26.11.2014 Views

EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS - Institutul de Arheologie şi Istoria Artei

EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS - Institutul de Arheologie şi Istoria Artei

EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS - Institutul de Arheologie şi Istoria Artei

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>EPHEMERIS</strong> <strong>NAPOCENSIS</strong><br />

XXII<br />

2012


ROMANIAN ACADEMY<br />

INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY OF ART CLUJ-NAPOCA<br />

EDITORIAL BOARD<br />

Editor: Coriolan Horaţiu Opreanu<br />

Members: Sorin Cociş, Vlad-Andrei Lăzărescu, Ioan Stanciu<br />

ADVISORY BOARD<br />

Alexandru Avram (Le Mans, France); Mihai Bărbulescu (Rome, Italy); Alexan<strong>de</strong>r Bursche (Warsaw,<br />

Poland); Falko Daim (Mainz, Germany); Andreas Lippert (Vienna, Austria); Bernd Päffgen (Munich,<br />

Germany); Marius Porumb (Cluj-Napoca, Romania); Alexan<strong>de</strong>r Rubel (Iași, Romania); Peter Scherrer<br />

(Graz, Austria); Alexandru Vulpe (Bucharest, Romania).<br />

Responsible of the volume: Ioan Stanciu<br />

În ţară revista se poate procura prin poştă, pe bază <strong>de</strong> abonament la: EDITURA ACADEMIEI<br />

ROMÂNE, Calea 13 Septembrie nr. 13, sector 5, P. O. Box 5–42, Bucureşti, România, RO–76117,<br />

Tel. 021–411.90.08, 021–410.32.00; fax. 021–410.39.83; RODIPET SA, Piaţa Presei Libere nr. 1,<br />

Sector 1, P. O. Box 33–57, Fax 021–222.64.07. Tel. 021–618.51.03, 021–222.41.26, Bucureşti,<br />

România; ORION PRESS IMPEX 2000, P. O. Box 77–19, Bucureşti 3 – România, Tel. 021–301.87.86,<br />

021–335.02.96.<br />

<strong>EPHEMERIS</strong> <strong>NAPOCENSIS</strong><br />

Any correspon<strong>de</strong>nce will be sent to the editor:<br />

INSTITUTUL DE ARHEOLOGIE ŞI ISTORIA ARTEI<br />

Str. M. Kogălniceanu nr. 12–14, 400084 Cluj‐Napoca, RO<br />

e-mail: choprean@yahoo.com<br />

All responsability for the content, interpretations and opinions<br />

expressed in the volume belongs exclusively to the authors.<br />

DTP and print: MEGA PRINT<br />

Cover: Roxana Sfârlea<br />

© 2012 EDITURA ACADEMIEI ROMÂNE<br />

Calea 13 Septembrie nr. 13, Sector 5, Bucureşti 76117<br />

Telefon 021–410.38.46; 021–410.32.00/2107, 2119


ACADEMIA ROMÂNĂ<br />

INSTITUTUL DE ARHEOLOGIE ŞI ISTORIA ARTEI<br />

<strong>EPHEMERIS</strong><br />

<strong>NAPOCENSIS</strong><br />

XXII<br />

2012<br />

EDITURA ACADEMIEI ROMÂNE


SOMMAIRE – CONTENTS – INHALT<br />

STUDIES<br />

FLORIN GOGÂLTAN<br />

Ritual Aspects of the Bronze Age Tell-Settlements in the Carpathian Basin.<br />

A Methodological Approach .............................................7<br />

ALEXANDRA GĂVAN<br />

Metallurgy and Bronze Age Tell-Settlements from Western Romania (I) ............57<br />

DÁVID PETRUŢ<br />

Everyday Life in the Research Concerning the Roman Army in the Western European<br />

Part of the Empire and the Province of Dacia .................................91<br />

CORIOLAN HORAŢIU OPREANU<br />

From “στρατόπεδον” to Colonia Dacica Sarmizegetusa. A File of the Problem ........113<br />

CĂLIN COSMA<br />

Ethnische und politische Gegebenheiten im Westen und Nordwesten Rumäniens<br />

im 8.–10. Jh. n.Chr. ...................................................137<br />

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND EPIGRAPHICAL NOTES<br />

AUREL RUSTOIU<br />

Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I) .................................159<br />

VITALIE BÂRCĂ<br />

Some Remarks on Metal Cups with Zoomorphic Handles<br />

in the Sarmatian Environment ............................................185<br />

FLORIN FODOREAN<br />

“Spa” Vignettes in Tabula Peutingeriana. Travelling Ad Aquas: thermal Water Resources<br />

in Roman Dacia .......................................................211<br />

DAN AUGUSTIN DEAC<br />

Note on Apis Bull Representations in Roman Dacia ...........................223<br />

SILVIA MUSTAŢĂ, SORIN COCIŞ, VALENTIN VOIŞIAN<br />

Instrumentum Balnei from Roman Napoca. Two Iron Vessels Discovered on the Site<br />

from Victor Deleu Street ................................................235<br />

IOAN STANCIU<br />

About the Use of the So-Called Clay “Breadcakes” in the Milieu of the Early Slav<br />

Settlements (6 th –7 th Centuries) ............................................253


DAN BĂCUEŢ-CRIŞAN<br />

Contributions to the Study of Elites and Power Centers in Transylvania during the second<br />

Half of the 9 th – first Half of the 10 th Centuries. Proposal of I<strong>de</strong>ntification Criteria Based<br />

on archaeological Discoveries .............................................279<br />

ADRIANA ISAC, ERWIN GÁLL, SZILÁRD GÁL<br />

A 12 th Century Cemetery Fragment from Gilău (Cluj County) (Germ.: Julmarkt;<br />

Hung.: Gyalu) ........................................................301<br />

ADRIAN ANDREI RUSU<br />

Stove Tiles with the Royal Coat of Arms of King Matthias I Corvinus ..............313<br />

REVIEWS<br />

IULIAN MOGA, Culte solare şi lunare în Asia Mică în timpul Principatului/Solar and Lunar Cults in<br />

Asia Minor in the Age of the Principate, Editura Universităţii “Alexandru Ioan Cuza” Iaşi (Iaşi<br />

2011), 752 p. (Szabó Csaba) .............................................327<br />

DAN GH. TEODOR, Un centru meşteşugăresc din evul mediu timpuriu. Cercetările arheologice <strong>de</strong> la<br />

Lozna-Botoşani/An Artisan centre from the Early Middle Ages. The archaeological research from<br />

Lozna-Botoşani, Bibliotheca Archaeologica Moldaviae XV, Aca<strong>de</strong>mia Română – Filiala Iaşi,<br />

<strong>Institutul</strong> <strong>de</strong> <strong>Arheologie</strong>, Editura Istros (Brăila 2011), 200 p. (including 118 figures), abstract<br />

and list of figures in French (Ioan Stanciu) ...................................331<br />

CĂLIN COSMA, Funerary Pottery in Transylvania of the 7 th –10 th Centuries, Series Ethnic and<br />

Cultural Interferences in the 1 st Millenium B.C. to the 1 st Millenium AD. 18, Romanian<br />

Aca<strong>de</strong>my – Institute of Archaeology and Art History Cluj‐Napoca, Mega Publishing House<br />

(Cluj-Napoca 2011), 183 p., 49 plates (Aurel Dragotă) .........................339<br />

RESEARCH PROJECTS<br />

Crossing the Boundaries. Remo<strong>de</strong>ling Cultural I<strong>de</strong>ntities at the End of Antiquity in Central and Eastern<br />

Europe. A Case Study (Coriolan H. Oprean, Vlad-Andrei Lăzărescu) ...............343<br />

Warriors and military retainers in Transylvania of the 7 th –9 th centuries (Călin Cosma) .........349<br />

Seeing the Unseen. Landscape Archaeology on the Northern Frontier of the Roman Empire at Porolissvm<br />

(Romania) (Coriolan H. Oprean, Vlad-Andrei Lăzărescu) .......................352<br />

Abbreviations that can not be found in Bericht <strong>de</strong>r Römisch-Germanische Kommission .....363<br />

Gui<strong>de</strong>lines for “Ephemeris Napocensis” .........................................366


ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND EPIGRAPHICAL NOTES<br />

COMMENTARIA ARCHAEOLOGICA ET HISTORICA (I)<br />

Aurel Rustoiu 1<br />

Abstract: The first note is discussing the Celtic grave with a helmet from Ciumeşti and the significance of<br />

the Greek bronze greaves which belong to this burial. During the 50 years which passed since its discovery,<br />

the aforementioned grave generated numerous comments, interpretations and scientific <strong>de</strong>bates. The note<br />

is a synthesis of the information regarding its context of discovery, the stages of publication of the inventory<br />

and the successive theories concerning the chronology and interpretation of the grave. A recent analysis has<br />

<strong>de</strong>monstrated that the burial can be dated to the LT B2-C1 (or more likely only to the LT C1) and very<br />

probably belonged to a Celtic warrior from the Carpathian Basin who was a mercenary in the eastern<br />

Mediterranean region in the second half of the 3 rd century BC. Starting from these aspects, the Greek bronze<br />

greaves belonging to the funerary inventory, alongsi<strong>de</strong> other items of LT military equipment, are analysed<br />

in <strong>de</strong>tail. The artefacts played an important role in <strong>de</strong>fining a particular warlike i<strong>de</strong>ntity in comparison<br />

with the military elites of the eastern Mediterranean.<br />

The second note comprises an evaluation of the ol<strong>de</strong>r or more recent Transylvanian discoveries belonging<br />

to the Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii group: funerary contexts or isolated finds including specific weaponry or<br />

harness fittings. They illustrate a concentration of the burials of Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii type in southwestern<br />

Transylvania, more precisely in an area related to the centre of power of the Dacian kingdom<br />

prior to and during the rule of Burebista. At the same time, some burials point to an extension of this<br />

phenomenon in farther areas from central or northern Transylvania, up to the upper Tisza, these regions<br />

being very probably taken over and controlled by Dacian kings. Chronologically, most of these discoveries<br />

can be dated to the LT D1, the latest dated burials belonging to the Augustan period.<br />

Keywords: Ciumeşti, graves, greaves, helmets, sica, Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii<br />

1. The grave with a helmet from Ciumeşti – 50 years from its discovery.<br />

Comments on the greaves 2<br />

The well-known grave from Ciumeşti (Satu Mare County, Romania), containing an<br />

iron helmet having a realistic-ma<strong>de</strong> bronze bird of prey fitted on the calotte, was discovered 50<br />

years ago, on 10 August 1961. The helmet is a unique artefact amongst the La Tène finds from<br />

