged by adding a narrow room in the shape of an irregular trapezium.

Dated to the same time are two graves dug just next to the two pre-Romanesque churches: Grave 71 next to the first church and Grave 67 next to the second. Analysis of floor plans and written sources demonstrates that Grave 71 was dug and used first; it was later exhumed and filled, the only evidence of burial being extremely tiny fragments of human bones. There followed the digging of the pit for Grave 67 about half a metre to the south, which caused a cut into the northern part of the then already emptied and filled Grave 71. These two graves are the only ones with sand recorded in their fills. The deceased in Grave 67 was the only one in the entire cemetery buried with hands on chest, i.e. clasped in prayer. The position of the two graves is particularly telling: the earlier (71) lay immediately outside the earlier church, the latter immediately outside the later pre-Romanesque church, while both were in the most likely position for their respective entrances (Fig. 4.6; also Šribar 1972, 391). Both were covered by mortar pavement, which contained in its lower part many fragments of pottery and animal bones (see Chapter 4.3). This means that the pavement directly covered the remains of an activity that happened just after the filling of Grave 67 or soon after and included food manipulation. There is evidence for such activities in medieval written sources (Fry 1999, 93–94), the term used being funerary feast (for the expression, see Makarovič 1995, 152).

These two graves differ from all others on Bled Island by the sand in the grave fill, the position of the hands, the remains of a funerary feast and the position under the threshold.

The same pattern is repeated by Grave 118 from stratigraphic Phase 3: it is carved into the bedrock under the threshold of the Romanesque church, it exhibits the traces of several subsequent burials and it is covered by mortar pavement (cf. Šribar 1966a, 173–174, 228). Šribar (1966, 231) concluded that this grave had to be related
Pokope odraslih oseb na vidnem mestu tik pred
cerkvenim vhodom omenjata irska srednjeveška pisna
vira, prvi o življenju sv. Senána iz Scatteryja in drugi o
pokopu kraljevega sina Magnusa leta 1244.<fnref n="1" /> Slednji ima
več za nas zanimivih elementov:

- dejstvo, da so kroniki posebej omenili lego *zunaj cerkvenega praga*, je dokaz, da je imela ta lega poseben pomen;

- v času pokopa je bila cerkev oskrunjena, kar je bil
morda vzrok, da grob ni bil postavljen v cerkev;

- pokojni je umrl v napadu na dotično cerkev, s katero je bil torej neposredno povezan.

Podobne primere poznamo tudi iz merovinške Ev-
rope (Effros 2003, 212) in zgodnjesrednjeveške Anglije
(Kjølbye-Biddle 1975, 101).<fnref n="2" /> Na podlagi analize virov je
opisane pokope mogoče razumeti kot pokope posebnega
pomena, ki imajo tudi *obrambno* vlogo: pogrebci so
morda verjeli, da bo tak grob odganjal nasprotnike ali
cerkvi zagotovil določeno zaščito (Fry 1999, 170–171).

Na podlagi te primerjave pokope tik pred vsa-
kokratnim vhodom v cerkev na Blejskem otoku razu-
memo kot pokope posebnega pomena. Starejša sta po
prestižu enakovredna pokopom znotraj cerkve oziroma
nadomeščata za ta čas običajnejše pokope v cerkvi (glej
zgoraj). Sodeč po irski analogiji, bi lahko sklepali, da
cerkev na Blejskem otoku ni bila (pravilno?) posveče-
na, kot ni bila posvečena leška lesena cerkev sv. Marije
Vnebovzete še sredi 12. stoletja (glej pogl. 8.1).

V vsakem primeru se zdi zelo verjetno, da so po-
grebci verjeli, da bodo ti pokopi vsakokratni cerkvi zago-
tovili določeno zaščito. Grobovi so bili jasno označeni in
tudi večkrat odprti, kar dokazuje dolgotrajno zavedanje
o pomenu teh grobov. Vendar je bila, drugače kot v
irskih primerih, lega pomembnejša od pokojnika. Ob
vsakem premiku cerkvenega vhoda je nastal nov grob
z istimi lastnostmi, tretji vsaj stoletje za prvim. Šlo je
torej za dolgotrajno tradicijo in ne za enkratno dejanje
ob izjemnem dogodku.

Interpretacijo grobov tik pred vhodom v cerkev, kot
je podana zgoraj, označujemo z izrazom čuvar vhoda.

CERKVENI GROBOVI V ROMANSKI CERKVI

Okvirno med letoma 1080 in 1140, morda zidana
v 3. in 4. desetletju 12. stoletja, je bila namesto lesene
postavljena kamnita cerkev v romanskem arhitekturnem
slogu, ki jo tu imenujemo romanska cerkev faze 3. Naj-
bolj neposredno povezan z njo je grob 120 v sredinski osi
apside tik vzhodno od oltarja. V zgodnjem in visokem
srednjem veku je bilo pokopavanje v cerkvi dovoljeno
le za škofe, menihe, izjemne župnike ter izjemno po-
božne laike. V praksi so med slednje sodili predvsem

to the functionality of the south-western entrance to the
church.

The listed graves (67, 71, 118) thus share the follow-
ing specific elements:

- the grave is not part of the contemporary cemetery, in-
stead being directly related only to the contemporary
church building;

- position just in front of the entrance;

- elements of ritual actions in the process of filling the grave (pottery and animal bones);

- the position of the grave is marked, the only patch of mor-
tar pavement being outside the church building; and

- multiple manipulations with the remains of the body
(exhumation of the body).

