Villafafila traesure

The so-called treasure of Villafáfila constitutes, without a doubt, one of the most important sets among the archaeological-type funds guarded by the Provincial Museum of Zamora, as it is among the few samples of Visigoth goldsmithing found in our country, along with the well-known treasures from Guarrazar and Torrdonjimento, with the exception of the richness and abundance of pieces that make up these, particularly the first of them, compared to the notoriously more modest nature of the Villafáfila find.

However, little or almost nothing has been disclosed about the treasure, after the first news of its existence by Gómez-Moreno, except for the always repeated reference to its presence in the Zamora Museum and the occasional publication of a photograph of the set or any of the crosses belonging to it.

Therefore, in these notes, we intend to provide as much information as possible about the circumstances of their appearance, as well as a detailed description of the pieces, accompanied, for the first time, by complete documentation [1] , detailing the descriptions, and completing all this with an appendix dedicated to metallographic analysis that may serve in due course as a comparative element for the study of the pieces.

The oldest reference to the treasure of Villafáfila dates back to 1927, - like so many others related to Zamora's archaeological or artistic heritage - when the Monumental Catalog of the province of Zamora was published by Mr. Manuel Gómez-Moreno, who briefly describes the pieces and publishes the first photograph of them [2] .

It will later be collected by Zeiss, in his work on the finds from the Visigothic period in Spain, including in addition to the corresponding plates, a brief description of the crosses, with their measurements, with reference to the remaining pieces [3] .

Likewise, Ferrandis refers to the crosses of Villafáfila when studying the decorative arts of the Visigoth period in the corresponding environment of the History of Spain directed by Menéndez Pidal [4] .

The catalog of the Provincial Museum of Zamora drawn up by its Director, Victoriano Velasco, logically collects the little treasure following the descriptions of Gómez-Moreno, but giving a new photograph of it in which piece number five appears, absent in the work of this [5] .

Likewise, a tangential reference to the tesorillo is included in the series dedicated to Zamoran finds by Martín Vall and Delibes when dealing with the Villafáfila area, reflecting in a note all the existing bibliography on it [6] and advancing its possible origin from the area. de la Fuente de San Pedro, a known Roman site located in the vicinity of Villafáfila that has provided remains of various massive pavements [7] .

In brief references, always referring to the original data by Gómez-Moreno, he echoes the existence of the little treasure Pedro de Palol [8] , Virguilio Sevillano [9] , and recently Ramón Corzo [10] , who publishes a new photograph of The pieces.

Lately the Villafáfila find has been collected by Wolfgang Hübener in his work on the gold foil crosses of the early Middle Ages [11] , where it receives a certainly opaque treatment, with details that are expensively equivocal as it comes from one source and alludes to supposed bronze trays that would accompany the crosses.

Much more tangentially, one of its crosses has been drawn as an illustration in a recent article by Puertas Tricas [12] .

The Provincial Museum of Zamora preserves among the old documentation related to the funds that make up its collections a series of references by which the circumstances that accompanied the appearance of the treasure in 1921 are easily reconstructed.

We consider it interesting to collect the administrative vicissitudes that it went through until its acquisition by the Museum, as they are illustrative of how sometimes economic or bureaucratic problems can lead to valuable works of our historical heritage not reaching the public destination they deserve.

The first reference to the discovery of Villafáfila in the Museum's documentation dates back to a letter dated August 21, 1921 addressed by the president of the Provincial Commission of Historical and Artistic Monuments of Zamora to Mr. Vicente Fernández Rodríguez, transferring a previous one from the Director General of Fine Arts dated August 6, requesting information on the discovery of jewelry in the municipality of Villafáfila and giving instructions on the deposit of the same, while raising the possibility of examining them personally.

From the draft of the extensive and detailed report sent a short time later by the Director of the Provincial Museum, at the time Mr. Severiano Ballesteros, it is possible to obtain a series of valuable data, which we directly transcribe:

“… the objects to which he refers were in fact found in the surroundings of Villafáfila, approximately half a kilometer from the town, in a labor camp owned by Mr. Vicente Fernández Rodríguez, from that neighborhood, on the occasion of being found opening in him a well According to references, these objects were at the bottom of another excavation, also in the form of a well, a meter and a half deep by a little more or less wide, indicated by a circular cut that was still preserved from the chalky layer of the subsoil, in the that penetrated half a meter and was covered with topsoil, stones and some small fragments that baited it” .