Europe due to its outstanding features. As a consequence it was inclu<strong>de</strong>d in numerous exhibitions<br />

and catalogues, as well as in syntheses concerning Celtic art and civilization. Unfortunately<br />

the burial was inci<strong>de</strong>ntally discovered and its inventory was recovered and published in successive<br />

stages. This situation led to the appearance and perpetuation of several confusions regarding the<br />

1<br />

Institute of Archaeology and History of Art Cluj‐Napoca, Romanian Aca<strong>de</strong>my Cluj Branch, M. Kogălniceanu<br />

str. 12–14, 400084, Cluj‐Napoca, Cluj county, RO; e-mail: aurelrustoiu@yahoo.com.<br />

2<br />

This work was supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research, CNCS –<br />

UEFISCDI, project number PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-0278.<br />

Ephemeris Napocensis, XXII, 2012, p. 159–183


160 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

interpretation of the grave from Ciumeşti. The main stages in the recovering of archaeological<br />

information and the subsequent chronological and cultural interpretation of this outstanding<br />

discovery are presented below.<br />

The first group of finds recovered from the inventory arrived in the Museum of Baia<br />

Mare, being later published by M. Rusu 3 . It inclu<strong>de</strong>d the iron helmet with the bronze bird, two<br />

bronze greaves, an iron javelin head and an iron chainmail (Fig. 1). M. Rusu noted that all of<br />

these artefacts lacked burning traces and, according to the information collected from discoverers,<br />

burnt remains or human bones (cremated or not) were not seen in the burial pit (having<br />

a circular shape and a diameter of about 1.2–1.5 m). The context suggested a symbolic burial<br />

(cenotaph), or a ritual <strong>de</strong>position. As concerning the chronological aspect, M. Rusu consi<strong>de</strong>red<br />

that the inventory could be dated towards the end of the 4 th century BC (La Tène B).<br />

Shortly after the publication J. V. S. Megaw remarked the typological resemblance of<br />

the helmet from Ciumeşti with the one from Batina, as well as the <strong>de</strong>piction of a similar helmet<br />

on the ‘weapons frieze’ from Pergamon. Megaw also ma<strong>de</strong> some pertinent observations about<br />

the entire inventory 4 , but these were ignored by Romanian specialist literature. A few years<br />

later U. Schaaff, analysing Celtic iron helmets, ad<strong>de</strong>d the find from Ciumeşti to a type specific<br />

to the eastern Celts (Helme mit verstärkte Kalotte), known in the area between Slovenia and<br />

Transylvania, although some examples reached Asia Minor, according to the <strong>de</strong>pictions from<br />

the temple of Athena Nikephoros from Pergamon 5 . Later discoveries confirmed the distribution<br />

of such helmets towards the Balkans, for example the finds i<strong>de</strong>ntified in Bulgaria, Albania and<br />

Macedonia (FYROM) 6 .<br />

Still, the grave from Ciumeşti was not an isolated <strong>de</strong>position, but a part of a larger<br />

La Tène cemetery. Thus its discovery led to the investigation of this site. Systematic archaeological<br />

excavations were carried out on the entire area of the cemetery (Fig. 3/1), as well as in the<br />

contemporaneous settlement from its vicinity (Fig. 3/2–4). The investigations were done in the<br />

following years (1962, 1964–1965), being published by V. Zirra 7 . In total were uncovered 32<br />

graves – seven of inhumation, 21 of cremation in pit and four of cremation in urn. Other three<br />

cremation graves in urn, initially consi<strong>de</strong>red as belonging to the La Tène cemetery, being ascribed<br />

to the indigenous population 8 , are earlier dated and belong to the Early Iron Age 9 . V. Zirra<br />

consi<strong>de</strong>red that <strong>de</strong>spite some early artefacts the cemetery should be dated only in the La Tène<br />

C, with an absolute date-range from around 230 to 130 BC 10 . At the same time I. H. Crişan 11<br />

continued to sustain an earlier dating in the La Tène B2. K. Horedt 12 also remarked that the<br />

Ciumeşti cemetery began in the La Tène B2 (after 275 BC), but most of the burials belonged<br />

to the La Tène C1 sub-phase. Today it is accepted that in general the entire cemetery can be<br />

3<br />

RUSU 1969; RUSU/BANDULA 1970.<br />

4<br />

MEGAW 1970, 133–134.<br />

5<br />

SCHAAFF 1974, 171–173, Fig. 25 (distribution map); SCHAAFF 1988, 300–301, Fig. 14 (distribution map).<br />

6<br />

RUSTOIU 2006, 48–49, Fig. 4; RUSTOIU 2008, 21–25, Fig. 7 (distribution map); GUŠTIN 2011,<br />

123–124, Fig. 2 (the most recent distribution map). GUŠTIN/KUZMAN/MALENKO 2011 published a grave<br />

belonging to a Celtic mercenary from Ohrid, dated to the La Tène C1, and having in inventory a helmet of the same<br />

type to the one from Ciumeşti, again confirming the dating of the Transylvanian burial (I am grateful to M. Guštin<br />

for allowing me to read the manuscript before publication). See below.<br />

7<br />

ZIRRA 1967 (cemetery); ZIRRA 1980 (settlement). The research team also inclu<strong>de</strong>d M. Rusu (1962), I. Németi<br />

and M. Zdroba for the cemetery, while I. H. Crişan participated in the investigations from the settlement (1964–1965).<br />

8<br />

CRIŞAN 1966, 5–22; ZIRRA 1967, 48–52.<br />

9<br />

NÉMETI 2000–2001, 62; NÉMETI 2003, 164.<br />

10<br />

ZIRRA 1967, 114. See also ZIRRA 1991, 382, this time providing a date-range between 240 and 130 BC.<br />

11<br />

CRIŞAN 1966, 41; CRIŞAN 1971, 70.<br />

12<br />

HOREDT 1973, 299–303.


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

161<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

Fig. 1. Ciumeşti grave with helmet. The finds published by M. Rusu (after RUSU 1969).


162 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

dated to the La Tène B2b–C1 sub-phases 13 , being contemporaneous with the horizons III–IV<br />

of the cemetery from Pişcolt, in the same region 14 . The mentioned chronological limits raised<br />

some doubts about the too early dating of the rich grave that belonged to a Celtic warrior.<br />

The chronological problem came again into discussion during the following years.<br />

Another part of the grave’s inventory remained in the possession of a local man who participated<br />

in the works of 1961 leading to the discovery of the grave. The artefacts were recovered<br />

in 1973 by T. Ba<strong>de</strong>r (from the Museum of Satu Mare on that time) and published two years<br />

later by I. Németi 15 . The remaining inventory inclu<strong>de</strong>s an iron belt with lanceolated buckle,<br />

the spring of an iron brooch, fragments from the chainmail, and another fragment of a cheekpiece<br />

belonging to the iron helmet, a large bi-truncated vessel and a bowl (Fig. 2). Some finds<br />

have burning traces, whereas the person who had them affirmed that in the pit were also<br />

cremated human bones. These new data <strong>de</strong>monstrate that the grave was of cremation in a<br />

pit. I. Németi opted for a dating in the La Tène B2b–C1 sub-phases, similar to the one of<br />

the entire cemetery.<br />

4<br />

1<br />

2<br />

5<br />

3<br />

Fig. 2. Ciumeşti grave with helmet. The finds published by I. Németi (after KULL 1997).<br />

13<br />

In Transylvania the absolute dating for the LT B2b is around 280/277–250 BC, while that of the LT C1<br />

is around 250–175 BC. See HOREDT 1973, 302; RUSTOIU 2000, 182–184; RUSTOIU/EGRI 2010, 218;<br />

RUSTOIU/EGRI 2011, 18.<br />

14<br />

According to NÉMETI 1975, 244–245; NÉMETI 1992b, 110.<br />

15<br />

NÈMETI 1975, 243–245.


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

163<br />

2<br />

1<br />

3 4<br />

Fig. 3. 1 – The plan of the cemetery from Ciumeşti (after RUSU 1969) (1 limits of the excavations; 2 limit of the<br />

sand dune; 3 limit of the area <strong>de</strong>stroyed before the beginning of systematic excavations; 4 mo<strong>de</strong>rn constructions;<br />

5 grave with helmet; 6 La Tène cremation graves; 7 La Tène inhumation graves; 8 cremation graves of the Early Iron<br />

Age). 2 – The plan of the settlement from Ciumeşti (after ZIRRA 1980). 3, 4 – Dwellings from the settlement from<br />

Ciumeşti (after ZIRRA 1980).<br />

In 1984 T. Ba<strong>de</strong>r published another piece found on the area of the cemetery – an<br />

iron horse-bit belonging to a common type from the northern Balkans 16 . However, there is<br />

no evi<strong>de</strong>nce that the piece belonged to this grave 17 , as B. Kull has suggested 18 . The horse-bit is<br />

nevertheless important as evi<strong>de</strong>nce of the connections between the Celts from Ciumeşti and the<br />

northern Balkans. Lastly, while re-drawing the finds from the Museum of Satu Mare, B. Kull<br />

ad<strong>de</strong>d another fragmentary iron object, probably a scissors 19 . Still the artefact is not belonging<br />

to the grave with helmet 20 .<br />

16<br />

BADER 1984.<br />

17<br />

NÈMETI 1992a, 139 affirmed that the horse-bit was found on the cemetery’s area after the end of the excavations.<br />

18<br />

KULL 1997, Fig. 38/8. The horse-bit is also inclu<strong>de</strong>d in the inventory by TELEAGĂ 2008, 15, no. 49.<br />

19<br />

KULL 1997, 280–281, Fig. 38.<br />

20<br />

I. Németi ma<strong>de</strong> me aware that the mentioned scissors was placed in the permanent exhibition of the Museum<br />

of Satu Mare in the same showcase with other artefacts from the grave with helmet from Ciumeşti. For this reason<br />

the German specialist got the impression that all of the artefacts from the showcase belonged to the same grave, but<br />

the scissors has a different provenance.


