Vol. 7 no. 2, 2 0 1 9 Editura ARC The journal is included in the European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences (ERIH PLUS), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and Central and Eastern European Online Library (CEEOL). The journal was accredited by the Supreme Council for Science and Technological Development of the Academy of Sciences of Moldova and the National Council for Accreditation and Attestation at Category B, the decision no. 93, 18.07.2017 Facultatea de Istorie și Geografie, Universitatea Pedagogică de Stat „Ion Creangă“ din mun. Chişinău History and Geography Faculty, “Ion Creangă” Pedagogical State University, Chișinău EDITORS: Sergiu MUSTEAȚĂ, Professor, Department of History and Geography, “Ion Creangă” Pedagogical State University (Editor-in-chief ) Diana DUMITRU, Associate Professor, Department of History and Geography, “Ion Creangă” Pedagogical State University, Chișinău Andrei CUȘCO, Associate Professor, Department of History and Geography, “Ion Creangă” Pedagogical State University, Chișinău Octavian MUNTEANU, Associate Professor, Department of History and Geography, “Ion Creangă” Pedagogical State University, Chișinău Petru NEGURĂ, Lecturer, Department of Social Work, “Ion Creangă” Pedagogical State University, Chișinău Valentina URSU, Associate Professor, Head of the Geography and Cultural Heritage Program, Department of History and Geography, “Ion Creangă” Pedagogical State University, Chișinău Igor CAȘU, Lecturer, Faculty of History and Philosophy, State University of Moldova, Chișinău EDITORIAL BOARD: Florin CURTA, professor, History Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA Liviu CHELCEA, associate professor, Sociology and Social Assistance Department, University of Bucharest, Romania Dorin DOBRINCU, associate professor, History Department, “Al. I. Cuza” University, Iași, Romania Mihai GLIGOR, associate professor, Chair of the History, Archaeology and Museography Department, “1 Decembrie 1918” University, Alba Iulia, Romania Carter JOHNSON, Regional Director, American Councils for International Education, Visiting Professor at the National Research University “Higher School of Economics”, Moscow Mark SANDLE, professor of history, King´s University College, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Jutta SCHERRER, professor of history, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (EHESS), Paris, France Mikhail SUSLOV, Assistant Professor of Russian history and politics at the Institute of Cross-Cultural and Area Studies, University of Kopenhagen Lynne VIOLA, professor of Russian History, University of Toronto, Canada ISSN 2345-1262 Interdisciplinary Study of the Pre-Roman and Roman Iron Age in Central and South Eastern European Barbaricum Dedicated to Professor Michael Meyer Edited by Octavian Munteanu, Vasile Iarmulschi CONTENT / CUPRINS Honoraria 6 Professor Michael Meyer – Doctor Honoris Causa of the „Ion Creanga” State Pedagogical University (Octavian Munteanu) Articles/ Studii 11 Mihail Băţ, Angela Simalcsik, Aurel Zanoci (Moldova, Romania), A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis 43 Jes Martens (Norway), From Ultima Thule to the Hellespont – Some remarks on the bone points of the Iron Age 53 Cristina Montana Pușcaș, Iosif Vasile Ferencz, Ciprian Cosmin Stremțan, Tudor Tămaș, Adrian Căsălean (Romania), The amazing architecture of the Dacians. Few thoughts concerning the use of mortars based on new analyses 68 Oleg Petrauskas, Mariana Avramenko (Ukraine), The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: a cultural and natural environment 92 Denis Topal (Moldova), The specificity of the Scythian panoply of the Lower Danube 111 Daniel Spânu (Romania), (Tierkopffibeln) in Romania Fibulae with Canid Protome 129 Vitalie Bârcă (Romania), Notes on the origin and dating of the bone pyxides from the Sarmatian environment between the Don and the Prut 156 Andrzej Michałowski, Jakub Niebieszczański, Milena Teska, Patrycja Kaczmarska (Poland), Non-invasive magnetometric prospection in forested area: the case study of Mirosław site 37 in Northwestern Poland 168 Alexandru Popa, Sergiu Musteață (Moldova, Romania), Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent geophysical surveys 190 Malgorzata Daszkiewicz, Octavian Munteanu, Vasile Iarmulschi (Poland, Moldova, Germany), Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements (PoieneştiLucaşeuca and Getic cultures) 226 Authors’ Short Biographies / Date despre autori 234 Submission Guidelines / Notă pentru autori PROFESSOR MICHAEL MEYER – Doctor Honoris Causa of the „Ion Creanga” State Pedagogical University On Thursday, the 27th of June an important event took place in the „Ion Creanga” State Pedagogical University – meaningful for both our institution and the entire academic environment of the country. The teachers of the University, in the presence of the deputy director of the German Embassy in the Republic of Moldova, Florian Seitz, together with the representatives of the country’s main profile institutions in the archaeological field (State University of Moldova, National Museum of History of Moldova, the Institute of the Cultural Heritage, National Archaeological Agency and the High School of Anthropology) marked the bestowment of the Doctor Honoris Causa title to the distinguished Professor Michael Meyer, deputy director of the Institute of Prehistoric Anthropology of the Freie Universität Berlin, Director of Excellency Cluster Topoi. The bestowment of such distinctions departs from the basic principle according to which an academic institution asserts and builds its value through its people, through the personalities it recognizes and values, through the models it promotes and which in time become fundamental role models for generations. Professor Michael Meyer is of utmost certainty a distinguished model and a personality of reference, to whom we thank for accepting this distinction. The name of Professor Meyer has been for a longer time already one of reference in the European academic environment, deemed to be one of the best researchers and experts regarding Barbarian Europe of the 1st millennium BC and the Roman civilization. As a director of the Excellency Cluster Topoi, he was the key person in the conceptualization, development and later in the coordination (ongoing) of the highly valuable and prestigious project of interdisciplinary studies “The Formation and Transformation of the Space and Knowledge in Ancient Civilizations”. Beyond his efforts, over years, Professor Meyer knew how to gather together - around the most modern and advanced ideas – high-quality specialists from widely varied fields and from the most Professor Michael Meyer – Doctor Honoris Causa PLURAL of the „Ion Creanga” State Pedagogical University prestigious university centres, whose efforts were combined to prove the value of interdisciplinary studies, as well as the huge potential of extending the knowledge about ancient civilizations based on these types of approaches. Professor Michael Meyer has an excellent scientific and academic carrier. He studied Prehistory, Geography, European Ethnology and Classical Archaeology at the prestigious universities from Marburg/Lahn, Heidelberg and at the Institute of Archaeology from London. In 1990 he completed his PhD at the University of Marburg, afterwards he was hired as an associated researcher at the Institute of Archaeological Researches from Hesse with the headquarters in Büdingen, where for a period of four years he asserted himself as a researcher of great perspective and in 1994 he received the position of associate at the Department of Prehistory and Early History of Humboldt-Universität from Berlin. It is within this oasis of high-value archaeological studies that, in 2005, he elaborated and defended his Habilitation thesis. The profundity of the research promoted him, immediately after the defense, to the position of Privatdozentur at Humboldt-Universität from Berlin, where he was offered the course of Prehistory and Early History, in parallel with the position of head of division for Archaeological Services at the State Office for Preservation of Monuments from Brandenburg and State Archaeological Museum from Wünsdorf. The erudition deepen and polished over years, the farsightedness and profoundness of ideas, combined with the use of the newest interdisciplinary methods of research and 7 8 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 with an enormous capacity of work would in only two years transform him in a Universitätsprofessor of Prehistoric Archaeology at the Free University of Berlin – Institute of Prehistoric Archaeology, but also into the deputy director of the of the Institute, position still held today. What is even more surprising is that behind this big and sober Professor with a brilliant carrier, scholar with many accomplishments and appreciations, with an extremely prestigious status and very appreciated by the academic environment, we shall have no shadow of bombastic, vanity or authoritarianism. On the contrary, in front of us is shaping the image of an exceptionally modest, open and cooperating person, with a very special intellectual diligence, receptive and always ready to step in with support and help. A profound thinker and a sensitive person; a subtle and refined intellectual with whom it one can discuss any subject from any field; a pleasant and responsive communicator, who knows both how to hear and to listen, to enter into the substance of the message and to split the thread in four. Any action he carries out, be it a research or a didactic activity, is characterized by high standards and rigour, but which are remarkably blended with tolerance and indulgence, while the diplomacy with which he treats any person is simply disarming. Equally disarming was his attitude of a classy intellectual towards those who assisted at the awarding of the honourable distinction. With an almost adolescent easiness, though in an extremely exquisite manner, the Professor Meyer delivered his speech in the sweet language we have inherited from Creanga and Eminescu, putting, for a while, on hold the entire auditorium. Professor Michael Meyer – Doctor Honoris Causa PLURAL of the „Ion Creanga” State Pedagogical University A separate aspect in Professor Michael Meyer’s activity is determined by the initiation and development, in 2014, of a fruitful Moldo-German collaboration. For our university it has been a branch which gave many opportunities to the students and professors through the collaboration agreement concluded between Institut für Prähistorische Archäologie, Freie Universität Berlin and Faculty of History and Geography of UPSC ”Ion Creanga”. Based on this agreement, there were organized public conferences, documentation and research visits at the Freie Universität Berlin for the students and professors from UPSC, including within the program Erasmus Plus. In the Republic of Moldova, there were organized yearly study-excavations with the participation of students from Moldova and Germany (with the funding sustained by Freie Universität Berlin). During the field research & excavations were used modern methods of research, including the non-invasive ones, some of them were used for the first time in the Republic of Moldova for certain types of sites: for the first time there were applied geomagnetic prospections at 2 sites of Poienesti-Lucaseuca type; for the first time were applied geographical prospections on this type of sites where soil samples have been collected; for the first time, there was made a comparative chemical and physical analysis of the archaeological vestiges discovered; for the first time there were collected samples of seeds from the sites of Poienesti-Lucaseuca type, which will be analysed including through the method of radiocarbon. In the meanwhile, a site scientific seminar has been organized (Butuceni, 2016) dedicated to the Iron Age in the Central and Eastern Europe, where professors from 5 states participated and following the 9 10 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 seminar it was issued the 5th edition of the Plural journal – Pre-Roman and Roman Iron Age in Central and South-eastern European Barbaricum, ARC Publishing House, 2017. With the plenary support of Professor Meyer, there were drawn up joint presentations for international conferences and articles in specialized journals have been published. As part of the Humboldt programs, has been developed the project of organizing an important international conference in Chisinau, a project supported by the Foundation in 2018. Over 30 specialists from 12 European countries have gathered in Chisinau. Currently, work is in progress over the publication of a volume regarding this conference, which we hope to be one of reference for the subjects discussed in the autumn of last year. We can easily ascertain that in only a few years we managed to register an important number of accomplishments – which gain importance in the light of perspectives that were opened for the researchers of the Ion Creanga University, namely for the multitude of doors opened by the Professor Meyer for the youth who chose to tie up their fate to science and research. Based on the above mentioned, recognizing the exceptional results acquired over years and the remarkable contributions to the development of Ion Creanga University, the Senate decided to award Professor Meyer the honourable degree of Doctor Honoris Causa, entering his name in the golden list of personalities who marked the history of Ion Creanga State Pedagogical University. It is the public gratitude our university brings today to the Professor Meyer. Vivat Professore! Octavian Munteanu A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis Mihail Băţ, Angela Simalcsik, Aurel Zanoci Abstract Among the numerous vestiges of the Iron Age at Saharna Mare / “Dealul Mănăstirii”, there are 11 finds of human remains, which are of particular interest for the interdisciplinary research of the site. In this article, we propose combining archaeological data with anthropological ones. The analyzed skeletal material comes from six types of archaeological contexts: “cultic structure”, “ditch”, “rampart”, “grave”, “dwelling”, and “cultural layer” (Fig. 2; 3). In all the analyzed cases the identified osteological remains come from a single individual. In total, seven individuals were identified, one of whom is female and six are male. Regarding age distribution, most individuals fall within the age range of 30-60 years (maturus). One individual falls within the age range of 20-30 years (adultus), and another one has passed the age of 60 (senilis). As a result of the paleopathological analyses, a wide spectrum of dental pathologies (supragingival calculus, cavities, abscess, antemortem tooth loss) and bone pathologies (osteoarthritis, intervertebral disc herniation, porotic hyperostosis) were recorded. The analysis of occupational indicators showed over-demanding physical activities, spatial mobility, and horseback riding. Traces of violent death, such as cranial and postcranial fractures, have been reported in several cases. There were also identified injuries with signs of healing. Keywords: Middle Dniester Region, Iron Age, settlement, fortification, burials, human bone finds, bone pathologies, dental pathologies, cutting traces, traumas, perimortem traumas. 1. Introduction The Saharna Mare / “Dealul Mănăstirii” site is located west of the Saharna village (Rezina District, Republic of Moldova) on a promontory of quasi-trapezoidal shape with an area of about 15 ha and an altitude of about 130 m concerning the level of the Dniester River (Fig. 1). The north, east and south sides of the promontory are formed by two ravines with steep slopes, which unite on the east side in a valley called by locals “Valea Crac” (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, 19). The first archaeological investigations were carried out by G. Smirnov in 1946-1947 (Smirnov 1949, 93-96; Smirnov 1953, 19-30). In 2001-2014 and 2017-2019 the archaeological investigations were carried out by the team of the 12 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Scientific Research Laboratory “Thracology” of the Moldova State University led by Professor Ion Niculiţă1. As a result, it was established that several open and fortified settlements chronologically succeeded each other on the Saharna Mare promontory between the second half of the 12th century and the end of the 3rd century BC. Thus, from the second half of the 12th century to the 11th century BC there was an open settlement, which, according to the collected artifacts, was attributed to the Holercani-Hansca culture. In the following centuries (10th-9th BC) Fig. 1. Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii” on on the promontory there was a hillthe map of the East-Carpathian area. fort and a large open settlement in its immediate vicinity, which belonged to the Cozia-Saharna culture. As for the 8th-7th centuries BC, there were found evidences in favor of the existence here of a settlement characteristic of the Basarabi-Şoldăneşti culture. In the 6th-3rd centuries BC on the Saharna Mare promontory there was a fortification attributed to the Thracian-Getic communities (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, 242-248). Among the numerous finds researched on the Saharna Mare promontory, there are a series of discoveries of human remains2, both in burial structures and in non-funerary contexts, which are of particular interest for the interdisciplinary research of the site. They are concentrated, at the moment, in the habitation layers attributed to the Cozia-Saharna, Basarabi-Şoldăneşti and Thraco-Getic cultures. 1 2 The results of these investigations were reflected in several scientific articles (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Arnăut 2007, 27-62; Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2011, 226-236; Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2013, 351-372; Niculiţă et al. 2012, 111-167; Niculiţă et al. 2013, 219-292; Niculiţă et al. 2019; etc.), as well as in two monographic studies (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Arnăut 2008, 51-150, fig. 40159; Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, 19-248). Most of them have been published previously, but in most cases separately and not accompanied by the results of anthropological analyses (Kashuba 2000, 284; Niculiţă and Nicic 2011, 225-235; Niculiţă and Nicic 2013, 173-190; Niculiţă et al. 2012, 141-144; Arnăut 2014, 128, fig. 40; Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, 95-98, 126-134; etc.). In some cases the human osteological material has been analyzed anthropologically (Constantinescu 2013, 211-219; Nagacevschi et al. 2019, 328-336; Simalcsik, Zanoci and Băţ 2019, 62-66). A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis 15 5 m Secţiunea 22 15 7. Secţiunea 19 5 m 16 0 165 m Secţiunea 17 16 2. 5 m m 164 m Secţiunea 16 16 5.5 m Secţiunea 4 Secţiunea 20 7.5 m 1.5 m 16 17 176 m 10 Secţiunea 11 5 m 16 17 5 m 170 m Secţiunea 5 6. Secţiunea 12 5m 17 3. 5 m 16 2 m 16 Secţiunea 18 9 Secţiunea 13 3 175 m 5 m 173 17 Secţiunea 15 cţiu 6 ne 11 4 ? 5 0. Secţiunea 24 m 5 7. 16 16 m m 31 Secţiunea 29 17 0 7 Secţiunea 13A a3 Secţiunea 26 a ne cţiu Se m 6.5 17 Secţiunea 9 1 Secţiunea 23 m Se 7. 2 Secţiunea 10 Secţiunea 14 174.5 m Secţiunea 6 9 6m 17 17 m 17 0m 6m 18 Secţiunea 25 Secţiunea 7 0 17 8 m Secţiunea 21 17 7 m 17 2. 5 m Secţiunea 8 Early Iron Age finds Late Iron Age finds 4m m 17 5 8. 17 8 17 m Secţiunea 28 6 Secţiunea 27 5 ? 0m 25 m 50 m 100 m 150 m Fig. 2. The topographic and magnetometric map of the Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii” settlement showing the location of human remains. 2. Early Iron Age (Cozia-Saharna culture) The human bones attributed to this horizon were found both in the fortification and in the open settlement. The fortification located on the southwestern edge of the Saharna Mare promontory, on the high bank of the Valea Crac gorge, consisted of two parts: a “citadel” of quasi-round shape in plan, with dimensions of about 74×76 m (approx. 0.50 ha), to which, on the north side, another “enclosure” of semi-oval shape was added, with the dimensions of 55×78 m (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, Fig. 26; 29). 13 14 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Feature Cultural affiliation Archaeological context Sex Age at death (years) Female ~50 Age groups Representation state maturus II-III / parts of skeleton in middle-aged to partial anatomical old adult position 1 ”Cultic structure” 2 Ditch Male 25-30 3 Rampart NDA ~50 NDA NDA NDA fragment of skull 4 Cultural layer Early Iron Age (Cozia-Saharna) adultus / young adult fragment of mandible maturus II-III / middle-aged to fragment of skull old adult 5 Grave No. 1 NDA NDA NDA complete skeleton in anatomical position (?) 6 Grave No. 2 Male 35-45 maturus I-II / middle-aged adult complete skeleton in anatomical position 7 Grave No. 3 Male >60 senilis / old adult complete skeleton in anatomical position Pit-house No. 1 Male (?) ~40 maturus I-II / middle-aged adult skull Ditch NDA NDA NDA fragment of skull Ditch Male (?) 30-40 maturus I / young to middle-aged adult fragment of mandible Stucture No. 3/20172019 Male ~60 maturus IIIsenilis / old adult isolated bones 8 Early Iron Age (BasarabiȘoldănești) 9 10 11 Late Iron Age NDA - No Data Available Fig. 3. Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”. Human remains. As a result of the investigations, it was established that the defensive system of the “citadel” consisted of a “wall” with an adjacent ditch with a total length of about 300 m, which surrounded the enclosure. The presence and arrangement of postholes indicate that rampart, with a width of 1.00-1.20 m, was made up of two timber frames, the space between which was clogged with earth and stones. The ditch was dug in front of the rampart in all its length, having a width at the top of about 4.20-6.00 m and a depth of 1.20-1.60 m from the ancient ground surface. A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis The adjacent “enclosure” was delimited by a ditch, which in plan is a semi-oval. The ditch, the ends of which were joined with the “citadel” ditch, had a length of about 185 m, a width of about 3 m and a depth of about 1.001.40 m (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, 45-60, fig. 26-38). Along with the remains of some household structures and artifacts (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, 61-154, figs. 39-102; Zanoci and Băţ 2019, 7-28), human remains were also found in the “citadel” (Fig. 3). Feature No. 1 Place of disposition. The bones were found in the so-called “cultic structure” situated in the central part of the “citadel” (Fig. 2). The feature was discovered at a depth of 0.36 m from the modern ground surface and represents an agglomeration of irregular shape, with dimensions 1.20×1.20 m, consisting of limestone rocks (Fig. 4, 1). Under the stones, at a depth of 0.60 m, there were found several human bones in partial anatomical order (Fig. 4, 2-6) and pottery sherds specific to the Cozia-Saharna culture (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, 95-98, fig. 6264). At the level of human bones, at a distance of 0.55 m to the east, a hearth was found (Fig. 4, 1, 2). The association of the hearth with the human skeleton found nearby led to the hypothesis of the existence of a cultic structure in the central part of the “citadel” (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, 97). Anatomical identification. All these skeletal elements come from the same individual. The preservation state of the bones is good (Connel 2008, 9), and the representation state is partial. From the cranial segment only the mandible is present, and from the postcranial one, prevailing the bones on the right side (White and Folkens 2005) (Fig. 5, 1). Biological age estimation. Dental crown wear and advanced alveolar retraction (Fig. 5, 6), along with the costal cartilages ossification and signs of joints degeneration, indicate a biological age of about 50 years – maturus II-III category or middle-aged to old adult (Ubelaker 1979, 82-110; Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 21-38; Mays 1998, 33-74; Latham and Finnegan 2010). Sex determination. The features of the mandible (Fig. 5, 6) along with those of the postcranial bones (the pelvic girdle, the long bones of the limbs), determine us to attribute these elements to a female (Ubelaker 1979, 72-80; Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 16-21; Mays 1998, 33-74; Walrath, Turner and Bruzek 2004). Biomorphometric characteristics. The mandible is gracile, with a high body, a prominent pyramidal symphysis, a short and wide vertical ramus and developed goniac muscle insertions. The humerus is platybrachic. The femur is platymeric, with slight pilastry. Tibia is eurycnemic. The skeletal stature, calcu- 15 16 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 5 3-4 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fig. 4. Feature No. 1. 1-2. Cultic structure; 3-6. Human bones in situ (photos by Sergiu Matveev). A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fig. 5. Feature No. 1. 1. Representation state of the skeleton; 2. Enthesopathic changes of the radius and ulna on the right arm; 3. L1-L5 vertebrae; 4. T2 vertebra, lytic lesions; 5. C7, vertebral body, antemortem trauma; 6. Mandible, perimortem trauma. lated according to all long bones of the right side (humerus, radius, ulna, femur, tibia, and fibula), is between 154 cm and 166 cm, values that fall into the female categories of middle to large statures. Non-metric/epigenetic traits. The right M3 (Fig. 5, 6) shows microdontia. It is smaller in size than the normal ones (Ionescu 2005, 15-33). 17 18 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Dental pathologies. The wear of the dental crowns is advanced (attrition type) (Fig. 5, 6), caused by the physiological process of chewing (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 53-54). We mention tooth decay on the left P2 and antemortem tooth loss (the left M1 and the right M1) produced long before death. Bone pathologies. At the postcranial level we mention osteoarthritis – degenerative joint disease, proliferative and erosive, characterized by the loss of cartilage that protects the joints surfaces. The main factors that lead to the development of osteoarthritis are age and movement, the latter being mandatory in the development of the disease (Waldron 2009, 26-71; Ortner 2003, 545560). Osteoarthritis was identified by the presence of osteophytes on the edge of the lumbar vertebral bodies (Fig. 5, 3), on some tarsal bones (cuneiform, navicular, cuboid) and the joints of the upper right limb, especially on the elbow (Fig. 5, 2). At the level of the T2 vertebral body, on the lower surface, a series of lytic resorptive lesions were identified (Fig. 5, 5). They are not accompanied/surrounded by reactive new tissue. The fact that the only one skeletal element presents such changes leads us to the hypothesis of tuberculosis (Mann and Hunt 2005, 15). Musculoskeletal stress markers. Muscle insertions are very pronounced, especially on the humerus and femur. In some areas (ligaments and tendons) enthesophytes are developed, which are a form of response of the body to the action of musculoskeletal stress. We identified enthesopathic changes on the radial tuberosity (Fig. 5, 2), on the tuberosity of the tibia, on the calcaneus, on the rough line and the subtrochanteric area of the femur (Ortner 2003, 546-570; Waldron 2009, 26-71). The distal end of the tibia has additional areas – squatting facets – evidence of hyperdorsiflexion (squatting, crouching) during daily activities (Prasada Rao 1966, 51-56; Tulsi and Prasada Rao 1968, 232-235). On the proximal epiphysis of the ulna, in the insertion area of the brachial triceps muscle (involved in the extension of the forearm), a large spur has formed (Fig. 5, 2), which suggests the overloading of this muscle. This feature is frequently reported in the archers (Blondiaux 1994, 97-110; Molleson and Blondiaux 1994, 312-316). On the lower side of the femur, proximally, in the immediate proximity of the gluteal tuberosity, we find the third trochanter, and on the anterior edge of the femoral neck, very close to the head-neck junction, the femoral plaque, also called the Walmsley facet. These prints sometimes indicate horse riding (Blondiaux 1994, 97-110; Molleson and Blondiaux 1994, 312-316; Radi et al. 2013, 261-262). A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis Trauma. In the left half of the mandible, both at the level of the body and the ramus, there are several fracture lines (Fig. 5, 6) that have perimortem characteristics, suggesting an injury/blow causing death (Aufderheide and Rodriguez-Martin 1998, 23-24). At the level of the C7 vertebral body we identified the traces of antemortem trauma, with clear traces of healing (Fig. 5, 5). Taphonomy. Except for the fractures produced perimortem, all other breaks that led to fragmentation are produced postmortem, most of them are old and only a few are recent (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 95-106). Feature No. 2 Place of disposition. Another discovery of human bone remains (the mandible) was attested at the edge of the defensive ditch on the eastern part of the “citadel” (Fig. 2), at a depth of about 1.10 m from the modern ground surface. Anatomical identification. The mandible – the only movable bone of the skull – is incomplete, with lacking in the right half (starting with P2) and in the region of the left condyle (White and Folkens 2005) (Fig. 6, 1). Biological age estimation. Dental crown wear is low and indicates the age of about 25-30 years – adultus category or young adult (Ubelaker 1979, 82-110; Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 21-38; Mays 1998, 33-74; Latham and Finnegan 2010). Biomorphometric characteristics and sex determination. The morphometric features of the mandible (Fig. 6, 2-3), such as moderate robustness, pyramidal symphysis, short and wide vertical ramus, developed goniac region, projected outside of the body and branch plane, make us attribute to this incomplete mandible the male sex (Ubelaker 1979, 72-80; Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 1621; Mays 1998, 33-74; Walrath, Turner and Bruzek 2004). Non-metric/epigenetic traits. The left M1 has five cusps (Fig. 6, 3). Dental pathologies. The wear of the dental crowns is weak (attrition type), caused by the physiological process of chewing (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 53-54) (Fig. 6, 2-3). We mention a tooth loss (the left M3) produced shortly before death. On the vestibular and lingual sides (Fig. 6, 4) of the front teeth is a yellowish supragingival calculus, with low consistency and high friability, easily removable from the enamel surface (Aufderheide and Rodriguez-Martin 1998, 401-402). Alveolar retraction is slight. Trauma. The fracture line of the mandibular body has perimortem features (Fig. 6, 4), which suggests the death-causing injury (Aufderheide and Rodriguez-Martin 1998, 23-24). 19 20 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 1 3 2 4 Fig. 6. Feature No. 2. 1. Representation state of the cranial elements; 2. Mandible, frontal view; 3. Mandible, lateral view; 4. Fracture line produced perimortem. Taphonomy. On the inner surface of the mandible, more pronounced on the lingual side of the teeth, can be noted a consistent deposits of limestone (Fig. 6, 4). In the region of the left condyle are traces from carnivorous teeth (probably) (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 95-106). Feature No. 3 Place of disposition. Among the ruins of the rampart on the northern part of the “citadel”, at a depth of about 0.60 m from the modern ground surface, a skull fragment was discovered (Fig. 2). Anatomical identification. The fragment comes from the cranial vault and includes parts of both parietals (White and Folkens 2005) (Fig. 7, 1). A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis Biomorphometric characteristics. The maximum dimensions of the fragment are: anterior-posterior – 108 mm, transversal – 97 mm, thickness – 8-9 mm (Fig. 7, 2-3). Biological age estimation. The obliteration degree of the sagittal suture (S3-S4) (Fig. 7, 2-3) suggests the age at death of about 50 years – maturus II-III category or middle-aged to old adult (Ubelaker 1979, 82-110; Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 21-38; Mays 1998, 33-74; Latham and Finnegan 2010). Sex determination. Due to lack of clear discriminatory clues, sex remains undeterminable. Bone pathologies. On the external surface of the fragment has been identified the porotic hyperostosis, also called exocranial porosity or cribra cranii (fig. 7, 2). Its presence may suggest anemias, hypervascularization or local inflammatory processes caused by trauma, but also secondary dissemination of inflammatory processes (Ortner 2003, 136-137). Iron deficiency/sideropenic anemia is most commonly cited. In this case, porotic hyperostosis was inactive at the time of death. The severity degree is 1 – light scattered fine foramina (Stuart-Macadam 1985). Taphonomy. The breaks lines of the fragment are produced postmortem, in ancient times, being covered with calcareous deposits strongly adherent to the bone tissue (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 95-106) (Fig. 7/3). 1 2 3 Fig. 7. Feature No. 3. 1. Representation state of the cranial elements; 2. The cranial fragment seen from the exocranium; 3. The cranial fragment seen from the endocranium. 21 22 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Feature No. 4 Place of disposition. The fourth find in this level, a fragment of a cranial vault, was made by G. Smirnov in 1946. It was attested in section no. 1 located in the southwestern sector of the hillfort, at a depth of 0.5-0.6 m (Fig. 2)3. Anthropological data: According to anthropologist A. Varzari, the parietal bone fragment had a high degree of porosity, caused by a deficiency of calcium. In A. Varzari’s opinion, this could be due to infectious diseases and/or frequent childbirths (Kashuba 2000, 412). *** In the open settlement attributed to the Cozia-Saharna horizon, three graves have been found. 4 Feature No. 5 Place of disposition. Grave No. 15 was discovered in 1947 by G. Smirnov (Smirnov 1949, 95)6. The deceased was placed in a crouched position on his right side, at the bottom of a bell-shaped pit about 1.50 m deep (Kashuba 2000, 284; Kašuba 2008, 108; Niculiţă and Nicic 2011, 225; Kašuba 2016, 101). Anthropological data: no data available. Feature No. 6 Place of disposition. Grave No. 27 represents a bell-shaped pit identified at a depth of 0.76-0.80 m from the modern ground level. The pit had a diameter of 1.26/1.30 m at neck, at base diameter of 1.60 m and the depth of 0.84 m. Its filling was composed of clayey chernozem mixed with stones and ash. The skeleton was placed directly on the bottom at the south extremity of the pit, on the 3 4 5 6 7 The discovery is mentioned by M. Kashuba (2000, 412), who worked on the collections from G. Smirnov’s excavations in 1946, as a result having found this skull fragment among the artifacts from Saharna Mare. The settlement, with an area of about 4 ha, is located west of the fortification, in its immediate vicinity. The numbering was done by us according to the order of finding. In the publication the location and the description of the grave are ambiguous. According to the information of G. Smirnov, it was attested in one of the three pits surveyed at the southern edge of the settlement, on the high bank of the ravine (Fig. 2). The finds from the pit with the skeleton are not clear either. G. Smirnov recalls about three cups with broken handles and several pottery sherds with incized and stamped ornament. However, it is not specified in what pits they were found (Smirnov 1949, 95). We can only assume that such fragments were discovered in the pit with the skeleton. Complex No. 32, Pit No. 24, according to the first publication (Niculiţă and Nicic 2011, 225), found in 2010. A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis Fig. 8. Feature No. 6. Grave No. 2 (photos by Andrei Nicic). right side, oriented with the head towards the west-southwest, in anatomical position, with the legs bent at the knees approximately at 90 ° to the north, with the right hand extended back along the body and the left one extended in front to the south (Fig. 8). Near the skull, in the south-east extremity of the pit, there was dug a niche of semi-oval shape, with the dimensions of 0.20×0.20 m. In the northeastern extremity of the pit, on the bottom, an arrangement of sherds was attested (Fig. 8). At the bottom of the pit, there were attested 12 postholes with a diameter ranging from 8 to 12 cm and a depth of up to 8.50 cm, probably leftover from a wooden superstructure (Fig. 8). In the chest area of the skeleton, four grayish-black pieces of burnt clay with dimensions of 15×10×5 cm were found. In the region of the neck, near the dorsal vertebrae, there was attested a fragment of “altar”, which was made of clay with straw and chaff. The fragment has a height of 8 cm and a thickness of 2.30 cm and was ornamented on the edge by imprints in the form of alveoli (orifices), and on the outside by incised decoration formed by bands of zigzag lines. Imprints of twigs are preserved on the inside, the diameter of which does not exceed 2 cm. 68 fragments of pottery were collected from the grave, which according to their characteristics were attributed to the Cozia-Saharna type vessels (Niculiţă and Nicic 2011, 225-228, fig. 3-5; Niculiţă and Nicic 2013, 174-176, fig. 2-7; Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, 127-131, fig. 82-85). 23 24 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 2 1 3 Fig. 9. Feature No. 6. 1. Skull. Radiating fractures and absence of a portion of the bone. 2. Distal third of the right radius; 3. Distal third of the right ulna (after Constantinescu 2013). The anthropological analysis of the skeleton was published in detail in 2013 (Constantinescu 2013). In the following, we will outline, in broad terms, the main characteristics of this individual. Biological age estimation: 35-45 years (maturus I-II category or middle-aged adult). Sex determination. The skeleton comes from a male individual. Biomorphometric characteristics. The skeletal stature, calculated according to the maximum length of the left femur, is cca. 167 cm (over-middle male category). Dental pathologies: an abscess, moderate alveolar retraction, supragingival calculus, linear enamel hypoplasia (two defects). Bone pathologies: lumbar disc herniation, osteoarthrosis, periosteal changes in the diaphysis of the right tibia and fibula. Traumas. On the frontal are numerous fracture lines and radiant fractures (Fig. 9, 1), all without traces of healing, being produced perimortem, with a blunt object, probably causing death. In the distal third of the right radius a healed fracture was identified, which led to deformations of the distal epiphysis of the right ulna (Fig. 9, 2-3). Musculoskeletal stress markers suggest intense physical activity throughout life. Taphonomy. Many skeletal elements have been damaged in ancient times, their breaking lines being covered with a consistent layer of limestone. A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis Feature No. 7 Place of disposition. Grave No. 3 was discovered at a depth of 1.60 m from the modern ground level (Fig. 2). The burial was made in a pit with a catacomb (Fig. 10). The burial pit was bell-shaped with a diameter of 1.80 m at neck, a diameter at base of 2.10 m and a depth of 0.80 m. The filling of the pit consists of gray soil mixed with burnt wood fragments. In the east wall of the burial pit an oval-shaped catacomb was excavated, with dimensions of 1.20×2.00 m. The entrance to the catacomb is 1.1 m wide and 0.7 m high. In the eastern part of the catacomb a niche with a depth of up to 0.5 m was excavated. The soil excavated from the catacomb is gray mixed with clay soil. When removing soil from the catacomb, a male human skeleton was discovered (Fig. 10). The deceased was laid in the catacomb in a crouched position on his right side, hands bent toward the head, palms at the chin, and legs bent at the knees. The skeleton was oriented in the north-south direction. A bone handle was placed to the right of the skull, and a fragment of a hand-shaped bowl or cup was placed above the skull of the skeleton. The surface of the vessel is polished, of a dark gray color. In the lower part, the cup has an umbo-shaped recess, and in the fragmentation area there are three ends of oblique incised lines. Also, in the catacomb there were found 31 pottery sherds and four fragments of bones, which, probably, got there after the ruin of the burial structure, at the time of the closing of the pit’s grave. From the grave pit were collected: a fragment of grinding stone, two hammerstones, a whetstone, 16 pottery sherds and 121 fragments of animal bones (Niculiţă et al. 2019, fig. 14-16). At the bottom of the burial pit, eight postholes with a diameter of about 0.20-0.40 m and a depth of 0.25-0.40 m have been identified, indicating the former existence of a wooden structure (Fig. 10). Fig. 10. Feature No. 7. Grave No. 3 (after Niculiță et al. 2019). 25 26 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 The anthropological analysis of the skeleton discovered in 2019 in the catacomb has been published in detail (Nagacevschi et al. 2019, 328-333). Further we will outline, in broad terms, the main features of this individual. The degree of representation and the state of preservation. The skeleton is very well represented (Fig. 11, 1). The preservation status of the analyzed skeletal components is very good. Biological age estimation and sex determination. The bones come from a male individual, with the biological age at death of at least 60 years (senilis category or old adult). Biomorphometric characteristics. The neurocranium is dolichocephalic. The occipital is tall, curved, with a slight bulge in its upper part. The forehead is wide, eurimetopic. The canine pit is deep. The zygomatics are tall and wide. The facial skeleton is high. The orbits are short and moderately wide. The nose is wide, with a tendency to rise. The jaw is narrow, relatively gracile. The horizontal facial shaping/profiling is accentuated, of the Europoid type (Fig. 11, 2-4). The postcranial bones are robust and tall, with extremely developed muscle insertions. The skeletal stature, calculated according to the length of the long bones of the limbs, is between 177 and 181 cm, values that range into the male category of large to very large statures. Dental pathologies. Dental health is precarious. We mention antemortem tooth loss, cavities and abscesses. The wear of the dental crowns is advanced, of mixed type (attrition and abrasion) (Fig. 11, 2, 4). Bone pathologies. Almost all joint surfaces are affected by advanced degenerative osteoarthritis. The responsible factors are, first of all, the age, but also the physical activities that have overloaded the muscles and joints. The osteophytes, the enthesophytes, the corrosion, the modification of the normal articular contour are present. The manifestations of the disease are more pronounced in the pelvic girdle and the spine (especially in the lumbar segment). Disc herniation was identified on the lower thoracic and lumbar vertebral bodies. On the surface of the patellae (Fig. 11, 5) and at the level of the tibial diaphysis, a series of structural changes of the periosteum has been identified, indicating acute active inflammation at the time of death, a clear localized response of the bone system to certain pathological factors, such as trauma or infectious disease. Most likely, in this case, the aggressive and galloping extension of a microbial infection, starting from the left femur, which shows complex pathological changes (Fig. 11, 6-9), can be invoked. Only the middle (fragmentary) and proximal thirds were preserved from the left femur. We think that the bone suffered an open, multifragmentary, compound fracture, located at the A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis 3 2 1 5 4 8 6 7 Fig. 11. Feature No. 7. 1. Representation state of the skeleton; 2-4. Facial, vertical, and lateral views of the skull; 5. Patellae, enthesopathic and pathological changes; 6-7. Anterior and posterior sides of the femurs; 8. Left femur, proximal third, view through the medullary canal; 9. Left femur, proximal third, pathological aggressive changes. 9 27 28 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 boundary between the median and proximal third, where bridges of the callus can be distinguished. Posttraumatically, an extremely aggressive bacterial infection (most likely, Staphylococcus aureus and/or Streptococcus sp.) consumed large portions of bone, starting from the medullary canal (Fig. 11, 8) and subsequently, crossed the bone wall, consuming the inside of the bone, which appears modified and thinned by the infectious/purulent processes (Fig. 11, 9). It was an extremely severe and very rapid inflammatory process. The subject survived a few days after the possible fracture occurred and, respectively, after the infectious process was installed; the bone had sufficient time to react so severely. The speed of this process can also be deduced from the fact that it remained localized on a single skeletal element, producing only severe periosteal reactions at the tibiae level and somewhat more superficial on the surface of the patellae. The final result was, after sufficient days of suffering, septicemia/sepsis, which led to death. So far, without further investigations (radiological, CT and histopathological examination), the final diagnosis remains questionable. We reserve the details of these results in a later work with a paleopathological profile. Musculoskeletal stress markers. First of all, we mention the unintentional cranial deformation, also called the “Tumpline deformation” or “post-coronal depression” (Fig. 11, 3-4), associated with certain intense physical activities during the childhood, but also during the adult period. Other markers of daily physical activity are the pronounced muscle insertions on the clavicles and humeri, the femoral pilastry, the enthesopathic changes on the lower side of the femur, the additional femoral trochanter, the supratrochlear foramen of the humerus/humeral septal aperture. Taphonomy. The breaks that led to the fragmentation of some skeletal elements are recent. No traces of oxidation or burning were identified. 3. Early Iron Age (Basarabi-Şoldănești culture) Feature No. 8 Place of disposition. From this level 8 comes a human skull, without a mandible, which was found at a depth of 1.00 m from the modern ground level (Niculiţă and Nicic 2011, 225, fig. 1; Niculiţă and Nicic 2013, 174, fig. 1; Arnăut 2014, 128, fig. 40/3). As can be seen from the stratigraphic situation, the skull was put on its left side, oriented east-west, in a niche arranged inside the Pit-house No. 1 8 The Basarabi-Șoldănești habitation is concentrated in the southwestern part of the Saharna Mare promontory and partially overlap the settlement of the previous period, of the Cozia-Saharna culture (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, 140-154, fig. 92-102). A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis 1 2 3 4 Fig. 12. Feature No. 8. 1. Pit-house No. 1. 2-3. Skull in situ (after Niculiță and Nicic 2013; Niculiță, Zanoci and Băț 2016); 4. Representation state of the skull. (Niculiţă, Nicic and Corobcean 2009, fig. 2; Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, fig. 16; 93). The material has not been analyzed anthropologically and is currently considered lost. We will try to make an analysis, based on the images taken in situ (Fig. 12, 2, 3,). Anatomical identification. The skull is almost complete. Part of the right parietal eminence and facial bones, including the jaw – only movable bone of the skull, are missing (Fig. 12, 4). 29 30 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Biological age estimation. According to the pictures (Fig. 12, 3), we can analyze a generous part of the coronal suture, which shows the beginning of obliteration. We glimpse the pars bregmatica segment of the sagittal suture, which seems closed. The biological age of the individual from which this skull comes is about 40 years – maturus I-II category or middle-aged adult (Ubelaker 1979, 82-110; Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 21-38; Mays 1998, 33-74; Latham and Finnegan 2010). Sex determination. The high degree of inclination/sloping of the forehead, the diminished frontal eminences, the prominent occipital in its upper (post-lambdoid) region, the thickened upper orbital margin, together with the developed glabellar and supraorbital relief (Fig. 12, 2-3) determine us to attribute this skull to a male (Ubelaker 1979, 72-80; Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 16-21; Mays 1998, 33-74; Walrath, Turner and Bruzek 2004). 4. Late Iron Age During this period, on the Saharna Mare promontory there was a fortification with a circular defensive system that surrounded an enclosure with an area of about 6 ha. The defensive elements on the west side were about 385 m long and consisted of a “wall” with an adjacent ditch. As a result of the archaeological investigations it was established that the “wall” had a width of about 5.60 m and was constructed of a wooden casing consisting of four frames filled with earth, sand, gravel and stone. The ditch had a width at the top of 15 m, at the bottom of 6 m, and a depth of about 3.20 m. Three gaps were noticed along the “wall”, one in the central part and by one on the flanks, which probably represent the former gateways. In front of these “gaps”, using the same construction technique as for the “wall” of the enclosure, bastions were built, which had its own defense ditches (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Arnăut 2008, 92-97, pl. 5-6, photo 16-26). On the north, east and south sides, which are currently quite steep, the fortification was also defended with a “wall”, the remains of which could be traced for a total length of about 650 m. On the eastern part this “wall” is winding, forming eight bastions, grouped four each on the northeast and southeast flanks. The bastions have a semi-round shape with a diameter of 9-11 m and are located at a distance of 5-6 m from each other, the distance between the groups of bastions being 34 m. A similar bastion was also attested to the north of the fortification, near the entrance gate on this side (Zanoci et al. 2019, 16-17). The archaeological investigations showed that the same building technique was used both for the construction of the “wall” and the bastions: wooden cas- A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis ing consisting of two timber frames filled with earth and stone. The width of the “wall” thus created varies from one portion to another, but falls within 1.11.6 m (Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2016, 156-171, fig. 103-114). In the Thracian-Getic fortification, three findings of human bones are currently known. Feature No. 9 Place of disposition. It was found in the filling of the defensive ditch (Section 5/2002) on the west side of the fortification, to the right of the central entrance gate. It represents the upper part of a cranial vault with traces of an ancient fracture (Arnăut 2014, 128). Anthropological data: no data available. Feature No. 10 Place of disposition. In the filling of the defensive ditch mentioned above, at a depth of 1.05 m, a mandible with traces of fracture on the right side was found9 (Arnăut 2014, 128, fig. 40/1). We tried to point out some features of the mandible based on the photograph published by T. Arnăut (Arnăut 2014, 370, fig. 40/1) (Fig. 13). Anatomical identification. The mandible – the only movable bone of the skull – is almost complete (Fig. 13). Only the coronoid process on the right side is missing. Biological age estimation. The molars crowns wear is attrition type, produced by the physiological phenomenon of mastication. The wear follows the classic model, M1> M2> M3 and indicate a biological age between 30 and 40 years – maturus I category or young to middle-aged adult (Ubelaker 1979, 82-110; Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 21-38; Mays 1998, 33-74; Latham and Finnegan 2010). Sex determination. The general appearance of the mandible does not offer very clear discriminating features. The shape of the symphysis is unclear and profiling is quite attenuated, the robustness of the body seems moderate, and the left goniac region (the only one visible in the image) protrudes slightly. Perhaps only the size of the molars and the goniac angle is the elements that would cause us to support the male sex for this jaw (Ubelaker 1979, 72-80; Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 16-21; Mays 1998, 33-74; Walrath, Turner and Bruzek 2004). Non-metric/epigenetic traits. The left M1 has five cusps (Fig. 13). 9 Currently the material is considered lost. 31 32 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 13. Feature No. 10. The mandible with the location of the cut mark (after Arnăut 2014) and representation state of the skull. Dental pathologies. The left P1 seems to have only a root residue, which leads us to support the presence of an advanced cavity, which consumed the crown of the tooth entirely (Fig. 13). Taphonomy. The broken line of the right coronoid process has postmortem characteristics, as well as the cracks that led to the fragmentation of both right P2 and M1 (Fig. 13). Cutting traces. At the base of the left mandibular ramus, immediately above the gonion, a horizontal linear lesion, parallel to the edge of the mandible body, is observed. It is a trace of cut, produced perimortem, with a sharp object. The location of this lesion is in the area where the masseter and medial pterygoideus muscles are inserted. We recall that these observations are made only by analyzing the photo image, which is not very clear. Even so, we dare to describe this cutting trace as narrow and quite deep, probably in the ”V” shape in the section, and may be associated with the metal blades of tools or weapons (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994, 98-99, 102). Above the line (in the cephalic direction) and below it (in the caudal direction), on the margins, the bone tissue is chipped, a feature that causes us to assume that the lesion was caused by applying a force large enough to cut its edges, but not so strong as to cause a bone fracture. A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis Fig. 14. Feature No. 11 (photos by Mihail Băț). Feature No. 11 Place of disposition. In the eastern corner of the north room of Structure 3/2017-2019, at a depth of 0.60 m a dark gray soil stain with dimensions of 1.00×1.50 m was attested, in which several fragments of human bones were discovered (Fig. 14). The bones were scattered, not in anatomical position. The anthropological analysis of these human remains has been published in detail (Nagacevschi et al. 2019, 333-336). Further we will outline, in broad terms, the main features of this individual. The degree of representation and the state of preservation. The skeleton is partially represented (Fig. 15, 1). The state of preservation of the analyzed skeletal components is satisfactory to good. All these skeletal elements come from a single individual. Biological age estimation and sex determination. The bones come from a male individual, with biological age at the time of death of about 60 years (maturus III-senilis category or old adult). Biomorphometric characteristics. The forehead appears of medium width, with weak eminences, and the occipital is quite flattened, with accentuated nuchal muscle insertions. The cranial relief is moderate. The postcranial bones are robust, with extremely pronounced muscle insertions. The skeletal stature, 33 34 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 3 4 1 5 2 6 Fig. 15. Feature No. 11. 