The Book of Minutes of the Board of the Museum's Board of Trustees collects, in its session on December 25, 1921, the delivery by Don Vicente Rodríguez of the objects found on his land, as a provincial deposit until the means were arbitrated to acquisition by the State or by the Museum itself.

A year later, the Minutes of the session of December 21, 1922 include the agreement to return the objects found to their owner at his request, since the means for their acquisition had not yet been obtained, a delivery that was made on November 23 of the following year as stated in the document that serves as receipt.

Finally, and given the risk that their owner could dispose of the found objects, the Museum's Board of Trustees agreed to acquire this with a charge to the Center's own material allocation, paying for them a price of one hundred and twenty-five pesetas requested by the finder, as stated in the Minutes of December 28, 1923, with which the lot of pieces definitively entered the Zamora Museum.

With these previous data we have carried out a direct investigation on the ground, coming into contact with people who, due to their relationship with the finder and being close to him at the time the pieces appeared, we believe could provide us with data novel or clarify confusing aspects [13] .

As a result of these inquiries, it has been possible to establish with certainty the specific place of the discovery, never registered to date in the repeated references to it.

According to these data, the discovery took place in the area or payment of "Santa Marta" (plate I. 1) located on the SW limit of the current urban area of Villafáfila, within the area defined by the junction of the local road that goes to the station of La Tabla, and a little further to the Nacional 630, with the also local to Villarrín de Campos (fig. 1) [14] .

The specific area of the discovery is a piece of land belonging to the rear of the current house of Mr. Demetrio Zamorano, nephew of the finder, located on the left side of the road that goes to La Tabla. (Plate I. 2) [15] .

At the time of the discovery of the treasure, the entire area would have been occupied by agricultural estates, somewhat removed from the urban center of Villafáfila, which fits well with the distance of half a kilometer established in the report by Don Severiano Ballesteros.

The fact that the Fuente de San Pedro farm, located about six kilometers from the town, belongs to the same owner of the Santa Marte farm where the crosses were found, Mr. Vicente Fernández, can largely explain the origin of the confusion about the place of the finding collected by some researchers.

The name "Santa Marta" given to the area seems to denote, likely, the existence in its surroundings of a possible church or other type of religious center dedicated to that dedication, which would have remained in the toponymy despite the disappearance of all traces of it. possible buildings.

In relation to this, a few years ago a grave appeared, with flagstone above the grave, inside a farm owned by Don Martín Gómez, to the left of the Villarrín road.

The entire batch of pieces is registered in the Zamora Museum registry books with the Inventory Number 105, so each of them has been diversified by adding a second order number to individualize them.

105 (1). Gold foil cross, with arms flared at the ends, or kick, topped at an obtuse angle resembling the Maltese cross. Slightly irregular arms. (fig. 2, 1, plate II, 1).

At the upper end it has a hole in which a chain formed by four s-shaped links is crimped, made from a twisted square gold thread forming edges except in the area where it joins the cross and at the ends of the link. exterior, where it adopts a flattened shape, and slightly pointed.

Dimensions: height 8cm.; width 7 cm.; chain length 6.5 cm.; sheet thickness 3 mm.; weight 9 grams.

105 (2). Cross kick gold foil. Slightly unequal width arms. (fig. 2, 2; plate II, 1).

At the upper end there is a circular hole in which a gold wire hook is attached, almost circular in section, decorated at intervals with parallel incisions, and finished off in the closing area with a double turn.

Dimensions: height 5.8 cm.; width 5.8 cm.; clamping length, 2.1 cm.; sheet thickness 2 mm.; weight 3 grams.

105 (3) Gold foil kick cross. Slightly irregular arms. (fig. 2, 3; plate II, 1).

It is finished off at the top by a fastening ring formed by a flat-section wire joined to the back of the cross by hammering. Fragmented in three parts although complete.

Dimensions: height 9.6 cm.; including retaining ring; width 7.8 cm.; sheet thickness 4mm.; weight 10 grams.

105 (4) Bronze container, frustoconical in shape, with a slightly outlined foot with vertical walls. (fig. 3; plate II. 2).

The upper edge is marked by a groove running the length, interrupted by a circular hole located slightly below that line. At the other end and at the same height, there are signs of a crudely made appendage. Slightly oblong mouth.