164 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

Recently I have comprehensively discussed the problem of the grave with helmet<br />

from Ciumeşti 21 . After analysing the entire ‘archaeological dossier’ my conclusion was that<br />

the burial is quite clearly of cremation in a pit. The burnt traces are missing on several objects<br />

(helmet, greaves and javelin head), while the chainmail was fol<strong>de</strong>d before being placed in the<br />

pit. These observations suggest that some of the grave goods did not accompany the <strong>de</strong>ceased<br />

on the pyre, being laid in the pit separately from the cinerary remains. Chronologically an<br />

early dating in the 4 th century BC cannot be sustained anymore. The analysis of the funerary<br />

inventory indicates that the dating should be placed in the La Tène B2b–C1 sub-phases,<br />

or more likely only in the La Tène C1. At the same time, the presence of the iron chainbelt<br />

ma<strong>de</strong> of eight-shaped segments, commonly encountered in feminine graves from the<br />

Carpathian Basin, suggests a double burial.<br />

Another important aspect concerns the ‘i<strong>de</strong>ntity’ of the warrior interred at Ciumeşti.<br />

The rich funerary inventory indicates that the <strong>de</strong>ceased was an important person in<br />

the local community, a representative of the warlike Celtic elites from the Carpathian Basin<br />

of the second half of the 3 rd century BC. More than that, the mentioned recent analysis<br />

suggests that the warrior from Ciumeşti was a mercenary on the battlefields from the eastern<br />

Mediterranean in a period in which the recruitment of Celtic troops by various Hellenistic<br />

rulers became a habit.<br />

In this context the presence of the bronze greaves in the assemblage of military equipment<br />

is relevant. These pieces were each ma<strong>de</strong> from a single sheet of bronze (with a high percentage<br />

of tin). They were carefully hammered to copy the anatomic <strong>de</strong>tails of the legs 22 (Fig. 4). Similar<br />

items, ma<strong>de</strong> according to the anatomic characteristics of the owner, appeared in Greece at the<br />

end of the Archaic period, and were used during the Classical period 23 and occasionally later in<br />

the Hellenistic times 24 . The right greave from Ciumeşti, better preserved, has a length of 46 cm 25 ,<br />

which suggest a tall owner of about 1.80–1.90 m. For example the greaves from Olympia (dated<br />

to the Classical period) have lengths of about 39–41 cm 26 , pointing to some anthropological<br />

differences between the two mentioned regions.<br />

These greaves were not simple ‘imported’ goods. J. V. S. Megaw noted four <strong>de</strong>ca<strong>de</strong>s ago<br />

that they have a Hellenistic origin and seem to be ‘the prize of some foray into the southern<br />

Balkans’ 27 . Still, their manufacturing required the precise measurements of the dimensions<br />

and anatomic characteristics of the owners, and this could have only been done by specialised<br />

craftsmen. The two gil<strong>de</strong>d greaves from the so-called grave of Philip II from Vergina, which have<br />

21<br />

RUSTOIU 2006; RUSTOIU 2008, 13–63.<br />

22<br />

RUSU 1969, 278–279, Fig. 6; RUSU/BANDULA 1970, 8, 13, Pl. 13.<br />

23<br />

KUNZE 1991, 76–80 (gr. IV); JARVA 1995, 96–97 (the anatomy group).<br />

24<br />

See for example the finds from the northern Black Sea region: GALANINA 1965.<br />

25<br />

RUSU 1969, 279, Fig. 6; RUSU/BANDULA 1970, 8, Pl: II; XIII. TELEAGĂ 2008, 442, no. 953, lists a<br />

length of 42 cm and 42.5 cm respectively (!?). I am won<strong>de</strong>ring if these differences are resulting from the way in<br />

which the artefacts were restored in the laboratory and preserved in the stores of the Museum of Baia Mare during<br />

the last <strong>de</strong>ca<strong>de</strong>s (some differences can be observed between the images published by M. Rusu and the more recent<br />

ones). Still, even if the new dimensions are taken into consi<strong>de</strong>ration, the greaves from Ciumeşti are amongst those<br />

which exceed the upper limit of the size of similar artefacts from the Mediterranean region.<br />

26<br />

KUNZE 1991, 117–120. Some pairs of greaves which exceed the size of the commonly found ones in<br />

the Greek region are also known from graves from the northern Pontic region, dated to the 4 th –3 rd centuries BC.<br />

For example in different graves from Pervomaevka they have a length of 46–46.5 cm, while in another grave from<br />

Kertch they reach a length of 47 cm. On the other hand there are also pairs of greaves which are well below the limit.<br />

For example a pair of greaves from Aksjutincy has a length of only 33 cm (ČERNENKO 2006, 102–103, no. 649,<br />

666–667, 681). All these variations <strong>de</strong>monstrate a wi<strong>de</strong> range of anthropological dimensions which had to be taken<br />

into consi<strong>de</strong>ration by the craftsmen who ma<strong>de</strong> such objects.<br />

27<br />

MEGAW 1970, 133 no. 211.


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

165<br />

Fig. 4. Greaves from Ciumeşti. County Museum of History and Archaeology, Baia Mare<br />

(photos Zamfir Şomcutean Baia Mare).


166 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

different dimensions, being ma<strong>de</strong> for a crippled man, are a significant example 28 (Fig. 5/1).<br />

At the same time the dimensional variations of the greaves discovered in different geo-cultural<br />

areas, previously mentioned, also support their ma<strong>de</strong>-to-or<strong>de</strong>r manufacturing. It is less probable<br />

that a Greek artisan could have ma<strong>de</strong> such objects in the Carpathian Basin to or<strong>de</strong>rs of some<br />

local aristocrats, since the greaves from Ciumeşti are unique not only in this region but across<br />

the whole Celtic area. The activity of such a specialised Greek artisan would have left more<br />

archaeological traces in the region. Thus it is almost sure that the warrior from Ciumeşti or<strong>de</strong>red<br />

and got the greaves from a Greek workshop in the Mediterranean area. This was possible only<br />

because the warrior himself travelled in the mentioned region. In the 3 rd century BC the mobility<br />

of certain groups from temperate Europe was often related to the mercenary activities. Due to<br />

this reason my presumption is that the warrior from Ciumeşti went to the Mediterranean as<br />

mercenary and this happened in the second half of the 3 rd century BC 29 .<br />

Recently E. Teleagă has published a vast work regarding the Greek imports recovered<br />

from cemeteries of the 6 th –3 rd centuries BC in the lower Danube basin. The author<br />

catalogued and classified numerous artefacts discovered in funerary contexts, also bringing<br />

into discussion the finds from other archaeological contexts (settlements, <strong>de</strong>positions etc)<br />

and from outsi<strong>de</strong> the mentioned area, for example those found in graves from Transylvania 30 .<br />

The book, <strong>de</strong>spite some errors regarding the cultural i<strong>de</strong>ntification and chronology probably<br />

resulting from the huge quantity of data collected 31 , will remain a reference work for this<br />

subject. Writing about the grave with helmet from Ciumeşti, E. Teleagă has suggested a<br />

dating around 300 BC, <strong>de</strong>spite the general dating of the cemetery at the end of the La Tène<br />

B2 and in the La Tène C1 32 . This dating is leading to an earlier dating of the funerary<br />

inventory and implicitly of the greaves, which are dated after 450 BC 33 . Thus the proposed<br />

dating is wrong, as it will be shown below.<br />

The presence of some Greek artefacts in contexts which are later dated than their regular<br />

period of use is theoretically possible. An episo<strong>de</strong> from 274 BC is relevant in this context. During<br />

the campaign of Pyrrhus in Macedonia against Antigonos Gonatas, Celtic mercenaries of the king<br />

of Epirus pillaged the royal Macedonian cemetery from Aegae (Plutarch, Pyrrhus 26. 6) 34 . Through<br />

such actions a Celtic mercenary could have gained some ol<strong>de</strong>r prestige objects, brought afterwards<br />

home. Still, as previously <strong>de</strong>monstrated, the grave from Ciumeşti belongs to the second half of the<br />

3 rd century BC and the greaves were ma<strong>de</strong> in the same period by a Greek artisan who measured<br />

the anatomic characteristics of the person who or<strong>de</strong>red the objects. Thus the dating proposed by<br />

E. Teleagă is incorrect, so the interpretation has to turn to another direction.<br />

28<br />

ANDRONICOS 1984, 186–189, Fig. 150.<br />

29<br />

RUSTOIU 2006; RUSTOIU 2008, 36–49.<br />

30<br />

TELEAGĂ 2008.<br />

31<br />

For example TELEAGĂ 2008, 256–257 no. 2, Karte 45, wrongly localizes Bene (nowadays Dobroselie in<br />

Trans-Carpathian Ukraine) in Transdanubia (in Hungary). More than that, probably the bronze vessel discovered<br />

at Bene, which arrived in the Museum of Cluj at the beginning of the 20 th century, was found in a funerary context<br />

(see POPOVICH 1995–1996, 86). At the same time, while the funerary inventories from the Carpathian Basin are<br />

discussed, a series of important discoveries are missing, for example the oenochoe dated to the end of the 4 th century<br />

BC and coming from a grave from Pećine cemetery (PAROVIĆ–PEŠIKAN 1993, 1243, Fig.: 1/4; 3/23) etc.<br />

32<br />

TELEAGĂ 2008, 15 no. 49.<br />

33<br />

TELEAGĂ 2008, 249, 442 no. 953, Pl. 133/1–4.<br />

34<br />

“… And after getting Aegae into his power, besi<strong>de</strong>s other seventies exercised upon its inhabitants he left as a<br />

garrison in the city some of the Gauls who were making the campaign with him. But the Gauls, a race insatiable of<br />

wealth, set themselves to digging up the tombs of the kings who had been buried there; the treasure they plun<strong>de</strong>red,<br />

the bones they insolently cast to the four winds.” (Translation PERRIN 1920). Plutarch. Plutarch’s Lives. with an<br />

English Translation by Bernadotte Perrin. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press. London. William Heinemann<br />

Ltd. 1920. See also GRIFFITH 1968, 63.


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

167<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3 4 5<br />

Fig. 5. 1 – Greaves from the ‘grave of Philip II’ from Vergina (after ANDRONICOS 1984). 2 – Silver plaque<br />

from Letnica. 3, 4 – Greaves from Agighiol. 5 – Greave from Vraca (all after KULL 1997). 6 – Greave from<br />

Malomirovo (after SÎRBU 2006).


