EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS

EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS

XXII2012

ROMANIAN ACADEMYINSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY OF ART CLUJ-NAPOCA

EDITORIAL BOARDEditor: Coriolan Horaţiu OpreanuMembers: Sorin Cociş, Vlad-Andrei Lăzărescu, Ioan Stanciu

ADVISORY BOARDAlexandru Avram (Le Mans, France); Mihai Bărbulescu (Rome, Italy); Alexander Bursche (Warsaw, Poland); Falko Daim (Mainz, Germany); Andreas Lippert (Vienna, Austria); Bernd Päffgen (Munich, Germany); Marius Porumb (Cluj-Napoca, Romania); Alexander Rubel (Iași, Romania); Peter Scherrer (Graz, Austria); Alexandru Vulpe (Bucharest, Romania).

Responsible of the volume: Ioan Stanciu

În ţară revista se poate procura prin poştă, pe bază de abonament la: EDITURA ACADEMIEI ROMÂNE, Calea 13 Septembrie nr. 13, sector 5, P. O. Box 5–42, Bucureşti, România, RO–76117, Tel. 021–411.90.08, 021–410.32.00; fax. 021–410.39.83; RODIPET SA, Piaţa Presei Libere nr. 1, Sector 1, P. O. Box 33–57, Fax 021–222.64.07. Tel. 021–618.51.03, 021–222.41.26, Bucureşti, România; ORION PRESS IMPEX 2000, P. O. Box 77–19, Bucureşti 3 – România, Tel. 021–301.87.86, 021–335.02.96.

E P H E M E R I S N A P O C E N S I S

Any correspondence will be sent to the editor:INSTITUTUL DE ARHEOLOGIE ŞI ISTORIA ARTEIStr. M. Kogălniceanu nr. 12–14, 400084 Cluj-Napoca, RO

e-mail: [email protected]

All responsability for the content, interpretations and opinionsexpressed in the volume belongs exclusively to the authors.

DTP and print: MEGA PRINTCover: Roxana Sfârlea

© 2012 EDITURA ACADEMIEI ROMÂNECalea 13 Septembrie nr. 13, Sector 5, Bucureşti 76117Telefon 021–410.38.46; 021–410.32.00/2107, 2119

ACADEMIA ROMÂNĂINSTITUTUL DE ARHEOLOGIE ŞI ISTORIA ARTEI

E P H E M E R I S NAPOCENSIS

X X I I2 0 1 2

EDITURA ACADEMIEI ROMÂNE

SOMMAIRE – CONTENTS – INHALT

STUDIES

FLORIN GOGÂLTAN Ritual Aspects of the Bronze Age Tell-Settlements in the Carpathian Basin. A Methodological Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

ALEXANDRA GĂVAN Metallurgy and Bronze Age Tell-Settlements from Western Romania (I) . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

DÁVID PETRUŢ Everyday Life in the Research Concerning the Roman Army in the Western European Part of the Empire and the Province of Dacia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

CORIOLAN HORAŢIU OPREANU From “στρατόπεδον” to Colonia Dacica Sarmizegetusa. A File of the Problem . . . . . . . . 113

CĂLIN COSMA Ethnische und politische Gegebenheiten im Westen und Nordwesten Rumäniens im 8.–10. Jh. n.Chr. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND EPIGRAPHICAL NOTES

AUREL RUSTOIU Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

VITALIE BÂRCĂ Some Remarks on Metal Cups with Zoomorphic Handles in the Sarmatian Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

FLORIN FODOREAN “Spa” Vignettes in Tabula Peutingeriana. Travelling Ad Aquas: thermal Water Resources in Roman Dacia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211

DAN AUGUSTIN DEAC Note on Apis Bull Representations in Roman Dacia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223

SILVIA MUSTAŢĂ, SORIN COCIŞ, VALENTIN VOIŞIAN Instrumentum Balnei from Roman Napoca. Two Iron Vessels Discovered on the Site from Victor Deleu Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235

IOAN STANCIU About the Use of the So-Called Clay “Breadcakes” in the Milieu of the Early Slav Settlements (6th–7th Centuries) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253

DAN BĂCUEŢ-CRIŞANContributions to the Study of Elites and Power Centers in Transylvania during the second Half of the 9th – first Half of the 10th Centuries. Proposal of Identification Criteria Based on archaeological Discoveries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279

ADRIANA ISAC, ERWIN GÁLL, SZILÁRD GÁL A 12th Century Cemetery Fragment from Gilău (Cluj County) (Germ.: Julmarkt; Hung.: Gyalu) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301

ADRIAN ANDREI RUSU Stove Tiles with the Royal Coat of Arms of King Matthias I Corvinus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

REVIEWS

IULIAN MOGA, Culte solare şi lunare în Asia Mică în timpul Principatului/Solar and Lunar Cults in Asia Minor in the Age of the Principate, Editura Universităţii “Alexandru Ioan Cuza” Iași (Iași 2011), 752 p. (Szabó Csaba) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327

DAN GH. TEODOR, Un centru meşteşugăresc din evul mediu timpuriu. Cercetările arheologice de la Lozna-Botoşani/An Artisan centre from the Early Middle Ages. The archaeological research from Lozna-Botoşani, Bibliotheca Archaeologica Moldaviae XV, Academia Română – Filiala Iași, Institutul de Arheologie, Editura Istros (Brăila 2011), 200 p. (including 118 figures), abstract and list of figures in French (Ioan Stanciu) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331

CĂLIN COSMA, Funerary Pottery in Transylvania of the 7th–10th Centuries, Series Ethnic and Cultural Interferences in the 1st Millenium B.C. to the 1st Millenium AD. 18, Romanian Academy – Institute of Archaeology and Art History Cluj-Napoca, Mega Publishing House (Cluj-Napoca 2011), 183 p., 49 plates (Aurel Dragotă) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339

RESEARCH PROJECTS

Crossing the Boundaries. Remodeling Cultural Identities at the End of Antiquity in Central and Eastern Europe. A Case Study (Coriolan H. Oprean, Vlad-Andrei Lăzărescu) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343

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

Seeing the Unseen. Landscape Archaeology on the Northern Frontier of the Roman Empire at Porolissvm (Romania) (Coriolan H. Oprean, Vlad-Andrei Lăzărescu) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352

Abbreviations that can not be found in Bericht der Römisch-Germanische Kommission . . . . . 363

Guidelines for “Ephemeris Napocensis” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366

COMMENTARIA ARCHAEOLOGICA ET HISTORICA (I)

Aurel Rustoiu1

Abstract: The first note is discussing the Celtic grave with a helmet from Ciumeşti and the significance of the Greek bronze greaves which belong to this burial. During the 50 years which passed since its discovery, the aforementioned grave generated numerous comments, interpretations and scientific debates. The note is a synthesis of the information regarding its context of discovery, the stages of publication of the inventory and the successive theories concerning the chronology and interpretation of the grave. A recent analysis has demonstrated that the burial can be dated to the LT B2-C1 (or more likely only to the LT C1) and very probably belonged to a Celtic warrior from the Carpathian Basin who was a mercenary in the eastern Mediterranean region in the second half of the 3rd century BC. Starting from these aspects, the Greek bronze greaves belonging to the funerary inventory, alongside other items of LT military equipment, are analysed in detail. The artefacts played an important role in defining a particular warlike identity in comparison with the military elites of the eastern Mediterranean. The second note comprises an evaluation of the older or more recent Transylvanian discoveries belonging to the Padea-Panagjurski kolonii group: funerary contexts or isolated finds including specific weaponry or harness fittings. They illustrate a concentration of the burials of Padea-Panagjurski kolonii type in south-western Transylvania, more precisely in an area related to the centre of power of the Dacian kingdom prior to and during the rule of Burebista. At the same time, some burials point to an extension of this phenomenon in farther areas from central or northern Transylvania, up to the upper Tisza, these regions being very probably taken over and controlled by Dacian kings. Chronologically, most of these discoveries can be dated to the LT D1, the latest dated burials belonging to the Augustan period.Keywords: Ciumeşti, graves, greaves, helmets, sica, Padea-Panagjurski kolonii

1. The grave with a helmet from Ciumeşti – 50 years from its discovery. Comments on the greaves2

The well-known grave from Ciumeşti (Satu Mare County, Romania), containing an iron helmet having a realistic-made bronze bird of prey fitted on the calotte, was discovered 50 years ago, on 10 August 1961. The helmet is a unique artefact amongst the La Tène finds from Europe due to its outstanding features. As a consequence it was included in numerous exhibi-tions and catalogues, as well as in syntheses concerning Celtic art and civilization. Unfortunately the burial was incidentally discovered and its inventory was recovered and published in successive stages. This situation led to the appearance and perpetuation of several confusions regarding the

1 Institute of Archaeology and History of Art Cluj-Napoca, Romanian Academy Cluj Branch, M. Kogălniceanu str. 12–14, 400084, Cluj-Napoca, Cluj county, RO; e-mail: [email protected].

