Romanian History and Culture

A Library of Knowledge from the Web. An Educational Website

Dacian Society

       

   Dacian reenactors

  Dacians were divided into three classes: the aristocracy (tarabostes), the common people (comati) and the priests. The aristocracy and the priests alone had the right to cover their heads and wore a felt hat (hence pileati, their Latin name), covering their hair top knot.
The second class, who comprised the rank and file of the army, the peasants and artisans, might have been called capillati (in Latin). Their appearance and clothing can be seen on Trajan's Column. 

 

  Trajan Column XVII (25) 62 detail- Decebalus conducting the first battle from his vantage point.   Among the most impressive scenes of the battle is the “Carrying of the injured Dacian youth”. The group around the wounded youth seems to be a product of  Hellenistic pattern books.  Such groups occur often on sarcophagi. The composition is in a pyramid form, with Decebalus being at the top of the pyramid. As the injured Dacian at the right is protruding in the next scene we can consider that the composition is in S shape with Trajan and his generals at the top of the S above Decebalus.  This scene reminds me of Michelangelo’s Pieta from the Opera del Duomo in Florence. We know that during his time in Rome, Michelangelo lived not far away from the Forum.

 

 Table of Contents, Cuprins:

Daily Life at Sarmisegethuza

Dacian Civilization

Dacian Women

Geto Dacian Fruit Stand and Ceremonial Cup

Calendarul Dac

The Deva Museum of  Dacian and Roman Civilization

The Dacian Commerce

Geto-Dacian Hairdo

The Dacian Koson

Belagines-Dacian Law

Opinci

Dac Fest, Festivalul Cetatilor Dacice

Ceramics-The Wolf of Carlomanesti

Dacian Ceramic Ovens

The Funerary Rituals

Geto-Dacian Kingsly Tombs South of the Danube 

Thracian-Dacian Wine

Dacian Doctors

Y-DNA of the Geto- Dacians 

The Hungarian Point of View

 

Daily Life at Sarmisegethuza

 

The Dacians were not the barbarians some typically think of. They had a settled and prosperous civilizations with many cities and fortresses . Their country was rich in minerals including salt, iron, gold and silver (which might have contributed to the invasion and help explain the allies the Romans were able to recruit).

Some believe the Dacians originated in north west Asia Minor and migrated north. to a broad and fertile plain with many natural defenses including the Carpathian Mts. and the Danube.

Others believe they were part of the Indo-european migration that occurred around 1,800 BC originating from the steppes north of the Black Sea. By the time of Herodotus around 500 BC, they were considered Thracian (Getae) and Herodotus lists them as the most populous people of the world next to the Indians.

 

Ptolemeu

 

          Îndreptar geografic - Descrierea provinciei Dacia, III, 8 :

Biblioteca Dacica

  Sarmizegetusa (also Sarmisegetusa, Sarmisegethusa, Sarmisegethuza, Ζαρμιζεγεθούσα (Zarmizegethousa), Ζερμιζεγεθούση (Zermizegethouse)) was the most important Dacian military, religious and political centre. Erected on top of a 1,200 meters high mountain , the fortress was the core of the strategic defensive system in the Orăştie Mountains (in present-day Romania), comprising six citadels.

The fortress, a quadrilateral formed by massive stone blocks (murus dacicus), was constructed on five terraces, on an area of almost 30,000 m². Sarmizegetusa also had a sacred precinct—among the most important and largest circular and rectangular Dacian sanctuaries the famous Circular Calendar Sanctuary is included.

The civilians lived around the fortress, down the mountain on man-made terraces. . The archaeological inventory found at the site shows that Dacian society had a high standard of living.

Water pipes from Sarmisegethuza

Dacian nobility had flowing water, brought through ceramic pipes, in their residences. The tubes made of burnt clay formed a water pipe placed into a wood sewer, together with the hollowed tree trunk, used as a water collecting basin, shows the preoccupation but also the knowledge and masterliness of the Daco-Getas, to ensure some comfort to the Dacian settlements.  For this system of water supply, using the pipes placed underground, responded in a large measure also to a strategic needs:  the necessary water supply for the defenders in the fortress.
 

        http://www.europabarbarorum.com/factions_eleutheroi_units5.html

 

  http://www.dacii.ro/modules.php?name=Topics

 

 

 

 

 

Dacian Civilization

  

 HISTORY OF ROME-THE IMPERIAL PEACE, CHAPTER II,VII.

THE DACIAN CIVILIZATION

 

About the time when Trogus announces the “incrementa Dacorum per Burobusten regem”, we see Dacian civilization beginning to bear an individual stamp of its own. Before this period the Dacians and Getae constituted merely a province of the Thracian, Scythian and Celtic cultures which were colored to a greater or less extent from their contact with the supreme achievements of Greek civilization.


Scythian influence in this region has been generally underestimated, although (especially since the researches of Minns and Rostovtzeff) the fundamental modification which it caused even in the Greek coastal cities has been clearly demonstrated. On the Thracians it is also very marked, especially among the more northerly tribes.

Thus Bulgaria is rich in finds of Scythian art-products, and the crossing of Thracian and Scythian stock through intermarriage is well attested. In Homer the Thracian allies of the Trojans still fight with war chariots, whereas Thucydides knows them as mounted archers of the Scythian type, just like the Getae.

The long Thracian cavalry cape is also borrowed from the Scythians, as are several of their customs, notably to induce perspiration and complete unconsciousness resembling sleep by means of the fumes from grains of hemp thrown on heated flat stones.

Among the Getae and Dacians, who were much more open to this influence, its effects were still more profound. This has been demonstrated by linguistic evidence: even the name of the Getae is the abbreviated form of a Scythian title, which appears to have originally designated an upper class among the Scythians.

The name Danus, applied to the central and upper Danube, is Scythian, and so is even the name of the chief Getic deity Zalmoxis.

The explanations given by Porphyry of this word's original meaning are by no means unconvincing. He translates it “bearskin” and “strange man”, and the two interpretations are complementary. The first takes us back to the cult of the bearskin prevalent among the North-Asiatic hunting peoples, and the second is a typical secret name for the bear among the same races. The cult of the bearskin belongs to a very primitive cultural stratum among the nomads: the sacred trio of bearskins apparently corresponds to a triple social division of the people, just as in the next stage of development the two animal ancestors correspond to a double social division

. The Scythians still preserved a threefold tribal organization when they reached the Black Sea region, and the Agathyrsi comprised one of the three units. The threefold structure has also a matriarchal aspect with the goddess of the hearth Tahiti, who organizes the life of the community, at its centre; the worship of Hestia of the Getae may correspond to this.

The bear-father in heaven, on the lofty mountain peak, the withdrawal of Zalmoxis to the (world-) cave, and the predominant part played by the belief in immortality may all belong to this order of ideas

The Scythians also introduced the knowledge of iron weapons among the Dacians, but the marked Iranian influence is not attributable to the Scythians alone. The Iazyges and the Roxolani were the Getans' instructors in the use of the phalanx of heavy-armed cavalry, and were in general a contributory factor in prolonging Iranian influence down to Imperial times. Hence the Thracian horseman divinity retained his original character, and the dragon remained the national banner of the Dacian troops.


Greek influence on the northern Thracians was naturally more indirect and far more superficial, though there was a strong demand for the excellent Greek manufactures which were bartered in exchange for raw materials and slaves. There was a considerable market for the products of Greek industry among the Getae—and also to the north of the Danube, where Istros and the neighboring cities controlled the supply, but in the mountainous regions of Dacia the imports were slight indeed.

The great bronze hydria from Bene is evidence that even in the sixth century such splendid manufactures could penetrate as far as Slovakia, just as, conversely, scanty reports concerning the inhabitants of Transylvania reached the Greeks at this early stage. But in the classical period this exchange of commodities was very small. A few of the fibulae found at Targu Mures and elsewhere may date back to this era, but the flow of trade did not really quicken until there came a moderate development in the Hellenistic age.

Greek palmettes on Dacian spiral silver armlets, copies of Megarian tankards from the Wittenberg near Sighisoara, and especially the circulation of Greek coins, attest this tendency. In the third and second centuries Dacians accustomed themselves to a monetary system, and used the silver coinage of Philip II and especially the gold of his son and of Lysimachus. Numerous tetradrachms from the first Macedonian administrative region and from Thasos also penetrated into the land. The vast number of drachmas from Apollonia and Dyrrachium, however, herald the approach of a time when Dacia will be a Roman sphere of influence, since these cities were used by Rome as military and trading centres. Yet coins from the Black Sea coastal cities are also found.


It was much easier for the Thracians to assimilate the La Tene culture with which they were brought into immediate proximity through the Celtic conquests. Whereas in earlier times this culture in Transylvania as elsewhere shows a striking uniformity, from the second century BC it develops in its own way into a special Dacian branch, which affords a parallel to the tendency towards unification in the political sphere, since the civilization of Moldavia and Wallachia, as of Transylvania, is uniform in character.

On the ornaments, mostly of silver, and the other typical articles, special Dacian characteristics emerge; while the Macedonian and Thasian tetradrachms are replaced by primitive imitations minted locally.

A very impressive monument to this Dacian culture, and at the same time characteristic of its strange aristocratic flavor, is to be found in its fortresses.   Few of these have as yet been examined, but their number and the skill with which they have been constructed are striking in themselves. The walls are unusual: the outer and inner faces are built of squared blocks of hewn limestone held together by wooden ties, while the centre is packed with rubble and earth; in Gradiste it is reported that the blocks of stone bear Greek letters.

These walls were built to a certain height only, a superstructure of sun-baked brick being added. The laborious leveling of platforms among the rocks, the transport of the heavy building materials into the mountain ranges, the construction of huge circular edifices—whether they were of practical utility (perhaps as granaries) or served a religious purpose is not yet determined—these, and many other achievements increase our respect for the builders of these strongholds. Great treasures of gold coins which came to light in these fastnesses reflect their owners' wealth.


The prestige of the kings was upheld by the great authority of the high priest, whose position doubtless resulted from a partition of the functions originally discharged by the priest-king. The leading aristocrats were called pilleati, the free warriors capillati (a title reminiscent of the Ostrogothic capillati): the sculpture of the Trajanic age has preserved typical portraits of both classes, which reveal the masculine arrogance of their character.

In time of peace the Dacians practised cattle-breeding, fend agriculture where there were plains to make it possible. In time of war they fought as infantry, and were feared for their scythe-like falces, whereas among the Getae cavalry predominated; both peoples were famed for archery.


At the same period at which friction with Rome began, in other words after the occupation of Macedonia, the cultural influence of Rome also became more strongly felt. Roman imports on the sites of Dacian settlements (such as Campanian bronze ware from the first century of our era), and also a list of Dacian botanical names originally written in Latin are evidence of this. And, in particular, the lively circulation of Roman denarii from the second century BC onwards, and the local copying of these issues, show that the Dacians could adopt the superior Roman culture. The enemies which Rome had to face after the thorough-going extermination of the Dacians were far more dangerous because they were wholly unfamiliar with Roman civilization.

The Historical Names of the Dacians and Their Memory: New Documents and a Preliminary Outlook
Publication: Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai - Historia (1/2006)
Author Name: Dana, Dan; 
Summary: This study will focus on a domain quite subject to controversy: the names of the Dacian kings in the literary sources (with the problem of their
localization and chronology) and the Dacian names in general. After (1) a
concise display of the sources, with their peculiarities and limits, this paper
seeks to lay emphasis on the new discoveries, then (2) to analyze the names
of the Dacian kings and chiefs, in order (3) to compare them with the
names of Dacian individuals attested all over the Roman Empire and to
discuss those characters (popular or historical), and finally (4) to focus on
the case of the king Decibalus, the Dacian historical name par excellence.

Geto-Dacian Hairdo

 

 Getian man top knot hairdo

 

 

 Dacian woman hairdo

 

 

Dacian Pottery Making Ovens

100 ovens built by the free Dacians around Mediesu Aurit village, Satu Mare County

About 100 ovens built almost 1,700 1,900 years ago by the free Dacians, who were living in the areas outside Roman occupation in 106 AD, were unearthed around Mediesu Aurit village, Satu Mare County in the North West of Romania, nearby other ovens previously discovered in the 1960s.

 

 

http://www.cjsm.ro/obiect-M-m0zsm-satumare-M-content-12.html 

 

 The Head of the Archaeology Department in Satu Mare County Museum Robert Gindele, said on Monday that following the process of gradiometre examination of the lands in the area, around 100 ovens were discovered underground, at a couple of tens of centimetres depth. 'The ovens were used to make pots for supply, they have more than 2-metre diameter and are unique. I believe what we have here is the largest pottery centre in Central Europe and even Western Europe maybe. They date back from 100 AD to 350 AD,' said Gindele.