168 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

The greaves were very popular in Greece during the Archaic and Classical periods, being<br />

part of the hoplites’ equipment 35 . They are discovered in archaeological contexts (graves or sanctuaries),<br />

but are also <strong>de</strong>picted on numerous monuments or painted vessels, un<strong>de</strong>rlining the role and<br />

significance of these artefacts in the assemblages of <strong>de</strong>fensive military equipment. In the same<br />

period, and also in the 4 th –3 rd centuries BC, the anatomic variants of the Greek greaves became<br />

popular amongst Thracian populations from the Balkans or Scythian tribes from the northern<br />

Black Sea region 36 (in the latter area the latest dated examples belong to the 2 nd century BC 37 ).<br />

In the lower Danube basin, at Agighiol and Vraca, and more recently at Malomirovo in Bulgaria,<br />

were found local variants ma<strong>de</strong> of silver and richly <strong>de</strong>corated 38 (Fig. 5/3–6). Asi<strong>de</strong> from that on an<br />

appliqué from the Letnica hoard (Bulgaria) is shown a hunting scene in which a ri<strong>de</strong>r wears such<br />

greaves 39 (Fig. 5/2), pointing to the role of status symbol of these objects for the aristocracy of the<br />

northern Balkans, together with the remaining elements of the military equipment.<br />

In Greece, greaves continued to be used in the Hellenistic period, but their symbolic role<br />

was modified. A grave with funerary chamber discovered at Lefkadia in Macedonia, and built around<br />

200 BC or slightly later, is relevant from this point of view. The burial belonged to the brothers Lyson<br />

and Kallikles, but it was <strong>de</strong>signed to also hold the funerary urns of an entire series of <strong>de</strong>scendants.<br />

On one of the walls is painted a panoply of arms having a Macedonian shield in the middle, flanked<br />

by two swords (a Macedonian one and another of ‘western’ type), while two helmets and a pair of<br />

greaves are <strong>de</strong>picted below (Fig. 6). On the opposite wall the shield and the two swords are accompanied<br />

by two body armours and two helmets 40 . The images of weapons on funerary monuments<br />

from Greece originate from earlier traditions of displaying real objects 41 . Their painting in a realistic<br />

manner, as in the case of the grave from Lefkadia, indicates that the intention was to present the real<br />

panoplies of arms of the <strong>de</strong>ceased 42 . They belonged to a class of lower local warlike aristocrats who<br />

increased their status, accumulated fortunes through military activities and expressed their social<br />

position and i<strong>de</strong>ntity a few generations after the <strong>de</strong>ath of Alexan<strong>de</strong>r the Great 43 . The panoplies of<br />

arms consisting of <strong>de</strong>fensive items (including the greaves) and offensive weapons were true emblems<br />

of their status within the society. More than that, the weapons <strong>de</strong>picted in the grave also played a<br />

symbolic role for their <strong>de</strong>scendants, as they reiterated the right to inherit the same privileged status.<br />

The greaves, together with other weapons, were also shown on a series of public monuments.<br />

Probably the best known example is the ‘weapons frieze’ from the stoa of the temple of Athena<br />

Nikephoros from Pergamon (Fig. 6). The relief was probably ma<strong>de</strong> during the reign of Eumenes II<br />

(after the <strong>de</strong>feat of Antiochus III at Magnesia in 190 BC) and shows the weapons captured from<br />

the enemy, both the Hellenistic ones and the weapons of Celtic mercenaries hired by the Seleucid<br />

king 44 . They were represented in a realistic manner, the military equipment being easily recognizable<br />

in <strong>de</strong>tail. Amongst the well known and most relevant examples belonging to the La Tène panoply<br />

of arms can be mentioned: a helmet having a morphology similar to the one from Batina and<br />

belonging to the same type as the helmet from Ciumeşti; the typical Celtic oval shields with iron<br />

bosses; the chainmails with a closing system i<strong>de</strong>ntical to those discovered in the Balkans (Fig. 7) etc.<br />

35<br />

SNODGRASS 1964, 88; SNODGRASS 1967, 58.<br />

36<br />

TELEAGĂ 2008, 249–251, Karte 43; ČERNENKO 2006, 98–105.<br />

37<br />

ČERNENKO 2006, 105 no. 694.<br />

38<br />

See for example BERCIU 1974, 52–55, Fig. 8–9; KULL 1997, 291–292,Fig. 46/1–3; TORBOV 2005, 59,<br />

167, 193, Pl. 8, 21; SÎRBU 2006, 89 Fig. 59/2.<br />

39<br />

KULL 1997, 291 Fig. 4/12; SÎRBU 2006, Fig. 53/1.<br />

40<br />

SAKELLARIOU 1983, 150–151 Fig. 96–97; POLITO 1998, 75–76 Fig. 3–4.<br />

41<br />

POLITO 1998, 97.<br />

42<br />

POLITO 1998, 76.<br />

43<br />

It is significant that in the royal cemetery from Vergina such images are missing, and real weapons were placed<br />

in graves. See also POLITO 1998, 77.<br />

44<br />

A synthesis of the current <strong>de</strong>bates regarding the dating of the monument from Pergamon in POLITO 1998,<br />

91–95.


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

169<br />

In comparison with the frequency of other types of weapons shown on the ‘weapons frieze’ from<br />

Pergamon, the greaves were seldom <strong>de</strong>picted (Fig. 6). This difference may suggest a selective use<br />

of them, only by certain individuals, probably high rank officers. A similar phenomenon has been<br />

noted in the Republican Roman army when only centurions and superior officers worn greaves 45 .<br />

Fig. 6. Detail of the painting on the wall of the grave belonging to brothers Lyson and Kallikles from Lefkadia<br />

above (after SAKELLARIOU 1983); fragment of the ‘weapons frieze’ from Pergamon, on which a pair of greaves is<br />

<strong>de</strong>picted bellow (after BOHN 1885).<br />

45<br />

FEUGÈRE 2002, 76.


170 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

1<br />

5<br />

2<br />

6<br />

3<br />

4<br />

Fig. 7. Pieces of military equipment and their representation on the ‘weapons frieze’ from Pergamon. 1 – Helmet<br />

from Batina, Croatia (after SCHAAFF 1988). 2 – Shield-boss from Fântânele-Dealul Popii, Transylvania<br />

(after RUSTOIU 2008). 3, 4 – Closing systems of some chainmails from Smochan (3) and Tărnava (4), Bulgaria<br />

(after TORBOV 2004). 5, 6 – Pergamon (after BOHN 1885).


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

171<br />

The monument from Pergamon is also important for the chronological aspect of this<br />

discussion. Its <strong>de</strong>corative panels illustrate a large range of weapons and military equipment,<br />

Hellenistic and ‘Barbarian’, some of them ol<strong>de</strong>r but still in use at the beginning of the<br />

2 nd century BC, others new and archaeologically documented up to the end of the 2 nd century<br />

or the beginning of the 1 st century BC.<br />

In conclusion, returning to the warrior buried at Ciumeşti, it has to be noted that the<br />

funerary inventory points to his belonging to a warlike elite displaying well <strong>de</strong>fined and visible<br />

signs of status. Still, these have to be interpreted from two different perspectives.<br />

The chainmail and the helmet <strong>de</strong>corated with a bird of prey were symbolic elements<br />

<strong>de</strong>signed to set him apart within the group of warriors from both its own community and on a<br />

wi<strong>de</strong>r area in the Carpathian Basin. The remaining graves with weapons from Ciumeşti (no. 9<br />

and 12) contain ‘standard’ panoplies of weapons of the period, commonly encountered in other<br />

cemeteries from the Carpathian Basin or other areas in temperate Europe: sword (sometimes<br />

with the chain-belt), spear head and shield 46 . For this reason the military equipment of the<br />

mentioned <strong>de</strong>ceased can be consi<strong>de</strong>red insignia of a chieftain having a significant authority in<br />

his community, and perhaps even on a larger area.<br />

On the other hand the greaves were also symbols of his rank, but of different nature<br />

than the local traditional equipment. It may be presumed that during his peregrinations in the<br />

eastern Mediterranean, and the military actions in which he was involved, the warrior from<br />

Ciumeşti, as head of a unit of mercenaries, must have compared himself with the Greek officers<br />

fighting alongsi<strong>de</strong> him. Aiming to be perceived as equal to these officers (perhaps also mercenaries<br />

hired by the same master), he adopted the insignia of the prominent military function<br />

which were comprehen<strong>de</strong>d and acknowledged as such by his Greek colleagues.<br />

Lastly, it has to be noted that in the 50 years which passed since the discovery, the grave<br />

with helmet from Ciumeşti continues to <strong>de</strong>termine numerous scientific <strong>de</strong>bates and to attract<br />

the public interest whenever it is presented in exhibitions, catalogues or books of general interest,<br />

due to its spectacular inventory.<br />

2. The Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii group in Transylvania. Old and new discoveries<br />

Nearly four <strong>de</strong>ca<strong>de</strong>s ago Z. Woźniak noted the spread of some cremation graves containing<br />

panoplies of weapons consisting of swords of La Tène type, spears, shields and curved daggers<br />

(sometimes <strong>de</strong>corated) on the territory of today Bulgaria (mainly in the north and north-west) and<br />

Romania (mainly in Oltenia). In many cases the inventories also contained horse-bits of local type,<br />

indicating that the graves belonged to ri<strong>de</strong>rs. The entire phenomenon was named ‘Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski<br />

kolonii’ and was dated mainly to the 2 nd –1 st centuries BC 47 . Still it was noted that during this period<br />

some elements of the funerary rite and ritual were different from a zone to another (tumuli in<br />

north-western Bulgaria, cremation graves in pit, sometimes with the burnt remains placed in urns in<br />

Oltenia etc), suggesting the existence of different traditions and ethnic origins of the members of the<br />

warlike elites which used an otherwise unitary, typologically and functionally, military equipment.<br />

Later discoveries revealed that the mentioned phenomenon was exten<strong>de</strong>d over a wi<strong>de</strong>r<br />

area, including both banks of the Danube in the Iron Gates region, areas in western and southern<br />

Muntenia, and south-western Transylvania 48 .<br />

46<br />

ZIRRA 1967, 24–28 (Grave 9 – complete panoply), 29–32 (Grave 12 – only a sword).<br />

47<br />

WOŹNIAK 1974, 74–138; WOŹNIAK 1976, 388–394. It was later noted that sometimes the military<br />

equipment also contained helmets and chainmails: RUSTOIU 1994a, 34–35; RUSTOIU 1996, 36, 147–150 etc.<br />

48<br />

RUSTOIU 1994a; RUSTOIU 1994b; SÎRBU/RUSTOIU 1999 (with bibliography); RUSTOIU 2002,<br />

11–23; RUSTOIU 2005, 110 Fig. 1; RUSTOIU 2008, 147 Fig. 73 (distribution map).


172 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

1<br />

2<br />

0 7 cm<br />

(1, 2)<br />

3<br />

Fig. 8. 1 – Curved dagger from Deva (after BAJUSZ 2005). 2 – Curved dagger from Berghin<br />

(drawing A. Rustoiu). 3 – Iron horse-bit from Mediaş (photos S. Berecki).<br />

As concerning the finds from Transylvania, they consist of several burials i<strong>de</strong>ntified on<br />

the middle Mureş basin: cremation graves in pit at Teleac 49 , Blandiana 50 and Tărtăria 51 , to which<br />

49<br />

MOGA 1982; RUSTOIU 2005, 112–113 Fig. 6–8.<br />

50<br />

CIUGUDEAN 1980.<br />

51<br />

CIUGUDEAN D./CIUGUDEAN H. 1993.