2 This work was supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research, CNCS – UEFISCDI, project number PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-0278.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND EPIGRAPHICAL NOTES

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

160 Aurel Rustoiu

interpretation of the grave from Ciumeşti. The main stages in the recovering of archaeological information and the subsequent chronological and cultural interpretation of this outstanding discovery are presented below.

The first group of finds recovered from the inventory arrived in the Museum of Baia Mare, being later published by M. Rusu3. It included the iron helmet with the bronze bird, two bronze greaves, an iron javelin head and an iron chainmail (Fig. 1). M. Rusu noted that all of these artefacts lacked burning traces and, according to the information collected from discov-erers, burnt remains or human bones (cremated or not) were not seen in the burial pit (having a circular shape and a diameter of about 1.2–1.5 m). The context suggested a symbolic burial (cenotaph), or a ritual deposition. As concerning the chronological aspect, M. Rusu considered that the inventory could be dated towards the end of the 4th century BC (La Tène B).

Shortly after the publication J. V. S. Megaw remarked the typological resemblance of the helmet from Ciumeşti with the one from Batina, as well as the depiction of a similar helmet on the ‘weapons frieze’ from Pergamon. Megaw also made some pertinent observations about the entire inventory4, but these were ignored by Romanian specialist literature. A few years later U. Schaaff, analysing Celtic iron helmets, added the find from Ciumeşti to a type specific to the eastern Celts (Helme mit verstärkte Kalotte), known in the area between Slovenia and Transylvania, although some examples reached Asia Minor, according to the depictions from the temple of Athena Nikephoros from Pergamon5. Later discoveries confirmed the distribution of such helmets towards the Balkans, for example the finds identified in Bulgaria, Albania and Macedonia (FYROM)6.

Still, the grave from Ciumeşti was not an isolated deposition, but a part of a larger La Tène cemetery. Thus its discovery led to the investigation of this site. Systematic archaeo-logical excavations were carried out on the entire area of the cemetery (Fig. 3/1), as well as in the contemporaneous settlement from its vicinity (Fig. 3/2–4). The investigations were done in the following years (1962, 1964–1965), being published by V. Zirra7. In total were uncovered 32 graves – seven of inhumation, 21 of cremation in pit and four of cremation in urn. Other three cremation graves in urn, initially considered as belonging to the La Tène cemetery, being ascribed to the indigenous population8, are earlier dated and belong to the Early Iron Age9. V. Zirra considered that despite some early artefacts the cemetery should be dated only in the La Tène C, with an absolute date-range from around 230 to 130 BC10. At the same time I. H. Crişan11 continued to sustain an earlier dating in the La Tène B2. K. Horedt12 also remarked that the Ciumeşti cemetery began in the La Tène B2 (after 275 BC), but most of the burials belonged to the La Tène C1 sub-phase. Today it is accepted that in general the entire cemetery can be

3 RUSU 1969; RUSU/BANDULA 1970.4 MEGAW 1970, 133–134.5 SCHAAFF 1974, 171–173, Fig. 25 (distribution map); SCHAAFF 1988, 300–301, Fig. 14 (distribution map).6 RUSTOIU 2006, 48–49, Fig. 4; RUSTOIU 2008, 21–25, Fig. 7 (distribution map); GUŠTIN 2011,

123–124, Fig. 2 (the most recent distribution map). GUŠTIN/KUZMAN/MALENKO 2011 published a grave belonging to a Celtic mercenary from Ohrid, dated to the La Tène C1, and having in inventory a helmet of the same type to the one from Ciumeşti, again confirming the dating of the Transylvanian burial (I am grateful to M. Guštin for allowing me to read the manuscript before publication). See below.

7 ZIRRA 1967 (cemetery); ZIRRA 1980 (settlement). The research team also included M. Rusu (1962), I. Németi and M. Zdroba for the cemetery, while I. H. Crişan participated in the investigations from the settlement (1964–1965).

8 CRIŞAN 1966, 5–22; ZIRRA 1967, 48–52.9 NÉMETI 2000–2001, 62; NÉMETI 2003, 164. 10 ZIRRA 1967, 114. See also ZIRRA 1991, 382, this time providing a date-range between 240 and 130 BC.11 CRIŞAN 1966, 41; CRIŞAN 1971, 70.12 HOREDT 1973, 299–303.

161Commentaria Archaeologica et Historica (I)

2

4

1

3

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

162 Aurel Rustoiu

dated to the La Tène B2b–C1 sub-phases13, being contemporaneous with the horizons III–IV of the cemetery from Pişcolt, in the same region14. The mentioned chronological limits raised some doubts about the too early dating of the rich grave that belonged to a Celtic warrior.

The chronological problem came again into discussion during the following years. Another part of the grave’s inventory remained in the possession of a local man who partici-pated in the works of 1961 leading to the discovery of the grave. The artefacts were recovered in 1973 by T. Bader (from the Museum of Satu Mare on that time) and published two years later by I. Németi15. The remaining inventory includes an iron belt with lanceolated buckle, the spring of an iron brooch, fragments from the chainmail, and another fragment of a cheek-piece belonging to the iron helmet, a large bi-truncated vessel and a bowl (Fig. 2). Some finds have burning traces, whereas the person who had them affirmed that in the pit were also cremated human bones. These new data demonstrate that the grave was of cremation in a pit. I. Németi opted for a dating in the La Tène B2b–C1 sub-phases, similar to the one of the entire cemetery.

4

1

2

35

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

13 In Transylvania the absolute dating for the LT B2b is around 280/277–250 BC, while that of the LT C1 is around 250–175 BC. See HOREDT 1973, 302; RUSTOIU 2000, 182–184; RUSTOIU/EGRI 2010, 218; RUSTOIU/EGRI 2011, 18.

14 According to NÉMETI 1975, 244–245; NÉMETI 1992b, 110. 15 NÈMETI 1975, 243–245.


1

3 4

2

Fig. 3. 1 – The plan of the cemetery from Ciumeşti (after RUSU 1969) (1 limits of the excavations; 2 limit of the sand dune; 3 limit of the area destroyed before the beginning of systematic excavations; 4 modern constructions; 5 grave with helmet; 6 La Tène cremation graves; 7 La Tène inhumation graves; 8 cremation graves of the Early Iron Age). 2 – The plan of the settlement from Ciumeşti (after ZIRRA 1980). 3, 4 – Dwellings from the settlement from

Ciumeşti (after ZIRRA 1980).

In 1984 T. Bader published another piece found on the area of the cemetery – an iron horse-bit belonging to a common type from the northern Balkans16. However, there is no evidence that the piece belonged to this grave17, as B. Kull has suggested18. The horse-bit is nevertheless important as evidence of the connections between the Celts from Ciumeşti and the northern Balkans. Lastly, while re-drawing the finds from the Museum of Satu Mare, B. Kull added another fragmentary iron object, probably a scissors19. Still the artefact is not belonging to the grave with helmet20.

16 BADER 1984.17 NÈMETI 1992a, 139 affirmed that the horse-bit was found on the cemetery’s area after the end of the excavations.18 KULL 1997, Fig. 38/8. The horse-bit is also included in the inventory by TELEAGĂ 2008, 15, no. 49.19 KULL 1997, 280–281, Fig. 38. 20 I. Németi made me aware that the mentioned scissors was placed in the permanent exhibition of the Museum

of Satu Mare in the same showcase with other artefacts from the grave with helmet from Ciumeşti. For this reason the German specialist got the impression that all of the artefacts from the showcase belonged to the same grave, but the scissors has a different provenance.

164 Aurel Rustoiu

Recently I have comprehensively discussed the problem of the grave with helmet from Ciumeşti21. After analysing the entire ‘archaeological dossier’ my conclusion was that the burial is quite clearly of cremation in a pit. The burnt traces are missing on several objects (helmet, greaves and javelin head), while the chainmail was folded before being placed in the pit. These observations suggest that some of the grave goods did not accompany the deceased on the pyre, being laid in the pit separately from the cinerary remains. Chronologically an early dating in the 4th century BC cannot be sustained anymore. The analysis of the funerary inventory indicates that the dating should be placed in the La Tène B2b–C1 sub-phases, or more likely only in the La Tène C1. At the same time, the presence of the iron chain-belt made of eight-shaped segments, commonly encountered in feminine graves from the Carpathian Basin, suggests a double burial.