The archaeologists hope to be able to start digging this spring in order to unearth the ovens. Gindele believes that once the digging starts, earthenware pots made in these ovens will be discovered which will provide useful information on the culture of those times. The first research activities showed that this area would have hosted some kind of complex of pots and jars production. In 1964 in Mediesu Aurit, 16 Dacian identical ovens used to burn ceramics were discovered, and they were transferred to the Satu Mare County Museum patrimony.

Source: Financiarul

Documente arheologice din Neamt
Descoperirile uimitoare facute de un profesor in Muntii Nemtului au avut darul sa stârneasca largi controverse in rândul istoricilor si sa aduca zona in centrul atentiei, transformând-o intr-un tinut al misterelor greu de elucidat.
Aici, au fost gasite tablite din lut, imprimate cu pictograme care s-ar putea dovedi a fi forme ale celei mai vechi scrieri din lume.
Mai nou, tot aici a fost descoperita o ciudata structura megalitica, inscriptionata cu un amestec de litere glagolitice, caracetere paleoslavone si simboluri necunoscute
. In cazul in care ar fi descifrat, textul ar putea oferi informatii despre viata si cultura celor care au trait pe aceste locuri cu mai bine de o mie de ani in urma. Dumitru Ionita este doctor in istorie, filosofie si drept international. Locuieste in Farcasa si este profesor de stiinte socio-umane, la liceul din Borca.
In palmaresul descoperirilor sale sunt incluse sceptrul voievodal ceremonial al lui Stefan cel Mare, sigilliul din aur al lui Cuza, icoana lui Daniil Sihastru, paftalele lui Petru Rares, blazonul familial al domnitorului Mihail Sturdza si harta cartografului Ortelius, in care apare pentru prima oara Dacia pe globul pamântesc.

Profesorul Dumitru Ionita, din comuna Farcasa, iese la rampa cu o noua descoperire interesanta. Este vorba de un obiect din piatra care are forma unui craniu. In cursul lunii decembrie, profesorul a gasit un craniu pietrificat ce are o forma bizara, ce il apropie de un ipotetic craniu de extraterestru. Profesorul spune ca obiectul este relativ identic cu cel de la Roxwell (SUA), descoperit in anul 1967. Cel de la Vadu Rau are o greutate de 6 kilograme si o inaltime de 37 de centimetri. "In situl unde a fost descoperit, au mai fost gasite circa 300 de tablite din lut ars, dintre care 120 poarta insemne protoliterate - celebrele tablite de la Vadu Rau, si care dateaza din neolitic, circa 4500-4300 inainte de Hristos, aici fiind, probabil, un centru de confectionare a acestora. Ulterior, astfel de tablite au fost raspindite pe o vasta arie geografica, de la Tartaria, unde au fost gasite 3 astfel de tablite, pina in insula Pastelui, fiind cea mai veche scriere protoliterata din lume, cu aproximativ un mileniu inaintea celei din Summer-Irak", a declarat profesorul Ionita. Acesta crede ca descoperirea sa este una foarte importanta. "Sa fi fost aici arealul enigmaticilor atlanti sau Tara Ramaiasilor (Tara oamenii focului)? Ramine totusi o mare enigma, ce viitorul s-ar putea sa-l dezlege", mai spune profesorul.
Pe teritoriul comunei Farcasa, in situl arheologic deschis la poalele Ceahlaului, in punctul denumit Vadu Rau, profesorul a gasit nu mai putin de 120 de tablite din lut ars, inscriptionate cu simboluri protoliterate -imagini reprezentând forme primitive de scriere ale populatiei din perioada neolitica.
Tablitele protoliterate descoperite de profesorul Ionita s-au dovedit a data din perioada anilor 5.500 inainte de Hristos si sunt identice, ca forma si mod de exprimare, cu cele din anticul Sumer.
Deosebirea este insa aceea ca tablitele sumeriene, considerate actualmente a constitui prima forma de scriere din istoria omenirii, sunt cu cel putin 1.000 de ani mai noi decât cele descoperite la Farcasa.
"Acest lucru dovedeste, in mod indiscutabil, faptul ca primele scrieri din lume au aparut la noi si nu in alta parte a globului pamântesc", a afirmat istoricul Ionita. El a mai spus ca va face toate demersurile pentru a ni se recunoaste acest lucru pe plan international.
 
 Cercetarile profesorului Ionita in Muntii Neamtului au dus, recent, la descoperirea unei pietre imense, inscriptionata cu un amestec de simboluri misterioase si de litere apartinând unui alfabet vechi de peste o mie de ani.
"Descoperirea a fost facuta pe Valea Bistritei, respectiv in zona unei trecatori de pe masivul Goia.
Piatra este incizata cu o scriere care se deruleaza pe registre semicirculare, iar simbolurile, precum si literele care apartin alfabetului glagolitic si, partial, celui slavon vechi, au dimensiuni de 10-15 centimetri", a relatat profesorul Ionita.
Scrierea glagolitica a aparut in secolul al IX-lea (dupa unele opinii chiar cu mult inainte de aceasta data) si este constituita dintr-un amestec de litere grecesti si arabe.
Alfabetul glagolitic a fost folosit in anii 800 de fratii Chiril si Metodiu, care l-au adaptat limbii slavone transformându-l in cunoscutul alfabet chirilic pe care l-au utilizat, mai apoi, pentru a traduce Scriptura si Liturghia din limbile greaca si latina.
In anul 1717, tarul Petru cel Mare, aflat in vizita la catedrala din Rheims, a descoperit un fapt uimitor: regii Frantei erau incoronati, de sute de ani, depunând juramântul pe o Evanghelie scrisa partial in limbaj glagolitic, mostenita de la primul rege francez crestinat, Clovis.
Tarul Petru a descifrat cu usurinta textele scrise intr-o limba asemanatoare celei slavone. In cazul pietrei descoperite in Muntii Neamtului, lucrurile sunt insa mai complicate, fiindca literele glagolitice sunt insotite de simboluri misterioase, formând mesaje de sine statatoare. In opinia profesorului Ionita, acest fapt ar putea fi explicat prin aceea ca, in urma cu peste o mie de ani, locuitorii acestor tinuturi au incercat sa imbine alfabetul glagolitic care tocmai se raspândea, cu propria lor forma de exprimare scrisa, datând din vremea geto-dacilor.
O desoperire asemanatoare a mai fost facuta, pe teritoriul tarii noastre, doar la Basarabi, in judetul Constanta, unde a fost scos la lumina un complex rupestru sapat intr-un masiv muntos de creta. In lume, se mai pastreaza de asemenea sapte manuscrise glagolitice, adevarate opere de arta in opinia profesorului Ionita, printre acestea numarându-se cele de la Vatican, Athos si Sinai.
Dat fiind faptul ca scrierea glagolitica a fost folosita in exclusivitate doar pentru textele si mesajele cu caracter religios, piatra descoperita pe Valea Bistritei ar putea reprezenta fie un monument funerar al vreunui conducator, fie un altar de inchinaciune al crestinilor timpurii de pe meleagurile noastre.
"Facem in continuare cercetari in zona si mai ales ne straduim sa descifram textul sapat in piatra, fiindca descifrarea acestor grupuri de litere ce contin un mesaj evident, ar putea elucida aspecte inedite cu privire la istoria veche a României", a spus Dumitru Ionita. Vestigiul cu inscriptii glagolitice, datând dupa primele estimari ale profesorului Ionita cel putin din secolele IX-X, nu a scapat insa manifestarilor barbare ale oamenilor timpurilor noastre.
Dupa ce au aflat de descoperire, câtiva localnici au dinamitat pur si simplu blocul de piatra, in speranta ca sub ea vor gasi ingropate comori. Nu au gasit nimic, insa au reusit sa distruga partial piatra inscriptionata, dislocând-o si spargând-o in trei blocuri distincte.
Din nefericire, autoritatile nu au luat nicio masura vis-a-vis de actul de barbarie comis.
Din fericire, insa, inscriptiile misterioase s-au pastrat in marea lor majoritate si asteapta sa fie descifrate.
http://www.forum.santamia.ro  
 
 
 
 
 
  

 

Geto-Dacian Fruit Stand and Ceremonial Cup

 Fruit Stands

 'Fruitstand' from Racatau. The clay 'fruitstand' was a ubiquitous form of wheelmade ware in the Dacian period. It had appeared earlier in the Basarabi horizon.

 

 Ceremonial Hand Made Cup

 Daco-Getic cup from Poiana. The crude clay handmade Daco-Getic cup, usually 6-12 cm high, with one or two handles and either plain or with barbotine decoration, had some special significance for the Daco-Getic North Thracians. Some were used as lamps and they were ubiquitous grave offerings, even in rich burials. Outside Dacia they are found west to Budapest and east to the Dnieper. Usually locally made, a large pottery at Butovo, near Turnovo, also produced them, perhaps for the local Getic market, perhaps for export across the Danube.

The strong Thracian element in the northern Lipica culture appears in its pottery. Above: Daco-Getic cup from the Zaleutsy settlement. Ht 8.5 cm. Centre: 'Fruitstand' from the Grinev cemetery. Ht 28 cm. Below. Wheel-made jug, also from Grinev. Ht 36 cm.

 A Mycenaean gold cup made int he same manner like the Dacian cups from coils of material.

 Credit to the photographer (Ruth van Mierlo) if you use this picture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mycenaean_Treasure.jpg 

Dacian Women

 

 

 

 

  Artist/Maker Unknown ,

Thetis gives her son Achilles his weapons newly forged by Hephaestus, detail of an Attic black-figure hydria, ca. 575 BC–550 BC.Dimensions Diam. 26.5 cm (10 ¼ in.)
Credit line Campana Collection, 1861
Accession number E 869 Department of Greek, Etruscan and Roman Antiquities, Sully wing, Campana Gallery , Louvre Paris     Photographer Jastrow (2006)

On this hydria Thetis and the Nereides are depicted wearing Thracian garb, and a special scarf seen also wore by Dacian women on the Trajan's Column in Rome, over 700 years later.

 

“The man is, before anything else, the woman's son”. (Vasile Parvan)

Dacia was not only composed of fierce warriors who amazed the ancient world with their faith and courage, but also the feminine half who bore the absence of the men in battle with strength and patience.

            If  historical sources for the Dacians are scarce, then those covering their women are practically non existent. Names are rarely mentioned. A rare exception is a coin discovered in Transylvania that has the name 'ZINA' (the lady?) written on it. She was possibly a queen or due to the date the wife of Burebista.  

             Despite the lack of written evidence, the role of women in Dacian society must have been important to judge by the carvings on Trajans column that illustrate women's faces.

          For years Trajan had been celebrating his victory against the Dacians through various feasts, 

http://www.ccm.ro/muzeu/podoabe_htm/bracelets.htm

important buildings, or through different art monuments. Of course the artists working at these monuments were  impressed not only by the Dacian men, but by their women too.

 

The Column shows us the Dacian women in different moments: they appear as thin,  determined, proud and harsh women, with graceful features, oval faces, wide foreheads, expressive eyes, straight noses, beautiful lips, long hair parted in the middle of the head covering their temples, leaving the years uncovered and tied up in a loop on their nape, all covered with a kerchief. If after 2 millenniums their grace has not faded nor is it too hard to imagine how beautiful they were in the real life!

                Their clothes consisted of shirts tightly tied up at the necks, resembling a 'ia' with large and long/short sleeves, a skirt reaching the ground and possibly a cloak. for their feet they had 'opinci' (peasant sandals) made of leather in the summer and fur in the winter.

 

           Their jewelry was  very varied and showed good taste.  Bronze or silver necklaces, skillfully made decorated their necks.  Their hands were full of  thick, silver threads and chains knitted and with their extremities shaped as snake heads. On their fingers they wore spiraled or simple rings . Their hairpins had various shapes but the most popular were those in the shape of a shield or a spoon placed on the spring. Earrings that have been found are in the shape of a thin circle with a small and fine pendant at one end . All these jewels were discovered by archaeologists with a great number of very colorful glass beads which, show us how stylish the Dacian women were.

 

 


          These women’s lives can be studied with the help of the scenes from Trajan’s Column and the Adamclisi monument. Here the Dacian woman is pictured carrying a small child in her arms and others by the hand, sometimes even carrying a child in a trough on her head. In all the pictures however, they are caring and affectionate mothers for their children.

 

 

          Their daily routine and essential occupations can only be guessed, mainly through examining the whole of Dacian society. Without any doubt a great part of  the farming and  raising animals was done by the women. Beside those, they  were skilled in various crafts such as spinning, weaving, cutting and in some pottery skills.

