Disc brooch from Osthofen

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Images of the Osthofen disc brooch inscribed with runes

The Disc Brooch of Osthofen ( KJ145 ; O36 ) or rune brooch from Osthofen is a Merovingian Franconian fibula from the Rheinhessen Osthofen , Alzey-Worms district , in Rhineland-Palatinate . The fragmented clasp made of pressed bronze sheet bears a runic inscription in the older Futhark and is dated around the year 600 AD. The inscription is interpreted as a regional testimony to the time of the conversion from pagan Germanic religious beliefs to Christianity.

Finding and describing

The disc brooch was found by a layman under unknown circumstances and came into the possession of a local landowner who gave it away. As a result, the object ended up in the depot of the Landesmuseum Mainz (inv. No. 2280), where it cannot be found today. The fibula presumably came from a Franconian row grave field that was found near Osthofen. Another disc fibula made of pressed sheet metal was also found in Osthofen and given to the museum, which looks very similar to the rune-inscribed fibula in terms of design and manufacture. A replica of the inscribed reverse is in the Roman-Germanic Central Museum in Mainz (Inv.-No. 462).

The damaged fibula, the lower half of which has broken off, consists of two bronze discs that are or were separated by a flat wooden disc or wooden rings. The diameter is 5.7 cm. The front disk is covered with gilded bronze press sheet, which has been decoratively decorated. The edge of the disc is framed by a surrounding field with incised triangles, followed by a surrounding pearl band. This is followed by a surrounding frieze with regular circles depicting birds (probably pigeons ). These are each connected by stylized half-palmettes . The middle field is cut out because it originally had an insert as a support for the needle holder on the back; this insert is missing. For comparison, the other better preserved sheet metal brooch from Osthofen shows a "mask en face" here. The back base plate shows seven concentric circles, between the outermost of which is the inscription towards the edge.

inscription

The line of runic script in older Futhark is determined by the two outer rings embossed on the edge for decoration. The inscription runs from top left to right towards the center and ends in front of the needle holder. According to Rudolf Henning's research results in the late 19th century, the runes were practiced and carved with a sure hand with a sharp needle (or a similar tool). Attempts to clean the back or the inscription caused the last two runes to be completely destroyed and the third to last rune partially destroyed. The original condition of the find is secured by detailed photographs. However, the inscription was not clearly legible even before these modern interventions. Further lacunae due to corrosion and structural features had prompted conjectures . The linguistic and textual interpretation is still not certain because of the state-related lexical and grammatical difficulties.

ᚷᛟ‿⁝ᚠᚢᚱᚨᛞ‿ᚻᛞ‿ᛟᚠᛁᛚᛖ (†)
go [1?] ⁝furad [1?] (h) d (e) o (f) ile (1Z)
go [d] fura d [i] (h) d (e) o (f) ile (1Z)
"God before you, devil †"

The rune no. 3 is almost completely eliminated by a subsequent rivet hole or damage and is syntactically supplemented to the d-rune ᛞ and read as the sequence ᚷᛟᛞ god , "God" by the remnants of sticks and twigs visible at the lower and upper edge of the hole .

A word separator carved from three or four points is followed by a sequence ᚠᚢᚱᚨ , which is read as an adjective fura . In the Old High German vocabulary that was documented later, the documents fora and furi = fore , before, (in) before; before, forwards, forwards , the form fura is still not occupied. The Old High German documents go back to Germanic * for (a) = in front of something, someone (to be / stand). In-final runen inscriptional -a ( ᚨ ) an idiomatic, local vordeutsche / is assumed voralthochdeutsche form for explanation.

In the following sequence without a word separator between the -a of fura and the following -d- ᛞ , rune No. 9, which was almost completely destroyed by corrosion, is supplemented with the i-rune ᛁ . From rune no. 10, only two parallel branches running from top left to bottom right are recognizable, so that there is basically the possibility of reading as ᚨ ( a ) or ᚻ h-rune. Overall, this sequence is read as ᛞᛁᚻ , dih = you . The Germanic voiced dental þ has already been shifted to the voiceless d, the plosive sound Germanic k has also been shifted to h .