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

173<br />

were recently ad<strong>de</strong>d those from Hunedoara 52 , or tumuli at Cugir 53 and Călan 54 . During the last two<br />

<strong>de</strong>ca<strong>de</strong>s I have shown that these burials concentrated in south-western Transylvania are later dated<br />

than the Celtic horizon (La Tène B2–C1) in the region. This fact may indicate a northward migration<br />

of a warlike elite from areas south of the Carpathians, which replaced the Celtic domination in<br />

Transylvania and later led to the appearance of the Dacian Kingdom. These burials are located in<br />

the vicinity of some Dacian settlements, sometimes fortified, and the ceramic inventories are local 55 .<br />

The publication of certain ol<strong>de</strong>r and previously unpublished discoveries, as well as the graves<br />

more recently uncovered across the entire area of the Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii group, enriched<br />

the ‘archaeological dossier’ and led to the appearance of some new contributions to this subject 56 .<br />

Archaeological repertoire of Transylvania can be also enlarged through an analysis of the information<br />

concerning ol<strong>de</strong>r discoveries and a re-evaluation of the recent ones, which are further discussed.<br />

The recent publication of the archaeological notes of István Téglás, a collector from<br />

Turda who worked in the second half of the 19 th century and at the beginning of the 20 th century,<br />

facilitated the recovery of some important scientific data. The Turda collector assembled a repertoire<br />

and drew numerous sketches of many artefacts from various Transylvanian collections or<br />

collected by himself from some archaeological sites. A part of these finds en<strong>de</strong>d in some of the<br />

mo<strong>de</strong>rn museums, but others were lost forever 57 .<br />

Amongst the finds which in the last quarter of the 19 th century were in the collection of<br />

Gábor Téglás from Deva (a gymnasium teacher, historian, archaeologist and collector of antiquities;<br />

<strong>de</strong>spite the similar surname the two collectors were unrelated) 58 was a curved dagger discovered in<br />

the same locality and having the morphological characteristics of a sica 59 (Fig. 8/1). The presumably<br />

lost dagger (perhaps it still exist in the ol<strong>de</strong>r collections of the Museum of Deva?) preserved a part<br />

of the scabbard (on about 20 cm of the bla<strong>de</strong>). The total length of the artefact was of 50 cm, being<br />

amongst the largest daggers of this type. The piece from Deva has numerous analogies inthe area of<br />

the Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii group. The shape of the hilt is also encountered on other examples<br />

discovered in graves from Cetate 60 in Oltenia, Târnava 61 and Vinograd 62 in Bulgaria, all of them being<br />

dated to the LT D1. The perfect state of conservation, according to the drawing ma<strong>de</strong> by I. Téglás,<br />

as well as the presence of the scabbard, suggests that the dagger probably belonged to a funerary<br />

52<br />

SÎRBU/LUCA/ROMAN 2007.<br />

53<br />

CRIŞAN 1980; RUSTOIU 2008, 161–162, Fig. 81.<br />

54<br />

RUSTOIU/SÎRBU/FERENCZ 2001–2002.<br />

55<br />

RUSTOIU 1994a, 35; RUSTOIU 1994b; RUSTOIU 2002, 25–40; RUSTOIU 2005; RUSTOIU 2008,<br />

142–163 etc.<br />

56<br />

ŞERBĂNESCU 2006, 168–171; TORBOV/ANASTASSOV 2008; ANASTASSOV 2011, 230–231 Fig. 11–12;<br />

BONDOC 2008; BONDOC 2008–2009 etc. See mostly ŁUCZKIEWICZ/SCHÖNFELDER 2008, with important<br />

comments regarding the entire phenomenon. The recently recovered artefacts coming from <strong>de</strong>stroyed graves from<br />

Hrtkovci, in the vicinity of the Scordiscian settlement at Gomolava (a sword, a curved dagger <strong>de</strong>corated with face-to-face<br />

birds of prey on the bla<strong>de</strong>, spear heads, a ‘Thracian’ horse-bit, chariot parts similar to those discovered in tumulus 2 from<br />

Cugir, late Republican bronze vessels etc), can be ascribed to the Pa<strong>de</strong>a – Panagjurski kolonii group. They illustrate the<br />

westward extension of the authority of the Dacian Kingdom un<strong>de</strong>r Burebista. See DAUTOVA RUŠEVLJAN/VUJOVIĆ<br />

2006, Fig.: 24; 29; 50; 52–53; 54; 63 etc, with numerous errors regarding the dating and cultural i<strong>de</strong>ntification.<br />

57<br />

BAJUSZ 1980; BAJUSZ 2005.<br />

58<br />

See WOLLMANN 1983, 262; RUSTOIU 1991.<br />

59<br />

BAJUSZ 2005, 134 no. 69, Fig. 18/141/3. During the last years several curved knifes from pre-Roman Dacia<br />

were published, completing the repertoire of discoveries. Still, some of these pieces are not curved daggers from a<br />

morphological and functional point of view. For example amongst the artefacts coming from Sălaj, and published by<br />

POP/BORANGIC 2009, only the piece from Şimleu Silvaniei (op. cit., Fig. 2/1) is a true sica. For the morphology<br />

and functionality of the curved daggers see RUSTOIU 2007a.<br />

60<br />

NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR 1945–1947, 19, Pl. 3/6.<br />

61<br />

THEODOSSIEV/TORBOV 1995, Fig. 21.<br />

62<br />

ŁUCZKIEWICZ/SCHÖNFELDER 2008, Fig. 24.


174 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

inventory. Around Deva were documented numerous traces of habitation from the same period of<br />

the 2 nd –1 st centuries BC (the fortress from Cozia – Piatra Coziei and probably the one from Deva<br />

– Cetate are the most significant) 63 which may sustain this hypothesis.<br />

Another curved dagger (sica) comes from Berghin (Alba County). The piece was<br />

i<strong>de</strong>ntified in the Museum of Sighişoara and belonged to the old collections accumulated in the<br />

19 th century 64 (Fig. 8/2). The bla<strong>de</strong> is fragmentary and has blood channels 65 . The hilt was broken<br />

in ancient times, but a part of the guard is still preserved. The preserved length of the piece is<br />

of 20 cm. This dagger probably was also part of a funerary inventory. The hilt might have been<br />

damaged when the weapon was ritually bent before being placed in grave, as it is the case of<br />

the finds from Rast 66 in Oltenia. From Berghin are known, from various plots, Dacian ceramic<br />

fragments, a Greek coin, a Roman Republican <strong>de</strong>narius and an attachment of a situla of E 18<br />

type, which may suggest the existence of some settlements from the 1 st century BC 67 .<br />

From Mediaş comes an assemblage of iron objects discovered in 1891, which could have<br />

belonged to some funerary inventories. They are preserved in the Brukenthal Museum Sibiu 68 .<br />

Amongst them is a ‘Thracian’ horse-bit and fragments belonging to another similar piece 69<br />

(Fig. 8/3). The horse-bit was first published by V. Zirra 70 and then by W. M. Werner 71 , whereas<br />

the fragments of the second piece remained unknown. W. M. Werner inclu<strong>de</strong>d the horse-bit from<br />

Mediaş in the XVI type (Hebelstangentrensen mit zweiteilingen Mundstück), variant 3 (birnenförmiges<br />

Seitenteil). The lateral rings were <strong>de</strong>corated with incised lines, similarly to some pieces from<br />

Bulgaria 72 . The examples belonging to this type are the most frequent in funerary inventories from<br />

the area of the Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii group 73 . The artefacts from Mediaş might have come<br />

from different graves, or from a single one. In certain situations, for example in the tumulus 2 from<br />

Cugir or in the tumulus from Călan, in the same grave were placed horse-bits from many horses 74 .<br />

The ol<strong>de</strong>r or more recent discoveries from Piatra Craivii (Craiva, Cricău commune, Alba<br />

County) indicate the existence of a small familial cemetery, similar to the one from Cugir, close to<br />

the well-known Dacian fortress. Some finds belonging to a burial were recovered at the end of the<br />

19 th century. The inventory inclu<strong>de</strong>d, according the reconstruction recently provi<strong>de</strong>d by C. I. Popa,<br />

a long sword and two spear heads 75 . Very probably from the same grave comes a curved dagger<br />

having an intricate <strong>de</strong>coration on the bla<strong>de</strong> 76 (Fig. 9/1). The <strong>de</strong>coration has close analogies on a<br />

curved dagger discovered in a grave from Mala Vrbica-Ajmana 77 (Fig. 9/2), on the right bank of the<br />

Danube, in the Iron Gates region, and on another coming from Popitsa 78 in north-western Bulgaria<br />

(Fig. 9/3). The structure of ornamentation indicates the distribution across a wi<strong>de</strong>r area of an elaborated<br />

iconographic repertoire, having symbolic and i<strong>de</strong>ological meanings specific to the mentioned<br />

warlike elites. The wi<strong>de</strong>spread distribution of these symbols was <strong>de</strong>termined by the mobility which<br />

63<br />

GHEORGHIU 2005, 33 no. 33, 36–37 no. 43.<br />

64<br />

Unpublished. Museum of Sighişoara, inv. no. 598.<br />

65<br />

Multiple blood channels, although rarely encountered, can be also seen on other daggers, for example on a<br />

piece from Komarevo, in Bulgaria: TORBOV 2005, 693–694, Pl. 1/2.<br />

66<br />

TUDOR 1968.<br />

67<br />

GHEORGHIU 2005, 26 no. 8.<br />

68<br />

An iron bridle and a disk published by NESTOR 1937–1940, 177–178, Fig. 7/1–2.<br />

69<br />

Brukenthal Museum Sibiu. Information and drawings by S. Berecki to whom I would like to thank.<br />

70<br />

ZIRRA 1981, 128 Fig. 5/3.<br />

71<br />

WERNER 1988, 91–92 no. 297, Pl. 46/297.<br />

72<br />

TORBOV 2005, 696 Pl. 3/1.<br />

73<br />

RUSTOIU 2002, 51–53, Fig. 36 (distribution).<br />

74<br />

RUSTOIU 2002, 52.<br />

75<br />

POPA 2008.<br />

76<br />

RUSTOIU 2007b, 83–84, Fig. 1/1.<br />

77<br />

STALIO 1986, 33, Fig. 42.<br />

78<br />

TORBOV 1997, Pl. 3/1; TORBOV 2005, 695 Pl. 2/3.