Another important aspect concerns the ‘identity’ of the warrior interred at Ciumeşti. The rich funerary inventory indicates that the deceased was an important person in the local community, a representative of the warlike Celtic elites from the Carpathian Basin of the second half of the 3rd century BC. More than that, the mentioned recent analysis suggests that the warrior from Ciumeşti was a mercenary on the battlefields from the eastern Mediterranean in a period in which the recruitment of Celtic troops by various Hellenistic rulers became a habit.

In this context the presence of the bronze greaves in the assemblage of military equipment is relevant. These pieces were each made from a single sheet of bronze (with a high percentage of tin). They were carefully hammered to copy the anatomic details of the legs22 (Fig. 4). Similar items, made according to the anatomic characteristics of the owner, appeared in Greece at the end of the Archaic period, and were used during the Classical period23 and occasionally later in the Hellenistic times24. The right greave from Ciumeşti, better preserved, has a length of 46 cm25, which suggest a tall owner of about 1.80–1.90 m. For example the greaves from Olympia (dated to the Classical period) have lengths of about 39–41 cm26, pointing to some anthropological differences between the two mentioned regions.

These greaves were not simple ‘imported’ goods. J. V. S. Megaw noted four decades ago that they have a Hellenistic origin and seem to be ‘the prize of some foray into the southern Balkans’27. Still, their manufacturing required the precise measurements of the dimensions and anatomic characteristics of the owners, and this could have only been done by specialised craftsmen. The two gilded greaves from the so-called grave of Philip II from Vergina, which have

21 RUSTOIU 2006; RUSTOIU 2008, 13–63.22 RUSU 1969, 278–279, Fig. 6; RUSU/BANDULA 1970, 8, 13, Pl. 13.23 KUNZE 1991, 76–80 (gr. IV); JARVA 1995, 96–97 (the anatomy group).24 See for example the finds from the northern Black Sea region: GALANINA 1965.25 RUSU 1969, 279, Fig. 6; RUSU/BANDULA 1970, 8, Pl: II; XIII. TELEAGĂ 2008, 442, no. 953, lists a

length of 42 cm and 42.5 cm respectively (!?). I am wondering if these differences are resulting from the way in which the artefacts were restored in the laboratory and preserved in the stores of the Museum of Baia Mare during the last decades (some differences can be observed between the images published by M. Rusu and the more recent ones). Still, even if the new dimensions are taken into consideration, the greaves from Ciumeşti are amongst those which exceed the upper limit of the size of similar artefacts from the Mediterranean region.

26 KUNZE 1991, 117–120. Some pairs of greaves which exceed the size of the commonly found ones in the Greek region are also known from graves from the northern Pontic region, dated to the 4th–3rd centuries BC. For example in different graves from Pervomaevka they have a length of 46–46.5 cm, while in another grave from Kertch they reach a length of 47 cm. On the other hand there are also pairs of greaves which are well below the limit. For example a pair of greaves from Aksjutincy has a length of only 33 cm (ČERNENKO 2006, 102–103, no. 649, 666–667, 681). All these variations demonstrate a wide range of anthropological dimensions which had to be taken into consideration by the craftsmen who made such objects.

27 MEGAW 1970, 133 no. 211.


Fig. 4. Greaves from Ciumeşti. County Museum of History and Archaeology, Baia Mare (photos Zamfir Şomcutean Baia Mare).

166 Aurel Rustoiu

different dimensions, being made for a crippled man, are a significant example28 (Fig. 5/1). At the same time the dimensional variations of the greaves discovered in different geo-cultural areas, previously mentioned, also support their made-to-order manufacturing. It is less probable that a Greek artisan could have made such objects in the Carpathian Basin to orders of some local aristocrats, since the greaves from Ciumeşti are unique not only in this region but across the whole Celtic area. The activity of such a specialised Greek artisan would have left more archaeological traces in the region. Thus it is almost sure that the warrior from Ciumeşti ordered and got the greaves from a Greek workshop in the Mediterranean area. This was possible only because the warrior himself travelled in the mentioned region. In the 3rd century BC the mobility of certain groups from temperate Europe was often related to the mercenary activities. Due to this reason my presumption is that the warrior from Ciumeşti went to the Mediterranean as mercenary and this happened in the second half of the 3rd century BC29.

Recently E. Teleagă has published a vast work regarding the Greek imports recovered from cemeteries of the 6th–3rd centuries BC in the lower Danube basin. The author catalogued and classified numerous artefacts discovered in funerary contexts, also bringing into discussion the finds from other archaeological contexts (settlements, depositions etc) and from outside the mentioned area, for example those found in graves from Transylvania30. The book, despite some errors regarding the cultural identification and chronology probably resulting from the huge quantity of data collected31, will remain a reference work for this subject. Writing about the grave with helmet from Ciumeşti, E. Teleagă has suggested a dating around 300 BC, despite the general dating of the cemetery at the end of the La Tène B2 and in the La Tène C132. This dating is leading to an earlier dating of the funerary inventory and implicitly of the greaves, which are dated after 450 BC33. Thus the proposed dating is wrong, as it will be shown below.

The presence of some Greek artefacts in contexts which are later dated than their regular period of use is theoretically possible. An episode from 274 BC is relevant in this context. During the campaign of Pyrrhus in Macedonia against Antigonos Gonatas, Celtic mercenaries of the king of Epirus pillaged the royal Macedonian cemetery from Aegae (Plutarch, Pyrrhus 26. 6)34. Through such actions a Celtic mercenary could have gained some older prestige objects, brought afterwards home. Still, as previously demonstrated, the grave from Ciumeşti belongs to the second half of the 3rd century BC and the greaves were made in the same period by a Greek artisan who measured the anatomic characteristics of the person who ordered the objects. Thus the dating proposed by E. Teleagă is incorrect, so the interpretation has to turn to another direction.

28 ANDRONICOS 1984, 186–189, Fig. 150.29 RUSTOIU 2006; RUSTOIU 2008, 36–49.30 TELEAGĂ 2008.31 For example TELEAGĂ 2008, 256–257 no. 2, Karte 45, wrongly localizes Bene (nowadays Dobroselie in

Trans-Carpathian Ukraine) in Transdanubia (in Hungary). More than that, probably the bronze vessel discovered at Bene, which arrived in the Museum of Cluj at the beginning of the 20th century, was found in a funerary context (see POPOVICH 1995–1996, 86). At the same time, while the funerary inventories from the Carpathian Basin are discussed, a series of important discoveries are missing, for example the oenochoe dated to the end of the 4th century BC and coming from a grave from Pećine cemetery (PAROVIĆ–PEŠIKAN 1993, 1243, Fig.: 1/4; 3/23) etc.

32 TELEAGĂ 2008, 15 no. 49.33 TELEAGĂ 2008, 249, 442 no. 953, Pl. 133/1–4.34 “… And after getting Aegae into his power, besides other seventies exercised upon its inhabitants he left as a

garrison in the city some of the Gauls who were making the campaign with him. But the Gauls, a race insatiable of wealth, set themselves to digging up the tombs of the kings who had been buried there; the treasure they plundered, the bones they insolently cast to the four winds.” (Translation PERRIN 1920). Plutarch. Plutarch’s Lives. with an English Translation by Bernadotte Perrin. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press. London. William Heinemann Ltd. 1920. See also GRIFFITH 1968, 63.


1

2

3 4 5

Fig. 5. 1 – Greaves from the ‘grave of Philip II’ from Vergina (after ANDRONICOS 1984). 2 – Silver plaque from Letnica. 3, 4 – Greaves from Agighiol. 5 – Greave from Vraca (all after KULL 1997). 6 – Greave from

Malomirovo (after SÎRBU 2006).

168 Aurel Rustoiu

The greaves were very popular in Greece during the Archaic and Classical periods, being part of the hoplites’ equipment35. They are discovered in archaeological contexts (graves or sanctu-aries), but are also depicted on numerous monuments or painted vessels, underlining the role and significance of these artefacts in the assemblages of defensive military equipment. In the same period, and also in the 4th–3rd centuries BC, the anatomic variants of the Greek greaves became popular amongst Thracian populations from the Balkans or Scythian tribes from the northern Black Sea region36 (in the latter area the latest dated examples belong to the 2nd century BC37). In the lower Danube basin, at Agighiol and Vraca, and more recently at Malomirovo in Bulgaria, were found local variants made of silver and richly decorated38 (Fig. 5/3–6). Aside from that on an appliqué from the Letnica hoard (Bulgaria) is shown a hunting scene in which a rider wears such greaves39 (Fig. 5/2), pointing to the role of status symbol of these objects for the aristocracy of the northern Balkans, together with the remaining elements of the military equipment.