1. Representation state of the skeleton; 2. Proximal third of the left femur, anterior view, enthesopathic changes and plaque; 3. Thoracic vertebrae T11-T12, disc herniation and marginal osteophytes; 4. Right humerus, pronounced muscle inserts and enthesopathic changes; 5. Left femur, posterior view, pronounced muscle inserts and enthesopathic changes; 6. Right femur, diaphyseal fragment, perimortem breaks line. calculated according to the length of the right humerus (the only complete bone), is between 171 cm and 177 cm, values that fall into the category of large male statures. Bone pathologies. On tabula externa ossis cranii (occipital and the right parietal) were identified porotic hyperostosis (cribra cranii), inactive at the time of death. A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis Most of the joint surfaces are affected by osteoarthritis, the first factor responsible being the age, along with movement and sustained and prolonged physical effort. All the characteristics of the disease are present: osteophytes, enthesophytes, corrosion, and deformation of the joint contour. The manifestations of the disease are more pronounced in the spine (Fig. 15, 3), but the disease also affected the coxofemoral, humeroulnar, radioulnar, glenohumeral and sternoclavicular joints. The thoracic and lumbar vertebral bodies show intervertebral disc herniation (Fig. 15, 3). The responsible factors are degenerative diseases of the spinal disc, along with the mechanical overload of the spine. Trauma. The diaphyseal fragment that comes from the right femur shows a perimortem fracture (around the time of death). The breaking line has no trace of healing and has all the features of an open, transversal-oblique, complete, multifragmentary fracture (Fig. 15, 6), probably produced by a mixed mechanism. Musculoskeletal stress markers. The muscle insertions in the bones of the girdles and limbs (Fig. 15, 2, 4, 5) are extremely pronounced, and the enthesopathic changes suggest a series of over-demanding physical activities, such as loading or lifting weights, ground mobility, long-distance walking on uneven and rugged terrain, long-term maintenance of the body upright, equestrian activities. Taphonomy. Except for the fractures produced perimortem, all other breaks that led to the fragmentation of the skeletal elements have occurred postmortem, some in ancient times. The patina of the analyzed skeletal remains is gray. 5. Concluding remarks As can be seen from the distribution of the finds of human remains known so far in the Saharna Mare / “Dealul Mănăstirii” settlement, they are concentrated in the southwest part of the settlement (Fig. 2). At the present stage of the research it is still premature to talk about the existence of a space within the settlement intended for burial and deposition of human remains. This density of contexts with human remains can also be explained by the fact that the area has been the most intensively researched by archaeologists in the last two decades. The human remains found in the settlement appear in six types of archaeological contexts: “cultic structure”, “ditch”, “rampart”, “grave”, “dwelling”, and “cultural layer”. The entire or partially represented skeletons come from archaeological structures and were found in anatomical order. The state of 35 36 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 preservation of the analyzed remains is satisfactory to good, and the state of representation is good (Features No. 1, No. 6, and No. 7). In other cases, human bones are represented, in particular, by cranial fragments (Fig. 3). One of the skulls appears to have been intentionally deposited in a niche arranged in the structure (Feature No. 8). The position and orientation of the dead could only be established in three cases, where they lie in a crouched position with their heads in the direction of the southwest (Features No. 1 and No. 6) or north (Feature No. 7). In all analyzed cases, the identified osteological remains originate from one individual for each feature. In the osteological sample reported in the present study, a total of seven individuals could be identified, one of which is female and six are male. In terms of age distribution, most individuals fall within the age range of 30-60 years (maturus). Only one individual falls within the age range of 20-30 years (adultus), and another one has passed the age of 60 (senilis) (Fig. 3). In some cases it was not possible to determine the sex and/or estimate the age because of the lack of the osteological material and the field archaeological records (Features No. 4, No. 5 and No. 9). In another case, under conditions of very poor skeleton representation, we could determine that the fragment of neurocranium originates from an individual at the age at death of about 50 years (Feature No. 3). The skeletal stature was estimated in four cases, being calculated by the length of the whole or restorable long bones of the limbs. The calculated value for the stature of the female individual (Feature No. 1) is between 154-166 cm and falls into the over-middle to height female category. In the case of the male individuals there are three categories: middle to over-middle – 163-172 cm (Feature No. 6), high – 171-177 cm (Feature No. 11) and high to very high – 177-181 cm (Feature No. 7). As a result of paleopathological analyzes, a wide spectrum of dental and bone pathologies has been recorded. Thus, for dental pathologies, we note the supragingival calculus (Features No. 2 and No. 6), cavities (Features No. 7 and No. 10), abscess (Features No. 6 and No. 7) and the antemortem tooth loss (Features No. 1 and No. 7). In most cases, severe wear of dental crowns is observed. Some individuals (Features No. 1 and No. 2) had attrition-type tooth wear caused by the physiological process of chewing. The individual buried in the catacomb (Feature No. 7) has the tooth wear of the mixed type (attrition and abrasion). In one case, the tooth crowns are worn weak (Feature No. 2), due to the age of the buried. Besides, we can mention some cases of non-metric features, also called epigenetic, such as microdontia (Feature No. 1) and additional dental cusps (Features No. 2 and No. 10). A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis In the analyzed sample, a series of lesions were identified, associated with pathologies, such as tuberculosis (Features No. 1 and No. 4), osteoarthritis (Features No. 1, No. 6, No. 7 and No. 11), intervertebral disc herniation (Features No. 6, No. 7 and No. 11) and periostitis (Features No. 6 and No. 7). Porotic hyperostosis or cribra cranii was recorded in three cases (Features no. 3, No. 4 and No. 11). The presence of this cranial pathology may be the result of anemia or trauma. As a result of the analysis of the occupational indicators, we can record a series of over-demanding physical activities, such as carrying loads or lifting weights, spatial mobility, walking long distances and on uneven and rough terrain, maintaining the body in an upright position, squatting, crouching, repetitive flexion-extension movements of the arms associated with the use of agricultural tools, horseback riding, etc. We also notice the unintentional “Tumpline type” cranial deformation (Feature No. 7), which is associated with carrying weights on the back supported by placing the strap over the top of the head (Nagacevschi et al. 2019, 332). In the case of bones found in the “cult complex”, there are numerous signs that prove that the skeleton belongs to a female rider and, probably, archer (Feature No. 1). Traces of violent death were reported in several cases. Of the traumas that caused death, we notice an open multifragmentary fracture of the femur (Feature No. 11), followed by the septicemia, which led to death (Feature No. 7). Another group of perimortem traumas are skull fractures (Features No. 1, No. 2 and No. 6). It should be noted, however, that in the case of the man buried in the grave no. 2, cranial fractures and some skeleton ruptures may be due to the collapse of a wooden superstructure (Constantinescu 2013, 213). In one case, the individual was injured at the level of the mandible, caused perimortem by a sharp object. The trace, probably in the form of a letter “V” in section, can be associated with the metal blades of tools or weapons (Feature No. 10). There were also identified injuries with signs of healing (Features No. 1 and No. 6). Many skeletal parts have been damaged in ancient times, their fractures being covered with a considerable layer of limestone (Features No. 3 and No. 6). Some of the analyzed skeletal remains show traces possibly left by the teeth of carnivorous animals (Feature No. 2). Anthropological analysis of the skeletal material found in the Saharna Mare/”Dealul Mănăstirii” settlement aimed, as far as possible, at combining archaeological and anthropological information. Overcoming the loss of several 37 38 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 osteological remains, but also the publication deficiencies, the data recovered in the last years come to contribute new and relevant information useful for understanding the funerary phenomenon of deposition of the human remains inside settlements10. Bibliography Ailincăi, Sorin-Cristian. 2015. Trăind cu morţii. Înmormântările în aşezările de la începutul epocii fierului între Balcani, Tisa şi Nistru. Cluj-Napoca: Editura Academia Română. Centrul de Studii Transilvănene. Arnăut, Tudor. 2014. Spaţii sacre şi practici funerare din mileniul I a. Chr. în arealul carpato-balcanic. Chişinău: Bons Offices. Aufderheide, Arthur C. and Conrado Rodriguez-Martin. 1998. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human Paleopathology. Cambridge. Blondiaux, Joël. 1994. “A propos de la dame d’Hochfelden et de la practique cavaliere: discussion autour des sites fonctionnels femoraux”. In La femme pendant le Moyen Âge et l’époque moderne, edited by Luc Buchet, 97-110. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Buikstra, Jane E. and Douglas H. Ubelaker. 1994. “Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains” In Arkansas Archaeological Survey Research Series, No 44. Fayetteville. Connell, Brian. 2008. “Preservation and archaeological data”. In Human osteology method statement, edited by N. Powers, 9. London. Constantinescu, Mihai. 2013. “Analiza antropologică a unui schelet din prima epocă a fierului de la Saharna (Rep. Moldova)”. Studii de Preistorie 10: 211-219. Ionescu, Ecaterina. 2005. Anomaliile dentare. Bucureşti: Cartea Universitară. Kashuba, Maya. 2000. “Ranee zhelezo v lesostepi mezhdu Dnestrom i Siretom (Kultura Cozia-Saharna)”. Stratum plus 3: 241-492. Kašuba, Maya. 2008. “Despre depunerile de oseminte umane în aşezările hallstattiene timpurii (sec. X-IX a. Chr.) cultura Saharna în regiunea Nistrului de Mijloc (spaţiul nord-vest pontic)”. In Omagiu lui Gavrilă Simion la a 80-a aniversare, edited by Sorin Cristian Ailincăi, Cristian Micu and Florian Mihai, 106-120. Constanța: Dobrogea. 10 Among the studies addressed the funerary phenomenon of burials in the settlements and the manipulation of human remains in the Middle Dniester region, we can mention the following: Kašuba 2008; Kašuba 2009; Kashuba 2016; Arnăut 2014, Ailincăi 2015. A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis Kašuba, M. 2009. “Die Bestattungen der Saharna-Kultur. Ein Beitrag zum frühhallstattzeitlichen Bestattungsrits im Mitteldnestrgebiet, Nordwestpontikum. In Der Schwarzmeerraum vom Äneolithikum bis in die Früheisenzeit (5000500 v. Chr.). Kommunikationsebenen zwischen Kaukasien und Karpaten edited by Joni Apakidze, Blagoe Govedarica and Bernard Hänsel. Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa, Band 25, 160-189. Rahden/Westf: Verlag Marie Leidorf. Kashuba, Maya. 2016. “Pogrebeniia na poseleniiakh v rannegalshtattskoi kulture Saharna Vostochnogo Prikarpatia: norma ili iskliuchenie?” In Drevnie nekropoli i poseleniia: postpogrebalinye ritualy, simvolicheskie zakhoroneniia i ogrableniia. Trudy IIMK RAN, t. 46, 96-112. Sankt Petersburg: Невская книжная типография. Latham, Krista E., and Michael Finnegan (eds.). 2010. Age Estimation of the Human Skeleton. Illinois: Springfield. Mays, Simon. 1998. The archaeology of human bones. London-New York: Routledge. Mann, Robert W. and David R. Hunt. 2005. Photographic Regional Atlas of Bone Disease: A Guide to Pathologic and Normal Variation in the Human Skeleton. Illinois: Springfield. Molleson, Theya and Joël Blondiaux. 1994. “Riders’ bones from Kish”. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 4: 312-316. Ortner, Donald J. 2003. Identification of Pathological Conditions in Human Skeletal Remains. Oxford: Academic Press. Prasada Rao, P.D. 1966. “Squatting facets on the talus and tibia in Australian Aborigines”. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 1/1: 51-56. Radi, Nico, Valentina Mariotti, Alessandro Riga, Stefania Zampetti, Chiara Villa and Maria Giovanna Belcastro. 2013. “Variation of the Anterior Aspect of the Femoral Head-Neck Junction in a Modern Human Identified Skeletal Collection”. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 152: 261-272. Nagacevschi, Tatiana, Angela Simalcsik, Vitalie Sochircă and Margareta Simina Stanc. 2019. „Cercetări interdisciplinare la situl Saharna Mare / „Dealul Mănăstirii”, raionul Rezina (2017-2019)”. Tyragetia s.n. XIII/1: 323-327. Niculiţă, Ion, Andrei Nicic and Andrei Corobcean. 2009. “Rezultatele investigaţiilor arheologice la aşezarea civilă Saharna-„Dealul Mănăstirii” (campania 2008). Tyragetia s.n. III/1: 193-225. Niculiţă, Ion and Andrei Nicic. 2011. “Practici funerare în situl din prima epocă a fierului de la Saharna-Dealul Mănăstirii”. Tyragetia s.n. V/1: 225-235. Niculiţă, Ion and Andrei Nicic. 2013. “Pratique funéraires dans le site de la premiere epoque du fer de Saharna-Dealul Mănăstirii”. Mousaios XVIII: 173190. 39 40 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Niculiţă, Ion, Aurel Zanoci and Tudor Arnăut. 2007. „Sistemul defensiv al cetăţii din epoca fierului – Saharna Mare”. Tyragetia s.n. I/1: 27-62. Niculiţă, Ion, Aurel Zanoci and Tudor Arnăut. 2008. Habitatul din mileniul I a. Chr. în regiunea Nistrului Mijlociu (siturile din zona Saharna). Chişinău: Bons Offices. Niculiţă, Ion, Aurel Zanoci and Mihail Băţ. 2011. “Die frühhallstattzeitliche Befestigung von Saharna, Rajon Rezina, Republik Moldova”. In Der Schwarzmeeraum von Äneolithikum bis in die Früheisenzeit (5000-500 v. Chr.), edited by Eugen Sava, Blagoe Govedarica, and Bernard Hänsel. Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa, Band 27, 226-236. Rahden/Westf: Verlag Marie Leidorf. Niculiţă, Ion, Aurel Zanoci, Mihail Băţ and Sergiu Matveev. 2012. “Investigaţiile arheologice la situl Saharna Mare (2009-2011) (I)”. Tyragetia s.n. VI/1: 111-167. Niculiţă, Ion, Aurel Zanoci, Mihail Băţ and Sergiu Matveev. 2013. “Investigaţiile arheologice la situl Saharna Mare (2009-2012) (II)”. Tyragetia s.n. VII/1: 219-292. Niculiţă, Ion, Aurel Zanoci and Mihail Băţ. 2013. “Siturile de pe interfluviul Saharna Mare (sfârşitul sec. XII - sec. III a. Chr.)”. In Din preistoria Dunării de Jos. 50 de ani de la începutul cercetărilor arheologice la Babadag (1962-2012). Actele conferinţei “Lower Danube Prehistory. 50 years of excavations at Babadag” (Tulcea, 20-22 septembrie 2012), edited by Sorin-Cristian Ailincăi, Alexandra Ţârlea and Cristian Micu, 351-372. Brăila: Istros. Niculiţă, Ion, Aurel Zanoci and Mihail Băţ. 2016. Evoluţia habitatului din microzona Saharna în epoca fierului. Chişinău: Cartdidact. Niculiţă, Ion, Aurel Zanoci, Mihail Băţ and Victor Dulger. 2019. “Investigaţiile arheologice la situl Saharna Mare / „Dealul Mănăstirii”, raionul Rezina (2017-2019)”. Tyragetia s.n. XIII/1: 253-322. Simalcsik, Angela, Aurel Zanoci, and Mihail Băţ. 2019. “Oseminte umane descoperite în citadela hallstattiană timpurie de la Saharna Mare - Dealul Mănăstirii”. In Colocviul Naţional ,,Fortificaţii şi sisteme de fortificare în spaţiul estcarpatic, din neolitic până în Evul Mediu” (21-22 septembrie, Muzeul de Istorie şi Etnografie Târgu Neamţ). Program şi rezumate, edited by Vasile Diaconu, and Ciprian-Dorin Nicola, 62-66. Piatra-Neamţ: Editura Constantin Matasă. Smirnov, Georgii. 1949. “Skifskoe gorodishche i selishche «Bol’shaia Saharna»”. Kratkie soobshchenia Instituta Istorii Materialnoi Kultury XXVI: 93-96. Smirnov, Georgii. 1953. Otchetnye materialy po arkheologicheskim issledovaniiam Moldavii za 946-1953 gody. Kishinev. Arhiva MNIM, inv. nr. 507. A place of Life and Death. Burials and human bone finds in the Iron Age settlement at PLURAL Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: archaeological data and anthropological analysis Stuart-Macadam, P. 1985. “Porotic hyperostosis: Representative of a childhood condition”. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 66/4: 391-398. Tulsi, R.S. and P.D. Prasada Rao. 1968. “Ilio-tibial facet of the tibia in the Australian Aborigine”. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 3: 232235. Ubelaker, Douglas H. 1979. Human Skeletal Remains: Excavation, Analysis and Interpretation. Washington D.C.: Taraxacum. Waldron, Tony. 2009. Palaeopathology. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Walrath, Dana E., Paul Turner and Jaroslav Bruzek. 2004. “Reliability test of the visual assessment of cranial traits for sex determination”. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 125: 132-137. White, Tim D. and Pieter A. Folkens. 2005. The Human Bone Manual. Amsterdam, Boston: Elsevier Academic. Zanoci, Aurel, Ion Niculiţă, Mihail Băţ and Victor Dulgher. 2019. “Noi elemente defensive, descoperite recent la fortificaţia traco-getică Saharna Mare”. In Conferinţa ştiinţifică „Istorie. Arheologie. Muzeologie” a Muzeului Naţional de Istorie a Moldovei (17-18 octombrie 2019, Chişinău). Rezumatele comunicărilor, 16-17. Сhişinău. Zanoci Aurel, and Mihail Băţ. 2019. “Structuri gospodăreşti din incinta fortificaţiei hallstattiene timpurii Saharna Mare/„Dealul Mănăstirii” / Household structures from the enclosure of the Early Iron Age hillfort Saharna Mare/“Dealul Mănăstirii”. In Structuri arheologice din aşezările epocii fierului în spaţiul tiso-nistrean. Materialele colloquium-ului de vară de la Saharna (Saharna, 12-15 iulie 2018) / Archeological structures at the Iron Age settlements in the Tisza-Dniester region. Proceedings of the Saharna Summer Colloquium (Saharna, July 12nd-15th, 2018) edited by Aurel Zanoci, Mihail Băţ, Alexandra Ţârlea and Sorin-Cristian Ailincăi, 7-28, Cluj-Napoca: Editura Mega. Un loc al vieții și al morții. Înmormântări și descoperiri de oseminte umane în așezarea din epoca fierului de la Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii”: date arheologice și analize antropologice Rezumat Printre numeroasele vestigii atribuite epocii fierului de la Saharna Mare / ”Dealul Mănăstirii” se evidențiază 11 descoperiri de oseminte umane, care prezintă un interes deosebit pentru cercetarea interdisciplinară a sitului. În articolul de față ne-am propus reunirea informațiilor arheologice cu cele antropologice. 41 42 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Materialul scheletic analizat provine din șase tipuri de contexte arheologice: „complex de cult”, „șanț”, „palisadă”, „mormânt”, „locuință” și „strat cultural” (Fig. 2; 3). În toate cazurile analizate resturile osteologice identificate provin de la câte un singur individ. În total, au putut fi identificați șapte indivizi, din care unul este de sex feminin și șase sunt de sex masculin. Din punct de vedere al repartiției pe vârste, majoritatea indivizilor se încadrează în intervalul de vârstă 30-60 ani (maturus). Un singur individ se încadrează în intervalul de vârstă 20-30 ani (adultus), iar altul a trecut de vârsta de 60 ani (senilis). Ca urmare a analizelor paleopatologice, a fost înregistrat un spectru larg de patologii dentare (tartrul supragingival, caria, abcestul, căderile dentare antemortem) și osoase (osteortrita, hernia intervertebrală, hiperostoza porotică). S-a urmărit și indentificarea markerilor stresului ocupațional, asociați cu activităţile fizice suprasolicitante, mobilitatea terestră, activităţile ecvestre etc. La o serie de indivizi au fost atestate urme de moarte violentă, precum fracturile craniene și postcraniene. Au fost identificate și traumatisme cu urme de vindecare. Cuvinte cheie: regiunea Nistrului Mijlociu, epoca fierului, așezare, fortificație, înmormântări, resturi osteologice umane, boli osoase, boli dentare, urme de tăiere, traumatisme, traumatisme perimortem. Mihail Băț, Moldova State University, Chisinau, Republic of Moldova. E-mail: mb_usm@yahoo.com Angela Simalcsik, “Olga Necrasov” Centre for Anthropological Research, Iași, Romania/ Institute of Bioarchaeological and Etnocultural Research, Republic of Moldova. E-mail: angellisimal@gmail.com Aurel Zanoci, Moldova State University, Chisinau, Republic of Moldova. E-mail: azanoci@gmail.com From Ultima Thule to the Hellespont – Some remarks on the bone points of the Iron Age Jes Martens Asbtract Taking the outset in two finds of bone points in Norway, the distribution and use of the artefact type is discussed. Points of bone and antler are frequently found at settlements and in wetlands in Northern Europe. However, the exact distribution of the artefact type is hard to determine because its modest design makes it easy to overlook. This is also the reason why it is usually looked upon as a sign of poverty and as second rate. It seems the artefact type had more than one area of use; as a tool, as an implement for fishing and hunting, and as a combat weapon. Concerning the latter, it is argued that the points of bone and antler were valued and efficient weapons that more likely served as spears rather than javelins. This is confirmed by ancient written sources. Keywords: Pre-Roman Iron Age, Bone Points, Antler Points, Weaponry, Spears. A numerous but easily overlooked artefact type is the bone or antler point. A very simple looking artefact usually made from a hollowed out tibia of a sheep, cut at right angles in one end and diagonally in the other, quite often with a rivet hole at the base. They occur all over northern Central Europe, the British Isles and in the southern part of the Scandinavian Peninsula, in settlements, in graves and in wetlands. Their dating is wide, but the majority seems to be dating to the Pre-Roman Iron Age, i.e. the last half of the first millennium BC. Depending on their context, different uses have been inferred; tool, hunting or fishing implement, or weapon. Due to their crude design and cheap raw material, the artefacts are often considered an expression of shortage of metal and as a cheap and disposable solution. This obviously has consequences for the interpretation, but the question is whether this is paying the artefacts their due respect. Taking the outset in some so far overlooked specimens from Norway, this paper will focus on the function of these artefacts. Distribution The distribution of the artefact type is a bit tricky, and it is uncertain whether the known distribution (Schatte 2013, figs. 14-15) reflects the factual. It is easier to state with certainty where it occurs than where it does not occur. One important factor is the conditions for preservation. Artefacts of bone and antler are most likely to be preserved in regions and context with low acidity in the 44 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 1. The three bone points from Skjonghelleren, Møre og Romsdal (photo Kirsten J. Helgeland, Museum of Cultural History, University of Oslo). ground as is the case in Eastern Denmark and Scania. Probably just as important a factor is the simplicity of the design. If no one pays particular attention to the artefact type, it may easily be overlooked or classified as a large needle or an awl. Therefore the bone points are particularly numerous in areas where researchers have given them special attention, like in Denmark, starting with the work of Hans Kjær (1901), in Mecklenburg where Ulrich Schoknecht (1982) recorded them, in Scania (Althin 1951), and in England (Olsen 2003 for references). Outside these areas, the presence or absence of the artefact is less well documented. One of these areas is Norway. When I first dealt with the type (Martens 2001), I was not aware of any finds known from Norway, and it was only when I accidentally noticed three such points in the Iron Age exhibition of the Museum of Cultural History in Oslo that I realized that they also occur in this part of the world. I have later tried to check whether there are more, but it is a difficult task, since the museum storages of Norwegian museums are not open to researchers, and you have to order the artefacts you want to study. Thus a misclassified artefact is really difficult to look up. The three specimens from the exhibition in Oslo stem from Skjonghelleren (Fig. 1; 2a-c), a rock-shelter on the island Valderøya near Ålesund on the Norwegian west-coast. The site was excavated in 1875 and published by Anton From Ultima Thule to the Hellespont – Some remarks PLURAL on the bone points of the Iron Age Fig. 2. The four known bone points from Norway – a-c Skjonghelleren (Museum of Cultural History, Oslo, C21834), d Havnhelleren (Museum of Cultural History, Oslo, C21848), (drawings V.V. & J.Martens). Wilhelm Brøgger in 1910. Brøgger recognized a number of bone points among the large material of animal bones and ascribed them to the type which Kjær had dealt with in detail a few years before (Brøgger 1910, 13-14, fig. 16). Brøgger also mentioned a further bone point (Fig. 2d) from another rock-shelter, Havnsundhelleren (Brøgger 1910, 17). Along with these points a number of arrow heads and an iron spearhead were found, in addition to a number of tools and pottery. In 1911, Anders Nummedal carried out excavations in two rock-shelters, Gjeithelleren and Sauehelleren, on the island Bjørnerem not far from the aforementioned shelters. The relatively large bone material from these two excavations was sent to Herluf Winge in Copenhagen for analysis. The bones came from fish, land and sea mammals, a large variety of wild birds in combination with bones of domesticated animals, 55 different species in all. Among the bones Winge recognized a possible bone point (Fig. 3), but Nummedal himself was uncertain whether to interpret the artefact as a spear head or a Fig. 3. Bone point bodkin (Nummedal 1913, 31, fig. 9b). The fact that the sides from Sauehelleren, Møre og Romsdal of the point of this specimen are concave in opposition to the (after Nummedal usual convex shape supports his doubt. This is most likely a 1913, fig. 9b). 45 46 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 bodkin. After this, no new finds have been published. The rock-shelters with the bone points date from the Late Roman Iron Age (Skjonghelleren and Havnsundhelleren) and the Migration Period (Sauehelleren). While Brøgger interpreted the rock-shelters as places of refuge during unruly times, Nummedal rather understood them as settlements with a mixed economy, combining agriculture and husbandry with hunting. This he based on the large number of bones of game and fish in the archaeological deposits in the shelters. Since then our knowledge of the regular settlement sites of the Iron Age has grown considerably. Therefore Nummedal’s interpretation has gained the upper hand, and the shelters can now be understood as hunting stations (for a modern survey of the Norwegian rock shelters see Bergsvik 2017). Furthermore, the predominant type of weapons found in the shelters was arrows, which could also indicate hunting. Thus even the bone points found in these shelters may have been part of this activity. Function This brings us to the function of these bone points. As mentioned in the introduction, a large number of the bone points have been found at settlements. This is especially the case in Denmark and in the British Isle, but also in the Netherlands and on Feddersen Wierde in Northern Germany. This naturally leads to an interpretation of the points as tools. Thus in English literature they are often referred to as gouges. However, experiments as well as studies on wear demonstrate that this is not a likely area of use, and neither is hide-scraper (Olsen 2003, 107-108). Another possible interpretation is that they served as awls, and more specifically as lip-work awls (Roes 1963, 36-37; Haarnagel 1979, 289), but even this interpretation is, according to Olsen, less likely at least when dealing with the completely hollowed out specimens. Olsen also considered several other suggested areas of use but rejected them because the points obviously were designed to be mounted on a wooden shaft. However, Olsen refers to a find where bone points were found in association with loom weights, indicating that these particular specimens may have served a function in relation to weaving. At other settlements such as Maiden Castle, Olsen points to the defensive nature of the sites what would seem to favour a martial interpretation of the artefacts (Olsen 2003, 108-110). The furnishing of graves often reflects the tools and weaponry of their time, but unfortunately only a few are known which are furnished with bone points. The reason for this may be that cremation was the predominant burial rite in Northern Europe during the Pre-Roman Iron Age. Still, an inhumation grave From Ultima Thule to the Hellespont – Some remarks PLURAL on the bone points of the Iron Age of a young man in East Yorkshire, England, was furnished with 16 bone points. The way they were placed in the grave gave rise to the interpretation that they had been used as skewers to pin together a wrapper, covering the body. It may, however, be that this was a secondary use of the points (Olsen 2003, 109). Furthermore, Klaus Raddatz listed three burials from Brandenburg, Germany and one from the Gdansk region in Poland each furnished with one or two bone points (Raddatz 1954, 64-65). Since, unfortunately, all these graves were cremations, they do not contribute to the use of the points. This leaves us with the finds from the wetlands. Often these points were found during peat cutting or mudding. Therefore, in many cases the contexts are not well illuminated. Two particular finds stand out in this connection, the finds in the Hjortspring bog (Rosenberg 1937) and at Krogsbølle (Kjær 1901) on the Danish isles Als and Fyn. In both cases the points are parts of larger weapon deposits, and in both cases some of them are still mounted on wooden shafts. Thus in these cases the interpretation as spear heads seems unquestionable. But does this apply for all bone points found in wet lands? Mogens Bo Henriksen has mapped the finds of such points around an inlet on Northern Fyn and interprets the distribution of these solitary finds as evidence of coastal fish hunting (Henriksen 1997). The argument seems convincing and gets support from the earlier mentioned Norwegian rock-shelter finds. Furthermore, fish spearheads would eventually be shafted very much in the same way as would weapon spearheads. Thus the bone points seem at least to have had two functions, as a weapon and as an implement for fishing and hunting. Bone and antler points as weapons The final question is how the bone points were used as a weapon. As mentioned earlier, the choice of raw material is usually considered as an evidence of a lack of better resources (i.e. metal). The bone points are therefore generally seen as of less worth and therefore being more disposable than their metal counterparts. Hence, they are often interpreted as javelins rather than spearheads (e.g. Randsborg 1995, 54-56), i.e. a weapon to be used before engaging in close combat. I have previously argued that there are signs that at least some of the bone points were attributed a higher value. This was based on the fact that some of the bone and antler points are carefully polished and ornamented (Martens 2011, 157) (figs. 4a and b). This indicates that these particular points were seen as personal weapons, perhaps even carrying the marks and symbols of a social or otherwise symbolic meaning. Such ornaments are usually found on weaponry but not on ordinary tools. 47 48 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 4a. Ornamented bone points from Borrebjerg (after Martens 2011, fig. 8). Fig. 4b. Ornamented bone and antler points from a; Pritzerber See, b; Hjortspring, c and d; Segeå and (after Raddatz 1954, fig 1.3; Martens 2011, fig. 11a; Martens 2001, figs. 11a and 13f ). Furthermore, referring to a study by Jon Bryant Finney (2006), I have pointed out that since the weight of a bone point usually is relatively low, it would not give the javelin sufficient balance in the glide. Though this could have been compensated by shaping the shaft in such a way that the balance of the javelin would be ideal, the factual evidence, i.e. the shafted points from Hjortspring and Krogsbølle do not support such an assumption (Martens 2011, 158). From Ultima Thule to the Hellespont – Some remarks PLURAL on the bone points of the Iron Age Fig. 5. The experimental set up of Torben Schatte (after Schatte 2013, fig. 18). To these arguments may be added that Torben Schatte in a series of controlled experiments has demonstrated that bone points in fact are effective weapons when shafted correctly, and he therefore concludes that they were by no means “ad hoc weaponry” (Schatte 2013, 95, fig. 18). In his experiment (fig. 5) the points were used as spearheads, and though the iron tipped spears in average penetrated about 30% deeper into the target, by means of the same thrust power the bone points proved to be not only efficient but also durable. 49 50 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Finally, it is time to call a witness. In the year 480 BC, Xerxes crossed the Hellespont with a formidable force in order to subdue the European part of the Greek world. His army was made up of contingents from all parts of the Persian Empire as well as from their allies. The Greek historian Herodotus has described this impressive show of force in detail, mentioning how each contingent set itself apart from the others in weaponry, armour as well as fighting techniques. About the Ethiopians he wrote; “The Ethiopians had skins of leopards and lions tied upon them, and bows made of a slip of palm-wood, which were of great length, not less than four cubits, and for them small arrows of reed with a sharpened stone at the head instead of iron, the same stone with which they engrave seals: in addition to this they had spears, and on them was the sharpened horn of a gazelle by way of a spear-head, and they had also clubs with knobs upon them. Of their body they used to smear over half with white, when they went into battle, and the other half with red” (here quoted from the online translation on the Gutenberg-project https:// www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2456) This quotation is especially interesting for two reasons; first of all it demonstrates that even in the Mediterranean world points of bone or antler could be used as weapons during what we in Northern Europe call the Early Pre-Roman Iron Age; secondly since Herodotus during his account of the two opposing armies explicitly distinguished between spears and javelins, there seems to be no doubt that the Ethiopian did use spears with antler points. Thus we know that antler and bone points have been used as spearheads, even alongside spears with metal points. Since weapon technology is often shared by large areas, this would indicate that the contemporary points of bone and antler found in martial contexts in Northern Europe were used in a similar way. That there was a connection between Northern Europe and the Mediterranean World during the Early Pre-Roman Iron Age and that it also was expressed in weaponry and fighting order has already been suggested by other authors (e.g. Kaul 1988; Randsborg 1995). Concluding remarks The present survey demonstrates that we are still far from completely understanding the use of this particular artefact type which seems to have served more than one function. The best documented ones are as combat weapons, i.e. spears, and as fishing and hunting implements, but even a function as lip-work From Ultima Thule to the Hellespont – Some remarks PLURAL on the bone points of the Iron Age awls or other kinds of tools cannot be ruled out. Due to their relatively simple appearance and their usual find contexts, it is likely that points of bone and antler may be overlooked in some areas and therefore their actual distribution is uncertain. The question of their dating has not been an issue in this paper, but even here there may be room for future research, since bone points have been reported found in context dating from the Neolithic to the Middle Ages. Bibliography Althin, Carl-Axel. 1951. “Einige schonische Funde aus der keltischen Eisenzeit.“ Meddelanden LUHM 1950/51:151-156. Bergsvik, Knut Andreas. 2017. “Caves and Rockshelters in Iron-Age Coastal Norway. At the Margins of the Society?“ In Life on the Edge: Social, Political and Religious Frontiers in Early Medieval Europe, edited by Sarah Semple, Celia Orsini and Sian Mui, 317-334. Neue Studien Sachsenforschung, 6. Braunschweig: Braunschweigisches Landesmuseum. Brøgger, Anton Wilhelm. 1910. “Vestnorske hulefund fra ældre jernalder.“ Bergen museums Aarbog 1910, nr. 16: 1-22. Finney, Jon Bryant. 2006. Middle Iron Age Warfare of the Hillfort Dominated Zone c. 400 BC to c. 150 BC. BAR British Series 423, Oxford: Archaepress. Haarnagel, Werner. 1979. Die Grabung Feddersen Wierde. Methode, Hausbau, Siedlungs- und Wirtschaftsformen sowie Sozialstruktur. Feddersen Wierde. Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabung der Vorgeschichtlichen Wurt Feddersen Wierde bei Bremerhaven in den Jahren 1955 bis 1963. Band II. Wiesbaden: F Steiner. Henriksen, Mogens Bo. 1997. “Fiskeri og kystjagt på Nordfyn i jernalder, vikingetid og tidlig middelalder.“ Sletten. Årsskrift for nordfynsk lokal- og kulturhistorie: 5-14. Kaul, Flemming. 1988. Da våbnene tav. Hjortspringfundet og dets baggrund. København: Arnold Busck. Kjær, Hans. 1901. “To nye Mosefund fra Jærnalderen.“ In Aarbøger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie 1901, 26-54. København: Nordiske Oldskriftselskab. Martens, Jes. 2001. “A Wooden Shield-Boss from Kvärlöv, Scania. Some Remarks on the Weaponry of the Early Pre-Roman Iron Age in Northern Europe and the Origin of the Hjortspring Warriors.“ In Trans Album Fluvium. Forschungen zur vorrömischen, kaiserzeitlichen und mittelalterlichen Archäologie edited by M. Meyer, Festschrift für Achim Leube zum 65. Geburtstag, 135-159. Rahden: Vlg Marie Leidorf. Martens, Jes. 2011. “Weapons, armaments and society. The Pre-Roman Iron Age on Zealand and in Scania.“ In The Iron Age on Zealand. Status and 51 52 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Perspectives, edited by L. Boye, 147-174. København: Det kongelige Nordiske Oldskriftselskab, Nationalmuseet. Nummedal, Anders. 1913. Bjørneremsfundet. Forhistoriske hulefund fra Mien i Romsdalen. Det kongelige norske videnskabers selskabs skrifter 1912, nr. 12, Trondhjem. Olsen, Sandra L. 2003. “The bone and antler artefacts: their manufacture and use.“ In Fiskerton. An Iron Age timber causeway with Iron Age and Roman votive offerings edited by N. Field and M. Parker Pearson, 92-111. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Randsborg, Klaus. 1995. Hjortspring. Warfare & Sacrifice in Early Europe. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. Roes, Anna. 1963. Bone and Antler Objects from the Frisian terp mounds. Haarlem: H. D. Tjeenk Willink. Rosenberg, Gustav. 1937. Hjortspringfundet. Nordiske fortidsminder III-1, 5-102. København:Gyldendal. Schatte, Torben. 2013. “Tüllenspitzen aus Knochen und Geweih.“ Mitteilungen der Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte 34: 91-110 Schoknecht, Ulrich. 1982. “Mecklenburgische Knochenlanzenspitzen aus germanischer Zeit.“ Bodendenkmalpflege in Mecklenburg, Jahrbuch 30: 47-66. De la Ultima Thule la Hellespont – câteva observații despre vârfurile din os în perioada epocii fierului Rezumat Pornind de la două descoperiri de vârfuri din os din Norvegia, se propune spre discuţie distribuția și utilizarea acestui tip de artefact. Vârfurile din os și corn de cerb sunt frecvent întâlnite în așezările și în zonele umede ale Europei de Nord. Cu toate acestea, distribuția exactă a respectivului tip de artefact este greu de determinat, deoarece designul său modest îl face ușor de trecut cu vederea. Acesta este și motivul pentru care este privit de obicei ca un semn al sărăciei și ca o piesă de a doua mână. Se pare că tipul de artefact a avut mai multe funcţionalităţi. Ele puteau servi în calitate de unelte, de ustensile de pescuit și vânătoare sau ca arme de luptă. În ceea ce privește funcţionalitatea de armă, se susține că vârfurile din os și corn de cerb erau arme preţuite și eficiente care, probabil, au servit, mai degrabă, ca sulițe decât în calitate de lance. Acest fapt este confirmat și de surse scrise antice. Cuvinte cheie: epoca preromană a fierului, vârfuri din os, vârfuri din corn de cerb, arme, sulițe. Jes Martens, Museum of Cultural History, University of Oslo, Norway. Email: Jes.martens@khm.uio.no The amazing architecture of the Dacians. Few thoughts concerning the use of mortars based on new analyses Cristina Montana Pușcaș, Iosif Vasile Ferencz, Ciprian Cosmin Stremțan, Tudor Tămaș, Adrian Căsălean Abstract In 2016, while carrying out a campaign on a Dacian “tower-house” type structure identified in earlier years on the Cetățuie Hill in Ardeu, an atypical material was noticed on the inferior surface of a stone block sitting perpendicular on the revetment. Its appearance, of different colour and texture compared to the stone block it was attached to, led us to immediately assume it could be mortar. Based on this working hypothesis a series of questions were formulated, with the purpose of extracting as much valuable information as possible from the sample. Powder X-ray diffraction and petrographic investigations were carried out in order to answer these questions. Keywords: Dacia, XRD, petrography, mortar, masonry, building materials, Transylvania Although the precise deeds and chronology of King Burebista are still debated in historical literature, the period’s portrayal illustrates a strong manifestation of power at a very different scale compared to earlier periods. It is neither the place, nor the time to rekindle the debate on the intricate aspects of the history of Dacia during the reign of its first king. Several years ago, Ion Horațiu Crișan tried, through a monographic study, to coherently present Burebista’s achievments (Crișan 1975; Crișan 1977), the work being translated to other languages as well (Crișan 1978; Crișan 1980). The study brought on an intensified interest in the subject from the part of scholars, but then slowly lost its appeal. Recently the period of the great king’s rule has been approached from a double perspective, archeological and hystorical, with an emphasis on the Southwestern region of Romania (Rustoiu, Ferencz 2018). From an archeological point of view, in Dacia and especially in Southwestern Transylvania a new type of settlement develops – the so-called “Dacian fortresses”. The majority of their characteristic traits reveal their social, economical, and symbolic functions, rather than the military ones (Pupeză 2012; Ferencz 2014, 125-126; Rustoiu 2015, 354-358; Rustoiu, Berecki 2018, 70-77). The most impressive among them were built in the South and Southwest of Transylvania. They are present especially in the intra-Carpathian area, although there are some examples on the Eastern and Southern slopes of the 54 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Carpathians as well (Glodariu 1983, 75-110). They are set on heights and surrounded by an agricultural hinterland, where the settlements that rely on the fortresses are also positioned (Egri 2014, 177; Rustoiu 2015, 358). The entire organization, vertical as well as horizontal, illustrates the fact that this type of habitat was created by a strongly hyerarchized social structure and that it represents fortified aristocrathic residences (Florea 2011, 93-94; Ferencz 2014, 115). At the top of the hierarchy seem to be the Dacian kings, their center of power lying in the Southwest of Transylvania. The structure of this type of settlement appears to represent a means of adaptating configurations from the Mediterranean region to the symbolic and practical needs of the local elite. The monumental stone buildings appear to fully illustrate this aspect. Walls built using a technique that confers them monumentality were meant to support terasses, to form enclosures, and were raised to become the base of ostentatious buildings. The so-called murus Dacicus can be described as a special technique consisting of revetments made from sizeable stone blocks. The two revetments are sparsely connected by wooden beams, and the space between them packed with pieces of rock and soil (Glodariu 1983, Fig. 12.2; Gheorghiu 2005, 107-117; Pupeză 2010, 160; Pupeză 2011, 148; Bodó 2015, 470). In fact, in most cases, the technique is an adaptation of the one used in the Hellenistic world, in general, and the walls of the Greek colonies on the Black Sea, in particular (Pârvan 1926, 476-477; Gheorghiu 2005, 132–141; Pupeză 2011, 148; Bodó 2015). The style was borrowed from the Mediterranean region, through master builders, probably of Greek origin. The phenomenon seems to have intensified following Burebista’s campaigns on the Western shore of the Black Sea (Bodó 2015, 470). Such walls are 2-3 m in thickness. The oldest monument built in such a manner is probably the one from Cetățuia hill from Costești (Glodariu 1983, 129), where the two so-called “tower-houses” with Hellenistic wall bases, brick elevations, and tilled roofs impress to this day. Also impressive are the monumental stairwell and the enclosure walls. Some scholars believe that the fortress on top of Cetățuia hill from Costești served as residence for King Burebista (Glodariu 1983, 29). A number of other monuments in Sowthwestern Transylvania have buildings and walls erected using the same technique. Analysing the Dacian settlements and fortresses known to date it is easy to discern that the number of buildings where this technique was implemented is very small, in fact it is nearly an exception (Pupeză 2011, 150). This observation can be explained from the perspective of the symbolic function of the walls and buildings, as well as other monumental structures (Pupeză 2011, 150). Their construction is the result of a decision taken by an authority who imposes lim- The amazing architecture of the Dacians. Few thoughts concerning PLURAL the use of mortars based on new analyses its and makes them known (Pupeză 2011, 151-152). In order to support the similarity that borderlines reproduction between the walls of Greek fortresses from the Western shore of the Black Sea and those of Dacian fortresses from Southern Transylvania, Ion Horațiu Crișan quotes the description of a segment of Histria’s wall (Crișan 1977, 328, 358). The monumental structures employing faceted limestone blocks found in Southwestern Transylvania have polarized the attention of specialists and general public alike, ever since their discovery. The building techniques and materials have also been the object of attention. Key moments in the research history of this topic were marked by contributions from Téglás Gábor (Téglas 1885, 306; Téglas 1888, 134; Téglas 1902; Téglas 1905), Dimitrie M. Teodorescu and Márton Roska (Teodorescu, Roska 1923), Alexandru Ferenczi (Ferenczi 1951), Ioan Glodariu (Glodariu 1983), Dinu Antonescu (Antonescu 1984), and Paul Pupeză (Pupeză 2011; Pupeză 2012). Within this topic the use of mortars has been a particular issue (Daicoviciu 1954, 61-63; Daicoviciu 1960, 321; Daicoviciu 1972, 133) Radu Popa (Popa 1977) and Ioan Glodariu (Glodariu 1983, 137-138), are some of the researchers who have taken on this subject from different perspectives. It is currently accepted that mortar was used as binder in the construction of the cistern from Blidaru, while the walls erected with the use of mortar from Piatra Roșie or Bănița are thought to be Medieval in age (Popa 1977). Several researchers have supported the ideea of the contribution to the erection of such walls from Greek master builders, who were present in Dacia after Burebista’s millitary campaigns against the Greek fortresses on Pontus Euxinus (Daicoviciu 1954, 42; Crișan 1977, 328, 342; Glodariu, Moga 1989, 29; Pupeză 2011, 152; Bodó 2015). However, Roman architects were familiar with building techniques, including the Greek ones, as noted by Vitruvius Pollio (Vitruvius, II, VIII, 12-16). Opinions didn’t always converge, some researchers claiming that walls lacking boutisses were a later creation pertaining to the Dacian master builders (Glodariu 1983, 124; Pupeză 2011, 148). There are also those of the opinion that such walls are entirely of local creation (Daicoviciu 1979, 106; Antonescu 1984, 108-109), despite all of the above-mentioned remarks. All of the discrepancies observed in the building technique can be more likely ascribed to the large number of master builders and architects involved in the construction work (Bodó 2015, 471-476). A “tower-house” type structure was identified in Ardeu, on the top of Cetăţuie hill, within a fortified Dacian enclosure (Ferencz, Căstăian 2019). The first architectural elements indicating the presence of the edifice were discovered in 2002 during an archeological evaluation of the site (Ferencz et al. 55 56 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 2003). Téglás Gábor had noticed, more than a century earlier, on the top of Cetăţuie hill the presence of a number of hand-chiseled, “cubical”, limestone blocks, similar to those found at Sarmizegetusa. This find allowed him to assume that their source was a construction made from such stone blocks, possibly a bastion or gate (Téglas 1885, 306; Téglas 1888, 134). The site layout observed during the 2002 campaign (Fig. 1) led us to believe for a long time that the tower was built as a wodden structure, raised on a base made of local stone, with a perimetral dry masonry wall. The identification of an asFig. 1. The infilling on the Northern side of the semblage (cca. 2 m wide and 0.30 m tower house’s wall (foto I. V. Ferencz 2002). in length; Fig. 1) of local stone, bound with clay pointed in this direction back in 2002. The context was interpreted as being a wall (Ferencz et al. 2003, 41). Later we considered it to be a stone platform meant to ensure a horizontal surface on which to build the edifice (Ferencz 2014, 123). During investigations of the hummock area, traces of construction were observed on both the surveyed and un-surveyed surfaces, permitting us to hypothesize on the presence of a monumental building on the area of the hummock, interpreted as being a “tower-house” (Bodó, Ferencz 2004, 150). Verifying this hypothesis began with the 2013 campaign, when surface Sp6 was surveyed (Ferencz, Căstăian, Dima, Popa, Roman 2014). Work was continued by campaigns throughout the following years (Ferencz, Căstăian, Popa, Roman 2015; Ferencz, Căstăian, Roman, Socol 2016). In 2014 work was started on sectioning the hummock, and implicitly the “tower-house”, along its West-East axis (Ferencz, Căstăian, Popa, Roman 2015, 27-28), which proved to be an inspired decision, as it allowed the identification of representative in situ segments of the edifice’s wall (Fig. 2; 3). It proved to be a construction based on a wall built in a Hellenistic manner (Fig. 4), with two revetments from sizable stone blocks (Ferencz, Căstăian, Roman, Socol 2016, 267), cut from oolitic limestone (Cetean, Ferencz 2016, 48-49), and with infilling (Ferencz, Căstăian, Popa, Roman 2015, 28). The amazing architecture of the Dacians. Few thoughts concerning PLURAL the use of mortars based on new analyses Fig. 2. The interior revetment and the infilling of the tower house’s wall (Foto C. C. Roman 2014) Fig. 3. The Western wall of the tower house (Foto C. C. Roman 2014). The hypothesis of the “tower-house” was also verified through non-invasive methods, more precisely by means of electrical resistivity tomography (Micle 2017). Their summation contributed to formulating a series of conclusions and working hypotheses that will be either confirmed or infirmed in the following years, depending on the amplitude of invasive (archaeological) and non-invasive re- Fig. 4. The exterior revetment on the Eastern side of the building (foto I. V. Ferencz 2017) search carried out. Electrical resistivity also allowed to establish the building’s planimetry (Ferencz, Căstăian 2019, Pl II/2). The plan drawn from the measurements indicates that the building’s foundation is quadrilateral in shape, each side cca. 12-14 m in length (Micle 2017). Invasive survey demonstrated that the 57 58 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 5. Boutisse (oolitic limestone block, set perpendicular to the wall surface), from the surface of which the mortar sample was taken (Foto I. V. Ferencz 2016). wall’s thickness, measured at the exterior of each revetment is about 3.15 m, while the width of the entire edifice, on its West-Est axis, is cca. 11.5 m from one exterior revetment to the other (Ferencz, Căstăian 2019, Pl II/2). On the Southern flank of the plan the electrical resistivity survey showed a discontinuity in resistivity values for both the exterior and interior wall. This represents most likely the acces way to the base of the “tower-house”. The discontinuity is approximately 2 m long and based on the morphology of the terrain it could have been the location of an access ladder (Micle 2017). During the 2016 campaign, on the inferior surface of a block sitting perpendicular on the revetment, a so-called ,,boutisse” (Fig. 5), we noticed the presence of a material of different texture and color compared to the stone block. We sampled the material in order to identify it. Its appearance led us to immediately assume it could be mortar. A series of thermal analyses were carried out in the Faculty of Chemistry, Biology, and Geography (West University of Timișoara), the manuscript being currently in preparation (Vlase, Vlase, Ferencz, Sfârloagă, Micle, Vlase 2019). Samples were also provided for analysis to Dr. Valentina Cetean (Romanian Geological Survey, Bucharest). In this paper we aim to present preliminary results from a third set of analyses carried out on a sample of the same material, as well as a first series of conclusions derived from these. Our choice of analytical methods was based on questions formulated ever since the material was discovered. These questions are as follows: 1. Is the sampled material a mortar? 2. If so, then which are its components? 3. In what percentage are each of the identified elements present? The amazing architecture of the Dacians. Few thoughts concerning PLURAL the use of mortars based on new analyses In order to find answers to the above questions we prepared petrographic thin sections from the material collected from the site, as well as carried out powder X-ray diffraction (XRD). Sample preparation is simple and relatively quick for both methods. For XRD approximately 1 gram of sample is powdered to cca. 10-50 µm particle size, then placed into a specially designed holder and measured. For petrographic thin sections, a billet ca. 1 cm 2 in surface of the solid sample is cut and polished on one side, then the polished side glued to a glass microscope slide using bi-component epoxy resin. Once the resin has cured, the excess sample is trimmed down and polished to a thickness of cca. 30 µm. The powder X-ray diffraction was performed on a Bruker D8 Advance diffractometer with Bragg-Brentano geometry, CuKa1 with λ = 0.15418 nm, Ni filter and a one-dimensional detector, at the Department of Geology, Babeş-Bolyai University Cluj-Napoca, using corundum (NIST SRM 1976a) as internal standard (NIST: U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology reference material). The data were collected on a 5 - 64o 2θ interval, at a 0.02o 2θ, with a measuring step of 0.5 seconds. The identification of the mineral phases was performed manually with the Diffrac.Eva 2.1 software from Bruker AXS, using the PDF2 (2012) database from the International Centre for Diffraction Data (www.icdd.com). Powder X-ray diffraction has been used for over a hundred years in the study of natural and synthetic crystalline structures (Debye and Scherrer, 1916; Pecharsky and Zavalij, 2009). The method compares the diffractogram (or pattern) of an unknown sample consisting of crystallized material with standard patterns from an internationally recognized database (Pecharsky and Zavalij, 2009). It is applied in a large array of research fields, comprising among others physics, chemistry, and geological studies. The analyzed material usually consists of crystalline powder obtained by grinding the collected sample in an agate mortar, in order to avoid contamination (Pecharsky and Zavalij 2009, 302). Masonry mortars are generally described as synthetic (i.e., man-made) compounds used to physically bind building materials, such as stones, bricks, etc. They are usually multicomponent systems (e.g., inert mineral aggregates, seldom mineral additions, binders, and binder-related particles), in which each of the comprising materials helps strengthen the mechanical properties of the final material. This particular property stems out of the physical hardness of the components (e.g., inert mineral aggregates), and the chemical reactions that take place during manufacturing and hardening of the mortars (e.g., formation of authigenic minerals, binders, etc.). One particularity of mortars is 59 60 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 6. Large alkali feldspar (orthoclase and microcline) lithoclast, with quartz and zircon microinclusions. Image on the left – plane polarized light; image on the right – crossed polarized light. Fig. 7. Angular quartz and feldspathic aggregates, showing poor sphericity. Image on the left – plane polarized light; image on the right – crossed polarized light. that each of the original components retain their chemical and mineralogical composition (Goffer 2007, 144; Elsen 2006). In other words, the mineral aggregates used will easily be identified long after the mortar was put in place. In most cases this applies to the binder as well, especially for lime masonry mortars. The type of inert aggregates used for the manufacturing of the mortars is very diverse as they tend to be sourced from the lithologies available locally, including sand sources, crushed rock formations, or from re-used construction materials, such as bricks and stone blocks. Identification of the mineral composition of the aggregates is a powerful tool for understanding the source of the raw material as well as the technology used. The petrographic analysis of the Ardeu samples has shown that the main mineral components of the aggregates are quartz, plagioclase feldspar (mainly Ca-rich albite, but also anorthite dis- The amazing architecture of the Dacians. Few thoughts concerning PLURAL the use of mortars based on new analyses Fig. 8. Photomicrograph (20X) showing micritic and sparitic calcite, as well as feldspathic and quartz aggregates. Primary and secondary porosity are visible. Image on the left – plane polarized light; image on the right – crossed polarized light. playing typical polysynthetic twinning), potassium feldspar (orthoclase and subordinately microcline with cross-hatch twinning; (Fig. 6; 7), micas (muscovite and subordinately biotite), as well as minute heavy minerals (e.g., titanite, rutile, zircon). The mineralogical composition suggests a granitic/andesitic source for the aggregates, in agreement with the local lithology (Cetean, Ferencz, Rustoiu 2018). Also, the fact that mineral grains are poorly sorted (i.e. a wide range of grain sizes is present), sub-angular to sub-rounded in shape, and have low sphericity (Powers 1953), further supports the hypothesis that raw materials for the aggregates were sourced locally and are alluvial (i.e. river sand) in origin. The typical binder identified in the Ardeu samples is lime. The calcium carbonate (calcite) is finely crystalized (micritic), with larger, well defined crystals developing on the inside of the pores. In some cases, dissolution-reprecipitation processes can be observed (Fig. 8), together with the formation of secondary binder porosity features (Fig. 8). No binder related particles (i.e., lime lumps) have been identified, which is a possible indication of a proficient lime manufacturing technology. The mineralogical composition and texture identified in thin section support the initial hypothesis that the sample represents a manmade material, more precisely a mortar. Based on the XRD pattern (Fig. 9) the principal components of the material are calcite (the main component of limestone, which is used to make lime), quartz, muscovite, feldspar (plagioclase and potassic), aragonite and heavy minerals (e.g., rutile), which are practically omnipresent in alluvium (i.e. sand; used as an aggregate). Together, these two analytical methods paint a pretty clear image of the makeup of the sampled material, and exclude the possibility that we are dealing with a naturally occuring compound. 