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

175<br />

characterised this group, but also by the mobility of the craftsmen who followed the aristocratic<br />

‘courts’ and created the entire panoply of arms and the prestige insignia of the military elite.<br />

0 5 cm<br />

(1-3)<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

0 5 cm<br />

(4)<br />

Fig. 9. Curved daggers with <strong>de</strong>corated bla<strong>de</strong> from Craiva Piatra Craivii (1), Mala Vrbica-Ajmana (2) and<br />

Popitsa (3); iron brooch from Craiva Piatra Craivii (4) (1 – after RUSTOIU 2007b; 2 – after STALIO 1986;<br />

3 – after TORBOV 1997; 4 – after RUSTOIU/GHEORGHIU 2009).<br />

The ol<strong>de</strong>r or more recent discoveries from Piatra Craivii (Craiva, Cricău commune, Alba<br />

County) indicate the existence of a small familial cemetery, similar to the one from Cugir, close to<br />

the well-known Dacian fortress. Some finds belonging to a burial were recovered at the end of the<br />

19 th century. The inventory inclu<strong>de</strong>d, according the reconstruction recently provi<strong>de</strong>d by C. I. Popa,


176 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

a long sword and two spear heads 79 . Very probably from the same grave comes a curved dagger<br />

having an intricate <strong>de</strong>coration on the bla<strong>de</strong> 80 (Fig. 9/1). The <strong>de</strong>coration has close analogies on a<br />

curved dagger discovered in a grave from Mala Vrbica-Ajmana 81 (Fig. 9/2), on the right bank of the<br />

Danube, in the Iron Gates region, and on another coming from Popitsa 82 in north-western Bulgaria<br />

(Fig. 9/3). The structure of ornamentation indicates the distribution across a wi<strong>de</strong>r area of an elaborated<br />

iconographic repertoire, having symbolic and i<strong>de</strong>ological meanings specific to the mentioned<br />

warlike elites. The wi<strong>de</strong>spread distribution of these symbols was <strong>de</strong>termined by the mobility which<br />

characterised this group, but also by the mobility of the craftsmen who followed the aristocratic<br />

‘courts’ and created the entire panoply of arms and the prestige insignia of the military elite.<br />

Recently another funerary inventory was also recovered from Piatra Craivii. The assemblage<br />

consists of a spear head, a curved dagger, a late La Tène (Vincovci type 83 ) brooch and a hybrid<br />

brooch, all of them ma<strong>de</strong> of iron. The inventory might have inclu<strong>de</strong>d a long sword of La Tène<br />

type, probably lost 84 . The hybrid brooch is chronologically very important (Fig. 9/4). The spring<br />

and the bow are morphologically similar to those of the Jezerine brooches, whereas the shape of<br />

the foot and catch-plate is encountered on the late La Tène brooches. Due to these morphological<br />

characteristics the brooch from Piatra Craivii cam be dated to the end of the 1 st century BC, the<br />

respective grave being one of the latest dated funerary discoveries of this kind, thus representing a<br />

chronological reference point for the end of the Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii group in Transylvania.<br />

Lastly, the recent discoveries from Malaja Kopanja in Trans-Carpathian Ukraine have to<br />

be mentioned. A series of cremation burials in pit, many of them <strong>de</strong>stroyed, have been found in<br />

the close vicinity of the Dacian fortified settlement, on Cellenitza site. Their inventories (Fig. 10)<br />

consist of weaponry and military equipment (La Tène swords, spear heads, curved daggers, shield<br />

bosses, a fragment of a chainmail etc), riding equipment (‘Thracian’ and ‘Getic’ horse-bits, buckles,<br />

rings, spurs etc) and garment accessories (the brooches of middle La Tène scheme being important<br />

for dating), which can be ascribed to the first half of the 1 st century BC (Fig. 10). Graves containing<br />

artefacts belonging to the feminine costume were also found 85 . In another closely located find-spot<br />

(Seredni Grunok) were discovered other cremation graves in pit, containing goods of local origin<br />

and others specific to the Przeworsk culture (including typical weaponry: shield bosses, swords<br />

etc). These graves are dated to the second half of the 1 st century AD and the first half of the<br />

following century 86 . Thus, <strong>de</strong>spite the summarily published archaeological reports, it can be noted<br />

that the cemetery from Malaja Kopanja began in the first half of the 1 st century BC. The ol<strong>de</strong>st<br />

graves belonged to individuals who used panoplies of arms resembling those from the area of the<br />

Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii group. This fact may suggest that the appearance of the Dacian fortress<br />

from Malaja Kopanja was <strong>de</strong>termined by the northward expansion of the military elites during<br />

the reign of Burebista. Still, unlike the situation from the rest of Dacia, as it is known today, a<br />

significant number of graves containing feminine inventories appear here, pointing to a regional<br />

feature of this cultural phenomenon characterising the northern extremity of the area of the Pa<strong>de</strong>a<br />

Panagjurski kolonii group. Later in the 1 st century AD, in the same region arrived groups of<br />

Germanic populations, bringing artefacts belonging to the Przeworsk culture, and interring their<br />

<strong>de</strong>ceased in the close vicinity of the ol<strong>de</strong>r cemetery. From this point of view the situation is similar<br />

to the one encountered in the cemetery at Zemplin 87 .<br />

79<br />

POPA 2008.<br />

80<br />

RUSTOIU 2007b, 83–84, Fig. 1/1.<br />

81<br />

STALIO 1986, 33, Fig. 42.<br />

82<br />

TORBOV 1997, Pl. 3/1; TORBOV 2005, 695 Pl. 2/3.<br />

83<br />

For the type see MAJNARIĆ-PANDŽIĆ 2009, 238–240 and DIZDAR 2003.<br />

84<br />

RUSTOIU/GHEORGHIU 2009; RUSTOIU/GHEORGHIU 2010.<br />

85<br />

KOTIGOROŠKO 2007; KOTIGOROŠKO 2011.<br />

86<br />

KOTIGOROŠKO ET AL. 2000–2004; KOTIGOROŠKO ET AL. 2006–2007.<br />

87<br />

BUDINSKÝ-KRIČKA/LAMIOVÁ-SCHMIEDLOVÁ 1990; SÎRBU/RUSTOIU 2006, 205, Fig. 13–15.


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

177<br />

5a<br />

2<br />

1<br />

0 5 cm<br />

(1)<br />

5b<br />

3 0 5<br />

cm<br />

4<br />

(3)<br />

Fig. 10. Weapons and horse-bits from the cemetery at Malaja Kopanja (after KOTIGOROŠKO 2011).


178 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

In conclusion, the re-evaluation of the ol<strong>de</strong>r or more recent discoveries illustrates a concentration<br />

of the funerary contexts of Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii type in south-western Transylvania,<br />

more precisely in the surroundings of the centre of power of the Dacian Kingdom prior to and<br />

during the reign of Burebista (Fig. 11). At the same time a series of graves indicates the extension<br />

of the phenomenon on distant territories in central or northern Transylvania, up to the upper Tisza<br />

basin, these regions probably being brought un<strong>de</strong>r the authority of the Dacian kings.<br />

Chronologically, these<br />

burials probably appeared in<br />

the LT C2, succeeding the<br />

Celtic horizon in Transylvania.<br />

The majority of the discoveries<br />

belong to the La Tène D1<br />

sub-phase (from the end of the<br />

2 nd century to the first half of<br />

the 1 st century BC). The grave<br />

from Piatra Craivii dated to<br />

the Augustan period marks<br />

the end of this phenomenon.<br />

The military elites from the<br />

northern Balkans, having<br />

different ethnic origins and<br />

funerary traditions, created in<br />

the 2 nd –1 st centuries BC sets<br />

Fig. 11. Map of the Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii funerary discoveries<br />

from Transylvania: 1 – Berghin (?). 2 Blandiana. 3 Călan. 4 – Craiva–<br />

Piatra Craivii. 5 Cugir. 6 – Deva (?). 7 – Hunedoara–“Grădina Castelului”.<br />

8 – Malaja Kopanja. 9 – Mediaş (?). 10 Tărtăria. 11 – Teleac.<br />

of symbolic elements seeking<br />

to express a privileged status<br />

within their communities.<br />

Amongst these sets the military<br />

panoply, having a typologically<br />

and functionally unitary character, played an important role. In the 1 st century AD these<br />

elements were modified. The elites abandoned the traditional funerary practices and some of<br />

the weapons inclu<strong>de</strong>d in the usual panoply, but continued to use the curved daggers which<br />

probably had an important symbolic role within the local practices. The later modifications were<br />

maintained until the conquest of Dacia by the Romans.<br />

Acknowledgements: I would like to thank Dan Pop and Z. Şomcutean (Baia Mare) for<br />

providing information and images of the greaves from Ciumesti, S. Berecki (Târgu-Mureş) for<br />

information and photos of the finds from Mediaş, Florin Gogâltan (Cluj-Napoca), Liviu Marta<br />

(Sat Mare), J. Emilov (Sofia) and M. Guštin (Koper) for bibliographic information.<br />

BIBLIOGRAPHY<br />

ANASTASSOV 2011<br />

J. ANASTASSOV, The Celtic presence in Thrace during the 3 rd century BC in light of new<br />

archaeological data. In: M. Guštin/M. Jevtić (Eds.), The Eastern Celts. The communities<br />

between the Alps and the Black Sea (Koper/Beograd 2011), 227–239.<br />

ANDRONICOS 1984<br />

M. ANDRONICOS, Vergina. The royal tombs and the ancient city (Athens 1984).<br />

BADER 1984<br />

T. BADER, O zăbală din a doua perioadă a epocii fierului <strong>de</strong>scoperită la Ciumeşti. Stud. şi Cerc.<br />

Istor. Veche 35/1, 1984, 85–90.


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

179<br />

BAJUSZ 1980<br />

I. BAJUSZ, Colecţia <strong>de</strong> antichităţi a lui Téglás István din Turda. Acta Mus. Porolissensis 4,<br />

1980, 367–394.<br />

BAJUSZ 2005<br />

I. BAJUSZ (Ed.), Téglás István jegyzetei. Régészeti feljegyzések I/1 (Kolozsvár 2005).<br />

BERCIU 1974<br />

D. BERCIU, Contribution à l’étu<strong>de</strong> <strong>de</strong> l’art Thraco-Gète (Bucureşti 1974).<br />

BOHN 1885<br />

R. BOHN, Das Heiligtum <strong>de</strong>r Athena Polias Nikephoros. Mit Beitrag H. Droysen, Die<br />

Balustra<strong>de</strong>nreliefs. Altertümer von Pergamon II (Berlin 1885).<br />

BONDOC 2008<br />

D. BONDOC, Discoveries from the second period of the Iron Age from the area of Beharca,<br />

Almăj commune, Dolj county, Romania. In: V. Sîrbu/I. Stîngă (Eds.), The Iron Gates<br />

region during the Second Iron Age. Settlements, necropolises, treasures. Proceedings of the<br />

International Colloquium from Drobeta-Turnu Severin, June 12 th –15 th 2008 (Drobeta-Turnu<br />

Severin/ Craiova 2008), 7–12.<br />

BONDOC 2008–2009<br />

D. BONDOC, Descoperiri <strong>de</strong> epocă La Tène <strong>de</strong> la Pa<strong>de</strong>a, jud. Dolj. Stud. şi Cerc. Istor. Veche<br />