Burials of adults in prominent places in front of
church entrances are mentioned by two Irish medieval
written sources, the first on the life of St Senán of Scattery
and the second on the burial of the king's son Magnus
in 1244.<fnref n="2" /> The latter contains several elements that are
interesting in our case:

- the fact that the chronicles especially mentioned the
position outside the church threshold proves that
this position held special significance;

- at the time of the burial the church had been desecrated,
which might be the reason for why the grave was not
placed inside the church;

- the deceased died during an attack on the church and
therefore had a direct connection with it.

Similar burials are known from Merovingian Europe
(Effros 2003, 212) and Early Medieval England (Kjølbye-
Biddle 1975, 101).<fnref n="3" /> Based on the analysis of sources, the
above-described burials can be understood as burials of
special significance, which also had a *defensive* role: the
mourners might have believed that such a grave would
repel enemies or provide some protection to the church
(Fry 1999, 170–171).

On the basis of these analogies, the burials near the
entrances to the church on Bled Island can be understood
as burials with special meaning. The earlier two graves
had no less prestigious positions as the burials inside the
church and they might have been replacements for what
at the time would have been more common burials inside
the church (see above). Judging by the Irish analogy, it
could be assumed that the church on Bled Island was not
(correctly?) consecrated, just like the wooden church of
St Mary of the Assumption in Lesce was not (correctly?)
consecrated as late as the middle of the 12th century (see
Chapter 8.1).

In any case, it seems very likely that the church-goers
believed that these burials would provide additional
protection to the church. The graves were clearly marked

<footnote n="1">¹ Vire navaja Fry 1999, 170–171.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Za podatek se zahvaljujem J. Rihterju.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Sources listed by Fry 1999, 170–171</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ The author would like to thank J. Rihter for the information</footnote>
ustanovitelji cerkve. Pokopi v cerkvi so bili omejeni na prostor pred korom, portikus in okoli oltarja (Fry 1999, 169–170; Hartmann 2003, 137–138; Schlokmann 2003, 204; Krznar 2012, 26), kot naroča Theodolfus iz Orleansa (+ 818) v 9. stoletju:

*Prohibendum etiam secundum maiorum instituta, ut in ecclesia nullatenus sepeliantur, sed in atrio aut in porticu aut exedra ecclesiae. Infra ecclesiam vero autprope altare, ubi corpus domini et sanguis conficitur, nullatenus habeat licentiam sepeliendi.<fnref n="3" />*

Theodolfusovo besedilo je v praksi veljalo še vsaj v začetku 11. stoletja, ko ga je v svoje delo vključil Burchard iz Wormsa (Hartmann 2002, 134). Lega vzhodno od oltarja je najprestižnejša lega pokopa v srednjem veku nasploh (Hartmann 2003, 134; Pedersen 2003, 172; Scholkmann 2003, 206–210; Wemhoff 2003, 102–103; Kenzler 2015, 150). Pravila pokopavanja v cerkvi so se v poznem srednjem in predvsem v novem veku zrahljala, vendar je neposredna bližina oltarja obveljala za najprestižnejše mesto (Rodwell 1989, 153–160; Scholkmann 2002, 212–217).

O izjemnosti lege tik ob oltarju priča Beda Venerabilis v zgodbi o pokopu irskega svetnika po imenu Furseus. Njegovo truplo je prvih 27 dni ležalo v cerkvenem portiku; ko so ga hoteli pokopati blizu oltarja, so odkrili, da se telo ni začelo razkrajati; po 4 letih so še vedno brezmadežno truplo prenesli v novozgrajeno cerkev, da ga pokopljejo vzhodno od oltarja (Miller 1999, 99). Zgodba priča, da je bila Sv. Furseusu lega blizu oltarju namenjena kot častitljivemu misijonarju; ko je nerazkrajanje telesa pokazalo, da gre za svetnika, so zgradili novo cerkev, da bi ga lahko pokopali tik vzhodno od oltarja. Za interpretacijo groba 120 je torej pomembno dejstvo, da je vsak pokop v bližini oltarja izjemen, pokop vzhodno od oltarja pa je edinstven, saj je v vsaki cerkvi prostora le za en tak grob.

Glede na zgornji opis bi torej v grobu 120 pričakovali klerika izjemnega statusa. Vendar je bil v ta grob položen otrok. Grob je torej izjemen ne le za Blejski otok, temveč širše, izjemen za evropski srednji vek.

Podobno neposredno povezan s cerkveno stavbo je grob 118, ki smo ga interpretirali kot čuvar vhoda (glej zgoraj). Kakšen je bil kronološki odnos tega groba 118 do groba 120, ne vemo, niti z uporabo trenutno znanih metod ne bomo nikoli izvedeli. Morda gre za element kontinuitete med *predromansko* fazo 2 in *romansko* fazo 3, pri čemer grob čuvarja vhoda (št. 118) pomeni odmev stare tradicije, grob 120 pa začetek nove tradicije.