          Their pottery is the most important discovery we have relating to them. The pottery and the wheel of pottery were highly used, but the most of the ceramics were hand made by the women in various shapes in order to be used at home. The women’s tendency to make everything beautiful means that this strand of Dacian pottery is beautifully ornamented with curved lines, incisions or buttons lain on the pot. Their great affection for their babies made them mould small pots and dolls for them.

          Using and analyzing archaeological, linguistic and ethnographical evidence as well as anthropological ones we can clearly emphasize the importance of the woman’s role in the Dacian society.

          She was the mistress of the house that she kept up with abnegation and steadiness, even when the man was  missing. Morale  was kept very by the Dacian women and they were cared for the children’s education. They were perfect housewives. The women knew how to cook broth mixing vegetables and tasty, nourishing roots, venison and fish. They also baked flat cakes made of millet and wheat. They even knew how to pickle.

The Thracian-Dacians were the inventors of many fermented aliments; the cheese is their invention, as well as the sour bran. Moreover it is now been discovered that the “braga” which, was thought to have been invented by the people of the Orient is actually a Thracian drink. Beer and wine were made in the Dacian homes long before other peoples could taste them. The number of Dacian houses discovered and the objects found in them are very complex, showing us that these people had a great constructive imagination .However, the evidence about the Dacian wood civilization is mostly lost, so we are forced to imagine their homes as they were.

          The Dacian cuisine was simple, but perfectly harmonized nutritionally. The Dacian women did use fried fats, did not use the meat too much nor did they use salt excessively. They preferred to boil food or to serve it raw. In the ancient literature we have descriptions of Dacian feasts in which, the main food was the vegetables, the roots, fruit and dairy produce. Keeping food over winter was no secret for the Dacian women, neither was the apiculture; the bees from this region  were a species adapted to the temperate climate and hence, very productive . All of this again emphasizes the importance of women in the Dacian society.

 

Svestari tomb - Wall paintings
 
Getian Women from Svestari-Bulgaria
 
 

 

          The place in which the women carried out their activities was the home, around the family. The houses were quadrilateral, oval, round or polygon in shape. Some of them had stone foundations made out of shaped stones or pieces of rock. The walls were made of long pieces of wood covered with clay and painted in different colors or of  long pieces of wood stuck into the earth, gathered by a wattle, covered with clay and then painted. At the entrance, the threshold and the wooden door, iron spikes were often set in different carved patterns : flowers, vegetation, geometrical shapes. The houses had one floor with one or several rooms and a porch. The roofs were made out of tiles, shingle or thatch. Around the houses there were holes for storing food - they had burned walls- it is also thought that some granaries were placed near the houses. Food and drink were stored in large jars buried in the ground.

          This is the world of the Dacian woman and there is no doubt that they helped at its building sometimes ultimately influencing it, but always individualizing it.

 

 

 

 Images with phalerae from the Dacian Silver Treasure found at Lupu, Romania.

wn.com

          Dacian history illustrates the courage, dignity, patriotism and the good sense of its men but also the affection and care of the Dacian mothers. Dacian women were responsible for the survival of the Dacian way of life even after the Roman conquest  and after various migratory peoples. These women, mothers, sisters and daughters carried on the Dacian  civilization and way of life when the men’s weapons could no longer keep away the vicious torrents of the attackers and in doing so they avenged those who died defending Sarmizegetusa.  

See Dacian Diet at:

http://www.dracones.ro/?operatie=subiect&locatie=istoria_daciei&fisier=Alimentatia

 

Tezaurul de la Cetatea Dacica Bunesti 

Institutul de Arheologie, Iasi

Violeta Veturia Teodoru
 
Prezentam mai jos principalele tezaure descoperite in primul tind in cetatea geto-dacica de la Bunesti, in ordinea descoperirilor lor:

 

     TEZAURUL Nr 1. In anul 1979, in luna august, in apropierea locuintei nr. 8, in sectiunea XIV, intr-o alveolare de forma aproape circulara, dupa indepartarea stratului vegetal, s-a recuperat continutul unui tezaur de obiecte de podoaba in marea majoritate din argint (o singura piesa din bronz). de aici s-au mai recuperat citeva fragmente de factura geto-dacica, de culoare galbuie, cu mica in compozitia pastei. Tezaurul contine: 14 fibule de tip tracic, doua bratari din bara groasa de argint cu capetele libere, o bratara spiralica cu protome de serpi din argint, 15 vergi *2 dintre ele au capetele subtiate, zece se termina cu butoni conici, doua aveau cirlige, iar unul are capetele rupte) si o drahma de argint histriana.

 

     Ultima piesa recuperata este o bratara din bronz spiralica.

     Referindu-ne la fibule, remarcam faprul ca ele apartin tipului tracic evoluat si se incadreaza in ultima serie a acestor piese - varianta VC dupa tipologia lui D. Berciu, putind circula si la inceputul secolului II i.e.n. Dintre 14 fibule, doar una singura are arcul decorat, 11 au arcul fatetat (cu sectiune hexagonala sau octogonala), iar la trei exemplare arcul este ingrosat la exterior

     Pina in prezent, pe teritoriul tarii noastre se cunoaste un singur exemplar decorat, la Orsova, incadrat in varianta V-a dupa tipologia lui D. Berciu. Fibule trace de tip evoluat au mai aparut si in alte tezaure sau statiuni din perioada Latene: Poiana, Tinosu, Barlad, Epureni-Husi.

     Analogiile cele mai pregnante ale fibulelor de la Bunesti le gasim in tezaurul de la Epureni-Husi.

     Bratarile din tezaur, asa cum aratam mai sus, sunt de doua tipuri: bratari deschise din bara octogonala de argint (doua exemplare) si bratari spiralice terminate cu protome de serpi (doua exemplare - una argint, una bronz).

     Bratarile din bara octogonala prezinta decoruri diferite, din cercuri adincite cu punct la mijloc, iar pe celelalte, liniute oblice, alternate pe puncte adincite.

     O bratara cu cerculete adincite a aparut si in cetatea de la Poiana, datata in secolele II-I i.e.n. Motivul ornamental al cerculetelor adincite este de veche traditie hallstattiana si il regasim pina tirziu pe anumite obiecte de podoaba in continutul tezaurelor geto-dacice din secolele I i.e.n. - I e.n.

     Bratarile spiralice cu protome de serpi sunt o podoaba preferata in lumea geto-dacica, regasind-o din secolul IV i.e.n. pina in secolul I e.n.. in tezaure sau asezari.

     Asupra verigilor nu vom insista prea mult, intrucit am inserat mai sus principalele probleme legate de tipologia lor. Drahma de argint histriana recuperata impreuna cu celelate piese face parte din ultimele emisiuni monetare si se incadreaza la sfirsitul secolului IV i.e.n. Repertoriul intocmit de Bucur Mitrea releva faptul ca acest tip de moneda apare frecvent in Moldova dupa cum o demonstreaza descoperirile de la Barlad, Obarseni, Beresti, Cabesti, Vaslui, Poiana.

     In statiunile de la Pietroasele apare o moneda de acest tip impreuna cu materialele databile in secolul II-I i.e.n., ce presupune in mod evident pastrarea acestor piese o vreme mai indelungata.

     Prezenta unui numar relativ mare de descoperiri monetare histriene ilustreaza rolul preponderent pe care cetatea histriana l-a jucat in aceasta zona in procesul schimburilor comerciale.

     In anul 1981, in locuinta 21, a aparut un depozit de 4 piese din argint pe care il consemnam si cu aceasta ocazie. Depozitul cuprinde bratari spiralice din argint cu protome de serpi si doua fibule de tip tracic, identice cu acele aparute in continutul primului tezaur.

     TEZAURUL DE PODOABA nr. 2. Tezaurul a fost descoperit in luna iulie 1982 in locuinta nr. 32, impreuna cu un depozit de unelte din fier si un vas depozit de cult.

Tezaurul II

     Tezaurul a fost depus intr-o cana lucrata cu mina, cu toarta usor suprainaltata, de culoare roscata. Intreg continutul tezaurului a fost protejat de un topor cu dulie deschisa. In cana au fost depuse urmatoarele piese:

     1. colier format din 70 de ramuri de corali de culoare rosietica.

     2. colier compus din 75 margele de chihlimbar si pasta de sticla decolorat cu ochi.

     3.bratara din sirma de argint formata din doua spire terminate cu protome de animalke.

     4. bratara similara din sirma de argint terminata cu protome de animale.

     5. perla din foita de aur, de forma bitronconica, goala in interior, cu extremitatile evazate spre exterior.

     6. piesa circulara din bronz, ce are pe ambele fete trei cercuri in relief.

     7. piesa din foite de aur, de forma bitronconica, goala in interior, cu extremitatile evazate spre exterior.

     8. doua cochilii Kauri.

     Asupra colierelor nu vom insista, deoarece nu fac obiectul prezentei teme, reluind in discutie doar bratarile si margelele din foita de aur.

     Bratarile din sirma de argint sunt specifice orfevrariei din epoca de maxima inflorire a civilizatiei geto-dacice, dar prezenta lor la Bunesti demonstreaza faptul ca ele apar mult mai devreme, putindu-se datra pe baza contextului general, in secolele IV-III i.e.n.

     O aparitie deosebita la Bunesti o reprezinta cele doua perle de aur. Un singur exemplar a aparut in statiunea de la Piscu Crasani, amintit de V. Parvan in Getica. Perle de argint de forma asemanatoare au mai fost descoperite in mormintul traco-getic de la Agighiol datat catre sfirsitul secolului IV i.e.n. Doua perle de la Agighiol au forma tronconica, similara cu cele de la Bunesti.

     Piesa circulara din bronz a jucat probabil tot un rol ornamental, putind apartine unuia din coliere.

     Datarea acestor tezaure din cetatea de la Bunesti, in pperioada secolelor IV-III i.e.n., este asigurata in primul rind de continutul lor, cit si de contextul arheologic general in care se incadreaza nivelul de locuire din cetate. Marea majorotate a pieselor isi gasesc analogii in principalele statiuni de la Zimnicea, Poaiana, Enisala (secolele IV-III i.e.n.).

Diadema de aur

   http://www.culturalvaslui.ro/sitba/sitba.html 

 Extremitatile celor doua bare ale diademei sunt modelate pe o lungime de 6,5 cm, in forma de animale de prada stilizate. Animalele au picioarele din spate indoite sub pintec, iar cele din fata sub bot; capul este intins inainte, urechile lipite de spate, iar botul ingrosat si taiat drept. In gura fiecaruia dintre cele patru animale este prinsa cite o veriga mica de inchidere (doua au diametrul de 0,8 cm si alte doua de 1,3 cm). Animalele formeaza doua perechi afrontate, redate din profil pe fata exterioara a barelor. Pe corpul lor au un motiv de linii oblice intersectate, realizat prin incizie, ce reprezinta blana, in timp ce suprafata picioarelor este lipsa. Spatiul dintre picioare si corp, precum si spatiile triunghiulare de la partea posterioara a animalelor sint adincite si au fost initial implute cu o pasta de culoare albastra-violacee. Extremitatile barelor, inaintea portiunii modelata in forma de animal, sunt ornate cu cite doua benzi circulare, hasurate, realizate prin incizie. Pina in prezent, nici pe teritoriul Romaniei, nici in alte zone de raspindire a produselor ofervrariei grecesti sau greco-barbare, nu a fost descoperita, dupa cite stim, o piesa identica sau direct asemanatoare diademei de la Bunesti. unele anologii se cunosc doar pentru schema ei de constructie sau pentru diferitele parti componente.

      Astfel, o diadema alcatuita din doua bare de aur care se apropie si se desparte ritmic, formind ochiuri, a fost gasita in tumulul regal de la Verghina (Grecia), atribuit lui Filip al II-lea al macedoniei si familiei sale, datat intre 350-325 i.e.n. Analogii apropiate pentru "bobocii" diademei de la Bunesti se intilnesc, pe de alta parte, la acele de podoaba si unele pandantive de aur din necropolele de la Sindos, expuse in Muzeul de arheologie din Salonic. Mormintele in care au aparut aceste piese se dateaza insa mai timpuriu si anume la sfirsitul secolului IV si inceputul secvolului II i.e.n. De asemenea, rozete florale asemanatoare se cunosc pe cerceii de aur de la Crispiana si Ginosu (Italia), precum si pe discul de aur din Cipru, toate datate in secolul IV i.e.n. Pe teritoriul tarii noastre unele analogii le gasim la rozetele de pe protomele de cai ale colierelor de la Baiceni si in acelasi tezaur, pe o aplica, aflam reprezentari asemanatoare ale animalelor de prada de pe capetele diademei de la Bunesti.