61 62 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig 9. XRD pattern of sample Ard-1/2019: C – calcite, M – muscovite, Q – quartz, A – aragonite, P – plagioclase feldspar, O – orthoclase feldspar, R – rutile. Conclusions As already mentioned, the wall building technique employing faceted stone blocks, with two revetments, supported by wodden beams set in channles dug in the blocks and with infilling is specific to the Hellenistic world (Pârvan 1926, 476-477; Daicoviciu 1954, 42; Crișan 1977, 328; Glodariu 1983, 28). Inspiration for the design of tiles and pantiles found in certain sites from Southern Transylvania can also be attributed to the same area (Glodariu 1983, 28). Also specific to the Hellenistic walls are the ,,boutisse”, blocks disposed perpendicular on the revetment, ensuring the connecton to the infilling (Glodariu 1983, 124), as is also the case in Ardeu the block from which our samples were sourced. One other architectural ellement considered to be of Hellenistic inspiration are plans of fortresses such as Costești - ,,Cetățuie”, Blidaru, and Piatra Roșie (Crișan 1977, 342; Glodariu 1983, 126). The Greek letters carved into one of the blocks from Blidaru, Căpâlna or Grădiștea Muncelului are also noteworthy (Crișan 1977, 342; Bodó 2015, 474-475). In our opinion, walls built in this manner were erected by master builders originating from the pontic region, possibly from other areas as well. We are referring here to walls constituting enclosures, those representing the base of “palaces”, as well as those with or without boutisses. We ascribe the elements that set them apart to a personal preference of the particular master builder (Bodó 2015, 471). Probably the most evident particularity was noted at Piatra Craivii, where the wall is of Mediterranean origins and copies the so-called The amazing architecture of the Dacians. Few thoughts concerning PLURAL the use of mortars based on new analyses “murus africanus” (Bodo 2001, 319-324). This is in concordance with the observation of Vitruvius Pollio, who recommends adapting construction methods to the site’s prospect (Vitruvius I. 10). Therefore, in our opinion, a better understanding of the use of mortar in certain constructions is imperative. The issue of mortar use in buildings dating from the Dacian Kingdom period is still open. The analytical results presented in this contribution are, in our view, only the very first elements upon which to build a solid, utterly needed data base. The analytical methods employed enabled us to find answers to two of the three questions we set when initiating this study. The answer to the first question, “Is the sampled material a mortar?” is an unequivocal yes; the sample represents a synthetic compound, intended for use as a binder for building materials. To the second question, “which are the mortar’s components?” the answer is sand (most likely sourced locally), aggregate (made up of lithic clasts compatible with the local geology, and crushed fragments of recycled building material – bricks and rocks), and qood quality lime. In order to succesfully approach the third question – “in what percentage are each of the identified elements present?”, we plan to carry out additional analyses in the near future. We strongly believe that the same type of analysis is necessary for the mortars discovered in the walls of fortresses from Piatra Roșie and Bănița, and of course from the fast deteriorating Blidaru cistern as well. Similar materials from walls of buildings and enclosures from other time periods must be analysed as well, contributing to such a data base. In our opinion, future survey of other sites will eventually lead to the identification of similar situations to that in Ardeu. As a logical next step, we intend to extend the analysis to other materials of similar nature collected from the top of Cetățuie Hill in Ardeu (i.e. medieval phase). Until that time, this recent discovery from Ardeu enables the re-opening of discussions around this remarkable topic. Bibliography Antonescu, Dinu. 1984. Introducere în arhitectura dacilor. București: Editura Tehnică. Bodó, Cristina, Ferencz Iosif Vasile. 2004. ,,Câteva consideraţii privind fortificaţia şi aşezarea dacică de la Ardeu (com Balşa), jud. Hunedoara.” Istros XI: 147-158. Bodó Cristina. 2015. ,,Lucrări ale arhitecţilor greci în zona capitalei regatului dac.” Istros XXI: 465-497. 63 64 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Cetean Valentina, Iosif Vasile Ferencz. 2016. ,,Studiu mineralogic preliminar privind tipurile de roci de pe șantierul arheologic Ardeu - Cetățuie, jud. Hunedoara.” Sargetia 7 S. N.: 45-66. Cetean Valentina, Iosif Vasile Ferencz, and Aurel Rustoiu. 2018. ,,Surse de materii prime pentru construcțiile de pe acropola cetății dacice de la Ardeu – Dealul Cetățuia. Cercetări interdiscipinare/Sources of raw materials for the constructions built on the acropolis of the Dacian fortress at Ardeu – Cetățuie Hill. Interdisciplinary research”. In Cercetări interdisciplinare la siturile din epoca fierului în spațiul tiso-nistrean. Materialele colloquium-ului de vară de la Saharna (Saharna, 13-16 iulie 2017 /Interdisciplinary research in Iron Age sites from the Tisa-Dnister area, edited by Aurel Zanoci, Mihail Băț, Sorin-Cristian Ailincăi, Alexandra Țârlea, Proceedings of Saharna Summer Colloquim, Saharna, July 13th-16th, 2017, 145-179, 209-237. Tulcea-Chișinău-Cluj-Napoca: Mega. Crişan, Ion Horațiu. 1975. Burebista şi epoca sa. First edition. Bucureşti: Editura enciclopedică română. Crişan, Ion Horațiu. 1977. Burebista şi epoca sa. Second edition. Bucureşti: Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică. Crişan, Ion Horațiu. 1978. Burebista and his time. Bucureşti: Editura Academiei. Crişan, Ion Horațiu. 1980. Burebista és kora. Bucureşti: Tudomànyos és Enciklopédiai Könyvkvkiadò. Daicoviciu, Constantin, Octavian Floca, Mihail Macrea, Mihai Dediu, P. Duka, Ștefan Ferenczi, Mihai Gostar, A. Ilieș, D. Mitrofan, D. Radu, and Winkler Iudita. 1954. ,,Şantierul arheologic Grădiştea Muncelului – Blidaru.” SCIV V, 1-2/1954: 123-155. Daicoviciu, Constantin. 1954. Cetatea dacică de la Piatra Roșie, București: Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Romîne. Daicoviciu, Constantin. 1960. ,,Apariția și formarea relațiilor sclavagiste în Dacia”. In Istoria României, 255-238. București: Editura Academiei. Daicoviciu, Hadrian. 1972. Dacia de la Burebista la cucerirea romană. București: Dacia. Debye, Peter, Paul Scherrer. 1916. Interferenzen an regellos orientierten Teilchen in Röntgenlicht. I., In Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse, 1916, 15 Pages (1-15). Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung. Egri, Mariana, 2014. ,,Enemy at the gates? Interactions between Dacians and Romans in the 1st century AD”. In The Edges of the Roman World, edited by Marko A. Janković, Vladimir D. Mihajlović and Staša Babić, 172-193. Cambridge: Scholars Publishing. The amazing architecture of the Dacians. Few thoughts concerning PLURAL the use of mortars based on new analyses Elsen, J. 2006. ,,Microscopy of Historic Mortars-a Review.” Cement and Concrete Research, 36 (8): 1416–1424. Ferencz, Iosif Vasile, Mihai Căstăian, Cristina Bodó, Cristian Ioan Popa, Ștefan Andrei, and Roxana Stăncescu. 2003. ,,Ardeu, com Balșa, jud. Hunedoara, punct Cetăţeaua”. In CCA, Campania 2002, 40–42. Covasna. Ferencz, Iosif Vasile, Mihai Căstăian, Cristian Dima, Cristian Ioan Popa, Cristian Constantin Roman. 2014 ,,Raport privind cercetările arheologice pe şantierul Ardeu (com. Balşa, jud. Hunedoara)”. In CCA, Campania 2013, 18. Oradea. Ferencz, Iosif Vasile, Mihai Căstăian, Cristian Ioan Popa, Cristian Constantin Roman. 2015. ,,Raport privind cercetările arheologice pe şantierul Ardeu (com. Balşa, jud. Hunedoara)”. In CCA, Campania 2014, 26-28. Pitești. Ferencz, Iosif Vasile. 2014. ,,The Dacian fortress before the Roman conquest. Case study - the fortress at Ardeu.” Acta Archaeologica Carpathica Vol. XLIX: 113-129. Ferencz, Iosif Vasile, Mihai Căstăian, Cristian Constantin Roman, Socol Ionuț Mihai Dealmar. 2016. ,,Raport privind cercetările arheologice pe şantierul Ardeu (com. Balşa, jud. Hunedoara)” In CCA, Campania 2015, 17-18. Tg. Jiu. Ferencz, Iosif Vasile and Mihai Căstăian. 2019. ,,Turnul-locuinţă -simbol al puterii nobiliare în Dacia. Studiu de caz, Ardeu-„Cetăţuie”. In Contribuţii la preistoria şi istoria antică a spaţiului carpato-danubiano-pontic. In honorem professoris Ion Niculiţă natalia sua octogesima celebrantis, edited by Aurel Zanoci and Mihail Băţ, 409-420. Chișinău: Cartdidact Ferenczi, Alexandru. 1951. ,,Studiu topografic al așezărilor” In Așezările dacice din Munții Orăștiei, edited by C. Daicoviciu, Al Ferenczi, 9-17. București: Editura Academiei RPR. Florea, Gelu. 2011. Dava et oppidum. Débuts de la genèse urbaine en Europe au deuxième âge du Fer. Cluj-Napoca: Académie Roumaine, Centre d’Études Transylvaines. Gheorghiu, Gabriela. 2005. Dacii pe cursul mijlociu al Mureşulu. Cluj-Napoca: Editura Mega. Glodariu, Ioan. 1983. Arhitectura dacilor. Civilă și militară (sec II î. e. n. – I e. n.). Cluj-Napoca: Dacia. Glodariu, Ioan, Vasile Moga. 1989. Cetatea dacică de la Căpâlna. București: Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică. Goffer, Zvi. 2007. Archaeological Chemistry, New Jersey: Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken. NIST SRM 1976a. ,,www.nist.gov/programs-projects/powder-diffraction-srms” seen 12.09.2019. Pârvan, Vasile. 1926. Getica. O Protoistorie a Daciei. Bucureşti: Cultura Natzională. 65 66 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Pecharsky, Vitalij K., and Peter Y. Zavalij. 2009. Fundamentals of Powder Diffraction and Structural Characterization of Material. New York: Springer. Popa, Radu. 1977. ,,Observații privind zidurile cu mortar din cetățile dacice hunedorene.” Sargetia XIII: 277-283. Powers, M.C., 1953. ,,A new roundness scale for sedimentary particles.” Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 23: 117-119. Pupeză, Luca Paul. 2010. ,,Murus dacicus between function and symbol.” Transylvanian Review, XIX, Supplement No. 2: 159-170. Pupeză, Luca Paul. 2011. ,,Murus Dacicus, simbol al războiului sau al păcii?”. Revista Bistriței XXV: 148-158. Pupeză, Luca Paul. 2012. ,,To see or to be seen. The Dacian fortresses from the Orăştie Mountains”. Annales d’Université Valahia Targoviste, Section d’Archeologie et d’Histoire, XIV, No 2: 81-85. Rustoiu, Aurel. 2015. ,,Civilian and funerary space in the Dacian fortified settlement at Cugir”. In Interdisciplinaritate în Arheologie și Istorie. edited by Forţiu Sorin and Stavilă Andrei. Vol. 1 ArheoVest, No. III: In Memoriam Florin Medeleț, 349-367. Szeged: Arheologie JATEPress Kiadó. Rustoiu, Aurel and Berecki Sándor. 2018. ,,Symbols of Status and Power in the Everyday Life of Late Iron Age Transylvania. Shaping the Landscape.” In Representations, signs and symbols: proceedings of the symposium on life and daily life, edited by Iosif Vasile Ferencz, Oana Tutilă, Nicolae Cătălin Rişcuţa, 65-78. Cluj-Napoca: Mega. Rustoiu, Aurel and Ferencz Iosif Vasile. 2018. ,,Burebista at the Banat’s Danube. Archaeological and historical data regarding the evolution of settlements in the Iron Gates Region in the 1ST Century BC.” Banatica 28: 123-149. Téglas, Gábor. 1885. ,,Emlékek és leletek. Az Erdőfalvi barlangok.” Archaeologiai Értesitő 5: 299-307. Téglas, Gábor. 1888. ,,Az erdélyi Érczhegység déli felének öskori védmüvei és legrégibb lakossága.” Erdélyi Múzeum Egyesület XV/9: 499-509. Téglas, Gábor. 1902. ,,Hunyadmegye a dákok és a rómaiak idején.” Hunyadvármegye monographiája, 34–211. Budapest. Téglas, Gábor 1905. ,,Decebál végső menedékvárainak holléte.” MTAÉ: 97–105. Teodorescu D.M., Roska M. 1923. Cercetări arheologice în Munții Hunedoarei. Cluj-Napoca: Cartea Romaneasca. Vitruvius Pollio, ,,On Architecture, De architectura libri decem”. http://www. perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Vitr.%201&lang=original (seen 30.08.2019) Vlase, Dan, Vlase Gabriela, Ferencz Iosif Vasile, Sfârloagă Paula, Micle Dorel, Vlase Titus 2019. ,,TG-DTA, XRD, SEM, EDS and FT-IR analyses of The amazing architecture of the Dacians. Few thoughts concerning PLURAL the use of mortars based on new analyses various samples of mortars from Deva region”, submitted to the Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry. Uimitoarea arhitectură a dacilor. Câteva considerații cu privire la utilizarea mortarelor pe baza unor noi analize Rezumat Cercetările recente desfășurate la Ardeu au condus la identificarea unei clădiri cu ziduri din blocuri de calcar de talie, dispuse pe asize, cu două paramente și emplecton. În 2016, în timpul desfășurării unei campanii de cercetare care avea ca obiectiv acea construcție monumentală, un așa-zis „turn-locuință” dacic, a fost constatată prezența unui adaos de material cu textură și culoare diferite față de cele ale blocului din piatră. Aceasta a fost observată pe suprafața inferioară a unui bloc de piatră așezat perpendicular în zid, o așa-zisă ,,butisă”. Descoperirea ne-a determinat să presupunem că ar fi mortar. Pe baza acestei ipoteze de lucru au fost formulate o serie de întrebări, cu scopul de a extrage cât mai multe informații valoroase din eșantion. Pentru a răspunde la aceste întrebări au fost efectuate o serie de investigații prin metoda difracției de raze X și investigațiile petrografice. Cuvinte cheie: Dacia, XRD, petrografie, mortare, zidărie, materiale de construcții, Transilvania Cristina Montana Pușcaș, Terra Analitic, Alba Iulia, Romania. E-mail: montana.puscas@terraanalitic.ro Iosif Vasile Ferencz, Museum of Dacian and Roman Civilisation Deva, Romania. E-mail: fiosifvasile@yahoo.com Ciprian Cosmin Stremțan, Teledyne Photon Machines, Bozeman, Montana, USA. E-mail: ciprian.stremtan@teledyne.com Tudor Tămaș, Department of Geology, Babeș-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania. E-mail: tudor.tamas@ubbcluj.ro Adrian Căsălean, Museum of Dacian and Roman Civilisation Deva, Romania. E-mail: adicasalean@yahoo.co.uk 67 The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: a cultural and natural environment Oleg Petrauskas, Mariana Avramenko Abstract The settlement of III-IV centuries AD near the village Komariv is located at the middle course of the Dniester River. In the 1950 - 70s, its excavations were conducted by M. Yu. Smyshko and Yu. L. Shchapova. 40 objects of the late Roman times were excavated (glass-melting kiln, building on a stone foundation, pottery kiln, pits and terrestrial dwellings, hearths). From 2012 comprehensive research of the settlement is carried out by a joint Ukrainian-German archaeological expedition (heads of the project O. Petrauskas and H.-Y. Karlsen). Project implementation provided new information about the monument. The area of the settlement is about 35 ha, of which 12 hectares have been geophysical survey. It is allowed to create a map of archaeological anomalies. 22 objects were excavated during five seasons: pottery kilns, dwellings, household pits and buildings, pit related to the production of glass, etc. In 2012 it was discovered a cemetery and six inhumations were investigated. The chronological frameworks of the existence of Komariv manufactory cover phases from C1 to D1. The settlement has a two-part planigraphy and consists from residential and industrial parts. The production included several crafts: glass, pottery, jewelry production, metallurgy of ferrous metals, burning charcoal and lime, and others. The peculiarity of the material culture of Komariv is strongly influenced by the late antique civilization. The cultural and ethnic composition of the Komariv inhabitants consisted from representatives of local and foreign populations. The study of materials of the monument is carried out by the involvement of a wide range of specialists in natural sciences - soil scientist, paleobotany, paleozoology, geology, etc. These data allow us to expand our understanding of the nature, economy, demography of the monument the closest area and the region between the Dniester and Prut. Since 2013 comprehensive reconnaissance of the area is being carried out to determine the cultural and natural environment in which this unique settlement exists. A special direction of research in Komariv is the creation of a regional map of deposits of raw materials, which was necessary for various crafts - sand, clay, limestone, etc. The study of the natural and cultural environment in which Komariv existed provides an opportunity to highlight the causes of its occurrence, the resource zone, etc. Keywords: Chernyakhiv culture, Komariv settlement, glass-production factory, landscape archaeology, raw materials. The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment The complex of archaeological sites with glass-production is located in the north-western region of Chernyakhiv culture. Given the special proximity of Komarov’s material complex to the Roman provinces, we note that it is located about 360 km north of the Danube Limes. Given the boundaries of the province of Dacia, the distance is somewhat smaller - about 250-300 km (Fig. 1). A well-known site of late Roman time near Komariv village lies on the right bank of the middle course of the Dniester River. The Dniester is the main waterway for this region. The complex of late Roman times with the remnants of glass production consists of a settlement (code „Komariv”) and a cemetery (code „Komariv-1”). They are located 2.5 km south of Komarov village (Kelmenetsky district, Chernivtsi region). The cultural layer of the settlement is fixed along both of two coasts of a small brook, which flows 5 km to the Dniester. The synchronous cemetery is located on the cape of the southern bank of the brook. The site with the materials of late Roman times near the village Komariv was discowered in 1950 by Oleksandr Chernysh. In 1956-1957, 1962, 1965 and 1969 excavations at the settlement carried out an archaeological expedition led by prof. Markijan Smishko (Smishko 1964, 64-80) In 1974 excavations on the settlement continued the expedition under the leadership of Yulia Shapova (Moscow) (Shchapova 1978, 230-242). For six seasons were excavated about 4,000 square meters of settlement. 40 objects of late Roman times and three objects of early iron-age were explored here (Petrauskas 2014, 87–116). From 2012 research of the settlement is carried out by Department of the Early Slavs Archeology and Research Center „Rescue Archeological Service” of the Institute of Archeology of NAS of Ukraine. From 2014, German scientists from the Free University of Berlin (group A-6 TOPOI) and the Heinrich Schliemann-Institute of Ancient Studies (Department of Pre and Early History) joined the project1. During the execution of the international project, the following works were done: the limits of the settlement were specified; discovered synchronous cemetery; geophysical research of the area of more than 12 hectares was conducted; archaeological excavations conducted; complex analysis of the obtained findings with the involvement of specialists of various branches of archeology and natural sciences has been carried out; inspection of the territory adjacent to the settlement has begun. Thus, as of 2017, at the settlement Komariv was excavated near 5000m 2, where 63 objects of late Roman times were investigated. In addition, 300 m 2 1 Heads of project O.Petrauskas, T.Milyan (Ukraine), H.-J. Carlsen, M.Heghevish (Germany). 69 70 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 1. Komarov's location within the Chernyakhiv culture (1), relative to the borders of Dacia province up to 275 AD (2), and the Rhine-Danube limes of the Roman empire of 1-4 centuries AD. (3). of area were excavated in the cemetery and six inhumations were investigated (Petrauskas et al. 2019, 327-328). The settlement in Komariv has a complex of specific features in comparison with other sites of Cherniakhiv culture. It is necessary to briefly characterize its material complex (detail: Smishko 1964, 64-80, Shchapova 1978, 230-242, Petrauskas 2014, 87–116, Petrauskas 2014a, 165-184) The main types of buildings of the settlement include: ground clay buildings; pithouses; a house with a stone foundation measuring 6×6.9 m; five pottery furnaces, which are excavated in Komarov, and another 20 can be assumed according to geomagnetic exploration; glass-melting furnace; fireplaces; different purposes pits, part of the pits may be linked with the burning of lime and smelting glass; as well as structures of unspecified type. The main categories of material culture of settlement in Komarov can be characterized as follows. This is a pottery, which consists of three groups — Chernyakhiv type pottery (up to 90%) and antique production pottery (up to 20% in wheel-made pottery and hand-made ware from different ethnic-cultural groups (up to 10%). The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment Fig. 2. The main varieties of Chernyakhiv type wheel-made pottery from the Komariv settlement: tableware (1-15) and cookingware (16-30). 71 72 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 3. The main varieties of hande-made pottery from the Komariv settlement. Chernyakhiv type pottery represented in all of the main categories of this culture - vases, pitchers, cups, bowls, pots, pithos (Fig. 2). The hand-made ware of the late Roman times has prototypes in various ethno-cultural centers. At the present time it is possible to distinguish Late-Scythian-Sarmatian, Early-Slavic, East Germanic and Dacian types of hand-made ware (Fig. 3). Pottery of antique production is represented by amphorae, red-colored vessels and a lamp. Typological spectrum of amphorus shows the wide geography of centers of their production, mainly from the Black Sea centers. In Komariv also found a rare type of amphoras, for example amphoras of Forlimpopolye The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment Fig. 4. Details of clothing (1-15, 21, 22) and weapons (16-20, 23-27) of the Komariv settlement. type, which were manufactured in the north of Italy (Didenko 2015, 23-27, Didenko 2017, 87-96). At the settlement was found lot of Roman coins that are minted from Augustus (27 BC. - 14 AD.) to Constantine I (306-337 AD.). In addition, there were found the Bosporus coins of Recuporid, which were not known before that on the west of the Dnieper (Didenko and Myzghin 2013, 367-369, Myzgin 2013, 336-341). Details of clothing and embroidery from Komariv are represented by fibulas, metal parts of belts, pendants and beads (Fig. 4). The tools found in the settlement are very diverse and numerous. Among them - axes, hammers, anvil, hoes, sickles, spitters and knives. This group includes numerous finds of spindles and pebbles. Arms items are represented by spurs, arrowheads and spears. A special category Komariv settlement finds is the building remnants of ancient origin, which are represented by plinfos, tiles, nails. 73 74 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 The chronology of the site is determined by the aggregate of objects from the settlement and the cemetery. In general, it is possible to distinguish the following degrees of relative chronology of barbarian antiquities in Europe (Fig. 5). B2 \ C1 - fibulae of type Almgren/141 (elbow) and 202-203 (with high receiver), amphorae of Zeest/90 type and early variants of Shelov D type, glass vessels of Eggers/189 type, 192; C2 - Gorokhovsky/A fibulae (garter, smooth), Thomas I combs (low semicircular back), Eggers/211 glass cups, late Shelov/D amphorae and Zeest 72/73 types. C3 - Gorokhovsky fibulae /B1 and B2 (faceted with sling receiver), Petrauskas-Sinitsa/type1, var. 3 (flap fibulae), glass cups Eggers/220-221, 230, amphorae of types Shelov/F and Zeest/100. D1 - Gorokhovsky/B3 fibulae (garters), Petrauskas/type 7 („military”), Eggers cups/232-238, buckles with a strongly thickened front of the frame, amphorae of Zeest types 100 and Böttger/I.1. D1 \ D2 - two-layer glass fragments of Straume VIII-1 type glass, hook for Kubai type quiver, large size fibula. Indicators of all phases of the Late Roman time are actually presented in Komariv. Very important finds that point to the earlier (early Roman times) and late (the time of Great Migration of peoples) stages of the existence of this settlement . In absolute dates it corresponds to the end of the II- the middle of the V century (Petrauskas 2014, 87–116, Petrauskas 2014a, 165-184, Rumyantseva 2014, 401-435) Of course, in Komariv a separate category is the findings of glass. During five seasons of our excavation, about 1000 units were found. For comparison, in Komariv, at 1 m2 of excavated area, 0.16 units of glass falls, while from other settlements such indicator is several orders less (Obukhiv - 0.002, Velyka Bugaivka - 0.04, Ripniv - 0.001, Zhuvivka Olszanskaya - 0.001 etc) (Petrauskas 2014, 96). The glass findings present three main stages of glassmaking: glass melting (or remelting); glass processing and finished products (vessels, beads, glass window) According to research by Yu.L. Shchapova, ready-made glassware from Komariv by morphological and chemical-technological features is divided into two large groups. These groups of glass are conventionally designated as „glass of antique type” (Fig. 6) and „glass of Chernyakhiv type” (Fig. 7) (Shchapova 1978, 230-242). The question whether the glass was melting in Komariv is the subject of discussion (Smishko 1964, 64-80, Bezborodov 1964, 67-80, Shchapova 1978, The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment Fig. 5. General scheme of the chronology of findings of the first half of the I millennium AD from the Komariv settlement. 75 76 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 6. Some forms of glassware of the first group by Yu. Shchapova, vessels of antique tradition from the Komariv settlement. The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment Fig. 7. Some forms of glassware of the first group by Y. Shchapova, vessels of Chernyakhiv tradition from the Komariv settlement. 77 78 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 230-242, Petrauskas 2014, 87–116, Rumyantseva 2017, 141–164, Rumyantseva 2017a, 203–218). Quite enough this is important from the point of view of the natural environment in which the glass manufactory in Komariv arose and has existed. There are two main types of glass manufactories - primary and secondary. In the primary manufactories there was a glass melting based on sand and alkaline raw materials (natural soda or plants ash); in the secondary - the products were made from imported untreated glass (Seibel 1998). In Komariv the finds present all stages of glass production - melting glass forming vessels and their decoration. We want to pay attention to the fact that during Smishko`s and our excavations was founded a series of items wich point to the melting of glass from natural components in a place. This is slag and charge that has undergone heat treatment with the unfinished stage of obtaining glass (Fig. 8). Preliminary analysis of the chemical elements revealed the presence of sodium in the slag and charge samples. In our opinion, this is direct indication that the glass was melting in place, namely in Komariv. To carry such semi-finished product from antique centers for 300km no sense. If we talking about the possibility of glass melting directly in Komariv, then the problem of the raw material base becomes particularly relevant. By definition of Bezborodov between glass and sources of alkaline raw materials was a direct production-geographical link in ancient times (Bezborodov 1956, 35). Based on other Chernyakhiv settlements, the Komariv looks like a manufactory with high-tech crafts, primarily of antique origin. One more feature of Komariv is his multidisciplinary character. Our research allows us to talk about at least four types of crafts - glass, pottery, processing of ferrous and nonferrous metals. Of course, the settlement had to deal with auxiliary crafts - fell charcoal and lime, leather processing, weaving, etc. This feature distinguishes Komariv from other production centers of the late Roman times from the barbarian territories of Central and Southern Europe. As a rule, such centers produced one kind of products - pottery vessels Iholomy (Poland) (Dobrzańska 1990); products from the horn of Velyka Snytinka 2 (Ukraine) (Mahomedov 1992, 94-116), Birlad (Romania) (Palade 2004)); metallurgy of ferrous metals Uman-Sinitsa (Ukraine) (Pankov and Nedopako 1999, 149-162) or jewelery production Gradiszk (Ukraine) (Rutkovskaya 1979, 317-364) and others. Note that some of these craft centers linked to the quality characteristics of the territory. For example, Uman is located in the zone of deposits of ferruginous quartzites in central Ukraine. Velyka Snytinka on the edge of the forest zone, which provided the opportunity to receive horny raw materials. The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment Fig. 8. Archaeological remains of the main stages of glass production and processing from Komariv. 79 80 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 The ethno-cultural composition of the Komariv population is very colorful and consists of immigrants from the Roman provinces; representatives of Late Scythian-Sarmatian, East Germanic, Early Slavic and Dacian tribes. In the general ethnocultural system of the Chernyakhiv culture, Komariv refers to heterogeneous types of Chernyakhiv settlements with a multi-component ethnic composition. Such sites are distributed in the contact areas between the regions of compact residence of ethnic groups that are part of the Chernyakhiv culture. Consequently, taking into account all the above, Komariv look like a powerful crafts, interethnic and cultural center. Among the conditions in which such production centers had effective existence could be called as: skilled personnel (knowledge of technologies); the availability of technical tools (instruments, devises); raw materials (presence of local deposits or stable supply of raw materials through stable trade routes); market; the socioeconomic environment that ensures its existence (obtaining raw materials, creating a production cell in a certain territory and selling products). Most of these items are related to the geographic environment in which there is a settlement. This characteristic of Komariv compared with other settlements of Chernyakhiv culture can be built on two indicators of the territory: natural data (qualitative assessment of the territory) and spatial structure (quantitative assessment of the territory). The study of the natural conditions of the archaeological site has an interdisciplinary character. For this purpose, the following research studies were undertaken and used for the research project on the study of the site in Komariv: geophysics, soil sciences, paleobotany, paleozoology, geology, etc.2 Basis of these studies are the traditional archeological methods of studying the territory - archaeological exploration (Avramenko, Didenko and Reida 2015, 262–264). It allows to study landscape features of the territory (relief, soils, vegetation) and spatial structure (area of settlements, resource zones, communicative ways, relation to other historical and cultural formations). Our researches were carried out taking into account the methodological principles and experience of research conducted on the Middle Dnieper (Shyshkin 1999, 129-139), the upper Dniester (Steblii 2007, 17-30) and the left bank of the Dnieper (Lyubichev and Myzgin 2014, 58-71). These data allow us to expand our understanding of the nature, economy, demography of our site, the closest district and the region between the Dniester and Prut. 2 Information on these studies is included in the annexes to Komariv’s annual research reports on our 2012-15 and 2017 expeditions. The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment Fig. 9. Komariv production area according to geomagnetic data. Spatial structure Thus, the data on “Komariv microregion” compared with Chernyakhiv culture looks as follows. The area of the Komariv settlement is over 35 hectare. Geophysical studies and archaeological surveys provided preliminary data on the settlement plan. Only the northern part of the settlement has distinct signs of production activity. The analysis of the map allows us to locate 22 anomalies that can be interpreted as craft furnaces and 29, which can be linked with living and household buildings. Production objects (furnaces) are located along the slope of the beam and above the living buildings. In the northwestern part of the settlement, a relief anomaly can be traced, which can be pre-defined as the career remnants. Thus, about 10 hectares of settlement area can be linked to the production area (Fig. 9). Thus, even if the residential area of the settlement in Komariv was 25 hectares, in the typological spectrum of settlements by area in the calculations of R. Shishkin, it belongs to a group of mega-settlements, that is from 26 hectares and more (Šiškin 1999, 83-90). According to researcher estimates, the vast majority of settlements (65%) of Chernyakhiv culture have an area of 10 hectares. According to the calculations of Baran, the average area of Chernyakhiv settlements of the Upper Dniester is 3-4 ha (Baran 1981, 19). In the Ukrainian and Moldavian parts of the Middle Dniester, the number of large settlements is considerably bigger: Sobar and Lukashivka — 25 hectares, Budeshti — 35 hectares. Shishkin paied attention to the fact that the mega-settlement is typical for the Middle Dniester (Šiškin 1999, 83-90). According to our calculations within a radius of 30 km from 81 82 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Komariv in the right bank of the Dniester settlement outweigh area of 10ha. However, notes much higher percentage of super large settlements — 18%. River system. Cartography of Chernyakhiv settlements of „Komariv location” has allowed to fix that the most typical is the location of settlements on the tributaries 2— 3 orders. For Cherniakhiv culture is most often the tributaries of 3 and 4 orders (totaling 67%), less often 2 order (12%) and 5 order (15%). Such a specificity may be explained by the „meander” nature of the Dniester river bed, which affects the length of its flow. In areas with a narrow Dniester valley, second-order inflows are dominated by short beams, which have one super-large settlement. In the areas with a wide valley of the Dniester there are tributaries up to 4 orders. There are (tributaries 3 and 4 of the order) several medium or large settlements located on a chain system. In the system of settlements in relation to the main river of the region (Dniester) and its influx sites monuments are divided into two groups: sites of the dividing plain (Komariv type) and sites of the Dniester valley (Oselivka-Bakota-Sokol type). The Dniester region shows a large percentage of „valleys” settlements, which is here 9%. In the basins of other main rivers (Dnipro, Bug), such percentage does not exceed 1% (according to R. Shishkin’s calculations). Interval and density. In the literature it is accepted to distinguish the chain and nest settlement system (Šiškin 1999, 83-90). The nest system in the materials of the Chernyakhiv culture seems not to be completely justified. The principle behind the allocation of such „nests” is the subjective visualization of the concentrations (clusters) of sites. Materials of culture, yet do not provide convincing evidence of the systemic nature of such entities. For example, such spatial models as „metropolis and satellites”, defense systems, etc. The other, namely, the chain principle in the placement involves the connection of settlements with the water system of the region. In such cases it is possible to talk about two factors that create - the distance between the settlements and the length of the individual links of the water system. It was established that Chernyakhiv settlements within one successive river system are located at a distance of about 2 km (Šiškin 1999, 83-90). In addition, the dependence of the number of settlements on the length of a single link of the river system can be traced. That is, if the length of the brooks (beams) to its fall to the next does not exceed 4-5km, then usually there is one settlement. A brook that reaches the length of 8-10 km has two or three settlements with an interval of 2 km. A clear interval of 2 km is traced between the settlements located in the basin of the river Sursha. In the course of the Sursha (length 12 km), until river Ramadanka falls in it (basically the terrain changes), there are 3 middle set- The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment Fig. 10. The Komariv settlement and other settlements which located around them. tlements (no more than 7 ha). On its right-hand sideways (short beams length of 2-4 km) there are 2 more middle settlements (Fig. 10). Also here are beams (brooks) whose length reaches 8-10 km. But the typical Chernyakhiv topography corresponds only to segments of 4-6 km. The survey of pools of these brooks allowed to detect only one settlement. However, the area of these settlements significantly exceeds the average - up to 30-40 ha. Surveys conducted within a radius of 10 km from the Komariv factor allowed to map 15 settlements of Chernyakhiv culture. So the population density of the region is about 6 km2 per settlement. The study of spatial indicators of settlements and the region allows to ask questions about calculations of concrete demographic indicators of a separate settlement, micro-region and region. As an example, you can calculate the materials of the cemetery Chernelyov-Russky (Tylishchak 2017, 159–168). Output for such calculations was the materials of the cemetery (the number of burials, the time of the existence of the cemeteries, the average age of life) and settlements (area of the settlement, the time of its existence and the average number of family/house). By these calculations, we assume that at the same time about 60-70 people or 8-10 families could live in the settlement of Komariv. So at the cemetery we can expect up to 500 burials. Qualitative characteristics of the geographical environment may be characterized as follows. Landscape conditions in Komariv can be considered as a set of three main components: soil, relief, vegetation. 83 84 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 11. Type of soils around Komariv. In general, the microregion of research (conventionally „Komariv location”) is located within the Prut-Dniester highland area, which is part of the broadleaf forests and is a transition from broadleaf to forest-steppe areas. It is located on the border of the Podolsk and Precarpathian hills, which has signs of a raised wavy plain with absolute marks of heights of 200 to 480 m (Khotyn highland). The plain is highly dismembered along the Dniester and Prut. Hight complexes with gray and dark gray forest soils (Atlas pochv Ukrainskoy SSR. 1979, 4548), remains of hornbeam, oak-hornbeam and beech forests (Khotynsky and Bystrytsko-Tlumatsky hills) dominate here. The Prut-Dniester region belongs to the zone of moderate humidification. The vegetation cover is characterized by a combination of natural forests (hornbeam, oak), meadows (floodplain and uppermost) and small areas of steppes on podzolic chernozems, gray forest and turf podzolic soils. The Komariv is located on the border between the Kelmenets steppe and the Sokyryansky watershed forest-steppe natural areas (Heobotanichne raionuvannia Ukrainskoi RSR 1977, 65-67). From other territories of the Sokyryany Ridge forest-steppe district, Komariv is separated by the Polivanian ravine - a large tract that clearly indicates the boundary of the nearest contact zone (Fig. 11). The exact indicators of settlement are as follows. Relief. The settlement occupies both separate slopes of the damped beam and the cultural layer does not reach the plains and even the eaves. That is, this is the typical location of Chernyakhiv settlements. It is possible that the smooth slopes provided favorable conditions for the natural draft of air during the op- The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment eration of furnaces. Let’s also pay attention to the results of geophysics, which recorded traces of a large number of stabilized rivers within the settlement. Archaeological work showed that some of the objects of Roman times were damaged by these rivers. Consequently, the active erosion of the slopes of the beam occurred after the end of the existence of the settlement in the 5th century AD. Soil at the settlement in Komariv are defined as gray and dark gray, which coincides with the general characteristics of the microregion. According to observations of Natalia Stebliy, similar soils are characteristic to the settlements of the Upper Dniester (Steblii 2007, 17-30). Let us pay attention to the fact that the type of soils in Komariv differs from „traditional views” about the attraction of Chernyakhiv sites to chernozems. However, given that there is no chernozems at the „Komariv location” it can be argued that the Cherniakhiv settlements on the Dniester tend to the most fertile soils present in the region. Plant cover. According to the definition of specialists at the time of existence of a settlement, that is 3-4 centuries, oak is quite prevalent in wood, which coincides with the current indicators of this region. A separate issue of natural conditions for Komariv as a glassmacking, and wider craft manufactory is the resource base of the Dniester. Three glass-forming components are required for glass production: sand (silica), limestone (calcite) and soda (sodium). For the full cycle of melting and glass processing, it is also important to have high quality fuel material and refractory clay. Assuming melting of glass in Komariv, for this purpose, deposits of sand, limestone and meadows are required. High quality sand (so-called quartz sand) in open access is known for 80 km from Komariv and used in the modern glass industry (Onut, Zastavnivsky rn) 1. In addition, within a radius of 4-5km from the settlement, there are several sand quarries known (Fig. 12). However, the qualitative composition of these deposits of sand is unknown to us yet. Sources of high-quality limestone provide the geological conditions of the region. In the closest district, deposits of dolomitic limestone are common. Layers of high-quality clay are also known in immediate proximity to Komariv settlement. The quality of the products from it was evidenced by the experimental work of our expedition (Petrauskas and Koval 2017, 220-228). All these components could be extracted in a career, the remains of which were recorded by geophysics in the northwestern part of the settlement. However, the most problematic is the lack of important and rather rare materials like soda, without which it is not possible to glaze. 85 86 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 12. Sand deposits in the immediate vicinity of the Komariv settlement. Traditionally it is believed that the extraction of natural soda for the needs of the glass industry in ancient times occurred in Egypt (Wadi-Natrun) or the Balkans. From there it came to the glass centers of the Roman Empire. However, let’s pay attention to the fact that in Ukraine surface and open soda deposits are known, in particular on the Crimean isthmus at Sivash. Second, an alternative source is the ash of plants with a high content of sodium. Such are the ash of marine and saline plants. Beside 300 km south of Komariv, Budzhak steppes with numerous salt mines are located. The volumes of possible sodium production from saline plants of Bessarabia in the 18th century considered at the industrial level. Komariv is connected with Budzhak by the Dniester and Prut rivers. The limited and remote regions of the soda deposits from Komariv make the transportation issue as a topical. For this purpose, land and waterways could be used. Komariv are conveniently located in relation to the main routes known since the Middle Ages. This is the Dniester itself, which was suitable for transportation up to Kamyanets-Podilsky (active exchange of barges with salt from the 18th-19th centuries). In addition, near Komariv was one of the four major trade routes of the Middle Ages of South-Eastern Europe. The track is known as the “Voloshsky” („Via valahica”) or the “Golden Way”, or the “Berladra Road”. The road linked north-west and south-eastern Europe, one of the main points through which it was held is Khotin, which is located 50 km from The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment Komariv. The profitability of such combinations in late Roman times clearly confirms the geography of imports found in Komariv. This is evidenced by the geography of the centers of the production of amphora: Heraclea Pontic, Egeid, the isles of Kos and Chios, Sardis (Asia Minor); Forlimpopolye (Northern Italy); North Africa (Tunisia). It should be noted that the percentage of amphora in Komarov is not at random level, which is almost 20% of the mass of all pottery dishes. Consequently, taking into account this transportation of soda raw materials is possible. In Komariv, glass was definitely processed and it needed a corresponding quality of fuel and the availability of appropriate equipment. As the analysis of wood species from the late Romanian sites in Komariv, oak forests dominated here (Serhieieva 2017, 76-78). This wood is the ideal fuel for high-temperature technologies in ancient times. Let’s look at one more nuance, which is important for the features of Komariv. Part of the grinding stones are made of sandstone of special quality. It contains small grains of garnet. Such a combination is ideal for abrasive tool, wich could be used to decorate Group II glass by Yu.Shapova. Thus, the data obtained provides the opportunity to reach the following conclusions: 1. Komariv is a unique settlement not only of Cherniakhiv Culture, but also of all the barbarian antiquities of Europe of late Roman times. Its production character and the specifics of the leading crafts (glassware) require special attention to the study of the natural and cultural environment. 2. According to its basic physical and geographical characteristics, Komariv is a part of the system of Chernyakhiv settlements of the region and culture. However, the settlement also has specific features. - Komariv is distinguished by a large area, which is increased at the expense of the crafting part. The presence of megacities is the property of the middle Dniester. Famous sights such as Sobar and perhaps Lukashivka distinguishes other specific features - the presence of stone construction and possibly the remnants of glass production. - for the Komariv location is characterized by a chain system of settlement along the rivers with an interval of 2 km. However, it is possible to raise the question of the dependence of the sizes of settlements from the system of water supply: - the soils of the sites are not chernozem, which is considered to be characteristic of Cherniakhiv Culture, however, the Komariv occupy the highest quality of the regions available (gray and dark gray). 87 88 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 - the raw material base of Komariv’s outskirts provides all the main components for obtaining glass except for soda. Delivery of this component is entirely possible taking into account land-based and waterways in late Roman times. Komariv are located at the crossroads/the combination of these paths. These same ways provided the possibility of marketing products in the deep areas of the barbarians. 3. A special connection between Komarov and the territories where the active process of interaction between the empire and the barbaric world took place is evidenced by a map of the original Roman finds on the adjacent territory. Bibliography Atlas pochv ukrainskoy SSR. 1979. Kiev. Avramenko, Mar’jana O., S.V Didenko and Roman M. Reida. 2015. Arkheolohichni rozvidky u Kelmenetskomu raioni Chernivetskoi oblasti. Arkheolohichni doslidzhennia v Ukraini 2014: 262–264. Baran, Vladimir D. 1981. Cherniakhivska kultura: Za materialamy verkhnoho Dnistra i Zakhidnoho Buhu. Kyiv: Naukova dumka. Bezborodov, Mikhail A. 1956. Steklodeliye v drevney Rusi. Minsk: Izdatelstvo Akademii nauk BSSR Bezborodov, Mikhail A. 1964. “Issledovaniye stekol iz steklodelatelnoy masterskoy III-IV vv. n.e. u s. Komarov”. Materialy i doslidzhennia z arkheolohii Prykarpattia i Volyni 5: 67-80. Didenko, S. V. 2015. “Dunaiski amfory z poselennia piznorymskoho chasu Komariv”, In Laurea I. Antichnyy mir i Sredniye veka: Chteniya pamyati professora Vladimira Ivanovicha Kadeyeva. Materialy: 23-27. Kharkov: OOO «NTMT». Didenko, S.V. 2017. “Italiiski amfory yak shche odyn aspekt «komarivskoho fenomenu»”. In Yevropeiska arkheolohiia I tysiacholittia n. e.: Zbirnyk naukovykh prats na chest Liany Vasylivny Vakulenko, 87-96. Kyiv: IA NAN Ukrainy Didenko, S.V. and Kirill V. Myzghin 2013. “Znakhidky antychnoho importu na poselenni Komariv”. Arkheolohichni doslidzhennia v Ukraini 2012 r.: 367369. Dobrzańska, Halina 1990. Osada z późnego okresu rzymskiego w Igołomi, woj. krakowskie. Wrocław-Warszawa-Kraków-Gdańsk-Łódź. Heobotanichne raionuvannia Ukrainskoi RSR. 1977. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka Lyubichev, Mikhail V. and Kirill V. Myzgin 2014. “Yuzhnaya granitsa areala chernyakhovskoy kultury v dnepro-donetskoy lesostepi: sovremennyye predstavleniya”. Cherniakhivska kultura: do 120-richchia vid dnia narodzhennia V.P. Petrova (Oium 4), 58-71. The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment Mahomedov, Boris V. 1992. “Velyka Snitynka 2 - poselennia hrebinnykiv III-IV st. n.e.” In Starodavnie vyrobnytstvo na terytorii Ukrainy, 94-116. Kyiv: Naukova dumka Myzgin, Kirill V. 2013. “O nakhodke dvukh bosporskikh staterov na poselenii pozdnerimskogo vremeni Komariv (Chernovitskaya oblast) i ikh vozmozhnom kulturno-istoricheskom kontekste”. In ed. Zinko, V.N. XIV Bosporskiye chteniya. Bospor Kimmeriyskiy i varvarskiy mir v period antichnosti i srednevekovia. Arkheologicheskiy obyekt v kontekste istorii, 336-341. Kerch: BF Demetra. Palade, Vasile 2004. Aşezarea şi necropola de la Bârlad-Valea Seac secolele III-V. Bucureşti: Editura ARC 2000 Pankov, S.V. and Dmitrij P. Nedopako 1999. “Poseleniye i proizvodstvennyy tsentr pozdnezarubinetskogo vremeni u sela Sinitsa”. Rossiyskaya Arkheologiya 4, 149-162. Petrauskas, Oleg V. 2014. “Komariv - ein Werkstattzentrum barbarischen Europas aus spätrömischer Zeit (Forschungsgeschichte, einige Ergebnisse und mögliche Perspektiven)”. Ephemeris Napocensis XXIV, 87–116. Petrauskas, Oleg, T. Mylian, Hans-Jörg Karlsen and M. Khehevysh 2019. “Pidsumky doslidzhen bilia s. Komariv”. Arkheolohichni doslidzhennia v Ukraini 2017 r., 327-328 Petrauskas, Oleg V. 2014a. “Deiaki pidsumky doslidzhen kompleksu pam’iatok piznorymskoho chasu bilia s.Komariv”. Cherniakhivska kultura: do 120-richchia vid dnia narodzhennia V.P. Petrova (Oium 4), 165-184. Petrauskas, Oleg V. and O.A Koval. 2017. “Eksperymentalni roboty Komarivskoi arkheolohichnoi ekspedytsii v 2015r”. Arkheolohiia i davnia istoriia Ukrainy 1 (22), 220-228. Rumyantseva, Ol’ga. 2017. «Steklodeliye za limesom: novyye dannyye ob organizatsii proizvodstva i khronologii masterskoy v Komarove”. Stratum+ 4, 141–164. Rumyantseva, Ol’ga. 2017a. “Litoye steklo poseleniya chernyakhovskoy kultuy Komarov: prestizhnaya posuda ili syrye steklodelatelnoy masterskoy?”. Stratum+ 4, 203–218. Rumyantseva, Ol’ga S. 2014. “Tolstostennyye steklyannyye sosudy s shlifovannym dekorom i khronologiya poseleniya Komarov”. Ranneslavyanskiy Mir 15, 401-435. Rutkovskaya, Lukerija M. 1979. “Arkheologicheskiye pamyatniki IV-V vv. v rayone Kremenchugskogo morya (Ukraina)”. Slovenska archeologia XXVII/2, 317-364. Seibel, Fritz. 1998. Technologie und Fertigungstechniken römischer Glashütten am Beispiel der Ausgrabungen im Hombacher Forst. Berlin: Glienicke. 89 90 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Serhieieva, M. 2017. “Antrakolohichni materialy za poselennia cherniakhivskoi kultury poblyzu s. Komariv (doslidzhennia 2014 r.) ”. In Arkheolohiia Bukovyny: zdobutky ta perspektyvy. Tezy dopovidei, 76-78. Chernivtsi: Tekhnodruk. Shchapova, Yulia. L. 1978. “Masterskaya po proizvodstvu stekla u s. Komarovo (III-IV vv.) ”. Sovetskaya Arkheologiya 3, 230-242. Shyshkin, Ruslan H. 1999. “Hospodarsko-ekolohichna model cherniakhivskoi kultury (za materialamy Serednoho Podniprov’ia)”. Arkheolohiia 4, 129139. Šiškin, Ruslan 1999. “Zur Siedlungsarchäologie der Černjachov-Kultur“. In Die Sîntana de Mureş-Černjachov-Kultur, 83-90. Bonn. Smishko, Markijan Yu. 1964. “Poselennia III—IV st. n. e. iz slidamy sklianoho vyrobnytstva bilia s. Komariv Chernivetskoi oblasti”. Materialy i doslidzhennia z arkheolohii Prykarpattia i Volyni 5, 67-80. Steblii, Natal’ja Ja. 2007. “Heohrafiia poselen v arkheolohichnykh doslidzhenniakh (za materialamy cherniakhivskoi kultury Verkhnoho Podnisteria ta Verkhnoho Popruttia)”. Visnyk Instytutu arkheolohii Lvivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu im. Ivana Franka, 17-30. Tylishchak, Volodymyr. S. 2017. “Do pytannia pro chyselnist cherniakhivskykh hromad (za materialamy Chernelovo-Ruskoho mohylnyka)”. In Yevropeiska arkheolohiia I tysiacholittia n. e.: Zbirnyk naukovykh prats na chest Liany Vasylivny Vakulenko, 159-168. Așezarea Komariv – un centru de producție a sticei în Barbaricum-ul european: mediul cultural și natural Rezumat Așezarea din secolele III-IV d. Hr. din apropierea satului Komariv este situată în zona Nistrului Mijlociu. În anii 1950-1970 au fost efectuate săpături arheologice de către M. Yu. Smyshko și Yu. L. Șchapova, care au cercetat circa 40 de structuri din epoca romană târzie (un cuptor pentru topirea sticlei, o construcţie cu fundație de piatră, un cuptor de ars ceramică, gropi, vetre și locuințe de suprafaţă). Începând cu anul 2012 cercetarea extinsă a așezării a fost realizată de o expediție arheologică mixtă ucraineano-germană (șefii proiectului O. Petrauskas și H.