It has a groove along the edge similar to the wing of the previous piece, and in its middle part it is decorated with openwork motifs in the form of two circles joined by a straight line, of which only one complete is preserved, Flat edge.

The dome-shaped piece ended in an appendix with a fastening hole, still conserving a ring attached to it.

It probably formed part, with piece No. 4, of the same element, as the lid of a possible incense burner, according to the similarity of the diameter resulting from the ideal development of the complete piece.

This piece is not mentioned in the report by Don Severiano Ballesteros or in the description or photograph by Gómez-Moreno.

105 (6). Incomplete brass stem with an irregular pear-shaped trace, finished at its end with a button. circular section. (fig. 3, 6; plate II, 2).

It presents traces of breakage in the part where it would join the face of the piece.

In the report of Mr. Severiano Ballesteros it is said that "it is part of another larger one in the shape of a cross, according to the statement of Mr. Vicente Fernández, of which this was one of the arms, with an extension of another of those that were missing so as to be fitted somewhere else. At the other end of the fragment that is described, appears the very recent break through which it was separated from the rest, lost”.

The bronze and brass objects presented a large number of sources of oxidation, in the form of chlorides, which, in addition to endangering their conservation, masked details of possible decorations on the pieces.

For this reason, during the course of 1985 they were sent to the School of Arts Applied to Restoration, in Madrid, where they underwent a mechanical cleaning treatment, elimination of chlorides and application of a protective layer.

This treatment has made it possible to verify that piece number 5, apparently only a formless fragment of functionality that is difficult to define, presented, after cleaning, a decoration with openwork motifs, in line, and a ring on its fastening appendage, inappreciable until then. , making it possible to put it in relation to piece number 4 as part of a possible censer.

The gold foil crosses, of which a total of 320 specimens are known, appear widely documented outside the Peninsula in multiple finds produced around the Alps, both in the North, in the German-Bajuwaric area, and in the South of the mountain range, in the Longobard area, assuming its maximum expansion towards the East the few specimens from Egypt and Villafáfila constituting the place of most accidental discovery, until now, of this type of pieces.

However, starting from an identical method of production, cutting the crosses from a sheet with scissors, most of the specimens from the Alpine region are not smooth but are decorated by means of a mold and delimited by embossing, with the exception of the German area of the Rhine. and Necker, where the proportion of smooth crosses is higher.

They appear studied in various monographs on barbarian art - mainly Lombard -, with examples sensibly similar to those of Villafáfila but die-cut decorations [16] .

Singularly, the monographic article by W. Hübener summarizing the symposium on the golden crosses in the early Middle Ages held in 1974 in Freiburg in Breisgau has been of great use to us, which, due to its more complete nature, will be an obligatory reference throughout this study [17] .

In the specimens collected by these authors, the crosses, similar in shape and technique to the specimens, generally have holes at the ends, indicating their functionality as they are sewn to clothing, generally forming part of funerary trousseau.

In this sense, it also has piece No. 111 from the Cluny Museum, also from the Alpine area [18] .

In Spain, the number of gold foil crosses is certainly scarce, with pieces and fragments of others corresponding to a total of 25 copies, being reduced exclusively to those that make up the Jaén treasure of Torredonjimeno, with 12 complete crosses and the Zamorano of Villafáfila object of this study, leaving aside that of Guarrazar which, due to its more complex technique and greater decorative richness, deviates from the simple type that we have been considering.

The similarities in form, techniques and finish between the simplest pieces from Torredonjimeno and those from Villafáfila are quite remarkable, including details such as chains, suspension hooks, holes for crimping or welded rings, which can be seen in various examples of the former that can be used as parallels. [19] , all of which seems to support a clear chronological identity.

In any case, a greater affinity of its crosses in general should be pointed out in Torredonjimeno, with the Latin cross models - shorter transverse arms -, compared to the examples of Villafáfila, with substantially equal arms, of the Greek type.

Regarding the functionality of the crosses, there is a fundamental difference between the Alpine and Hispanic specimens. While the former come mostly from tombs - about 220 specimens have this origin on both sides of the Alps -, the latter would be associated with treasures offered to churches, a fact contrasted in the pieces with a consecration legend from Torredonjimeno and Guarrazar, and presumably, by affinity, in the case of Villafáfila, following an ancient tradition prior to 672 [20] in any case .

