Many bracteates bear striking similarities to one another, without being made with the same die. Such closely related designs still display a range of variations. They combine characteristic motifs and details in a way that neither can be explained by the overarching type concept (A-, B-, C-, D- or F-bracteates) (Types), nor with the production techniques or with general conventions of the animal style (Animal Style I). Thus, they cannot have been created independently of one another. The similarities are so close that the bracteates must have been made as copies from the same model, or simply from each other. Members of such a variation group are referred to as ‘family’ (resp. ‘design family’, ‘form family’; German: ‘Formularfamilie’). The fundamental standardisation of images throughout the entire production of bracteates is even more evident in the families than in the types.
When we look at the whole of members of one specific family, it becomes possible to read weaker impressions or poorly executed representations more clearly by comparing them with the better variants. The variation in the additional markings and runic inscriptions on the individual impressions, which can vary greatly within a family, also increases the clarity of the image. Both of these factors open up new approaches to interpreting individual motifs or subjects.
The families can be analysed without semantical interpretation. Their distribution allows direct relationships to be proven. Ideally, it is also possible to deduce the direction in which a family spread. It is also possible to determine the original place of conception of a family, and thus better trace the overall network of central places.
To date, eight families of A-bracteates have been defined, eleven of B-, 16 of C-, 19 of D- and two of F-bracteates. These also include images that share many criteria with one of the families but are excluded due to deviant details. They are called ‘bastards’. All in all, approximately 71% of all bracteate images belong to families. With the new finds added since 2011, additional families are already emerging.
- Pesch, Alexandra: Thema und Variation – Die Goldbrakteaten der Völkerwanderungszeit. Berlin/New York 2007.
Not only because of the precious metal gold, but also because of high collector's values, bracteates fetch high prices when they go on sale. Auction houses, including renowned ones, are keen to include them in their offerings. However, some of the pieces are suspected of being forgeries, counterfeits. A combination of various suspicious factors is decisive in this regard: These include unsatisfactory clarification of the origin of the pieces (often from supposedly old collections), their exceptionally good condition (compared to other archaeological finds), very clearly legible, almost ideal motifs, and the above-average size of many pieces due to their magnificent border zones. These are also particularly ‘customer-friendly’ features. The appearance of identical motifs in unusually large series is also suspicious.
Examples of this are the five copies of IK 594, the seven copies of IK 600 and the eight copies of IK 624. However, individual pieces also belong to this category, such as IK 637, 653, 662 and many more. Unfortunately, it has not yet been possible to conclusively confirm that any of the pieces are forgeries – the counterfeiters have become too clever when it comes to imitating old manufacturing methods and using old gold.
- Pesch, Alexandra: Zu schön, um wahr zu sein: Moderne Fälschungen von Goldbrakteaten? In: Forschungen in Franconofurd. Festschrift für Egon Wamers zum 65. Geburtstag, Hg: P. Fasold et al. Regensburg 2017, 147-157.