Stratigrafsko sočasni in prostorsko protistavni grobu 120 so grobovi, ki so ležali z nogami tik ob zahodni steni *romanske* cerkve (faza 3). Gre za skupino (sl. 4.2: G4) 24 grobov z vsaj 42 pokojniki. Lega grobišča v strnjeni skupini zahodno od sočasne cerkvene stavbe ni običajna. Srednjeveška grobišča ob cerkvah so namreč

and several times opened, offering evidence of prolonged awareness of the significance of these graves. However, unlike the Irish examples, the positions were more important than the deceased. Every time the church entrance was moved, a new grave with the same characteristics was created, the third more than a century after the first. This was therefore a long-lasting tradition, not a one-time action after an exceptional event. The above interpretation of the graves in front of church entrances can be referred to as the guardians of the entrance.

## CHURCH GRAVES IN THE ROMANESQUE CHURCH

Roughly between 1080 and 1140 and perhaps constructed in the third and fourth decades of the 12th century, the stone church in the Romanesque architectural style, here referred to as the *Romanesque* church of Phase 3, replaced the wooden church. The grave with the most direct connection to this church is Grave 120 in the central axis of the apse, east of the altar. In the Early and High Middle Ages, burials inside the church were only permitted for bishops, monks, exceptional parish priests and very pious laymen. In practice, the latter mostly included the founders of churches. Burials in churches were limited to the area in front of the portico and around the altar (Fry 1999, 169–170; Hartmann 2003, 137–138; Schlokmann 2003, 204; Krznar 2012, 26), as ordered by Theodulf of Orleans (+ 818) in the 9th century:

*Prohibendum etiam secundum maiorum instituta, ut in ecclesia nullatenus sepeliantur, sed in atrio aut in porticu aut exedra ecclesiae. Infra ecclesiam vero autprope altare, ubi corpus domini et sanguis conficitur, nullatenus habeat licentiam sepeliendi.<fnref n="4" />*

In practice, Theodulf's text was observed at least as late as the beginning of the 11th century, when it was incorporated in the work of Burchard of Worms (Hartmann 2002, 134). The position east of the altar was the most prestigious burial position in the Middle Ages in general (Hartmann 2003, 134; Pedersen 2003, 172; Scholkmann 2003, 206–210; Wemhoff 2003, 102–103; Kenzler 2015, 150). In the Late Middle Ages and even more so in the post-Medieval period, the rules for church burials became loose, but the immediate proximity of the altar was still the most esteemed position (Rodwell 1989, 153–160; Scholkmann 2002, 212–217).

The exceptional character of the position next to the altar is reported by Bede the Venerable in the story of Furseay, an Irish saint. For the first 27 days, his body lay in the church portico; when people wanted to bury him close to the altar, they discovered that the body had not started to decompose and after four years, still spotless, they brought

<footnote n="3">³ Capit. I.11.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Capit. I.11.</footnote>
najpogosteje razprostranjena okoli cerkve (npr. Predovnik, Dacar, Lavrinc 2008), najprestižnejše lokacije pa so v bližini oltarja, torej vzhodno od cerkve, in ob cerkvenem vhodu, v tem primeru južno. Lege ni mogoče pojasniti z razgibano geomorfologijo, saj so grobovi vklesani v skalno osnovo, kar bi bilo mogoče narediti kjerkoli. Lokacija grobišča je bila tako najverjetneje omejena na majhen prostor zaradi drugih dejavnikov. Ena možnost je, da so grobovi že v fazi 2b ležali v predprostoru, t. i. portiku (*porticus*; prim. Sorries 2003, 35).

Je pa zato bolj izpovedna struktura grobišča. Za grobove (št. 79–89, 92–96, 101–107, B04, B05) skupine G4 so značilne globoke, deloma v živo skalo vklesane grobne jame s številnimi ponovnimi pokopi. Gre za 6 sočasnih grobnih parcel, od katerih sta bili dve namenjeni dvojnim grobovom. Poleg teh je na severnem robu še starejši grob, ki ga prekrivata najsevernejši grobni parceli, na južnem robu pa je bilo ob koncu grobišče razširjeno z dodatnim grobom (sl. 6.2). Ob ponovnem pokopavanju so večino kosti predhodnih trupel uničili, le lobanje v dveh grobovih (št. 82, 93) se zdijo skrbno zložene ob rob. Ob pokopavanju so večkrat posegali tudi v sosednje grobove (npr. št. 102 in 103 ali št. 90, 107, 94).

Z izjemo prstana popolna odsotnost najdb v grobovih na eni strani in uniformna lega rok v naročju na drugi strani pričata, da so bila trupla najverjetneje zavita v mrtvaški prt. Med najdbami tudi ni igel, kar pomeni, da so bili prti bodisi zašiti bodisi zvezani (prim. Daniell 1997, 38–39, 45, 109 in 155).