In Greece, greaves continued to be used in the Hellenistic period, but their symbolic role was modified. A grave with funerary chamber discovered at Lefkadia in Macedonia, and built around 200 BC or slightly later, is relevant from this point of view. The burial belonged to the brothers Lyson and Kallikles, but it was designed to also hold the funerary urns of an entire series of descendants. On one of the walls is painted a panoply of arms having a Macedonian shield in the middle, flanked by two swords (a Macedonian one and another of ‘western’ type), while two helmets and a pair of greaves are depicted below (Fig. 6). On the opposite wall the shield and the two swords are accom-panied by two body armours and two helmets40. The images of weapons on funerary monuments from Greece originate from earlier traditions of displaying real objects41. Their painting in a realistic manner, as in the case of the grave from Lefkadia, indicates that the intention was to present the real panoplies of arms of the deceased42. They belonged to a class of lower local warlike aristocrats who increased their status, accumulated fortunes through military activities and expressed their social position and identity a few generations after the death of Alexander the Great43. The panoplies of arms consisting of defensive items (including the greaves) and offensive weapons were true emblems of their status within the society. More than that, the weapons depicted in the grave also played a symbolic role for their descendants, as they reiterated the right to inherit the same privileged status.

The greaves, together with other weapons, were also shown on a series of public monuments. Probably the best known example is the ‘weapons frieze’ from the stoa of the temple of Athena Nikephoros from Pergamon (Fig. 6). The relief was probably made during the reign of Eumenes II (after the defeat of Antiochus III at Magnesia in 190 BC) and shows the weapons captured from the enemy, both the Hellenistic ones and the weapons of Celtic mercenaries hired by the Seleucid king44. They were represented in a realistic manner, the military equipment being easily recognizable in detail. Amongst the well known and most relevant examples belonging to the La Tène panoply of arms can be mentioned: a helmet having a morphology similar to the one from Batina and belonging to the same type as the helmet from Ciumeşti; the typical Celtic oval shields with iron bosses; the chainmails with a closing system identical to those discovered in the Balkans (Fig. 7) etc.

35 SNODGRASS 1964, 88; SNODGRASS 1967, 58.36 TELEAGĂ 2008, 249–251, Karte 43; ČERNENKO 2006, 98–105.37 ČERNENKO 2006, 105 no. 694.38 See for example BERCIU 1974, 52–55, Fig. 8–9; KULL 1997, 291–292,Fig. 46/1–3; TORBOV 2005, 59,

167, 193, Pl. 8, 21; SÎRBU 2006, 89 Fig. 59/2.39 KULL 1997, 291 Fig. 4/12; SÎRBU 2006, Fig. 53/1.40 SAKELLARIOU 1983, 150–151 Fig. 96–97; POLITO 1998, 75–76 Fig. 3–4.41 POLITO 1998, 97.42 POLITO 1998, 76.43 It is significant that in the royal cemetery from Vergina such images are missing, and real weapons were placed

in graves. See also POLITO 1998, 77.44 A synthesis of the current debates regarding the dating of the monument from Pergamon in POLITO 1998,

91–95.


In comparison with the frequency of other types of weapons shown on the ‘weapons frieze’ from Pergamon, the greaves were seldom depicted (Fig. 6). This difference may suggest a selective use of them, only by certain individuals, probably high rank officers. A similar phenomenon has been noted in the Republican Roman army when only centurions and superior officers worn greaves45.

Fig. 6. Detail of the painting on the wall of the grave belonging to brothers Lyson and Kallikles from Lefkadia above (after SAKELLARIOU 1983); fragment of the ‘weapons frieze’ from Pergamon, on which a pair of greaves is

depicted bellow (after BOHN 1885).

45 FEUGÈRE 2002, 76.

170 Aurel Rustoiu

1

2

3

4

5

6

Fig. 7. Pieces of military equipment and their representation on the ‘weapons frieze’ from Pergamon. 1 – Helmet from Batina, Croatia (after SCHAAFF 1988). 2 – Shield-boss from Fântânele-Dealul Popii, Transylvania (after RUSTOIU 2008). 3, 4 – Closing systems of some chainmails from Smochan (3) and Tărnava (4), Bulgaria

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


The monument from Pergamon is also important for the chronological aspect of this discussion. Its decorative panels illustrate a large range of weapons and military equipment, Hellenistic and ‘Barbarian’, some of them older but still in use at the beginning of the 2nd century BC, others new and archaeologically documented up to the end of the 2nd century or the beginning of the 1st century BC.

In conclusion, returning to the warrior buried at Ciumeşti, it has to be noted that the funerary inventory points to his belonging to a warlike elite displaying well defined and visible signs of status. Still, these have to be interpreted from two different perspectives.

The chainmail and the helmet decorated with a bird of prey were symbolic elements designed to set him apart within the group of warriors from both its own community and on a wider area in the Carpathian Basin. The remaining graves with weapons from Ciumeşti (no. 9 and 12) contain ‘standard’ panoplies of weapons of the period, commonly encountered in other cemeteries from the Carpathian Basin or other areas in temperate Europe: sword (sometimes with the chain-belt), spear head and shield46. For this reason the military equipment of the mentioned deceased can be considered insignia of a chieftain having a significant authority in his community, and perhaps even on a larger area.

On the other hand the greaves were also symbols of his rank, but of different nature than the local traditional equipment. It may be presumed that during his peregrinations in the eastern Mediterranean, and the military actions in which he was involved, the warrior from Ciumeşti, as head of a unit of mercenaries, must have compared himself with the Greek officers fighting alongside him. Aiming to be perceived as equal to these officers (perhaps also merce-naries hired by the same master), he adopted the insignia of the prominent military function which were comprehended and acknowledged as such by his Greek colleagues.

Lastly, it has to be noted that in the 50 years which passed since the discovery, the grave with helmet from Ciumeşti continues to determine numerous scientific debates and to attract the public interest whenever it is presented in exhibitions, catalogues or books of general interest, due to its spectacular inventory.

2. The Padea-Panagjurski kolonii group in Transylvania. Old and new discoveries

Nearly four decades ago Z. Woźniak noted the spread of some cremation graves containing panoplies of weapons consisting of swords of La Tène type, spears, shields and curved daggers (sometimes decorated) on the territory of today Bulgaria (mainly in the north and north-west) and Romania (mainly in Oltenia). In many cases the inventories also contained horse-bits of local type, indicating that the graves belonged to riders. The entire phenomenon was named ‘Padea-Panagjurski kolonii’ and was dated mainly to the 2nd–1st centuries BC47. Still it was noted that during this period some elements of the funerary rite and ritual were different from a zone to another (tumuli in north-western Bulgaria, cremation graves in pit, sometimes with the burnt remains placed in urns in Oltenia etc), suggesting the existence of different traditions and ethnic origins of the members of the warlike elites which used an otherwise unitary, typologically and functionally, military equipment.

Later discoveries revealed that the mentioned phenomenon was extended over a wider area, including both banks of the Danube in the Iron Gates region, areas in western and southern Muntenia, and south-western Transylvania48.

46 ZIRRA 1967, 24–28 (Grave 9 – complete panoply), 29–32 (Grave 12 – only a sword).47 WOŹNIAK 1974, 74–138; WOŹNIAK 1976, 388–394. It was later noted that sometimes the military

equipment also contained helmets and chainmails: RUSTOIU 1994a, 34–35; RUSTOIU 1996, 36, 147–150 etc.48 RUSTOIU 1994a; RUSTOIU 1994b; SÎRBU/RUSTOIU 1999 (with bibliography); RUSTOIU 2002,

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

172 Aurel Rustoiu

1

2

3

0 7 cm(1, 2)

Fig. 8. 1 – Curved dagger from Deva (after BAJUSZ 2005). 2 – Curved dagger from Berghin (drawing A. Rustoiu). 3 – Iron horse-bit from Mediaş (photos S. Berecki).

As concerning the finds from Transylvania, they consist of several burials identified on the middle Mureş basin: cremation graves in pit at Teleac49, Blandiana50 and Tărtăria51, to which

49 MOGA 1982; RUSTOIU 2005, 112–113 Fig. 6–8.50 CIUGUDEAN 1980.51 CIUGUDEAN D./CIUGUDEAN H. 1993.


were recently added those from Hunedoara52, or tumuli at Cugir53 and Călan54. During the last two decades I have shown that these burials concentrated in south-western Transylvania are later dated than the Celtic horizon (La Tène B2–C1) in the region. This fact may indicate a northward migration of a warlike elite from areas south of the Carpathians, which replaced the Celtic domination in Transylvania and later led to the appearance of the Dacian Kingdom. These burials are located in the vicinity of some Dacian settlements, sometimes fortified, and the ceramic inventories are local55.

