A jewel worthy of a duke from the moat of Castle Kolno

Abstract

Medieval elite culture is often difficult to grasp among archaeological records from settlement sites. A silver-gilt amethyst setting, probably part of a brooch, from the moat of Castle Kolno in Poland represents an unusual high-status find from a context related to everyday activity.

Introduction

Medieval jewellery made of precious metal is an expected find in the context of a hoard (Witecki 2018) or within an aristocratic tomb (Gómez-Moreno 1946: 22, fig. 141), but such objects are rare in settlement contexts related to everyday activity. Dress accessories of gold and silver are seldom found in the rural (Standley 2013: 82–83, 115–16, fig. 6.4) and urban environment (Haase & Whatley 2020: 131), but also on castle sites (Krauskopf 2005: 91–93). Those documented through systematic archaeological excavation are even less common (see: Radohs 2023: 339). The jewel excavated at the ducal Castle Kolno, site 4 in Stare Kolnie, Opole district, Poland (Figure 1), is unique. Probably lost by a person travelling to or from the fortress through the crossing, it was discovered in the sediments of the moat (Figure 2) between timber bridge posts at the northern abutment. Strata in this area, although distorted, may be dated by dendrochronology, numismatics (Prague Groschen, local hellers), and other evidence (enamelled glass, kitchenware, stoneware) to between the early fourteenth century and the castle’s destruction in 1443. Originally the fortress guarded a ducal customs house at the border between the duchies of Opole and Brzeg, and the first known owner was Duke Bolesław III of Brzeg. Later the castle belonged to wealthy knights and local dukes. The jewel—a part projecting from a larger ornament—was susceptible to accidental loss.

Figure 1. Gem setting from the find from Castle Kolno, with the brooch from Środa Śląska (lower right) for comparison. Scale bars are 10mm (figure by N. Lenkow & L. Marek).

Figure 2. Lidar-generated map of Stare Kolnie, site 4. The location of the find is marked with a star. Co-ordinate system EPSG 2180. Grid squares: 20 × 20m (figure by L. Marek).

Analysis

The artefact was subject to non-destructive archaeometric investigations using a Midex XRF (x-ray fluorescence) microspectrometer and a Hitachi TM4000 scanning electron microscope paired with energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (SEM-EDS) capable of micro-region and spot analysis. Its metal parts are made of silver and were fire-gilded, as indicated by the considerable amounts of mercury visible in the XRF (Figure 3) and SEM-EDS (Figure 4) energy spectra. The jewel is an amethyst cabochon in a cone-shaped claw setting, and a halo of openwork rays or palmette petals encircles the gem. Once, it must have formed part of a larger object, as suggested by the silver pin and traces of lead solder on the back of the setting (Figure 3c). This ornament represents an international style in gem setting characteristic of the thirteenth century (Pietrusiński & Witkowski 1996: 17–18). Similar halos are found around re-used first–second-century cameos on the crown of King Sancho IV el Bravo, recovered from his tomb in Toledo (del Campo 2002: 68–70), on the golden coronets from Wawel, Cracow (Mühlemann 2013: 185–90, 262–330), and on the imperial brooch in the hoard from Środa Śląska, Poland (Figure 1, bottom right). Late examples may be found on the fourteenth-century silver-gilt brooch from the Cathedral Treasury in Split (Lightbown 1992: 155, fig. 78). Present on precious, as well as more modest but still luxurious, brooches (see Stürzebecher 2010: 101–103, 223–24), matching settings were emblems of the medieval aristocracy, who continued to visit Kolno Castle, even after it had been sold to the lesser nobility (Eistert 1934: 6).

Figure 3. Energy XRF spectra of the setting: sampling the cone (a), claws (b), solder (c) and ornament attachment points (d) (figure by B. Miazga).

Figure 4. Images and energy SEM-EDS spectra of the setting: attachment points (red & green markers) and claws (blue marker) (figure by B. Miazga).

Discussion and conclusions

Assuming that social status is shown by a broad spectrum of material culture rather than the occurrence of outstanding individual artefacts, the lifestyle of settlement inhabitants should be determinable through statistical methods (Atzbach & Radohs 2020), with jewellery representing evidence for the aristocratic lifestyle at a given site (Radohs 2023: 68). Recent debate has focused on how archaeological records mirror the negotiation of social identities through consumption patterns (Haase & Whatley 2020). Analysis of the relationship between material culture and social identity often utilises the idea of ‘conspicuous consumption’, defined through the presence of objects that are non-productive, economically irrational, and beyond necessity (Veblen 1915: 99). Using this concept, five categories of markers characteristic of specific consumption strategies may be defined (Haase & Whatley 2020: 124, tab. 2.): 1) conspicuous objects without functionality; 2) conspicuous objects with functionality; 3) conspicuous objects through their functionality; 4) standard setters, or inconspicuous; 5) religious or magical objects with no practical function and low economic value. This model focuses on function and aesthetics rather than symbolism, placing jewellery into the first category (Haase & Whatley 2020: 131, tab. 2). However, in dealing with the value of objects in medieval society, we cannot separate functionality from the spiritual culture (Immonen 2009: 36). What seems economically irrational today might have been reasonable in the medieval period.

Jewellery was a visible sign of wealth or an emblem of legal status and allegiance recognisable to other members of the society (Lightbown 1992: 71, 79). Jewels were believed to possess supernatural qualities and were borrowed or stolen with these qualities in mind (Evans 1922: 113). According to medieval folklore, the amethyst guarded against intoxication and venom, representing faith, modesty and martyrdom (Kobielus 2012: 101–102). It was supposed to provide protection from gout, bad dreams, treason, deceit, captivity, blindness, enchantment and strangulation (Evans 1922: 35, 40, 60–61). Although the setting of stones or gems in jewellery for “magical or mystical reasons” is difficult to corroborate (Lightbown 1992: 96), there are literary analogies. In the Arthurian Lancelot Vulgate, the Lady of the Lake’s maiden Saraide provides two cousins of Sir Lancelot with magical brooches of gold and precious stones, “and the spell cast by the stones … was so powerful that, as long as they wore them, no weapon could draw blood from them or brake a single limb” (Lacy 1993: 29). As such, it is perhaps prudent to view the symbolic meaning of an object as equally relevant to its aesthetic character when evaluating functionality as it was understood in the medieval period.