Obstaja še druga možnost priprave trupla pokojnika za pokop, ki bi zapustila enake arheološke sledi, namreč oblačenje trupla meniha, kot ga opisuje Lanfranc (+ 1089) v svojih monastičnih navodilih:

> ... komornik naj bo prisoten s pogrebnimi oblačili prave vrste in z iglo za šivanje ... Ko je (truplo) oprano, naj bo zavito v novo ali sveže oprano srajco in kuto; kapuca iz lana in volne, ki sodi h kuti, naj bo poveznjena prek tega in prišita z nitjo na treh mestih. Golenice iz istega materiala, segajoč do kolen, naj bodo nadete in nočni čevlji obuti. **Roke naj bodo zašite skupaj od nadlakti do nadlakti** in okrog nog takisto. Nočni čevlji naj bodo tudi zašiti skupaj. Tako opravljeno naj bo truplo položeno na voz in pokrito z mrtvaškim prtom.<fnref n="4" />

Vendar ni verjetno, da bi bili laiki pripravljeni za pogreb enako kot menihi (Fry 1999, 126). Pokojniki z Blejskega otoka so bili torej verjetneje zaviti v mrtvaški prt, vendar po strogo določenem pravilu, ki je predvideval tudi manipulacijo drže rok.

Našteto priča, da gre za grobnice zelo majhne, a ortodoksne in konservativne populacije. Pogreb na tem delu grobišča si lahko predstavljamo zelo podobno

it to a newly built church to be buried east of the altar (Miller 1999, 99). The story shows that St Fursey, a venerable missionary, was going to be buried in the proximity of the altar, but when his body would not decompose – indicating a saint – a new church was built so that he could be buried immediately east of the altar. It is therefore an important fact for the interpretation of Grave 120 that each burial in the proximity of the altar is exceptional, while a burial east of the altar is unique, as there is space for only one such grave in each church. Consequently, a cleric of exceptionally high status should be expected in Grave 120. However, it was a child who was put in this grave. This renders the grave unique, not only on Bled Island, but in the wider context of the European Middle Ages.

Grave 118, interpreted as the guardian of the entrance (see above), has a similar direct connection to the church building. The chronological relationship of this grave (118) and Grave 120 is unknown and may remain unknown unless some new, currently unknown methods are used. Perhaps this is an element of continuity between the pre-Romanesque Phase 2 and the Romanesque Phase 3, with the grave of the guardian of the entrance (118) being a reflection of the old tradition and Grave 120 the beginning of a new tradition.

Stratigraphically contemporary and in antithetical position to Grave 120 are the graves with legs immediately next to the western wall of the Romanesque church (Phase 3). This is a group of 24 graves (Fig. 4.2: G4) with at least 42 deceased. A cemetery with graves in a compact group west of the contemporary church building is uncommon. Most often, Medieval cemeteries near churches extend around the church (e.g. Predovnik, Dacar, Lavrinc 2008), with the most prestigious locations being found in the proximity of the altar, i.e. east of the church or near the entrance, to the south in this case. This position cannot be explained by difficult geomorphology, for the graves are carved into the bedrock, possible anywhere. The location of the cemetery was most likely limited to a small space due to other factors. One possibility is that as early as in Phase 2b, graves lay in the anteroom in the so-called portico (*porticus*; cf. Sorries 2003, 35).

The structure of the cemetery offers us more information. The graves of the G4 group (79–89, 92–96, 101–107, B04, B05) are characterized by deep pits, partly carved into the bedrock, with numerous subsequent burials: a total of six contemporary grave plots, two of which were intended for double graves. In addition is one earlier grave at the northern edge and covered by the two northernmost grave plots and an additional grave added to the cemetery at the southern edge (Fig. 6.2). During the subsequent burials, most of the bones of the earlier skeletons were destroyed; only the skulls of two graves (82, 93) seem to have been carefully placed at the edge. Burials often interfered with the neighbouring graves (e.g. 102 and 103 or 90, 107 and 94).

The complete lack of finds in the graves (with the exception of one ring) on the one hand and the uniform

<footnote n="4">⁴ Prevod iz angleščine po Fry 1999, 125; poudaril B. Š.</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_161.png" /><figcaption>Sl. 8.4: Leicester (Velika Britanija), Wygstonova hiša, 18 Highcross Street: detajl panela slikanega okenskega stekla, 1490–1500: Prizor pokopa v mrliški prt zavitega pokojnika; v spodnjem delu so poleg značilne srednjeveške okovane lesene lopate dolge kosti, verjetno človeške. Upodobitev le-teh jasno izraža ravnodušnost do kosti, in s tem do popolnoma razkrojenih trupel, na srednjeveških grobiščih.</figcaption></figure>

<caption>Fig. 8.4: Leicester (UK), Wygston house, 18 Highcross Street: detail of the painted window panel glass, 1490–1500: Burial scene, at the bottom scattered beside a typical medieval wooden spade are long bones, most likely human. Inclusion of the latter in the depiction is a clear indication of indifference towards human bones in a medieval cemetery</caption>

(vir / source: https://www.storyofleicester.info/a-place-to-live/wygston-s-house/; window panel is housed in the Newarke Houses Museum, Leicester).

angleški upodobitvi iz konca 15. stoletja (sl. 8.4; prim. Hamilton 1980).

Oseminštiridest posameznikov v vsaj 6 generacijah pomeni, da je bilo v povprečju pokopanih 8 pokojnikov na generacijo. Toliko je tudi prostora v 4 enojnih in 2 dvojnih grobnicah. To je vsaj pol manj ljudi na generacijo kot na zgodnjesrednjeveškem grobišču (glej zgoraj), kar je jasen dokaz, da ne gre za isto populacijo. Je pa to število skladno s številom članov razširjene družine ali druge manjše družbene celice, v kateri so enakovredno zastopani moški, ženske in otroci.