The publication of certain older and previously unpublished discoveries, as well as the graves more recently uncovered across the entire area of the Padea-Panagjurski kolonii group, enriched the ‘archaeological dossier’ and led to the appearance of some new contributions to this subject56. Archaeological repertoire of Transylvania can be also enlarged through an analysis of the information concerning older discoveries and a re-evaluation of the recent ones, which are further discussed.

The recent publication of the archaeological notes of István Téglás, a collector from Turda who worked in the second half of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century, facilitated the recovery of some important scientific data. The Turda collector assembled a reper-toire and drew numerous sketches of many artefacts from various Transylvanian collections or collected by himself from some archaeological sites. A part of these finds ended in some of the modern museums, but others were lost forever57.

Amongst the finds which in the last quarter of the 19th century were in the collection of Gábor Téglás from Deva (a gymnasium teacher, historian, archaeologist and collector of antiquities; despite the similar surname the two collectors were unrelated)58 was a curved dagger discovered in the same locality and having the morphological characteristics of a sica59 (Fig. 8/1). The presumably lost dagger (perhaps it still exist in the older collections of the Museum of Deva?) preserved a part of the scabbard (on about 20 cm of the blade). The total length of the artefact was of 50 cm, being amongst the largest daggers of this type. The piece from Deva has numerous analogies inthe area of the Padea-Panagjurski kolonii group. The shape of the hilt is also encountered on other examples discovered in graves from Cetate60 in Oltenia, Târnava61 and Vinograd62 in Bulgaria, all of them being dated to the LT D1. The perfect state of conservation, according to the drawing made by I. Téglás, as well as the presence of the scabbard, suggests that the dagger probably belonged to a funerary

52 SÎRBU/LUCA/ROMAN 2007.53 CRIŞAN 1980; RUSTOIU 2008, 161–162, Fig. 81.54 RUSTOIU/SÎRBU/FERENCZ 2001–2002.55 RUSTOIU 1994a, 35; RUSTOIU 1994b; RUSTOIU 2002, 25–40; RUSTOIU 2005; RUSTOIU 2008,

142–163 etc.56 ŞERBĂNESCU 2006, 168–171; TORBOV/ANASTASSOV 2008; ANASTASSOV 2011, 230–231 Fig. 11–12;

BONDOC 2008; BONDOC 2008–2009 etc. See mostly ŁUCZKIEWICZ/SCHÖNFELDER 2008, with important comments regarding the entire phenomenon. The recently recovered artefacts coming from destroyed graves from Hrtkovci, in the vicinity of the Scordiscian settlement at Gomolava (a sword, a curved dagger decorated with face-to-face birds of prey on the blade, spear heads, a ‘Thracian’ horse-bit, chariot parts similar to those discovered in tumulus 2 from Cugir, late Republican bronze vessels etc), can be ascribed to the Padea – Panagjurski kolonii group. They illustrate the westward extension of the authority of the Dacian Kingdom under Burebista. See DAUTOVA RUŠEVLJAN/VUJOVIĆ 2006, Fig.: 24; 29; 50; 52–53; 54; 63 etc, with numerous errors regarding the dating and cultural identification.

57 BAJUSZ 1980; BAJUSZ 2005.58 See WOLLMANN 1983, 262; RUSTOIU 1991.59 BAJUSZ 2005, 134 no. 69, Fig. 18/141/3. During the last years several curved knifes from pre-Roman Dacia

were published, completing the repertoire of discoveries. Still, some of these pieces are not curved daggers from a morphological and functional point of view. For example amongst the artefacts coming from Sălaj, and published by POP/BORANGIC 2009, only the piece from Şimleu Silvaniei (op. cit., Fig. 2/1) is a true sica. For the morphology and functionality of the curved daggers see RUSTOIU 2007a.

60 NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR 1945–1947, 19, Pl. 3/6.61 THEODOSSIEV/TORBOV 1995, Fig. 21.62 ŁUCZKIEWICZ/SCHÖNFELDER 2008, Fig. 24.

174 Aurel Rustoiu

inventory. Around Deva were documented numerous traces of habitation from the same period of the 2nd–1st centuries BC (the fortress from Cozia – Piatra Coziei and probably the one from Deva – Cetate are the most significant)63 which may sustain this hypothesis.

Another curved dagger (sica) comes from Berghin (Alba County). The piece was identified in the Museum of Sighişoara and belonged to the old collections accumulated in the 19th century64 (Fig. 8/2). The blade is fragmentary and has blood channels65. The hilt was broken in ancient times, but a part of the guard is still preserved. The preserved length of the piece is of 20 cm. This dagger probably was also part of a funerary inventory. The hilt might have been damaged when the weapon was ritually bent before being placed in grave, as it is the case of the finds from Rast66 in Oltenia. From Berghin are known, from various plots, Dacian ceramic fragments, a Greek coin, a Roman Republican denarius and an attachment of a situla of E 18 type, which may suggest the existence of some settlements from the 1st century BC67.

From Mediaş comes an assemblage of iron objects discovered in 1891, which could have belonged to some funerary inventories. They are preserved in the Brukenthal Museum Sibiu68. Amongst them is a ‘Thracian’ horse-bit and fragments belonging to another similar piece69 (Fig. 8/3). The horse-bit was first published by V. Zirra70 and then by W. M. Werner71, whereas the fragments of the second piece remained unknown. W. M. Werner included the horse-bit from Mediaş in the XVI type (Hebelstangentrensen mit zweiteilingen Mundstück), variant 3 (birnenför-miges Seitenteil). The lateral rings were decorated with incised lines, similarly to some pieces from Bulgaria72. The examples belonging to this type are the most frequent in funerary inventories from the area of the Padea-Panagjurski kolonii group73. The artefacts from Mediaş might have come from different graves, or from a single one. In certain situations, for example in the tumulus 2 from Cugir or in the tumulus from Călan, in the same grave were placed horse-bits from many horses74.

The older or more recent discoveries from Piatra Craivii (Craiva, Cricău commune, Alba County) indicate the existence of a small familial cemetery, similar to the one from Cugir, close to the well-known Dacian fortress. Some finds belonging to a burial were recovered at the end of the 19th century. The inventory included, according the reconstruction recently provided by C. I. Popa, a long sword and two spear heads75. Very probably from the same grave comes a curved dagger having an intricate decoration on the blade76 (Fig. 9/1). The decoration has close analogies on a curved dagger discovered in a grave from Mala Vrbica-Ajmana77 (Fig. 9/2), on the right bank of the Danube, in the Iron Gates region, and on another coming from Popitsa78 in north-western Bulgaria (Fig. 9/3). The structure of ornamentation indicates the distribution across a wider area of an elabo-rated iconographic repertoire, having symbolic and ideological meanings specific to the mentioned warlike elites. The widespread distribution of these symbols was determined by the mobility which

63 GHEORGHIU 2005, 33 no. 33, 36–37 no. 43.64 Unpublished. Museum of Sighişoara, inv. no. 598.65 Multiple blood channels, although rarely encountered, can be also seen on other daggers, for example on a

piece from Komarevo, in Bulgaria: TORBOV 2005, 693–694, Pl. 1/2.66 TUDOR 1968.67 GHEORGHIU 2005, 26 no. 8.68 An iron bridle and a disk published by NESTOR 1937–1940, 177–178, Fig. 7/1–2.69 Brukenthal Museum Sibiu. Information and drawings by S. Berecki to whom I would like to thank. 70 ZIRRA 1981, 128 Fig. 5/3.71 WERNER 1988, 91–92 no. 297, Pl. 46/297.72 TORBOV 2005, 696 Pl. 3/1.73 RUSTOIU 2002, 51–53, Fig. 36 (distribution).74 RUSTOIU 2002, 52.75 POPA 2008.76 RUSTOIU 2007b, 83–84, Fig. 1/1.77 STALIO 1986, 33, Fig. 42.78 TORBOV 1997, Pl. 3/1; TORBOV 2005, 695 Pl. 2/3.


characterised this group, but also by the mobility of the craftsmen who followed the aristocratic ‘courts’ and created the entire panoply of arms and the prestige insignia of the military elite.