-Y. Karlsen). Implementarea proiectului a furnizat noi informații despre sit. Suprafața așezării este de aproximativ 35 ha, dintre care 12 hectare au fost cercetate geofizic, fapt ce a permis elaborarea unei hărți a anomaliilor arheologice. Pe parcursul a cinci campanii au fost excavate 22 de structuri: cuptoare de ars ceramica, locuințe, gropi și construcţii auxiliare, o groapă The settlement Komariv – glass-production centre in the European Barbaricum: PLURAL a cultural and natural environment legată de producția de sticlă etc. În anul 2012 a fost descoperit un cimitir și s-au investigat șase inhumații. Cadrul cronologic al funcţionării atelierului Komariv acoperă fazele C1 și D1. Așezarea are o planigrafie constituită din două componente: partea rezidențială și partea industrială. Producția a inclus mai multe meșteșuguri: sticlărie, producţia ceramică și de podoabe, metalurgia metalelor feroase etc. Particularitatea esenţială a culturii materiale ce caracterizează așezarea Komariv este determinată de puternica influență venită dinspre civilizația antică târzie. Structura culturală și etnică a comunităţii din situl Komariv era determinată atât de prezenţa reprezentanților locali, cât și de reprezentanţi ai populaţiilor alogene. Studiul materialelor monumentului se realizează prin implicarea unui număr important de specialiști din diverse domenii ale științelor naturii – știința solului, paleobotanică, paleozoologie, geologie etc. Datele oferite de studiile interdisciplinare ne permit să extindem înțelegerea condiţiilor naturale în care s-a constituit comunitatea de la Komariv, ale evoluţiei economice, ale proceselor demografice ce au caracterizat cea mai apropiată zonă și regiunea dintre Nistru și Prut. Din 2013 se realizează o valorificare cuprinzătoare a zonei pentru a aprecia caracteristicile mediului cultural și natural în care a funcţionat această așezare unică. O direcție specială de cercetare în Komariv este crearea unei hărți regionale a depozitelor de materii prime, care a fost necesară pentru diversele meșteșuguri - nisip, argilă, calcar etc. Studiul mediului natural și cultural în care a existat Komariv oferă o oportunitate de a evidenția cauzele apariției sale, zona de resurse etc. Cuvinte cheie: cultura Cernyakhiv, așezarea Komariv, atelier de producție a sticlei, arheologie de peisaj, materii prime. Petrauskas Oleh V., National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. Email: oleg_petrauskas@iananu.org.ua Avramenko Maryana O., National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. Email: mariana_avramenko@iananu.org.ua 91 The specificity of the Scythian panoply of the Lower Danube Denis Topal Abstract The archaeological landscape of the Lower Danube was changing with the importance of the Danube itself, which either became, or a cultural watershed, or an artery, connecting the ancient communities. In the Early Iron Age, it seems that the Danube did not become an invincible barrier for the spread of offensive weapons of Scythian origin. Moreover, Dobruja itself looks like a territory mastered by the Scythians, starting from the Archaic period. The Lower Danube group forms a separate “steppe” cultural assemblage together with the Lower Dniester, South Carpathian and South Danube groups, for which the spear became the main type of weapon. However, these preferences were reflected in the morphology of the Scythian akinakes. So, for this steppe or Danube enclave, swords are more characteristic than daggers. Daggers are connected mainly with the forest-steppe part of the Carpathian-Dniester region and Transylvania. The warrior graves of the Lower Danube region mainly belong to the Classical Scythian period, while the only exception is related to the right bank of the Lower Danube. However, there are no burials with akinakai and even stray finds in Classical time outside the steppe. The main funeral practice is the burial mound and inhumation (one exception of cremation was recorded to the west, in northeastern Bulgaria, near Branichevo). In Late Classical time (350—300 BC) the Scythian akinakes also evolves in the steppe: an original series of single-edged akinakai of the Chaush type appear; besides that, Thracian combat knives are borrowed. Then the Scythian akinakes dissolves with the disappearance of the Classical Scythian culture at the turn of 4th—3rd centuries BC. Something similar happens a century earlier in the forest-steppe between the Dniester and Siret rivers. The complete disappearance of akinakes dates back there in the late 5th century BC. Thus, in the Scythian time, the Lower Danube becomes kind of frontier, or the territory, where cultures meet, clash, and grapple with each other, often in contexts of highly asymmetrical relations of power. Keywords: Scythian; Early Iron Age; Lower Danube; weapons; panoply; the akinakes; the spearheads; axes; swords; daggers. The archaeological landscape of the Lower Danube was changing with the importance of the Danube itself, which either became, or a cultural watershed, or an artery, connecting the ancient communities. In the Early Iron Age, it seems that the Danube did not become an invincible barrier for the spread of offensive weapons of Scythian origin. Moreover, Dobruja itself looks like a territory mastered by the Scythians, starting from the Early Scythian period. After all, since The specificity of the Scythian panoply PLURAL of the Lower Danube Fig. 1. Scythian period in Carpathian-Danube region. I. Swords and daggers (A), spearheads and javelins (B), axes (C): 1 – Balabanu, 2 – Taraclia, 3 – Kubey, 4 – Tabaki, 5 – Crihana Veche, 6 – Vasilyevka, 7 – Kalanchak, 8 – Izmail, 9 – Mresnota Mogyla, 10 – Șivița, 11 – Vladycheni, 12 – Kotlovina, 13 – Nagornoe, 14 – Plavni, 15 – Chaush, 16 – Kugurluy, 17 – Gradeshka, 18 – Dervent, 19 – Isaccea, 20 – Celic-Dere, 21 – Chiscani, 22 – Murighiol, 23 – Enisala. II. Statues (D) and bronze cauldrons (E): 24 — Shvaykivtsy, 25 — Ivane-Puste, 26 – Avrămeni, 27 – Iacobeni-Dângeni, 28 – Loevtsy, 29 – Nizshiy Olchedaev, Kukavka, 30 – Dubossary, 31 – Butor, 32 – Krasnogorka, 33 – Nikolskoe, 34 – Yaroslavka, 35 – Ostrovnoe, 36 – Vinogradovka, Mresnota Mogyla, 37 – Plavni, 38 – Scorțaru Vechi, 39 – Ograda, 40 – Platonești, 41 – Stupina, 42 – Castelu, 43 – Sibioara, 44 – Szőny. the 6th century BC on the Medgidia Plateau (between Constanța and Cernavoda in Romania), very characteristic materials appear, which are hard to explain only by influences or intercultural contacts (Fig. 1, II; Fig. 2). It has long been known of three Scythian anthropomorphic statues: from Sibioara (Fig. 2, 1), Stupina (Fig. 2, 3) and the find from Dobrudja (Fig. 2, 6) (Alexandrescu 1958, fig. 1, 2, 4; 1960, 384, fig. 1; Vulpe 1990, Taf. 18: 96, 97). Besides, not far from Medgidia, a unique bronze cast model or an emblem of a Scythian akinakes was found, possibly also made to decorate the statue (Berciu 1959, 18, fig. 1, a, c, pl. 3). Closely to them is the find of the bronze cauldron from Castelu (Fig. 2, 10) (Aricescu 1965, 565-570, fig. 1; Sîrbu 2015, 55, fig. 4) discovered also near Med- 93 94 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 2. Scythian stone statues (1–6) and bronze cauldrons (7–11) from the Lower Danube: 1 – Sibioara, 2 – Platonești, 3 – Stupina, 4 – Vinogradovka, 5 – Plavni, 6 – Dobruja passim, 7 – Ograda, 8 – Mresnota Mogyla, 9 – Ostrovnoe, 10 – Castelu, 11 – Scorțaru Vechi. The specificity of the Scythian panoply PLURAL of the Lower Danube Fig. 3. Distribution of swords (1), spearheads (2) and axes (3) in the Carpathian-Danube region and the correlation between the local cultural groups (4). Burials: A – 1 ex.; B – 2-3 ex.; C – more than 3 ex.; D – stray finds; E – destroyed burial. gidia. The Scythian penetration to the Baragan steppe is probably shown by the statue from Platonești (Fig. 2, 2) (Matei, Coman 2000, fig. 1a) and the cauldrons from Ograda (Fig. 2, 7) and Scorțaru Vechi (Fig. 2, 11) (Sîrbu 2015, 54-55, fig. 2, 95 96 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 3; Pârvan 1926, 9-11, fig. 1). These are the most western finds of Scythian cauldrons in Europe, after a bronze cauldron found on the Hungarian-Slovak border near Szőny (Patay 1990, 81, Taf. 68: 148). The correlation between the finds of Scythian statues and bronze cauldrons is quite stable, their main clusters, as a rule, coincide, for instance, on the Dniester and Western Podolia – Bukovina. And on the contrary, in the zone between Carpathians and Dniester (on the territory of the so-called Moldavian group), where we observe a lot of assemblages and artefacts of Scythian origin (including weapons), neither Scythian statues nor Scythian cauldrons are found (Fig. 1, II). Interestingly, the repertoire of Scythian statues of the Lower Danube differs from the panoply in the same territory. On the statues, in descending order are akinakai, bows and axes (Fig. 2, 1, 3-5). At the same time, it is well known that in the North-Western Black Sea region the spearheads are the most popular and basic weapons for the Scythian panoply (Ostroverkhov, Redina 2013, 393) and this doesn’t differ this region from its nearest neighbours. Judging by the panoply, the Lower Danube organically fits into the so-called Danube or steppe cultural enclave, which also includes the Lower Dniester region, the South Carpathian region and the Southern Danube (Topal 2018, 175). This cultural enclave is characterized by a predominance of spearheads, long swords with a minimum of axes (Fig. 3). The other two enclaves are distinguished, in one case, by the predominance of axes (western enclave consisting of Great Hungarian Plain and Silesia), in the other case by daggers and medium swords (the Carpathian enclave, consisting of Transylvania, Moldova and Western Podolia) (Topal 2018, 187). The spearheads are the most common find of weaponry in Scythian burials of the Northwest Black Sea region, after arrowheads, of course (Ostroverkhov, Redina 2013: 393). The spearheads from such assemblages of the left bank of Lower Danube were introduced into the scientific circuit: e.g. barrow 27 (Fig. 4, 11, 12, 22) (Andrukh, Dobrolyubsky, Toshchev 1985, 66, fig. 26, 5-7) and 32 (Fig. 4, 21) of Plavni-I burial ground. The fragments also come from burial 1 of barrow 2 and burial 1 of barrow 26 (Sunichuk, Fokeev 1984, fig. 2, 5, 15), the burial of 1 barrow 8 (Fig. 4, 15) and burial 6 of barrow 5 (Fig. 4, 16, 17) of Gradeshka burial ground; burial 1 of barrow 5 at s. Vladychen (Fig. 4, 18) (Ostroverkhov, Redina 2013, 389, fig. 92, 7-13), barrow 12 of the Chaush burial ground (Sunichuk 1985, 41, fig. 15), burial 4 of barrow 4 of Gradeshka-I burial ground, burial 2 of barrow 1 (Fig. 4, 13) of Tabaki burial ground, burial 1 of barrow 12 (Fig. 4, 19) of the Kubey burial ground, burial 5 of barrow 3 near Vasilyevka (Subbotin et al. 1992, fig. 2, 7; 4: 8; 8: 3). At the same time, spearheads from the burial grounds of Kotlovina-I, Kalanchak, Dervent, Kugurluy, Ostrovnoye remain still unpublished. The specificity of the Scythian panoply PLURAL of the Lower Danube Fig. 4. Selected axes (1-7) and spearheads (8-22) of Scythian period from the Lower Danube: 1, 2 – Kugurluy (1 – b.11, gr. 1; 2 – b.29, gr. 1); 3, 6-10 – Celic-Dere (7 – b. 11a); 4 – Șivița; 5, 11, 12, 20-22 – Plavni-I (5 – b.32; 11, 12, 22 – b. 27; 20 – b. 28; 21 – b. 32); 13 – Tabaki b.1, gr. 1; 14 – Dervent b. 14, gr. 1; 15-17 – Gradeshka-I (15 – b. 8, gr. 1; 16, 17 – b.6, gr. 6); 18 – Vladychen b.5, gr. 1; 19 – Kubey b. 12, gr. 1. 97 98 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Despite the abundance of burials with spearheads, they date back to the time not earlier than the middle of the 5th century BC. Though the looting in antiquity, the main burial of the barrow 3 of the “Mresnota Mogyla” burial ground contained besides the spearheads, the iron body armour and the shield (Redina 1992, 84). This grave is well-dated back by black-glazed skyphos and partly by the amphorae (of unidentified centres), and is attributed to the third quarter of the 5th century BC (Monakhov 1999, 139-140; Polin 2014, 203). A female burial with two spears in the barrow 6 near Balabanu (Chebotarenko, Yarovoy, Telnov 1989, 36, fig. 14, 1) also could be dated back to the last quarter of the 5th century BC. (Teleaga 2008, 364). Besides the supposed spear in the burial 2 of barrow 3 at Ostrovnoe were found two pythoid Heraclean amphoras of I-4 variant (according to S. Yu. Monakhov) with the stamp of ΑΡΙΣΤΟΚ|ΛΗΣ ΑΡΤΩΝ|ΔΑ and the one more hardly recognizable by Satyrion (?). That allows dating the complex to the late 5th – early 4th centuries BC or 395-390 BC (Monakhov 1999, 205-206; Kats 2007, 429; Polin 2014, 305). Judging by the funeral feast near the barrow 27 at Plavni, which contained two Thasian Early Biconic, one Heraclean and two amphorae of Murighiol type (Monakhov 1999, 181-182), this assemblage can be attributed to the early 4th century BC. The stamp of ΑΡΧ|ΕΛΑ on the Heracleian amphora of type I allows dating the barrow 27 within the first decades of the 4th century BC or within 410-390 BC (Monakhov 1999, 182; Polin 2014, 304). On the right bank of the Lower Danube, at least five spearheads (Fig. 4, 8-10) come from the burials of the Celic-Dere burial ground (Simion 2005, fig. 6, 3): e.g., from the 10-B burial (Simion 1992, 102, fig. 4; 1992a; fig. 5a). So far, one can only speculate about the chronological position of this burial (as well as many others excavated by G. Simion), but probably this grave should be attributed to the final phase of the burial ground, the lower boundary of which is the end of the 5th century. BC. Thus, the most popular type of individual weaponry of the Scythians of the Lower Danube region relates mainly to the Classical Scythian period, and possibly, partly to the end of the Middle Scythian period. Axes are known from the following burials on the left bank of the Danube: burial 1 of barrow 11 (Fig. 4, 1), burial 1 of barrow 29 (Fig. 4, 2) of Kugurluy burial ground (Ostroverkhov, Redina 2013, 391, fig. 93, 11, 13) and burial mound 32 (Fig. 4, 5) of Plavni-I burial ground (Sunichuk, Fokeev 1984, 114, fig. 4, 16). It is difficult to judge the dating of these complexes in each case, but it is obvious that they belong to the Classical Scythian culture. Moreover, it is reasonable to place these burials from Kugurluy, following most of the dated graves (Polin 2014, 585), in the second half of the 4th century BC, or even closer to the end of the century. The specificity of the Scythian panoply PLURAL of the Lower Danube On the right bank of Danube River, a two-blade axe, similar to an item from Kugurluy, was discovered near Shivița village (Fig. 4, 4) of Galați County (Dragomir 1983, 88, fig. 11, 4). In the Celic-Dere burial ground near the Telița village were found at least two single-bladed iron axes (Fig. 4, 3, 6) (Simion 2005, fig. 5, 2) and one bronze bird-headed sceptre (Fig. 4, 7) (Simion 2005, fig. 6, 1). The sceptre decorated in the animal style in the shape of a bird’s head with a curved beak comes from the burial 11. This assemblage (according to G. Simion) refers to the final phase of the burial ground or the late 5th – early 3rd century BC (Simion 1992, 104). Most of the analogical scepters are represented by stray finds: e.g. from P.O. Burachkov collection (Yatsenko 1959, pl. III: 3) in the Lower Dnieper, Kunderevich collection (Illinska 1961, fig. 11, 5), Pastyrskoe (Drevnosti Pridneprovya 1907, tab. IV: 428) in the forest-steppe of the right bank of Dnieper River. Another Scythian bird-headed sceptre is displayed in the Museum of the History of Arms in Zaporizhzhia (Murzin, Shlayfer 2008, 49-50, fig. 6), however, it is not cast from bronze, but forged from iron. Despite this difference, this item stylistically fits into the group of similar scepters of the early Classical time, therefore the dating by the authors within the “7th – the first half of 6th century BC” (Murzin, Shlayfer 2008, 49) seems unreasonably underestimated. Relatively recently it became known about the discovery of a bronze sceptre from the Crimea, found near the Partizany village of the Kirov District (Skoryi, Zimovets 2014, 135). A similarly shaped bronze bird-headed axe is kept at the Dobrich Historical Museum (Torbatov 1998, 1012; History at Dobrudja 2011, 167, fig. 152) in North-East Bulgaria. The only assemblage with a bronze scepter-axe was excavated near Zaporizhzhia, in the barrow 25 of the Kichkass burial ground (Illinska 1961, 44, fig. 11, 7). In addition to the axe, “an iron spearhead, 7 bronze arrowheads, 2 bronze finials and a bronze plaque in the shape of a bird of prey” were found in the burial, and the grave itself dates back to the late 5th century BC (Yatsenko 1959, 63). Swords and daggers. The border between the steppe Danube and Carpathian cultural enclaves lies literally along the landscape border of the steppe and forest-steppe. Namely, along the western fringe of the Lower Dniester Plain, the northern edge of the South Moldavian Plain and the Tigeci Upland. To the west of the Prut River, this border most likely limits the Bârlad Plateau from the south. Therefore, if we focus on the Carpathian-Dniester region, we will be able to detect many important trends in the weaponry. First of all, the trends are easy to trace with the help of swords and daggers or akinakai. The situation could be described by a basic metaphor from the books by George Martin. In the Scythian time, the Carpathian-Dniester region is characterized by such an abundance of akinakai that this period can be called the “storm of 99 100 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 5. Selected swords of the Late Classical period from the Lower Danube: 1, 2, 8, 9 – Chaush (1 – b. 15, gr. 1; 2 – b. 15, gr. 2; 8 – b. 12, gr. 1; 9 – b. 11, gr. 1); 3, 6, 7 – Plavni-I (3 – b.24, gr. 1; 6 – b. 22, gr. 1; 7 – b. 15, gr. 1); 4, 5 – Crihana Veche (4 – b. 5, gr. 1; 5 – b. 7, gr. 2). The specificity of the Scythian panoply PLURAL of the Lower Danube swords” (Topal 2019, 141). We do not know a similar storm either before or after the Scythian period, and the bladed weapons of Scythian origin in Carpathian-Dniester were more popular than in any other region to the west of the Dniester. The region is also specific in that some of the Scythian type swords and daggers are associated with the nomadic entourage, some are found in a context, different from the typical Scythian one. On the other hand, in the Late Classical time (from the mid. 4th century BC), Scythian steppe assemblages itself became open to the different cultural influences, both direct import and the import of ideas, which led to the emergence of hybrid forms. But if we ignore cultural differences and present the entire volume of burials with Scythian-type bladed weapons as a unified mass of warrior burials, we will find some signs that have landscape and chronological significance. Unlike the forest-steppe zone of the Dniester region, the overwhelming majority of the akinakai finds in the steppe part refer to the Classical Scythian culture. The burials with the akinakai of Classical period are basically few and they are mainly associated with the territory of the Lower Dniester and the Lower Danube groups. According to V. S. Sinika (2007, 18), the swords and daggers were inside only the 30 graves or 5,7% of all the Scythian burials of the steppe between Dniester, Prut and Danube. The only one burial with an akinakes could be dated to the Early Scythian period: the grave of the 2nd sector of the burial ground II of Celic-Dere near Telița, Tulcea County, Romania (Simion 1992, fig. 1). This grave was considered by A. I. Melyukova (2001, 22) as a simultaneous one to the Sabangia barrow and dated back to the second half – the late 7th century BC. Later, two items with a semicircular hilt from the Celic-Dere burial ground can be attributed to the end of the Middle Scythian period (the first half of the 5th century). The hilt of one of them is decorated with engraving in Scythian animal style, similar to the decoration of daggers from Petricani and Tudora-Palanca. The earliest burials with bladed weapons of the Classical period are still located in Dobrudja: e. g. barrows 10a and 11 (Simion 1992, fig. 3, 5), as well as the recently excavated barrow 44 (Sîrbu et al. 2013, 356) of the Celic-Dere burial ground near Telița1. The main burial of the barrow 10a was dated back by G. Simion (1992, 104) to the third quarter of the 5th century BC by the “Thasian” amphora, later this amphora was defined as “Samian” and dated to the late 5th century BC (Teleagă 2008, 49, fig. 192.1011; Sîrbu et al. 2013, 350), but it chronology could be more accurate. G. Simi1 Among the materials of the Celic-Dere burial ground excavated by G. Simion, at least eight akinakai are known (Simion 2005, fig. 6, 4). At the same time, judging the grave goods of burials that include this type of weaponry is rather problematic, because only two of them (10a and 11) are reliably attributed. 101 102 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 on attributed barrow 11 to the period of the third quarter of the 5th century BC, basing on three amphorae and a bronze axe-sceptre, however, due to the lack of illustrations and description of the amphora, this dating is still in doubt. Barrow 44 from Celic-Dere is dated back, according to the authors of the excavations, to the second half of the 5th century (Sîrbu et al. 2013, 356). Although a quiver set consisting of arrowheads with internal sleeves (Sîrbu et al. 2013, fig. 10d) indicates an earlier date, the upper limit of which is likely to come in the mid.-5th century BC. The similar sword was occasionally discovered on the territory of the Murighiol burial ground. It was traditionally dated back to the late 4th – early 3rd century BC (Bujor 1958, fig. 8.1, Vulpe 1990, 67, Taf. 17.80), but due to the recent discovery from Celic-Dere, there were reasons for its earlier dating, i.e. to the finale of Middle Scythian time. A sword with slots and an imitation of a winding on a hilt, an oval ornamented pommel was found in the destroyed barrow on the territory of Izmail city in Odessa Region. According to the Heraclean amphora’s stamp, the barrow is dated back to the early 360s BC (Palamarchuk, Sinika 2014, 296). Such swords with slotted handles of so-called Chertomlyk type (Topal 2014) mainly refer to the earlier time, i.e. to the first half of the 4th century BC, however, tending to the beginning of the century. This is indicated by other archaic features, such as imitation of wire or rope winding on the handle and ornamentation of the upper part of the blade with longitudinal grooves. The burial with a sword, discovered in 1958 on a destroyed burial ground near Chiscani (Harţuche, Anastasiu 1976, 197-198, 209, cat. 400-405, 422) contained an amphora attributed by V. Sîrbu (1982, 101) to the time after the 340s BC. Besides that, it is known another akinakes from the vicinity of Chiscani, apparently also referring to the Classical Scythian culture (Andrukh 1995, fig. 4.25, Măndescu 2010, pl. 85.22). The Scythian burial grounds of the Lower Danube also provide a series of original single-edged swords of Chaush type (Fig. 5, 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9). Seven items come from the eponymous Chaush burial ground, but only three of them could be entirely reconstructed: from the grave 12 (Fig. 5, 8), 15 (Fig. 5, 1) and 22 (Sunichuk 1985, 44, рис. 2: 16, 17; Redina 1999, 223–226, fig. 1, 2, 3; 2: 1–3). These burials were dated back by E. F. Redina to the third quarter of the 4th century BC. A similar sword was found in the barrow 24 of Plavni I burial ground (Fig. 5, 3). In general, the cemetery is considered to be simultaneous to Chaush and is also dated to the mid.-third quarter of the 4th century BC (Sunichuk, Fokeev 1984, 117; Redina 1999, 223). The most recent find of Chaush type sword was revealed in Crihana Veche burial ground (Fig. 5, 4), in grave 1 of barrow 5 (Ciobanu, Simalcsik 2017, 23), but remains still unpublished. And it could be only supposed that this funeral complex is dated back to the second The specificity of the Scythian panoply PLURAL of the Lower Danube half of the 4th century BC as other Scythian graves from Crihana Veche. But the Chaush type swords are distinguished (for example, from the Thracian combat knives) by the presence of an essential detail – the lower part of the handle, in contact with the blade, is equipped with a hilt. This made it possible to use such a sword not only for the chopping blows, characteristic of single-edged weapons but also for the stabbing ones. The Thracian types of weapons became very popular in the Classical Scythian period, and are represented by the single-edged combat knives (Bruyako 103 104 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 6. Contextual and cultural distribution. I – distribution of blade weapons of Scythian time in Carpathian-Dniester region (a – stray find, b – flat grave, c – cremation in flat grave, d – barrow, e – cremation in a barrow): 1 – Sokirintsy, 2 – Ruski Filvarki (Kamianets-Podilskyi), 3 – Lenkovtsy (Lenkivtsy), 4 – Nelipivtsy, 5 – Lipnic, 6 – Cristinești, 7 – Ibănești, 8 – Cajvana, 9 – Zăicești, 10 – Volodeni, 11 – Rîșcani, 12 – Muncelu de Sus, 13 – Petricani, 14 – Moțca, 15 – Agapia, 16 – Văratec, 17 – Ghindăoani, 18 – Boureni, 19 – Miroslovești, 20 – Mileștii de Sus, 21 – Bârsești, 22 – Buciumeni, 23 – Bălăbănești, 24 – Găiceana, 25 – Nănești, 26 – Lichitișeni, 27 – Suseni, 28 – Mânzătești, 29 – Măcișeni, 30 – Gănești, 31 – Lărguța, 32 – Capaclia, 33 – Vaslui, 34 – Poienești, 35 – Dumești, 36 – Bâcu, 37 – Mircești, 38 – Dănești, 39 – Chircești, 40 – Moșna, 41 – Cozia, 42 – Comarna, 43 – Năvîrneț, 44 – Teșcureni, 45 – Boldurești, 46 – Nisporeni, 47 – Pîrjolteni, 48 – Telenești, 49 – Lucășeuca, 50 – Vatici, 51 – Ivancea, 52 – Trebujeni, 53 – Susleni, 54 – Mikhailovka, 55 – Kotovsk (Podilsk), 56 – Suruceni, 57 – Hansca, 58 – Rezeni, 59 – Butor, 60 – Parcani, 61 – Krasnoe, 62 – Talmaza, 63 – Purcari, 64 – Tudora, 65 – Mayaky, 66 – Nikolaevka (Mikolaivka), 67 – Nikonion (Roksolany), 68 – Gnilyakovo (Dachne), 69 – Diviziya, 70 – Artsyz, 71 – Snake Island (Zmiynyi), 72 – Murighiol, 73 – Enisala, 74 – Celic-dere (Telița), 75 – Chiscani, 76 – Chaush, 77 – Plavni, 78 – Izmail, 79 – Crihana Veche, 80 – Cuhureştii de Jos. II – correlation between burial rite and chronology. 1989, 68). A stray find from Enisala (Simion 1971, fig. 7c) was discovered on the territory of the burial ground, which was generally dated to the 4th century BC (Măndescu 2010, 75). The fragment of the curved dagger from the barrow 1 of Nikonion necropolis was found near the main burial, which was dated back to the second half of the 4th century BC (Bruyako 1989, 68, fig. 1.2). The handle of one of such combat knives was found on the Lower Prut, in the grave 2 of barrow 7 near Crihana Veche (Fig. 5, 5), Cahul District, Republic of Moldova. The bone handle is decorated with silver wire inlay representing a running wave pattern, characteristic of Greek and Thracian production (Ceban et al. 2015, 52, fig. 11). The funeral feast of barrow refers to the middle of the 4th century. BC. All the amphorae (at least 25) found in the ditch and various features can be attributed to the Thasian production. The Thasian amphorae belong to the conical or biconical type of II-B-2 (or advanced biconical) by S. Yu. Monakhov (2003, 60, 67), which appears since the late 370s BC. There are two-line stamps on five handles, four of which have the name of Πυλάδης manufacturer. Three imprints are made with one stamp (Bon & Bon 1957, No. 1504; Garlan 1999, No. 597) and refer to the fifth stage of stamping which dates back to the mid.-350s BC according to Y. Garlan or to the late 360s BC according to V. I. Kats (2007, 415, pril. 2). Another Pylades’ stamp contains besides the name of the manufacturer a sign of the eponym: a star (Bon & Bon 1957, No. 1505; Garlan 1999, No. 633) and refers to the same time. The fifth stamp refers to the production of the Λυσικλῆς of 360-50s BC or mid-350s BC according to Y. Garlan (Bon & Bon 1957, No. 1107; Avram 1996, No. 60; Garlan 1999, No. 593). Thus, the amphoric complex, and, consequently, the time of the burial mound’s construction can be attributed to the end of the 360s – the mid.-350s BC (Ceban et al. 2015, 56). The specificity of the Scythian panoply PLURAL of the Lower Danube Early Scythian burials with akinakai between the Carpathians, the Danube and the Dniester, without any exception, are connected with barrows, including the cremations. (Flat graves with early Scythian akinakai are associated exclusively with Transylvania). At the beginning of the Middle Scythian period, flat graves appear, but they, like the burial mounds, are characteristic only of the forest-steppe. The end of the Middle Scythian period is the time of the greatest spread of akinakes and the time of the greatest contextual diversity. Akinakes covers all, without any exception, the regions to the west of the Dniester River, and the “storm of swords” truly becomes a hurricane. The funeral rite also reaches the greatest variety: swords become an integral part of both flat and barrow graves, both cremations and inhumations. At the same time, burial mounds during this period were erected only within the framework of the steppe Danube enclave. By the way, the famous bronze model of akinakes from Medgidia, in my opinion, also refers to this period. Later, in the Classical period, the area of akinakes is significantly reduced: Scythian blade weapons are represented exclusively in the steppe and are represented only by inhumations (although one cremation with akinakes is known in North-Eastern Bulgaria). It is now obvious that weapon preferences are directly related to preferences in the funeral rite and landscape localization (Fig. 6). Thus, these cultural enclaves (the steppe, the Carpathian and the western one) demonstrate uniformity not only in the choice of weapons but also in the funeral rite. The steppe enclave is characterized not only by spearheads and swords but also by the burial mound, while for the western and Carpathian (with their daggers and axes) the flat graves are preferable. But let’s go back to the northeastern Lower Danube region. So, the main weapon of the area is the spear. And according to the panoply contents, the Lower Danube group forms a separate cultural enclave together with the Lower Dniester, South Carpathian and South Danube groups. The panoply influenced affected in a way the morphology of the Scythian akinakes. For instance, the swords are more characteristic than daggers for the steppe Danube region. Daggers are connected mainly with the forest-steppe part of the Carpathian-Dniester region and Transylvania. The most of warrior’ assemblages of the Lower Danube region belong mainly to the Classical Scythian period. The only exception is connected with the right bank of the Lower Danube (e.g. early Scythian burial with an akinakes from Celic-Dere). Moreover, in Classical time there are no assemblages with akinakai, but even stray finds outside the steppe. The main element of the funeral rite is the mound and the inhumation (one case of cremation with supposed akinakes in the steppe was recorded to the west, in northeastern Bulgaria, near Branichevo). In late Classical time, from the second half of the 4th century BC, a transformation of the Scythian 105 106 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 akinakes occurs in the steppe: an original series of single-bladed akinakai of the Chaush type appears and at the same time, the Thracian combat knives are borrowed. Akinakes dissolves with the disappearance of the Classical Scythian culture in the early 3rd century BC. But that happens a century earlier in the forest-steppe between the Dniester and Siret rivers, when the akinakes completely disappears in the late 5th century BC. Then it was excellently linked with the appearance of a huge number of Getian settlements and hillforts in this territory, that corresponds with the data of ancient sources, who placed the Getae to the north of the Danube during this period for the first time. Thus, in the Scythian time, the Lower Danube becomes kind of frontier, or the territory, where “the cultures meet, clash, and grapple with each other, often in contexts of highly asymmetrical relations of power” (Pratt 1991, 34). Or, in other words, it was the territory where the cultural conflict and, as a consequence, cultural dialogue, lead to the cultural exchange. And the Lower Danube panoply of the Scythian period could be considered a special case of this phenomenon. Acknowledgements I would like to express my gratitude to Dr Vitaliy Sinika for the information on unpublished finds of weapons from Budjak steppe, Dr Lavinia Grumeza for the opportunity to present this study in Iași during a workshop about early nomads and Dr Octavian Munteanu for his patience in waiting for the last version of the article. Bibliography Alexandrescu, Alexandrina. 1958. „Două statui traco-scitice din Dobrogea”. SCIV 9, 2: 291-302. Alexandrescu, Alexandrina. 1960. „În legătura cu statuile scitice.” Studii şi Cercetări de Istorie Veche 11, 2: 383-389. Andrukh, Svetlana I. 1995. Nizhnedunayskaya Skifiya v VI – nachale I v. do n. e. (etno-politicheskiy aspekt). Zaporozhye: ZGU. Andrukh, Svetlana I., Andrey O. Dobrolyubskiy and Gennadiy N. Toshchev. 1985. Kurgany u sela Plavni v nizovyakh Dunaya. INION AN SSSR 13.06.1985, №21110. Odessa: OGU im. I. I. Mechnikova. Aricescu, Andrei. 1965. „Cazanul scitic de la Castelu”. Studii şi Cercetări de Istorie Veche 16, 3: 565-570. Avram, Alexandru. 1996. Les timbres amphoriques. Thasos. Histria 8. Bucureşti: Editura Enciclopedia. The specificity of the Scythian panoply PLURAL of the Lower Danube Berciu, Dumitru. 1959. „O descoperire traco-scitică din Dobrogea şi problema scitică la Dunărea de Jos”. Studii şi Cercetări de Istorie Veche 1: 7-48. Bon, Antoine and Anne-Marie Bon. 1957. Les timbres amphoriques de Thasos. Études Thasiennes 4. Paris: École française d’Athènes. Bruyako, Igor V. 1989. „Predmety vooruzheniya iz Nikoniya“. In Arkheologicheskie pamyatniki stepej Podnestrovya i Podunavya. Kiev: Naukova dumka, 65—70. Buzhor, Expectacus. 1958. “O geto-dakiyskoj kulture v Murigiole”. Dacia 2: 125-142. Ceban, Ion, Denis Topal, Serghei Agulnikov and Sergiu Popovici. 2015. “Tumulul scitic nr. 7 de la Сrihana veche La Pietricei (r-nul Cahul)”. Arheologia Preventivă în Republica Moldova 2 (1-2): 43-58. Chebotarenko, Georgiy F., Evgeniy V. Yarovoy, and Nikolay P. Telnov. 1989. Kurgany budzhakskoy stepi. Kishinev: Shtiintsa. Dragomir, Ion T. 1983. “Mărturii hallstattiene traco-geto-dacice în regiunea de sud a Moldovei”. Istros II-III, 81-114. Drevnosti Pridneprovya 1907: Drevnosti Pridneprovya i poberezhya Chyornogo morya. Sobranie B. I. i V. N. Khanenko. 1907. Vypusk 6. Kiev: Fototipiya i tipografiya S. V. Kulzhenko. Garlan, Yvon. 1999. Les timbres amphoriques de Thasos. Vol. I. Timbres Protothasiens et Thasiens anciens. Études Thasiennes XVIII. Athènes: École française d’Athènes. Harţuche, Nicolae and Florin Anastasiu. 1976. Catalogul selectiv al colecţiei de arheologie a Muzeului Brăilei. Brăila: Muzeul Brăilei. Illinska, Varvara A. 1961. “Skifski sokiri”. Arkheologiya 12: 27—52. Istoria na Dobrudzha 2011. Todorova, Henrieta, Kiril Yordanov, Velizar Velkov and Sergey Torbatov. Istoria na Dobrudzha. Tom I. Velyko Tarnovo: Faber. Kats, Vladimir I. 2007. Grecheskie keramicheskie kleyma epokhi klassiki i ellinizma (opyt kompleksnogo izucheniya). Bosporskie issledovaniya 13. Simferopol-Kerch: Demetra. Măndescu, Dragoș. 2010. Cronologia perioadei timpurii a celei de-a doua Epoci a Fierului (sec. V-III a. Chr.). între Carpaţi, Nistru şi Balcani. Brăila: Istros. Matei, Gheorghe and Radu Coman. 2000. „Statuia traco-scitică de la Platoneşti, jud. Ialomiţa”. Ialomiţa 3: 15-19. Melyukova, Anna I. 2001. “Novye dannye o skifakh v Dobrudzhe (k voprosu o “Staroy Skifii” Gerodota)”. Rossijskaja Arheologija 4: 20-32. Monakhov, Sergey Yu. 1999. Grecheskie amfory v Prichernomore. Kompleksy keramicheskoy tary VII-II vekov do n. e. Saratov: Izdatelstvo Saratovskogo universiteta. 107 108 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Monakhov, Sergey Yu. 2003. Grecheskie amfory v Prichernomore. Tipologiya amfor vedushchikh tsentrov-eksporterov tovarov v keramicheskoy tare. Katalog-opredelitel. Moskva, Saratov: Kimmerida, Izdatelstvo Saratovskogo universiteta. Murzіn, Vyacheslav Yu. and Vitaliy G. Shlayfer, 2008. “Skіfskі sokiri-skіpetri z Muzeyu іstorії zbroї u m. Zaporіzhzhі”. Іstorіya zbroї 1: 45-53. Nikulitse, Ivan T. 1977. Gety IV-III vv. do n. e. v Dnestrovsko-Karpatskikh zemlyakh. Kishinev: Shtiintsa. Ostroverkhov, Anatoliy S. and Evgeniya F. Redina. 2013. “Skifskie drevnosti”. In Drevnie kultury Severo-Zapadnogo Prichernomorya, edited by Igor V. Bruyako and Tatyana L. Samoylova, 374-418. Odessa: SMIL. Palamarchuk, Svetlana V. and Vitaliy S. Sinika. 2014. “Skifskie zakhoroneniya iz kurganov v g. Izmail i u s. Kamyshovka”. Stratum plus 3: 291-302. Pârvan, Vasile. 1926. Getica. O protoistorie a Daciei. Bucureşti: Cultura Națională. Patay, Pál. 1990. Die Bronzegefäße in Ungarn. PBF II, 10. München: Beck. Polin, Sergey V. 2014. Skifskiy Zolotobalkovskiy kurgannyy mogilnik V—IV vv. do n.e. na Khersonshchine. Kurgany Ukrainy 3. Kiev: Oleg Filyuk. Pratt, Mary Louise. 1991. “Arts of the Contact Zone”. Profession, 33-40. Redina, Evgeniya F. 1992. „Skifskiy mogilnik Mresnota Mogila“. In Kimmeriytsy i skify. Tezisy dokladov II Mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii, posvyashchennoy pamyati L. I. Terenozhkina, edited by Boris N. Mozolevskiy, 83-84. Melitopol: IA AN Ukrainy. Redina, Evgeniya F. 1999. “K voprosu o frako-skifskikh kulturnykh vzaimootnosheniyakh (skifskoe odnolezviynoe oruzhie)“. In Problemy skifo-sarmatskoy arkheologii Severnogo Prichernomorya (k 100-letiyu B.N. Grakova), 222—227. Zaporozhe: ZGU. Simion, Gavrilă. 1992. “Geţii şi sciţii dinspre gurile Dunării”. Carpica 23 1: 92-105. Simion, Gavrilă. 1992a. “Geţii de la Dunărea de Jos şi civilizaţia lor”. In Probleme actuale ale istoriei naţionale şi universale, edited by Anatol Petrencu, 18-47. Chişinău: Universitas. Simion, Gavrilă. 2005. “Presences interethniques dans la region des embouchures du Danube aux VIe-Ve s. av. J.-C”. In Ethnic contacts and cultural exchanges. North and West of the Black Sea from the Greek colonization to the Ottoman conquest, 43-58. Iaşi: Trinitas Sinika, Vitaliy S. 2007. “Pogrebalnye pamyatniki skifskoy kultury VII — nachala III v. do n. e. na territorii Dnestro-Prutsko-Dunayskikh stepey”. PhD diss., Moscow State University. The specificity of the Scythian panoply PLURAL of the Lower Danube Sîrbu, Valeriu, Maria-Magdalena Ştefan, Dan Ştefan, Gabriel Jugănaru, and Tomasz Bochnak. 2013. „The necropolis from Teliţa-Celic Dere (6th—3rd c. BC), Tulcea county, Romania. The study case of tumulus T44”. In The Thracians and their neighbours in the Bronze and Iron ages, II, edited by Valeriu Sîrbu, 347-372. Braşov: Istros. Sîrbu, Valeriu. 1982. “Importuri greceşti în Câmpia Brăilei (sec. V-I î.e.n.)”. Pontica 15: 99-124. Sîrbu, Valeriu. 2015. “Deux découvertes datant des Ve-IVe s. av. J.-C. à l’est de la Valachie : la tombe de Râmnicelu (dép. de Brăila) et la chaudière d’Ograda (dép. d’Ialomiţa)”. Thraco-Dacica VI-VII (XXIX-XXX): 51-60. Skory, Serghey A. and Roman V. Zimovets, 2014. Skifskie drevnosti Kryma. Materialy odnoy kollektsii. Kiev: Oleg Fіlyuk. Subbotin, Leonid V., Anatoly S. Ostroverkhov, Sergey B. Okhotnikov and Evgeniya F. Redina. 1992. Skifskie drevnosti Dnestro-Dunayskogo mezhdurechya. Kiev: IA NANU. Sunichuk, Evgeniya F. 1985. “Skifskiy mogilnik Chaush v nizovyakh Dunaya”. In Pamyatniki drevney istorii Severo-Zapadnogo Prichernomorya, edited by Vladimir P. Vanchugov and Ganna A. Dzis-Rayko, 38-45. Kiev: Naukova dumka. Sunichuk, Evgeniya F. and Mikhail M. Fokeev. 1984. “Skifskiy mogilnik Plavni I v nizovyakh Dunaya”. In Ranniy zheleznyi vek v Severo-Zapadnom Prichernomorye, edited by Ivan T. Chernyakov, 103-120. Kiev: Naukova dumka. Teleagă, Emilian 2008. Griechische Importe in den Nekropolen an der unteren Donau 6. Jh. – Anfang des 3. Jhs. v. Chr. Rahden: Marie Leidorf. Topal, Denis A. 2014. “Finalnaya liniya razvitiya mechey klassicheskoy Skifii. Sootnoshenie tipov Chertomlyk i Shulgovka”. Stratum plus 3: 129-156. Topal, Denis A. 2018. “Sostav vooruzheniya i vozmozhnosti kulturnoy gruppirovki (na materialakh skifskogo vremeni Karpato-Podunavya)”. In Drevnosti, issledovaniya, problemy, edited by Vitaliy S. Sinika and Roman A. Rabinovich, 165-194. Tiraspol: PGU. Topal, Denis A. 2019. “Scythian akinakai between Carpathians and Dniester: The structure of a storm”. In Un secol de arheologie în spațiul est-carpatic: concepte, metode, tendințe, edited by Vasile Diaconu and Ludmila Pârnău. 141195, Brăila: Istros, Piatra Neamț: Constantin Mătasa. Torbatov, Sergey. 1998. “Scythian zoomorphic sceptre from North-East Bulgaria”. Arkheologicheski vesti 1: 10-13. Vulpe, Alexandru 1990. Die Kurzschwerter, Dolche und Streitmesser der Hallstattzeit in Rumänien. PBF VI, 9. München: Beck. 109 110 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Yatsenko, Irina V. 1959. “Skifiya VII-V do n. e. (Arkheologicheskie pamyatniki stepnogo Pridneprovya i Priazovya VII-V vv.do n. e.)”. Trudy GIM 6. Moskva: GIM. Particularitățile panopliei scitice din regiunea Dunării de Jos Rezumat Peisajul arheologic al Dunării de Jos se schimba odată cu importanța și rolul pe care îl deţinea marele fluviu în anumite perioade de timp. Acesta fie se transforma într-o barieră ce despărţea anumite grupuri umane, fie din contra, devenea o arteră care lega diferite comunități antice. În epoca fierului, se pare că Dunărea nu a reprezentat un obstacol de netrecut, inclusiv pentru răspândirea armelor ofensive de origine scitică. Mai mult, Dobrogea acelei perioade arăta ca un teritoriu stăpânit de sciți, începând încă din perioada arhaică. Grupul scitic al Dunării de Jos, împreună cu grupurile Nistrului de Jos, Carpațilo de Sud și Dunării de Sud, formaseră un ansamblu cultural „de stepă”, pentru care lancea devenise principalul tip de armă. Totodată, aceste preferințe s-au reflectat și în morfologia akinakai scitice. Or, pentru această enclavă de stepă sau danubiană, spadele au fost mai utilizate decât pumnalele, acestea din urmă fiind caracteristice mai mult pentru silvostepă regiunii Carpato-Nistrene și Transilvaniei. Mormintele războinice din regiunea Dunării de Jos aparțin mai degrabă perioadei scitice clasice, în timp ce singura excepție este legată de malul drept al Dunării de Jos. Cu toate acestea, în perioada clasică nu există înmormântări cu akinakai în afara stepei și nici chiar descoperiri fortuite. Principala practică funerară este înhumarea cu ridicarea de tumuli, chiar dacă o incinerație a fost înregistrată în apropiere de Branicevo, în nord-estul Bulgariei. În perioada clasică târzie (350300 a. Chr.), pumnalele scitice evoluează și în stepă, făcându-și apariţia o serie originală de akinakai cu un singur tăiș de tip Ceauș, care cunosc o largă circulaţie de rând cu cuțitele de luptă de origine tracică. La răscrucea secolelor IV-III a. Chr, odată cu prăbușirea culturii clasice scitice, akinakai scitice dispar din circuit. Ceva similar se întâmplase cu un secol mai devreme în silvostepa Sireto-Nistreană. Dispariția completă a akinakai în regiunea respectivă se datează la sfârșitul secolului V a. Chr. Astfel, în perioada scitică, Dunărea de Jos devine un fel de borderland, sau teritoriul, unde „culturile se întâlnesc, se ciocnesc și comunică între ele, deseori în contexte de relații de putere extrem de asimetrice”. Cuvinte cheie: sciţi; epoca timpurie a fierului; Dunărea de Jos; arme; panoplie; akinakai; vârfuri de lance; topoare; săbii; pumnale. Denis Topal, University of High Anthropological School, Chisinau, Republic of Moldova. E-mail: denis.topal@gmail.com Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) in Romania Daniel Spânu Abstract At the present stage of the research, 12 fibulae with canid protome (germ. Tierkopffibeln) were discovered on the territory of Romania. With the exception of one item from Ocniţa (Wallachia), all the other fibulae come from the Eastern Carpathians area (Eastern Romania). These fibulae provide some valuable clues to the local chronology and allow some insight into the phenomena of imports circulation and acculturation in pre-Roman Dacia. Keywords: Fibulae with canid protome (Tierkopffibeln), early imperial period, pre-Roman Dacia, imports, acculturation Preamble The fibulae with canid protome on the bow (germ.: Fibeln mit beißendem Tierkopf / Tierkopffibeln, acronym: TKF) form a particular group of strongly profiled fibulae of the early Roman imperial period and were perceived as Noric derivates of Almgren 67 type (Werner 1954, 151-152; Demetz 1999, 137, 195). The shape of the protome with an elongated muzzle biting the foot of the fibula may recall the head of a carnivore of the species canidae. The morphological classification of these fibulae has been elaborated gradually, especially based on the researches of Joachim Werner, Manfred Menke and Stefan Demetz (Werner 1954; Menke 1974; Menke 1977; Demetz 2000, 15-18). The latter has the largest and most up-to-date collection of data. Based on nuanced morphological and stylistic distinctions, Stefan Demetz proposed the most refined classification of the variants of this type (Fig. 1). The fibulae with canid protome have not yet been signaled in the North-Pontic space (see Kropotov 2010; Hellström 2018). This aspect puts in a particular light the Romanian discoveries: these form the eastern extremity of the spreading area of the provincial fibulae with canid protome. In general, the western and central European debates have been focused preferentially on the spread of these fibulae between the circum-alpine provinces and Scandinavia (Böhme-Schönberger 1994, 514515, fig. 111; cf. Jahn 1952, 95, fig. 1; Werner 1954, 156, fig. 3; Müller 1985, 83; Bemmann 1999, 151-154, fig. 2; Demetz 2000, 19-20 with older literature). The fascination exercised by the Ambre Road has been irresistible and the eastern discoveries were overlooked. Meanwhile, the specimens found in Romania were previously documented and illustrated, and their reference to the central 112 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 1. Systematizing Demetz’s classification (drawings after Demetz 2000). European classifications has never been satisfactorily undertaken. This paper is intended to compensate for these shortcomings. Current Stage of Data in Romania In the current stage of the research, from Romania can be listed 12 certain fibulae with canid protom (Fig. 2). These come exclusively from extra-Carpathian finds: Ocniţa in Vallachia and Brad, Cândeşti, Poiana and Răcătău de Jos in Moldavia. So far, this kind of fibula has never been identified in Transylvania (Fig. 5). Except the only silver fibula from Cândeşti, all other items found in Romania were made of bronze. A fibula with hinge system (?) from Poiana appears to have been decorated with an extremely simplified canid protome (cat. no. 10). If the published drawing is accurate (Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 589, fig. 110/1; this image is reproduced here in Fig. 2/10), this item would represent the only case of fibula with canid protome with hinge (and not with spring) known so far. In any case, the archaeological vestiges from Poiana reunite more fibulae with canid protome than in all other discoveries of the rest of Romania. In other localities only one item was discovered. Most likely, a regional center of distribution of this type of fibulae has been operating in Poiana. The majority of fibulae come from different unsatisfactory documented contexts (see Appendix) within small oppida or “dava”-type settlements of regional importance. (On the compatibility vs. incompatibility between “oppidum” and “dava” see Florea 2011, 173). Two fibulae from Poiana were discovered in funeral contexts: one of them was found in the wall of the burial chamber in “Movila cu pietre” tumulus (Fig. 2/11; cat. no. 11); the other comes from the inventory of an ustrinum in the “Movila Hârtop” tumulus (Fig. 2/12; cat. no. 12). Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Fig. 2. Fibulae with canid protome in Romania. 1: Brad; 2: Cândeşti; 3: Ocnița; 4-10: Poiana “Cetățuie”; 11: Poiana “Movila cu pietre”; 12: Poiana “Movila Hartop”; 13: Răcătău de Jos. 1: after Ursachi 1995, 499, pl. 204/2. 2, 4-5, 8 şi 11-12: after the original. 3: graphic processing of a draw after original by Cristina Georgescu. 6-7 and 9-10: after Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 573, fig. 94/1-2, 5-6 şi 589, fig. 110/1. 13: after Căpitanu 1989, 120, fig. 104; 1 and 13: uncertain scale. 1, 3-13: bronze; 2: silver. 113 114 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Short History of the Research in Romania Ecaterina Dunăreanu-Vulpe has the merit of recognizing for the first time in the Romanian literature the presence of a canid protome on the bow of a fibula from Poiana (Fig. 2/11), as well as its provincial origin (Dunăreanu-Vulpe 1938, 164, fig. 15/3). However, the fibula was not included in subsequent repertoires of Roman imports (Glodariu 1974; Glodariu 1976). During the national-communist era (1964-1989), the Roman origin of other later discovered fibulae, such as those from Ocniţa and Cândeşti was not recognized (Berciu 1981, 30; Bobi 1987, 507), and the protomes on the items from Brad and Răcătău de Jos were not even noticed (Ursachi 1987, 119, fig. 12/9; Căpitanu 1989, 120, fig. 10/4; Ursachi 1995, 228). Instead, some scholars were seduced by the problematic analogy between the canid ornaments of some fibulae and the wolf’s head on the “Dacian” standards called dracones (Bobi 1987, 507; Rustoiu 1989, 143; the alleged relationship between Dacians and wolves was critically examined by Dana 2000, 167-173). The distinct typology and the provincial origin of the fibulae with canid protome found in Romania were coherently outlined by Aurel Rustoiu. Under the influence of the anthropomorphic interpretation of its decoration, previously proposed with naivety by Berciu, the fibula from Ocniţa was classified separately (type 25: Rustoiu 1997, 58) from the other items gathered in type 21 (Rustoiu 1997, 55-56, 113, list 18, 220, fig. 64/1 and 222, fig. 66/1-3.). No fibula from Poiana was illustrated. For chronology, Aurel Rustoiu retained the unduly delayed dating (Tiberius - Domitianus) proposed by Vinko Šribar (Šribar 1968), but omitted the earlier dates (Augustus - Claudius), as well as the more consistent arguments of some scholars as Joachim Werner, Günter Ulbert, Emilie Riha, Manfred Menke, Rosemarie Müller, Stefan Demetz a.o. (Werner 1954, 152; Ulbert 1960, 52; Riha 1973, 77; Menke 1977; Hedeager, Kristiansen 1981, 103; Müller 1985, 83; Demetz 1993). The conclusions of more recent syntheses and interdisciplinary studies (Demetz 1999, 137-147 and Demetz 2000, 21 accepted by: Gugl 2001, 315, Sedlmayer 2009, 25-26, Quast 2009, 110; Blakenfeldt 2015, 31; Grabherr 2015, 154-155 a.o.) require the abandonment of the Vinko Šribar’s long chronology. For exemple, the results of the 14C analyses performed on the grave 872 from Czarnówko (Michalska et al. 2015, 254, fig. 1/1) do not contradict the dating of the fibulae with canid protome in the first half of the 1st centuty AD. Fibulae with Canid Protome in Romania and Demetz’s Classification The fibulae from Brad, Cândeşti and Răcătău de Jos (cat. no. 1-2, 13, Fig. 2/1-2, 13) as well as most of the fibulae from Poiana (cat. no. 4-11, Fig. 2/4- Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania 11) are decorated only with a protome; additional biconical knots are missing. These ornamental features correspond to the Demetz TKF I type (Demetz 2000, 15-16). According to Stefan Demetz, such items were produced in the East-Alpine region (Noricum and Pannonia) and can be dated in the Augustus-Claudius period, in the first half of the 1st century AD (Demetz 2000, 21). Only the fibula from Cândeşti has a plate protecting the spring. In the case of some fibulae from Poiana (cat. no. 5, 6, 9, Fig. 2/5, 6, 9), the bow was engraved with a group of oblique incisions placed behind the zoomorphic head – probably a suggestion of a ridge. Such details have no analogies in central Europe. Moreover, the protomes of some East-Carpathian fibulae (Fig. 2/1, 6-8, 10, 13) were extremely simplified and schematized and reflect a pronounced stylistic degeneration compared to the East-Alpine models. These particularities may reflect the brand of a peripheral and coarsening workshop. In favor of this interpretation, the absence of any à jour decoration of the catch-plates (Fig. 2/1-2, 4-11, 13) can be also invoked. The fibula from “Movila Hârtop” tumulus in Poiana (cat. no. 12, Fig. 2/12) illustrates a more complex ornamentation: the protome is preceded by several knots, and the spring is protected by a small plate. These details are specific to the Demetz TKF IIb1 variant, dated also in the first half of the 1st century AD (Demetz 2000, 21). The biggest fibula with canid protome from Romania is the one discovered in Ocniţa (9,5 cm in length – almost twice the length of most other fibulae: see Fig. 2). The complex ornamentation of the bow and the à jour openings in the catch-plate are specific to the Demetz TKF IId type (cf. Demetz 2000, 28 and 31, fig. 2/5, 32, fig. 3/5; Riha 1973, 77, tip 2.12, pl. 10/no. 270). The origin of the Ocniţa fibula is most likely West Alpine (raetian) and its import in Dacia could be dated at the latest (!) in the Neronian period, at the end of the second third of the 1st century AD. The Chronological Importance of “Movila Hâtop” Inventory The “Movila Hârtop” tumulus from Poiana contains the only inventory in Romania in which e fibula with canid protome is associated with expressive chronological markers as well as with jewels of local tradition as the spoon fibulae and the spiral rings with ending plates on silver (Fig. 3). The tumulus was partially investigated by Radu Vulpe in the pre-War time (1931 and 1936). Its inventory was introduced slowly and with great difficulty in the scientific knowledge (Vulpe et al. 1952, 210: first short mention; Vulpe 1976, 208-209: 115 116 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 3. Fibulae, spiral rings and imported vesseks from the “Movila Hârtop” inventory. 1-2 and 5-7: silver; 3-4: bronze; 8, 10-11: glass; 9: ceramics (terra sigillata); after the original. Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania brief presentation without illustration; Spânu 2009, 88-90, fig. 3, Spânu 2012a, 235, pl. 97/3, Spânu 2012b, 169-171, fig. 6/3: partial illustration of the inventory). A systematic debate of the tumulus “Movila Hârtop” is now underway. Recently (2016), in the warehouses of the Archaeological Institute in Bucharest were found some lost and hitherto unpublished imports from “Movila Hârtop” tumulus: the fragment of a terra sigillata plate (Fig. 3/9; for analogies and their dating in the first half of the 1st century AD see Hayes 1973, 427-428, form 8, no. 24, 444, pl. 82/24; Hayes 2008, 41-44, 165, no. 466-467, fig. 16/466-467; Bossman, de Weerd 2004, 44; Eschbaumer 2011, 29-30; cf. Mocanu 2016, 125), the fragments of a glass jug – probably a specimen of Isings 52 type (Fig. 3/8) and the fragment of a blue-cobalt glass bowl of Isings 3a type (Fig. 4/11; for bot glass vessels see Isings 1957, 17-19 and 69-71; Biaggio Sinona 1991, 192195; Isings, van Lith 1992, 10-11). According to the diaries of the old field excavations (accesible only after 2016), the inventory from “Movila Hârtop” also included a norico-pannonian fibula of Almgren 236 type (Fig. 3/4). Its poor preservation shape prevents an accurate reporting to the Jochen Garbsch’s classification (Garbsch 1965, 26-49). However, the small dimensions of the item correspond to some specimens included in the Almgren 236 b and c variants (Garbsch 1965, 28-32). The imports from this spectacular inventory allow a chronological framing of the “Movila Hârtop” tumulus in Claudian - Neronian period, respectively during the second third of the 1st century AD (beginning of the B2a phase of the Roman period). Due to its extravagant goods, the “Movila Hârtop” burial could be compared to the ‘princely’ graves of Lübsow type from North-Central Europe and South-Scandinavia (Eggers 1953; Gebühr 1974; cf. Völling 2005, 203). The synchronism between the “Movila Hârtop” burial and the Lübsow-type graves is provided precisely by the fibulae with canid protome (cf. Tejral 1998, 388; Quast 2009, 110; Schuster 2010; Blakenfeldt 2015, 31). An example is granted by the fibulae found in the Bendstrup burial, dated in the B1a phase of the Roman period (Hedeager, Kristiansen 1981, 94-103). For the local chronology of early Roman period, the “Movila Hârtop” inventory holds a particular relevance: its chronological markers allow the latest dating of the spoon fibulae which illustrate a late La Tène tradition. However, this circumstance must be carefully discerned. The spoon fibulae type is one of the guiding ‘fossils’ of the latest phase of the ‘Dacian’ hoards (Horedt 1973, 151; Rustoiu 1997, 49-50; Spânu 2012a, 145), together with denarii issued exclusively in the first decades of Augustus’s reign (all termini post quem are BC!). In this way the latest ‘Dacian’ hoards could be well framed in the Augustan period, respectively in the B1 phase of the Roman period (Spânu 2012a, 117 118 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 142-145; Spânu 2012b, 171). These later hoards do not contain post-Augustan prestigious goods similar to those from the “Movila Hârtop” burial. Thus, the burial from Poiana becomes iconic for a chronological sequence subsequent to the hoards. At the same time, the differences between the spoon fibulae from “Movila Hârtop” and those from the hoards should be noted: the first ones have a pseudo-filigree and punched ornamentation on the bow-plate (Fig. 3/12), absent in the case of the latter. Together with other similar items from the Cârlomăneşti and Răcătău de Jos settlements (Babeş 2010, 143, fig. 6 right/up; Căpitanu 1976, fig. 41/1), the “Movila Hârtop” spoon fibulae make up a particular and probably later variant of this type. In other words, the tradition of the spoon fibulae survived the ‘Dacian’ hoards (cf. Rustoiu 1997, 48-49). As I will show below, several ornamental motifs on some spoon fibulae from Poiana or Ocniţa can be considered as aesthetic takeovers inspired by certain Roman fibulae types. Among these types we can also include the provincial fibulae with canid protome. Imitation and Acculturation The extreme simplification of the protome and the threadlike aspect of some of the fibulae from Poiana reflects an advanced stylistic and technological depreciation, specific to a peripheral workshop. The question may be asked whether these fibulae with very simplified morphology were produced on the spot. In the absence of half products and of satisfactory archaeological evidence, this hypothesis is fragile, but can be corroborated with the presumption of the activity of itinerant (provincial?) craftsmen in Poiana (Rustoiu 2000, 339; Rustoiu 2002, 200). Unfinished strong-profiled fibulae of Almgren 67 and 82 types were documented here (cf. Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 61; Spânu 2019, 432433). From the perspective of this hypothesis, the fibulae with canid protome from Poiana do not represent ‘barbarian’ imitations but are the result of an import of technology and Roman aesthetic models in Barbaricum. The impact of import of fibulae with canid protome in the east of Romania and in particular in Poiana is different from the effects of the import of similar items in South Scandinavia. The fibulae with canid protome enjoyed a particular appreciation on the shores of the Baltic Sea where they were imported since the beginning of the 1st century AD and where they were imitated until the beginning of the 2nd century AD (Jahn 1952, 97; Hedeager, Kristiansen 1981, 94103, fig. 9-19). Scandinavian or local ‘barbarian’ imitations of the circum-alpin type were not evidenced in pre-Roman Dacia. However, the import of fibulae with canid protome and/or the import of their technology area did not remain Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Fig. 4. Spoon fibulae with canid protome. 1: Craiva, after Rustoiu 1989, 139, fig. 2/5. 2-3: Ocnița, after Berciu 1981, 88, fig. 20/1, 211, pl. 36/5 (2: uncertain scale). 4: Poiana, after Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 581, fig. 102/8. 1-4: bronze. without local echoes. From Craiva (a complete item), Ocniţa (a complete and a fragmentary item) and from Poiana (a fragmentary item) come a few spoon (!) fibulae with canid protome on the bow-plate (Fig. 4; Berciu 1981, 87-88, fig. 20/1, 211, pl. 36/5; Rustoiu 1989, 137, no. 5, fig. 2/5; Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 215, no. 138, 581, fig. 102/8). In the case of fragmentary items, the trapezoidal shape of the catch-plate (specific to the spoon-fibulae) and not triangular (as the catch-plates of the strongly profiled fibulae) makes the typological framing proposed in the literature plausible. The well-preserved fibulae from Craiva and Ocniţa (Fig. 4/1-2) convincingly attest the integration of the canid protome inspired by circum-Alpine types in the decoration of a local traditional fibula-shape. Thus, it can be considered that the local tradition and the provincial tradition could be intertwined. However, at the scale of entire pre-Roman Dacia, such ‘interbreedings’ are isolated and have not enjoyed a general appreciation (Fig. 5). The spoon fibulae from “Movila Hârtop” were not decorated with canid protome, but their pseudo-filigree/punched decoration could be inspired by that of other Roman fibulae, such as Aucissa or Langton-Down types, especially attested in the settlement of Poiana (e. g. Vulpe 1957, 150, fig. 5/3; Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 583, fig. 104/4-6). Most likely, the oppida from Poiana and Ocniţa did not host only outlets for early imperial imports but represented effervescent craft centers, where Roman technological and aesthetic models were adopted and filtered according to the local needs and tastes. During the 1st century AD, Poiana and Ocniţa can be considered as main focal points of acculturation to Roman cultural values in the South- and East-Carpathian space. 119 120 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 5. Spatial distribution of the provincial fibulae with canid protome and the spoon fibulae with protome in pre-Roman Dacia. Conclusion Except for the item from Ocniţa (probably a later one), the fibulae with canid protome were imported in the east-Carpathian area during a period (the first half of the 1st century AD) when the southern bank of the Lower Danube (Ripa Thraicae) had not yet been integrated into the province of Moesia but was controlled by the client kingdom of Thrace (Fig. 5; cf. Matei-Popescu 2018). Therefore, the import of fibulae with canid protome into the east of Romania could not be explained as the result of a border trade, but as a display of particular long-distance relations maintained between Barbaricum and Rome since the Augustan era. The inventory of the “Movila Hârtop” tumulus convincingly mirrors this circumstance. Hunt’s Pridianum (British Museum, papyrus 2851) mentions the detachment of Roman military units from Moesia to Buridava and Piroboridava, sometime during the reign of Emperor Traianus (Fink 1958; Syme 1959; Vulpe 1960; Gillam 1962). The two toponyms were tracked down in Ocniţa and Poiana (Vulpe 1960; Vulpe 1964, 233; Berciu 1981, 8 a.o.): that is precisely Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania in the centers where we find most of the specimens (Poiana) and the largest specimen (Ocniţa) of fibulae with canid protomelisted in Romania. These fibulae and other provincial forms (as Aucissa type, Almgren 236 type, Langton Down type etc.) were imported long before the advance of the Roman troops mentioned in Hunt’s Pridianum. Thus, in the century preceding the military conquest of Dacia, markers of a previous but genuine cultural ‘conquest’ can be noticed. Roman fibulae and, perhaps even their producers, arrived North of the Lower Danube well before the legions and cohorts. Appendix Catalog of the Fibulae with Canid Protome in Romania 1. Brad (Negri commune, Neamţ county). Site: “Cetatea dacică”. Circumstances of the discovery: research excavation made by V. Ursachi (1963-1984). Context: settlement, filling of the defensive ditch (according to Ursachi 1995, 228) or level IV (according to Ursachi 1995, 499). Type: Demetz TKF I (?). Technical data: bronze; unknown lenth. Fig. 2/1. Storage institution: Muzeul de Istorie şi Arheologie, Piatra Neamţ, inv. 5899 (?). Lit.: Ursachi 1995, 228 (c1), 499, pl. 204/2, 561, pl. 328/23. 