     Desi pina in prezent nu cunoastem analogii perfecte care sa ne permita o incadrare cronologica mai strinsa, este evident ca diadema este, in mare parte, contemporana cu locuirea de Bunesti, datata in secolele IV-III i.e.n. Ea a fost lucrata intr-un atelier ce stapinea tehnica orfevrariei grecesti, dar era puternic inrudita si cu influentele artei animaliere traco-getice. 

DATARE

 

 


     In sprijinul datarii nivelului geto-dacic de la Bunesti stau in primul rind analogiile pe care le comporta materialul arheologic. Ceramica isi gaseste analogii in toate statiunile de pe teritoriul tarii noastre datate in secolele IV-III si III-II i.e.n., sprijina datarea locuirii de aici, existind si copii dupa tetradrahmele grecesti. Desigur nu putem trece cu vederea materialul celtic descoperit, ce se dateaza in aceasta perioada de timp (in primul rind fibulele de schema Latene B2 si buterola de sabie).

     Cercetarile intreprinse in cetatea Bunesti aduc noi contributii la cunoasterea unor aspecte ale vietii materiale si spirituale ale geto-dacilor din Moldova in perioada amintita. S-a putut constata ca cetatile de pamint sunt concentrate in numar mare in Podisul Central Moldovenesc: Cretesti, Tarzii, Mosna, Arsura si au jucat un rol important in organizarea politico-militara a societatii locale. Pe baza descoperirilor de la bunesti se confirma faptul ca aceste cetati erau intens locuite. Prezenta unui numart insemnat de unelte din fier, cit si a ustensilelor necesare prelucrarii fierului demonstreaza progresul realizat in domeniul metalurgiei. Intrucit nu exista minereu de fier in zona, acesta cu siguranta a fost procurat pe calea schimburilor intertribale.

     Prezenta unui numar mare de unelte agricole, cit si a unor vase cu boabe de griu carbonizat, ne indica rolul deosebit pe care l-a jucat agricultura in economie.

     Tesutul este una din ocupatiile ce cunoaste o mare dezvoltare, fapt demonstrat de prezenta celor peste 200 de fusaiole descoperite pina in prezent.

     În evolutia formelor ceramice, surprindem mentinerea unora mai vechi, cu mici transformari. Apar totodata si forme noi, evoluate, fata de faza veche a culturii geto-dacice. In acest sens, amintim aparitia vaselor cu doua torti, ce nu se cunosc in perioada anterioara. pe parcursul secolului III i.e.n. se mentin vasele de tip clopot cu peretii usor arcuiti in interior, ornati de cele mai multe ori cu briu in girlanda. Alaturi de butonii conici apar si pastile buton, dispuse in general la partea superioara a vasului, cit si alte ornamente plastice in relief. Imitatia unor forme grecesti se observa la unele strachini si in profilul unor cani elegante. De mentionat este si proportia mica a ceramicii lucrata la roata, care va deveni tot mai abundenta pe parcursul secolelor urmatoare. Descoperirile de la Bunesti aduc o lumina noua asupra culturii geto-dacice din Moldova, care datorita puternicii dezvoltari de sub influentele grecesti si celtice, trece la un nou stadiu de dezvoltare, caracteristic cele de a doua epoci a fierului.

Calendarul Dac

 Sarmisegethuza

Un alt lucru foarte intersant la aceste sanctuare este şi modul lor de folosire. Se pare că ele erau utilizate pentru măsurare timpului, un fel de templu-calendar, asemănător celui maiaş. În urma cerecetărilor şI a calculelor, s-a descoperit că dacii aveau un calendar bazat pe cicluri de 13 ani, anul dacic avñd 47 de săptămâni. Anii dacici nu aveau un număr fix de zile.

Datorită rotirii continue, a faptului că fiecare an are 47 de săptămâni şi a două săptămâni de excepţie (care aveau 7 şi, respectiv 6 zile, faţă de numărul obişnuit de 8 zile), numărul de zile dintr-un an varia între 364 şI 367 de zile. Anul era împărţit în trei trimestre de 13, 21 şi din nou 13 săptămâni. Trimestrul de 21 de săptămâni corespunde "perioadei vegetative" a viţei-de-vie şi a altor căteva culturi, perioadă ce probabil constituia o durată distinctă din an, mai ales pentru un popor de agricultori şi păstori.Interesant este faptul că anul dacic începea mereu în prima zi a unei săptămâni şi se termina mereu în ultima, iar eroarea acestui calendar era de o zi la 8840 de ani!

Dac Fest, Orastie, Dacii Liberi Timisoara 2010

 

 

http://stirileprotv.ro/exclusiv/timp_liber/preparate-din-bucataria-dacilor-si-vin-din-belsug-la-dacfest-la-orastie.html

FESTIVALUL „DACII LIBERI” LA TIMIŞOARA

Inaugurat anul trecut, pe stadionul din satul Covaci din suburbiile Timişoarei, Festivalul „Dacii Liberi” va fi reluat anul acesta, au anunţat ieri organizatorii care au precizat că a doua ediţie a fost programată pentru sâmbătă, 2 octombrie. Ca şi anul trecut, manifestarea va cuprinde competiţii sportive clasice şi  tradiţionale, o expoziţie de suveniruri, mai multe lansări editoriale tematice şi un concert. Atracţia festivalului o va constitui, fără îndoială, demonstraţia de tehnică şi tactici de luptă antice a asociaţiei universitare de arheologie experimentală “Terra Dacica Aeterna” din Cluj-Napoca, alături de care vor evolua talentatele membre ale ansamblului coregrafic antic “Zânele Zalăului”. Festivalul este organizat cu sprijinul Consiliului Judeţean Timiş.

Festivalul Cetatilor Dacice – prima zi! 2009

La Cricau, langa Alba Iulia, organizat de Consiliul Judetean Alba

http://iatalumea.blogspot.com/2009/06/festivalul-cetatilor-dacice-prima-zi.html 

 

The Deva Museum of Dacian and Roman Civilization

The Deva Museum of  Dacian and Roman Civilization

  Ironsmithing

  A  glass case  in the Dacian Museum which contains two anvils, a tripod which suport the tongs and an iron raw magnifying glass, renders, by and large, the image of a forge.  In other four cases are exposed large size tongs, one of them being decorated with geometrical motifs, a group of sledges, hammers, fishing taps, riveters, knifes of different shapes and sizes, pieces of harness, scissors, cleats for walking on slippery ground, crow bars, rods, hinges, iron rings, clamps and so on.  In this way the visitor can get a panoramic view of the instruments and of the products made by the Dacian craftsmen, products so necessary, not only for the peaceful occupations (farming, housing and so on) but also for war. A warehouse of iron tools, discovered at Luncani, composed from axes (3 pieces), a pair of tongs, a hoe a wedge and a craftsman's pick figure also in the display.

 Woodworking

 is documented in the exhibition by different kinds of tools, placed in two glass cases - axes for shaping the wood, adzes, grooveled stanza, wedges, "raftsmen's picks", and so on.

 Agriculture

 Agricultural tools made of iron (an archaic plough, typical of 1st century AD, and one coulter, scythes, sickles, hoes, rakes and axes)  presented  in three glass cases, clearly prove the high level that Dacian agriculture had reached.  From main fortress Sarmizegetusa (Gradistea Museulului) carbonised grains and peas are exhibited in three glass jars.

For more information see:

http://www.dracones.ro/?operatie=subiect&locatie=istoria_daciei&fisier=Uneltele_de_fier

  Ceramics

 Ceramics made from fine paste, painted with decorative motifs, vegetal and zoomorphic ones, were discovered at Sarmizegetusa Regia, the grey bowl-pot, and the Dacian decanter decorated with floral motifs, underline not only the development of Dacian pottery, but also some preoccupations in the field of decorative art. The decanters in the shape of a truncated cone, created manually, many fragments of cups in he shape of bitruncated cone, also made manually, likewise parts of some pots of big capacity (ewers [chiupuri]) from the next two glass cases testify, the civilian character of that settlement.  The decoration of the ceramic, being made up of cell-like (alveolar) belts and lines incised with the aspect of waves, are part of the scale of Dacian decorative motifs from the first half of the last century BCE.  The masterliness of the autochthonous potters, is underlined by the quality and elegant shapes of some oft he pot samples from Campuri-Surduc.  Among them we can distinguish, by their artistic qualities; fruit dishes with a lithe, high peg, made at the wheel, from high quality paste.  Undoubtedly, these fruit dishes which clearly differ from pottery used in households, mainly rought, belong to the luxury ceramic made for the Dacian aristocracy. here one can see displayed within two glass cases ceramical fragments ornamented with wavy-shaped motifs, done by incision, alveolary middles and cylindrical buttons, pieces that open the series of the Dacian dwellings in the settlement discovered and searched ona hill that lies near Deva and called "Piatra Coziei" (Cozia's Cliff).

 Among this ceramics groups we can distinguish parts belonging to the typical Dacian pots with red-brick walls, used for keeping corn? seeds."Cozia's Cliff Hill", high of 686m, dominates the Mures River's Valley, perhaps more severly.  Its upper terrasels shelter a level of Dacian settlements with tracts of material culture typical for the 2nd century BCE. Nevertheless, most of the dwellings date back to the 1st century CE.

 The fragments from the fire heathes of the dwellings, the clay building material with wood prints, the round grinder from volcanic rock, the polishers (metal sharpeners) for pots and the nails of different types and sizes displayed in two glass cases on the left side of the 8th hall, all prove an obvious civil character of the settlement.

 The typological and ornamental diversification of Cozia cermanics is marked through the great number of pots and pot fragments that are hand-made, as well as manufactured on the pottery wheel, that can be seen in the three glass cases on the wall adjacent to the 9th hall.

 The fruit bowl made from gray thin paste, with a tall leg, a Dacian pot dating to the 1st century CE and the cups in the shape of two cones united at tops, of a large variety in size, are samples representative for the local pottery workshops.

The ritual drinking cup- catuie-  was made by hand, without the aid of a wheel, the potter building up the vessel from the bottom with coil upon coil of soft clay, as a tradition from Neolithic cultures.  After the vessel was formed, tools were employed to smooth both the outer and interior surfaces. When completely dry, it was fired in an outdoor bonfire at a temperature of no more than about 900° C.

 

Along with the ceramics fragment in all Dacian settlements, some less common fragments showed up.  We put into relief a part of a pot made of very good quality clay, with painting applied on both faces, upper parts of painted fruit-bowls and adorned with white liens, designed as sun beams.

 There get into bold relief the two fragments of amphor side handles on which are imprinted the signs of the craftsmen in whose workshops they werew produced, potters' signatures, containing leaves applied like stamps.  Nearby are displayed several iron pieces, among which one can distinguish a bracelet manufactured in the style of similar silver jewellery, a knife with a curved blade, the point of a speare and some scales, a unique sample deriving from the Dacian settlement so far, up to the current stage of the searchings.

 In the middle of the hall are presented two pots specific to Dacians, made by hand:  a pitcher with a conical body, with the ear flat, and a type of bag pot, on the outside being decorated with alveolar row combined with conical cuff links which creates a great  effect. Both recipients, with their graceful form, stands out for the ability of Dacian potters, which, even without the potter wheel had been able to make not only useful pots but beautiful in the same time.

For more information see:

http://www.dracones.ro/?operatie=subiect&locatie=istoria_daciei&fisier=Ceramica-Tipologia

http://www.dracones.ro/?operatie=subiect&locatie=istoria_daciei&fisier=Ceramica-Ornamentatia_pictata

 Jewelry

The treasure of the Dacian silver jewelry is exhibited in the 7th hall, was dug out in Sarascau settlement. The fibulae with knots, the bracelets, the necklaces and the hair curl rings are living proofs for the Dacian's skills in manufacturing silver pieces.  This craftsmanship reached a remarkable technical level between the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE.  The silversmiths' artistic abilities, their skills and at the same time, their originality of the models they created are reflected in the decorative motifs on these jewelery pieces which were manufactured with gentleness, and obviously stand for the Dacians' aesthetic taste.

  The manufacture of body adornments made of noble metals and bronze by the

Dacian craftsmen can be proven not only by the originality of their models, but also by the discovery of tools especially designed for practicing this activity.  Within the glass case next to the treasure from Saracsau there is an anvil, and other tools made from bronze, as well as a set of bracelets of various sizes, a fibula with an arch-shaped basis, typical for the 1st century BCE, several bracelets of various sizes, all of which were discovered in Ardeu, at the Dacian settlement spotted on Cetateaua height. Within the same show case there are a group of bracelets and rings, a handle on the upper edge of which a prey animal is represented (a lion maybe) made from silver, (all these come from Costesti), as well as a silver bracelet (dug at Banita).  The pieces mentioned before complete the list of the ornamental Dacian pieces from the area of Hunedoara county.