Celotno grobišče torej glede na kontinuirano uporabo skoraj 2 stoletji, enakomerno število pokojnikov v vsaki generaciji, uravnoteženo spolno in starostno strukturo ter izjemno lokacijo pri otoški cerkvi lahko razumemo kot grobnico družbene celice, ki je bila v najtesnejši povezavi z briksenskimi škofi.

V isto stratigrafsko fazo sodi še nehomogena skupina 6 grobov, katerih lega je tako ali drugače vezana na

position of hands in the lap on the other provide evidence that the bodies were probably wrapped in a burial shroud. There are no pins, which means the shrouds were either sewn or tied together (cf. Daniell 1997, 38–39, 45, 109 and 155).

There is another possibility for the preparation of the body of the deceased for the funeral that would leave the same archaeological traces: the dressing the body of a monk, as described by Lanfranc (+1089) in his monastic guidelines:

> The chamberlain should be present with grave-clothes of the right kind and thread and a needle for sewing... When it is (the corpse) washed, shall be clad in a new shirt, or one newly washed, and a cowl; a head-cloth of linsey-wolsey belonging to the cowl shall be brought over this and attached in three places with thread. Gaiters of the same material reaching to the knees shall be put on the legs and night shoes on feet. **The hands shall be sewn together from arm to arm,** and round the legs likewise. So dressed, the corpse shall be set in the hearse and covered with a pall.<fnref n="5" />

It is not likely, however, that laymen were prepared for funeral in the same way as monks (Fry 1999, 126). The deceased from Bled Island were most likely wrapped in a funerary shroud, respecting the strict rule that included the manipulation of the arms position.

All this testifies to the fact that these were the tombs of a very small yet orthodox and conservative population. A funeral in this part of the cemetery may be imagined as very similar to an English depiction from late 1400s (Fig. 8.4; cf. Hamilton 1980).

Forty-eight individuals in at least six generations means that on average, eight deceased per generation were buried. This corresponds to the available space in four single and two double tombs. Compared to the Early Medieval cemetery (see above), this is half the number of people per generation, a clear indication that the population was not the same. Nevertheless, the number corresponds to the number of members of one extended family or a similar small social group, in which men, women and children were equally represented.

Based on the continuous use over almost two centuries, the even number of the deceased in every generation, the balanced gender and age structure and the exceptional location near the island church, the entire cemetery can be understood as the tomb of a social group with a very close connection to the bishops of Brixen.

The same stratigraphic phase includes a non-homogeneous group of six graves, whose positions are in one way or another related to the Romanesque church of Phase 3. Some of the graves are located in the south-

<footnote n="5">⁵ Translation after Fry 1999, 125; emphasis by author.</footnote>
romansko cerkev faze 3. Del grobov leži v jugovzhodnem delu sočasne stavbe, drugi del zunaj tik južno od apside.

Grobovi (št. 65, 66, 68, B05, B04) v romanski cerkveni ladji so bili večinoma močno poškodovani z gradbenimi posegi v gotski fazi 4. Izjema je grob 65, katerega jama je bila umetelno vklesana v živo skalo. Podoben je bil sosednji grob (št. 66) in oba skupaj lahko opišemo kot grobnici v bližini oltarja. Drugačen je kontekst, označen kot grob 109, zunaj romanske cerkve, tik južno ob apsidi. Jama je bila vkopana v dolomitno osnovo, na severu omejena z živo skalo. V zasutju so bile številne kosti iz prekopanih grobov, pod njimi je na dnu jame ležalo okostje v prvotni legi. Južno je bil še vsaj en grob, ki pa ni bil izkopan. Grobovi so bili močno poškodovani ob gradnji tako imenovane male zakristije in že prej ob gradnji gotske cerkve v fazi 4.

Arheoloških podatkov, ki bi omogočali neposredno kronološko opredelitev teh grobov, ni. Edini element za časovno umestitev je stratigrafska povezava z romansko cerkvijo. O teh grobovih lahko torej zapišemo le, da gre za visokosrednjeveške pokope na prestižnih mestih v cerkvi ali zunaj tik ob njej. Glede na majhno število grobov in glede na lego ne moremo govoriti o ločenem grobišču ali delu grobišča, temveč o posameznih grobovih. Sodeč po analogijah iz srednjeveških virov, bi grobovi v cerkvi lahko pripadali pomembnim cerkvenim veljakom, grobovi tik izven cerkve pa zaslužnim laikov, ki so si častno mesto pridobili kot izjemni donatorji (prim. Fry 1999, 170). Donatorji proštiji na Blejskem otoku so postali številčni v 2. polovici 12. stoletja (glej pogl. 8.1).

Vsi grobovi te faze so torej neposredno povezani s cerkveno stavbo in Cerkvijo ter jih za potrebe pričujočega besedila imenujemo *cerkveni grobovi*.

## POZNOSREDNJEVEŠKI IN NOVOVEŠKI CERKVENI GROBOVI

Večino ostalih srednjeveških grobov sestavlja nekoliko manj homogena skupina 6 grobov, katerih lega je tako ali drugače vezana na romansko cerkev 3. faze. Del grobov leži v jugovzhodnem delu sočasne stavbe, drugi del zunaj tik južno od apside.