The last sequence ᛞ‿ᛟᚠᛁᛚᛖ has been discussed in research, especially with regard to the overall interpretation, whether it is to be read as a (Greek) male personal name, Latinized Teofilus or the title devil . According to sound, the damaged rune No. 12, of which, after an autopsy by Wolfgang Krause on the original, only a stick is clearly recognizable, which is to be supplemented either as an l-rune ᛚ or as an e-rune ,, decided in research as e . The hard-to-read rune no. 14, however, is determined by older research as the f-rune ᚠ . With regard to Krause's interpretation of the sequence as a deofile devil, he notes that, in contrast to the shift of the þ in the typeface to the d in the sequence dih, this has not yet happened with the media d to the t . The last Rune no. 17 e is a Latin-influenced Vokativendung explained.

Finally, a sign follows the inscription  †, a sloping cross set high above the level of the inscription. In the older to the oldest research (among others Henning) this symbol, which touches the needle holder directly, was read as the g-rune ᚷ .

interpretation

In the more recent research a "Christian sense" of the runic inscription is seen. Dating to the 7th century, it is one of the latest continental runic inscriptions. Furthermore, the primer itself forms a typological group with other disc primers, which shows both Mediterranean and Christian motifs. Margarete Klein-Pfeuffer shows that fibulae with a bird-palmette frieze in stylized form represent the Christian motif of the vine inhabited by animals. Historically, the Osthofen Disc Primer should be placed in the context of the Frankish conquest of Rheinhessen and the Palatinate after 500 AD ( Battle of Zülpich ) and of the Mainz bishopric , which had been orphaned since 451 and which was reoccupied from the middle of the 6th century. As a result of the new appointment, the region experienced an upswing in missionary work and church life. This was shown by archaeological evidence in everyday culture and especially in burial culture ( Bertichilde tombstone ). In the Middle Rhine region, a Frankish lapidary script increasingly prevailed, which clearly shows the runic influence on the shape of some letters. In addition, the Osthofen inscription and the bow brooch from Freilaubersheim show that the runic script was still known and common.

Wolfgang Krause noted that "an interpretation of the inscription that is convincing in all points [...] is not possible", but that under all considerations, the "pronounced" Christian content with the wish "that God should always stand before the devil", the so far "reasonably most acceptable" interpretation.

literature

Web links

Remarks

  1. ↑ Runic project of the University of Kiel: Profile: most important data on an inscription. Disc brooch from Osthofen. 1. Find history and context
  2. ↑ Krause, Jankuhn: The runic inscriptions in the older Futhark. Göttingen 1966, p. 285.
  3. ↑ Margarete Klein-Pfeuffer: For the interpretation of the pressed sheet metal discs from Eschwege-Niederhone Gr. 17. In: Wilhelm Heizmann, Sigmund Oehrl (Hrsg.): Pictorial monuments to the Germanic saga of gods and heroes. (= Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde - supplementary volumes Volume 91). Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / Boston 2015, p. 269 f., 289 fig. 3.1. ( chargeable via GAO at De Gruyter Online , illustration )
  4. ↑ Runic project of the University of Kiel: Profile: most important data on an inscription. Disc brooch from Osthofen. 2. Inscription object
  5. ^ Rudolf Henning: The German rune monuments. Strasbourg 1889, p. 71.
  6. ↑ Jochen Splett : Old High German Dictionary. Analysis of the word family structures of Old High German, at the same time the foundation of a future structural history of the German vocabulary. Volume 1.1 Introduction, word families A - L. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1993, ISBN 3-11-012462-9 , p. 256. ( fee required from de Gruyter Online)
  7. ^ Frank Heidermanns: Etymological dictionary of Germanic primary adjectives (= Studia linguistica Germanica. Volume 33). Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1993, ISBN 978-3-11-087161-6 , p. 223. ( fee required from de Gruyter Online ). Vladimir Orel: A Handbook of Germnanic Etymology. Brill, Leiden / Boston 2003, ISBN 90-04-12875-1 , p. 119.
  8. ↑ Krause, Jankuhn: The runic inscriptions in the older Futhark. Göttingen 1966, p. 285.
  9. ↑ Wolfgang Jungandreas: God fura dih, deofile. In: ZfdA Volume 101, 1972, pp. 84f.
  10. ↑ Max Martin: Continental Germanic runic inscriptions and "Alamannic runic province" from an archaeological point of view. P. 294 f.
  11. ↑ Klaus Düwel : Runic and Latin epigraphy in southern Germany during the Merovingian period. In: Klaus Düwel (Ed.): Runic writing culture in continental Scandinavian and Anglo-Saxon interrelationship. (= Reallexikon der Germanischen Alterumskunde - supplementary volumes, volume 10). Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 1994, ISBN 978-3-11-014328-7 , pp. 229-308; here 233. ( chargeable at de Gruyter Online )