 Coins

 The third central show-case contains silver Dacian coins from Radulesti treasure.  These coins have Heracles's head on their head, and a horse rider on their tail.  Both figurative representations, planned in a completely original manner, can be noticed only on the Dacian coins that were dug out throughout the area of current Hunedoara county. Due to this, they were called "coins of Hunedoara type". The coins were made by local tribal communities and used to circulate throughout the territory of those social groups.

 http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/dacia/history.html

http://www.sarmizegetusa.net/?operatie=sectiune&sectiune=nemvs

 

Dacian Commerce

Le commerce des Daces devait avoir une certaine importance. Ils exportaient vers les villes grecques du Pont-Euxin du blé et autres céréales, du miel et de la cire, la laine de leurs brebis et l'or de leurs mines. Leurs chevaux jouissaient aussi d'une grande réputation, et Philippe II voulant améliorer la race chevaline de la Macédoine acheta 20,000 juments des plaines du Bas-Danube.
 http://www.archive.org/stream/histoiredesrouma01xnuoft/histoiredesrouma01xnuoft_djvu.txt

Ancient Coinage of Dacia, the Koson

Ancient Coinage of Dacia, Koson
[RPC 1701B]

Koson or Coson or Cotison, a king of the Getae Dacians. This coinage has been associated with Marcus Junius Brutus due to simularity with Brutus' types as moneyer (see Junia 31) but this interpretation is very much open to debate.

 

Click here for the Dacia, Koson page with thumbnail images.

 

RPC_1701Thrace, Dynasts of. Koson. Mid 1st Century BC. AV Stater. KOSWN, Roman consul accompanied by two lictors; BR monogram to left / Eagle standing left on sceptre, holding wreath. RPC 1701; BMC Thrace pg. 208, 2; BMCRR II pg. 474, 48. TextObvRev
TextObvRev
TextImage
TextImage
TextImage
TextImage
TextImage
TextImage
TextImage
TextImage
TextImage
TextImage
TextObvRev
TextImage
RPC_1701AThrace, Dynasts of. Koson. Mid 1st Century BC. AV Stater. KOSWN, Roman consul accompanied by two lictors; BR monogram to left / Eagle standing left on scepter, holding wreath. BMC Thrace 1; BMCRR 48. TextImage
TextImage
TextImage
RPC_1701BThrace, Dynasts of. Koson. 1st Century BC. AV Stater. KOSWN, Roman consul accompanied by two lictors / Eagle standing left on scepter, wreath in beak. BMC Thrace 2; BMCRR 50. TextImage
TextImage
TextObvRev
TextImage
 Search for Koson or Coson at CoinArchives.com  
  

 http://www.mihaigramatopol.ro/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=378%3Athe-art-the-of-geto-dacian-coins&catid=52%3Aarta-monedelor-geto-dacice&Itemid=96

Galeria de imagini Arta monedelor geto-dacice by Mihai Gramatopol

 

 

Belagines-Dacian Law

 MARIA CIORNEI,BASARABI, LEGI BELAGINE, KOGAION in Studii daco-române, Postfaþã de Artur Silvestri:„Densusianism“ ºi „recucerire a memoriei“

http://bibliotecaonline.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/basarabi.pdf 

 

 

„BELAGINELE“ — EXPRESIE A DÃINUIRII

MILENARE A VALAHILOR ÎN ISTORIE

Societatea umanã a înregistrat, în evoluþia ei de-a lungul  istoriei, populaþii care s-au distins prin nivelul înalt al civilizaþiei, exprimatã în formele organizãrii socio-economice ºi ale celei spirituale. Despre civilizaþia pelasgilor, înaintaºii daco-românilor, ai valahilor, au scris, sau au vorbit, mai toþi învãþaþii sau personalitãþile antichitãþii — ºi n-au fost puþini cei ce au consemnat. Acest lucru este explicabil, dacã ne gândim cã pelasgii au roit din centrul originar- spaþiu vechi primordial, civilizator, aflat în zona carpato-

danubianã — în toate direcþiile. (dr. N. Sãvescu „Noi nu suntem urmaºii Romei“, Ed. Axa, Botoºani, 2003, p. 33-38). În urmã cu 12 milenii, pe acest teritoriu sunt menþionate în documentele antice, universitãþile zalmocsiene, prin care au trecut mari nume ale antichitãþii. Atestatã documentar este însã Hestia-Ista-Vesta  2500 î.H., ca Mare Preoteasã a Colegiului Fecioarelor-ºtiutoare de carte. Aceasta conducea regatul feminin al dacilor „ce avea la bazã cel mai vechi cod de legi scrise din lumea anticã, cod cunoscut sub numele de BELAGINE sau Legile Frumoase.“ (D. Bãlaºa — „Basmul Romanizãrii“, pag. 5, Fundaþia Artelor Dor, 1998) Herodot-lib. I 211, aminteºte de un rege al agatârºilor, Anacharsis, care era contemporan cu Numa Pompiliu al Romei-694 î.H., „care a compus o lucrare în versuri despre legile scyþilor pãstori. Despre legile agathârºilor, scrise în versuri, a amintit ºi Aristotel.“ N. Densusianu „Dacia Preistoricã“ (Buc.Institutul de Arte Grafice Carol Gobel 1913 p.895).

Redactarea legilor scite sau agathârºe, atribuite lui Anacharsis e mult mai veche, þinând cont de faptul cã turdulii sau turditanii din Peninsula Italicã care s-au desprins în timpuri „obscure“ din Transilvania, aveau, cum spune Strabon 1 III 1, 6 „un codice de legi vechi de 6000 de ani, dupã mãrturisirea lor“. Despre legile agathârºilor scrise ºi cântate, vorbeºte ºi Aristotel (Pobl. Sect. -xix, 28). De altfel creºtinismul a preluat practica cântãrii Legilor Noi, hristice, care sporeºte ºi întreþine atmosfera de sacralitate. Putem accepta cã aceste legi, date geþilor, sunt de origine divinã, cum susþin unii, numai având în vedere faptul cã pelasgii, fãuritorii unei culturi ºi ai unei civilizaþii superioare, erau consideraþi de vechii greci, care au venit mult mai târziu pe pãmânturile Eladei din Nord , „dioi“, („divini“) de aceeaºi origine cu zeii, (Homer-Iliada X, 422-426, 441) stârnindu-le admiraþia ºi recunoa ºterea superioritãþii.

Existenþa pelasgilor antici consemneazã pe un rege bãrbat, numit Zalmoxa. Numele ni-l aratã ca fiind un slujitor al lui Zalmocsis, menþionat la jumãtatea mileniului al II-lea. (1400 î. d. H.), mare legislator. Scriitorul Iamblicus (33 d.e.n. Fontes I pag. 19) adaugã cã Zalmoxa-tracul „le-a întocmit legile“ ºi „le-a scris“.  Credem cã acesta a reconsiderat aceste legi, în raport cu cerinþele timpului, rescriindu-le, aºa cum, de fapt, a fãcut ºi Deceneu. La începuturi, în adâncul vremii, Belaginele au fost impuse prin constrângeri ºi cu ajutorul vestalelor ºtiutoare de carte. Deceneu, Marele Iniþiat ºi Rege al dacilor, preocupat de cultivarea supuºilor sãi, cum spune ºi Herodot, a transcris aceste legi ºi ele se pãstreazã pânã astãzi sub numele de BELAGINE“ (Fontes II p. 416-417), ºi tot el este cel ce a simþit nevoia sã revizuiascã ºi sã impunã mai cu hotãrâre, actualizând, legile vechi.

Belaginele „stau la baza civilizaþiei umane“ (Fontes II p.19). Ele au prinse în sine legile sfinte care au înveºnicit pe cei nobili, prin respectarea lor, prin perfecþiunea laturii iniþiatice ºi nu numai, dar au fost ºi  „cuþite“ pentru cei ce nu ºtiau de nici o ordine. Belaginele sunt traduse diferit ºi de contemporanii nostri; fie „legile frumoase“, (D. Bãlaºa op. cit. p.5 ), fie „legile naturii“ (V. Kernbach — „Universul mitic al românilor“ -Ed. ªtiinþificã 1994). Putem lua în considerare aceste interpretãri, având în vedere cã ele erau puse ºi în versuri ºi se ºi cântau, asigurând prin prevederile lor, în cazul aplicãrii, o viaþã armonioasã.

Etimologia cuvântului „Belagine“ Unii cercetãtori propun ca etimologie structurile belanus — cele bune (legi) + ginus = începãtori, sau începuturi, deci legi de la începuturi, sau derivã acest cuvânt compus de la belle + leagines, ori de la bela + logos. Vom arãta care este etimologia cuvântului Belagine pornind de la relevarea clarã a etimonului lexemului „Valah“, care aratã, fãrã îndoialã, cã Valahii de azi sunt aceeaºi cu Pelasgii de ieri ºi cã aceºtia, cu adevãrat, au fiinþat dintotdeauna aici, sunt cei mai îndreptãþiþi sã se mândreascã cu înaintaºii civilizatori ai lumii, cu originea lor nobilã, ºi cã, acceptând Adevãrul, oricât de surprinzãtor ar fi pentru cei încremeniþi în rutinã, aºa-zisele pete albe, dispar. Vorbim de evoluþia în timp a lexemului „Pelasg“ ºi înregistrãm urmãtoarele forme: pelasg(i) –pelah(i) — velah(i) — valah (nu insistãm asupra legilor fonetice, acestea au fost prezentate în studiul — Valahii — factor de continuitate în istoria universalã — M. Ciornei — rev. Dacia Magazin nr. 23 iulie 2005 )Considerãm lexemul BELAGINES un cuvânt compus din doi termeni ºi anume din pelasgus ºi gentes (gens-gentis, însemnând, „neam“, „gintã“). Înregistrãm urmãtoarea evoluþie foneticã: Desinenþa finalã „us“ cade ca o lege generalã a trecerii la limba dacoromânâ-valahã-desinenþa — us este pelasgã, nu latinã — ºi rezultã termenul pelas(g)gentis. ª

prima consoanã „s“, greu de pronunþat dispare ºi rãmâne cuvântul pelagentis. Prin efectul  legii comoditãþii în comunicare, se anuleazã fonemul „t“ — ºi se ajunge la forma pelagenis. Are loc metateza „i/e“; în vorbire, vocala „e“ se confundã uºor cu vocala „i“ ºi se pronunþã termenul în discuþie pelagines. Între bilabialele „p“ ºi „b“ se face confuziaîntr-o vorbire fluentã, fiind foarte apropiate sonor ºi va rezulta termenul în discuþie belagines. În timp, se pierde ºi terminaþia finalã „s“ într-un proces normal de dezvoltare, în condiþii diferite ale aceleaºi limbi pelasge ºi va rezulta lexemul belagine. ]

Deci, sã sintetizãm: PELASGUS+GENTES=PELASGENTIS-PELAGENTISPELAGENIS- PELAGINES-BELAGINES deci BELAGINE.În traducere vom spune — stricto senso — cã cele douã cuvinte „pelasgus“ ºi „gentis“ înseamnã — „a neamului pelasg“.Se cere, fireºte, o completare a sintagmei. Pentru a deveni inteligibilã, adãugãm ceea ce-i lipseºte ºi anume cuvântul iniþial „leges“.Se spunea încã în antichitate LEGES P(B)ELAG(E)INTES, adicãLEGILE NEAMULUI PELASG. Cu timpul s-a pierdut, prin neuzanþã, termenul „leges“ ºi sensul sãu l-a integrat lexemul BELAGINES. Memoria colectivã n-a mai pãstrat întreaga sintagmã, formatã din mai mulþi termeni. Acest lucru se datoreazã tot nevoii de comunicare sinteticã; utilizarea frecventã a termenului belagines a fãcut sã se piardã sensul originar al celor douã cuvinte, devenind sinonim cu noþiunea de „cod de legi“. Etimologia cuvântului BELAGINE odatã relevatã, constituie încã o verigã din lanþul continuitãþii ºi vechimii valahilor. Deºi transformãrile etimologice nu sunt uºor de urmãrit, fiind chiar plictisitoare, etimologia poate aduce luminã în problemele nedezlegate pânã acum, deschizând largi orizonturi spre cunoaºtere, nu numai în istoria noastrã, dar ºi în cea universalã.