2. Cândeşti (Dumbrăveni commune, Vrancea county). Site: “Coasta Banului”. Circumstances of the discovery: research excavation made by M. Florescu and V. Bobi in 1972. Context: pre-Roman settlement level. Technical data: silver; lenght: 3,8 cm; wight: 5,3 g. Fig. 2/2. Storage institution: Muzeul de Istorie, Focşani, inv. 17159. Lit.: Bobi 1987, 507-509, fig. 2. 3. Ocniţa (Vâlcea county). Sit: right bank of “Pârâului Sărat” river. Circumstances of the discovery: research excavation made by D. Berciu in 1969. Context: settlement, level I, trench XIII/60, depth -2,60 m. Type: Demetz TKF II c-d. Technical data: bronze; lenght: 9,5 cm. Fig. 2/3. Storage institution: Muzeul Judeţean Aurelain Sacerdoţeanu Vâlcea, Râmnicu Vâlcea, inv. No. Oc. 69402. Lit.: Berciu 1981, 30, 181, pl. 5/7, 12/3. 4. Poiana (Galaţi county). Site: “Cetăţuia”. Circumstances of the discovery: research excavation made by R. Vulpe and E. Dunăreanu Vulpe in 1927. Context: settlement (?). Type: Demetz TKF I. Technical data: bronze; lenght: 4,9 cm. Fig. 2/4. Storage institution: Muzeul Teodor Cincu, Tecuci, inv. 7552 (personal remark, 2003). Lit.: Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 208, no. 33, 573, fig. 94/1. 5. Poiana (Galaţi county). Site: “Cetăţuia”. Circumstances of the discovery: research excavation R. Vulpe şi A. Niţu in 1950. Context: settlement, area 121 122 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 I-4 (data from the MNA file II 6126, written by A. D. Alexandrescu). Type: Demetz TKF I. Technical data: bronze; lenght: 5,15 cm. Fig. 2/5. Storage institution: Muzeul Naţional de Istorie a României, Bucharest, inv. 16355 (former inv. no. MNA II 6126). Lit.: inedit. 6. Poiana (Galaţi county). Site: “Cetăţuia”. Circumstances of the discovery: the fibula was discovered by treasure hunters in the Z-R area of the prehistocic settlement and handed over to R. Vulpe on June 16, 1951 (data from the unpublished manuscript R. Vulpe, Poiana 1951 I, p. 62, MNA archive, Bucharest). Context: unknown. Type: Demetz TKF I. Technical data: bronze; lenght: 5 cm. Fig. 2/6. Storage institution: Muzeul de Istorie Teodor Cincu, Tecuci, inv. 2405 (?). Lit.: Teodor, Ţau 1997, 95, no. 34, fig. 4/2; Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 208, no. 34, fig. 94/2. 7. Poiana (Galaţi county). Site: “Cetăţuia”. Circumstances of the discovery: research excavation S. Teodor ş.a., 1987, trench N. Context: settlement. Type: Demetz TKF I. Technical data: bronze; lenght: 4,8 cm. Fig. 2/7. Storage institution: Muzeul de Istorie Teodor Cincu, Tecuci, inv. 2408 (?). Lit.: Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 209, no. 39, 573, fig. 94/6. 8. Poiana (Galaţi county). Sit: “Cetăţuia”. Circumstances of the discovery: research excavation R. Vulpe, 1950, trench I1, c. 41-11. Context: settlement. Type: Demetz TKF I. Technical data: bronze; lenght: 2,7 cm. Fig. 2/8. Storage institution: Muzeul Naţional de Antichităţi, Bucharest. Lit.: Spânu 2019, 425, 427-429, 435, no. 8, fig. 1/8. 9. Poiana (Galaţi county). Site: “Cetăţuia”. Circumstances of the discovery: research excavation made by Silvia Teodor a.o. in 1990, trench P. Context: settlement. Type: Demetz TKF I (?). Technical data: bronze; lenght: 5,2 cm; the foot and cathe-plate are missing. Fig. 2/9. Storage institution: Muzeul de Istorie Teodor Cincu, Tecuci, inv. 2407 (?). Lit.: Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 208, no. 37, 573, fig. 94/5. 10. Poiana (Galaţi county). Sit: “Cetăţuia”. Circumstances of the discovery: săpături sistematice, R. Vulpe, 1950, secţiunea K. Context: aşezare (?). Fibulă cu şarnieră (?); decorul arcului ar putea corespunde variantei Demetz TKF I. Date tehnice: bronz; lenght: 4,7 cm. Fig. 2/10. Storage institution: Muzeul de Istorie Teodor Cincu, Tecuci, inv. 2473 (?). Lit.: Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 223, no. 248, 589, fig. 110/1. 11. Poiana (Galaţi county). Site: “Movila cu pietre”. Circumstances of the discovery: research excavation made by E. Dunăreanu Vulpe in 1928 (and not in 1927 as stated by Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 208). Context: tumulus; fibula provine în peretele camerei funerare (şi nu din “necropola monteoreană”). Type: Demetz TKF I. Date tehnice: bronz; lenght: 4,8 cm. Fig. 2/11. Storage institution: Muzeul de Istorie Teodor Cincu, Tecuci, inv. vechi 2406 (Vulpe, Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Teodor 2003, 208), inv. nou 16402 (informaţie Paul Ciubotaru, martie 2017). Lit.: Dunăreanu-Vulpe 1938, 164, fig. 15/3; Vulpe, Teodor 2003, 208, no. 35, 573, fig. 94/3; Spânu 2012b, 166-169, fig. 4; informaţii suplimentare din jurnalul manuscris al E. Dunăreanu Vulpe, Poiana 1928 (arhiva MNA, Bucureşti). 12. Poiana (Galaţi county). Site: “Movila Hârtop”. Circumstances of the discovery: research excavation made by R. Vulpe, 1931. Context: ustrinum under the tumulus (according to the unpublished manuscript R. Vulpe, Poiana 1931, MNA arhive, Bucharest). Type: Demetz TKF II a-b. Date tehnice: bronz; lenght: 4,2 cm. Fig. 2/12. Storage institution: Muzeul de Istorie Teodor Cincu, Tecuci. Lit.: Spânu 2009, 88-90, fig. 3, Spânu 2012a, 235, pl. 97/3; Spânu 2012b, 169-171, fig. 6/3. 13. Răcătău de Jos (Horgeşti commune, Bacău county). Site: “Cetăţuia”. Circumstances of the discovery: research excavation made by V. Căpitanu, 1967-1988. Context: protohistoric settlement (?). Type: Demetz TKF I. Date tehnice: bronze; unspecified lenght. Fig. 2/13. Storage institution: Complexul Muzeal Iulian Antonescu, Bacău. Lit.: Căpitanu 1989, 120, fig. 10/4. Bibliography Babeş, Mircea. 2010. “Staţiunea geto-dacică de la Cârlomăneşti: dava sau centru religios?” Mousaios 15: 123-146. Bemmann, Jan. 1999. “Norisch-pannonische Trachtbestandteile aus Mitteldeutschland. Zur Bedeutung fremd Sachguts am Beginn der älteren römischen Kaiserzeit in Mitteldeutschland.” In Arbeits- und Forschungsberichte zur Sächsischen Bodendenkmalpflege 41, edited by Judith Oexle, 151-174. Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss Berciu, Dumitru. 1981. Buridava dacică. Bucureşti: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste România. Biaggio, Simona, 1991. I vetri romani provenienti dalle terre dell’attuale Cantone Ticino, vol. 1-2. Locarno: Armando Dado. Blankenfeldt Ruth. 2015. “Fünfzig Jahre nach Joachim Werner: Überlegungen zur kaiserzeitleichen Kunst.” In Bilddenkmäler zur germanischen Götter- und Heldensage, edited by Wilhelm Heizmann and Sigmund Oehrl, 9-82. Göttingen: De Gruyter. Bobi, Victor. 1987. “Două fibule dacice din colecţiile Muzeului Vrîncean, Vrancea.” Studii şi Comunicări (Focşani) 4: 507-509. Böhme-Schönberger, Astrid. 1994. “Römische Kaiserzeit im Provinzialrömischen Gebiet und Beziehungen zur Germania magna” In Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde, Band 8 (Euhemerismus-Fichte, s. v. Fibeln und Fi- 123 124 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 beltracht), edited by Johannes Hoops and Heinrich Beck, 511-523. Berlin-New York: de Gruyter. Bossman, Arjen and Maarten de Weerd. 2004. “Velsen. The 1997 Excavation in the Early Roman Base and a Reappraisal of the Post-Kalkriese Velsen/ Vechten Dating Evidance.” In: Archaeology in Confrontation: Aspects of Roman Military Presence in the Northwest. Studies in Honour of Hugo Thoen, edited by Frank Vermeulen, Kathy Sas and Wouter Dhaeze, 31-63. Ghent: Academia Press. Căpitanu, Viorel. 1976. “Principalele rezultate ale săpăturilor arheologice în aşezarea geto-dacică de la Răcătău (jud. Bacău).” Carpica 8: 49-120. Căpitanu, Viorel. 1989. “Obiecte de podoabă şi piese vestimentare descoperite în dava de la Răcătău, judeţul Bacău.” Carpica 20: 97-124. Dana, Dan. 2000. “Dacii şi lupii. Pe marginea teoriei lui Mircea Eliade.” Studii şi Cercetări de Istorie Veche şi Arheologie 51, 3-4: 153-174. Demetz, Stefan. 1993. “Fibule a testa di animale dal Trentino. Considerazioni sulla possibilità di ricerche tipologiche su fibule della prima età imperial.” Archeologia delle Alpi 2: 59-71. Demetz, Stefan. 1999. Fibeln der Spätlatène- und Frühen Kaiserzeit in den Alpenländern. Frühgeschichtliche und provinzialrömische Archäologie. Materialien und Forschungen, Band 4. Leidorf: Rahden/Westf. Demetz, Stefan. 2000. “Fibeln mit beissendem Tierkopf (TKF - Tierkopffibeln).” Sborník Národního Muzea v Praze/Acta Musei Nationalis Pragae 54: 15-36. Dunăreanu-Vulpe, Ecaterina. 1938. “La nécropole de l’âge du bronze de Poiana.” Dacia 5-6, 1935-1936: 151-167. Eggers, Hans Jürgen. 1953. “Lübsow, ein germanischer Fürstensitz der älteren Kaiserzeit.” Prähistorische Zeitschrift 34-35, 2, 1949-1950: 58-111. Eschbaumer, Pia. 2011. “Frühe Italische Sigillata (Arretina) in Asciburgium.” In Terra Sigillata in den germanischen Provinzen: Kolloquium Xanten, 13.14. November 2008. Xantener Berichte 20, edited by Bernd Liesen, 21-32. Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern. Fink, Robert Orwill. 1958. “Hunt’s Pridianum, British Museum Papyrus 2851.” The Journal of Roman Studies 48: 102-116. Florea, Gelu. 2011. Dava et Oppidum. Débuts de la genèse urbaine en Europe au deuxième âge du Fer. Cluj-Napoca: Académie Roumaine. Centre d’études Transylvaines. Garbsch, Jochen. 1965. Die Norisch-pannonische Frauentracht im 1. und 2. Jahrhundert. München: Beck’sche. Gebühr, Michael. 1974. “Zur Definition älterkaiserzeitlicher Fürstengräber vom Lübsow-Typ.” Prähistorische Zeitschrift 49: 82-128. Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Gillam, James Frank. 1962. “The Moesian Pridianum.” In Hommages à Albert Grenier, edited by Marcel Renard, Collection Latomus 58, 747-757. Bruxelles: Latomus. Glodariu, Ioan. 1974. Relaţiile comerciale ale Daciei cu lumea elenistica şi romană. Cluj-Napoca: Dacia. Glodariu, Ioan. 1976. Dacian Trade with the Hellenistic and Roman World. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, Suppl. Ser. 8. Grabherr, Gerald. 2015. “Zur römischen Frühzeit im Südlichen Alpinen Teil Raetiens:” In Der obere Donauraum 50 v. bis 50 n. Chr., edited by Ute Lohner-Urban and Peter Scherrer, 153-169. Berlin: Frank&Timme. Gugl, Christian. 2001. “Das Umland Teurnias vom 2. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis ins 1. Jahrhundert n. Chr. Eine Studie zur Siedlungskontinuität von der Latène- und Römerzeit im oberen Drautal.” Arheološki vestnik 52: 303-349. Hayes John W. 1973. “Roman Pottery from the South Stoa at Corinth.” Hesperia 42: 416-470. Hayes, J. W. 2008. “Roman Pottery. Fine-Ware Imports.” In The Athenian Agora. Results of Excavation conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Volume 32. Princeton, New Jersey: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Hedeager, Lotte and Kristian Kristiansen. 1981. “Bendstrup – en fyrstegrav fra den romerske jernadel, dens sociale historiske miljø / Bendstrup – a Princely Grave from the Early Roman Iron Age: Its Social and Historical Context.“ Kuml: Arbog og Jysk Arkaologisk Selskab: 81-165. Hellström, Kirsten. 2018. Fibeln und Fibeltracht der Sarmatischen Zeit im Nordschwarzmeergebiet (2. Jh. v. Chr. – 3. Jh. n. Chr.), In Archäologie in Eurasien, edited by Sven Hansen, Band 39, Bonn: Habelt. Horedt, Kurt.1973. “Die dakische Silberfunde.” Dacia 17: 122-165. Isings, Clasina. 1957. Roman Glass from Dated Finds, Groeningen, Djakarta: J.B. Wolters. Isings, Clasina, Sophia M. E. van Lith. 1992. Romeins glas. Nijmegen: Vereniging van Vrienden van het Museum Kam. Jahn, Martin, 1952. “Fernhandel zwischen Ostalpen und Skandinavien in der frühen Kaiserzeit.” Jahresschrift für Mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte 36:93-101. Kropotov, Viktor V. 2010. Fibuly sarmatskoj jepohi, Kiev: ADEF-Ukraina. Matei-Popescu, Florian. 2018. “The Thracian strategiae in Scythia Minor.” In Society, Kings, Gods. In memoriam professoris Margaritae Tacheva, edited by Dilyana Boteva-Boyanova, Peter Delev and Julia Tzevetkova, Jublaeus VII, 107118. Sofia: University St. Kliment Ohridski. 125 126 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Menke, Manfred. 1974. ““Rätische” Siedlungen und Bestattungsplätze der frührömischen Kaiserzeit im Voralpenland.” In Studien zur vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie. Festschrift für Joachim Werner zum 65. Geburtstg, edited by Georg Kossack and Günter Ulbert, 141-159. München: Beck. Menke, Manfred. 1977. “Zur Struktur und Chronologie der spätkeltischen und frührömischen Siedlungen im Reichenhaller Becken.” In Ausklang der Latène-Zivilisation und Anfänge der germanischen Besiedlung im mittleren Donaugebiet, edited by B. Chropovský, 223-238. Bratislava: Veda. Michalska, Danuta, Magdalena Benysek and Jacek Andrzejowski. 2015. “IV.7. Czarnówko, Fpl. 5 – die 14C-Datierung.” In Czarnówko, Fpl. 5. Vor- und frühgeschichtliche Gräberfelder in Pommern, edited by Jacek Andrzejowski, 253256, Teil 1. Lębork, Warszawa: Muzeum. Mocanu, Marian. 2016. “Importuri de terra sigillata în spaţiul vest-pontic.” Peuce 14: 119-128. Müller, Rosemarie. 1985. Die Grabfunde der Jastorf- und Latènezeit an unterer Saale und Mittelelbe. Veröffentlichungen des Landesmusuem für Vorgeschichte in Halle 38. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften. Quast, Dieter. 2009. “Frühgeschichtliche Prunkrgäberhorizonte.” In Aufstieg und Untergang. Zwischenbilanz des Forschungsscherpunktes «Studien zu Genese und Struktur von Eliten in Vor- und Frühgeschichtlichen Gesellschaften», edited by Markus Egg and Dieter Quast, 107-142. Monographien des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums 82, Mainz: Romisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum. Rustoiu, Aurel. 1989. “Fibule dacice cu ornamente zoomorfe.” Apulum 26: 135-145. Rustoiu, Aurel. 1997. Fibulele din Dacia Preromană, Bibliotheca Thracologica 22. Bucureşti: Institutul român de tracologie. Rustoiu, Aurel. 2000: “Grupa răsăriteanã a podoabelor dacice (un studiu privind relaþiile inter-regionale în Dacia preromanã în sec. I î.e.n. - I e.n.).” Analele Banatului 1999-2000, 7-8: 325-365. Rustoiu, Aurel. 2002: “Die östliche Gruppe des dakischen Schmuckes. Eine Untersuchung bezüglich der interregionalen Beziehungen im vorrömischen Dakien im 1. Jh. v. Chr. - 1 Jh. n. Chr.” In Interregionale und Kulturelle Beziehungen im Karpatenraum (2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. - 2 Jahrtausend n. Chr.), edited by Aurel Rustoiu and Adrian Ursuţiu, 191-226. Cluj-Napoca: Nereamia Napocae. Schuster, Jan. 2010. Lübsow: älterkaiserzeitliche Fürstengräber im nördlichen Mitteleuropa. Bonner Beiträge zur vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie, 12. Bonn: Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität. Sedlmayer, Helga. 2009. Die Fibeln von Magdalensberg. Funde der Grabungsjahre 1948-2002 und Altfunde des 19. Jahrhundert, In Archäologische Forschun- Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania gen zu den Grabungen auf dem Magdalensberg, edited by G. Piccottini, 16. Klagenfurt am Wörthersee: Verlag des Landesmuseums Kärnten. Spânu, Daniel. 2009. “The Spoon-Bow Fibula Retrieved from the Giurgiu Customs. Observations on the Spoon-Bow Fibulae from the Lower Danube Area.” In Treasure Lost, Treasure Regained, edited by Cristina Alexandrescu, Adrian Ioniţă; Andrei Măgureanu and Bogdan Florin Tănăsescu, 85-94. The Heritage Series No. 1. Giurgiu: Pelican. Spânu, Daniel. 2012a. Tezaurele dacice. Creaţia în metale preţioase din Dacia preromană. Bucureşti: Simetria. Spânu, Daniel. 2012b. “Zur Transformation der Bestattungssitten östlich der Karpaten im Kontext der römischen Eroberung Dakiens.” Prähistorische Zeitschrift 87, 1: 161-188. Spânu, Daniel. 2019. “Un mic lot de fibule inedite de la Poiana în colecţiile Muzeului Naţional de Antichităţi din Bucureşti.” In Contribuţii la preistoria şi istoria antică a spaţiului carpato-danubiano-pontic. In honorem professoris Ion Niculiţă natalia sua octogesima celebrantis, edited by Aurel Zanoci and Mihail Băţ, 421-438. Chişinău: Cartdidact. Šribar, Vinko. 1968. “K absolutni kronologiji najdb iz zgodnje Emone.” Arheološki Vestnik 19: 445-453. Syme, Roland. 1959. “The Lower Danube under Trajan.” The Journal of Roman Studies 49: 26-33. Tejral, Jaroslav. 1998. “Die Grundprobleme der kaiserzeitlichen Fibelforschung im norddanubischen Raum.” Forschungen zur Archäologie im Land Brandenburg 5: 387-398. Ulbert, Günter. 1960. “Alpenländische Fibeln aus dem frührömischen Kastell Rheingönheim.” Mitteilungen des Historischen Vereins der Pfalz 58: 49-55. Ursachi, Vasile. 1987. “Cetatea dacică de la Brad.” Thraco-Dacica 8, 1-2: 100-126. Ursachi, Vasile. 1995. Zargidava. Cetatea dacică de la Brad, Bibliotheca thracologica 10. Bucureşti: Institutul Român de Tracologie. Völling, Thomas. 2005. Germanien an der Zeitenwende. Studien zum Kulturwandeln beim Übergang vorrömischen Eisenzeit zur älteren römischen Kaiserzeit in der Germania Magna. In British Archaeologial Reports, edited by Holger Baitinger, Alexandru Popa and Gabriele Rasbach, International Series 1360. Oxford: Archaeopress. Vulpe, Radu. 1957. “La civilisation dace et ses problèmes à la lumière des dernières foilles de Poiana en basse Moldavie.” Dacia 1: 143-164. Vulpe, Radu. 1960. “Muntenia şi Moldova de Jos în timpul lui Traian în lumina unei noi lecturi a papirusului Hunt.” Studii Clasice 2: 337-359. 127 128 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Vulpe, Radu. 1964. “Ptolemy and the ancient geography of Moldavia.” Studii Clasice 6: 233-246. Vulpe, Alexandru 1976. “La nécrople tumulaire gète de Popeşti.” Thraco-Dacica 1: 193-215. Vulpe, Radu, Ecaterina Vulpe, A. Niţu, Nicolae Gostar and Eugen Chirilă. 1952. “Şantierul Poiana.” Studii şi Cercetări de Istorie Veche 3: 191-230 Vulpe, Radu and Silvia Teodor. 2003. Piroboridava. Așezarea geto-dacică de la Poiana, Bibliotheca Thracologica 39. București: Institutul Român de Tracologie. Werner, Joachim. 1954. “Fibeln aus Aquileia.” In Origines. Raccolta di scritti in onore di Mons. Giovanni Baserga, 151-159. Società Archeologica Comense, Como: Antonio Noseda. Fibule cu protome canide (Tierkopffibeln) din România Rezumat În stadiul actual al cercetării, pe teritoriul României au fost descoperite 12 fibule cu protomă canidă pe arc (germ. Tierkopffibeln). Cu excepţia unui exemplar de la Ocniţa (Valahia), toate celelalte provin din spaţiul est-carpatic (Moldova). Aceste fibule oferă unele indicii preţioase pentru cronologia locală a epocii imperiale timpurii și permit unele deslușiri in privinţa fenomenelor de circulaţie a importurilor romane și de aculturaţie în Dacia preromană. Cuvinte cheie: fibule cu protomă canidă; epocă imperială timpurie, Dacia pre-romană, importuri, aculturaţie Daniel Spânu, Institute of Archaeology, Bucharest, Romania. E-mail: hazdrik@yahoo.com Notes on the origin and dating of the bone pyxides from the Sarmatian environment between the Don and the Prut Vitalie Bârcă Abstract The object of this article is to discuss the bone pyxides discovered in the Sarmatian graves from the north and north-west of the Black Sea. The study, without being exhaustive, attempts a presentation of the graves where bone pyxides were identified, but also of the cultural environments where similar toiletry pieces were used. The conclusion is that bone pyxides in Sarmatian graves from the north and north-west Pontic territory are mainly Roman products. Nonetheless, it is not excluded that some pyxides are copies of the first, made in local workshops (north-Pontic). The author notes that all Sarmatian graves containing bone pyxides date, on the basis of grave goods, to the second half of the 1st – early/first decades of the 2nd c. AD. Furthermore, it is noted they are usually part of the grave group belonging to the new wave of Sarmatians arriving to the north-Pontic area starting with mid 1st c. AD from east of the Don and that in the second half of the 1st – first decades of the 2nd c. AD they form a well marked local cultural-chronological horizon. Last but not least, the author notes that pyxides are part of funerary features dating to the period of major inflow of Roman artifacts to the Sarmatian environment set between AD 60/70 – 120/130. Keywords: the Sarmatians, pyxides, artifacts, imports, graves, the north Pontic area, the Roman Empire Pyxides are toiletry objects, commonly cylindrical, rather well spread in the Graeco-Roman world, but also intensively used in other cultural environments. Over the course of the ancient times, pyxides were made of clay, metal, marble, alabaster, rarely of glass or plaster, to which add those in bone, widely spread and used (Sokol’skij 1971, 199; Béal and Feugère 1983, 115-116; Peters 1986, 68; Moshkova 1989, 188-189; Mordvintseva and Trejster 2007, I, 55-56; Bârcă 2017, 101 sqq.). However, the basic material used from the very beginning in the making of these pieces was wood (Sokol’skij 1971, 199)1. They are lidded, while in some metal specimens a fastening/hanging system to the belt/strap (cf. Bârcă 2017, 102) may be noted. Pyxides mainly served for preserving makeup paints, certain substances/powders used for embellishment or aromatic 1 For the analysis of a number of over 100 wood pyxides from territories north the Black Sea dated to the 5th c. BC – 4th c. AD see pages 200-215. 130 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 substances and rarely, mineral materials, resins or plants believed healing. The remains of these substances are occasionally found inside the pyxides. Most specimens from the Sarmatian environment of the first centuries AD are bonemade, yet there are also wood or metal specimens etc. For the making of bone pyxides in the ancient period elephant bones, large cattle and horses were used. Among the bone pieces from the Graeco-Roman world count also specimens decorated with depictions made in relief. Usually, these artifacts are attributes of female graves, but there are also cases when they were discovered in male graves (Sokol’skij 1971, 200; Gushchina and Zasetskaya 1994, 33) as well. In the north-Pontic area, bone cylindrical pyxides were widely spread in the first two centuries AD, although they were also used in the previous period (cf. Peters 1986, 68-70). Bone pyxides are frequent in the first centuries AD in the Roman provincial environment (Davidson 1952, 136, Pl. 69, no. 965, 137, Pl. 70, no. 964; Alföldi 1957, 488, Pl. CXXXIV/14; Pleniscar-Gec 1972, Pl. CCX/6; Petru 1972, Pl. IX/26, XV/1, LXI/4, LXIV/4, LXVIII/24, XCV/13; Marangou 1976, no. 217, 125, Pl. 64/a, b; Goethert-Polaschek 1977, Pl. 3, 5, 9; Mackensen 1978, Pl. 76/2; Béal, and Feugère 1983,115-126; Groh 1990, 17-23; Groh 1994, 187-195; Bíró 1994, 41, 127, Pl. LI-LII; Deschler-Erb 1998, Band 27/1, 179-180, Pl. 4445, Band 27/2, 332-333; Bíró et al. 2012, 17, 95-98), yet they are often found among finds in Greek towns and their cemeteries from the north of the Black Sea (Ivanova 1955, 407, Fig. 2; Sokol’skij 1971, 209, Pl. XXIX/14-15; XXX/14; Peters 1986, 68-70, 143-145, 177, Pl. XIV; Medvedev 2009, 170, Fig. 3/3; Medvedev 2011, Fig. 3/1, 4/12 (originate in late ancient date graves); Zhuravlev and Lomtandze 2002, 77, cat. no. 289), the late Scythian environment of Crimea (Gushchina 1982, 26; Vysotskaya 1994, 98, 119, Pl. 5; Puzdrovskij 2007, 155156, Fig. 133/12-15, 135/1-8, 136/1-2, 6-7) and that Meotian (Marčenko and Limberis 2008, 309, cat. no. 177.3, 181.2, Pl. 185/3, 190/2). Because of the archaeological finds, dynamically on the rise, but also the publishing of the results of previous research, the number of pyxides increased, while new finds were reported in various cultural environments. Nevertheless, it must be noted that pyxides, either of bone, wood or metal are not very numerous in the Sarmatian environment2 . This state of fact indicates, according to M. G. Mosh2 For wood pyxides in the Sarmatian environment we may mention the wood cylindrical specimen identified, among other wood wares, in T 4 G 4 from Olănești to the right of the Lower Dniester (Melyukova 1962, 204-205; Kurchatov and Bubulici 2003, 300, 301). Its body extremities were decorated with two incised lines and the lid with two concentric circles. A wood pyxide comes also from T 43 discovered between the places of Kazanskaya and Tiflisskaya (Tbilisskaya) in the Kuban region (Gushchina and Zasetskaya 1994, 33, cat. no. 115, Pl. 12/115; Marčenko and Limberis 2008, 347, cat. no. 39 Pl. 68/7). Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania kova, that Sarmatian women used them for keeping makeup paints, embellishment substances/powders etc., leather sachets or fiber materials, their remains being found quite often within graves (Moshkova 1989, 188). In the area between the Don and the Prut such bone artifacts, either complete or fragmentary, were discovered in several Sarmatian graves (Fig. 9). Amongst count T 6 G 1 from the cemetery at Sladkovka, 1977 (Maksimenko 1998, 132, Fig. 55/13) (Fig. 2/3), T 2 G 1 at Novofilippovka (Simonenko 2008, 80, cat. no. 124.1, Pl. 136/4; Simonenko 2011, 174, cat. no. 11.1, Fig. 67/6)3 (Fig. 1/1), T 2 G 1 at Novofilippovka4 (Vyaz’mitina et al. 1960, 44, Fig. 27/4; Simonenko 2008, 80, cat. no. 125.2, Pl. 137/3; Simonenko 2011, 174, cat. no. 12.2), the eastern grave group (Fig. 1/2), T 18 from Akkermen’ II5 (Vyaz’mitina et al. 1960,78, Fig. 64/4; Simonenko 2008, 80-81, cat. no. 128.1, Pl. 139/2a; Simonenko 2011, 176, cat. no. 17.1), the western grave group (Fig. 1/3), T IV from the eastern group of graves from Akkermen’ II6 (Vyaz’mitina et al. 1960, 85, Fig. 68/6; Simonenko 2008, 81, cat. no. 130.3, Pl. 141/1e; Simonenko 2011, 177, cat. no. 19.3, Fig. 67/3) (Fig. 1/4), T 13 G 1 at Novo-Podkryazh7 (Kostenko 1977, 124; Moshkova 1989, 188, Pl. 80/14; Simonenko 2008, 60, cat. no. 37.1, Pl. 26/1; Simonenko 2011, 186, cat. no. 48.1, Fig. 67/1; Bârcă and Symonenko 2009, 178, Fig. 64/8) (Fig. 3/1), T 45 G 1 at Ust’-Kamenka8 (Fig. 3/2) (Kostenko 1993, 49, Fig. 16/32; Simonenko 2008, 64, cat. no. 63.3, Pl 48/2b; Simonenko 2011, 190-191, cat. no. 59.3, Fig. 67/2; Bârcă and Symonenko 2009, 178, Fig. 64/2), Tsvetna9 (Fig. 2/1) (Simonenko 2008, 70, cat. no. 87.4, Pl. 80/1; Simonenko 2011, 206, cat. no. 90.4, Fig. 67/5), Kovalevka, the Sokolova Mogila G 3 barrow grave10 (Fig. 2/2) (Kovpanenko 1986, 78-80, Fig. 82-83; Simonenko 2008, 75, cat. no. 99.9, Pl 107/3; Simonenko 2011, 223, cat. no. 110.8, Fig. 67/4; Bârcă and Symonenko 2009, 178, Fig. 64/3) to which adds that from T 424 G 2 at Krasnopolka (Simonenko 2008, 68, cat. no. 81, Pl. 165; Simonenko 2011, 194, cat. no. 68; Bârcă 2014a, 53-54), T 20 G 1 (Fig. 4/1-3) (Bârcă 2006, 161, 278, Fig. 7/3-5; Bârcă and Symonenko 2009, 178, Fig. 64/1) and T 27 G 111 (Fig. 4/4) from Bădragii Vechi (Bârcă 2006, 161, 284, Fig. 17/5), and that in T 9 3 Body height – 3 cm; lid diameter 3.4 cm; midway body diameter 3 cm; base diameter – 3.4 cm. Height – 3.8 cm; diameter – 3.4 cm. 5 Height – 3.9 cm; midway body diameter – 3.2 cm. 6 Height – 4 cm; lid diameter – 4 cm; base diameter 4.1 cm. 7 Pyxis height lid included – 6.7 cm; lid diameter – 4.8 cm. 8 Height – 5.8 cm; midway body diameter – 3.4 cm; lid height with elongated profiled knob included -2.7 cm. 9 Height – 3.2 cm; lid diameter – 3 cm; base diameter – 3.5 cm. 10 Height with lid included – 4.5 cm; lid and base diameter – 3.5 cm. 11 Height – 6.2 cm; diameter – 3.3 and 4 cm, base diameter – 3.8 cm, lid diameter – 4.1 cm. 4 131 132 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 1. Bone pyxides. 1. Novofilippovka (T 2 G 1); 2. Novofilippovka (T 2 G 1, eastern grave group); 3. Akkermen’ II (T 18, western grave group); 4. Akkermen’ II (T IV, eastern grave group) (after Simonenko 2008). Fig. 2. Bone pyxides. 1. Tsvetna; 2. Kovalevka, Sokolova Mogila barrow (G 3) (after Simonenko 2008); 3. Sladkovka, 1977 (T 6 G 1) (after Maksimenko 1998). Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Fig. 3. Bone pyxides. 1. Novo-Podkryazh (T 13 G 1); 2. Ust’-Kamenka (T 45 G 1) (after Simonenko 2008). Fig. 4. 1-3. Bădragii Vechi (T 20 M 1); 4. Bădragii Vechi (T 27 G 1); 5. Dumeni (T 9 G 13) (after Bârcă 2006). 133 134 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 G 13 from Dumeni (Fig. 4/5) (Grosu 1988, 84, Fig. 3/7; Grosu 1990, 58; Bârcă 2006, 161, 309, Fig. 51/1). Such bone pieces are also present in a series of Sarmatian graves from the north-east of the Black Sea, the Don-Volga interfluve and the territories east of Volga (Cf. Fig. 9). In the Kuban region (north-east of the Black Sea) bone pyxides, either complete or parts of them, were discovered in the secondary grave from the “Ostryj” barrow at Yaroslavskaya12 (Fig. 6/1) (Marčenko and Limberis 2008, 309, 335, cat. no. 2.6, Pl. 2/2), in the graves from T 4413 (Fig. 5/1) (Gushchina and Zasetskaya 1994, 33, 49, cat. no. 127, Pl. 13/127; Marčenko and Limberis 2008, 309, 347, cat. no. 40.2, Pl. 69/8) and T 4514 (Fig. 5/2) (Gushchina and Zasetskaya 1994, 33, 49, cat. no. 132, Pl. 13/132) between the places of Kazanskaya and Tiflisskaya (Tbilisskaya), the graves in T 1815 (Fig. 5/3) (Gushchina and Zasetskaya 1994, 33, 60, cat. no. 300, Pl. 32/300; Marčenko and Limberis 2008, 309, 350, cat. no. 51.3, Pl. 78/2) and T 2016 (Fig. 5/4) (Gushchina and Zasetskaya 1994, 33, 62, cat. no. 322, Pl. 34/322; Marčenko and Limberis 2008, 309, 350, cat. no. 52.3, Pl. 81/3) from Tiflisskaya (Tbilisskaya), to which adds the specimen from the barrow grave at Kunchukokhabl’17 (Fig. 6/2) (Marčenko and Limberis 2008, 309, 356, cat. no. 74.4, Pl. 110/1). In the Don-Volga interfluve such fragmentary pieces were discovered in the rich barrow grave (T 1 G 1) at “Dachi” (Fig. 6/3) (Bespalyj 1992, 177, Fig. 1/6), T 1 G 1 at Vysochino, 1978 (Maksimenko 1998, 132), T 2 G 1 at Novoaleksandrovka, 1977 (Maksimenko 1998, 132) (left of the Danube mouths) and T 44 G 1 in the Krivoj Liman cemetery, left of the Lower Don, 1980 (Fig. 6/4) (Maksimenko 1998, 132, Fig. 16/6, 55/12; Bespalyj and Luk’yashko 2018, 9, 11, 12, Fig. 373). To these adds the specimen from the main grave of a Sarmatian barrow from Sadovoe18 (Fig. 7) (Firsov 1998, 129, 133-134, Fig. 3), west the Lower Volga. In the territories east of Volga, a bone pyxis comes from grave T 6 in the Kurpe Baj cemetery (Western Kazakhstan)19 (Fig. 8) (cf. Senigova 1956, 144, 148, Pl. IV/1; Moshkova 1989, 188). 12 Height – 3.8 cm; diameter – 3.7 cm. Height – 4.5 cm; diameter – 3 cm. 14 Surviving base diameter – 2.9 cm. 15 Height – 5.5 cm; diameter – 3 cm. 16 Height – 5.3 cm; diameter – 3.2 cm. 17 Height - 5 cm; mouth diameter - 3 cm; base diameter - 4 cm. 18 Body height – 3.1 cm; outer mouth diameter – 2.1 cm; outer lid diameter– 3.1 cm; base diameter 2.6 cm. 19 Height - 4 cm; mouth diameter – 3.5 cm; base diameter - 4 cm. 13 Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Fig. 5. Bone pyxides. 1. Kazanskaya/Tiflisskaya (T 44); 2. Kazanskaya/Tiflisskaya (T 45); 3. Tiflisskaya (T 18); 4. Tiflisskaya (T 20) (after Marčenko and Limberis 2008 (1, 3-4); Gushchina and Zasetskaya 1994 (2)). Fig. 6. Bone pyxides. 1. Yaroslavskaya (“Ostryj” barrow); 2. Kunchukokhabl’ (after Marčenko/ Limberis 2008); 3. ”Dachi” (T 1 G 1) (after Bespalyj 1992); 4. Krivoy Liman (T 44 G 1) (after Maksimenko 1998). 135 136 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 In the Sarmatian environment of the Great Hungarian Plain the pyxides discovered within graves are mainly of metal (Cf. Párducz 1941, Pl. XXII/4; Párducz 1950, 9, 24, 26, Pl. VII/5a-b, VIII/7, LXXII/9, LXXIV/3, 5; Párducz 1950a, 69, 70-71, Pl. XIV/2/1a-e; Vaday 1980, 57, Pl. 19/2; Vaday 1989, 124, 259, cat. no. 214/8, Pl. 74/11, 281, cat. no. 396/3, Pl. 153/8; Vaday and Szőke 1983,113; Bozsik 2003, 102, Fig. 7/6, 8/6; Bârcă 2014, 136-138; Bârcă 2017), bone artefacts being currently unknown. From the point of view of the geographical location, in the territories east of Volga there is only one piece, it being in fact the most eastern find. In the Don-Volga interfluve, these artifacts are represented by five finds. Amongst, three are from the left of the Don mouths, one from around the Lower Don and the fifth from a place located half the way between the Volga and the Lower Don. Other six pyxides come from the north-east of the Black Sea (Kuban region) (Fig. 9). In the case of the finds above, the majority come mainly from territories closer to the Bosporan Kingdom. In the north-Pontic Sarmatian environment between the Don and the Prut, such artifacts are represented by 13 finds. Amongst, six come from the area between the Don and the Dnieper, three from the Dnieper-Bug interfluve, a specimen comes from the right of the Lower Bug, and other three from the area between the Dniester and the Prut (Cf. Fig. 9). Fig.7. Bone pyxis in the Sadovoe barrow (after Firsov 1998). Fig. 8. Bone pyxis in barrow 6 from the Kurpe Baj cemetery (after Senigova 1956). Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Fig. 9. Map of bone pyxides distribution in the Sarmatian environment from the territories between the Prut and Ural Negre: 1. Kurpe Baj; 2. Sadovoe; 3. Krivoj Liman (T 44 G 1); 4. “Dachi” (T 1 G 1); 5. Novoaleksandrovka (T 2 G 1); 6. Vysochino (T 1 G 1); 7. Kazanskaya / Tiflisskaya (T 44); 8. Kazanskaya / Tiflisskaya (T 45); 9. Tiflisskaya (T 18); 10. Tiflisskaya (T 20); 11. Kunchukokhabl’; 12. Yaroslavskaya (“Ostryj” barrow); 13. Sladkovka, 1977 (T 6 G 1); 14. Novofilippovka (T 2 G 1), 15. Novofilippovka (T 2 G 1, eastern grave group), 16. Akkermen’ II (T 18, western grave group), 17. Akkermen’ II (T IV, eastern grave group), 18. Novo-Podkryazh (T 13 G 1), 19. Ust’-Kamenka (T 45 G 1), 20. Tsvetna, 21. Kovalevka, tumulus Sokolova Mogila (G 3), 22. Krasnopolka (T 424 G 2), 23. Bădragii Vechi (T 20 G 1), 24. Bădragii Vechi (T 27 G 1), 25. Dumeni (T 9 G 13). All bone specimens from within the graves between the Don and the Prut, but also in the Sarmatian environment of the territories east of the Don and Volga, as well as from the north-east of the Black Sea, are characterised by a series of general typological features. Their body is cylindrical or cylindrical with slightly concave walls, while some of the specimens have the body slightly narrowed in the upper part. Their diameter is not very large, which is explained by the specificity of the material they are made of. A part of the pyxides are decorated in the lower body half with incised lines. The base of all pyxides is made of another disc-shaped bone piece, occasionally decorated with incised concentric circles, set on their cylindrical body. The lid is most often profiled, some specimens having set an elongated profiled knob in the lid’s central part20. Most lids are made of a circle-shaped body in which the disc piece is set, yet there are also specimens made of a single bone piece. The lid disc is either bulg20 Their shape is similar to that of the chess pown. 137 138 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 ing or decorated with sunken concentric circles, forming a well marked surface. Among the bone pyxides from the north and north-Pontic Sarmatian environment there are no specimens with depictions figured in relief on their body, like those in the Roman environment21. All bone pyxides from the Sarmatian graves have numerous parallels among the finds from various cultural environments of the first two centuries AD, but especially in that Roman provincial. The pieces in the Sarmatian environment have parallels also among the wood pyxides from the north-Pontic space of the first centuries AD (Sokol’skij 1971, 205, Pl. XXIX/6, 8, 10, 11, 15, XXX/3, 6, 8, XXXI/7-11). *** The pyxides in the Sarmatian environment of the territories between the Don and Prut were discovered beside various classes of artifacts. They, together with other elements, allow a more accurate chronological framing of both graves and period of use. The grave at Novofilippovka (T 2 G 1), for which information regarding the pit shape and the position of the deceased is missing, contained among the grave goods scarabs of Egyptian faience, grape-shaped pendants, amphora-shaped pendants and an altar-shaped amulet, all of Egyptian faience. To these adds a returned foot brooch, three pottery wares, of which worthy of note is a wheel-thrown cup with everted rim and spout (Simonenko 2008, 80, Pl. 136, Simonenko 2011, 174, cat. no. 11, Fig. 24, 69/16). In A. K. Ambroz’s classification, the brooch of Novofilippovka belongs to the second variation of series I in group 15 of brooches characterised by not very curved, downward bow, and foot slightly widened by the extremity compared to the rest of the body (Ambroz 1966, 49, Pl. 9/7). The same author includes in this series both outer chord brooches and those with inner chord, of which it was argued that only part of the early specimens had inner chord (Ambroz 1966, 48 sqq.). The brooches in the second variation were dated by A. K. Ambroz to the 1st century AD, mainly the second half, without yet excluding the possibility of their use by early 2nd century AD (Ambroz 1966, 49). The large number of such brooches made of a single metal piece with inner chord discovered in the last four decades, allowed V. V. Kropotov (Kropotov 2010, 129-150) to frame all specimens in series II of brooches with returned foot wound onto the bow from the fourth group. Within the series, they were divided, based on certain peculiarities, into four variations. The brooch from Novofilippovka belongs to shape 1 of the second variation of series II (Krop21 For such pyxides see references in works quoted in note 6. Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania otov 2010, 131, Fig. 40/2, 5, 11). Finds of such brooches mainly cluster in the Lower Dnieper river basin and Crimea, yet they are also sporadically found in the Kuban region, North Caucasus and the north-west Pontic territories. Chronologically, brooches in this variation are dated to the second half of the 1st c. – early 2nd c. AD (Kropotov 2010, 131), as in fact confirmed by the artifacts they were identified with within the features. The second grave from Novofilippovka (T 2 G 1, eastern group of graves) is a main burial within a Sarmatian barrow. The gravepit is rectangular (2.2 x 1 m), had the dead placed head towards the SW. The grave was looted. Beside the pyxis, among the surviving grave goods count a wheel thrown cup, a fragment of a massive bronze piece, a quiver with three-winged iron arrowheads, with socket, bronze rivets and one terra sigillata (Vyaz’mitina et al. 1960, 44-45, Fig. 27; Simonenko 2008, 80, Pl. 137/1-7; Simonenko 2011, 174, cat. no. 12) aryballos, indicative of a dating to the second half of the 1st – early 2nd c. AD. The grave in T 18 from Akkermen’ II is a main burial, in a rectangular pit (1.8 x 0.6 m), with the dead head towards SW. It was looted. The grave goods also contained a bracelet, five clasps in the shape of links and one earring, all of bronze, to which also adds a glass bead and a handmade jar (Vyaz’mitina et al. 1960, 78, Fig. 64; Simonenko 2008, 80-81, Pl. 139/2a-e; Simonenko 2011, 176, cat. no. 17). The grave in T IV at Akkermen’ II (eastern group of graves) is a main burial, in a square pit (Vyaz’mitina et al. 1960, 84-85, Fig. 68; Simonenko 2008, 81, Pl. 141/1a-f; Simonenko 2011, 176-177, cat. no. 19). Alike the preceding, it was also looted. Beside the pyxis, among the grave goods were recovered a wheelthrown jug with strongly everted rim shaped as a funnel, short narrow neck, bulging body and ringfoot, a small wheel-thrown jar, handmade pottery fragments, a tazza type vessel with inverted rim, a bronze buckle with ring-shape prong and a bronze brooch. The latter has bilateral spring made of four coils, outer chord, curved widened bow in the form of a rhomboid plate, solid catchplate, rectangular and foot extremity raised above and twisted in the form of a loop/coil. The bow is decorated with incised oblique lines. In A. K. Ambroz’s typology, such brooches belong to variation three of group 13 (Ambroz 1966, 45, Pl. 5/15-16). The same author maintains they were used extensively over the 1st c. AD, partially found also by early 2nd c. AD (Ambroz 1966, 45). In V. V. Kropotov’s recent classification, such brooches are part of series I, form 3 of group 8 (Kropotov 2010, 185, Fig. 55/11-14, 16, 21, 23). Chronologically, the six forms of this series are often found together in both features of the second half of the 1st – early 2nd c. AD and in some later (Kropotov 2010, 185). This indicates their use for a long time. The finds of such 139 140 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 brooches cluster mainly in the Lower Don area, Crimea, Kuban region and the territory north the Caucasus, but also sporadically in the territories from the north and north-west of the Black Sea (Kropotov 2010, 185, 186-201, Fig. 56). Based on the dating of the artifacts from the grave in T IV, yet also the chronological framing of the other graves from Akkermen’ II, it may be argued they date sometime to the second half of the 1st c. – early 2nd c. AD. The pyxis from Novo-Podkryazh (T 13 G 1) counts among the grave goods of a main catacomb grave, with the deceased extended, head to the NW. The goods also included a wheel-thrown jar and cup, a whetstone, a mirror with round and flat disc, amethyst and carnelian beads, but also one amber and crystal bead each (Kostenko 1977, 124; Simonenko 2008, 60, Pl. 26, 27/1a-c; Simonenko 2011, 186, cat. no. 48). Mirrors of the type at Novo-Podkryazh are the simplest type of such toiletries from the Sarmatian world, being used as early as the Early Sarmatian period (Cf. Khazanov 1963, 62; Maksimenko 1983, 96-97, Fig. 16-17, 19; Skripkin 1990, 150; Skripkin and Klepikov 2004, 99, Fig. 4/31-35; Marchenko 1996, 19-20; Bârcă 2006a, 93-95; Bârcă and Symonenko 2009, 74-75; Simonenko 1993, 28; Simonenko 2004, 139). They were massively used by the Sarmatians in the 1st c. BC – 1st c. AD (Khazanov 1963, 64), particularly in the latter (Skripkin 1990, 153; see for finds of mirrors of the type to the 1st c. AD in Abramova 1971, 121132; Grosu 1990; Simonenko and Lobaj 1991, 57; Kostenko 1993, 106, 113; Simonenko 1993, 85; Marchenko 1996, 19-20; Bârcă 2006, 148-150; Bârcă 2006a, 93-95; Bârcă and Symonenko 2009, 74-75, 171-172; Glukhov 2003; Simonenko 2004, 139, 144). Once with the end of the 1st c. AD, such mirrors ceased to exist in the Sarmatian world east of the Don, while by early 2nd c. AD only singular specimens may be found (Khazanov 1963, 64; Skripkin 1990, 153, Fig. 44. A. A. Glukhov believes that in the Don-Volga interfluve, the upper limit of the use of round disc mirrors may be placed most likely by mid 1st c. AD, without yet excluding some specimens being fashionable also in the second half (Glukhov 2003, 91). In the north-Pontic region east of the Don, mirrors of the type are frequent within 1st c. AD-graves, especially the second half. In the same area, simple disc mirrors are rare also in a series of graves from early/first half of the 2nd c. AD. Mirrors with round flat disc are present also in other cultural environments (Cf. Bârcă 2006, 149 with bibliography), the Great Hungarian Plain Sarmatian milieu included (Istvánovits and Kulcsár 1993, 9-58; Bârcă 2016, 55-61). The grave at Ust’-Kamenka (T 45 G 1) is a main burial in a square funerary pit with the deceased (woman) extended, head to the NW. Its grave goods include, beside the pyxis, a wheel-thrown bowl, reddish, a glass unguentarium, a bronze bowl, a bronze brooch, a pendant and bronze clasps, two wheel-thrown Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania censers and one vessel, a wheel-thrown jar, an iron knife, two spindle weights and many glass, crystal, carnelian and onyx beads (Kostenko 1993, 48-50, Fig. 16, 17/1-20; Simonenko 2008, 64, Pl 48/2a-e, 49-50; Simonenko 2011, 190-191, cat. no. 59). The brooch has bilateral spring, formed of four coils and outer chord, bandshaped flattened bow and trapezoid catchplate. The bow is decorated by incisions and has a knob by the foot end. In A. K. Ambroz’s typology, the brooch at Ust’-Kamenka may be framed to the first three brooch variants with flattened bow and trapezoid catchplate with a more or less marked knob by the end (group 12) (Ambroz 1966, 43, Pl. 5/2-9). In V. V. Kropotov’s recent work, such brooches belong to variation 2 in group 9 (Kropotov 2010, 212, Fig. 61-62), though some features ascribe it also to the first variation. A. K. Ambroz dated the brooches in the first variation to the 1st c. AD, while those in variation three to the end of the 1st – first half of the 2nd c. AD (Ambroz 1966, 43). The first two variations of the specimens from Crimea are dated to the last quarter of the 1st c. AD, while the emergence of the brooches in variation three is placed by the eve between the 1st – 2nd c. AD, with the note of use of some specimens until mid-third quarter of the 2nd c. AD (Puzdrovskij 2007, 181, 185, 188). Subsequent to the analysis of all these brooches from the north-Pontic area, V. V. Kropotov concluded that the specimens in the first variation date to the second half of the 1st – early 2nd c. AD, while those in the second over the 2nd c. AD (Kropotov 2010, 213). The finds of such brooches cluster mainly in the lower Don area, Crimea and the Kuban region, but also sporadically in the territories from the north and north-west of the Black Sea (Kropotov 2010, Fig. 60, 62). Another very good dating element is the glass unguentarium of type Isings 6. Such unguentaria were dated by C. Isings to the 1st c. AD (Isings 1957, 22-23). N. Z. Kunina and N. P. Sorokina ascribe such glass vessels to type II, being dated to the 1st – early 2nd c. AD (Kunina and Sorokina, 1972, 169-171, Fig. 11). In the Sarmatian and Meotian environment from the Kuban region, such pieces come from second half of the 1st – early 2nd c. AD graves (Marčenko and Limberis 2008, 303, map, 9, cat. no. 51, 2, 73, 4, 127, 1, 141, 1, 157, 1, 172, 1, 198, 6-7). The find of two censers within the same grave, occasionally one on top of the other, is a chronological and cultural mark of the Middle Sarmatian period (Skripkin 1990, 99). In the Sarmatian graves from the north and north-west Pontic area, this innovative custom emerges by mid 1st c. AD and is found mainly in a series of graves and cemeteries from the second half of the 1st – early/first half of the 2nd c. AD (Cf. Bârcă 2006, 77; Bârcă 2015, 53; Bârcă and Symonenko 141 142 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 2009, 117-118). This custom as well as some censer types were carried to the north and north-Pontic area by the new Sarmatian tribes arriving from the east. In fact, it is not fortuitous that the finds from the north and north-west of the Black Sea come mainly from most definite eastern feature graves. On the basis of the dating of all artifacts from the grave in T 45, it may be argued it dates sometime to the end of the 1st c. – early 2nd c. AD. The pyxis from Tsvetna was discovered together with a bronze jar (Oinochoe) with trilobate rim of type Eggers 124, a type Eggers 137 bronze casserole, a silver jar, not very vertical with ringfoot, a bronze cauldron, a golden bracelet with hexagonal section, a golden buckle, a cauldron-shaped pendant and several types of golden dress appliques, belt fittings, a fine red fabric wheel-thrown cup, fragments of a dark grey cup and from an amphora handle. There add also sword fragments and several three-winged iron arrowheads with socket etc. (Simonenko 2008, 69-70, Pl. 77-81; Simonenko 2011, 203-206, cat. no. 90, Fig. 7/1-2, 18/6-7, 28, 40; Mordvintseva and Trejster 2007, II, 136, no. B46). Based on each of the piece dating it may concluded that the entire feature dates to the second half – last 1st c. AD (Simonenko 2008, 15; Simonenko 2011, 40; V. Mordvintseva and M. Trejster date the feature to the mid-third quarter of the 1st c. AD (Mordvintseva and Trejster 2007, II, 136). The grave from the Sokolova Mogila barrow is a secondary burial in a Bronze-date barrow with rectangular funerary pit. The deceased (woman) lay extended on the back, head to WSW. Its rich furnishing included an oinochoe, skyphos and silver spoon, a bronze situla, one ring, earrings, bracelets, collars, brooches and golden dress appliques, bronze rings, two fans (flabella) with silver and bone handles, a bronze mirror with handle in the shape of a male’s face with eastern facial features, sitting with legs crossed, a bone comb, to which add many beads of semiprecious and glass stones, cauldron-shaped pendants, a marble vessel, one of alabaster, a wheel thrown jug and dish, one censer, bowl and box with wooden lid (Kovpanenko 1986, 9-110, Fig. 23-118; Simonenko 2008, 74-75, Pl. 103-111; Simonenko 2011, 220-225, cat. no. 110). Most pieces date to the 1st c. AD, yet there are artifacts with a somewhat broader chronological framing. Based on the dating of all these artifacts we believe that in G 3 from the Sokolova Mogila barrow, which included also a pyxis, is dated, as previously mentioned, to the second half of the 1st c. AD (possibly the third quarter or last third) (See also Bârcă 2011, 10; Bârcă 2015, 41; Simonenko 2011, 43-44) and not the first half as dated by G. T. Kovpanenko (Kovpanenko 1986, 127). The grave at Krasnopolka (T 424 G 2) is a secondary burial with the deceased (woman) placed with head to the north in a coffin made of a hollowed Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania tree trunk (?). Beside the pyxis, the grave goods also included handmade and wheel-thrown pottery, glass, quartz and carnelian beads, a golden link with loop, bronze links, spindle weights, a rectangular mirror, yet also a Eggers 140 (Simonenko 2008, 68, cat. no. 81, Pl. 165; Simonenko 2011, 194, cat. no. 68; Bârcă 2014a, 53-54) bronze casserole. Subsequent to the study of all casseroles bearing the artisan’s stamp as well as the contexts of their find, it was reached the conclusion that the production start of this casserole type must be placed sometime in AD 5/10, while their cease sometime around AD 30/35, no later than the end of Tiberius’s reign (Petrovszky 1993, 52-54). Nonetheless, a significant part of these casseroles were discovered on the entire duration of the 1st c. AD and early following century, as the case of the Sarmatian graves dated to the end of the 1st c. AD – early 2nd c. AD (Cf. Kropotkin 1970, 95, no. 822; Medvedev and Yefimov 1986, 84; Grosu 1990, 61; Simonenko 2008, 17, 71; Bârcă 2001, 338; Bârcă 2006, 171; Bârcă 2009, 101-103; Bârcă and Symonenko 2009, 188; Simonenko 2011, 49-52). Rectangular mirrors like the one in respective grave were very popular and widely spread in most part of the Roman provinces of the 1st c. AD. Their majority come from 1st c. AD contexts and complexes, yet there are also cases when they remained fashionable for a longer time span (For rectangular mirrors in the Roman environment see Lloyd-Morgan 1977, 231-252; Lloyd-Morgan 1980, 97, 104; Lloyd-Morgan 1981, 145, 155; Lloyd-Morgan 1981a, 3-20). There is no information regarding the production of rectangular mirrors over the 2nd c. AD (Lloyd-Morgan 1980, 97; Lloyd-Morgan 1981a, 3). In the north-Pontic Sarmatian environment, rectangular mirrors are part of graves dated mainly to the second half of the 1st c. – first decades of the 2nd c. AD (for the rectangular mirrors in the Greek and Sarmatian environment from the north-Pontic space see Bârcă 2014a, 49-63 with complete bibliography, while for those in the Sarmatian environment of the Great Hungarian Plain (Istvánovits and Kulcsár 1993, 14). The dating of the Krasnopolka grave may be placed most likely sometime in the second half of the 1st c. – early 2nd c. AD. The pyxides from Bădragii Vechi are part of the furnishing of two graves (T 20 G 1, T 27 G 1), which are secondary burials in Bronze Age barrows. The funerary pit of the grave in T 20 was trapezoid, while that of the grave in T 27 could not delimited. The dead in T 20 G 1 was placed head to NNW, while that in T 27 G 1 was extended with head to NE (Cf. Bârcă 2006, 277, 283, Fig. 7/1, 17/1). The grave goods of T 20 G 1 included beside the fragmentary pyxis, a glass fragmentary bead, a bronze mirror with round, flat disc (while metal), fragments of an iron piece and a wheel-thrown cup (Bârcă 2006, 277-278, Fig. 7/26). The latter is identical with the specimens of type Knipovič 4(M), dated to 143 144 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 the first two thirds of the 1st c. AD (Knipovich 1952, 296-297, Fig. 1/4), with those of Robinson M 33 type, dated to the second half of the 1st c. - first half of the 2nd c. AD (Robinson 1959, 87, Pl. 18, 62) and those belonging to form Hayes 70 (Hayes 1985, 63, Pl. XIV/19). It is very similar also to the Robinson G 28, G 70-71 (Robinson 1959, 25, Pl. 4, 62) type cups, dated to the first half of the 1st c. AD and those of Robinson H 7 type, dated to the first half of the 2nd c. AD (Robinson 1959, 47, Pl. 8, 68). Recipients of the type are part of the class of terra sigillata orientales B, known in the specialty literature as “Samian” (see in detail Hayes 1985, 49-70). A somewhat richer furnishing had the grave in T 27, comprising a silver fragmentary earring, a bronze brooch, several amber, agate, carnelian and glass beads, a bronze casserole, the handle of a bronze vessel, a mirror and two bronze plates, an iron knife, a bone cylindrical fragmentary piece, a spindle weight, a handmade censer, a jar and a wheel-thrown cup (Cf. Bârcă 2006, 283285, Fig. 17-19). The brooch is strongly profiled with inner chord and bilateral spring formed of 12 coils and chord inserted under the bow. The bow was decorated with two knobs: one towards the bow head and the other divides the bow from foot. The latter has a small knob by the end, while the catchplate is trapezoid. The brooch is made of two metal parts. Regarding the peculiar strongly profiled brooch making of two metal pieces (brooch body, on one hand and the spring with pin on the other) it occurred towards the end of the 1st c. AD and generalizes in the first decades of the 2nd c. AD (Rustoiu, 1997, 54). Strongly profiled brooches made of two parts are documented by the end of the 1st – early 2nd c. AD also in pre-Roman Dacia, where they are Roman imports (Rustoiu 1997, 54). The brooch from Bădragii Vechi has no identical parallel presently. However, since it has inner chord, we may assume it may be a product of a workshop from the Barbaricum, possibly the eastern Getae-Dacian environment, where workshops making them also functioned (Rustoiu 1997, 20-21). The casserole in this grave belongs to type Eggers 142 and preserves on the exterior handle part the stamp LAN II/I. Such casseroles were discovered in various cultural environments throughout the Europe of the early Roman imperial period (Cf. Bârcă 2009, 103-104, with bibliography). Based on the analysis of all casseroles bearing the artisan’s stamp as well as the find contexts, R. Petrovszky concluded that their production started sometime in AD 35-40 and their cease in the 90’s of the 1st c. AD (Petrovszky 1993, 71). Based on the large number of such casseroles with the artisan’s stamp on the handle, it was established they were mainly made in the workshops of the Ansii and Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Cipii in Capua (Campania) (Lund Hansen, 1987, 48-49; Petrovszky 1993, 69-71), but also occasionally in Gaul (Petrovszky 1993, 69, 71). The stamp on the specimen from Bădragii Vechi belongs to artisan Lucius Ansius Epaphroditus making vessels in Capua between AD 50/55 and 85 (Petrovszky 1993, 143, 144, 207). Alike the Eggers 140 type casseroles, those of type 142 were used in some cases for a long period of time, being also found in the 2nd c. AD. As regards the dating of the grave at Bădragii Vechi, it dates, as mentioned, to the end of the 1st c. – early 2nd c. AD (Bârcă 2001, 340; Bârcă 2006, 172, 283-285; Bârcă 2009, 104). The grave at Dumeni (T 9 G 13) is a secondary burial in a Bronze Age barrow. The outline of the funerary pit, rectangular, was delimited only at skeleton level, extended, with head to NE. The grave goods included beside the fragmentary pyxis, also a bronze brooch, an amber bead, four golden plates and one leaf, a knife and iron sword with ring by the end of the grip and also 21 threewinged iron arrowheads (Grosu 1988, 84-85, Fig. 3/6-13, 15; Grosu 1990, 58, Fig. 18B; Bârcă 2006, 161, 309-310, Fig. 51). The brooch is strongly profiled with bilateral spring formed of 12 coils and chord inserted under the bow. The bow is decorated with two knobs: one towards the bow head and the other divides the bow from foot. The foot exhibits a small knob by the end, while the catchplate is trapezoid. The brooch is made of two metal parts and is of small sizes (2.3 cm). Brooches of the type are frequently present in the Geto-Dacian settlements from the Siret river basin (Rustoiu 1997, 54), where workshops making such brooches were operational (the settlements of Brad and Poiana, Rustoiu 1997, 20-21). Such brooches are frequent in the Geto-Dacian settlements and fortresses from south-east Transylvania (Rustoiu 1997, 54; Crişan 2000, 140, Pl. 114/8-10, 12), but also in that of Ocniţa (Berciu 1981, Pl. 20/1, 71/5, 82/7, 91/6, 11, 102/10-11, 16; Rustoiu 1997, 54, Fig. 62/14-20, 63/7). It was argued that discussed brooches originate in the east-Carpathian Geto-Dacian environment from where they reached also the north-Pontic Sarmatian environment (Bârcă 2006, 129; Bârcă 2011, 18). In addition, in the Sarmatian environment, finds of brooches of the type mainly come from graves in the north-west territories of the Black Sea22 . Such a brooch also comes from Olbia and other five from late Scythian graves from Crimea (Kropotov 2010, 227-228, no. 16-20). 22 Except the brooches in the Sarmatian graves from T 3 at Kazanskaya (“Zolotoe kladbishche” cemetery, on the right bank of the Kuban river) (Gushchna and Zasetskaya 1994, 42, cat. no. 22, Pl. 2/22), T 4 at Kolpachki (lower Volga region) (Sergatskov 2004, 109, Fig. 1/21) and G9/1956 at Kobyakovo gorodishche on the right bank of the Danube mouths (Kropotov 2010, 228, no. 22). 