Pet grobov (št. 90, 91, 98–100) je bilo vkopanih ob južni steni gotske cerkve faze 4. Gre za grobni jami, v katerih je bilo zaporedno pokopanih najmanj 11 pokojnikov. Stratigrafsko ti grobovi jasno sodijo v fazo 4 in so sočasni cerkveni stavbi, grajeni v gotskem slogu. Stratigrafsko sočasen je še grob 119, ki leži osamljen ob zunanji južni steni portika. Glede na usmeritev sklepamo, da je bil obeležen z nagrobnikom, vgrajenim v cerkveni zid. Tudi v tem primeru gre za *cerkvene grobove*, morda zaslužnih laikov.

Grobova 69 in 70 ležita pod korom v severozahodnem delu cerkvene ladje. Gre za novoveška grobova, ki sta mlajša od zadnje obnovitve kamnitih tal v cerkveni

eastern part of the contemporary building, while others are outside, just south of the apse.

The graves (65, 66, 68, B05, B04) in the Romanesque church nave were generally badly damaged by the constructions in the Gothic Phase 4. An exception is Grave 65, whose pit was carved into the bedrock. Similar is true of the neighbouring Grave 66 and both can be described as tombs in the proximity of the altar. Grave 109 is located outside the Romanesque church, immediately south of the apse. The pit was dug into the dolomite base, to the north limited by the bedrock. The fill contained numerous bones from exhumed graves and, underneath at the bottom of the pit, a skeleton in the original position. At least one further unexcavated grave lay to the south of it and was badly damaged during the construction of the so-called small vestry.

There are no archaeological data available to enable the direct dating of these graves. The only element that can help with the dating is the stratigraphic connection with the Romanesque church. The sole thing that can be said about these graves is that they are High Medieval burials in prestigious locations within, outside or immediately next to the church. Judging by the small number of graves and by their positions, this is not a separate cemetery or a separate part of a cemetery, but individual graves. Judging by analogies from medieval sources, the graves inside the church may belong to important ecclesiastical personages, while the graves outside (just next to the church) belong to worthy laymen who earned honorary positions as exceptional donors (cf. Fry 1999, 170). Donors to the Bled Island provostry became numerous in the second half of the 12th century (see Chapter 8.1).

All the graves of this phase are directly related to the church building and the Church and for the purposes of this text shall be labelled as *church graves*.

## LATE MEDIEVAL AND POST-MEDIEVAL CHURCH GRAVES

The majority of the remaining medieval graves are represented by a slightly less homogeneous group of six graves, whose positions are in one way or another connected to the Romanesque church of Phase 3. Some of the graves lie in the south-eastern part of the contemporary building, while others are outside, just south of the apse.

Five graves (90, 91, 98–100) containing remains of at least 11 individuals were dug next to the southern wall of the Gothic church of Phase 4. Stratigraphically, these graves clearly belong to Phase 4 and are contemporary to the church building constructed in the Gothic style. Stratigraphically contemporary is the solitary Grave 119 located alone near the exterior side of the southern wall of the portico. Its orientation leads to the assumption that it was marked with a tombstone built into the church wall. These graves are also *church graves*, perhaps belonging to worthy laymen.
ladji (pred arheološkimi izkopavanji leta 1972). Tudi v tem primeru gre za *cerkvena grobova*.

## 8.2. SKLEP

Znanstveni vprašanji, na kateri odgovarjamo v tem delu knjige, sta morebiten obstoj predkrščanskega templja na Blejskem otoku in – v neposredni povezavi s tem – kronologija cerkva.

Sklenemo lahko, da je bil na Blejskem otoku nadlokalen predkrščanski objekt češčenja studenec. Sodeč po primerjavah v pisnih virih, je bil studenec obkrožen z gajem ali vsaj v senci drevesa. Vegetacija na otoku in s tem podoba otoka s kopnega je bila verjetno podobna današnji, če odmislimo dominantno cerkev in stopnišče (sl. 3.10). S studencem je bilo obredno povezano bližnje mesto, ki je bilo v 10. st. označeno s kamnom. Neposrednih arheoloških podatkov o tem, kdaj je bilo takšno stanje vzpostavljeno, nimamo. Edini indic o starosti je jama pod omenjenim kamnom, vklesana v živo skalo in obkrožena s prazgodovinsko lončenino ter sekiro iz glajenega kamna. S precejšnjo verjetnostjo torej lahko domnevamo, da je bil ta del Blejskega otoka kraj posebnega pomena že pred 10. st., morda že v prazgodovini.

V začetku 10. st. je nekako na sredini med opisanja mestoma majhna skupnost začela pokopavati svoje mrtve. Grobišče so sprva uredili tako, da so ga simbolno povezali s češčenim studencem na otoku ter tudi z osrednjim mestom sveta mrtvih v zgodnjesrednjeveški pokrajini Blejskega kota, s kresiščem na Višelnici. Arheološka sled obeh povezav je osrediščena v verjetno najpomembnejšem zgodnjesrednjeveškem grobu (št. 72) na Blejskem otoku. Pokojnik v njem je pokopan z nogami tik ob omenjeni kamen, grob pa je usmerjen bočno na kresišče Višelnica. Druge arheološke sledi te povezave so skrbno določena mesta 3 pokopov 1. pokolenja in ognjišče, kjer je ogenj gorel med vsaj nekaterimi pogrebi. Že naslednja generacija, in vse naslednje, je pokopavala po drugačnih pravilih: grobove so postavljali v vrste in pri nekaterih so izkazali precejšnje astronomsko znanje, saj so jih usmerili proti kardinalnemu vzhodu. Zadnji grob na tem grobišču je bil skopan v 1. desetletju 11. stoletja. Pokojnica je bila v grob položena z značilnim nakitom, a grob je bil že usmerjen enako kot prva cerkev. Gre torej za biritualen pokop, ki hkrati upošteva dve tradiciji.