1

2

3

4

0 5 cm(1-3)

0 5 cm(4)

Fig. 9. Curved daggers with decorated blade from Craiva Piatra Craivii (1), Mala Vrbica-Ajmana (2) and Popitsa (3); iron brooch from Craiva Piatra Craivii (4) (1 – after RUSTOIU 2007b; 2 – after STALIO 1986;

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

The older or more recent discoveries from Piatra Craivii (Craiva, Cricău commune, Alba County) indicate the existence of a small familial cemetery, similar to the one from Cugir, close to the well-known Dacian fortress. Some finds belonging to a burial were recovered at the end of the 19th century. The inventory included, according the reconstruction recently provided by C. I. Popa,

176 Aurel Rustoiu

a long sword and two spear heads79. Very probably from the same grave comes a curved dagger having an intricate decoration on the blade80 (Fig. 9/1). The decoration has close analogies on a curved dagger discovered in a grave from Mala Vrbica-Ajmana81 (Fig. 9/2), on the right bank of the Danube, in the Iron Gates region, and on another coming from Popitsa82 in north-western Bulgaria (Fig. 9/3). The structure of ornamentation indicates the distribution across a wider area of an elabo-rated iconographic repertoire, having symbolic and ideological meanings specific to the mentioned warlike elites. The widespread distribution of these symbols was determined by the mobility which characterised this group, but also by the mobility of the craftsmen who followed the aristocratic ‘courts’ and created the entire panoply of arms and the prestige insignia of the military elite.

Recently another funerary inventory was also recovered from Piatra Craivii. The assem-blage consists of a spear head, a curved dagger, a late La Tène (Vincovci type83) brooch and a hybrid brooch, all of them made of iron. The inventory might have included a long sword of La Tène type, probably lost84. The hybrid brooch is chronologically very important (Fig. 9/4). The spring and the bow are morphologically similar to those of the Jezerine brooches, whereas the shape of the foot and catch-plate is encountered on the late La Tène brooches. Due to these morphological characteristics the brooch from Piatra Craivii cam be dated to the end of the 1st century BC, the respective grave being one of the latest dated funerary discoveries of this kind, thus representing a chronological reference point for the end of the Padea-Panagjurski kolonii group in Transylvania.

Lastly, the recent discoveries from Malaja Kopanja in Trans-Carpathian Ukraine have to be mentioned. A series of cremation burials in pit, many of them destroyed, have been found in the close vicinity of the Dacian fortified settlement, on Cellenitza site. Their inventories (Fig. 10) consist of weaponry and military equipment (La Tène swords, spear heads, curved daggers, shield bosses, a fragment of a chainmail etc), riding equipment (‘Thracian’ and ‘Getic’ horse-bits, buckles, rings, spurs etc) and garment accessories (the brooches of middle La Tène scheme being important for dating), which can be ascribed to the first half of the 1st century BC (Fig. 10). Graves containing artefacts belonging to the feminine costume were also found85. In another closely located find-spot (Seredni Grunok) were discovered other cremation graves in pit, containing goods of local origin and others specific to the Przeworsk culture (including typical weaponry: shield bosses, swords etc). These graves are dated to the second half of the 1st century AD and the first half of the following century86. Thus, despite the summarily published archaeological reports, it can be noted that the cemetery from Malaja Kopanja began in the first half of the 1st century BC. The oldest graves belonged to individuals who used panoplies of arms resembling those from the area of the Padea-Panagjurski kolonii group. This fact may suggest that the appearance of the Dacian fortress from Malaja Kopanja was determined by the northward expansion of the military elites during the reign of Burebista. Still, unlike the situation from the rest of Dacia, as it is known today, a significant number of graves containing feminine inventories appear here, pointing to a regional feature of this cultural phenomenon characterising the northern extremity of the area of the Padea Panagjurski kolonii group. Later in the 1st century AD, in the same region arrived groups of Germanic populations, bringing artefacts belonging to the Przeworsk culture, and interring their deceased in the close vicinity of the older cemetery. From this point of view the situation is similar to the one encountered in the cemetery at Zemplin87.

79 POPA 2008.80 RUSTOIU 2007b, 83–84, Fig. 1/1.81 STALIO 1986, 33, Fig. 42.82 TORBOV 1997, Pl. 3/1; TORBOV 2005, 695 Pl. 2/3.83 For the type see MAJNARIĆ-PANDŽIĆ 2009, 238–240 and DIZDAR 2003.84 RUSTOIU/GHEORGHIU 2009; RUSTOIU/GHEORGHIU 2010.85 KOTIGOROŠKO 2007; KOTIGOROŠKO 2011.86 KOTIGOROŠKO ET AL. 2000–2004; KOTIGOROŠKO ET AL. 2006–2007.87 BUDINSKÝ-KRIČKA/LAMIOVÁ-SCHMIEDLOVÁ 1990; SÎRBU/RUSTOIU 2006, 205, Fig. 13–15.


5

1

2

3 4

5a

5b

0 5cm(1)

0 cm(3)

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

178 Aurel Rustoiu

In conclusion, the re-evaluation of the older or more recent discoveries illustrates a concen-tration of the funerary contexts of Padea-Panagjurski kolonii type in south-western Transylvania, more precisely in the surroundings of the centre of power of the Dacian Kingdom prior to and during the reign of Burebista (Fig. 11). At the same time a series of graves indicates the extension of the phenomenon on distant territories in central or northern Transylvania, up to the upper Tisza basin, these regions probably being brought under the authority of the Dacian kings.

Chronologically, these burials probably appeared in the LT C2, succeeding the Celtic horizon in Transylvania. The majority of the discov-eries belong to the La Tène D1 sub-phase (from the end of the 2nd century to the first half of the 1st century BC). The grave from Piatra Craivii dated to the Augustan period marks the end of this phenomenon. The military elites from the northern Balkans, having different ethnic origins and funerary traditions, created in the 2nd–1st centuries BC sets of symbolic elements seeking to express a privileged status within their communities. Amongst these sets the military panoply, having a typologi-

cally and functionally unitary character, played an important role. In the 1st century AD these elements were modified. The elites abandoned the traditional funerary practices and some of the weapons included in the usual panoply, but continued to use the curved daggers which probably had an important symbolic role within the local practices. The later modifications were maintained until the conquest of Dacia by the Romans.

Acknowledgements: I would like to thank Dan Pop and Z. Şomcutean (Baia Mare) for providing information and images of the greaves from Ciumesti, S. Berecki (Târgu-Mureș) for information and photos of the finds from Mediaș, Florin Gogâltan (Cluj-Napoca), Liviu Marta (Sat Mare), J. Emilov (Sofia) and M. Guštin (Koper) for bibliographic information.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ANASTASSOV 2011J. ANASTASSOV, The Celtic presence in Thrace during the 3rd century BC in light of new archaeological data. In: M. Guštin/M. Jevtić (Eds.), The Eastern Celts. The communities between the Alps and the Black Sea (Koper/Beograd 2011), 227–239.

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

BADER 1984T. BADER, O zăbală din a doua perioadă a epocii fierului descoperită la Ciumești. Stud. și Cerc. Istor. Veche 35/1, 1984, 85–90.

Fig. 11. Map of the Padea-Panagjurski kolonii funerary discoveries from Transylvania: 1 – Berghin (?). 2 Blandiana. 3 Călan. 4 – Craiva–Piatra Craivii. 5 Cugir. 6 – Deva (?). 7 – Hunedoara–“Grădina Castelului”.

8 – Malaja Kopanja. 9 – Mediaş (?). 10 Tărtăria. 11 – Teleac.


BAJUSZ 1980I. BAJUSZ, Colecţia de antichităţi a lui Téglás István din Turda. Acta Mus. Porolissensis 4, 1980, 367–394.

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

BERCIU 1974D. BERCIU, Contribution à l’étude de l’art Thraco-Gète (București 1974).

BOHN 1885R. BOHN, Das Heiligtum der Athena Polias Nikephoros. Mit Beitrag H. Droysen, Die Balustradenreliefs. Altertümer von Pergamon II (Berlin 1885).

BONDOC 2008D. BONDOC, Discoveries from the second period of the Iron Age from the area of Beharca, Almăj commune, Dolj county, Romania. In: V. Sîrbu/I. Stîngă (Eds.), The Iron Gates region during the Second Iron Age. Settlements, necropolises, treasures. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Drobeta-Turnu Severin, June 12th–15th 2008 (Drobeta-Turnu Severin/ Craiova 2008), 7–12.

BONDOC 2008–2009 D. BONDOC, Descoperiri de epocă La Tène de la Padea, jud. Dolj. Stud. și Cerc. Istor. Veche 59–60, 2008–2009, 137–163.