 Dacã Pelasgii sunt Valahii, ºi Belaginele sunt Legile Valahilor, atunci concluzia cea mai direct este cã Belaginele sunt Legile Valahilor, ºi am putea chiar închide demersul nostru privind — Belaginele, ca dovadã a continuitãþii milenare a valahilor, în istorie. Demonstrarea evoluþiei fonetice a lexemului BELAGINES, susþine, ca un argument în plus, cã valahii cei dispreþuiþi de unii ignoranþi, sau rãu intenþionaþi, au ca strãmoºi direcþi pe nobilii pelasgi, creatorii unei civilizaþii care s-a impus în toatã lumea.

Vechimea Belaginelor

Acestea vin din timpuri imemoriale, dupã cum am arãtat; existau încã în sec. al VI-lea e. n. ºi Iordanes (Getica c.11) spune cã se numeau LEGES BELAGINES. ªi Dionisie Exigul, dac de origine, (465-545) cel ce a pus bazele calendarului creºtin, introducând era noastrã de la Hristos, responsabilul Marii Arhive Sinodale a Bisericii din Constantinopole, „a avut în bibliotecã Belaginele“ (N. Durã — „Strãromânul Dionisie Exigul ºi opera sa“, Rev. „Ortodox- ia“ 1979, p. 7). Filozof, publicist, astrolog, poet ºi mare didacticist, moralist a fost acesta. Dionisie Exigul a þinut legãtura cu dacii de-acasã. ªtiutor de carte multã, cunoscând bine aceste legi morale, de bazã pentru dacii trãitori, le-a lãrgit importanþa, completându-le, valorificând ºi tradiþiile orale ºi a format un corpus de legi pe care le-a ºi comentat ºi care s-au impus printer credincioºi ºi printre slujitorii preoþi. Aceste legi le-au pãstrat ºi urmaºii; în documentele istorice ale Banatului se numesc Jus Walachie, în Transilvania, în Þara Româneascã ºi în Moldova,

Lex Vlachorum, sau Jus et Consuetudo; în Ungaria — Antiqua Valachorum Lex et Consuetudo sau Mos Valachorum. În Polonia se numeau Jus Valachorum (apud N. Densusianu. op cit. p. 879). Am insistat asupra acestor denumiri pentru cã ,având în vedere cã „pelasgii“ se numesc în timp „valahi“, este clar cã legile bãtrâne s-au pãstrat neîntrerupt ºi cã vecinii aveau conºtiinþa originii valahilor ºi a vechimii legilor lor, pe care le numesc fie Antiqua, fie Vetus. Orgolioºii romani au preluat legile de la daco-pelasgi, chiar dacã-i urau. Tacitus (Ann. 27) menþioneazã cã decemvirii, la îndemnul senatului, au fãcut un proiect de legi pentru romani, „culegând din toate pãrþile, unde au putut afla ceva bun“. Servius (Aen. VII 695) spune cã aceiaºi decemviri au luat de la falisci , „o populaþie de pãstori, grupã de BELACI — velahi, emigraþi din regiunea Carpaþilor ºi a Istrului, stabiliþi în Etruria, sute de dispoziþiuni legale ºi au mai luat unele suplimente la cele „XII Table“.

În sec.al XVI-lea ºi al XVII-lea la Fãgãraº încã se înregistra Lex Antiqua Valachorum. N. Densusianu, în urma unui studiu comparative între acestea ºi legile romane prinse în cele „XII Tabe“, ambele scrise în limba latinã, aratã cã sunt identice ºi ajunge la concluzia cã „Tabulele“ sunt o compilaþiune „ºi cã acelaºi cod din timpurile pelasge sunt Leges Belagines, în evul mediu numite Lex Antiqua Valachorum, sau Jus Valachie, prezente în Apusul ºi Estul Europei.“ (N. Densusianu „Dacia Preistoricã“ pag. 903.) S-ar putea pune problema ºi invers — adicã: de ce n-ar fi copiat valahii legile de la romani. Problema are rãspuns; în primul rând am demonstrat cã valahii de azi sunt pelasgii de ieri, în al doilea rând înºiºi autorii romani vorbesc de o lege tradiþionalã imemorialã, (vezi Cicero-De Republica I. V 1) pe care o numesc Vetus Lex Romana, sau Vetus Mos, ori Romanus Mos — (Nominus p. 53). Chiar ºi în Galia aceeaºi lege tradiþionalã era denumitã Vetustissima Paganorum Consuetudo — (Cicero opera citatã). Dacã cele „XII Table“ romane constituie fondul legislasþiei romane, atunci sintagma Lex Antiqua Romanorum, sigur se referã la antichitatea anticilor, care nu pot fi decât strãmoºii lor pelasgi.

Platon (Critias, II, 259) confirmã acest adevãr spunând cã „în regatul lui Atheas, care domnise peste hiperboreenii din nordul Traciei, au existat cele mai vechi legi de origine divinã, scrise cu litere, pe o columnã de aramã“. La romani aceste legi aveau ºi autoritatea unor legi sfinte pe care le venerau-tinerii erau învãþaþi sã le cânte — spune acelaºi Cicero (op. cit.) dar cu mult mai înainte acest lucru îl fãceau agatârºii de pe malul râului Maris. (Aristotel — op citatã).

 

 

Jordanes - The Origin and Deeds of the Goths

XI Then when Buruista was king of the Goths,     67
Dicineus came to Gothia at the time when Sulla ruled the
Romans. Buruista received Dicineus and gave him almost
royal power. It was by his advice the Goths ravaged
the lands of the Germans, which the Franks now possess. 68
Then came Caesar, the first of all the Romans to assume
imperial power and to subdue almost the whole world,
who conquered all kingdoms and even seized islands lying
beyond our world, reposing in the bosom of Ocean. He
made tributary to the Romans those that knew not the
Roman name even by hearsay, and yet was unable to prevail
against the Goths, despite his frequent attempts.
Soon Gaius Tiberius reigned as third emperor of the
Romans, and yet the Goths continued in their kingdom
unharmed. Their safety, their advantage, their one hope 69
lay in this, that whatever their counsellor Dicineus advised
should by all means be done; and they judged it
expedient that they should labor for its accomplishment.
And when he saw that their minds were obedient to him
in all things and that they had natural ability, he taught
them almost the whole of philosophy, for he was a skilled
master of this subject. Thus by teaching them ethics he
restrained their barbarous customs; by imparting a knowledge
of physics he made them live naturally under laws
of their own, which they possess in written form to this
day and call belagines. He taught them logic and made
them skilled in reasoning beyond all other races; he
showed them practical knowledge and so persuaded them
to abound in good works. By demonstrating theoretical
knowledge he urged them to contemplate the twelve signs
and the courses of the planets passing through them, and
the whole of astronomy. He told them how the disc of
the moon gains increase or suffers loss, and showed them
how much the fiery globe of the sun exceeds in size our
earthly planet. He explained the names of the three hundred
and forty-six stars and told through what signs in
the arching vault of the heavens they glide swiftly from
their rising to their setting. Think, I pray you, what 70
pleasure it was for these brave men, when for a little
space they had leisure from warfare, to be instructed in
the teachings of philosophy! You might have seen one
scanning the position of the heavens and another investigating
the nature of plants and bushes. Here stood one
who studied the waxing and waning of the moon, while
still another regarded the labors of the sun and observed
how those bodies which were hastening to go toward the
east are whirled around and borne back to the west by
the rotation of the heavens. When they had learned the 71
reason, they were at rest. These and various other matters
Dicineus taught the Goths in his wisdom and gained
marvellous repute among them, so that he ruled not only
the common men but their kings. He chose from among
them those that were at that time of noblest birth and
superior wisdom and taught them theology, bidding them
worship certain divinities and holy places. He gave the
name of Pilleati to the priests he ordained, I suppose
because they offered sacrifice having their heads covered
with tiaras, which we otherwise call pillei. But he bade
them call the rest of their race Capillati. This name the 72
Goths accepted and prized highly and they retain it to
this day in their songs.
XII When he too had departed from human affairs,
Coryllus ascended the throne as king of the Goths and for
forty years ruled his people in Dacia. I mean ancient
Dacia, which the race of the Gepidae now possess. This
country lies across the Danube within sight of Moesia, 74
and is surrounded by a crown of mountains. It has only
two ways of access, one by way of the Boutae and the
other by the Tapae. This Gothia, which our ancestors
called Dacia and now, as I have said, is called Gepidia,
was then bounded on the east by the Roxolani, on the west
by the Iazyges, on the north by the Sarmatians and Basternae
and on the south by the river Danube. The Iazyges
are separated from the Roxolani by the Aluta river only.

 

 
 

The Oldest Leather Shoe found in Armenia. 3,500 B.C. similar with Romanian opinci

ScienceDaily (June 10, 2010) — A perfectly preserved shoe, 1,000 years older than the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt and 400 years older than Stonehenge in the UK, has been found in a cave in Armenia.


The 5,500 year old shoe, the oldest leather shoe in the world, was discovered by a team of international archaeologists and their findings will publish on June 9th in the online scientific journal PLoS ONE.

The cow-hide shoe dates back to ~ 3,500 BC (the Chalcolithic period) and is in perfect condition. It was made of a single piece of leather and was shaped to fit the wearer's foot. It contained grass, although the archaeologists were uncertain as to whether this was to keep the foot warm or to maintain the shape of the shoe, a precursor to the modern shoe-tree perhaps? "It is not known whether the shoe belonged to a man or woman," said lead author of the research, Dr Ron Pinhasi, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland "as while small (European size 37; US size 7 women), the shoe could well have fitted a man from that era." The cave is situated in the Vayotz Dzor province of Armenia, on the Armenian, Iranian, Nakhichevanian and Turkish borders, and was known to regional archaeologists due to its visibility from the highway below.

The stable, cool and dry conditions in the cave resulted in exceptional preservation of the various objects that were found, which included large containers, many of which held well-preserved wheat and barley, apricots and other edible plants. The preservation was also helped by the fact that the floor of the cave was covered by a thick layer of sheep dung which acted as a solid seal over the objects, preserving them beautifully over the millennia!

"We thought initially that the shoe and other objects were about 600-700 years old because they were in such good condition," said Dr Pinhasi. "It was only when the material was dated by the two radiocarbon laboratories in Oxford, UK, and in California, US that we realised that the shoe was older by a few hundred years than the shoes worn by Ötzi, the Iceman."

Three samples were taken in order to determine the absolute age of the shoe and all three tests produced the same results. The archaeologists cut two small strips of leather off the shoe and sent one strip to the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit at the University of Oxford and another to the University of California -Irvine Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Facility. A piece of grass from the shoe was also sent to Oxford to be dated and both shoe and grass were shown to be the same age.

The shoe was discovered by Armenian PhD student, Ms Diana Zardaryan, of the Institute of Archaeology, Armenia, in a pit that also included a broken pot and wild goat horns. "I was amazed to find that even the shoe-laces were preserved," she recalled. "We couldn't believe the discovery," said Dr Gregory Areshian, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA, US, co-director who was at the site with Mr Boris Gasparyan, co-director, Institute of Archaeology, Armenia when the shoe was found. "The crusts had sealed the artefacts and archaeological deposits and artefacts remained fresh dried, just like they were put in a can," he said.

The oldest known footwear in the world, to the present time, are sandals made of plant material, that were found in a cave in the Arnold Research Cave in Missouri in the US. Other contemporaneous sandals were found in the Cave of the Warrior, Judean Desert, Israel, but these were not directly dated, so that their age is based on various other associated artefacts found in the cave.Image hosted by Photobucket.com

Interestingly, the shoe is very similar to the 'pampooties' worn on the Aran Islands (in the West of Ireland)(and in Romania were they were called opinci) up to the 1950s. "In fact, enormous similarities exist between the manufacturing technique and style of this shoe and those found across Europe at later periods, suggesting that this type of shoe was worn for thousands of years across a large and environmentally diverse region," said Dr Pinhasi.

 

"We do not know yet what the shoe or other objects were doing in the cave or what the purpose of the cave was," said Dr Pinhasi. "We know that there are children's graves at the back of the cave but so little is known about this period that we cannot say with any certainty why all these different objects were found together." The team will continue to excavate the many chambers of the cave.

The team involved in the dig included; lead author and co-director, Dr Ron Pinhasi, Archaeology Department, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland; Mr Boris Gasparian, co-director and Ms Diana Zardaryan of the Institute of Archaeology and Enthography, National Academy of Sciences, Republic of Armenia; Dr Gregory Areshian, co-director, Research Associate at the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, US; Professor Alexia Smith, Department of Anthropology of the University of Connecticut, US, Dr Guy Bar-Oz , Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa, Israel and Dr Thomas Higham, Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, University of Oxford, UK.