This different functionality is equally evident in the configuration of the crosses, -with holes generally in all or some of the arms in the European specimens-, and hooks and suspension chains in the Hispanic pieces, indicating in the first case their use to go sewn on leather or fabric dresses and in the second serve to be hung in the temples, all indicating a different conception of the object.

For Hübener, the crosses of the alpine zone would constitute funerary offerings that the deceased would have acquired in life for that purpose, responding to the roots of the cult of the afterlife in the Alamanni, Longobard and Bajuwaric territories, a feeling absent among Visigoths, Saxons and Franks [ 21] . In any case, it is risky to specify the exact use of the pieces, which could easily be different.

In the Spanish case, however, it seems evident to associate these crosses with the traditional offerings to churches as thanksgiving or in consecration ceremonies, documenting the customs of carrying them from ancient times, in the second half of the 7th century, without ruling out the also idea that important people could wear the crosses on festive clothing on important occasions, although the weakness of the same seems to be an argument against this idea [22] .

The lack of inscriptions alluding to dedications on the Villafáfila crosses, contrary to some pieces from Guarrazar and Torredonjimeno, makes it difficult to determine the chronology with adjective elements, which, in general, in alpine specimens has its point of gravity in the first half of the seventh century, covering a period that would go from 580 to 650 [23] , while in Spain this type of manifestations would be somewhat later, developing throughout the seventh century [24] , and fundamentally for Palol [25] in the second half of it, coinciding with the last phase of Visigothic art.

Regarding the other pieces that make up the treasure, we consider, for the reasons explained when describing them, that objects number 4 and 5 would be the bowl and lid, respectively, of a unitary element, specifically a liturgical censer. The similar proportion also contributes to strengthening this belief. of its metallographic components that emerge from the analysis results.

Although the examples of incense burners that we have been able to know as a reference point generally present a larger size and greater structural complexity, we believe that there are sufficient elements in favor of this identification.

It would be, by having a lid, a censer used in liturgical worship, not merely votive as simple copies should be, not equipped with a cover [26] .

Except for the distances, the hemispherical, albeit irregular, shape of the bowl could recall Sicilian examples, particularly from Gramminchele or Syracuse [27] , derived in turn from Coptic models [28] .

In general, all of them are wider and hemispherical than the Villafáfila specimen and equipped with three chains for suspension that would be linked to as many appendages that were torn from the edge of the bowl, a system that does not seem to be found in the piece we are studying.

Piece number 4, considered until now to be a glass, however, shows signs of what can probably be identified as traces of possible hinges that serve to close and crimp the upper part in a similar way, perhaps, to the fixing elements of the glass. square vase from the basilica of Alconétar [29] .

However, as we are inclined to consider it, like piece number 5, an incense burner with a lid, the openwork decoration of the latter would allow comparison with such well-known parallels as the example from Volubilis, with a dome-shaped cover and a series of motifs in the form of horseshoe arches, although the lower part, cylindrical in shape and supported by three feet, bears no resemblance to that of Villafáfila, as well as the rather more complicated setting elements of the closure [30] .

The Villafáfila piece could also be related to the example in the Cluny Museum, from the Eastern Mediterranean [31] , with a dome-shaped roof with arcades on its upper part and perforations somewhat similar to those of Villafáfila in its vertical section, with the difference that in the latter the motifs are simple vertical lines joining circles at their ends and in the Cluny copy the drawings, being similar, form a pommeled cross when the vertical section is crossed by another horizontal section of a similar shape.

Much further from the Villafáfila example would be the Coptic censer from Crikvine, in Dalmatia, polygonal in shape at the bottom, with three feet, and a lid decorated with horseshoe arches that are not at all schematic compared to the Villafáfila piece, or the same ones from Volubilis or Cluny [32] .

All these specimens would be suspended from a ring and chain, aspects that, despite its fragmentary conservation, are perfectly verifiable in the Villafáfila specimen.

Although the decoration of the Villafáfila piece cannot be strictly considered as facing horseshoe arches, a broad interpretation could assume them to be a schematization of said motif, and to that extent be related to the other pieces mentioned.

According to Wulff, the hemispherical-type censer appears in Egypt from the 6th to the 7th or 8th century, a date that Orsi also gives for the Sicilian group [33] , a period in which the considered parallels are also inscribed: Crikvine, 6th century, Volubilis , 8th century, and in a more indeterminate way the copy of Cluny, between the 5th and 7th centuries.