59–60, 2008–2009, 137–163.<br />

BUDINSKÝ-KRIČKA/LAMIOVÁ-SCHMIEDLOVÁ 1990<br />

V. BUDINSKÝ-KRIČKA/M. LAMIOVÁ-SCHMIEDLOVÁ, A late 1 st century BC–<br />

2 nd century AD cemetery at Zemplin. Slovenská Arch. 38/2, 1990, 245–344.<br />

ČERNENKO 2006<br />

E. V. ČERNENKO, Die Schutzwaffen <strong>de</strong>r Skythen. PBF III/2 (Stuttgart 2006).<br />

CIUGUDEAN 1980<br />

H. CIUGUDEAN, Mormântul tracic <strong>de</strong> la Blandiana. Acta Mus. Napocensis 17, 1980, 425–432.<br />

CIUGUDEAN D./CIUGUDEAN H. 1993<br />

D. CIUGUDEAN/H. CIUGUDEAN, Un mormânt <strong>de</strong> războinic geto-dac la Tărtăria.<br />

Ephemeris Napocensis 3, 1993, 77–79.<br />

CRIŞAN 1966<br />

I. H. CRŞAN, Materiale dacice din necropola şi aşezarea <strong>de</strong> la Ciumeşti şi problema raporturilor<br />

dintre daci şi celţi în Transilvania (Baia Mare 1966).<br />

CRIŞAN 1971<br />

I. H. CRŞAN, În legătură cu datarea necropolei celtice <strong>de</strong> la Ciumeşti. Marmaţia 2, 1971,<br />

54–93.<br />

CRIŞAN 1980<br />

I. H. CRŞAN, Necropola dacică <strong>de</strong> la Cugir. Consi<strong>de</strong>raţii preliminare. Apulum 18, 1980, 81–87.<br />

DAUTOVA RUŠEVLJAN/VUJOVIĆ 2006<br />

V. DAUTOVA RUŠEVLJAN/M. VUJOVIĆ, Roman army in Srem (Novi Sad 2006).<br />

DIZDAR 2003<br />

M. DIZDAR, Prilog poznavanju kasnoga latena u istočnoj Slavoniji. Opuscula Arch. (Zagreb)<br />

27, 2003, 337–349.<br />

FEUGÈRE 2002<br />

M. FEUGÈRE, Weapons of the Romans (Stroud 2002).<br />

GALANINA 1965<br />

L. K. GALANINA, Grečeskie ponoži severnogo pričernomorija. Arch. Sbornik (Leningrad) 7,<br />

1965, 5–27.<br />

GHEORGHIU 2005<br />

G. GHEORGHIU, Dacii <strong>de</strong> pe cursul mijlociu al Mureşului (Cluj-Napoca 2005).<br />

GRIFFITH 1968<br />

G. T. GRIFFITH, The mercenaries of the Hellenistic World (Groningen 1968).<br />

GUŠTIN 2011<br />

M. GUŠTIN, On the Celtic tribe of Taurisci. Local i<strong>de</strong>ntity and regional contacts in the ancient


180 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

world. In: M. Guštin/M. Jevtić (Eds.), The Eastern Celts. The communities between the Alps<br />

and the Black Sea (Koper/Beograd 2011), 119–130.<br />

GUŠTIN/KUZMAN/MALENKO 2011<br />

M. GUŠTIN/P. KUZMAN/V. MALENKO, Ein keltischer Krieger in Lichnidos/Ohrid,<br />

Mazedonien [forthcoming].<br />

HOREDT 1973<br />

K. HOREDT, Interpretări arheologice II. Stud. şi Cerc. Istor. Veche 24/2, 1973, 299–310.<br />

JARVA 1995<br />

E. JARVA, Archaiologia on archaic Greek body armour. Stud. Arch. Septentrionalia 3<br />

(Rovaniemi 1995).<br />

KOTIGOROŠKO 2007<br />

V. KOTIGOROŠKO, Novăie dannăie ob istorii Malokopanskogo gorodišta. In: V. Ciubotă<br />

et al. (Eds.), Relaţii româno-ucrainene. Istorie şi contemporaneitate (Cluj-Napoca/Satu Mare<br />

2007), 62– 82.<br />

KOTIGOROŠKO 2011<br />

V. KOTIGOROŠKO, Issledovanije Malokopansăskogo kompleksa v 2008 g. Stud. şi Comun.<br />

(Satu Mare) 27/1, 2011, 129–176.<br />

KOTIGOROŠKO ET AL. 2000–2004<br />

V. KOTIGOROŠKO/I. PROHNENKO/V. CIUBOTĂ/R. GHINDELE/L. MARTA, Mogilnik<br />

Malokopanskogo gorodišta. Stud. şi Comun. (Satu Mare) 17–21, 2000–2004, 59–69.<br />

KOTIGOROŠKO ET AL. 2006–2007<br />

V. KOTIGOROŠKO/I. PROHNENKO/V. CIUBOTĂ, Itogi issledovani’ja Malokopanskogo<br />

kompleksa v 2004–2005 gg. Stud. şi Comun. (Satu Mare) 23–24, 2006–2007, 131–154.<br />

KULL 1997<br />

B. KULL, Tod und Apotheose. Zur Ikonographie in Grab und Kunst <strong>de</strong>r jüngeren Eisenzeit an<br />

<strong>de</strong>r unteren Donau und ihrer Be<strong>de</strong>utung für die Interpretation von “Prunkgräbern”. Ber. RGK<br />

78, 1997, 197–466.<br />

KUNZE 1991<br />

E. KUNZE, Beinschinen (Berlin/New York 1991).<br />

ŁUCZKIEWICZ/SCHÖNFELDER 2008<br />

P. ŁUCZKIEWICZ/M. SCHÖNFELDER, Untersuchungen zur Ausstattung eines<br />

späteisenzeitlichen Reiterkriegers aus <strong>de</strong>m südlichen Karpaten – o<strong>de</strong>r Balkanraum. Jahrb.<br />

RGZM 55, 2008, 159–210.<br />

MAJNARIĆ-PANDŽIĆ 2009<br />

N. MAJNARIĆ-PANDŽIĆ, On the South Pannonian Population in the Late Iron Age.<br />

In: G. Tiefengraber/B. Kavur/A. Gaspari (Eds.), Keltske študije II. Studies in Celtic Archaeology.<br />

Papers in honour of Mitja Guštin (Montagnac 2009), 235–245.<br />

MEGAW 1970<br />

J. V. S. MEGAW, Art of the European Iron Age. A study of the elusive image (Bath 1970).<br />

MOGA 1982<br />

V. MOGA, Mormintele dacice <strong>de</strong> incineraţie <strong>de</strong> la Teleac. Apulum 20, 1982, 87–91.<br />

NÉMETI 1975<br />

I. NÉMETI, Weitere Angaben über die keltischen Gräberfel<strong>de</strong>r von Ciumeşti und Sanislău<br />

(Kreis Satu Mare). Dacia 19, 1975, 243–248.<br />

NÉMETI 1992A<br />

I. NÉMETI, Importuri greco-elenistice în <strong>de</strong>scoperirile celtice din nord-vestul României. Unele<br />

consi<strong>de</strong>raţii istorice. Symp. Thracologica 9, Bucureşti, 1992, 139–141.<br />

NÉMETI 1992B<br />

I. NÉMETI, Necropola Latène <strong>de</strong> la Pişcolt, jud. Satu Mare. III. Thraco-Dacica 13, 1992,<br />

59–112.<br />

NÉMETI 2000/2001<br />

I. NÉMETI, Thraker und Kelten. In: Thraker und Kelten Beidseits <strong>de</strong>r Karpaten (Eberdingen<br />

2000/2001), 59–69.


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

181<br />

NÉMETI 2003<br />

I. NÉMETI, Tracii şi celţii. In: L. Cornea/C. Ghemiş/G. Moisa (Eds.), In Memoriam<br />

N. Chidioşan (Ora<strong>de</strong>a 2003), 161–175.<br />

NESTOR 1937–1940<br />

I. NESTOR, Keltische Gräber bei Mediaş. Ein Beitrag zur Frage <strong>de</strong>r frühen keltischen Fun<strong>de</strong> in<br />

Siebenbürgen. Dacia 7–8, 1937–1940, 159–182.<br />

NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR 1945–1947<br />

C. S. NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR, Antiquités celtiques en Olténie. Dacia 11–12, 1945–1947,<br />

17–33.<br />

PAROVIĆ – PEŠIKAN 1993<br />

M. PAROVIĆ – PEŠIKAN, Les cruches à bec-verseur (prochoi) du VI e –IV e siècle av.n.è. dans<br />

l’interieur <strong>de</strong>s Balkans. Ancient Macedonia 5, 1993, 1239–1247.<br />

PERRIN 1920<br />

B. PERRIN, Plutarch. Plutarch’s Lives (Cambridge/London 1920).<br />

POLITO 1998<br />

E. POLITO, Fulgentibus armis. Introduzione allo studio <strong>de</strong>i fregi d’armi antichi (Roma 1998).<br />

POP/BORANGIC 2009<br />

H. POP/C. BORANGIC, Cuţite <strong>de</strong> luptă dacice <strong>de</strong>scoperite în nord-vestul României. Stud.<br />

Historia UBB 54/1–2, 35–42.<br />

POPA 2008<br />

C. I. POPA, A possible Dacian burial in the vicinity of the Piatra Craivii fortress. Apulum 45,<br />

2008, 357–365.<br />

POPOVICH 1995–1996<br />

I. POPOVICH, Periodization and chronology of Kushtanovica type sites in the ranscarpathian<br />

region. Nyíregyházi Jósa András Múz. Évk. 37–38, 1995–1996, 77–114.<br />

RUSTOIU 1991<br />

A. RUSTOIU, Repere la o arheologie a Transilvaniei (6). Tribuna, s.n. III (Cluj-Napoca), 25,<br />

1991, 8.<br />

RUSTOIU 1994A<br />

A. RUSTOIU, Observaţii privind înmormântările tumulare din Dacia preromană. In: S. Mitu/<br />

F. Gogâltan (Eds.), Studii <strong>de</strong> istorie a Transilvaniei (Cluj 1994), 33–37.<br />

RUSTOIU 1994B<br />

A. RUSTOIU, Neue präzisierungen bezüglich <strong>de</strong>s “Keltischen Grabes” von Silivaş. In:<br />

P. Roman/M. Alexianu (Eds.), Relations Thraco-Illyro-Helléniques (Bucarest 1994), 295–300.<br />

RUSTOIU 1996<br />

A. RUSTOIU, Metalurgia bronzului la daci (sec. II î. Chr. – sec. I d. Chr.). Tehnici, ateliere şi<br />

produse <strong>de</strong> bronz. Bibl. Thracologica 15 (Bucureşti 1996).<br />

RUSTOIU 2000<br />

A. RUSTOIU, Les matériels celtiques <strong>de</strong> l’habitat Dace <strong>de</strong> Sighişoara–Wietenberg.<br />

In: C. Gaiu/A. Rustoiu (Eds.), Les Celtes et les Thraco-Daces <strong>de</strong> l’Est du Bassin <strong>de</strong>s Carpates<br />