BUDINSKÝ-KRIČKA/LAMIOVÁ-SCHMIEDLOVÁ 1990V. BUDINSKÝ-KRIČKA/M. LAMIOVÁ-SCHMIEDLOVÁ, A late 1st century BC– 2nd century AD cemetery at Zemplin. Slovenská Arch. 38/2, 1990, 245–344.

ČERNENKO 2006E. V. ČERNENKO, Die Schutzwaffen der Skythen. PBF III/2 (Stuttgart 2006).

CIUGUDEAN 1980H. CIUGUDEAN, Mormântul tracic de la Blandiana. Acta Mus. Napocensis 17, 1980, 425–432.

CIUGUDEAN D./CIUGUDEAN H. 1993D. CIUGUDEAN/H. CIUGUDEAN, Un mormânt de războinic geto-dac la Tărtăria. Ephemeris Napocensis 3, 1993, 77–79.

CRIŞAN 1966I. H. CRŞAN, Materiale dacice din necropola și așezarea de la Ciumești și problema raporturilor dintre daci și celţi în Transilvania (Baia Mare 1966).

CRIŞAN 1971I. H. CRŞAN, În legătură cu datarea necropolei celtice de la Ciumești. Marmaţia 2, 1971, 54–93.

CRIŞAN 1980I. H. CRŞAN, Necropola dacică de la Cugir. Consideraţii preliminare. Apulum 18, 1980, 81–87.

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

DIZDAR 2003M. DIZDAR, Prilog poznavanju kasnoga latena u istočnoj Slavoniji. Opuscula Arch. (Zagreb) 27, 2003, 337–349.

FEUGÈRE 2002M. FEUGÈRE, Weapons of the Romans (Stroud 2002).

GALANINA 1965L. K. GALANINA, Grečeskie ponoži severnogo pričernomorija. Arch. Sbornik (Leningrad) 7, 1965, 5–27.

GHEORGHIU 2005G. GHEORGHIU, Dacii de pe cursul mijlociu al Mureșului (Cluj-Napoca 2005).

GRIFFITH 1968G. T. GRIFFITH, The mercenaries of the Hellenistic World (Groningen 1968).

GUŠTIN 2011M. GUŠTIN, On the Celtic tribe of Taurisci. Local identity and regional contacts in the ancient

180 Aurel Rustoiu

world. In: M. Guštin/M. Jevtić (Eds.), The Eastern Celts. The communities between the Alps and the Black Sea (Koper/Beograd 2011), 119–130.

GUŠTIN/KUZMAN/MALENKO 2011 M. GUŠTIN/P. KUZMAN/V. MALENKO, Ein keltischer Krieger in Lichnidos/Ohrid, Mazedonien [forthcoming].

HOREDT 1973K. HOREDT, Interpretări arheologice II. Stud. și Cerc. Istor. Veche 24/2, 1973, 299–310.

JARVA 1995E. JARVA, Archaiologia on archaic Greek body armour. Stud. Arch. Septentrionalia 3 (Rovaniemi 1995).

KOTIGOROŠKO 2007V. KOTIGOROŠKO, Novăie dannăie ob istorii Malokopanskogo gorodišta. In: V. Ciubotă et al. (Eds.), Relaţii româno-ucrainene. Istorie și contemporaneitate (Cluj-Napoca/Satu Mare 2007), 62– 82.

KOTIGOROŠKO 2011V. KOTIGOROŠKO, Issledovanije Malokopansăskogo kompleksa v 2008 g. Stud. și Comun. (Satu Mare) 27/1, 2011, 129–176.

KOTIGOROŠKO ET AL. 2000–2004V. KOTIGOROŠKO/I. PROHNENKO/V. CIUBOTĂ/R. GHINDELE/L. MARTA, Mogilnik Malokopanskogo gorodišta. Stud. și Comun. (Satu Mare) 17–21, 2000–2004, 59–69.

KOTIGOROŠKO ET AL. 2006–2007V. KOTIGOROŠKO/I. PROHNENKO/V. CIUBOTĂ, Itogi issledovani’ja Malokopanskogo kompleksa v 2004–2005 gg. Stud. și Comun. (Satu Mare) 23–24, 2006–2007, 131–154.

KULL 1997B. KULL, Tod und Apotheose. Zur Ikonographie in Grab und Kunst der jüngeren Eisenzeit an der unteren Donau und ihrer Bedeutung für die Interpretation von “Prunkgräbern”. Ber. RGK 78, 1997, 197–466.

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

ŁUCZKIEWICZ/SCHÖNFELDER 2008P. ŁUCZKIEWICZ/M. SCHÖNFELDER, Untersuchungen zur Ausstattung eines späteisenzeitlichen Reiterkriegers aus dem südlichen Karpaten – oder Balkanraum. Jahrb. RGZM 55, 2008, 159–210.

MAJNARIĆ-PANDŽIĆ 2009 N. MAJNARIĆ-PANDŽIĆ, On the South Pannonian Population in the Late Iron Age. In: G. Tiefengraber/B. Kavur/A. Gaspari (Eds.), Keltske študije II. Studies in Celtic Archaeology. Papers in honour of Mitja Guštin (Montagnac 2009), 235–245.

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

MOGA 1982V. MOGA, Mormintele dacice de incineraţie de la Teleac. Apulum 20, 1982, 87–91.

NÉMETI 1975I. NÉMETI, Weitere Angaben über die keltischen Gräberfelder von Ciumești und Sanislău (Kreis Satu Mare). Dacia 19, 1975, 243–248.

NÉMETI 1992AI. NÉMETI, Importuri greco-elenistice în descoperirile celtice din nord-vestul României. Unele consideraţii istorice. Symp. Thracologica 9, București, 1992, 139–141.

NÉMETI 1992B I. NÉMETI, Necropola Latène de la Pișcolt, jud. Satu Mare. III. Thraco-Dacica 13, 1992, 59–112.

NÉMETI 2000/2001 I. NÉMETI, Thraker und Kelten. In: Thraker und Kelten Beidseits der Karpaten (Eberdingen 2000/2001), 59–69.


NÉMETI 2003 I. NÉMETI, Tracii și celţii. In: L. Cornea/C. Ghemiș/G. Moisa (Eds.), In Memoriam N. Chidioșan (Oradea 2003), 161–175.

NESTOR 1937–1940I. NESTOR, Keltische Gräber bei Mediaș. Ein Beitrag zur Frage der frühen keltischen Funde in Siebenbürgen. Dacia 7–8, 1937–1940, 159–182.

NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR 1945–1947C. S. NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR, Antiquités celtiques en Olténie. Dacia 11–12, 1945–1947, 17–33.

PAROVIĆ – PEŠIKAN 1993M. PAROVIĆ – PEŠIKAN, Les cruches à bec-verseur (prochoi) du VIe–IVe siècle av.n.è. dans l’interieur des Balkans. Ancient Macedonia 5, 1993, 1239–1247.

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

POLITO 1998E. POLITO, Fulgentibus armis. Introduzione allo studio dei fregi d’armi antichi (Roma 1998).

POP/BORANGIC 2009H. POP/C. BORANGIC, Cuţite de luptă dacice descoperite în nord-vestul României. Stud. Historia UBB 54/1–2, 35–42.

POPA 2008C. I. POPA, A possible Dacian burial in the vicinity of the Piatra Craivii fortress. Apulum 45, 2008, 357–365.

POPOVICH 1995–1996I. POPOVICH, Periodization and chronology of Kushtanovica type sites in the ranscarpathian region. Nyíregyházi Jósa András Múz. Évk. 37–38, 1995–1996, 77–114.

RUSTOIU 1991A. RUSTOIU, Repere la o arheologie a Transilvaniei (6). Tribuna, s.n. III (Cluj-Napoca), 25, 1991, 8.

RUSTOIU 1994AA. RUSTOIU, Observaţii privind înmormântările tumulare din Dacia preromană. In: S. Mitu/ F. Gogâltan (Eds.), Studii de istorie a Transilvaniei (Cluj 1994), 33–37.

RUSTOIU 1994BA. RUSTOIU, Neue präzisierungen bezüglich des “Keltischen Grabes” von Silivaș. In: P. Roman/M. Alexianu (Eds.), Relations Thraco-Illyro-Helléniques (Bucarest 1994), 295–300.

RUSTOIU 1996A. RUSTOIU, Metalurgia bronzului la daci (sec. II î. Chr. – sec. I d. Chr.). Tehnici, ateliere și produse de bronz. Bibl. Thracologica 15 (București 1996).