In its expansion towards the West from the Coptic-Byzantine world, it reached the Spanish coast in the mid-7th century, serving as a model for specifically Hispanic forms and types that lasted with few variations until the Romanesque period [34] .

With respect to piece number 6 in brass, which we have described above, its stem shape finished in a button could perhaps remind us of a gripping element, perhaps the control of a presumed paten, although the known examples of these characteristics, in the case of the he piece from El Gatillo (Cáceres) in the National Archaeological Museum is larger and has a polygonal section.

Due to its shape, it could also be associated with a hypothetical censer handle, normally longer with a cylindrical shape, typical of Coptic liturgical furniture [35] , which does not seem very likely.

For other possible uses, bell clapper, cross arm, etc., we have not found parallels, so its true functionality escapes us, although in favor of this last use the testimony collected by Don Severiano should be taken into account. Ballesteros and Gómez-Moreno himself [36] .

For all the parallels considered, and fundamentally taking into account the chronology attributed by various authors to the gold foil crosses that appeared together with these other metallic elements, it seems to place them in the second half of the 7th century.

We are not in a position to specify the possible manufacturing workshop to define ourselves with respect to the possible importance of the pieces, although the probability that gold from the Northwest is used in the manufacture of the crosses, judging by the metallographic analyzes carried out, may endorse the idea that they were objects made in a local workshop, which would also explain the imperfections of the auctions. At the hypothesis level, I could even think of the alleged workshop located in the North Plateau considered by Palol when studying the Hispanic-Visigothic liturgical bronzes [37] .

The appearance of the treasure in the town of Villafáfila, in an area with a place name as significant as Santa Marta, seems to most likely associate it with an ecclesiastical establishment, most likely a monastery, as there are several documented monasteries since the Mozarabic era dedicated to the Astorganan martyr within the Asturian diocese, of which Santa Marta is Patron, with witnessed worship since time immemorial [38] .

Let us remember in this regard the monasteries of Santa Marta de Tera and Santa Marta de Camarzana, both located in the North of the Province of Zamora, with documented existence since the 10th century [39] .

With all traces of possible remains of the monastery or church disappeared, its memory would remain in popular memory, reaching the place name to this day.

The reasons for the concealment, surely intentional, can be made to depend, in the absence of more reliable data, on the existence of some moment of insecurity and danger in the area, not necessarily associated with the Muslim invasion since moments of confusion are documented in the own times of the Gothic monarchy that should not, in principle, be ruled out.

The apparent contradiction represented by the presence of some pieces of bronze and brass in a fragmentary way to consider the finding as an intentional concealment, would probably be explained by the breakage of those at the time of their appearance and the subsequent loss of the fragments, that would have made them reach our days incompletely.

Regarding the settlement of the early Middle Ages in the area of Villafáfila, so rich on the other hand in vestiges of intense habitation in prehistoric and Roman times [40] , and with a toponym that seems to go back to possible settlements of the Germanic invaders [41] , It must be related to the exploitation of salt in the endorheic lagoons so abundant in the area, mainly the "Lacuna Maiore".

As of the 10th century, references to this activity are manifested in the multiple "pausatas" salt exploitations, sold or transferred and largely acquired by the monasteries, which makes Villafáfila a main salt focus in the Lampreana region [42 ] .

The oldest preserved document on "villa de Fafila" dates back to the year 936, when a "pausata" was sold in its terminus to the Leonese monastery of Sahagún [43] , a moment contrasted with some archaeological remains preserved nearby, such as a capital Corinthian marble existing in Otero de Sariegos, decorated with caulicula, dated to the 9th century or earlier, and another, rougher, in the also nearby town of Revellinos [44] , which testify to the persistence of the Visigothic tradition in the area.

The discovery of the treasure in the territory of what is currently this province of Zamora would correspond to other place names from the Visigothic period preserved in the same [45] , particularly in the church of La Nave, which support the importance of the territory at this time of the century. century in which it must have known a certain artistic and economic floating, as the construction of that seems to testify, period in rural life is articulated in a fundamental way around the ministries, which lasted in the following era [46] , and as with the which hypothetically could be related to the supposed religious center to which the crosses and other liturgical furniture of Villafáfila would have belonged.

Photographs of the pieces to Jerónimo Cendoyal. Plate1: 1 and 2, Plate2: 1 and 2. FIG. 1 2 and 3.

All text, photographs, transcription and montage, the rights belong to their authors, any type of use is prohibited without authorization.