V prvem desetletju 11. stoletja, verjetno po formalnem prevzemu posesti s strani briksenskih škofov leta 1004, je bila na otoku zgrajena lesena cerkvica, posvečena Mariji Vnebovzeti. Lokacija je bila skrbno izbrana tako, da je kar najbolje prevzela funkcijo predhodnega mesta češčenja s kamnom. Takšna izbira lokacije v ničemer ni naključna in se popolnoma ujema s tedanjim pristopom k pokristjanjevanju predkrščanskih svetih mest s studenci. Cerkvici je dodatno simbolno zaščito zagotavljal pokop pod vhodnim pragom, čuvar vhoda.

Two graves (69 and 70) lie under the western gallery in the north-western part of the nave. They are post-Medieval graves, later than the last reconstruction of the stone floor in the nave (before the archaeological excavations in 1972). These, too, are *church graves*.

## 8.2 CONCLUSION

Two key scientific questions have been asked in this part of the book: Did a pre-Christian sanctuary exist on Bled Island? What was the chronology of the churches?

It can be concluded that the supra-local object of a pre-Christian worship on Bled Island was a spring. Judging by the analogies from written sources, the spring was surrounded by a grove or was at least situated in the shadow of a tree. The vegetation on the island and the appearance of the island as viewed from the land was probably similar to what it is today, but without the dominant church and staircase (Fig. 3.10). Ritually connected to the spring was a nearby location, in the 10th century marked with a rock. There are no direct archaeological data available on when this situation was established. The sole chronological indication is a pit under the stone, carved into the bedrock and surrounded by prehistoric pottery and an axe with a polished surface. Therefore, it may be quite safely assumed that this part of Bled Island held special significance even before the 10th century and perhaps already in the prehistoric period.

At the beginning of the 10th century, a small community started to bury their dead approximately in between these two locations. The original organization of the cemetery connected it symbolically to the spring that was worshipped on the island as well as with the central location of the world of the dead in the Early Medieval landscape of the Bled area, the Višelnica bonfire site. The archaeological traces of the two connections are concentrated in what is probably the most important Early Medieval grave (72) on Bled Island. The deceased here is buried with legs immediately next to the above-mentioned stone and the grave is oriented with its side to the Višelnica bonfire site. Other archaeological traces of this connection are the carefully chosen locations of three burials of the first generation and the fireplace, where the fire burned during at least some of the funerals. Already the next generation – as well as all the following generations – buried their dead in accordance with different rules: the graves were arranged in rows, some indicating considerable astronomical knowledge, being oriented towards true east. The last grave in this cemetery was dug in the first decade of the 11th century. The deceased woman was put in the grave with typical jewellery, but the orientation of the grave already corresponded to the orientation of the first church. The grave is therefore a mixed-rite burial, adhering to two different traditions simultaneously.
<figure><img src="image_162.png" /></figure>

Kljub navidezni skromnosti je bilo v gradnjo stavbe vloženo tedaj vrhunsko arhitekturno in astronomsko znanje. Usmeritev cerkve proti sončnemu vzhodu na dan Marijinega vnebovzetja je materialna sled izrazite razlike med predkrščanskim in krščanskim modelom umeščanja religioznih objektov v prostor. Predkrščanski model je mnogocentričen in temelji na čim številčnejših neposrednih povezavah z božjim; to je bilo v primeru Blejskega otoka v zgodnjem srednjem veku konkretizirano s simbolno navezavo grobišča na češčen studenec na širšo grobiščno pokrajino. Krščanski model povezavo z Bogom monopolizira in osredišči v cerkvi; cerkev ni navezana na nobeno drugo mesto v pokrajini, le simbolno neposredno z Božjim. A te neposredne povezave so deležni le udeleženci bogoslužja v cerkveni stavbi, dostop h kateremu pa neposredno nadzoruje Cerkev. S tem je krščanstvo legitimiziralo koncentracijo moči (sl. 8.5; prim. Fabech 1999, 469–470). Udejanjenje tega na Blejskem otoku je astronomska orientacija cerkve glede na sončni vzhod na praznik Marijinega vnebovzetja.

Že po nekaj desetletjih so prvotno cerkvico podrli in jo nadomestili z nekoliko večjo in nekoliko imenitneje zgrajeno stavbo, ki je bila še vedno vsaj deloma lesena. Tudi to je ščitil nov čuvar vhoda. Zahodno od cerkve, v senci sončnega vzhoda na dan Marijinega vnebovzetja, je svoje mrtve začela pokopavati zelo majhna, spolno in starostno mešana skupnost. Skupnost je bila ortodoksna in konservativna, kar se izraža v doslednem upoštevanju

Sl. 8.5: Shematski prikaz razlike med centralnostjo v predkrščanskem (zgoraj) in krščanskem (spodaj) obdobju. V predkrščanskem kozmosu je središče sveta kmetija oziroma prosto dostopno mesto posebnega pomena in noben kraj ne more postati pomebnejši od ostalih. V krščanskem kozmosu je bog pomembnejši od vsakogar in vsega in zato cerkev postane najpomembnejše mesto v pokrajini, dostop pa nadzorujejo lokalni predstavniki Cerkve (avtor B. Štular; vir: Fabech 1999, fig. 12).