145 146 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Chronologically, they emerged most likely by mid/second half of the 1st c. AD and were fashionable until early 2nd c. AD. To this period also date the Sarmatian graves with such brooches among the other artifacts classes specific to the period (Bârcă 2006, 129-130; Kropotov 2010, 226, 227-228). In the Sarmatian graves of the first half of the 2nd c. AD such strongly profiled brooches are missing) included in their furnishing. As regards T 6 G 1 at Sladkovka, 1977 it dated to the Middle Sarmatian period, alike most graves from this barrow cemetery (Cf. Maksimenko 1998). The pyxides from presented finds have many parallels mainly in the Roman provincial milieu (Davidson 1952, 136, Pl. 69, nr. 965, 137, Pl. 70, nr. 964; Alföldi 1957, 488, Pl. CXXXIV/14; Pleniscar-Gec 1972, Pl. CCX/6; Petru 1972, Pl. IX/26, XV/1, LXI/4, LXIV/4, LXVIII/24, XCV/13; Marangou 1976, nr. 217, 125, Pl. 64/a, b; Goethert-Polaschek 1977, Pl. 3, 5, 9; Mackensen 1978, Pl. 76/2; Béal and Feugère 1983, 115-126; Groh 1990, 17-23; Groh 1994, 187195; Bíró 1994, 41, 127, Pl. LI-LII; Deschler-Erb 1998, Band 27/1, 179-180, Pl. 44-45, Band 27/2, 332-333; Bíró et al. 2012, 17, 95-98). Such pieces are also found among the finds from the Greek cities, the Bosporan Kingdom, the late Scythian environment of Crimea and that Meotian of the Kuban region (Ivanova 1955, 407, Fig. 2; Sokol’skij 1971, 209, Pl. XXIX/14-15; XXX/14; Peters 1986, 68-70, 143-145, 177, Pl. XIV; Medvedev 2009, 170, Fig. 3/3; Medvedev 2011, Fig. 3/1, 4/12; Zhuravlev and Lomtandze 2002, 77, cat. nr. 289; Gushchina 1982, 26; Vysotskaya 1994, 98, 119, Pl. 5; Puzdrovskij 2007, 155-156, Fig. 133/12-15, 135/1-8, 136/1-2, 6-7; Marčenko and Limberis 2008, 309, cat. nr. 177.3, 181.2, Pl. 185/3, 190/2). Typologically, bone pyxides from above Sarmatian finds belong, except for the fragmentary specimen from Dumeni, to type 1a and 1b in J.-C. Béal and M. Feugère’s classification (Béal and Feugère 1983, 116-117, Fig. 2-5). The piece in T 45 G 1 at Ust’-Kamenka (Fig. 3/2) belongs to type 1b, while the other complete specimens are similar or close to those ascribed to type 1a. Chronologically, the specimens in type 1a come mainly from 1st c. AD-contexts and complexes, yet they are found as well in the first decades of the 2nd c. AD. To the second half of the 1st – first decades/mid 2nd c. AD date the pyxides that may be ascribed to type 1b (for the dating of the pyxides of the two types see: Davidson 1952, 136, Pl. 69, nr. 965, 137, Pl. 70, nr. 964; Alföldi 1957, 488, Pl. CXXXIV/14; Pleniscar-Gec 1972, Pl. CCX/6; Petru 1972, Pl. IX/26, XV/1, LXI/4, LXIV/4, LXVIII/24, XCV/13; Marangou 1976, nr. 217, 125, Pl. 64/a, b; Goethert-Polaschek 1977, Pl. 3, 5, 9; Mackensen 1978, Pl. 76/2; Béal and Feugère 1983,115-126; Groh 1990, 17-23; Groh 1994, 187-195; Bíró 1994, 41, 127, Pl. LI-LII; Deschler-Erb 1998, Band 27/1, 179-180, Pl. 44-45, Band 27/2, 332-333; Bíró et al. 2012, 17, 95- Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania 98). The latter are notable by the presence of a conical elongated profiled knob or similar to the chess pawn in the centre of the lid (Cf. Béal and Feugère 1983,117, Fig. 3/1b, 5). Concerning the fragmentary piece from the grave at Dumeni(Fig. 4/5), decorated with four horizontal lines, double, incised, it must be mentioned that the decoration with incised lines on the body is found on a series of pyxides from the ancient centres from the north of the Black Sea (Cf. Peters 1986, Pl. XIV/9, 17, 20, 21), and also the Roman provincial environment (Cf. Bíró 1994, 41, Pl. LI/442; Bíró et al. 2012, 95, cat. no. 179). Thus, based on the above notes, it may be concluded that bone pyxides from the discussed Sarmatian graves are mainly Roman products. It is not excluded that some are copies of the latter, being made in local workshops (north-Pontic), like at Panticapaeum23, from where, likely, some also reached the Sarmatians, Meotians and late Scythians. All Sarmatian graves with pyxides and other import artifacts among the grave goods as well, date to the second half of the 1st c. – early/first decades of the 2nd c. AD. Even more, those from the area west of the Don are mainly part of the grave group which belonged to the new wave of Sarmarians arriving to the north-Pontic area starting with mid 1st c. AD from regions east of the Don (Bârcă and Symonenko 2009, 178; Simonenko 2008, 30; Simonenko 2011, 111). The graves in this group contain a series of eastern elements and features (for elements specific to the new wave of Sarmatians arriving from the east in the north-Pontic area see Simonenko 2000, 133-144; Bârcă and Symonenko 2009, 99-203; Bârcă 2015, with complete bibliography), also noticeable in the case of graves with pyxides. A careful analysis of all aspects also shows that these complexes form in the second half of the 1st c. – first decades of the 2nd c. AD a local well-marked cultural-chronological horizon. Last but not least, the pyxides are part of funerary complexes from the period of major inflow of Roman artefacts in the Sarmatian environment, placed between AD 60/70 – 120/130 (stage B2 in the Central-European chronology). It corresponds to the political and military offensive of the Roman empire by the Lower Danube, the establishment of the Roman province of Dacia and also the power increase and more important role played by the Sarmatians in the north and north-west Pontic territories. As regards the graves with bone pyxides from the north-east Pontic area and the territories east of the Don and Volga, they are from the Middle Sarmatian period and chronologically frame closely or similarly with those from the area 23 It is argued that in the 1st – 2nd c. AD, bone pyxides production spread on general basis in the towns from the north of the Black Sea. Cf. Peters 1986, 68. 147 148 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 between the Don and Prut. In their case as well, there are many import artefact classes present (brooches, pottery, amphorae, glass or bronze wares, etc.) which are good dating elements, the deceased in some of these graves belonging to the upper class of the Sarmatian society. Typologically, the bone pyxides from the Sarmatian finds in the north-east Pontic area and the territories east of the Don and Volga may be ascribed, alike those from the west of the Don, to type 1a and 1b in J.-C. Béal and M. Feugère’s (Béal and Feugère 1983, 116-117, Fig. 2-5) classification. The piece in T 20 at Tiflisskaya (Tbilisskaya) (Fig. 5/4), belongs to type 1b, while the other complete specimens are similar or close to those framed in type 1a. Bibliography Abramova, Maja Pavlovna. 1971. „Zerkala gornyh rajonov Severnogo Kavkaza v pervye veka nashej ery.” In Istoriya i kul’tura Vostochnoj Evropy po arkheologicheskim dannym, edited by S. M. Oreshnikova, 121-132. Moskva: Sovetskaya Rossiya. Alföldi, Mária. 1977. Intercisa II (Dunapentele). Geschichte der Stadt in der Römerzeit. Archaeologia Hungarica, Series nova, 36. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. Ambroz, Анатолий Константинович. 1966. Fibuly yuga evropejskoj chasti SSSR. Arkheologiya SSSR. Svod Arkheologicheskih Istochnikov D1-30. Мoskva: Nauka. Bârcă, Vitalie. 2001. „Vasele romane de bronz din mormintele sarmatice din spaţiul pruto-nistrean.” In Studii de Istorie Antică, edited by Florea, G., G. Gheorghiu, and E. Iaroslavschi, 335-361. Deva: Muzeul Naţional de Istorie a Transilvaniei. Bârcă, Vitalie. 2006. Istorie şi civilizaţie. Sarmaţii în spaţiul est-carpatic (sec. I a. Chr. – începutul sec. II p. Chr.). Cluj-Napoca: Argonaut. Bârcă, Vitalie. 2006a. Nomazi ai stepelor. Sarmaţii timpurii în spaţiul nord-pontic (sec. II-I a. Chr.). Biblioteca Ephemeris Napocensis 6. Cluj-Napoca: Argonaut. Bârcă, Vitalie. 2009. „Câteva consideraţii privind vasele metalice de import din mediul sarmatic nord-pontic.” In Near and Beyond the Roman Frontier. Proceedings of a colloquium held in Târgovişte, 16-17 October 2008, edited by O. Ţentea and I. C. Opriş, 85-124. Supplementum Cercetări Arheologice 16. Bucureşti: Conphys. Bârcă, Vitalie. 2011. „The fibulae in the North-Pontic Sarmatian Environment (1st C – first half of the 2nd C CE).” Ephemeris Napocensis XXI, 2011: 7-35. Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Bârcă, Vitalie. 2014. Sarmatian vestiges discovered south of the Lower Mures River. The graves from Hunedoara Timișană and Arad. Cluj-Napoca: Mega. Bârcă, Vitalie. 2014a. „Rectangular Mirrors in the Sarmatian Environment. Notes on their origin and the dating of the graves containing them.” In Archäologische Beiträge - Gedenkschrift zun hundertsten Geburtstag von Kurt Horedt, edited by S. Cociș, 49-63. Cluj-Napoca: Mega. Bârcă, Vitalie. 2015 „The reinterpretation of the Sarmatian finds from the Romanian Plain (I).” Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology 2/1: 35-71 (DOI: 10.14795/j.v2i1.105). Bârcă, Vitalie. 2016. „A disk mirror recently discovered South the Lower Mureș.” Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology 3/3: 55-61 (DOI:10.14795/j. v3i3.198). Bârcă, Vitalie. 2017. “Notes on the metal pyxides recently discovered in the Sarmatian environment south the Lower Mureș River.” Plural. History-Culture-Society vol. 5, nr. 2: 101-123. Bârcă, Vitalie and O. Symonenko. 2009. Călăreţii stepelor. Sarmaţii în spaţiul nord-pontic. Cluj-Napoca: Mega. Berciu, Dumitru. 1981. Buridava dacică. Bucureşti: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste România. Bespalyj, E. I. 1992. „Kurgan sarmatskogo vremeni u g. Azova.” Sovetskaya Arkheologiya 1: 175-191. Bespalyj, E. I. and S. I. Luk’yashko. 2018. Drevnee naselenie mezhdurech’ya Dona i Kagal’nika. Kurgannyj mogil’nik u s. Novoaleksandrovka, Vol. 2 Rostov-na-Donu: Izdatel’stvo Yuzhnogo nauchnogo tsentra Rossijskoj Akademii Nauk. Béal, Jean-Claude and Michel Feugère. 1983. “Les pyxidesgallo-romainesenosde Gauleméridionale.” Documents d’Archéologie Méridionale 6: 115-126. Bíró, Maria T. 1994. The Bone Objects of the Roman Collection. In memoriam Gizella Erdélyi. Catalogi Musei Nationalis Hungarici, Series Archaeologica II. Budapest: Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum. Bíró, Maria T., Alice M. Choyke, Lóránt Vass, and Ádám Vecsey. 2012. Aquincumicsonttárgyak/Bone Objects in Aquincum. Aquincumi Múzeumgyűjteménye 2. Aquincum Collection 2. Budapest: Aquincumi Múzeum. Bozsik, K. 2003. „Szarmata sírok a Kiskundorozsma-subasai 26/78. lelőhelyen.” In Úton-útfélen. Múzeumi kutatások az M5 autópálya nyomvonalán, edited by Cs. Szalontai, 97-106. Szeged: Móra Ferenc Múzeum. Crişan, Viorica. 2000. Dacii din estul Transilvaniei. Sfântu Gheorghe: Carpatii Răsăriteni. 149 150 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Davidson, Gladys R. 1952. Corinth. Results of Excavations conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, XII, The Minor Objects. Princeton: American School of classical studies at Athens. Deschler-Erb, Sabine. 1998. Römische Beinartefakteaus Augusta Raurica. Rohmaterial, Technologie, Typologie und Chronologie. Forschungen in Augst 27. Augst: Römermuseum. Firsov, Kirill. B. 1998. „Kurgan sarmatskogo vremeni v Kalmykii.” Arheologhicheskij sbornik. Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Istoricheskogo muzeya 96: 128-136. Glukhov, Aleksandr A. 2003, “Tipologiya i khronologiya zerkal srednesarmatskogo vremeni (po materialam mezhdurech’ya Volgi i Dona)“, Nizhnevolzhskij arkheologicheskij vestnik 6, 89-102. Goethert-Polaschek, Karin. 1977. Katalog der römischen Gläser des Rheinischen Landesmuseums Trier. Trierer Grabungen und Forschungen 9. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Groh, Stefan. 1990, “Römische Bein- und Elfenbeinschnitzereinen mit Erotendarstellungen.” Diplomarbeit, Graz. Groh, Stefan. 1994. “Ein Elfenbeinrelief aus der Tunnelhöhle am Kugelstein in der Steiermark.” Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 24, 2: 187-195. Grosu, Vasilij I. 1988. „Sarmatskie pamyatniki Srednego Poprut’ya.” In Arheologicheskie issledovaniya v Moldavii v 1983 g., edited by G.F. Chebotarenko, 79-91. Kishinev: Ştiința. Grosu, Vasilij I. 1990. Khronologiya pamyatnikov sarmatskoj kul’tury Dnestrovsko-Prutskogo mezhdurech’ya. Kishinev: Știința.. Gushchina, Irina I. 1982. „O lokal’nykh osobennostyakh kul’tury naseleniya Bel’bekskoj doliny Kryma v pervye veka n. e.” Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Istoricheskogo muzeya 54. Arkheologicheskie issledovaniya na yuge Vostochnoj Evropy II: 20-30. Gushchina, Irina. I. and I. P. Zasetskaya. 1994. „Zolotoe kladbishche” Rimskoj epohi v Prikuban’e. Sankt-Peterburg: Farn. Hayes, John W. 1985. „Sigillate Orientali.” In Enciclopedia dell’arte antica classica e orientale. Atlante delle forme ceramiche II. Ceramica fine romana nel bacino Mediterraneo (tardoellenismo e primo impero), 1-96. Roma: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana. Istvánovits, Eszter and Valéria Kulcsár, 1993, „Tükrök a császárkori és a kora népvándorlás kori barbár népeknél a Kárpát-medencében.” A Herman Ottó Muzeum Ėvkönyve XXX-XXXI, 2: 9-58. Isings, Clasina. 1957. Roman Glass from dated finds. Groningen-Djakarta: J. B. Wolters. Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Javanova, A. I. 1955. „Khudozhestvennye izdeliya iz dereva i kosti.” In Antichnye goroda Severnogo Prichernomor’ya. Ocherki istorii i kul’tury edited by V. F. Gajdukevich, and M. I. Maksimova, 400-436. Moskva-Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Akademii nauk SSSR. Khazanov, Anatolij M. 1963. „Genezis sarmatskih bronzovyh zerkal.” Sovetskaya Arkheologiya 4: 58-71. Knipovich, Tat’jana N. 1952. „Krasnolakovaya keramika pervyh vekov nashej ery iz raskopok Bosporskoj ekspeditsii v 1935-1940.” Materialy i issledovaniya po arkheologii 25: 289-326. Kostenko, V. I. 1977. „Sarmatskie pamyatniki v materialakh archeologicheskoj ekspeditsii DGU.” In Kurgannye drevnosti stepnogo Podneprov’ ja III – I tys. do. n. e., edited by I. F. Kovaleva, 114-137. Dnepropetrovsk: Izdatel’stvo DGU. Kostenko, V. I. 1993. Sarmaty v Nizhnem Podneprov’e (po materialam Uşt’-Kamenskogo mogil’nika). Dnepropetrovsk: Izdatel’stvo DGU. Kovpanenko, Galina T. 1986. Sarmatskoe pogrebenie I v. n. e. na Yuzhnom Buge. Kiev: Naukova dumka. Kropotkin, Vladislav V. 1970. Rimskie importnye izdeliya v Vostochnoj Evrope (II v. do n. e. - V v. n. e.). Arkheologiya SSSR. Svod Arkheologicheskih Istochnikov D1-27. Moskva: Nauka. Kropotov, Victor V. 2010. Fibuly sarmatskoj epokhi. Kiev: ADEF-Ukraina. Kunina, N. and N. Sorokina, 1972, „Steklyannye bal’zamarii Bospora.” Trudy Gosudarstvenogo Ermitazha 13: 146-177. Kurchatov, Sergej and Valerij Bubulici, 2003. „Sarmatskoe pogrebenie iz kurgana u s. Oloneshty – 40 let spustya.” In Interferenţe cultural-cronologice în spaţiul nord-pontic, edited by E. Sava, 285-312. Chişinău: Institutul de Arheologie şi Etnografie. Lloyd-Morgan, Glenys. 1977. „Mirrors in Roman Britain.” In Roman Life and Art in Britain, edited by J. Munby and M. Henig, 231-252, British Archaeological Reports 41 (II). Oxford: B.A.R. Lloyd-Morgan, Glenys. 1980. „Roman Mirrors and Pictish Symbol.” In A note on Trade and Contact. Roman Frontier Studies 1979, edited by W. S. Hanson, and L. J. F. Keppie, 97-106. Papers presented of the 12th International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 71 (I). Oxford: B.A.R. Lloyd-Morgan, Glenys. 1981. „Roman Mirrors and the Third Century.” In The Roman West în Third Century: Contributions from Archaeology and History, edited by A. King and M. Henig, 145-157. British Archaeological Reports, International Series109. Oxford: B.A.R. 151 152 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Lloyd-Morgan, Glenys. 1981a. The Mirrors: Description of the Collections in the Rijksmuseum G. M. Kam at Nijmegen IX. Nijmegen: Ministry of Culture, Recreation and Social Welfare. Lund Hansen, Ulla. 1987. Römischer Import im Norden. Warenaustausch zwischen dem Römischen Reich und dem freien Germanien während der Kaiserzeit unter besonderer Berücksichtigung Nordeuropas. Nordiske Forditsminder, Serie B 10. København: Det Kongelige nordiske Oldskriftselskab. Mackensen, Michael. 1978. Das römische Gräberfeldauf der Keckwiese in Kempten, I. Gräber und Grabanlagen des 1. und 4. Jahrhunderts. Materialhefte zur bayerischen Vorgeschichte 34, Kallmünz/Opf: Verlag Michael Lassleben. Maksimenko, Vladimir. E. 1983. Savromaty i sarmaty na Nizhnem Donu. Rostov-na-Donu: Izdatel’stvo Rostovskogo universiteta. Maksimenko, Vladimir. E. 1998. Sarmaty na Donu (arkheologiya i problemy etnicheskoj istorii). Donskie drevnosti 6. Azov: Azovskij kraevedcheskij muzej. Marangou, Lila. 1976. Bone Carving from Egypt, I. Graeco-Roman Period. Tübingen: Ernst Wasmuth. Marchenko, Ivan I. 1996. Siraki Kubani (po materialam kurgannyh pogrebenij Nizhnej Kubani. Krasnodar: Kubanskij gosudarstvennyj universitet. Marčenko, Ivan I. and Natal’ja Ju. Limberis. 2008. Römische Importe in sarmatischen und maiotischen Denkmälern des Kubangebietes, 265-400, Pl. 1-222. In: Römishe Importe in sarmatischen und maiotischen Gräbern zwischen Unterer Donau und Kuban edited by Aleksandr Simonenko, Ivan I. Marčenko and Natal’ja Ju. Limberis, Archäologie in Eurasien 25. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Medvedev, Aleksandr P. 2009. „Dva pozdneantichnykh sklepa Vostochnogo nekropolya Fanagorii”. In Gunny, goty i sarmaty mezhdu Volgoi i Dunaem, edited by A. Furas’ev, 167-182. Sankt-Peterburg: Fakul’tet filologii i iskusstv SPbGU. Medvedev, Aleksandr P. and K. Yu Yefimov. 1986. „A Sarmatian barrow with Roman and Chinese imports in the Middle Don Region”. In Roman Imports in the Lower Don Basin, edited by B. A. Raev, British Archaeological Reports, International Series 278, 83-84. Oxford: B.A.R.. Melyukova, Anna. I. 1962. „Sarmatskoe pogrebenie iz kurgana u s. Oloneshty (Moldavskaya SSR)”, Sovetskaya Arkheologiya 1: 195-208. Moshkova, Marina G. 1989. „Srednesarmatskaya kul’tura”. In Arkheologiya SSR. Stepi Evropejskoj chasti SSR v skifo-sarmatskoe vremea, edited by A. I. Melyukova, 177-191. Moskva: Nauka. Mordvintseva, Valentina. and Mikhail Trejster 2007. Proizvedeniya torevtiki i yuvelirnogo iskusstva v Severnom Prichernomor’e 2 v. do n. e. – 2 v . n. e., I–III. Simferopol’-Bonn: Tarpan. Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Opaiţ, Andrei 1980. „Consideraţii preliminare asupra amforelor romano-bizantine din Dobrogea”. Peuce VIII : 291-327. Párducz, Mihály. 1941. A szarmatakor emlékei Magyarországon I/Denkmäler der Sarmatenzeit Ungarns I. Archaeologia Hungarica XXV. Budapest: AkadémiaiKiado. Párducz, Mihály. 1950. A szarmatakor emlékei Magyarországon III/Denkmäler der Sarmatenzeit Ungarns III. Archaeologia Hungarica XXX. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiado. Párducz, Mihály. 1950a. „Szarmata sírok Tápiószelén”. Archeológiai Értesitö 77: 67-71. Peters, B. G. 1986. Kostoreznoe delo v antichnykh gosudarstvakh Severnogo Prichernomor’ya. Moskva: Nauka. Petrovszky, Richard. 1993. Studien zu römischen Bronzegefäßen mit Meisterstempeln. Buch am Erlbach: M. L. Leidorf. Petru, Sonja. 1972. Emonske nekropole. Odkrite med leti 1935–1960. Ljubliana: Narodni muzej. Pleniscar-Gec, L. 1972. Severno Emonsko Grobisce. Ljubliana: Narodni muzej. Puzdrovskij, Aleksandr. E. 2007. Krymskaya Skifiya II v. do n. e. – III v. n. e. Pogrebal’nye pamyatniki. Simferopol’: Biznes-Inform. Robinson, Henry. S. 1959. Pottery of the Roman Period. Chronology. The Athenian Agora. Princeton-New Jersey: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Rustoiu, Aurel. 1996. Fibulele din Dacia preromană (sec. II î. e. n. – I e. n.). Bucureşti: Vavila Edinf. Senigova, Taisija. N. 1956. „Otchet o rabote Zapodno-Kazakhstanskoj arkheologicheskoj ekspeditsii v 1953 g.”. Trudy Instituta Istorii i Arkheologii Kazakhskoj SSSR I, 140-156. Sergatskov, Igor’ V. 2004. „K khronologii srednesarmatskoj kul’tury Nizhnego Povolzh’ya”. In Sarmatskie kul’tury Evrazii: problemy regional’noj khronologii, edited by B. A. Raev. Doklady k 5-j mezhdunarodnoj konferentsii “Problemy sarmatskoj arkheologii i istorii”, 107-116. Krasnodar: OOO firma NSS. Shelov, Dmitrij B. 1978, „Uzkogorlye svetloglinyanye amfory pervyh vekov nashej ery. Klassifikaciya i khronologiya”. Kratkie soobshcheniya Instituta arkheologii 156: 16-21. Simonenko, Aleksandr V. 1993, Sarmaty Tavrij. Kiev: Naukova dumka. Simonenko, Aleksandr V. 2000. „Mogilnik Dneprozavodstroj i sarmatskie pamyatniki “vostochnoj volny”v Severnom Prichernomor’e”. Nizhnevolzhskij arkheologicheskij vestnik 3: 133-144. 153 154 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Simonenko, Aleksandr V. 2004. „Khronologiya i periodizatsiya sarmatskih pamyatnikov Severnogo Prichernomor’ya”. In Sarmatskie kul’tury Evrazii: problemy regional’noj khronologii, edited by B. A. Raev, Doklady k 5-j mezhdunarodnoj konferentsii “Problemy sarmatskoj arkheologii i istorii”, 134-173. Krasnodar: OOO firma NSS Simonenko, Aleksandr V. 2008. „Römische Importe in sarmatischen Denkmälern des nördlichen Schwarzmeergebietes”, In A. Simonenko, I. I. Marčenko and Natal’ja Ju. Limberis, Römishe Importe in sarmatischen und maiotischen Gräbern zwischen Unterer Donau und Kuban, Archäologie in Eurasien 25, 1-94, Pl. 1–168. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Simonenko, Aleksandr V. 2011. Rimskij import u sarmatov Severnogo Prichernomor’ya. Sankt-Peterburg: Nestor-Istoriya. Simonenko, Aleksandr V. and Boris I. Lobaj 1991. Sarmaty Severo-Zapodnogo Prichernomor’ya v I v. n. e. (pogrebenie znati u s. Porogi) Kiev: Naukova dumka. Skripkin, Anatolij S. 1990. Aziatskaya Sarmatiya. Problemy khronologii i eĕ istoricheskij aspekt Saratov: Izdatel’stvo Saratovskogo universiteta. Skripkin, Anatolij S. and Valerij M. Klepikov 2004. „Khronologiya rannesarmatskoj kul’tury Nizhnego Povolzh’ya. In Sarmatskie kul’tury Evrazii: problemy regional’noj khronologii, edited by B. A. Raev, Doklady k 5-j mezhdunarodnoj konferentsii “Problemy sarmatskoj arkheologii i istorii”, 95-116. Krasnodar: OOO firma NSS Sokol’skij, N. I. 1971. Derevoobrabatyvayushchee remeslo v antichnykh gorodakh Severnogo Prichernomor’ya. Materialy i issledovaniya po arkheologii SSSR 178, Moskva: Nauka. Vaday, Andrea. 1980. „Sarmatisches Gräberfeld in Törökszentmiklós, Surján”. Mitteilungen des Archäologischen Instituts der Ungarischen Akademie der Wissenscheften 8-9, 1978-1979: 57-69, 309-324. Vaday, Andrea H. 1989. Die sarmatischen Denkmäler des Komitats Szolnok. Antaeus 17-18, 1988-1989. Budapest: Archäologisches Inst. der UAW. Vaday, Andrea and Béla Miklós Szőke 1983. „Szarmata temetö és gepida sír Endrőd-Szujókereszten” Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungaricae: 79-132. Vnukov, Sergej Yu. 2003. Prichernomorkie amfory I v. do n. e. – II v. n. e. (morfologiya). Moskva: Institut arkheologii Rossijskoj akademii nauk. Vnukov, Sergej Yu. 2006. Prichernomorkie amfory I v. do n. e. – II v. n. e., II, Petrografija, hronologija, problemy torgovli. Sankt-Peterburg: Aletejya. Vysotskaya, Tat’jana N. 1994. Ust’-Alminskoe gorodishche i nekropol’. Kiev: Kievskaya Akademiya Evrobiznesa. Fibulae with Canid Protome (Tierkopffibeln) PLURAL in Romania Vyaz’mitina, Marija I., Varvara A. Ill’ins’ka, E. F. Pokrovs’ka, Oleksij. I. Terenozhkin, and Galina T. Kovpanenko 1960. „Kurgany bilya s. Novo-Pilipivki i radgospu Akkermen’”. Arheologichni pam’yatki URSR VIII: 22-135. Zhuravlev, Dmitrij V. and Gheorhij. A. Lomtadze 2002. „Izdeliya iz gipsa i kosti”. In Na krayu ojkumeny. Greki i varary na severnom beregu Ponta Evksinskogo, edited by Dmitrij V. Zhuravlev, 76-78. Moskva: Gosudarstvennyj Istoricheskij Muzej. Pixidele din os din mediul sarmatic nord și nord-vest pontic. Observații pe marginea origini și datărilor Rezumat Subiectul articolului de faţă îl constituie analiza pixidelor din os descoperite într-o serie de morminte sarmatice din nordul și nord-vestul Mări Negre. Fără a avea pretenţii de exhaustivitate, se încearcă o prezentare a mormintelor în care acestea au fost descoperite, dar și a mediilor culturale unde au fost utilizate piese de toaletă similare. În urma analizei, autorul concluzionează că pixidele din os descoperite în mormintele sarmatice din teritoriul nord-pontic sunt, cu precădere, produse romane. Cu toate acestea, nu se exclude ca unele dintre pixide să fi fost imitaţii ale celor dintâi, fiind realizate în atelierele locale (nord-pontice). Autorul constată că toate mormintele sarmatice în care s-au descoperit pixide se datează, judecând după componenţa inventarelor acestora, în a doua jumătate a sec. I – începutul/primele decenii ale sec. II p. Chr. De asemenea s-a remarcat că acestea fac parte, cu precădere, din cadrul grupului de morminte ce au aparținut noului val de sarmaţi veniţi în spaţiul nord-pontic începând cu mijlocul sec. I p. Chr. de la est de Don și că formează în doua jumătate a sec. I – primele decenii ale sec. II p. Chr. un orizont cultural-cronologic local bine evidențiat. Nu în ultimul rând autorul remarcă că pixidele fac parte din complexe funerare din perioada cu aflux major de artefacte romane în mediul sarmatic, situată în intervalul cronologic cuprins între anii 60/70 – 120/130 p. Chr. Cuvinte-cheie: sarmați, pixide, artefacte, importuri, morminte, spațiul nord și nord-vest pontic, Imperiul Roman Vitalie Bârcă, Institute of Archaeology and Art History of Cluj-Napoca, Romania. Email: vitalie_barca@yahoo.com 155 Non-invasive magnetometric prospection in forested area: the case study of Mirosław site 37 in Northwestern Poland Andrzej Michałowski, Jakub Niebieszczański, Milena Teska, Patrycja Kaczmarska Abstract The following article concerns the results of a combined non-invasive and invasive fieldworks in Mirosław, site 37 (Piła county, Wielkopolska voivodeship, Northern Poland). The site is a Wielbark culture barrow cemetery located in a forested area, thus limiting it access to a variety of methods. With the usage of a single-sonde gradientometer it was possible to survey the site by the means of magnetometry. The magnetic map of the site indicated presence of eroded mound (possibly due to ploughing) with associated grave-pit as well as numerous other anomalies, including the position of a burnt structure in between the barrows. Consecutive excavations were aimed to verify the interpretation of the magnetometry survey and confirmed the presence of an denudated barrow with a grave-pit within. In the light of results, the visible anomalies seen as a specific forest type of ploughing should be treated as the main factor of the barrow destruction. Also the earthworks revealed that the anomaly interpreted as a burnt structure appeared to be a hearth. All of the excavated objects were associated with the Wielbark culture, thus indicating the potential of investigating areas between the preserved barrows, which might bear other features of funeral rites and similar activities. Keywords: Magnetometry survey, Geomagnetics, Non-invasive prospection, forest archaeology, Wielbark culture, barrow cemetery, funeral rites. 1. Introduction Archaeological excavations in Mirosław 37 were carried out during two seasons in July of 2016 and 2017. Discussed site is a barrow cemetery which was discovered by the means of the LIDAR (ALS) technology, obtained from the Polish geoportal (geoportal.gov.pl). The first field verification of the Digital Elevation Model produced from the ALS was conducted by J. Rola in 2015. In result of surface survey and archaeological excavations, the site was enlisted by the Polish Heritage Service. The village of Mirosław is situated in Wielkopolska voivodeship, Piła County. The site 37 lies in the southern edge of the lower Noteć Valley on the Walkowice gacio-fluvial terrace (Fig 1.) (Kondracki 2000, 130). The barrows most certainly have survived, due to their location in forested area – the Sarbia Non-invasive magnetometric prospection in forested area: PLURAL the case study of Mirosław site 37 in Northwestern Poland district of the Polish National Forests – in section 150a of Jabłonowo Forestry. During the first season of fieldworks, excavations were started on one of the seven barrows forming the cemetery. Selected mound was slightly denudated by agricultural works and set apart from the main linear arrangement of barrows (Michałowski et.al. 2018, 110). Mound no. 7 was oval-shaped and 11.9 m in diameter. Its southern side was distinctively less preserved than the opposite one. Moreover, dur- Fig. 1. Barrow cemetery in Mirosław (site 37). ing the season of 2016 an addition- A shaded relief model obtained from geoportal. al trench in the barrow context was gov.pl with superimposed net of survey grids for the magnetometric prospection. opened embracing 250 m2 . In the result of archaeological exploration in 2016, a total number of 13 archeological features were discovered. Excavations revealed that the mound was most probably erected in one act and the material for its construction comprised of sands and gravels. Below the barrow embankment, the exploration of grave pit (feature no. 8) was started. The grave was discovered at the depth of 1.5 m below the ground. Skeleton burial was oriented along the N–S axis, but preserved in poor condition (Fig. 2). Despite of that, the anthropological analysis showed, that in this grave, a young women (19-21 y.old) was buried (see Wrzesińska 2017). Besides that, in the area of barrow embankment another feature (6) was discovered. On the level of sterile earth few pits with small shards of Wielbark culture pottery or without materials, were recorded. They might be some remains of iron smelting. Moreover to the north side from mound a flat grave was discovered. Few fragments of human bones lied between 4 large stones. It was a burial of a small child, without any vessel. The inventory of feature no. 8 was rich and typical for Wielbark culture (Michałowski et. al. 2018). Grave goods included: fibulae O. Almgren (1897) type AVII 213, AV series 8, AV 96, silver bracelets - 2 snake-shaped and 2 viper-head type IIIB by T. Wójcik (1982), 2 bronze belt ferrules, rectangular belt buckle type MLG 3 (Madyda-Legutko 1986), sliver S-shape buckle, sliver conical pendant. Basing on these artifacts, the site be therefore dated to the phase B2/C1 of the Roman Period (Michałowski, Teska 2017; Michałowski et.al. 2018). 157 158 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 2. Feature no. 8 - young women grave discovered in first season in 2016 (photo A. Michałwoski). The specifity of Wielbark culture barrow cemeteries is the diversity of the graves type. Particular site could often comprise both the inhumation or cremation practices (see Wołągiewicz 1981). Also, Wielbark cemeteries are usually characterized by the occurrence of pit graves which accompanies the grave mounds. Due to the fact, that the child flat burial in Mirosław was discovered outside the barrow no. 7, it was decided to expand research area in the subsequent season. In order to provide an insight into the spatial distribution of archaeological features outside and in-between the main barrow alignments the magnetometric method was used. It was suspected to encounter the accessory features to the cemetery, such as ritual objects in type of fireplaces or accompanying burials. 1. Materials and methods Magnetometry measures disturbances of the Earth’s magnetic field gradient, related to the subsurface objects and layers of higher magnetic susceptibility (Schmidt 2007). Such anomalies emerge as a result of remanent magnetism characterized by stability in case of ferromagnetic, and induction which occurs in physical objects under the influence of external magnetic field. Various ranges of objects and features can be influenced by both remanent and inductive type of magnetism, i.a. metals, bricks, rotten or burnt or- Non-invasive magnetometric prospection in forested area: PLURAL the case study of Mirosław site 37 in Northwestern Poland ganic features (wood, bodies etc.), rocks containing ferri- and ferromagnetic minerals. As the archaeological objects can be created from all of these features, the method is suitable enough to provide a distribution map of the remains of human activity. During the research in Mirosław 37, a Fluxgate magnetometer of Bartington, model Grad-601 was used. The equipment comprised one probe with two sensors separated by a distance of 1m vertically. The prospection was held with a 0.1 nT accuracy, taking measurements each 0.25 m along the transect, while the latter were separated by a 1 m interval. The calibration of magnetometer was set in a remote area characterized by relatively stable magnetic field, which did not exceed the range of -1 – 1nT. Magnetometric prospection took place in area delimited by three squares of 20 x 20 m each, arranged in a L-shaped manner (Fig. 1). In terms of the cemetery chorology, the survey embraced the southern and south-western area to the excavated barrow no. VII. This area presented the best terrain properties, as the entire cemetery context is dominated by the pine-tree forest. Three survey grids were established in a relatively less-densely forested place. The analysis of the magnetometry results was held in Geoplot 3.0. However, all of the analysis of the resulting imagery was conducted in ArcGIS 10.1. Interpolation by the means of TopoToRaster tool allowed to create the color distribution map of magnetic anomalies, while toolboxes of High and Low pass filters and mean grid were applied in Geoplot to increase the visibility of archaeological features and omit the technical glitches. Visualization of the magnetic properties of the prospected area was presented in -5 – 5nT range (Fig. 3). This created the contrast between the natural features and archaeological objects, and therefore it allowed to better understand the distribution of anomalies. It needs to be emphasized that the prospected terrain was set in a forested area, which might had an effect on the magnetic picture. Also in a nearby area there is a line of trenches from the Greatern Poland Uprising in 1918 and 1919. The suspected presence of military (mostly metal) remains also have to be considered while discussing the results of the survey. After the prospection, the interpretation of magnetic map was submitted to verification by means of excavations and geological drillings. At first, the excavation area (10x30) was set accordingly to the magnetic plan in 2017. The excavations embraced an area of 300 m2 . Archaeological exploration was conducted with mechanic troweling of the layers each 20cm. The artifacts (only Wielbark culture pottery shreds), were documented within the quarters. In total, 14 archaeological features of various dimensions were discovered. Geological drill- 159 160 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 3. Results of the magnetometric prospection in Mirosław 37. Fig. 4. Interpretation of the magnetometric prospection results with location of the excavated area. ings were performed in the places of the occurrence of magnetic anomalies not subjected to the earthworks by excavations. The equipment used was the hand operated driller with half-open auger of 10cm width. 2. Results and discussion The resulting magnetic imagery comprise of a relatively non-variated structure of the distribution of magnetic anomalies (Fig. 4). The real values for the three polygons prospected during the survey varies between -5 and 43nT, which suggest that the entire surface is slightly raised in terms of magnetic properties, perhaps due to the ferromagnetic minerals of the erratic rocks abundant in the subsoil layers. The latter comprise of fluvio-glacial sands and gravels which also might have contributed to the slightly elevated magnetic signals. However, the applied range of -5 to 5 nT range of the visualization shows that the background noise oscillates around 0 nT. Magnetic anomalies registered in the prospected area differ in the nT values as well as in shapes and their distribution. Due to this differentiation it was decided to describe the anomalies by separating them into the particular types (Fig. 4). Type I: Only one anomaly was assigned to the first type and it was located in the southern part of grid 2 (Fig. 4). It have an ellipsoidal shape, elongated on an Non-invasive magnetometric prospection in forested area: PLURAL the case study of Mirosław site 37 in Northwestern Poland Fig. 5. Feature no. 15 interpreted as exhumed grave (photo W. Szambelan). east-west axis. The meridional radius of this magnetic manifestation is app. 6.5 m, while the perpendicular length is 4.2 m. The anomaly is characterized by single-pole concentration of higher values (10-12nT) in form of a encirclement of an relatively neutral center (app. 1nT). Very similar manifestation in magnetometric imagery can be seen in case of denudated round barrows (comp. Makarowicz et al. 2016; 2018; Cwaliński et al. 2018). Also in this case, there are no visible morphological features like small hummock or elevation which would suggest the existence of a tumulus. The higher magnetic pass encircling the empty space within, can therefore be the result of an earlier existence of barrow’s slope, along which occurred the transportation of ferromagnetic minerals downwards. The deposited fractions could thus create a circular manifestation on the magnetic map. During the excavations the oval-shape pit, mainly composed of the grey layer with ash and charcoals (Fig. 5) was discovered. Exploration showed there was also prehistoric cut, which interfered to the grave (Michałowski 2017, 3). However, the grave turned out to be empty, where only a spindle whorl on the top and one pottery sherd on the bottom were recovered. It appears that the exhumed grave was crowned by a spindle whorl (Michałowski et.al. 2018, p. 113). Most probably, before the exhumation, 161 162 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 6. Two heats (features 17 and 18) form Mirosław site 37 (photo K. Krawczyk). the symbolic fire was heated there. Feature form and its dimensions were in accordance with the Wielbark culture cremation burials. The erosion or denudation of the barrow could have taken place due to the agricultural or forestry works (see Type V). Type II: The anomaly of type II was located in the border of grid 2 and 3 in the central part of the overall picture (Fig. 3 and 4). It formed two concentric high susceptibility poles and one negative signal adjacent from the north and northwest. The nT values of this type range from -10 to 43. This could represent the presence of burnt daub or perhaps the erratic rocks which contain the ferromagnetic minerals. However, the chronology of the site suggests that this anomaly could indeed represent the clay, subjected to a high temperature like the hearths. In case of Mirosław site, hearth-like features (features 17 and 18) were discovered at the depth of 60 cm b.g.l. (Fig. 6). Two regular and rectangular features (first –180x160cm, second – 170x190 cm) in the middle part of the excavation unit, were mostly built from burned stones. In the top layer, numerous sherds of pottery were found, while deeper only the charcoals were recorded (Michałowski 2017, 4). Moreover, in feature no. 18 laid unburned Non-invasive magnetometric prospection in forested area: PLURAL the case study of Mirosław site 37 in Northwestern Poland fragment of the cattle mandible (see Warszczuk 2017). This suggests that the remains were put there after the fire was extinguished. All this indicates a ritual activities taking place in the space outside the barrows (see Michałowski et. al. 2018) Type III: Third type of anomalies were the singular anomalies of a dipole properties, registered in all of the research grids (Fig. 3 and 4). They comprise of various shapes, from few to over a dozen of centimeters. Anomalies of this type were characterized by bipolar arrangement of positive and negative values, aligned on a North-South axis. Their sizes as well as the specific order of magnetic poles, suggested that they manifest the metal objects or rocks with specific mineral contamination, that raises the magnetic record. In the north eastern part of grid 3, such anomalies are connected to very modern remains of excavations conducted a year before the prospection (in 2016). As such, these anomalies were not taken into the interpretation of the magnetic picture. Also, it is assumed that these objects could be the remains of the military activities in the XXth century. A drilling verification proved that most of these anomalies were related to the metal waste (bottle cans, metal pins etc.) or war relics – like remains of the belt chain. Type IV: Anomaly of type IV was recorded in the north eastern part of grid 3 (Fig. 4). It has a rectangular shape of a positive single-pole pattern in range from 5 to 15 nT. Its location and comparison with the excavations from the year before corresponds with the position of a earth pile which was created during the archaeological earthworks. The modern and surely anthropogenic character of this anomaly is supported by the rectangular shape and increased magnetic properties. It shows that the area of the anomaly comprise of a different or disturbed lithological material than the geological background. Type V: Anomalies assigned to type V comprise of an elongated, and linear features visible mostly in grid 1 (Fig. 4). At least ten lines are visible in this part of the research area, oriented on the north-east – south-west axis. The lines are characterized by raised magnetic signal in contrast to the background noise. Often such patterns are derived from the technical glitches due to the improper method of walking during the survey. In this case such explanation is not possible as the course of these lines do not follow the walking pattern from 163 164 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 south to north. Therefore, it should be assumed that such structures were created in result of anthropogenic disturbances in the soil structure. The parallel form of the linear alignments looks very similar to the forest ploughing, and as the area is densely overgrown by young pines, such explanation should be taken into account. 3. Conclusions Inside the 1200 m2, several different types of anomalies were registered, which have occurred in result of the prehistoric human activity (Type I and II) as well as during the modern times (Type III and V), which was shown by archaeological excavations and geological drillings. Anomaly reflecting the prehistoric burial was the round structure, revealed during the excavations as the denudated round barrow. One should also consider that anomalies of type V (the linear structures), interpreted as the ploughing remains could be the factor of the barrow destruction. The large bipolar anomaly of type II was verified to be the hearths - features no. 17 and 18. It is worth noticing that in the space between the tumuli appearance, there were no morphological indications of other forms of human activity in the area. This points to the importance of conducting the non-invasive studies like magnetometry, which can reveal the associated sedentary or burial facilities in the areas of the barrow cemeteries. Two seasons of multidisciplinary archaeological works, combined with the magnetometric prospection showed a great potential in revealing the funeral space within the cemetery. There are no doubts, that the discussed cemetery was created and used by the Wielbark culture societies, which was confirmed by discovered artifacts. Also the radiocarbon dating indicates that the cemetery was in use during the 2nd and 3rd century AD. During two seasons, a large part of ritual area was recognized. As excavations have shown, not only the burial mounds were associated with ritual activities. This has been proved during the first season, when the child burial was discovered in the northern part of the site. In 2017 also other funeral practices, like exhumed grave and two large heats in burial zone, were revealed. The Wielbark culture in Poland is characterized by diversified funeral customs. Its means, that these people used cremation and inhumation for burying, often on one cemetery. Also forms of graves were diverse; flat graves, grooved graves and barrows occurring together in one site, are known. Often these habits were practiced in the area between the barrows (see Wołągiewicz 1981). Sim- Non-invasive magnetometric prospection in forested area: PLURAL the case study of Mirosław site 37 in Northwestern Poland ilar to features recorded in Mirosław site 37, were the ones discovered in the 19th century in Mirosław – Wilanowiec. Beside the cremation flat graves also hearth was found (Gałęzowska 2007, 182). It should be emphasized that so far in Mirosław 37 groove-type graves and also stone circles and pavement were not found. Nevertheless, in the northern part of barrow no. 7 lied a processed large stone, which most likely was a funerary stele and crowned the mound (see Michałowski et all 2018). According to the discussed site in Mirosław and all archaeological features found there, future research is needed. Despite the substantial knowledge about local society’s funeral behaviors, the space between the excavation area from 2017 and the burial mound no. 7 should be recognized. It’s necessary to verify also one other barrow, to determine chronology of entire site. This paper shows how significant for comprehensive recognition and complementary knowledge, is the usage of magnetometric method on archaeological sites form the Iron Age. It is also important, that this method should be correlated with excavation results, or verified at least by the means of drillings and soundings. Bibliography Cwaliński, Mateusz, Jakub Niebieszczański and Dariusz Król. 2017. “The Middle, Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Cemetery in Skołoszów, site 7, Dist. Jarosław, in the Light of the Results of Non-invasive Archaeological Survey in 2016.” Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia, vol. 12: 40-48. Gałęzowska, Alicja. 2007. “Obrządek pogrzebowy kultury wielbarskiej w Wielkopolsce”. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Archaeologica, vol. 25: 155234. Makarowicz Przemysław, Mateusz Cwaliński, Jacub Niebieszczański and Jan Romaniszyn. 2018. “Barrows from the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age in the Upper Dniester Basin in Ukraine. Geophysical Research and Archaeological Verification.“ Analecta Archaeologica Ressoviensia, vol. 12: 59-74. Makarowicz Przemysław, Ihor Kochkin, Jacub Niebieszczański, Jan Romaniszyn, Mateusz Cwaliński, Robert Staniuk, Hubert Lepinka, Iwona Hildebrandt-Radke I., Halyna Panakhyd, Yuriy Boltryk, Vitaliy Rud, Adam Wawrusiewicz, Taras Tkachuk, Rafał Skrzyniecki and Cezary Bahyrycz. 2016. Catalogue of Komarów Culture Barrow Cemeteries in the Upper Dniester Drainage Basin (former Stanisławów Province). Archaeologia Bimaris, vol. 8. Poznań: Wyd. Nauk. UAM. 165 166 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Michałowski, Andrzej, Milena Teska, Jakub Niebieszczański, Marta Krzyżanowska, Patrycja Kaczmarska, Emilia Smółka-Antkowiak and Mateusz Wawrzyniak. 2018. “Wyniki badań na stan. 37 w Mirosławiu, gm. Ujście, pow. pilski, woj. wielkopolskie.” In Badania archeologiczne na Nizinie Wielkopolsko-Kujawskiej w latach 2013-2017, edited by Jacek Wierzbicki, 109-116, Poznań: Instytut Archeologii UAM Michałowski Andrzej and Milena Teska. 2016. “Wstępne wyniki badań wykopaliskowych w Mirosławiu, stan. 37, gm. Ujście, pow. Pilski”. Wielkopolskie sprawozdania archeologiczne 17: 119-126. Michałowski, Andrzej 2016. “Sprawozdanie z prac wykopaliskowych prowadzonych w dniach 1-30 lipca 2016 roku na stan. 37 w Mirosławiu, gm. Ujście, pow. pilski, woj. Wielkopolskie.” unpublished dissertation. Poznań. Michałowski, Andrzej. 2017. “Sprawozdanie z prac wykopaliskowych prowadzonych w dniach 1-30 lipca 2017 roku na stan. 37 w Mirosławiu, gm. Ujście, pow. pilski, woj. Wielkopolskie.” unpublished dissertation. Poznań. Schmidt, Armin. 2007. Archaeology, Magnetic Method. In Encyclopedia of geomagnetism and palaeomagnetism, edited by David Gubbins and Emilio Herrero-Bervera, 23-30, New York: Springer. Wołągiewicz, Ryszard. 1981. “Kultura wielbarska.” In Prahistoria ziem polskich, edited by Jerzy Wielowiejski, t. V, 165-178, Wrocław-Warszwa-KrakówGdańsk: Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk. Prospecțiuni magnetometrice non-invasive în zona forestieră. Studiu de caz: situl Mirosław 37 din Polonia de nord-vest Rezumat În articol sunt reflectate rezultatele unei cercetări combinate non-invazive și invazive în situl Mirosław 37 (județul Piła, voievodatul Wielkopolska Polonia de Nord). Situl reprezintă o necropolă tumulară atribuită culturii Wielbark. Fiind situat într-o zonă împădurită, este limitat accesul la o varietate mai largă de metode. Utilizând un gradientometru cu o singură sondă, totuși a fost posibilă cercetarea sitului prin intermediul prospecției magnetometrice. Harta magnetică a sitului a indicat prezența unei movile erodate (posibil datorită aratului) cu groapă asociată, precum și numeroase alte anomalii, incluzând poziția unei structuri arse între tumuli. Săpăturile consecutive au avut ca scop verificarea interpretării sondajului de magnetometrie și au confirmat prezența unui tumul cu o groapă de mormânt în interior. În lumina rezultatelor, anomaliile care se prezintă ca un tip specific de arătură de pădure, trebuie tratate ca principalul factor de distrugere a tumulului. De asemenea, lucrările de teren au dezvăluit că Non-invasive magnetometric prospection in forested area: PLURAL the case study of Mirosław site 37 in Northwestern Poland anomalia interpretată ca o structură arsă pare a fi o vatră. Toate obiectele excavate au fost asociate cu cultura Wielbark, indicând, astfel, potențialul investigării zonelor dintre tumulii conservaţi, care ar putea păstra alte structuri funerare și urme de activități similare. Cuvinte cheie: prospecţiune magnetometrică, prospecţiune geomagnetică, prospecțiune non-invazivă, arheologie forestieră, cultura Wielbark, necropolă tumulară, rituri funerare. Andrzej Michałowski, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland. Email: misiek@amu.edu.pl Jakub Niebieszczański, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland. Email: jakubniebieszczanski@gmail.com Milena Teska, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland. Email: m.teska@amu.edu.pl Patrycja Kaczmarska, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland. Email: patrycja.kaczmarska93@gmail.com 167 Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent geophysical surveys Alexandru Popa, Sergiu Musteață Abstract Orheiul Vechi is one of the most attractive cultural sites in the Republic of Moldova and one of the most frequently discussed. The density of sites and the continuity of living in this space has made Orheiul Vechi attractive for the multidisciplinary research since 1946. In the context of preparing the dossier for the inscription of the historic-cultural and natural landscape reserve “Orheiul Vechi” into the World Heritage List, a series of studies have been carried out in the last two decades. Some of these scientific approaches include non-invasive surveys in various areas of the reservation. Thus, in this article, all the results of magnetometric surveys carried out by a Moldovan-Romanian-German team in 2009-2014, have been presented for the first time. The surveys confirmed a number of archaeological situations already known and facilitated new discoveriesthat should be developed in the coming years. Keywords: Orheiul Vechi, the Republic of Moldova, non-invasive methods, magnetometry. 1. Introduction In 2009-2014 the State Pedagogical University “Ion Creangă” of Chisinau, in partnership with the Römisch-Germanische Kommssion des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Frankfurt am Main conducted several geophysical surveys at a number of archaeological sites in the Republic of Moldova. One of the points where we would work during several campaigns is the historic-cultural and natural landscape reserve “Orheiul Vechi” (Fig. 1). Through this article, we intend to present briefly the results of these researches1. 1 Fig. 1. Orheiul Vechi on the map of the Republic of Moldova. We would like to thank, on this occasionas well, the scientific coordinator of the researches from Orheiul Vechi, dr. habil.prof. Gheorghe Postică for the support granted on the occasion of the acquisition, analysis and interpretation of the data, coming from the magnetometric researches carried out by us in Orheiul Vechi. Special thanks to Dr. F. Lüth and Dr. U. Voss, the colleagues from RGK, Frankfurt am Main for the sustainable partnership and for the transfer of Know-how in the field of non-invasive research in the Republic of Moldova. Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent PLURAL geophysical surveys Fig. 2. The general plan of the Orheiul Vechi site (after Postică 2006, Fig. 1). Orheiul Vechi is one of the most important archaeological sites in the Republic of Moldova comprising the traces of human habitation from the Palaeolithic to the present time (Fig. 2). Systematic archaeological research began in 1946 and has continued up to now (Postică 2006, 14-17). The result of archaeological investigations has been the discovery of 26 sites from the Palaeolithicto the modern age, 5 hill fortresses from the ancient period and 2 fortresses from the Middle Ages, 2 medieval cities, 6 cemeteries from the ancient and medieval times, 177 cells in the limestone rocks by the river Raut from the Middle Ages to the modern age (Postică, Boboc, Chirică, Buzilă, Lazu, Corcimari, and Zubcov 2010, 53-57). 2. Research method In our research, we used the method of mapping the vertical gradient of the terrestrial magnetic field. Its use made possible the creation of magnetic maps which represent the interpretation of the archaeological potential of the surface of the land. As a research method in archaeology, magnetometry is based on interpreting the contrast of the values of the magnetic field of the soil surface at a certain point and of the natural magnetic field of the earth. As a result, mag- 169 170 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 netic anomalies can be highlighted, indicating the existence of possible underground structures of natural or human origin. Used in conjunction with other research methods, magnetometry allows for a much more efficient recognition of underground archaeological traces. Unlike many other methods of archaeological research, magnetometry has particular features: its results do not depend significantly on the time of day, season, weather, agrarian cultivation or soil surface condition. Apart from this, the method offers the possibility to discover completely under-earth archaeological structures, at a depth of up to 2 m. Thus, magnetometry in archaeology is a non-destructive research methodthat does not affect the current surface of the soil by no means. On the side-lines of our activities from Orheiul Vechi, data acquisition and processing involved the following work stage: – The general assessment of the land and establishing the areas accessible for evaluation; – Establishing a general plan for the acquisition of instrumental data; – Designing and drawing on the ground the measuring perimeters with the help of geodesic equipment; – Carrying out the acquisition of the magnetometric data sets; – Topographic data processing and creation of the Project’s GIS; – Processing of geomagnetic data and making maps of variation of vertical gradient of the terrestrial magnetic field; – Georeferencing and integration of archaeometry data into the Project’s GIS; – Archaeometry and archaeological interpretation of the sets of processed maps; – Writing the land evaluation report2 . In order to map the magnetic anomalies from the site of Orheiul Vechi, we used installations composed of five„Fluxgate/Dr. Förster” vertical coils, set on non-magnetic mobile support. The distance in-between the coils was 0.50 m so that measurements were taken by 2.50 m wide stripes. Counting on movement direction measures were taken at each 0.05 m. Magnetometric coils of this type measure the vertical component ofthe magnetic field with an error margin of about 0.1-0.5 nT. When using the 5-coils magnetometer, the measurements were made in rectangular perimeters, which were georeferenced using a geodesic GPS. The magnetometric system with 16 coils had the GPS system mounted directly on the magnetometric equipment, fixing in real time the precise coordinates of all measurements. Initially, we worked with a differential correction system, using two GPS receivers paired as a base and a rower. 2 For a brief description of magnetometric prospecting method, see, for instance, Milsom and Eriksen 2011, 75-84. For examples of good practice in Romania and the Republic of Moldova, see Ștefan 2012). Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent PLURAL geophysical surveys Subsequently, the real-time corrections from MOLDPOS and ROMPOS were used. In both cases, the work was done with an accuracy of 0.02-0.04 m. The acquired topographic data were stored during the first campaigns in the projection system “WGS 84”, later the national projection system of the Republic of Moldova “MOLDREF 99” was used. The data acquired with the help of the magnetometric equipment were interpolated by the algorithm of “bi-linear rectangle” and subsequently compensated by means of the median filter. The results of the data interpolation were represented as gray tones. The small values, corresponding to a lower magnetization of the investigated surface, are represented in lighter shades of colour, the higher ones - by a suitable one in darker tones. 3. The Results Research inside the medieval citadel Within the framework of our first magnetometric researches from Orheiul Vechi, conducted in the autumn of 2009, our research was oriented towards the interior of the medieval citadel (Popa, Musteaţă, Bicbaev, Rassmann, Munteanu, Postică and Sîrbu 2010a, 145-157; Popa, Musteaţă, Bicbaev, Rassmann, Munteanu, Postică and Sîrbu 2010b, 171-179), considered in the specialized literature as the “central element of the fortress and, respectively, of the city of Orhei itself ..., which represented the headquarters of the local command and control and military administration” (Postică 2006, 41). The Orheiul Vechi Citadel is a trapezoidal construction with a single access gate, located on the south side, with the dimensions of about 127 (north) x 92 (east) x 122 (south) x 107 (west) (Fig. 3)3. The objective of our research inside this complex was oriented towards identifying some possible archaeological complexes, masonry or other structures hidden within the citadel. In order to reach this objective, a rectangular perimeter with the dimensions of 30x40 m was investigated. Its tracing in the field was conditioned by the accessibility of the land with the magnetometer, mainly due to the terrain slopes and the ruins of the former invasive archaeological research sections, as well as of the works carried out during the reconstruction of the enclosure in 1974-1976 (Postică 2006, 41-43). An attempt was made to approach the southern side of the perimeter of the southern side of the wall of the medieval enclosure. 