(Cluj-Napoca 2000), 179–188.<br />

RUSTOIU 2002<br />

A. RUSTOIU, Războinici şi artizani <strong>de</strong> prestigiu în Dacia preromană (Cluj-Napoca 2002).<br />

RUSTOIU 2005<br />

A. RUSTOIU, The Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski Kolonii Group in south-western Transylvania (Romania).<br />

In: H. Dobrzańska/V. Megaw/P. Poleska (Eds.), Celts on the margin. Studies in European<br />

Cultural Interaction (7th Century BC–1st Century AD) Dedicated to Zenon Woźniak (Krakow<br />

2005), 109–119.<br />

RUSTOIU 2006<br />

A. RUSTOIU, A Journey to Mediterranean. Peregrinations of a Celtic Warrior from<br />

Transylvania. Stud. Univ. Babeş-Bolyai. Ser. Hist. [Special Issues: Focusing on Iron Age Élites]<br />

51/1, 2006, 42–85.<br />

RUSTOIU 2007A<br />

A. RUSTOIU, Thracian “sica” and Dacian “falx”. The history of a “national” weapon. In:


182 Aurel Rustoiu<br />

S. Nemeti/F. Fodorean/ E. Nemeth/S. Cociş/I. Nemeti/M. Pîslaru (Eds.), Dacia felix. Studia<br />

Michaeli Bărbulescu oblata (Cluj-Napoca 2007), 67–82.<br />

RUSTOIU 2007B<br />

A. RUSTOIU, About a curved dagger discovered at Piatra Craivii. Apulum 44, 2007, 83–97.<br />

RUSTOIU 2008<br />

A. RUSTOIU, Războinici şi societate în aria celtică transilvăneană. Studii pe marginea<br />

mormântului cu coif <strong>de</strong> la Ciumeşti (Cluj-Napoca 2008).<br />

RUSTOIU/ EGRI 2010<br />

A. RUSTOIU/M. EGRI, Danubian Kantharoi – Almost three <strong>de</strong>ca<strong>de</strong>s later. In: S. Berecki (Ed),<br />

Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin, Proceedings of the International Colloquium<br />

from Tg. Mureş, 9–11 October 2009 (Cluj-Napoca 2010), 217–287.<br />

RUSTOIU/EGRI 2011<br />

A. RUSTOIU/M. EGRI, The Celts from the Carpathian Basin between Continental traditions<br />

and the fascination of the Mediterranean. A study of the Danubian kantharoi – Celţii din<br />

Bazinul Carpatic între tradiţiile continentale şi fascinaţia Mediteranei. (Cluj-Napoca 2011).<br />

RUSTOIU/GHEORGHIU 2009<br />

A. RUSTOIU/G. GHEORGHIU, An iron variant of the Jezerine type brooch from pre-Roman<br />

Dacia. Bull. Instrumentum 30, 2009, 30–31.<br />

RUSTOIU/GHEORGHIU 2010<br />

A. RUSTOIU/G. GHEORGHIU, “General” and “particular” in the dressing fashion and<br />

metalwork of pre-Roman Dacia (An iron variant of the Jezerine-type brooches from Piatra<br />

Craivii). In: I. Cân<strong>de</strong>a (Ed.), Tracii şi vecinii lor în antichitate. Studia in honorem Valerii Sîrbu<br />

(Brăila 2010), 447–457.<br />

RUSTOIU/SÎRBU/FERENCZ 2001–2002<br />

A. RUSTOIU/V. SÎRBU/I. V. FERENCZ, Mormântul tumular dacic <strong>de</strong> la Călan<br />

(jud. Hunedoara). Sargetia 30, 2001–2002, 111–127.<br />

RUSU 1969<br />

M. RUSU, Das keltische Fürstengrab von Ciumeşti in Rumänien. Ber. RGK 50, 1969, 267–300.<br />

RUSU/ BANDULA 1970<br />

M. RUSU/O. BANDULA, Mormântul unei căpetenii celtice <strong>de</strong> la Ciumeşti (Baia Mare 1970).<br />

SAKELLARIOU 1983<br />

M. B. SAKELLARIOU (Ed.), Greek lands in history. Macedonia: 4000 years of Greek history<br />

and civilization (Athens 1983).<br />

SCHAAFF 1974<br />

U. SCHAAFF, Keltische Eisenhelme aus vorrömischer Zeit. Jahrb. RGZM 21/1, 1974, 149–204.<br />

SCHAAFF 1988<br />

U. SCHAAFF, Keltische Helme. In: Antike Helme (Mainz 1988), 293–317.<br />

ŞERBĂNESCU 2006<br />

D. ŞERBĂNESCU, Morminte geto-dacice <strong>de</strong>scoperite în ju<strong>de</strong>ţul Călăraşi. Istros 13, 2006,<br />

167–181.<br />

SÎRBU 2006<br />

V. SÎRBU, Oameni şi zei în lumea geto-dacilor (Braşov 2006).<br />

SÎRBU/LUCA/ROMAN 2007<br />

V. SÎRBU/S. A. LUCA/C. ROMAN, Tombs of Dacian warriors (2 nd –1 st C. BC) found in<br />

Hunedoara – Grădina Castelului. Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis 6/1, 2007, 155–177.<br />

SÎRBU/RUSTOIU 1999<br />

V. SÎRBU/A. RUSTOIU, Découvertes funéraires Géto-Daces du sud-ouest <strong>de</strong> la Roumanie<br />

(150–50 av.J.C.). In: M. Garasanin et al. (Eds), Le Djerdap/Les Portes <strong>de</strong> Fer a la <strong>de</strong>uxieme<br />

moitie du premier millenaire av. J.C. jusqu’aux guerres daciques. Kolloquium in Kladovo-<br />

Drobeta-Tr. Severin (September–October 1998) (Beograd 1999), 77–91.<br />

SÎRBU/RUSTOIU 2006<br />

V. SÎRBU/A. RUSTOIU, Funerary practices at the Geto-Dacians of the 2 nd century BC–<br />

1 st century AD. In: V. Lungu et al. (Eds.), Pratiques funéraires et manifestations <strong>de</strong> l’i<strong>de</strong>ntité<br />

culturelle (Tulcea 2006), 199–228.


Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)<br />

183<br />

SNODGRASS 1964<br />

A. SNODGRASS, Early Greek armour and weapons from the end of the Bronze Age to 600<br />

B.C. (Edinburgh 1964).<br />

SNODGRASS 1967<br />

A. SNODGRASS, Arms and armours of the Greeks (London 1967).<br />

STALIO 1986<br />

B. STALIO, Le site prehitorique Ajmana à Mala Vrbica. Cahiers <strong>de</strong>s Portes <strong>de</strong> Fèr 3 (Belgra<strong>de</strong><br />

1986), 27–50.<br />

TELEAGĂ 2008<br />

E. TELEAGĂ, Griechische Importe in <strong>de</strong>n Nekropolen an <strong>de</strong>r unteren Donau. 6. Jh. – Anfang<br />

<strong>de</strong>s 3. Jh. v. Chr. In: Marburger Stud. Vor– und Frühgesch. 23 (Rah<strong>de</strong>n/Westf. 2008).<br />

THEODOSSIEV/TORBOV 1995<br />

N. THEODOSSIEV/N. TORBOV, Trakiiski mogili ot kăsnoeliniceskata epoha pri Tărnava,<br />

Beloslatinsko. Izv. Muz. Severozapadna Bălgarija 23, 1995, 11–58.<br />

TORBOV 1997<br />

N. TORBOV, Krivi trakiiski nojove ot III v. pr. Hr. – I v. otkriti v severozapadna Bălgarija. Izv.<br />

Muz. Severozapadna Bălgarija 25, 1997, 15–46.<br />

TORBOV 2005<br />

N. TORBOV, Decoration of Thracian weapons and accoutrements, found in northwestern<br />

Bulgaria (III–I c. BC) (in bulgarian). In: Stephanos Archaeologicos in honorem Professoris<br />

Liudmili Getov (Sofia 2005), 693–700.<br />

TORBOV/ANASTASSOV 2008<br />

N. TORBOV/J. ANASTASSOV, Le groupe “Pa<strong>de</strong>a-Panagjurski kolonii”: réexamen <strong>de</strong>s<br />

ensembles funéraires <strong>de</strong>s II e –I er s. av. J.-C. du nord-ouest <strong>de</strong> la Bulgarie. In: V. Sîrbu/I. Stîngă<br />

(Eds.), The Iron Gates region during the Second Iron Age. Settlements, necropolises, treasures.<br />

Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Drobeta-Turnu Severin, June 12 th –15 th 2008<br />

(Drobeta-Turnu Severin/Craiova 2008), 95–107.<br />

TUDOR 1968<br />

E. TUDOR, Morminte <strong>de</strong> luptători din a doua vârstă a fierului <strong>de</strong>scoperite la Rastu. Stud. şi<br />

Cerc. Istor. Veche 19/3, 517–526.<br />

WERNER 1988<br />

W. M. WERNER, Eisenzeitliche Trensen an <strong>de</strong>r unteren und mittleren Donau. PBF XVI/4<br />

(München 1988).<br />

WOLLMANN 1983<br />

V. WOLLMANN (Ed.), Briefe zur Geschichte <strong>de</strong>r siebenbürgischen Altertumskun<strong>de</strong> (Bukarest<br />

1983).<br />

WOŹNIAK 1974<br />

Z. WOŹNIAK, Wschodnie pogranicze kultury latènskiej (Wroclaw/Warszawa/Kraków/Gdansk<br />

1974).<br />

WOŹNIAK 1976<br />

Z. WOŹNIAK, Die östliche Randzone <strong>de</strong>r Latène Kultur. Germania 54, 1976, 382–402.<br />

ZIRRA 1967<br />

V. ZIRRA, Un cimitir celtic în nord-vestul României (Baia Mare 1967).<br />

ZIRRA 1980<br />

V. ZIRRA, Locuiri din a doua vârstă a fierului în nord-vestul României (Aşezarea contemporană<br />

cimitirului La Tène <strong>de</strong> la Ciumeşti şi habitatul indigen <strong>de</strong> la Berea). Stud. şi Comun. (Satu Mare<br />

4), 1980, 39–84.<br />

ZIRRA 1981<br />

V. ZIRRA, Latènezeitlichen Trense in Rumänien. Hamburger Beitr. Arch. 8, 1981, 115–171.<br />

ZIRRA 1991<br />

V. ZIRRA, La necropoli e la Tomba <strong>de</strong>l Capo di Ciumeşti. In: I Celti (Milano 1991), 382–383

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!