RUSTOIU 2000A. RUSTOIU, Les matériels celtiques de l’habitat Dace de Sighișoara–Wietenberg. In: C. Gaiu/A. Rustoiu (Eds.), Les Celtes et les Thraco-Daces de l’Est du Bassin des Carpates (Cluj-Napoca 2000), 179–188.

RUSTOIU 2002A. RUSTOIU, Războinici și artizani de prestigiu în Dacia preromană (Cluj-Napoca 2002).

RUSTOIU 2005A. RUSTOIU, The Padea-Panagjurski Kolonii Group in south-western Transylvania (Romania). In: H. Dobrzańska/V. Megaw/P. Poleska (Eds.), Celts on the margin. Studies in European Cultural Interaction (7th Century BC–1st Century AD) Dedicated to Zenon Woźniak (Krakow 2005), 109–119.

RUSTOIU 2006A. RUSTOIU, A Journey to Mediterranean. Peregrinations of a Celtic Warrior from Transylvania. Stud. Univ. Babeș-Bolyai. Ser. Hist. [Special Issues: Focusing on Iron Age Élites] 51/1, 2006, 42–85.

RUSTOIU 2007AA. RUSTOIU, Thracian “sica” and Dacian “falx”. The history of a “national” weapon. In:

182 Aurel Rustoiu

S. Nemeti/F. Fodorean/ E. Nemeth/S. Cociș/I. Nemeti/M. Pîslaru (Eds.), Dacia felix. Studia Michaeli Bărbulescu oblata (Cluj-Napoca 2007), 67–82.

RUSTOIU 2007BA. RUSTOIU, About a curved dagger discovered at Piatra Craivii. Apulum 44, 2007, 83–97.

RUSTOIU 2008A. RUSTOIU, Războinici și societate în aria celtică transilvăneană. Studii pe marginea mormântului cu coif de la Ciumeşti (Cluj-Napoca 2008).

RUSTOIU/ EGRI 2010 A. RUSTOIU/M. EGRI, Danubian Kantharoi – Almost three decades later. In: S. Berecki (Ed), Iron Age Communities in the Carpathian Basin, Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Tg. Mureș, 9–11 October 2009 (Cluj-Napoca 2010), 217–287.

RUSTOIU/EGRI 2011A. RUSTOIU/M. EGRI, The Celts from the Carpathian Basin between Continental traditions and the fascination of the Mediterranean. A study of the Danubian kantharoi – Celţii din Bazinul Carpatic între tradiţiile continentale şi fascinaţia Mediteranei. (Cluj-Napoca 2011).

RUSTOIU/GHEORGHIU 2009A. RUSTOIU/G. GHEORGHIU, An iron variant of the Jezerine type brooch from pre-Roman Dacia. Bull. Instrumentum 30, 2009, 30–31.

RUSTOIU/GHEORGHIU 2010A. RUSTOIU/G. GHEORGHIU, “General” and “particular” in the dressing fashion and metalwork of pre-Roman Dacia (An iron variant of the Jezerine-type brooches from Piatra Craivii). In: I. Cândea (Ed.), Tracii și vecinii lor în antichitate. Studia in honorem Valerii Sîrbu (Brăila 2010), 447–457.

RUSTOIU/SÎRBU/FERENCZ 2001–2002A. RUSTOIU/V. SÎRBU/I. V. FERENCZ, Mormântul tumular dacic de la Călan (jud. Hunedoara). Sargetia 30, 2001–2002, 111–127.

RUSU 1969M. RUSU, Das keltische Fürstengrab von Ciumești in Rumänien. Ber. RGK 50, 1969, 267–300.

RUSU/ BANDULA 1970M. RUSU/O. BANDULA, Mormântul unei căpetenii celtice de la Ciumești (Baia Mare 1970).

SAKELLARIOU 1983M. B. SAKELLARIOU (Ed.), Greek lands in history. Macedonia: 4000 years of Greek history and civilization (Athens 1983).

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

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

ŞERBĂNESCU 2006D. ŞERBĂNESCU, Morminte geto-dacice descoperite în judeţul Călărași. Istros 13, 2006, 167–181.

SÎRBU 2006 V. SÎRBU, Oameni și zei în lumea geto-dacilor (Brașov 2006).

SÎRBU/LUCA/ROMAN 2007V. SÎRBU/S. A. LUCA/C. ROMAN, Tombs of Dacian warriors (2nd–1st C. BC) found in Hunedoara – Grădina Castelului. Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis 6/1, 2007, 155–177.

SÎRBU/RUSTOIU 1999 V. SÎRBU/A. RUSTOIU, Découvertes funéraires Géto-Daces du sud-ouest de la Roumanie (150–50 av.J.C.). In: M. Garasanin et al. (Eds), Le Djerdap/Les Portes de Fer a la deuxieme moitie du premier millenaire av. J.C. jusqu’aux guerres daciques. Kolloquium in Kladovo-Drobeta-Tr. Severin (September–October 1998) (Beograd 1999), 77–91.

SÎRBU/RUSTOIU 2006V. SÎRBU/A. RUSTOIU, Funerary practices at the Geto-Dacians of the 2nd century BC– 1st century AD. In: V. Lungu et al. (Eds.), Pratiques funéraires et manifestations de l’identité culturelle (Tulcea 2006), 199–228.


SNODGRASS 1964A. SNODGRASS, Early Greek armour and weapons from the end of the Bronze Age to 600 B.C. (Edinburgh 1964).

SNODGRASS 1967A. SNODGRASS, Arms and armours of the Greeks (London 1967).

STALIO 1986B. STALIO, Le site prehitorique Ajmana à Mala Vrbica. Cahiers des Portes de Fèr 3 (Belgrade 1986), 27–50.

TELEAGĂ 2008 E. TELEAGĂ, Griechische Importe in den Nekropolen an der unteren Donau. 6. Jh. – Anfang des 3. Jh. v. Chr. In: Marburger Stud. Vor– und Frühgesch. 23 (Rahden/Westf. 2008).

THEODOSSIEV/TORBOV 1995N. THEODOSSIEV/N. TORBOV, Trakiiski mogili ot kăsnoeliniceskata epoha pri Tărnava, Beloslatinsko. Izv. Muz. Severozapadna Bălgarija 23, 1995, 11–58.

TORBOV 1997N. TORBOV, Krivi trakiiski nojove ot III v. pr. Hr. – I v. otkriti v severozapadna Bălgarija. Izv. Muz. Severozapadna Bălgarija 25, 1997, 15–46.

TORBOV 2005N. TORBOV, Decoration of Thracian weapons and accoutrements, found in northwestern Bulgaria (III–I c. BC) (in bulgarian). In: Stephanos Archaeologicos in honorem Professoris Liudmili Getov (Sofia 2005), 693–700.

TORBOV/ANASTASSOV 2008N. TORBOV/J. ANASTASSOV, Le groupe “Padea-Panagjurski kolonii”: réexamen des ensembles funéraires des IIe–Ier s. av. J.-C. du nord-ouest de la Bulgarie. In: V. Sîrbu/I. Stîngă (Eds.), The Iron Gates region during the Second Iron Age. Settlements, necropolises, treasures. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Drobeta-Turnu Severin, June 12th–15th 2008 (Drobeta-Turnu Severin/Craiova 2008), 95–107.

TUDOR 1968E. TUDOR, Morminte de luptători din a doua vârstă a fierului descoperite la Rastu. Stud. și Cerc. Istor. Veche 19/3, 517–526.

WERNER 1988W. M. WERNER, Eisenzeitliche Trensen an der unteren und mittleren Donau. PBF XVI/4 (München 1988).

WOLLMANN 1983V. WOLLMANN (Ed.), Briefe zur Geschichte der siebenbürgischen Altertumskunde (Bukarest 1983).

WOŹNIAK 1974Z. WOŹNIAK, Wschodnie pogranicze kultury latènskiej (Wroclaw/Warszawa/Kraków/Gdansk 1974).

WOŹNIAK 1976Z. WOŹNIAK, Die östliche Randzone der Latène Kultur. Germania 54, 1976, 382–402.

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

ZIRRA 1980V. ZIRRA, Locuiri din a doua vârstă a fierului în nord-vestul României (Așezarea contemporană cimitirului La Tène de la Ciumești și habitatul indigen de la Berea). Stud. și Comun. (Satu Mare 4), 1980, 39–84.

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

ZIRRA 1991V. ZIRRA, La necropoli e la Tomba del Capo di Ciumești. In: I Celti (Milano 1991), 382–383

EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS

Documents

Transcript of EPHEMERIS NAPOCENSIS