3 These dimensions are based on measurements made by Gheorghe Postica in 1998 (Postică 2006, 41, note 2). 171 172 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 3. The general plan of the Orheiul Vechi stone citadel (after Postică 2006, Fig. 48). The measurements were made with the five-sensory magnetometer, the distance between the coils of the magnetometer being 25 cm. The result obtained when processing the results indicates a surface with numerous magnetic anomalies (Fig. 4), a part of which denotes the existence of numerous bi-polar anomalies in the ground, probably of some objects with significant magnetic peculiarities. The contours of some structures, marked by anomalies with a significant magnetic amplitude (over ± 25 nT), are observed on the south side. The identified magnetic anomalies are not grouped together into a single complex but are apparently aligned along the wall of the medieval enclosure (Fig. 5). Due only to the outline of these anomalies we cannot safely deduce the functionality of the signal structures. However, we can suppose that they denote the presence of some archaeological complexes, somehow related to the arrangement of the entrance, documented in the same area of the south side of the enclosure (Postică 2006, fig. 2, 48). Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent PLURAL geophysical surveys Fig. 4. The result ofthe geomagnetic survey inside the citadel from 2009. Fig. 5. The result of the 2009 geomagnetic survey from inside the citadel overlapped on the orthophotoplan and the plan of the citadel. 173 174 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 6. The placement of the geomagnetic surveyed area on the north terrace of the medieval city (A), compared to the medieval citadel (B) and the Tatar bath C). Researches on the Raut terrace between the medieval citadel and the Tatar bath During the 2010 research campaign, our investigations focused on studying an area of the medieval city on the quaternary terrace of the Raut river (Postică Postica et alii, 2010, 18) between the citadel and the Tatar bath. It is an area located to the north of the road to the village of Trebujeni (Fig. 6). The research was carried out with the help of a 16-coils magnetometer, arranged at a distance of 25 cm from each other and the GPS system integrated directly on the self-propelled trolley of the magnetometer. An interval of 20 cm was established in the direction of the movement of the equipment. The research objective represented the identification on a larger scale (compared to the one in the campaign of 2009) of the archaeological potential from the content of the Golden Hoard city and/or of the medieval Moldovan one (Postică 2006, 41). The amplitude with which the investigations can be made with the self-propelled 16-coils magnetometer and the accessibility of the site surface in this area (grassland) are the factors that contributed to the result obtained in the campaign of 2010.In total, an area of about 10,700 s.m. has been investigated, the magnetometric map, processed by interpolation, indicates the presence of anomalies both of archaeological nature and of natural origin (Fig. 7). Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent PLURAL geophysical surveys Fig. 7. The results of the geomagnetic survey from 2010. The anomalies of non-archaeological nature are elongated in shape, oriented approximately in the north-south direction (Fig. 8. C). In all probability, it is the impact of the depth plow, whose traces can be distinguished in the interpolated image from the measurements with the magnetometer. Apart from these relatively large anomalies, a number of small anomalies known as “metallic bi-poles” (Fig. 8. B) were also found in the investigated area. They are noticeable by their approximately round shape, with halves in opposite colors, i.e. black and white, corresponding to very high and very low magnetic values. These are usually separate objects, arranged at certain depths in the ground. The paleo-archaeological nature of this category of anomalies cannot be determined solely on the basis of measurements of the magnetic gradient of the soil. Most often they are small objects and magnetic properties unintentionally reached on agricultural land during the last 100 years. Within the investigated area, a series of anomaliesof different configurations and dimensions have been discovered and which are noticeable by positive, relatively small values of the vertical gradient of the magnetic field (Fig. 8.E). From experience, we appreciate this type of anomalies as the expression of underground structures, which do not always have archaeological potential. In this case, they could be structures that appeared due to either way of carrying out past agricultural work, or some traces of vegetation burning in the ground, or traces of some rodents’ holes, etc. Nor can the possibility be excluded that they represent traces of human habitation, dating in the same chronological period with the archaeological site, that is, in the medieval period. 175 176 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 8. The 2010 results of the geomagnetic survey overlapped on the topographic sketch with level quotas. Within the framework of our research, apart from these types of anomalies, we have identified several areas with very probable archaeological potential. They are the agglomerations of anomalies delimited by us on the interpretive plan of the research results through the rectangles of yellow color (Fig. 8.F). Along with them, a series of approximately circular anomalies were also distinguished in the magnetometric plan made in 2010, interpreted by us as the traces of some pits with archaeological material (Fig. 8. D). Magnetometric researches in the context of preparing the dossier for registration of Orheiul Vechi cultural landscape into the List of UNESCO World Heritage In the autumn of 2014, our team was entrusted with the magnetometric research of the medieval site of Orheiul Vechi in order to prepare the scientific documentation for the dossier of the inscription of OrheiulVechi cultural landscape into the UNESCO World Heritage List. The primary objective of that campaign was to document the archaeological potential of representative sequences within the promontory known among the locals as “Peștere” on the Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent PLURAL geophysical surveys Fig. 9. The placement of the surveyed areas in 2014. surface of which archaeologists had identified not only medieval but also other eras’ vestiges. In order to achieve the objectives of the project, 29 rectangular perimeters were traced and measured. For a brief presentation of the investigation results, the measurement perimeters were grouped into 14 research sectors, noted by us from A to O (Fig. 9). Within the measurements of the 2014 campaign, the same types of magnetic anomalies could be identified as those of the 20092010 campaigns, described above: from plow traces and parcels’ boundaries to those ones that could show traces of some archaeological complexes. Therefore, we will confine ourselvesto reminding the reader that the anomalies able to indicate possible archaeological complexes, following the detailed analysis of the traces discovered and, above all, their interpretation in the archaeological context of different culturallevels and epochs from the promontory “Cave” will remain on the account of the archaeologists responsible for the research in Orheiul Vechi. Sector A covered an area of 17.5×120 m (Fig. 10) and is located in the area where so far, apart from the medieval cultural level, traces of the Iron Age (from the early period and up to the Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca culture) have been identified (Postică and Kavruk 2018, 68-70). Within this perimeter, we point out a number of pits of different shapes and sizes, but especially a possible rectangular structure with the dimensions of about 7×5 m. We refer to the contour with negative values, next to which there is a strong anomaly in the middle and two or three smaller ones - probably it could have been a rectangular construction 177 178 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 with a fire pit and some pits from support pillars (Fig. 10). Sector B covered an area of 104×24.5 m. Magnetic anomalies corresponding to pits of different shapes and sizes were discovered on it (Fig. 11); also, a series of approximately rectangular anomalies with the dimensions of about 5-6×3-4 m, with relatively weak magnetic values were recorded there and whose interpretation as traces of archaeological complexes would be very tempting, but also very uncertain. The southern limit of the sector is marked by a series of strong anomalies that come from a parcelboundary. Fig. 10. The survey results of area A. Fig. 11. The survey results of area B. Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent PLURAL geophysical surveys Fig. 12. The survey results of area C. Sector C has dimensions of 92×12 m (Fig. 12). From its contents, we can notice not only the strong bipolar anomalies from the western boundary and the middle of the sector but also some round or elongated anomalies up to 2.5 m in length and with strong magnetic values. In all likelihood, they represent traces of habitation in this area of the investigated site. Sector D covers an area of 110×14.5 m (Fig. 13). Its surface is largely covered by bipolar anomalies of smaller sizes (on the south side) or larger ones (on the north side). At the same time, we notice a number of round or elongated anomalies that may indicate traces of archaeological complexes, the nature, and functionality of which would be worth checking by intrusive excavation or by coring. In Sector E, two perimeters were worked, covering together an area of 110×19.5-22 m (Fig. 14). As in the case of the previous perimeters, anomalies have been identified that can be interpreted as traces of some pits or even larger archaeological complexes. An elongated anomaly with positive magnetic values disposed of approximately in the center of the western half of sector E stands out of these, for example. After a more detailed analysis, it can be noticed that another anomaly is observed around this anomaly – however, with the negative magnetic values, reaching the size of circa 2.5×3.5 m. Our proposal for interpreting this complex would be related to the existence of a pit-house there with a fire pit in the middle. 179 180 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 13. The survey results of area D. Fig. 14. The survey results of area E. Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent PLURAL geophysical surveys Fig. 15. The survey results of area F. Sector F covered an area of 90×29.5 m and allowed the identification of a series of archaeological anomalies on it, some out of which having been marked by us on the magnetometric plan of the sector (Fig. 15). In sector G, which covered the surface of 90×27 m, we managed to identify fewer anomalies than in the previous one. Of note is the agglomeration of strong anomalies in the northeast corner of the sector (Fig. 16). Unfortunately, due to the inaccessibility of the neighboring parcel, we could not extend the research to the south-southwest, which could have allowed us to follow the continuation of those anomalies and, respectively, to estimate its origin. We have grouped several research perimeters into Sector H (Fig. 17), together covering an area of about 280×12 m. In its contents, two anomalies stand out first of all, seem to have an “archaeological” character. The rest ofthe anomalies seem to come from either a hedge (on the south side) or from the household waste thrown onto the field by the owners of the land on the respective parcels. 181 182 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 16. The survey results of the area G. Fig. 17. The survey results of the area H. Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent PLURAL geophysical surveys Fig. 18. The survey results of area I. Fig. 19. The survey results of area J. Sector I had the dimensions of 88×14.5 m, being drawn at about 40-45 m to the south from the stone church of Orheiul Vechi (Fig. 18). In its contents, we have identified a number of anomalies that can be associated with archaeological complexes, out of which we absolutely distinguish the one marked by quadrangle. In all likelihood, it could be a complex similar to the one identified in sectors A and E: an anomaly of rectangular shape with negative values with the dimensions of about 4×6.5 m, including an anomaly with high positive values inside. Our assumption also rests on the role of the two anomalies (with positive values) on the north side of the large anomaly, which can be easily associated with two pits from pillars. Sector J occupies an area of 96×32.5 m. Its surface is surrounded by small bipolar anomalies and in its northeast corner, there is an agglomeration of anomalies with high amplitude of magnetic values. These include some smaller anomalies that may have an “archaeological” character (Fig. 19). 183 184 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 20. The survey results of area K. Sector K covered an area with dimensions of 120×59.5 m, being bounded on the south by sector J (Fig. 20). Within it, a series of magnetic anomalies have been identified, some of which appear to be traces of habitation. The sector is crossed by linear anomalies from east to west, due to deep plow furrows which could not be filtered from the Software. Sector L (Fig. 21) covered an area of 44.5×24.5 m. Only a few anomalies that could be interpreted as traces of habitation were discovered in its contents. Sector M covered an area of 38×22 m (Fig. 22). Judging by the position of this sector within the contents of an Eneolithic settlement (Postică and Kavruk 2018, 67), we can hypothesize that the agglomeration of anomalies in the northwest corner of sector M, visible on an area of about 8×10 m, could represent the traces of an Eneolithic “platform”, composed of a massive layer of burnt clay. Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent PLURAL geophysical surveys Fig. 21. The survey results of area L. Fig. 22. The survey results of area M. 185 186 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 23. The survey results of area N. The N sector is joined to the previous one on the north side and covered an area of 3×32.5 m. Its surface is dominated by bipolar magnetic anomalies, an agglomeration of which can be observed in the central part of the sector (Fig. 23). Sector O was drawn to the south from sector N but without having common sides with it. As in the case of the previous one, the surface of sector O is plagued by bipolar anomalies, an agglomeration of which is observed on an area of about 8×6.5 m, in the center of the southern half of the sector (Fig. 24). 4. Conclusions Our magnetometric researches from Orheiul Vechi have been carried out during three distinct campaigns and with different types of equipment used for data acquisition. Initially, they represented the materialization of the initiatives of the German project partner4 to contribute to the cross-disciplinary research in the Republic of Moldova, subsequently, the research was continued by the State Pedagogical University “Ion Creangă” in Chisinau, representing our con4 Römisch-Germanische Kommssion des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Frankfurt/ Main. Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent PLURAL geophysical surveys Fig. 24. The survey results of area O. tribution to the efforts of the initiative group for the elaboration of the registration dossier of the Site and subsequently of the archaeological and natural landscape of Orheiul Vechi for the World Heritage List. Regardless of the fate of the vote on the file in the decision-making forums of UNESCO, we are glad that we were able to contribute within the limits of our possibilities to the elaboration of that documentation. Our researches have covered only a small number of parcels of land on the surface of the medieval site of Orheiul Vechi and have not led until now to some spectacular discoveries on the site. However, we consider that the objectives of our approach have been achieved - we have tested the magnetometry method in Orheiul Vechi, we have demonstrated its possibilities of application not only in organizing invasive archaeological research but also in organizing safeguarding for this archaeological monument of national importance to a greater extent. Bibliography: Milsom, John and Asger Eriksen. 2011. Field Geophysics. The Geological Field Guide Series. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. 187 188 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Musteaţă, Sergiu. 2015. „Preserving archaeological remains in situ: from the legal to the practical issues. The Romanian case”. In Current Trends in Archaeological Heritage Preservation: National and International Perspectives, edited by Sergiu Musteață and Ștefan Caliniuc, Proceedings of the international conference, Iași, Romania, November 6–10, 2013, 15-19. BAR International Series 2741, Oxford. Popa, Alexandru, Sergiu Musteaţă and H.-U. Voss. 2013. „Prospecţiuni magnetometrice în Republica Moldova: rezultate şi perspective ale unui proiect moldo-german.” Zargidava. Revistă de istorie XII: 251-263. Popa, Alexandru, Sergiu Musteaţă, H.-U. Voss. 2012. „Landscape Archaeology şi prospecţiuni magnetometrice în Republica Moldova: rezultate şi perspective ale unui proiect moldo-german.” Akademos. Revistă de ştiinţă, inovare, cultură şi artă 1/24: 102-108. Popa, Alexandru, Sergiu Musteaţă, Veaceslav Bicbaev, Knut Rassmann, Octavian Munteanu, Gheorghe Postică and Ghenadie Sîrbu. 2010. “Rezultate preliminare privind sondajele geofizice din anul 2009 şi perspectivele folosirii magnetometriei în Republica Moldova.” In Arheologia între ştiinţă, politică şi economia de piaţă, edited by Sergiu Musteaţă, Al. Popa and Jan-Peter Abraham, 145-57. Chişinău: Pontos. Popa, Alexandru, Sergiu Musteaţă, Veaceslav Bicbaev, Knut Rassmann, Octavian Munteanu, Gheorghe Postică and Ghenadie Sârbu. 2010. “Consideraţii privind sondajele geofzice din anul 2009 în Republica Moldova. ”Revista Arheologică (Chişinău) Serie nouă VI, no. 1: 171-179. Popa, Alexandru and Sergiu Musteaţă, “Geophysikalische Prospektionen in Rumänien. Ein deutsch-rumänisch-moldauisches Forschungsprojekt an der Ostgrenze der römischen Provinz Dacia.” Humboldt-Kolleg in Chişinău, Republik Moldova, Internationale Fachtagung von Humboldianern für Humboltianer „Der Swarzmeerraum vom Äneolitikum bis in die Früheisenzeit (5000-500 v. Chr.). Globale Entwicklung versus Lokalgeschehen”, 4.-8. Oktober 2009: 56-58. Postică, Gheorghe and Valerii Kavruk. 2018. Orheiul Vechi. Archaeological Landscape. Chişinău: Tipografia Centrală. Postică, Gheorghe, Nicolae Boboc, Lazăr Chirică, Varvara Buzilă, Ştefan Lazu, Nicolae Corcimari and Nicolae Zubcov. 2010. Peisajul Cultural Orheiul Vechi. Chişinău: CEP USM. Postică, Gheorghe. 2006. Orheiul Vechi. Cercetările Arheologice 1996-2001. Bibliotheca Archaologica Iassiensis, edited by Victor Spinei and V. MihăilescuBîrliba. Iaşi: Editura Universităţii “Alexandru Ioan Cuza”. Ştefan, Dan. 2012. ArheMAG. Aplicații ale metodei magnetice în arheologie. Manual de bune practici. Brăila: Editura Istros a Muzeului Brăilei. Orheiul Vechi: the results of recent PLURAL geophysical surveys Orheiul Vechi: rezultatele prospecțiunilor geofizice recente Rezumat Orheiul Vechi reprezintă unul dintre cele mai atractive situri culturale din Republica Moldova și respectiv unul dintre cele mai des discutate. Densitatea siturilor și continuitatea de locuire în acest spațiu fac ca Orheiul Vechi să fie atractiv pentru cercetările pluridisciplinare sistematice începând cu anul 1946. În contextul pregătirii dosarului pentru înscrierea Rezervaţiei istorico-culturale și natural-peisagistice „Orheiul Vechi” în Lista patrimoniului mondial, în ultimele două decenii s-au realizat un șir de cercetări. Printre aceste demersuri științifice se înscriu și câteva cercetări non-invazive în diverse zone ale rezervației. Astfel, în acest articol sunt prezentate, pentru prima dată, integral rezultatele sondajelor magnetometrice realizate de o echipă moldo-româno-germană în anii 2009-2014. Rezultatele acestor sondaje au confirmat un șir de situaţii arheologice deja cunoscute și au facilitat noi descoperiri, care merită a fi dezvoltate în anii următori. Cuvinte cheie: Orheiul Vechi, Republica Moldova, metode non-invazive, magnetometrie Alexandru Popa, University of Regensburg, Germany / National Museum of Eastern Carpathians in Sfântu Gheorghe, Romania. Email: alexandru.popa@geschichte.uni-regensburg.de Sergiu Musteață, State Pedagogical University of Chisinau, Republic of Moldova. Email: sergiu_musteata@yahoo.com 189 Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) Malgorzata Daszkiewicz, Octavian Munteanu, Vasile Iarmulschi Abstract The aim of laboratory analysis carried out on pottery fragments recovered from the Poienești-Lucaşeuca (PL) site of Orheiul Vechi and the Getic site of Butuceni was to verify the hypothesis that there was a continuity in pottery technology traditions and the hypothesis that there was continuity in raw material use. In order to verify these hypotheses, i.e. to determine whether we are dealing with continuity or with changes in pottery manufacturing, two factors must be taken into account: know-how and raw material. This means that it is necessary to perform both technological and raw material analyses. For the purposes of this study the following methods were used: MGR-analysis, chemical analysis by WD-XRF, thin-section studies and an estimation of physical ceramic properties. The results of archaeometric analysis of pottery from the PL site of Orheiul Vechi and the Getic site of Butuceni did not substantiate the hypothesis that there had been a continuity in pottery technology traditions. The results of archaeometric analysis of pottery from the PL site of Orheiul Vechi and the Getic site of Butuceni did, conversely, confirm the hypothesis that there was a continuity in raw material use. At both sites and in both phases there is a marked emphasis on local production of ceramics using locally sourced raw materials. The analyses performed show how vital technological analyses are in the study of ancient pottery. If only chemical composition and/or thin-sections are analysed (which is the most common practice) and a report is then written up based on even the precise findings of a technique such as WD-XRF and on sophisticated statistical methods, there is a chance that the resultant cultural and historical conclusions may be erroneous. Without technological analyses, the conclusions drawn solely from the results of chemical analysis/thin-section studies would be that from an archaeometric point of view, there is nothing to suggest a lack of continuity in ceramic production traditions between the Getic site and the PL site. In summary, the similarities in production between pottery from the Getic site and the PL site are clearly reflected in the raw materials used, both in terms of plastic ingredients and intentional temper. However, the results of preliminary technological analyses suggest that there is a lack of continuity in pottery technology traditions. In this way, given the differences observed in the physical ceramic property values, a broader range of analyses is required that will enable us to more accurately reconstruct the ceramic technology. Keywords: Pre-Roman Iron Age; Getic culture; Poienești-Lucașeuca culture; pottery; archaeoceramology; archaeometry; ceramic technology; MGR-analysis; thin-section studies; physical ceramic properties. Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) Research Questions The subject of this study is the phenomenon of migration from Central and Northern Europe to the North-Western Pontic regions that occurred in the last three centuries of the pre-Christian era. As a result, a range of related cultures was created, including the Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca (further – PL) culture, the one we focused our attention on (Fig. 1). As it was mentioned before and on the occasion of other studies (Daszkiewicz et al., 34), one of the major questions of the Pre-Roman Iron Age settlements in the East part of the Carpathians Region is the relationship between the Getic culture and the PL culture. One of the key problems of this correFig. 1. Distribution of Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca lation is determined by the insufficient culture settlements (after Meyer et al., 2016). research of PL culture settlements, on the one hand, but also the insufficient comparative studies of vestiges that define the two cultures, on the other hand. This insufficiency has left room to this day for diametrically opposite interpretations regarding the genesis of PL culture and the relationship between the Getic and PL cultures. Certainly, the situation shall be clarified as a result of new researches of habitat sites , but until then, along with the new field investigations, the interdisciplinary studies of older vestiges could be an effective tool. Among them, ceramics would hold an extremely important place for understanding certain realities. We assumed that the destruction of settlements and new immigration can be seen in a clearly evident change in ceramic technology and the associated supply of raw materials. It is assumed that extensive continuities in the production of ceramics require an undisturbed knowledge transfer between the actors, which cannot be the case in a complete new settlement. In particular, this can be traced back to archaeometric analyzes of ceramics, whereby local or non-local sound supply, leaning, sound processing and burning techniques have meaning (Daszkiewicz et al. 2017, 35). We shall remind that the first analyzes of this kind have already been carried out. Two years ago, the ceramic discoveries from 191 192 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 2. Codrii in the valley of Moțca River. Distribution of Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca settlements. Numbering site on map: 1 – Brănești-Partea de Vest; 2 – Ivancea-Sub Pădure; 3 – Ivancea IV; 4 – Ivancea II; 5 – Poharniceni-Petruha; 6 – Brăneşti-Valea Budăi; 7 – Trebujeni-Potârca; 8 – Trebujeni Fantana Joaiei; 9 – Orheiul Vechi Est; 10 – Măşcăuții-Poiana Ciucului. Yellow pointsOrheiul Vechi PL settlement and Butuceni-West Getae fortification. the Getic Horodca Mare fortification and the one of PL type from Ulmu, both from Hancesti district, Republic of Moldova, have been subjected to analysis (Daszkiewicz et al. 2017, 32-74). The results obtained seem to be quite interesting and forward-looking. For this reason, ceramics of the two cultures of two neighboring settlements – Orheiul Vechi, Orhei District, Republic of Moldova (PL culture: Munteanu and Iarmulschi 2017; Postică and Munteanu 1999) and Butuceni, Orhei District, Republic of Moldva (Getic culture: Munteanu et. al. 2014; Munteanu et al. 2015; Munteanu 2015; Munteanu 2016; Munteanu 2017) – were examined for these parameters (Fig. 2, points marked with yellow). The choice was determined by several reasons, the same, in fact, which determine us now to prioritize the examination of namely these settlements (Branesti and Ivancea, Fig. 2, points 1 and 2). First, because it is a microregion adjacent to one that is quite well known thanks to previous research from Lucașeuca (burial sites and the habitat that gave the name of culture). Second, because it is a region where we have a relatively high density of known sites and being investigated (Fig. 2), would open up the prospect of understanding cultural events in clearly defined spaces and will give the opportunity to compare them with those of neighbouring or remote territories. Third – because we already have an investigated site in this area that can be the key to new discoveries. And not least, because the microregion has preserved a significant number of Getic fortifications (Fig. 3), but the correlation of these and PL culture sites (which has not yet been clearly established, at least for the Prut and Dniester area) could be the key to Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) Fig. 3. Distribution of Getic Fortifications in the East Carpathian Space. – (after Niculiță, Zanoci and Băț 2014, fig. 1). better understand the period when people migrated from north, the way of coming and established relationships with Getae. The landscape: general characteristics The micro-region of direct interests is situated on a small area at the north-eastern periphery of the forest region (Codri) occupying the central part of Moldova: it is the highest from the Prut-Dniester region. Codri represents a relief with an increased degree of rough terrain, the depth of the fragmentation ranging from 300 m to 100-150 m, in most landscapes being 200-350 m. The eastern part of the forest consists of the landscapes Periseci and Trebujeni. The relief has an orientation to the east and southeast, where the maximum altitude decreases to 250 m, with a fragmentation density of 3-4 km2 in the north and 2/3 km2 in the eastern part. At the basis of the tectonic structure there are colluvial deposits, which are characterized by considerable areas of forest soils with two types: brown and gray forest soils pluspodzol and leached chernozem soils. The brown soils and gray forest soils can be found in the wooded areas, at altitudes typically (Ursu 1977; Krupenikov and Podymov 1987; Conea, Vintilă and Canarache 1977) between 200 and 350 m. These conditions have facilitated the growth of rich forest vegetation which is represented by deciduous forests of Central European type. 193 194 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 The region is crossed by valleys of several rivers that flow into the Prut and Dniester rivers. In the Codri area, the river valleys are well-shaped and deep, becoming less pronounced to the periphery. Răut is the third longest river in Moldova, having its origin in the north of the country. The total length is 286 km. Downstream from the confluence with Ciuluc, the river valley widens sharply, but the riverbeds achieve a width of 6-8 km, which continues down to Orhei. In Orhei downstream and to its confluence with the Dniester River, Răut River crosses deeply Sarmatian average limestones, where the large riverbed narrows to 100-150 m. The beautiful landscapes start in the immediate proximity of the contemporary town of Orhei and are mainly generated by the very specific meandering of the Răut River between the calcareous rocks that has shaped promontories with high and steep borders of a very peculiar beauty. The landscape becomes truly spectacular nearby Răut’s meandering borders between the Butuceni and Trebujeni villages, which, in fact, constitutes to the region of the Orheiul Vechi archaeological reservation. Orheiul Vechi, as such, is one of the most unusual sites in the Prut-Dniester area. It is a true natural landscape and archaeological reserve, situated down the Răut River, at around 18 km from where Răut flow into the Dniester. It is situated very strategically but is also very picturesque. In this area, the water flow shaped two promontories with unique landscape enclosed between the Răut’s rocky and steep borders of over 90 m high. The territory is almost isolated and communication with the outside world is possible only from its western side for the “Peştere” promontory, via a narrow saddle in the rock and from the East, for the “Butuceni” promontory (Fig. 4). The strategic importance of the micro zone is confirmed by the sites that it has hosted over time. Human activity on these promontories has been attested since the prehistoric era till the 17thcentury, in our context the most relevant being the fortifications from the Getic period but also the settlements of the PL Culture. The Getic fortifications on the lower course of the Raut River The fortifications are located on the promontory Butuceni (Fig. 4, points 1-3, 6), protected from three sides (north, west, and south) by the steep banks of Răut meanders over 100 m high. Now it is one of the best studied sites in Moldova (Smirnov 1964; Niculiţă, Teodor and Zanoci 1995, 471-490; Niculiţă 1996, 139-167; Niculiţă, Teodor and Zanoci 1997, 292-339). It was found that the headland Butuceni began to be inhabited since the Hallstatt era (Niculiţă and Zanoci 1999; Niculiţă, Teodor and Zanoci 2002). Later, most likely in the Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) Fig. 4. 1 – The Meanders of the River Răut in the Butuceni Village Microzone with the location of the fortifications: 1 – Butuceni; 2 – Butuceni-Est; 3 – Butuceni-Vest; 4 – Măşcăuți-Poiana Ciucului; 5 – Măşcăuți-Dealul cel Mare; 6 – Butuceni-Cetățuia Nouă; 2 – view of the ditch at the northeastern extremity of the Butuceni promontory. – (Google Earth). Yellow arrows – the access roads to Butuceni promontory. early 6th century B.C., the Getae tribes settled in and built an entire defense system (Niculiţă, Teodor and Zanoci 1995, 472-490; Niculiţă 1996, 139-167; Niculiţă, Teodor and Zanoci 1997, 293-339; Niculiţă and Zanoci 1999, 135142; Niculiţă, Teodor and Zanoci 2002). The Getae system of fortifications from Butuceni consists of several defense lines, the eastern and the central lines having been studied by Gh. Smirnov and I. Niculiță (Smirnov 1964; Niculice 1987, 88-101; Zanoci 1998; Niculiţă, Teodor and Zanoci 2002, 27; Postică et al. 2010, 62). Thus, in the Eastern part we have a very large site of more than 7 ha, delimited from the north by a defensive system that is not too extended but very strong. (Fig. 4, point 2). The central part (Fig. 4, point 1) was fortified with a double palisade and at the extremities it was protected by complex and massive constructions, preceded by deep ditches. In the eastern part of the central citadel, a Hellenistic wall was identified, which has no known analogues in our area. The value of the discoveries made inside the fortification must be noted, which places the site among the most important ones. The discovery of a sanctuary on the promontory was one of the most impressive findings made by the team from Moldova State University – it also served as a calendar (Niculiţă 1987, 72-82; Niculiță, Teodor and Zanoci 2002, 41-42; Niculiţă, Zanoci and Băţ 2014, 267-269). It should be noted that this construction is unique on the current territory of the Republic of Moldova, having similarities to the sites dated at the 2nd century B.C. – 1st century A.D. in the classic Getae-Dacian culture. 195 196 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 5. Butuceni headland. Overview from the northwest, marking points which have been identified traces of fortification (1-5). Dashed line: established trajectory of the defensive line; dotted line: hypothetical trajectory of the defense system. There are very special the discoveries that show important influences from the Greek world (Mateevici 1999, 177-195; Mateevici, 2007), which was the nucleus of the European civilization over the 1st millennium B.C. And the western part of the promontory has been fortified (Fig. 4, point 3). Examined in the last few years only, there can be delimited a few defensive lines and only a part of them were researched. Thus, one of the lines bars the promontory, after all, immediately in the area of river curvature that delimits the Butuceni promontory. To this is added a second defensive line, which has been studied partially only, and has a semicircular shape, located behind the first defensive line. It may have been a third defensive line, identified in one single point, but it is still premature to say its trajectory (Fig. 5, Munteanu 2016, 248-250). Taking all this into consideration, it becomes clear that the Butuceni site belongs to important military, commercial, and religious facilities. But, we note that attention is paid to not only to the defensive consolidation of the site from Butuceni promontory, but to the entire microzone. Opposite the Butuceni promontory, on the other side of Răut, there are two other promontories with abrupt steeps on which two fortifications were built: Măşcăuţi-Poiana Ciucului (Fig. 6, No. 4) and Măscăuţi“-Dealulcel Mare” (Fig. 6, No.5). So, the Getae citadel of Butuceni is part of a complex defense system that offers highly effective control of the lower course of the Răut River (Fig. 6). Such an arrangement of Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) Fig. 6 Orheiul Vechi Microregion with Getae fortifications. 1 – Butuceni; 2 – Butuceni-Est; 3 – Butuceni-Vest; 4 – Măşcăuți-Poiana Ciucului; 5 – Măşcăuți-Dealul cel Mare; 6 – Butuceni Cetățuia Nouă; 7 – Trebujeni-Selitra; 8 – Trebujeni-Potârca; 9 – Furceni-Cot; 10 – Trebujeni-Piscul Ciobanului;. – (geoportal.md). fortifications offers an image of the extremely well-ordered protection of the territory from the heights that dominate the Răut valley in the area of Butuceni village. In fact, the river seems to be caught in “pincers” that don’t allow anyone to pass the area without consent, and the Greek material, discovered in abundance, suggests the importance of the place for trade with the Greek world from Pontus colonies. Summing up, we notice that the entire microzone between the villages of Furceni and Butuceni, is a system that emerged as a result of a unified strategy of strengthening the area (Fig. 6). At the same time, it should be mentioned that beyond the fortified settlements, in the microzone there is known a range of open settlements, many of which revolve around the fortified ones. Poienești-Lucașeuca settlements on the lower course of the Raut River The Valley of the Lower Raut represents a space in which most of known sites are located, of those assigned to the PL horizon. From the data available, we notice the location of PL-type settlements in nests (Fig. 2). The PL site from Orheiul Vechi is situated in the immediate proximity (about 400 m away from the getic fortress) of the water flow (as most of the PL sites are), on South-oriented slope (Fig. 2/yellow dot, PL). Its size is estimated to around 1,2 hectare. The excavations were not too broad, counting slightly over 1000 sq. m. 197 198 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Considering the prior research we have performed, we can count today 30 complexes: 6 habitations, 21 auxiliary pits, 2 outbuildings and one tomb. The most representative material has, of course, been the ceramics (Munteanu, Iarmulschi 2019, 140; Munteanu, Iarmulschi 2017, 68; Ткачук 1991, 44-53; Postică, Munteanu 1999, 457-494). On the same promontory, at a distance of about 2 km in the western direction, there were also discovered traces attributed to the PL horizon (Postică et al. 1998, Fig. 2/9). Given the distance of about 2 km between the discovered tracks and the average dimensions of about 1-1.5 ha of the PL-type settlements, we could admit the existence of two sites. A third site is reported in the immediate vicinity of the Pestere promontory. It is located southern wards of Orheiul Vechi, on the high and steep promontory on the opposite bank of the river Raut – Mascauti-Poiana Ciucului (Fig. 2/10). The site is located in the immediate vicinity of the Getic fortress (partially overlapping it), located on the Eastern slope of the promontory, occupying a surface of about 1.2 ha. The site has been researched within several archaeological campaigns and the findings were mainly reported to the Getic horizon (Niculiţce 1984; Niculice 1986; Niculiţă and Arnăut 1996; Musteaţă 2002; Musteaţă 2003; Musteaţă 2004; Musteaţă 2006). At relatively equal distances from the Butuceni microzone other three sites are located. One of them is located on the surface of the Getic fortress Potarca. In that place the Raut River makes a second great meander, the fortress being located on the steep bank of the tributary, near its spilling in Raut (Fig. 2/7). The surface of this site would not exceed 2 ha (Niculiţă, Matveev and Nicic 2019, 16). The first archaeological digs within the Geto-Dacian Trebujeni-Potarca fortress were carried out by Gh. D. Smirnov in the 1950s and 1957, afterwards they were continued by the team of the State University of Moldova headed by I. Niculita (Niculiţă, Matveev and Nicic 2019, 16). There were examined the wall and the defense ditches as well as several sectors of the fortification. At the distance of about 3 km to the North-East of the Orheiul Vechi site, the Trebujeni Fantana Joaiei site is located (Fig. 2/8) and in the opposite direction, approximately at the same distance - the sites Branesti II Valea Budai (Fig. 2/6). All three sites are known only by surface discoveries, having relatively equal dimensions about 1-1.3 ha, located on slopes with South – South-West orientation (Postică 2009, 214). To the West of the last settlement there is located another nest consisting three settlements, in each of which the archaeological investigations were carried out. At the distance of about 3 km South-West of the Branesti-Valea Budai site, on the right bank of the creek, on the western side the Branesti West Side site is lo- Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) cated (Fig. 2/1). The plot represents a slope leading down to the riverbed, oriented northwest. The archaeological remains since the PL period are concentrated closer to the stream bed and cover an area of about 1,5 ha. The site was subjected to magnetometric prospections, some types of anomalies were verified through archaeological digs which confirmed the presence of three PL features (Meyer et al. 2016). From the last site, at the distance of about 4 km to the West, the Ivancea sub-Padure site is located, on the left bank of the Motca River, at the distance of approximately 1750 m to the NW from the center of the Ivancea village (from the Town Hall’s building, Fig. 2/2). The site occupies a surface of about 2 ha and is located on the valley of a creek, with the slope facing North-East. It is worth mentioning, that discoveries of archaeological vestiges were made in the forest too, so it is quite difficult at the moment to appreciate the dimensions of the site. The site was investigated through magnetometric and geographical prospections. It is the only site in the microzone with a single level, which allowed to clearly delimiting the number of complex features. There were discovered and partially researched the traces of 3 dwellings, of two auxiliary potholes and a range of potholes arranged in line which might suggest the existence of a specific type dwelling - long-house (Meyer et al. 2018, 166-171, Meyer et al. 2020, in print). The Poharniceni-Petruha site is located at a distance of about 2.6 km North of Ivancea-sub Padure, in the upper part of a valley with the slope facing North, on the left bank of a creek (Fig. 2/5). Given the multitude of cultural horizons that have been reported within the site, is more difficult to estimate the surface of the site. In the late eighties, the site benefited from little research by which it was clearly delimited including the PL horizon (Postică and Cavruc 1989). Concluding the above presented, we ascertain, in the microzone of Lower Raut, a cluster of settlements assigned to the PL horizon, which are grouped into nests of two or three sites. The distance between the nests is relatively narrow, about 3.5-4 km, and between the sites it was reported a distance of about 2-3 km. A moment worth taking into account is the fact of mutual visibility between the sites that are in the immediate vicinity (obviously, we refer to the knowledge we have now, being sure that there are enough sites on which we have no information yet). Archaeoceramological analysis We reiterate: the aim of laboratory analysis carried out on pottery fragments recovered from the PL site of Orheiul Vechi and the Getic site of Butuceni was to verify the hypothesis that there was a continuity in pottery technology traditions and the hypothesis that there was continuity in raw material use. 199 200 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 In order to verify these hypotheses, i.e. to determine whether we are dealing with continuity or with changes in pottery manufacturing, two factors must be taken into account: know-how (the level of technological knowledge within a given culture or period provides information about continuous or discontinuous transmission of knowledge) and raw material (geological factors – potters working at different ceramic production centres/workshops may have used the same/different clays as well as the same/different non-plastic raw materials to make ceramic bodies). This means that it is necessary to perform both technological and raw material analyses. For the purposes of this study the following methods were used: MGR-analysis, chemical analysis by WD-XRF, thin-section studies and an estimation of physical ceramic properties1. The first procedure carried out on all 30 sherds was abridged MGR-analysis. MGR-groups were defined taking into account the thermal behaviour of samples refired at three temperatures (1100°C, 1150°C and 1200°C). Definitive classification was based on thermal behaviour after refiring at 1200°C. The following types of matrix were identified based on the appearance of samples when refired at 1200°C: – over-melted matrix type (ovM) = the surface of the sample becomes over-melted and its edges slightly rounded; – semi-melted matrix type (sMLT) = over-melting of the surface occurs, changes in sample shape are noted (not just rounded edges) but no bloating; – melted matrix type (MLT) = the sample becomes spherical or almost spherical in shape. Additionally, nearly all samples also exhibited slight bloating (BL), meaning that they expanded in volume. In some samples this bloating did not affect the entire sample, but only its irregularly arranged small parts2 . A number of other terms are used to describe characteristics observed after refiring. These include: ‘pit’, which refers to the fact that the surface of the sample is uneven with visible pitting, and ‘few pits’ (f-pit), which signifies that only a small number of pits are visible. Based on the colour of samples after refiring at 1200°C, only one category of matrix can be identified: non-calcareous (NC). Different colours and shades can be distinguished within this category of matrix. This signifies that all analysed samples were made from non-calcareous clays coloured by iron compounds. 1 2 For a full description of methods see Appendix. In table 1 irregularly arranged parts are marked with a ‘\’, regular parts with a ‘/’ and small parts are indicated in parentheses. Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) Fig. 7. Butuceni. Samples with ovM matrix type, samples after refiring at 1200ºC. (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). Fig. 8. Butuceni. Samples with sMLT matrix type, samples after refiring at 1200ºC. (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). Sherds found in Butuceni can be divided into two main groups based on matrix type: four samples have an ovM matrix type (Fig. 7) and six samples have a sMLT matrix type (Fig. 8). All samples with an ovM matrix type turn the same shade of brownish-red after refiring. They belong to a single MGRgroup (BUT-1) in contrast to samples with a sMLT matrix type, each of which 201 202 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 9. Orheiul Vechi. Samples with ovM matrix type and one sample (AD1421) with ovM\(sMLT) matrix type, samples after refiring at 1200ºC. (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/ Hanna Baranowska). represents a different MGR-group3 (sMLT samples fire to various shades of reddish-brown). Some carbonate aggregates of various grain size fractions are visible in most samples, and some clay lumps4 are also observed. However, the principal ingredients macroscopically visible in the matrix of each sherd are grog particles. MGR-analysis reveals that this grog comprises crushed sherds made from the same raw material as the ceramic body to which it was added and/or crushed pottery made from different raw materials. In samples AD1394 and AD1401 several grog inclusions exhibit the same thermal behaviour as the dominant type of grog in sample AD1392. Sherds recovered from Orheiul Vechi can be divided into three main groups based on matrix type: five samples have an ovM matrix type, one sample has an ovM/(sMLT) matrix type (Fig. 9), seven samples have an sMLT matrix type, 3 4 The term ‘group’ is used even when that group is represented by a solitary sample. Because it is improbable that only a single vessel would have been produced from one ceramic body, it is assumed that the analysed sample represents a group of vessels made from the same material. This is why the term ‘group’ is used even in those cases where groups are represented solely by a single sample. It is not always easy to make a distinction between clay lumps (associated with poorly homogenised clay bodies) and grog in sherds made from the same raw material. Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) Fig. 10. Orheiul Vechi. Samples with sMLT matrix type, samples after refiring at 1200ºC. (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). Fig. 11. Orheiul Vechi. Samples with MLT matrix type, samples after refiring at 1200ºC. (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). two of them have an sMLT matrix type with pits (Fig. 10) and seven samples have an MLT matrix type with varying numbers of pits (Fig. 11). Various MGR-groups can be identified within each group of the same matrix type. Just like the sherds from Butuceni, some carbonate aggregates, some clay lumps and 203 204 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 12. Example of samples after MGR-analysis. Samples tempered of various sized grog and sample featuring a temper of sand-size carbonates (white grains). (Graphic preparation: Małgorzta Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) grog particles of various grain size fractions representing intentional temper are observed in the ceramic fragments found at Orheiul Vechi (Fig. 12). Sample AD1410 is interesting because it features a large number of grog fragments derived from crushed pottery made of calcareous clay. This type of grog was not noted in sherds from Butuceni. One of the samples with an MLT matrix type (sample no. AD1414) had a lot of very small areas of calcareous matrix, though not enough to warrant the sample being reclassified to the MX (mixed) matrix category or to classify it as being made of an NC cc raw material, hence a non-calcareous clay coloured by iron compounds enriched with carbonates in clay fraction. Multiple MGR-groups were identified at both sites, but each of these groups was associated with only one of the sites. The exception to this are two MGRgroups to which sherds from both Butuceni and Orheiul Vechi are attributable, namely: MGR-group BUT-5 (samples AD1397 and AD1407) and BUT-6 (samples AD1399 and AD1413). Samples representing the BUT-6 group were made from a ceramic body prepared using the same recipe, but were most probably fired differently. The firing process was assessed solely by macroscopic analysis of original samples – analysis of matrix colour of original samples (on figure 13 and figure 14 are shown the cut-sections of original samples). Fig. 13. Butuceni. Samples before refiring (original samples) displayed in order of sample numbers (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). 205 206 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 14. Orheiul Vechi. Samples before refiring (original samples) displayed in order of sample numbers (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). The next step involved macroscopic identification of the clastic material. In this instance the field of vision was the surface of four briquettes which were cut out for the purposes of MGR-analysis. Describing temper particles based on optical examination of the four briquettes reduces macroscopic analysis error. Once clastic material classification had been completed, samples were selected for the preparation of thin sections so that these could be examined in order to obtain accurate descriptions of the types of non-plastic inclusions. Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) Fig. 15. Butuceni. Thin-sections, microphotos, XPL (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). This step-by-step strategy makes it possible to reduce the number of analyses performed5. Twelve sherds were selected for thin sections: seven of them from the Orheiul Vechi site and five sherds from the Butuceni site. Macrophotographs of typical thin-section images are shown in figures 15 – 18. 5 This strategy requires far more time for the various analyses, but it significantly reduces their cost. 207 208 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 16. Butuceni (AD1400 and AD1401) and Orheiul Vechi (AD1405). Thin-sections, microphotos, XPL (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). Studies of the thin sections under a polarising microscope reveal a very similar or almost identical petrofabric in terms of the type, number and size of non-plastic particles. Natural temper in all of the samples consists of grains of quartz in fine sand fraction; only single quartz grains are observed in medium sand fraction. Grains of cryptocrystalline carbonates, mostly in coarse sand fraction, are also observed, along with a small number of grains of carbonates in medium sand fraction. Grog was an intentional temper in all 12 sherds. Individual samples differ in the number of grog inclusions and their grain size. Grog Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) Fig. 17. Orheiul Vechi. Thin-section, microphotos, XPL (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). particles of medium sand size are rare; most of the grog is of very coarse sand size, and grog fragments of gravel size (granules6) are also observed. These grog particles came from crushed vessels that were originally fired at both higher and lower temperatures than the firing temperature of the sample to which they were intentionally added as a temper. 6 2–4 mm, according to geological classification after Uden-Wentworth. 209 210 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 18. Orheiul Vechi. Thin-section, microphotos, XPL (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). Pottery fragments found in Butuceni, like those found in Orheiul Vechi, have a matrix consisting of a fine clay with some quartz silt. In some sherds there is very little quartz silt (e.g. sample AD1394), and in others (e.g. sample AD1395) it is more abundant (Fig. 15). All 12 analysed samples were fired at low temperatures, therefore the matrix is still anisotropic. In samples from Butuceni, sand size inclusions of micritic calcite seem to be mostly from recarbonized secondary calcite (AD1392, AD1395); however, a few sparitic calcite crystals are primary. This means the temperature could not have been much above 750°C. A few other inclusions of sand size represent Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) quartz (e.g. AD 1392). The most typical feature of all samples are more-or-less angular inclusions of grog made from a more silty material. The photomicrograph of AD1401 (Fig. 16) shows a larger grog inclusion with the plain surface of an original sherd (grog 2) which had been tempered with grog (grog 1). In one of the samples from Orheiul Vechi (AD1410) the grog inclusions are made from a sandy calcareous clay (Fig. 17). The difference in clay types between the matrix of the sherd and the matrix of the grog is very clearly evidenced by MGR-analysis (see Fig. 12). Grains of quartz and fine sandstone are also observed in sample AD1410 (Fig. 17). Very typical biogenic calcite inclusions are observed in sample AD1414 (Fig. 17) – biogenic calcite is not observed in samples from Butuceni. A single small piece of crushed bone is observed in sample AD1416 (Fig. 18); this inclusion is certainly not a special temper. Next, chemical analysis by WD-XRF was performed on all samples. At this point it is important to bear in mind that two sherds made from the same clay (representing the same MGR-group) will only be attributed to the same chemical group if there is no intentionally added temper in one of them. It should also be stressed that MGR-analysis cannot be used in place of chemical analysis in provenance studies. Individual MGR-groups can only be sorted into groups of the same geochemically important parameters on the basis of chemical analysis. On the other hand, the results of MGR-analysis enable the correct interpretation of chemical clusters deriving from multivariate statistics (multivariate cluster analysis is based on the content of elements within a given sample regardless of what phase they occur in7). The content of geochemically important elements (i.e. elements that are significant in determining provenance) indicates that samples from both sites have a very similar chemical composition (Tab. 1) with few exceptions. One of these exceptions is a sample from Orheiul Vechi (sample no. AD1414) which is distinctive because it has much lower levels of titanium (Ti), chrome (Cr) and vanadium (V) than the other samples and a lower potassium (K) and aluminium (Al) content. This sample also has the highest concentration of calcium (Ca) that is not correlated with the highest concentration of strontium (Sr), which is geochemically correlated with calcium – this means that the calcium was of a different origin (sample no. AD1414 also stands out in MGR-analysis and thin-section studies – see above). 7 Chemical analysis enables the quantity of major and trace elements in the body to be established, although the phases in which individual elements occur cannot be ascertained; giving the major elements as oxides is standard procedure in geochemistry when presenting the results of chemical analysis (CaO content identified by chemical analysis may be attributable to, for example, inclusions of calcite or dolomite or anorthite, or may occur exclusively in clay fraction in the matrix). 