The research received funding from the National Geographic Society, the Chitjian Foundation (Los Angeles), US, Mr Joe Gfoeller of the Gfoeller Foundation of US, the Steinmetz Family Foundation,US, the Boochever Foundation, US, and the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, UCLA, US.

   

 

Ceramics

 


Lupul de la Carlomanesti, Buzau

 

 

 A piece of Terra Sigillata pottery, from Cioroiu Nou, Oltenia but not from Roman times. It was made by the Dacian people and is a very rare piece.
Photo: Adrian Gheorghe 2nd August 2010

 

Descoperire arheologică monumentală în Covasna  

 

În satul Olteni din  judeţul Covasna este atestată existenţa milenară a dacilor înainte, în timpul şi după ocupaţia romană

Una dintre cele mai importante descoperiri arheologice din România demonstrează existenţa dacilor în Transilvania şi continuitatea lor în Ardeal pe parcursul unui întreg mileniu (IV BC-VI AC). Pentru prima oară, specialiştii au scos la lumină o aşezare completă, formată din sat şi cimitir, pe şantierul arheologic de la Olteni, comuna Bodoc, judeţul Covasna.

www. adevarul. ro/articole/descoperire-arheologica-monumentala-in-covasna/317248

 

Racos, Piatra Detunata Dacian settlement 

 

In the space of the wall, toward the premises, were clearly delimited two levels of Dacian occupation, the last ceasing at the Roman conquest. Contemporary with this is a worship [religious] hearth, in which was deposited a mandible of a wild boar and fragments of small Dacian ceramics, from vases modelled by hand or on a wheel. It was discovered near the dwelling excavated in the year 1998, from which resulted very many iron objects and pieces of costume and ornament of iron, bronze and silver. 
Section S. II / 2000. Located at 35 m E of Section S. II / 1998, it had the aim of verifying the period and the method of arranging of the interior terraces (with dimensions of 25 x 1.5 m). The first terrace was produced in the bronze age, in the Wietenberg culture period, [from which were dated - since given] two above-ground dwellings. The edges of the terraces were reinforced by the Dacians, by raising and widening with large slabs of local limestone. The dwellings were only above-ground. Outside of the [movable - furniture] inventory characteristic of the Latene, here was discovered a slab of soft [bushes - tuf] in which is sculpted a "fir tree[ bradut ]", unique until now in Dacian settlements
The "In sea" ["In saddle"] sector. In the saddle between the hill [personal-say - propriu-zis] and the [breast - mamelonul] that is risen just on the left bank of the Olt were [traced] two sections in cross (measuring 15 x 2 m each), with the aim of verifying if this zone was occupied. Beginning from a depth of -0.15 / -0.2 m appeared bits of mortar of wall black or reddened from fire and charcoal, testing for the existence of some above-ground dwellings of [caror] of contours wasn't able to delimit. Ceramics modelled by hand are represented by jars, cups and saucers, while pottery worked on a wheel is recorded fragmentary [shouts - shreaks - chiupuri] ash grey and red, with incised decorations in wavey or circular bands, Fruit holdres[fructiere] of the same colour, [strachini], a bowl, cups and saucers, [ulcer - ulcioare]. Both species of ceramic are very friable due to acidity and excessive moisture from the soil. Among the pieces of metal are of mention many more iron knives, an ear ring of bronze, an iron fibula (cloak pin) with rhomboidal [diaper - scut] (of type 11 after A. Rustoiu), a silver fibula ( safety pin used to fasten a garment at the shoulder) with the strong body standing out [in relief] (of type 20a after A. Rustoiu) etc. In the majority, materials are dated between the first half century CE and the Roman conquest.

 


Paulina Poleska:Celtic Pottery Workshop in the Settlement of Kraków-Pleszów (Site 20)

 

 Elements of the Dacian pottery, i.e. some characteristic shapes and decoration appeared in the 1st century BC within almost the whole zone of the Carpathian Basin. The relevant literature claims that the Púchov culture was the indirect link enabling the import of such designs and decoration by the Tyniec group (Woźniak 1990, 56, 76; Madyda-Legutko 1996, 65). This process may have been initiated by Celtic centres (Celtic and Dacian) from the area of the central section of the River Danube, directly, and most likely through the Zemplin centre in eastern Slovakia, and this phenomenon occurred also when new ceramic production centres were set up (Točik 1959; Pieta 1982, 103n.; Woźniak 1990, 79). Another solid argument to support this thesis is the assemblage of Kraków-Pleszów 20, where beside a series of wheel-made painted pottery which is probably production waste from a local workshop, an unusually abundant collection of pottery of the Dacian type and pieces of an early terra sigillata vessel have been found. It is thus no coincidence that other finds of early pottery imported from the South come from Devin from the youngest layers of the oppidum in Bratislava and Budapest.

 

 

 

Dacian Commerce

Le commerce des Daces devait avoir une certaine importance. Ils exportaient vers les villes grecques du Pont-Euxin du blé et autres céréales, du miel et de la cire, la laine de leurs brebis et l'or de leurs mines.

Leurs chevaux jouissaient aussi d'une grande réputation, et Philippe II voulant améliorer la race chevaline de la Macédoine acheta 20,000 juments des plaines du Bas-Danube.

 http://www.archive.org/stream/histoiredesrouma01xnuoft/histoiredesrouma01xnuoft_djvu.txt

 

http://muzeulgorjului.ro/

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/29414079.jpg

Dacian monoxile,  Muzeul Gorjului

Ancient Coinage of Dacia, Koson
[RPC 1701B]

Koson or Coson or Cotison, a king of the Getae Dacians. This coinage has been associated with Marcus Junius Brutus due to simularity with Brutus' types as moneyer (see Junia 31) but this interpretation is very much open to debate.

 

Click here for the Dacia, Koson page with thumbnail images.

 Polibiu  relata (31.25) despre indignarea lui Cato cel Bătrân în faţa preţului enorm – 300 de drahme o amforă – cu care se vindea la Roma peştele sărat importat de pe coastele Mării Negre.

 http://www.historia.ro/exclusiv_web/general/articol/pasarile-persane-pestii-curcubeu

Dacian Funerary Ritual

 

Romanian experts uncover biggest Dacian find ever

04/08/2008
 Romanian archaeologists discovered an ancient cemetery, which experts consider the largest necropolis ever found in the Dacian area. They made their photodiscovery in Malaia Kopalnia, Ukraine, 20km from the Romanian border. It should reveal more about the Dacians' burial rites. Women's graves contained fibulas, jewels, buckles, rings and chain loops, while the men's graves contained weapons, such as a one-bladed sword called "fica", spurs, spearheads and other objects.
 

Satu-Mare archaeologists working in an archaeological site in Ukraine’s Malaia Kopania, 20 kilometers from the border with Romania, have discovered the largest cemetery in the Dacian area.

Robert Gindele, the head of the Archaeological Section within the Satu Mare County Museum, has stated on Tuesday that the cemetery in Malaia Kopania represents the largest Dacian discovery until now.

He pointed out that the women’s graves contained fibulas, jewels, buckles, rings and chain loops, while the men’s graves contained weapons, some of them spectacular, such as falxes, a special one-bladed sword called ‘fica’, spurs, spear tips and other objects.

Gindele has stated that the discovery is very important considering that the Dacians’ burial ritual is very little known and that the cemetery in Malaia Kopania is the largest Dacian necropolis ever discovered.

‘In Malaia Kopania we have discovered more graves than ever found in the Great Dacia area. We can state for certain that here is the location where the largest necropolis in all of the Dacian area will be investigated’ Gindele stated.

He pointed out that the graves date back to Burebista’s period, with a Greek silver coin dating back to that period being discovered too. This is the second Dacian necropolis discovered, apart from the one discovered in Zemplen, Slovakia, 200 kilometres from Romania’s borders. The archaeological site in Malaia Kopania is located 20 kilometres from Romania’s borders, where the river Tisa enters the historical Maramures.

 

The Dacian Stones Speak, By Paul Lachlan MacKendrick

 http://books.google.com/books?id=Lwt5Li_q2asC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_book_other_versions_r&cad=6

 

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/dragons/esp_sociopol_dragoncourt02_01.htm

The Society of the Living – the Community of the Dead
(from Neolithic to the Christian Era) 
 

 

 

Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis, VI, 1, 2007

TOMBS OF DACIAN WARRIORS (2ND - 1ST C. BC) FOUND IN HUNEDOARA-GRĂDINA CASTELULUI (HUNEDOARA COUNTY)

by Valeriu Sîrbu, Sabin Adrian Luca, Cristian Roman Romania  

 