All text and photography has been authorized for storage, treatment, work, transcription and assembly to José Luis Domínguez Martínez, its dissemination on villafafila.net, and any other means that is authorized.

[1] The drawings are due to Ángel Rodríguez González and the photographs of the pieces to Jerónimo Cendoyal.

[2] Gómez-Moreno, M., Monumental catalog of the province of Zamora, Madrid, 1927, p. 76 pl. 25.

[3] Zeiss, H., Die Grabfunde aus den Spanischen westgotenreich, Berlin-Leipzig, 1934, pp. 73 and 178, pl. 22, 1 to 3.

[4] Ferrandis Torres, J. Visigothic decorative arts, in History of Spain directed by R. Menéndez Pidal, III, Visigothic Spain, 1985, 5th ed. p. 692.

[5] Ferrandis Torres, J., Visigothic Decorative Arts, in History of Spain directed by R. Menéndez Pidal, III, Visigothic Spain, 1985, 5th ed., p. 692.

[6] Velasco Rodríguez, V., Catalog-inventory of the Provincial Museum of Fine Arts of Zamora, 1968, p. 71, pl. 28.

[7] Rodríguez Hernández, J., A possible Roman villa in Villafáfila (Zamora) in Zephirus, XXVIII-XXIX, 1978, pp 260-263; Regueras Grande, F., Remains and notes of Roman mosaics in the province of Zamora, in the Yearbook of the Institute of Zamorano Studies "Flolrián de Ocampo", 1985, pp. 42-46, pls. IV to VII.

[8] Palol Salellas, P. de, Hispanic Demography and Archeology of the IV-VIII Centuries, in BSAA, XXXII, 1966, p. 53

[9] Sevillano Carvajal; V., Archaeological testimony of the province of Zamora, Zamora, 1978, p. 311.

[10] Corzo Sánchez., R. San Pedro de la Nave. Historical and archaeological study of the Visigothic church, Zamora, 1986, p. 35, photo. eleven.

[11] HüBener, W. The gold foil crosses of the early Middle Ages, in Ampurias, 43, 1981, p. 272.

[12] Puertas Tricas, R., El Caño Hispano-Visigodo de Cártama, in Homage to Prof. Martín Almagro Basch, IV, Madrid, fig. 3.7.

[13] According to the daughter of the finder of the treasure, Mrs. Ladislaa Fernández, who kindly provided us with much of the invaluable data collected, the pieces appeared due to the consecutive opening of three waterwheels for irrigation, currently blocked, and the treasure was found when you open the first one. The batch of pieces would have appeared about two meters deep in the wall of the well, in a land that seemed disturbed, not finding bone or stone remains, and if some fragments of containers, "mortars" for our informant. When the open hole was covered because no water was found, a gold cross arm would have been found that would be acquired by a street vendor, always according to the testimony of the finder's daughter.

[14] We have used Sheet 13-13 (308) of the General Map, scale 1: 50:000, series L, of the Military Cartography of Spain, for sketches that graphically indicate the place of the discovery, due to the fact that its edition with respect to the corresponding Sheet of the National Topographic Map E. 1: 50,000.

[fifteen]In order to be able to better document the place where the treasure was found, and recover, if possible, materials that could be related to it, on June 21 and 25, 1986, we carried out a small excavation aimed fundamentally at verifying the existence of some kind of structure, -possible hidden building or necropolis area-, or deduce, if not, that it was an isolated finding, unrelated to a context. To this end, two test pits of 3 x 2 meters and 2 x 2 meters respectively were proposed, with a 1-meter core between them, which were located in front of the end of the dovecote that delimits Demetrio Zamorano's estate to the south (pl. 1 and 2 right). The first one was sterile and was therefore abandoned at 80 cm. deep, in a layer of chalky soil.

Unfortunately, the surveys carried out did not provide the expected results, so graphic documentation on them is not included in this article. From this, logically, it cannot be inferred in the absence of structures in the entire area related to the discovery of the treasure, but strictly in the specific points in which the tastings were raised, which cannot be considered sufficiently indicative, although they affirm on the idea of the isolated find. On the other hand, the excavation, finding one of the wells dug on the occasion of the discovery of the treasure in 1921, supports the veracity of the news regarding the circumstances of its appearance provided by our informants.