211 212 V Cr Ni Cu Zn ppm Rb Sr Y Zr Nb Ba 626 768 775 528 La Ce Pb Th l.o.i. % 153 143 152 149 115 130 137 115 59 77 68 56 39 37 44 39 120 110 117 123 127 136 147 153 175 206 204 162 30 30 33 29 154 180 171 155 19 19 17 18 29 29 42 37 63 62 90 81 22 20 22 21 10 11 12 12 5.49 5.93 3.75 2.25 118 128 129 140 130 123 63 68 71 77 67 68 39 26 37 49 34 43 111 116 109 111 117 119 120 156 133 137 140 135 283 206 256 205 241 198 32 28 26 32 32 30 175 147 142 149 148 147 16 744 34 15 547 37 17 846 27 16 700 43 15 1066 40 17 667 35 66 66 75 72 76 74 19 20 21 22 22 24 10 11 9 10 10 11 5.50 1.95 6.63 7.45 5.62 5.73 133 132 131 134 114 123 51 50 51 49 64 48 28 33 29 29 33 30 119 115 122 123 107 117 155 165 165 168 117 141 196 160 164 184 195 225 24 26 28 26 31 26 166 170 162 170 210 173 18 17 17 18 17 15 718 424 563 512 840 736 32 31 32 24 35 58 62 77 82 81 68 63 23 19 18 20 19 20 11 7 10 7 10 11 2.44 0.93 1.20 1.47 3.97 4.32 623 843 791 800 741 976 821 32 36 32 44 37 37 37 68 60 70 73 69 62 81 19 10 7.65 22 13 6.74 22 9 6.90 22 9 7.85 21 12 9.54 20 8 6.01 22 9 5.39 sMLT/sBL sMLT-sBL sMLT/sBL sMLT/sBL f-pit sMLT/sBL sMLT-sBL AD1392 AD1393 AD1396 AD1397 AD1399 AD1400 64.02 62.89 61.46 61.82 63.18 62.55 0.781 0.768 0.744 0.806 0.792 0.779 16.83 17.37 17.25 17.76 17.45 18.23 6.87 7.01 6.69 7.01 7.23 7.40 0.078 0.066 0.057 0.094 0.067 0.049 2.81 2.81 2.33 2.96 2.90 3.26 4.60 4.69 7.70 5.70 4.12 4.00 ovM ovM ovM ovM ovM ovM (sMLT) AD1402 AD1404 AD1412 AD1415 AD1418 AD1421 66.32 66.17 65.80 65.53 69.13 66.82 0.798 0.791 0.800 0.801 0.780 0.750 17.47 17.29 17.82 17.48 15.99 16.36 5.92 5.83 6.02 6.03 6.25 5.86 0.034 0.035 0.028 0.034 0.098 0.039 2.52 2.56 2.59 2.58 2.45 2.35 2.47 2.48 1.99 3.03 1.43 2.95 0.27 3.42 0.32 132 0.24 3.83 0.33 154 0.24 3.26 0.27 156 0.18 3.43 0.24 152 0.29 3.52 0.45 157 0.18 3.35 0.20 165 Orheiul Vechi 0.51 3.72 0.24 154 0.52 4.16 0.17 156 0.56 4.02 0.35 160 0.55 3.73 0.22 166 0.58 2.93 0.37 135 0.58 3.98 0.32 143 sMLT sMLT sMLT sMLT sMLT pit sMLT/sBL sMLT/sBL f-pit AD1405 AD1409 AD1416 AD1419 AD1411 AD1413 AD1407 63.39 62.12 64.59 65.17 60.31 63.20 62.35 0.784 0.797 0.712 0.782 0.760 0.794 0.817 16.18 17.92 16.32 15.95 16.77 17.50 17.24 6.27 7.11 6.46 6.26 6.67 7.36 6.76 0.104 0.075 0.076 0.113 0.085 0.064 0.105 2.61 3.07 2.62 2.50 3.06 2.86 2.92 7.12 4.75 4.68 5.53 8.50 4.08 5.84 0.22 0.29 0.39 0.37 0.40 0.28 0.35 3.10 3.50 3.82 3.08 3.15 3.46 3.25 0.22 0.36 0.33 0.25 0.29 0.41 0.38 143 156 137 121 150 152 149 126 133 124 111 123 128 124 63 69 68 59 64 67 65 52 36 38 37 43 35 34 108 125 125 102 120 115 115 135 138 144 110 133 139 136 215 208 200 206 331 222 250 31 31 30 34 30 32 34 171 137 167 208 145 143 150 18 18 15 17 15 17 17 MLT f-pit MLT f-pit MLT f-pit MLT pit MLT pit MLT pit MLT pit AD1414 AD1417 AD1420 AD1403 AD1406 AD1408 AD1410 64.76 62.40 63.62 59.47 64.08 64.63 61.91 0.680 0.748 0.752 0.766 0.741 0.737 0.757 13.67 16.17 15.74 16.78 14.84 14.96 15.81 5.39 6.46 5.75 7.26 5.16 5.84 6.16 0.092 0.085 0.075 0.122 0.116 0.094 0.111 2.35 3.00 2.67 3.28 2.87 2.89 2.65 9.81 7.26 7.23 8.18 8.31 6.86 8.58 0.37 0.27 0.37 0.35 0.45 0.64 0.37 2.56 3.29 3.46 3.39 3.00 3.05 3.35 0.31 0.32 0.34 0.40 0.42 0.29 0.29 112 146 142 158 131 128 139 92 127 121 127 108 112 120 51 62 57 64 51 63 61 35 39 40 43 32 46 34 91 115 118 122 95 108 110 102 144 134 152 126 121 133 257 242 287 287 295 225 291 28 29 31 32 31 29 30 181 157 167 139 211 173 168 12 706 45 69 16 5 10.77 16 1006 30 64 18 8 9.29 16 724 12 83 18 10 8.45 16 594 47 83 22 7 2.15 16 639 36 74 22 5 7.98 16 603 38 67 17 9 6.50 15 746 39 70 19 7 6.11 Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 ovM ovM ovM ovM Sample SiO2 TiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 MnO MgO CaO Na2O K2O P2O5 No. per cent by weight Butuceni AD1394 63.67 0.796 18.12 7.29 0.053 2.95 3.06 0.25 3.53 0.28 AD1395 65.31 0.838 17.51 7.25 0.153 2.52 2.82 0.31 3.15 0.14 AD1398 65.13 0.846 17.79 7.05 0.058 2.36 2.52 0.46 3.58 0.21 AD1401 63.57 0.782 17.91 7.18 0.043 2.95 3.05 0.32 3.98 0.23 PLURAL Tab. 1. Results of chemical analysis by WD-XRF. Analysis on ignited and melted samples. Major elements normalised to 100%. Preparation of samples by M. Daszkiewicz in ARCHEA, calibration of Arbeitsgruppe Archaeometrie by G. Schneider and A. Schleicher in GFZ Potsdam. ovM = over-meletd matrix type; sMLT = semi-melted matrix type; MLT = melted matrix type. Matrix type Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) Fig. 19. Dendrogram presenting the results of multivariate cluster analysis. Analysis using Euclidean distance and average linkage aggregative clustering of a distance matrix, data lodged, elements used: Si, Ti, Al, Fe, Mn, Mg, Ca, Na, K, V, Cr, Ni, Cu; Zn, Rb, Sr, Y, Zr, Nb and Ba (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz). Sample AD1406 also has a fairly low concentration of Cr, though not as low as sample AD1414. Cr levels in the remaining 28 sherds range from 112 to 140 ppm, with nickel (Ni) content ranging from 51 to 77 ppm. Magnesium (Mg) content calculated as MgO ranges from 2.35 to 3.28%. Titanium calculated as TiO2 ranges from 0.74 to 0.85%. The greatest differences were noted in the concentrations of Ca and Sr. These samples (four from Butuceni and six from Orheiul Vechi) are characterised by a calcium content of 1.5–3.1 wt.% (calcium calculated as CaO). All of these samples have an ovM matrix type. The sample with the lowest concentration of CaO (AD1418) also has a low K content and the highest silica content among all of the analysed samples (Si concentration calculated as SiO2 amounts to 69.1 wt.%) as well as an exceptionally high ratio of Sr/Ca. The highest concentrations of calcium are noted in samples with an MLT matrix type, in which CaO content ranges from 6.9 to 9.8 wt.%. Figure 19 shows the results of multivariate cluster analysis presented in the form of a dendrogram8. This dendrogram shows a very clear correlation be8 Analysis using Euclidean distance and average linkage of clustering of a distance, data logged, elements used: Si, Ti, Al, Fe, Mn, Mg, Ca, Na, K, V, Cr, Ni, Cu; Zn, Rb, Sr, Y, Zr, Nb and Ba. 213 214 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 20. Results of discriminant analysis, elements used: Si, Ti, Al, Fe, Mn, Mg, Ca, Na, K, V, Cr, Ni, Zn, Rb, Sr, Y, Cu, Zr, Nb and Ba (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz). tween the phase composition of the matrix and the chemical composition of the sherds. One large cluster encompasses samples with an ovM matrix type. Another cluster comprises samples which have sMLT and MLT matrix types, with all but two sMLT-matrix-type samples forming a distinct subcluster. Four samples that are distinctive in terms of both their chemical composition and thermal behaviour as well as their non-plastic particles form separate clusters. The samples in question are: AD1393 (only one grog inclusion is observed in this sample), AD1418 (no carbonate particles are observed), AD1406 (paler matrix after refiring at 1200°C than all other MLT samples), AD1414 (sample with biogenic calcite). It is interesting that within cluster 1 (ovM samples), samples from Butuceni and Orheiul Vechi are very clearly separated from one another (fig. x, cluster 1a and 1b). Samples with an sMLT matrix type are not separated. Two samples, one from Butuceni (AD1399) and the other from Orheiul Vechi (AD1413), share the same chemical composition. Given that these samples belong to the same MGR-group and were made using the same recipe, there is no doubt that they must have been made at the same workshop and as part of the same batch. The same clustering pattern also emerges when taking into consideration discriminant analysis (Fig. 20) demonstrating the good discrimination of matrix type/site groups. The physical ceramic properties of all samples was also assessed. This means that an estimation was made of their open porosity, water absorption Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) Fig. 21. Histograms showing distribution of samples in individual value ranges together with normal distribution curves for open porosity values (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). and apparent density. Figure 21 shows histograms together with normal distribution curves for open porosity values. The open porosity values for pottery from Butuceni is distinctly different from open porosity values for pottery from Orheiul Vechi. The open porosity values of pottery from Butuceni falls within a range of 31.4–43.8%, in contrast to that of pottery from Orheiul Vechi, the 215 216 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Fig. 22. Box and whisker plots for open porosity values for samples divided according sites (Butuceni and Orheiul Vechi). The boxes indicate the interquartile range (i.e. the compositional range of the central 50% of samples) and the whiskers indicate the full range (Graphic preparation: Małgorzata Daszkiewicz/Hanna Baranowska). open porosity values of which fall within a range of 23.039.6.8%. The median values are 36.4 vol.% and 32.1 vol.% respectively. Box and whisker plots for open porosity values (Fig. 22) indicate that there is no overlap of the interquartile range (i.e. the compositional range of the central 50% of samples), in fact it is quite the opposite: open porosity values of individual quartiles representing pottery from Orheiul Vechi are distinctly lower than the corresponding values for pottery from Butuceni. Conclusions The results of archaeometric analysis of pottery from the PL site of Orheiul Vechi and the Getic site of Butuceni did not substantiate the hypothesis that there had been a continuity in pottery technology traditions. There is no doubt that technology (the particular aspect that was analysed) is attributable to culture. Given the differences observed in the physical ceramic property values, a broader range of analyses is required that will enable us to reconstruct the ceramic technology: analyses that will allow for the adjustment of firing temperature and firing atmosphere and studies examining evidence of shaping and forming techniques (KH analysis, APTMGT or RTI observation of sur- Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) face phenomena). It would also be advisable to carry out analyses of functional properties. A suite of analyses of this sort would make it possible to determine precisely what differences there were in know-how between potters at the PL site of Orheiul Vechi and the Getic site of Butuceni. The issue of technology is particularly interesting in the case of two samples, one from Butuceni (AD1399) and the other from Orheiul Vechi (AD1413). These samples came from vessels that were undoubtedly made at the same pottery workshop using a ceramic body prepared according to the same recipe, but were most probably subject to different firing and possibly de-airing processes. Do these two vessels represent a workshop that was operational during the transition period? Does the firing technology represented by vessels found at Butuceni correspond to Getic culture know-how and that represented by vessels found at Orheiul Vechi correspond to PL culture know-how? The results of archaeometric analysis of pottery from the PL settlement of Orheiul Vechi and the Getic fortification of Butuceni did, conversely, confirm the hypothesis that there was a continuity in raw material use. At both sites and in both phases there is a marked emphasis on local production of ceramics using locally sourced raw materials. This situation was probably dictated by economic factors: transporting ceramic raw materials from further afield is an unnecessary effort if appropriate raw materials are available in the immediate vicinity. The analyses performed show how vital technological analyses are in the study of ancient pottery. If only chemical composition and/or thin-sections are analysed (which is the most common practice) and a report is then written up based on even the precise findings of a technique such as WD-XRF and on sophisticated statistical methods, there is a chance that the resultant cultural and historical conclusions may be erroneous. Without technological analyses, the conclusions drawn solely from the results of chemical analysis/thin-section studies would be that from an archaeometric point of view, there is nothing to suggest a lack of continuity in ceramic production traditions between the Getic site and the PL site. In summary, the similarities in production between pottery from the Getic site and the PL site are clearly reflected in the raw materials used, both in terms of plastic ingredients and intentional temper. However, the results of preliminary technological analyses suggest that there is a lack of continuity in pottery technology traditions. This discontinuity in technology can be interpreted as an interruption in the transmission of knowledge between individuals. These preliminary technological analyses suggest a higher level of know-how among potters of the PL culture. 217 218 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Appendix Description of analytical procedures MGR-analysis Four thin slices were cut from each sample in a plane at right angles to the vessel’s main axis. One of these sections was left as an indicator of the sample’s original appearance, whilst the remaining three were refired, each one at a different temperature, in a Carbolite electric laboratory resistance furnace using the standard procedure. Firing was carried out at the following temperatures: 1100, 1150 and 1200 °C in air, static (this means without air flow), at a heating rate of 200 °C/h and a soaking time of 1h at the peak temperature, and cooled at a cooling rate of 5°C/min to 500oC, followed by cooling with the kiln for 1 hour. They were subsequently removed from the kiln and left to continue cooling until they reached room temperature. The fragments were then glued on to paper and a photograph was taken with a macro lens for each slice. Chemical analysis In this instance, chemical analysis by WD-XRF (Wavelength-dispersive X-ray fluorescence) was used to determine the content of major elements, including phosphorus and a rough estimation of sulphur and chlorine. Total iron was calculated as Fe2O3. Samples were prepared by pulverising fragments weighing c. 2g (sample size was determined by the number and size of the non-plastic components), having first removed their surfaces and cleaned the remaining fragments with distilled water in an ultrasonic device. The resulting powders were ignited at 900 °C (heating rate 200 °C/h, soaking time 1h), melted with a lithium-borate mixture (Merck Spectromelt A12) and cast into small discs for measurement. This data is, therefore, valid for ignited samples but, with the ignition losses given, may be recalculated to a dry basis. For easier comparison the major elements are normalised to a constant sum of 100%. Major elements are calculated as oxides. The long-term precision (coefficient of variation) for major elements is better than 2% (6% for Na). WD-XRF was used to determine levels of the trace elements V, Cr, Ni, Zn, Rb, Sr, Y, Zr, and Ba with long-term precision (measurement and preparation) ranging up to 3%; for Nb, Cu and Ce longterm precision was as high as 6% (rising to 1520% for trace elements at very low concentrations). Accuracy was tested by analysing over fifty certified international standard reference samples (CRMs) and by multiple exchange of samples with other laboratories. For major elements in CRMs the maximum deviations are predominantly below 5%, and for sodium and trace elements Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) they are below 10% (except for low concentrations of Cu, Nb, Ba, La, Ce, Pb and Th). Samples were prepared for analysis by M. Daszkiewicz at ARCHEA, and measurements were performed using the calibration by G. Schneider and a PANalytical AXIOS XRF-spectrometer (courtesy of Anja Schleicher, Helmholtz-Zentrum Potsdam, Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum GFZ, Sektion 4.2, Anorganische und Isotopengeochemie). Thin sections A laboratory saw with a diamond-tipped blade was used to remove thin slices perpendicular to the wall of the sherd and to the rim of the vessel. Each piece was impregnated multiple times with epoxy resin, ground and polished to a thickness of 0.0300.025 mm, after which it was mounted on a glass slide and covered with a thin cover glass. These thin sections were examined under an Olympus polarising microscope using crossed polarizers (XPL) and plane polarizers (PPL). A photographic record (consisting of a series of microphotographs taken at magnifications of 25×, 100× and 400×) was compiled for each thin section. Physical ceramic properties Physical ceramic properties (apparent density, open porosity, water absorption) were estimated by hydrostatic weighing; this was carried out on original pottery fragments. Prior to weighing, all of the samples were boiled in distilled water for two hours in order to fully saturate their open pores with water. Subsequently, the samples were cooled to room temperature and then weighed twice: during the first weighing the samples were immersed in water, and during the second the wet samples were weighed in air. Each sample was then dried to a constant mass in a dryer at 105°C and cooled to room temperature in a desiccator, before being weighed for a third time in air. This process yielded three values: ms – mass of dry sample; mw – mass of wet sample weighed in air; mww – mass of sample weighed in water (with pores saturated by boiling in water). Physical ceramic properties were only calculated after all of these procedures had been completed. Bibliography Arnăut, Tudor 1977. Vestigii ale sec. VII-III a Chr. în spaţiul de la răsărit de Carpaţi. Chişinău: Universitatea de Stat. Conea, Ana, Irina Vintilă and Andrei Canarache 1977. Dicţionar de ştiinţa solului. București: Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică. 219 220 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Daszkiewicz, Małgorzata 2014. “Ancient pottery in the laboratory – principles of archaeological investigations of provenance and technology.” Novensia 25: 177-197. Daszkiewicz, Małgorzata and Lara Maritan 2017. “Experimental Firing and Re-firing.” Chapter 27. In The Oxford Handbook of Archaeological Ceramic Analysis, edited by Alice Hunt, 487-508. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Daszkiewicz Malgorzata, Michael Meyer, Octavian Munteanu and Vasile Iarmulschi 2017. “Pottery found at the Horodca Mică and Ulmu Iron Age settlements – results of archaeoceramological analysis.” In Pre-Roman and Roman Iron Age in Central and Southeastern European Barbaricum, edited by Octavian Munteanu and Vasile Iarmulschi. Plural: History. Culture. Society, seria archaeologica I, vol. 5, 2: 32-74. Daszkiewicz, Malgorzata, Gerwulf Schneider and Ewa Bobryk 2012. „Wozu brauchen wir kombinierte Methoden für Keramikanalysen?” In Archäometrie und Denkmalpflege: Jahrestagung an der Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen, edited by Frank Schlütter, Susanne Greiff and Matthias Prange. Metalla Sonderheft 5, 160-162. Bochum: Deutsches Bergbau-Museum. Igor A. Krupenikov and Boris P. Podymov 1987. Klassifikacija I sistematicheskij spisok pochv Moldavii. Kishinev : Shtiinca. Mateevici, Natalia 1999. „Contribuții la cercetarea și studierea materialului ceramic grecesc de la cetatea getică de la Butuceni.” In Studia în honorem I. Niculiță, edited by Tudor Arnăut, Aurel Zanoci and Sergiu Matveev, 177-195. Chișinău: Cartdidact. Mateevici, Natalia 2007. Amforele grecești în mediul barbar din nord-vestul Pontului Euxin în sec. VI - în-ceputul sec. II a. Chr. Chișinău: Bons Offices. Matveev, Sergiu 2004. „Reconstrucţia sistemului de fortificaţii a cetăţii Potârca (jud. Orhei). Studiu de caz.” In Studii de istorie veche şi medievală: Omagiu Profesorului Gheorghe Postică, edited by Tudor Arnăut, Octavian Munteanu and Sergiu Mustaţă, 115-120. Chişinău: Pontos. Meyer, Michael, Octavian Munteanu, Vasile Iarmulschi, Bjorn Rauchfuß and Franca Höppner 2016. “The Poienesti-Lucaseuca site from Branesti – The West Side, Orhei district, Republic of Moldova (researches of the period 2014 – 2015)”. In Culturi, Procese și Contexte în Arheologie. Volum omagial Oleg Leviţki la 60 de ani, edited by Livia Sîrbu, Nicolae Telnov, Larisa Ciobanu, Ghenadie Sîrbu and Maia Kașuba, 310-330. Chişinău: Garamont-Studio. Meyer, Michael, Octavian Munteanu, Vasile Iarmulschi and Torben Schatte 2018. „Prospecţiuni geomagnetice și sondaje realizate în așezarea de tip Poienești-Lucașeuca de la Ivancea-sub Pădure.” In Cercetări interdisciplinare la siturile din epoca fierului în spaţiul tiso-nistrean. Materialele colloquium-ului de Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) vară de la Saharna (Saharna, 13-16 iulie 2017), edited by Aurel Zanoci, Mihail Băț, S.-C. Ailincăi and Alexandra Târlea, 145-179. Cluj-Napoca: Mega. Meyer, Michael, Octavian Munteanu, Vasile Iarmulschi, Bjorn Rauchfuß and Torben Schatte 2020, „Reluarea cercetării siturilor Poienești-Lucașeuca în spaţiul Pruto-nistrean: campaniile de la Brănești și Ivancea în anii 2015-2018.” Iași, in print. Munteanu, Octavian, Vasile Iarmulschi and Sergiu Popovici 2014. „Cercetările arheologice de la Butuceni în anul 2013. Preliminarii.” Arheologia Preventivă în Republica Moldova, Vol. I-nr.1-2: 55-67. Munteanu, Octavian, Sergiu Moraru and Maria Vetrilă 2015. „Cercetările arheologice din anul 2014 în fortificaţia Butuceni, raionul Orhei”. In Arheologia preventivă în Republica Moldova, vol. II: 33-42. Munteanu, Octavian 2017. „Butuceni: general and particular features of the defense system from the west side of promontory.” In Iron Age fortifications on the Tisa-Dniester space, Proceeding of Saharna Summer Colloquim, July 14 th -17th , 2016, edited by Aurel Zanoci, Valeriu Sîrbu and Mihail Băţ, 65-113. Chişinău-Brăila: Istros. Munteanu, Octavian 2016. „Noi descoperiri defensive în partea de vest a promontoriului Butuceni (cercetările din anul 2015).” Tyragetia S.N., vol. 1, X (XXV): 237-252. Munteanu, Octavian 2015. “Landscape and Getae Populations in the upper course of the Botna River.” In Fortified sites from the 1st millennium BC. Materials of the Moldovan-Romanian-German Colloquim, July 24 th -26 th 2014, edited by Aurel Zanoci, Peter Ettel and Mihail Băţ, 63-80. Chisinau: Bons Offices. Munteanu, Octavian and Vasile Iarmulschi 2019. „Regarding the dwellings discovered in Poieneşti-lucaşeuca culture settlement.” In Archaeological structures at the Iron Age settlelements in the Tisza-Dniestr region. Proceedindg of Saharna Summer Colloqium July 12th -15th 2018, edited by Aurel Zanoci, Mihail Băţ, A. Ţârlea and Sorin-Cristian Ailincăi, 139-156. Tulcea-Chisinau: Mega Publishing House. Munteanu, Octavian and Vasile Iarmulschi 2017. „Pottery from the Poieneşti-Lukaševka Culture Settlement of Orheiul Vechi, Republic of Moldova.” In Settlements Pottery on the pre-Roman Iron Age in Central European Barbaricum – new research perspectives, edited by Michałowski, Andrzej, Milena Teska, Przemysław Niedzielski and Marek Żółkiewski, 67-96. Poznań: Biblioteka Telgte Wydawnictwo. Musteaţă, Sergiu 2003. Raport ştiinţific privind rezultatele investigaţiilor arheologice din anul 2002 în cadrul monumentului Maşcauţi-Cetate, Chişinău: Arhiva MNAIM. 221 222 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Musteaţă, Sergiu 2002. Raport ştiinţific privind rezultatele investigaţiilor arheologice din anul 2001 în cadrul monumentului Maşcauţi-Cetate, Chişinău: Arhiva MNAIM. Musteaţă, Sergiu 2004. Raport ştiinţific privind rezultatele investigaţiilor arheologice din anul 2003 în cadrul monumentului Maşcauţi-Cetate, Chişinău: Arhiva MNAIM. Musteaţă, Sergiu 2006. Raport ştiinţific privind rezultatele investigaţiilor arheologice din anul 2005 în cadrul monumentului Măşcăuţi-Cetate, Chişinău: Arhiva MNAIM. Nikulicje, Ivan T. 1984. Otchet o rezul’tatah polevyh arheologicheskih issledovanij v zone muzejnogo kompleksa „Staryj Orhej” v 1983 g., Kishinjov: Arhiva MNAIM. Nikulicje, Ivan T. 1986. Otchet o rezul’tatah arheologicheskih issledovanij v muzejnom komplekse «Staryj Orhej» i na prilegajushhih territorijah v 1985 g. Kishinjov: Arhiva MNAIM. Nikulicje, Ivan 1987. Severnye frakijcy VI-I vekov do nashej jery. Kishinjov: Shtiinca. Niculiţă, Ion T. 1996. „Habitatul traco-getic de la Butuceni”. Thraco-Dacica XVII/1-2: 139-167. Niculiţă, Ion 1999. „Cercetarea arheologică a cetăţii traco-getice Trebujeni-Potărca din preajma Orheiului Vechi în anii 1996-199.” In Orheiul Vechi. Buletin istorico-arheologic, 33-35. Chişinău: Ruxanda. Niculiţă, Ion and Tudor Arnăut 1996. Raport preliminar al cercetărilor arheologice din cadrul aşezării şi cetăţii Măşcăuţi din anul 1995. Chişinău: Arhiva MNAIM. Niculiţă, Ion, Sergiu Matveev and Andrei Nicic 2019. Cercetările sitului arheologic Potârca din Rezervaţia Cultural-Naturală Orheiul Vechi. Chișinău: Cartdidact. Niculiţă, Ion, Sergiu Matveev and Eduard Potângă 1999. „Cetatea traco-getică Potârca”. In Cercetări arheologice în aria nord-tracă, III, 279-343. Bucureşti: Institutul Român de Thracologie. Niculiţă, Ion, Sergiu Matveev and Eduard Potângă 1999a. „Săpăturile arheologice de la cetatea getică Potârca din anul 1998.” Symposia Professorum. Seria Istorie: 8-10. Niculiţă, Ion and Silvia Teodor 2001. Raport preliminar despre rezultatele săpăturilor arheologice la cetatea getică Potârca din rezervaţia muzeală “Orheiul Vechi”din anul 2001, Chişinău: Arhiva MNAIM. Niculiță, Ion, Silvia Teodor and Aurel Zanoci 1995. „Săpăturile arheologice de la Butuceni, raionul Orhei, 1993-1994.” In Cercetări arheologice în aria Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) nord-tracă, edited by Marian Gumă, I, 472-490, București: Institutul Român de Tracologie. Niculiţă, Ion, Silvia Teodor and Aurel Zanoci 1996. Raport preliminar despre rezultatele săpăturilor arheologice la situl traco – getic de la Butuceni în anul 1995, Chișinău: Arhiva MNAIM. Niculiţă, Ion, Silvia Teodor and Aurel Zanoci 1997. „Săpăturile arheologice de la Butuceni, raionul Orhei, 1995-1996.” In Cercetări arheologice în aria nordtracă, II, 292-339. Bucureşti: Institutul Român de Tracologie. Niculiţă, Ion, Silvia Teodor and Aurel Zanoci 2002. Butuceni. Monografie arheologică, Bucureşti: Vavila Edinf. Niculiţă Ion and Aurel Zanoci 1999. „Leş vestiges du type Saharna-Solonceni decouverts sur le promontoire de Butuceni”, Thraco-Dacica, XX: 135-142. Niculiţă, Ion and Aurel Zanoci 2001. Raport preliminar despre rezultatele cercetărilor arheologice la cetăţile getice Butuceni, Potârca şi Măşcăuţi din Codrii Moldovei. Campania 2000, Chişinău: Arhiva MNAIM. Niculiţă, Ion, Aurel Zanoci and Andrei Nicic 2003. Raport despre rezultatele cercetărilor arheologice la obiectivele traco-getice Maşcauţi “Dealul cel Mare” şi Potârca din 2002, Chişinău: Arhiva MNAIM. Niculiţă, Ion, Aurel Zanoci and Mihail Băţ 2014, „Administrative, religious and cult centers in the East-Carpathian area during the 2nd half of the 1st millennium BC”. In Residential Centres (dava, emporium, oppidum, hillfort, polis) and Cult Places in the Second Iron Age of Europe, Proceedings of the International Colloquium Buzău (Romania), 23rd-26th October. Musaios XIX: 259-276. Postică, Gheorghe, Ion Hîncu and Octavian Munteanu, Raport știinţific privind rezultatele investigaţiilor arheologice din anul 1997 de la Orheiul Vechi, Chișinău: Arhiva MNAIM. Postică, Gheorghe, Nicolae Boboc, Lazăr Chirică, Varvara Buzilă, Ștefan Lazu, Nicolae Corcimari and Nicolae Zubcov 2010. Peisajul Cultural Orheiul Vechi. Chișinău: CEP USM. Postică, Gheorghe 2009. „Istoricul cercetării arheologie in zona Orheiului Vechi” In Miscellanea historica et arhaeologica in honorem professoris Ionel Cândea, edited by Valeriu Sârbu and Cristian Luca, 209-248. Brăila: Istros. Postică, Gheorghe and Valeriu Cavruc 1989. Investigații arheologice a așezării Petruha din anul 1988. Chișinău: Arhiva MNIM. Postică, Gheorghe and Octavian Munteanu 1999. „Așezarea de tip Poienești-Lucașeuca de la Orheiul Vechi.” In Cercetări Arheologice in Aria Nord-Tracă, III, 457-494. București: Institutul Român de Tracologie. 223 224 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Smirnov, Georgij D. 1964. „Arheologicheskie razvedki v nizhnem techenii Reuta” In Materialy i issledovanija po arheologii i jetnografii Moldavskoj SSR, 248-254. Kishinev: Kartja Moldovenjaskje. Ursu, Andrei. F. 1977. Prirodnye uslov’ ja i geografija pochv Moldavii. Kishinev: Shtiinca. Tkachuk, Mark E. 1991. „Novye dannye k issledovaniju pamjatnikov tipa Pojanesht’-Lukashevka po materialam Starogo Orheja.” In Arheologicheskie issledovanija v Starom Orhee, edited by Pavel P. Byrnja and Nikolaj P. Tel’nov, 44-53. Kishinev: Shtiinca. Zanoci, Aurel 1998. Fortificaţiile geto-dacice din spaţiul extracarpatic în secolele VI-III a. Chr. Bucureşti: Vavila Edinf. Analiza arheoceramologică a vestigiilor din siturile Orheiul Vechi şi Butuceni-Vest (culturile getică şi Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca) Rezumat În articol sunt prezentate rezultatele analizelor de laborator efectuate pe fragmentele de ceramică recuperate în două situri învecinate: în situl de tip Poienești-Lucașeuca de la Orheiul Vechi și cel getic de la Butuceni. Scopul acţiunii întreprinse a urmărit verificarea ipotezei conform căreia, între culturile menţionate mai sus există continuitate în tradițiile tehnologice de producţie a ceramicii și cele de utilizare a materiei prime. Pentru a verifica această ipoteză, adică pentru a determina dacă avem de-a face cu continuitatea sau cu modificări în modul de producere a ceramicii, a trebuit să se țină seama de doi factori: knowhow și materia primă. Aceasta înseamnă că a fost necesar să se efectueze atât analize tehnologice, cât și analize ale materiei prime, fiind utilizate următoarele metode: analiza MGR, analiza chimică prin WD-XRF, studii în secțiune subțire și estimarea proprietăților fizice ale ceramicii. Rezultatele analizei arheometrice a ceramicii descoperite în situl Poienești-Lucașeuca de la Orheiul Vechi și în situl getic de la Butuceni nu au confirmat ipoteza că ar fi existat o continuitate în tradițiile tehnologice de producţie a ceramicii. În schimb, rezultatele analizei arheometrice au confirmat ipoteza că a existat o continuitate în utilizarea materiei prime: în ambele situri și în ambele faze se pune accentul pe producția locală de ceramică, folosind materii prime locale. În acest fel, analizele efectuate arată cât de importante sunt aspectele tehnologice în studiul ceramicii antice. Dacă sunt analizate doar compozițiile chimice și/sau secțiunile subțiri (care este cea mai obișnuită practică), atunci este foarte probabil să ajungem la concluzii eronate atât de ordin cultural, cât și de ordin istoric, chiar dacă la bază sunt puse rezultate exacte ale unei tehnici precum WD-XRF și metode statistice sofisticate. Astfel, fără analize tehnologice, am ajunge la concluzia că din punct de vedere arheometric, nu există nimic care să sugereze lipsa de continu- Archaeoceramological analysis of the pottery from Orheiul Vechi and Butuceni-Vest settlements PLURAL (Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca and Getic cultures) itate în tradițiile producției ceramice între situl getic și cel de tip Poienești-Lucașeuca. De facto, rezultatele analizelor tehnologice preliminare ne sugerează că există o lipsă de continuitate în tradițiile tehnologiei de producţie a ceramicii între cele două comunităţi învecinate – purtătorii culturii Poienești Lucașeuca de la Orheiul Vechi și apărătorii cetăţuii Butuceni-Vest din perioada getică. În acest fel, având în vedere diferențele observate în valorile fizice ale proprietății ceramice, pentru reconstruirea mai exactă a tehnologiei ceramice este necesară o gamă mai largă de analize. Cuvinte cheie: epoca pre-romană a fierului; cultura getică; Cultura Poienești-Lucașeuca; ceramica, arheoceramologie; arheometrie, tehnologia producţiei ceramice; analiza MGR; cercetări ale secţiunilor subţiri; caracteristici fizice ale ceramicii. Małgorzata Daszkiewicz, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany/ ARCHEA, Warszawa, Poland. E-Mail: m.dasz@wp.pl Octavian Munteanu, State Pedagogical University of Chisinau, Moldova. E-mail: ocmunteanu@gmail.com Vasile Iarmulschi, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany, The National Museum of History of Moldova, Chisinau, Moldova. E-mail: vasile.iarmulschi@gmail.com 225 AUTHORS’ SHORT BIOGRAPHIES / DATE DESPRE AUTORI AVRAMENKO, Maryana O. Joung researcher of the Early Slavs Department of the Institute of Archaeology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. Sphere of scientific interest - wheel-made pottery and funeral rite of Chernyakhov’s culture. Author of more than 10 papers. E-mail: mariana_ avramenko@iananu.org.ua BÂRCĂ, Vitalie is scientific fellow II with the Institute of Archaeology and Art History of Cluj- Napoca, Romania. He is a specialist in the archaeology and history of the Sarmatian civilisation from the North-Pontic area, the Lower Danube and the Great Hungarian Plain. His expertise also includes aspects of ethnic, cultural, political and military interferences between the Graeco-Roman and Barbarian worlds in Central and Eastern Europe. He is the author of over 80 studies published in specialty journals and volumes. His books include History and Civilisation. The Sarmatians in the east-Carpathian area (1st century BC – early 2nd century AD.), Cluj-Napoca 2006, which has received the “Vasile Pârvan” award of the Romanian Academy; Nomads of the Steppes. The Early Sarmatians in the North-Pontic area (2nd – 1st century BC) Cluj-Napoca, 2006; Riders of the Steppes. The Sarmatians in the North-Pontic area (together with O. Symonenko); Alburnus Maior III, the Roman Cemetery at Tăul Corna, Cluj-Napoca, 2008 (co-author) and Sarmatian vestiges discovered south of the Lower Mureş River. The graves from Hunedoara Timișană and Arad , Cluj-Napoca, 2014. He is editor of the volume Richard A. Mason, Costin Croitoru, Carl Schuchhard’s Contributions on Ancient Linear Fortifications along the Lower Danube , Cluj-Napoca, 2016 and founder and editor of the Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology (http://www.jaha.org.ro). E-mail: vitalie_barca@yahoo.com BĂŢ, Mihail is researcher and lecturer at Moldova State University. At the present, he is doctoral student at the same university. His doctoral thesis focused on the study of the communities from the Middle Dniester Region in the XIIth-3rd centuries BC (supervision Prof. Aurel Zanoci). Current projects focus on Iron Age archaeology, geoarchaeology, geophysics, GIS and landscape archaeology. He participated at numerous national and international scientific conferences. Author and co-author of more than 35 scientific publications, including 1 monograph: Evoluţia habitatului din Microzona Sa- Authors’ Short Biographies / PLURAL Date despre autori harna în epoca fierului / Evolution of the Habitat in the Saharna micro-zone in the Iron Age, Chişinău, 2016 (co-authors Ion Niculiţă, AurelZanoci). Email: mb_usm@yahoo.com CĂSĂLEAN, Adrian Cătălin is a young archaeologist working at the Museum of Dacian and Roman Civilization in Deva, with an MA in archaeology. He specialises in Ancient History and is particularly interested in the Second Iron Age. His research is centred around the subject of imported objects in Dacia. He accumulated significant field experience on the archaeological sites at Tărtăria-Gura Luncii, Ardeu-Cetățuie, Unip-Dealul Cetățuica, Alba Iulia-Mithreum III, and Oarda-Bulza, sites that boast discoveries from various periods, from prehistory to the modern age. He is currently a Doctoral Student at the Babeș-Bolyai University in Cluj-Napoca, the thesis topic being: Glass Artefacts from the Eastern Carpathian Basin in the Second Iron Age. E-mail adicasalean@yahoo.co.uk. DASZKIEWICZ, Małgorzata has studied geography and archaeology at the Univerity of Warsaw. In 1993 she earned her PhD in Archaeology and founded in 1998 her own firm – ARCHEA – in Warsaw as a laboratory for archaeometric analysis and research. Currently she is research associate for archaeometry, Freie Universität Berlin. Research interests: technology, production, provenance, function, classification of ceramics. Her main research interests are determining the technology and provenance of archaeological ceramics using thin-section microscopy, chemical analyses and MGR-analysis as well as scientific research aimed at developing methods for determining the original firing temperatures. Research fields: Roman pottery in Germany and the Mediterranean, Neolithic to medieval pottery in Europe, Mesopotamia, and Sudan (joint databank of ca 30000 analyses with G. Schneider). Further interests are functional properties, production techniques and classification of bulk ceramic finds. E-Mail: m.dasz@wp.pl FERENCZ, Iosif Vasile is a senior researcher at the Museum of Dacian and Roman Civilization in Deva. He specialises in Ancient History, being especially interested in the Second Iron Age. His presentations and studies were centred mainly on the La Tène and Dacian civilizations in Transylvania. His 2007 Doctoral Thesis at the Babeș-Bolyai University in Cluj-Napoca was published in the same year under the title: The Celts of the Middle Mureș Valley. The author is certified by the Romanian Ministry of Culture as expert archaeologist and an expert in national cultural heritage goods. The activity he carried out at the museum over more than two decades was oriented toward three main directions: archaeological research, the research, inventory, 227 228 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 and ranking of the mobile national cultural heritage, and raising the profile of the mobile national cultural heritage. He participated in archaeological research and designed and led the investigations on sites such as SighișoaraWietenberg, Divici-Grad, Șeușa-La Cărarea Morii, Alun-Piatra Roșie, ArdeuCetățuie, Tărtăria-Pietroșița, Unip-Dealul Cetățuica, and others. The author published, alone or collaboratively, over 100 studies, papers, and books, organised numerous exhibits, and presented the results of his work at multiple national and international conferences, symposia, colloquia, and round table discussions. He organised or co-organized 12 national and international conferences. Since 2018 he has been teaching Military Archaeology and Habitat Archaeology courses within the master’s degree curriculum of the West University of Timișoara. E-mail fiosifvasile@yahoo.com IARMULSCHI, Vasile is PhD (Chisinau, 2014), researcher at the National Museum of the History of Moldova and at the Freie Universität Berlin. He has received his bachelor’s degree in prehistoric archaeology at the “Ion Creangă” Pedagogical State University in Chișinău. Dissertation in 2014 at the Institute of Cultural Heritage of the Academy of Sciences of Moldova. Research focus: Late Pre-Roman Iron Age; Poienești-Lukaševka-culture; intercultural relations. E-Mail: vasile.iarmulschi@gmail.com KACZMARSKA, Patrycja MA, PhD Student at the Faculty of Archaeology of Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland. She specializes i in problems of younger pre-Roman iron age in Western Pomerania and the Baltic zone. Email: patrycja.kaczmarska93@gmail.com MARTENS, Jes (PhD,) is associate professor of the Early Iron Age at the Museum of Cultural History, Department of Archaeology since 1999. Before that he was executive officer (archaeologist) at the Swedish National Board of Antiquities (Riksantikvarieämbetet) in Lund (1996-1999) and before that he held scholarships at the University of Copenhagen (1992-1996) and the National Museum of Denmark (1990-1992). Martens finished his MA at the University of Aarhus in 1990, including a year at the University of Warsaw (1982-1983). The PhD was obtained at the University of Copenhagen in 1998. Martens has held several scholarships such as the Carlsberg foundation, Deutsche Akademische Austausch Dienst, NorFa, the Danish Research Council of the Humanities and Queen Margrethe II foundation. Martens has taught archaeology at the University of Copenhagen and the University of Oslo and has delivered guest lectures at a number of universities in Northern Europe. Martens has functioned as censor at the Universities of Copenhagen, Oslo and Tromsø. The main focus of his research is on the Authors’ Short Biographies / PLURAL Date despre autori subjects «The Early Iron Age in Northern and Northern Central Europe» and «settlement archaeology». He has published more than 60 papers in national and international journals, books and enciclopediae (in English, German, Italian, Polish, Danish and Norwegian) and has edited or been coeditor of five books. In addition he has presented papers at more than 50 international conferences as well as being the initiator of more than 10 such events. Email jes.martens@khm.uio.no MICHAŁOWSKI, Andrzej is an Professor at the Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań. Dean of the Faculty of Archaeology Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, the President of the General Board of the Scientific Association of Polish Archeologists, Corresponding member of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Römisch-Germanische Kommision. His research interests include the Pre-Roman Iron Age and the Roman Period in the Central Europe; prehistoric building construction; settlement archaeology, contacts between Jastorf- and Przeworsk-Culture circle, pottery study. Author and co-author of over 100 studies published in specialty journals and monographs. E-Mail: misiek@amu.edu.pl MUNTEANU, Octavian is Associate Professor at History and Geography Department of Ion Creanga State Pedagogical University of Moldova, PhD in Archaeology (1996, Cluj-Napoca). Member of the Archaeological Research Centre from Moldova (from 2016 – vice president); member of the Scientific Council of the Orheiul Vechi Cultural-Natural Reserve; associate-member of the Archaeological Committee of the Moldovan Ministry of Culture; Corresponding member of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Römisch-Germanische Kommision. Hi is Member of the editorial board of the journals Plural. History. Society. Culture and Arheologia Preventivă în Republica Moldova. His research interests are determined by the settlement archaeology and pottery study, Latène era issues in the South-Eastern Europe, especially those linked with the Germanic population in the East-Carpathian forest-steppe and their relations with the local population (contacts between Poieneşti-Lucaşeuca – Zarubineck – Jastorf - and Przeworsk Culture circle). E-mail: ocmunteanu@gmail.com MUSTEAŢĂ, Sergiu is currently a Professor at the History and Geography Department, ‘Ion Creangă’ State Pedagogical University of Chișinău. He is the author of 8 monographs and more than 300 articles on history, archaeology, cultural heritage preservation and textbooks analysis. The most recent works are „Community Archaeology in Eastern Europe. An Example from the Republic of Moldova”. In: Jameson, John H. and Sergiu Musteata (eds), 229 230 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 Transforming Heritage Practice in the 21st Century - Contributions from Community Archaeology. One World Archaeology Series. Springer, 2019, 45-58; „Archaeological Heritage Resource Management in Romania and the Republic of Moldova: A Comparative View”. In: Campbell S., White L., Thomas S. (eds) Competing Values in Archaeological Heritage. Springer, Cham, 2019, 45-61; Nomads and Natives beyond the Danube and the Black Sea, 700-900 CE, Amsterdam University Press, ARC Humanities Press, Leeds, 2018. He is the editor of two monograph series – ANTIM monographs and Unknown Documents and Histories (30 volumes published). Every year he delivers over 20 presentations and public lectures in various academic centres around the world. During recent years, he has been a visiting scholar and a visiting professor in many universities in the USA, Germany, Romania, Sweden, etc. Email: sergiu_musteata@yahoo.com NIEBIESZCZAŃSKI, Jakub PhD, Assistant professor on the Faculty of Archaeology of Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland. He specializes in geoarchaeological research using interdisciplinary methods on archaeological sites by the means of geomorphology, palaeogeography but also the archaeological magnetometry on settlements and funeral sites. He conducted his research in Poland, Ukraine, Hungary and Greece, thus his scientific interests lie in the Central-eastern and Southern Europe. By the means of geoarchaeological methodology he investigated sites from Neolithic up to Medieval period. E-mail: jakubniebieszczanski@gmail.com PETRAUSKAS, Oleh V., Ph.D., Head of the Early Slavs Department of the Institute of Archaeology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. The main areas of research are archaeological cultures and historical processes in Southeastern Europe in the I millennium AD. The main topics are related to the study of Roman and early medieval monuments. Author of more than 100 papers. Since 2012, he has been leading an international scientific project to investigate the unique monument of the Cherniakhiv culture – Komariv (http://komariv.in.ua/). E-mail: oleg_petrauskas@iananu.org.ua POPA, Alexandru is an archaeologist, specialising in the study of the Roman Time in south-eastern Europe. He studied History and Archaeology at the State University of Moldova (Chişinău/Moldova), “Al.I. Cuza” University of Iaşi/ Romania, J.-W. Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main and Justus Liebig University in Giessen/Germany. He holds his habilitation degree at the Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-University in Bonn/Germany (2013). Since 2016 he is associate professor for “Vor- und Frühgeschichte” at the University of Regensburg/Germany. Between 2005 and 2010 he worked at Authors’ Short Biographies / PLURAL Date despre autori the Roman-Germanic Commission of the German Archaeological Institute in Frankfurt am Main. Since 2011 he is scientific researcher at the National Museum of Eastern Carpathians in Sfântu Gheorghe/Romania. The recent monographs are Studii asupra graniţelor romane din Dacia. Fortificaţia de la Comolău. Studii şi Cercetări asupra frontierelor Imperiului Roman de pe teritoriul României 1 (Cluj-Napoca 2016) (coautor Z. L. Bordi); Untersuchungen zu den römisch-barbarischen Kontakten östlich der römischen Provinz Dacia. Antiquitas III 47 (Bonn, 2015). E-mail: alexandru.popa@ur.de PUŞCAŞ, Cristina Montana has earned her PhD in geology from the University of South Florida in 2013. After a three-year postdoc at the Cologne University, she founded Terra Analitic SRL (in Alba Iulia, Romania) in 2017, as a consulting firm and research lab specialized in analytical geochemistry and petrography. Main research interests: stable isotope geochemistry, speleology, and archaeometry. Her present focus is the application of analytical methods developed for geological samples to archaeological artefacts, as tools for retracing provenance and manufacturing techniques. E-mail: montana.puscas@teraanalitic.ro SIMALCSIK, Angela, MD (Medicinae Doctor), researcher, a biological anthropologist at the ”Olga Necrasov” Centre for Anthropological Research of the Romanian Academy Iaşi Branch; expert anthropologist and Deputy Director of the Institute of Bioarchaeological and Ethnocultural Research in Chişinău; author and co-author of over 200 scientific papers in the field of palaeoanthropology, palaeodemography and auxology, including seven monographs, two anthropological atlases, and one treatise; laureate of three prizes awarded by the Romanian Academy. Her main field of interest is the reconstruction of past lives based on the examination of skeletal remains. This includes markers of life history, indicators of workload, activities and stress, pathological conditions and injuries, dietary habits and phenotypical appearance. Its purpose is to describe past populations and their interaction with the environment. E-mail: angellisimal@gmail.com SPÂNU, Daniel (Dr., Hab.) is an archaeologist and research felllow at the “Henri Coandă” Institute of Archeology in Bucharest since 1997. Previously, he attended and graduated the Faculty of History in Bucharest. Spânu was the beneficiary of a pre-doctoral fellowship “Fritz Thyssen Sonderprogramm zum wissenschaftlichen Wiederaufbau in Südosteuropa” offered by the “Alexander von Humboldt” Foundation at the Institute of Prehistoric Archeology in Berlin (2000-2001) and a post-doctoral fellowship offered by the same Foundation at the German Archaeological Institute and the Free 231 232 PLURAL Vol. 7, nr. 2, 2019 University of Berlin (2009-2010). He also carried out several documentation internships in Vienna, Budapest and in several museums in Romania. Spânu defended a doctoral thesis transformed into the monograph Tezaurele dacice, (Bucharest, 2012, dedicated to the “Dacian” hoards of the late La Tène period), as well as an habilitation thesis materialized in the monograph Poieneşti. Necropola din secolele II-III (Cluj-Napoca, 2019, an analysis of the burial practices of the 2nd - 3rd centuries from Poieneşti, eastern Romania). He has participated in 45 archaeological campaigns in Romania and 10 abroad (France, Germany, Republic of Georgia) and is the author of more than 50 studies published in national or international volumes or periodicals; he presented over 80 papers at national and international scientific meetings. His scientific activity focused mainly on the archeology of the Second Iron Age on the territory of Romania and on the archeology of the “barbaric” world in the vicinity of the Dacia Province in Roman period. E-mail: hazdrik@yahoo.com STREMȚAN, Ciprian has earned hid PhD in geochemistry at University of South Florida and is currently a laser ablation product specialist at Teledyne Photon Machines. His current research is aimed at applying analytical chemistry tools used in earth sciences to other fields of research, such as life sciences, material sciences, and archaeometry. E-mail: Ciprian.Stremtan@Teledyne.com TĂMAŞ, Tudor is a geologist based in Cluj-Napoca, Romania. He received his PhD in 2003 with a thesis on the mineralogy and palaeoclimatic significance of speleothems. At present he is a lecturer at the Department of Geology, Babeș-Bolyai University in Cluj-Napoca, where he teaches Crystallography and Analytic Methods in Mineralogy, also being in charge of the X-ray diffraction facility. He has studied the mineralogy of caves for nearly 30 years, during which he authored or co-authored over 50 papers. His present research interests include the study of cave deposits and archaeological materials. E-mail: tudor.tamas@ubbcluj.ro TESKA, Milena, is an Assistant Professor at Faculty of Archaeology Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań. The focus of her research is on the pre-Roman Iron Age on the Right-Bank Lower Vistula and in Greater Poland (especially in the Noteć valley), intercultural relations and archaeology of archival materials. Author na co-autor of over 40 studies published in specialty journals and monographs. Co-author of the book Grabkowo, Gm. Kowal, stanowiska 7 i 8. Źródła archeologiczne do studiów nad okresem przedrzymskim na Nizinie Wielkopolsko-Kujawskiej, Poznań 2017 (with W. Kaczor, A. Michałowski, M. Żółkiewski). She is the editor of the volume: Viator per Authors’ Short Biographies / PLURAL Date despre autori devia scieniae intinera. Studia nad problematyką okresów przedrzymskiego, rzymskiego, wędrówek ludów i wczesnego średniowiecza, Poznań 2015 (with A. Michałowski, M. Żółkiewski); Settlements Pottery of the pre-Roman Iron Age in Central European Barbaricum – new research perspectives, Poznań 2017 (with A. Michałowski, P. Niedzielski, M. Żółkiewski); Archeologia sarbskich lasów, Sarbia 2017 (with A. Michałowski, M. Strawa, R. Bartkowiak), Extra limites, Poznań-Wrocław 2017 (with M. Bohr). The editor’s secretary of Journals Slavia Antiqua and Wielkopolskie Sprawozdania Archeologiczne. E-Mail: m.teska@amu.edu.pl TOPAL, Denis is an archaeologist specializing in the archaeology of the early nomads of Eurasia and his research background stands for analyzing tendencies of evolution of warfare in European cultures in the Iron Age. His expertise also includes Late Bronze age — Early Iron age depositions and barrow landscape archaeology of the Pontic steppe in prehistory. D. Topal obtained his PhD title at the Academy of Sciences of Moldova in 2018 with his thesis “Scythian blade weaponry of 7th–4th centuries BC (South-western part of Eastern Europe)”. Since 2017 D. Topal is functioning as a head of Documentation Department of the National Agency for Archaeology of Moldova and since 2020 activates as a scientific researcher at the National Museum of History of Moldova in Chișinău. He has published more than 50 articles and presented papers at more than 20 national and international conferences. In addition, since 2010 he is associate editor of Stratum plus journal (volume dedicated to the Iron Age). E-mail: denis.topal@gmail.com ZANOCI, Aurel is PhD, Associate Professor at Moldova State University. Specialist in the Iron Age of the Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic space. Scientific interests are especially focused on the study of the habitat of the communities of Cozia-Saharna culture and of the Thraco-Getic tribes in the 6th-3rd centuries BC. Author of more than 150 scientific publications, including 4 monographs: Fortificaţiile geto-dacice din spaţiul extracarpatic în secolele VI-III a. Chr. / Geto-Dacian fortifications in the extra-Carpathian space in the 6th-3rd centuries BC, Bucureşti, 1998; Butuceni. Monografie arheologică / Butuceni. Archaeological monograph, Bucureşti, 2002 (co-authors Ion Niculiţă, Silvia Teodor); Habitatul din mileniul I a. Chr. în regiunea Nistrului Mijlociu: Siturile din zona Saharna / The Habitat in the 1st millennium BC from the Middle Dniestr Region: the sites from Saharna Area, Chişinău, 2008 (co-authors Ion Niculiţă, Tudor Arnăut); Evoluţia habitatului din microzona Saharna în epoca fierului / Evolution of the Habitat in the Saharna micro-zone in the Iron Age, Chişinău, 2016 (co-authors Ion Niculiţă, Mihail Băţ). E-mail: azanoci@gmail.com 233 SUBMISSION GUIDELINES All manuscripts submitted to our journal must be original research and must meet our guidelines with respect to scope. If the article is suitable, the editor will sent out for peer review. The editors team, based on the reviews received will recommend the manuscript for final decision to editorial board. The articles will be published just after rigorous peer review, anonymous refereeing by independent expert referees, members of editorial board and revision by article authors when required. Please read carefully the guidelines below before completing and submitting your articles. The texts submitted for review shall be written in Romanian or a language of international circulation in academia (English, French, German). Submissions in Russian will also be accepted, provided that the texts in question fit into the journal’s profile. The texts shall not exceed 40,000 characters in length. They shall be submitted as MS Word attachments (Times New Roman, 12 pct, single-spaced). The format of the footnotes will follow the same model (except for the 10 pct size). The footnotes and the bibliography will follow the norms and guidelines of the Chicago Manual of Style: http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_ citationguide.html The submitted texts shall include a short English abstract (300-350 words) and the main keywords (5-8 words) in English. The number and size of the graphs or equivalent figures accompanying the text shall not exceed 5 pages. The Cyrillic titles and citations in Slavic languages will be transliterated according to the existing customary rules (for English, see the modified Library of Congress system). The submitted texts that include figures or illustrations should be accompanied by a complete list of illustrations, indicating the source or the author of the image. The list of illustrations should be translated into the same foreign language as the summary (i.e., English). The illustrations or figures shall be submitted in the appropriate electronic format (i.e. , jpg. 300 dpi resolution for images and 1200 dpi for drawings). Author’s personal data and short bio: The submitted text should include the full name of the author, her/his institutional affiliation, the current mailing address and e-mail, as well as a short bio, detailing her/his research interests and recent publications. Relevant deadlines: 1st issue – May 30th of every year and 2nd issue – October 30th of every year. Mailing address: The Faculty of History and Geography, „Ion Creangă” State Pedagogical University, Chișinău, Republic of Moldova Ion Creangă Str., 1, Central Building, of. 509 Chişinău, MD-2069, Republic of Moldova Phone: 373 22 358305; Fax: 373 22 358169 e-mail: plural.journal@upsc.md NOTĂ PENTRU AUTORI Toate manuscrisele trimise la revista noastră trebuie să fie cercetări originale și trebuie să respecte regulile noastre de redactare. În cazul în care articolul este adecvat cerințelor, editorul îl va trimite pentru evaluare. Echipa redactorilor, pe baza comentariilor primite de la recenzenți, va recomanda manuscrisul pentru decizia finală consiliului editorial. Articolele vor fi publicate doar după recenzarea lor riguroasă de către experți independenți, membrii consiliului editorial și după revizuirea lor de către autori atunci când este necesar. Citiţi atent condiţiile înainte de a redacta și trimite articolele dvs. Textul în limba română sau o limbă de circulaţie internaţională (engleză, franceză, germană), cca 30 000 semne, trebuie să fie redactat în Word, la 1 rând cu corp 12, fontul Times New Roman, notele în subsolul fiecărei pagini, utilizând opțiunea FOOTNOTE, același caracter, mărimea 10. Aparatul critic al contribuțiilor se va elabora conform normelor Chicago Manual of Style: http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html Textele în limba română trebuie să fie însoţite de un rezumat în limba engleză de cca 4 000 semne. Numărul planșelor care însoţesc textul nu trebuie să depășească 5 pagini. Titlurile din limbile slave vor fi transliterate. Lucrările care au ilustraţii trebuie să fie însoţite de lista ilustraţiilor, cu indicarea sursei sau autorului. Lista ilustraţiilor trebuie să fie tradusă în limba străină în care este tradus și rezumatul. Ilustraţiile vor fi trimise în format electronic (jpg. 300 dpi resolution pentru imagini și 1200 dpi pentru desene). Date despre autor: Lucrarea trebuie să includă numele complet al autorului, instituţia unde activează, adresa de contact, inclusiv e-mail, și o scurtă prezentare a preocupărilor științifice și publicațiilor recente. Termen: Nr. 1 - 30 mai al fiecărui an. Nr. 2 – 30 octombrie al fiecărui an. Adresa de contact: Facultatea de Istorie și Geografie, UPS „Ion Creangă” din Chișinău str. Ion Creangă nr. 1, bloc central, of. 509, Chișinău, MD-2069, Republica Moldova Telefon: 373 22 358305; Fax 373 22 358169; e-mail: plural.journal@upsc.md Tiparul executat la Casa Editorial-Poligrafică „Bons Offices“ str. Feredeului nr. 4/6, tel.: 0-22-50-08-95 www.bons.md, e-mail:ion@bons.md