Fig. 8.5: Illustration of differences in centrality between the pre-Christian (above) and the Christian (below) landscape. In the pre-Christian cosmos, the farm was a nodal point that included direct access to the gods and no site ranged in principle above the others. In the Christian cosmos, God is placed above everyone and everything. Christianity thus legitimized the concentration of power in fewer sites and churches. Church representatives controlled the access to these sites and by extension to God (by B. Štular; source: Fabech 1999, Fig. 12).

In the first decade of the 11th century, probably after the formal adoption of the property from the bishops of Brixen in 1004, a small wooden church dedicated to St Mary of the Assumption was built on the island. The location was carefully chosen so that it would assume the function of the previous site of worship with the rock. The selection of the location was by no means coincidental and was perfectly in accordance with the common approach of the time to the Christianization of pre-Christian sacred sites with springs. A burial under the threshold, the guardian of the entrance, provided symbolic protection to the church.

Despite its apparent modesty, some state-of-the-art architectural and astronomical knowledge for the time was involved in the construction of the church. Orientation towards the sunrise on the day of the Assumption is a material trace of the marked difference between the pre-Christian and the Christian models of placing religious objects in space. The pre-Christian model is multi-centric and is based on as many direct links to the Divine as possible. In the case of Bled Island in the Early Middle Ages, this was expressed by connecting the cemetery to the worshipped spring and the wider mortuary landscape. In the Christian model, the connection to God is monopolized and centralized in a church; the church is not connected to any location in the landscape but symbolically directly to the Divine. However, this direct connection only pertained to participants of worship in the church building, access to which was directly controlled by the Church. In this way, Christianity legitimized the concentration of power (Fig. 8.5; cf. Fabech 1999, 469–470). The realization of this on Bled Island was the astronomical orientation of the church in accordance with the sunrise on the day of the Assumption.
istih navodil za krščanski pogreb skozi skoraj dve stoletji.
Naštete lastnosti in izjemnost lokacije grobišča na otoku
to skupnost uvrščajo v krog ljudi, ki so bili vključeni v
upravno-obrambni aparat gospoščine škofov iz Briksna.

Po skoraj stoletju, morda v 2. desetletju 12. stoletja,
so leseno cerkev podrli in začeli zidati novo iz kamna.
Šlo je za razmeroma ambiciozno romansko arhitekturo
z več kot trikrat večjo površino od predhodnice, ki je
popolnoma spremenila gabarit Blejskega otoka: prej otok
s cerkvico ob studencu v gaju, sedaj cerkev na otoku. Tik
vzhodno od oltarja, najsvetejšega mesta v krščanskem
svetu, običajno rezerviranega za svetnike ali vsaj škofe,
so v novi cerkvi pokopali neodraslo osebo. Kontinuiteto
s starim vendarle kažeta pokop še tretjega čuvarja vhoda
in nadaljevanje pokopavanja zahodno od cerkve.

Arheološke datacije se dobro ujemajo z interpretacijami zgodovinarjev, ki izpostavljajo darovnico iz leta 1004 in posvetitev neke cerkve leta 1142. Vendar je treba opozoriti, da zaradi odličnega kronološkega ujemanja arheoloških in zgodovinopisnih interpretacij nobena ne postane trdnejša. Ker interpretacije temeljijo na popolnoma različnih virih, ostajajo ločene, vsaka trdna toliko kot argumenti, na katerih je bila zgrajena.

After only a few decades, the original wooden church
was demolished and replaced by a slightly larger and finer
building, which was nevertheless at least partly made of
wood. This church was also protected by the guardian of
the entrance. To the west of the church, in the shadow of
the sunrise on the day of the Assumption, a very small
community of mixed gender and age began to bury their
dead. The community was orthodox and conservative,
reflected in their strict adherence to the same rules for
Christian burial over almost two centuries. These quali-
ties and the exceptional location of the island cemetery
placed the community within the circle of people included
in the administrative and defensive apparatus of the
bishops of Brixen.

After almost a hundred years, perhaps in the sec-
ond decade of the 12th century, the wooden church was
demolished and the construction of a new stone church
began. This was relatively ambitious Romanesque archi-
tecture with a surface area more than three times greater
than its predecessor, completely altering the image of
Bled Island: what was before an island with a little church
near a spring in a grove, became a church on an island.
Immediately east of the altar, the most sacred place in the
Christian world (which is usually reserved for saints or at
least bishops), a non-adult person was buried in the new
church. Continuity with the old was reflected in the burial
of the third guardian of the entrance and the continued
burials west of the church.

The archaeological dates correspond well with the
interpretations of historians, who point to the deed of
gift from 1004 and the consecration of a church in 1142.
However, it is worth noting that an excellent degree of
congruity between archaeological and historical interpre-
tations does not render any of them more solid. Given that
these interpretations are based on completely different
sources, they remain separate, each only as solid as the
arguments that support it.