[16] Haseloff, G, Die langobardischen Goldblattekruze. Ein Beitran zur Frage nach dem Ursprung von Stil II, Mainz, 1956, pp. 143-163, Tefel 9-12; Schaffan, E. Kunst der longobarden in Italian, Leipzig, 1941, Tafel 52a, 54e, Peroni, A. Orefecerie e Archeologia longobarda in Toscana. Le necropoli, Firenze 1971, pl. 10.

[17] Hübener, W., The sheet crosses..., op. cit.

[18] Caillet, J. P, L´antiquité classique, le haut moyen age et Byzance au Musee de Cluny. Catalogue, Paris 1985, p. 187.

[19] Almagro Basch, M., The fragments of the Treasure of Torredonjimeno preserved in the Archaeological Museum of Barcelona, in Memoirs of the Provincial Archaeological Museums, VI, 1946, láms. XIII; Almagro Basch, M, The fragments of the Treasure of Torredonjimeno preserved in the Museum of Barcelona, in Men. of the Mus. Arq. Prov., IX-X, 1948-49, pl. LXVI; Hübener, W., The crosses of lamina..., ob. cit., fig. Four.

[20] Hübener, W., The foil crosses... ob. cit., p. 275-246.

[21] Ibid, p. 260.

[22] Ibid, p. 276.

[23] Ibid, p. 257.

[24] Schlunk, H. and Hauschild, Th. Hispania Antiqua. Die Denmäler der frühchristlichen und westgotischen Zeit, Mainz an Rhein, 1978, pp. 110-111, p. 201; López Serrano, M., Decorative arts of the Visigothic era, in History of Spain directed by Menéndez Pidal, III, Visigothic Spain, Madrid, 1985, 5th ed., p. 733.

[25] Palol, P. De, Hispanic art from the Visigoth period, Barcelona, 1986, pp. 158, 168-173.

[26] Palol Salellas, P. De los incensarios de Aubenya (Mayorca and Lladó (Girona), in Ampurias, XII, 1950 p. 12.

[27] Orsi, P., Byzantine Sicily, Rome, 1942, vol. I, figs. 80-81.

[28] Strzygowski, J., Kostische Kunst. General Catalog of Egyptian Antiquities of the Musée du Caire, Osnabrük, 1973, plate XXXII.

[29] Caballero Zoreda, L., Alconétar on the Roman road of La Plata. Garrovillas (Cáceres), Arch. Excavations in Spain, 70, 1970, p. Fig. 29.

[30] Boube-Piccot, CH., Coptic Bronzes du Maroc, in Belletin d' Archeologie Marocaine, VI, 1966, p. 343, pl. SAW.

[31] Caillet, JP., L´antiquité..., op. cit., p. 215.

[32] Cabrol, F. and Lecleroq, H. Dictionnaire d´Archeologie chrétienne et de liturgie, Paris, 1922, p. 24.

[33] Palol, P. De, Los incesarios..., ob. cit., p. 7.

[34] Ibid, p. 13.

[35] Cabrol, F. and Lecleroq, H., Dictionnaire..., op. cit. p. 27.

[36] Goméz-Moreno, M. Catalogo..., ob. cit., p. 76.

[37] Palol Salellas, P. De. Hispano-Visigothic bronzes of Mediterranean origin I. Little jars and liturgical patens, Barcelona, 1950, p. 136

[38] Quintana Prieto, A., Santoral of the Diocese of Astorga in Introibo, 3, Astorga, 1966.

[39] Gómez-Moreno, M. Catalogo..., op. cit., p. 182.

[40] Martin Valls. R. and Delibes de Castro, G. Findings... ob. cit., p. 303 and 311.

[41] Menéndez Pidal, R., in History of Spain directed by R Menéndez Pidal, III, Visigothic Spain, Madrid, 1985, 5th ed., p. XVII.

[42] Martínez Sopena, P., The land of Western Fields. Population, power and community from the 10th to the 13th century, Valladolid, 1985, pp. 309 et seq.

[43] Mínguez Fernández, J. Mª, Sahagún Monastery Diplomatic Collection (9th and 10th centuries) León, 1976, p. 40.

[44] Gómez-Moreno, M., Catalogo..., ob. cit., p. 76

[45] Alonso Avila, A., Suevos and Visigoths in the territory of the current province of Zamora, in Studia Zamorensia Histórica, VI, 1985, p. 52.

[46] Corzo Sánchez, R., San Pedro de la Nave..., op. cit., p. 36