 During the excavations of the important site from Hunedoara – Grădina Castelului (Sîrbu et alii 2007), one has found 3 complexes that consist of the vestiges of Dacian warriors (C12, C70 and C71). Although they were recently published in a volume dedicated to the site (Sîrbu et alii 2007, p. 24-25, 48-49, 195-196, fig. 7/5; 13/15; 14/6, 13; 34/9-11; 12; 42-44, 73-74), a separate analysis is required because C71 was found after the volume had been edited and it was only included in an Addenda (Sîrbu et alii 2007, p. 195-6) and because more detailed observations on the rituals, inventory and the importance of the discoveries are in order.
The warrior tombs
Complex no.12; S.V, cass. 2; -(35-40)cm.
Context of the discovery. The dead and the inventory were found at the depth of 0.32-0.35m, on an area of the stone that was relatively flat, on a thin layer of soil and broken dolomite; the bones, spread on a surface of 0.35-0.40m, were protected by dolomite blocs arranged in a circle and were covered with soil and broken dolomite. The inventory was found in various areas of the fitting out: the spearhead was west of the cremated bones, oriented SSW, while the curved battle knife was under it; the metal, bone and glass items were on top of or among the cremated bones; the fruit bowl fragments were above the dead, on a layer of soil 4-5 cm thick (Fig. 1/1-2).
The recovered cremated bones are from all of the body parts; one noticed that the vertebrae are less touched by the fire, which means the dead was not cremated lying on his back.
Therefore, in the funerary deposit, the items were placed following certain rules: the weapons were west of the cremated bones, with no traces of burning, while the fruit-bowls had been broken elsewhere and were deposited in fragments over the dead and the rest of the inventory.
As shown by the anthropological analysis, the recovered cremated bones, from all of the body parts, belong to a male 21-22 years of age. The cremation took place elsewhere and the bones of the dead were selected carefully, as there was no trace of the pyre in the deposit.
Anthropological analyses (Soficaru, Comşa, Stan 2007, p. 93).
The skeleton was cremated. The femoral wall has a maximal thickness of about 8mm and a very well outlined linia aspera, so it is possible that the individual could have been a male.
Cranial fragments (parietal, temporal, occipital) could not be identified, some of them being warped by the fire. The maxilla could be also recovered and reconstructed. The margins of the anthropin aperture have been destroyed. On its right half, a part of the first permanent molar was preserved. The palate was deepened. Together with that bone there were the ascending ramus of the mandible, partly destroyed.
Out of the spine, four fragmentary vertebrae and vertebral apophyses have been found. Rib fragments and metacarpals were also found.
The hip bone was represented just by small fragments. In depth, it could be observed that the bone was not highly affected by the action of the fire, maintaining its natural appearance and color.
From the long bones just diaphysis of the humeri, radiuses, ulnae, femora and tibiae could be recovered. Separately, two epiphyses have been identified, one of them of a humerus and the other one of a radius.
One of the pubic symphysis which was preserved in good conditions indicated an age of about 21-22 years.
It is interesting to mention here that the vertebrae were hardly affected by fire, so we can infer that the individual was not laid on its back while being burnt on the pyre.
Inventory (Sîrbu et alli 2007, p. 24-25, fig. 34/9-11; 35).
a) iron spearhead (L = 310mm, L. tip = 200mm, D. orifice = 23mm; MCC-Inv. A4734), with a long, slightly truncated body, the tip shaped like a willow’s leaf and a median nervure (Fig.1/1; 3/8);
b) iron knife (L = 134mm; MCC-Inv. A4686) with a curved blade and a gush channel near the edge, triangular in section, short handle, rectangular in section, with an orifice and a bolt for affixing (Fig. 1/1;3/6);
c) round bronze chain link (D = 20x19mmm, MCC-Inv. A4653), rhombic profile (Fig. 3/3); 156
electronic version at http://arheologie.ulbsibiu.ro
Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis, VI, 1, 2007
d) round bronze chain link (D = 20mm; MCC-Inv. A4675), with defects from when the metal was cast, oval in section (Fig. 3/2);
e) bead (D = 17mm, H = 12mm; MCC-Inv. A4673), made of whitish glass, with a cylindrical orifice, painted blue and with “ribbed” decorations (Fig. 3/1);
f) bone handle (L = 70mm, D = 10mm, d = 8mm, MCC-Inv. A4683), cylindrical, with an orifice on the inside, decorated with motives consisting of two concentric circles with a dot in the middle, made by incisions, probably passed through fire (Fig. 3/7);
g) fragment from a similar handle, in terms of material, shape and decoration, but with a larger diameter (Fig. 3/4);
h) fragmentary iron item, probably a buckle tongue (L = 43mm; MCC-Inv. A4663), with a round and rectangular profile (Fig. 3/9);
i) fragmentary iron item, probably a buckle tongue (L = 49mm, MCC-Inv. A4655), with a round and oval profile (Fig. 3/5);
i) a fruit-bowl’s cup (D = 230mm), made of semi-fine clay, hand-modeled, put through reducing burn, gray in color (Fig.3/10);
j) fruit bowl’s cup (D = 300mm), made of semi-fine clay, hand-modeled, put through reducing burn, gray in color (Fig. 3/11).
One interesting aspect is the variety of the items - types, materials and uses - but suggesting a warrior’s inventory.
Offering (?): burnt mammal bones, including the molar of a goat or sheep.
Dating: 125-51/25 BC.
The inventory found in the three complexes is diverse: a) offensive weapons – two lances, a sheathed dagger, a curved knife, b) defensive gear – a chain mail shirt, a shield, perhaps a helmet as well, c) clothing accessories – a decorative belt buckle, a belt buckle, plus what could be another two belt buckles, d) adornments – a glass bead, e) pottery – a mug and two fruit-bowls, f) bridle bit (?), g) miscellaneous – two bone handles and two bronze chain links. All in all, therefore, one has found around 20 items.
We will speak in more detail only about a few types of the items with a higher typological, chronological and, eventually, ethnic relevance.
Chain mail shirts, such as the one on C70D7, were found in the Dacian tumuli from Cugir-T2 (Crişan 1980, p. 81-87), Popeşti-T2, T3 and T4, Radovanu, Poiana-Gorj and Cetăţeni (Vulpe 1976, p. 201, 208, fig. 15/1, 18/6-8), namely both in south-western Transylvania and in Oltenia or Walachia, in tombs from the second half of 2nd c.-1st c. BC. Many instances from 2nd - 1st c. BC were found in tombs of the Panaghiurski Kolonii group from north-western Bulgaria (Torbov 2004, p. 57-69). Also, on the upper Tisa, in the necropolis from Zemplin, Tumulus 3, cremation tomb 78, belonging to an adult, one has found a chain mail shirt (Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlova 1990, p. 255, fig. 20a-b); the inventory is that of a Dacian warrior from the last decades of 1st c. BC – first decades of 1st c. AD. Since the chronology and diffusion of this type of item for the Celts and Dacians were recently discussed by Aurel Rustoiu (2006, p. 49-52), we believe there is no point in delving on them
Although the curved daggers (sica) of this type are rather numerous (Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947, p. 17-33, ill. I/6; III/3, 5-6; V/11; Wozniak 1974, p. 98-104; Popović 1989-1990, fig. 3/23; Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 80, fig. 4), there are few items that were found whole, decorated and sheathed by means of systematic research. One has found 25 instances, in 20 localities, in the Geto-Dacian area north of the Danube (Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 80, fig. 4, plus the new discoveries). The local origin of this weapon is proven by its presence in the Thracian area for almost half a millennium, from 3rd c. BC (Domaradzki 1986, p. 227) to the representations on Traian’s Column or on artifacts dating back to after the Roman conquest (2nd c. AD), such as the plate discovered in Gârla Mare (Stângă 1996, p. 241, fig. 10/5, 11). Of these items, we would like to mention just those from Călăraşi, Cetate, Orodel (Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947, ill. I/6; III/3, 5, 6; V/11), Corcova (Sîrbu, Rustoiu, Crăciunescu 1999, fig. 2), from Oltenia, or Sofronievo, Altimir and Tărnava, from north-western Bulgaria (Wozniak 1974, fig. 10/3, 4; Teodossiev, Torbov 1995, fig. 21) and Ezerče (Radoslavna 2005, p. 277-283), next to Razgrad. Special attention should be paid to the decoration on the blades of these weapons, probably showing two affronté vultures, next to solar symbols (Fig. 8;11/1d). The presence of these affronté birds on the blades of the Geto-Dacian fighting knives
160
electronic version at http://arheologie.ulbsibiu.ro
Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis, VI, 1, 2007
(Wozniak 1974, p. 100, fig. 10/1-4) was interpreted as a symbolic element in the ideology of the Dacian warriors and, therefore, as another argument for the cult role played by these weapons (Rustoiu 2002, p. 57-61). In fact, there is the well known scene of Decebal’s suicide with a curved dagger, rendered very dramatically on Traian’s Column (scene CXLV).
The lance heads are among the most common weapons found in the tombs from 2nd – 1st c. BC (Fig. 7; 10/3 since north of the Danube alone one has found over 60 instances, in more than 30 localities (Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 80, fig. 8, plus the new discoveries). As for the items found here, we only want to remind the reader that they were deposited whole, not burned, not warped and without their wooden part.
As for the type of the iron shield found here, it is difficult to come up with some of the details, given the highly fragmentary state of the item; however, the presence of fragments with indications of curvature, including with the edge, points to a hemispherical umbones; there are also fragments from the outside edge, the rivets and the universal iron (Fig. 4/1, 3, 11; 6/1-2, 13, 16-17)). The number of shields found north of the Danube is not high, being under 10 (Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 81, fig. 5). Various types of shields were found in Dacian tumular tombs, such as in Cugir (Crişan 1980, p. 85) and Popeşti-T4 (Vulpe 1976, p. 201, fig. 14/5), as well as in the group of flat tombs of the Padea-Panaghiurski Kolonii type (Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 81, fig. 4) or in the Przeworsk culture (Bochnak 2006, p. 100, fig. 6).
The decorative belt buckle found here is type II, under the typology established by Mircea Babeş (1983, p. 214-215, 219-220, fig. 10); we also need to call attention to the similar item found in Simeria, in the bed of the river Strei (Pădureanu 2002-2003, p. 101, ill. I), not far from our item in Hunedoara. All in all, the some 25 decorative belt buckles from the Geto-Dacian group, of type I or II, were found in almost 20 sites, the large majority of them settlements or fortresses, but also in some “fields of pits” (Orlea, Sighişoara, Şura Mică), tombs (Hunedoara) or sacred enclosures (Pietroasa Mică-Gruiu Dării) (Babeş 1983, p. 196-221, plus the new discoveries). North of the Danube, one has found items similar to those from Hunedoara in Simeria, Sighişoara, Ostrovul Şimian, Orlea, Vlădiceasca, plus Altimir south of the Danube (Babeş 1983, fig. 10).
Since the main issues related to these types of items were analyzed in very much detail in the synthesis study by Mircea Babeş (1983, p. 196-221), we only want to call attention to the fact that their diffusion area (southern part of Transylvania and Moldavia, then Oltenia and Walachia) and their chronology (second half of 2nd c. – 1st c. BC) correspond to the only area from which we have evidence of Dacian tombs, flat or tumular.
Pottery. The number of ceramic vessels from 2nd - 1st c. BC is not very high, because many tombs were chance discoveries and these items were broken and dumped.
The mug used in C71 (Fig. 9/3; 10/4) is a type encountered rather often with the Dacians, either as an urn or as an offering vessel, wheel-modeled, as in Corcova (Sîrbu, Rustoiu, Crăciunescu 1999, p. 218, fig. 4/2), Brad (Ursachi 1975, p. 254, fig. 336/3; 355/5) and Chirnogi (Şerbănescu 2006, p. 168-170, fig. 4/3-6), or hand-modeled, such as in Turburea-Spahii (Gherghe 1978, p. 17, fig. 3), Teleac (Moga 1982, p. 87-91), Blandiana (Ciugudean 1980, p. 428, fig. 4/1) or Zimnicea – C10M118, C14M1, C15M56 (Alexandrescu 1980, fig. 26/1, 2, 4). These vessel shapes are characteristic of the Dacian pottery of 2nd – 1st c. BC and encountered often in all the types of sites from this period.
Also, the two fruit-bowls (Fig. 3/10-11) are characteristic of the Dacian pottery of this period and are sometimes found in tombs as well, especially in the tumular ones, as is the case in Cugir (Crişan 1980, p. 83), Popeşti (Vulpe 1976, p. 194-202, fig. 3/2; 7/8; 10/1) ori Lăceni (Moscalu 1977, p. 333, fig. 3/1-2; 4/1).
Similar mugs and fruit-bowls, hand- or wheel-modeled, were found nearby, in the settlement in Hunedoara-Sânpetru (Sîrbu et alli 2007, p. 153, fig. 59/5; 60/4; 61/4, 6; 62/1; Sîrbu, Mariş 2008), as well as in other places on the territory of the Hunedoara municipality, so there is no doubt they are from the local Dacian community.
Since we have very few fragments from the helmet and the bridle bit, it is difficult to say what their type was and, consequently, what their analogies were.
There aren’t many helmets found north of the Danube and they include those discovered in the tumular tombs from Cugir (Crişan 1980, p. 85) and Popeşti (Vulpe 1976, p. 201, fig. 12/1). 161
electronic version at http://arheologie.ulbsibiu.ro
Acta Terrae Septemcastrensis, VI, 1, 2007
On the other hand, the bridle bits found in the tumular or flat tombs is rather high and we speak here of only three discoveries nearby, namely Cugir (Crişan 1980, p. 82), Călan (Rustoiu, Sîrbu, Ferencz 2001-2002, p. 113, fig. 4) and Blandiana (Ciugudean 1980, p. 425-432). Although the elements preserved do not offer enough for identifying the type, it probably was a bridle bit of Thracian origin, as found in the many Dacian tumular or flat tombs (Wozniak 1974, p. 109, fig. 11/10-17; Werner 1988; Zirra 1981, p. 115-172; Rustoiu, Sîrbu, Ferencz 2001-2002, p. 113-114, 116-117).
Based on the origin of the items discovered, we believe six of them are Dacian (pottery, dagger with scabbard, curved knife and decorative belt buckle), as the rest of the artifacts are “supranational” goods. Suffice to reopen the issue of the item deposit found in Veliki Vetren, where one has found complete sets of weapons, military gear, clothing accessories and harness items (Stojić 2003, p. 31-86).
We need to make clear that these tombs are not the only ones found in Grădina Castelului because, from the second half of 2nd c-first half/mid-1st c. BC we have C18Dead13a, C30Dead16a, C33Dead17, C34Dead18, which is evidence of a well documented tomb landscape for this period. Save for one case (C33Dead17 – inhumed adolescent), we are always dealing with inhumed adults, but without any representative inventory (Sîrbu et alli fig.37/2, 10).
From Complex 21 Deposit 2, we have two sword accessories: a) a scabbard fragment from a bronze Celtic sword of the “pencil-case” type, (Sîrbu et al. 2007, p. 43-44, fig. 41/10), called that way because a part of it slid in the other, dated back to La Tène D (Zachar 1974, fig. 5/2, 7; tab. 1); we know of many similar instances in the south of Gallia, but also in areas that are closer, such as tomb 108 from the necropolis in Zemplin (Budinský-Krička, Lamiová-Schmiedlova 1990, p. 260, ill. XV/30), and b) an iron item shaped like and “S”, from a sword sheath’s armor (Sîrbu et alii 2007, p. 43-44, fig. 41/12), used for reinforcing it close to the guard, with many analogies among items from La Tène C2-D (Zachar 1974, fig. 5/3, 5; tab. III/4; Łuczkiewicz 2006, p. 36, fig. 5/3).
Two other deposits, C24D4 and C25D5 (Sîrbu et alii p. 45-47, fig. 39; 41/9-10), containing both weapons and wearable or harness items, are probably from 1st c. BC too.
All of the weaponry items with a narrower dating, belonging to the second half of 2nd c-1st c. BC, were found together with adult dead or in deposits and they document the presence of warriors here.
The presence of these Dacian warrior tombs, next to other tombs, deposits and isolated Dacian deposits and items from 2nd-1st c. BC are evidence of the existence of local communities in the area. In fact, the lack of Celtic discoveries from the Hunedoara valley, as well as other valleys from southern Transylvania (Sîrbu 20071, p. 149-150) and the presence of Dacian materials from 4th - 3rd c. right in Grădina Castelului (C22Pit1, C46Dep6) point to the presence of Dacians in the area even during this period (Sîrbu et alii, p. 47-48, 50-51, fig. 41/5-8; 14).
Although one has produced some new data on the situation from the middle Mureş during 4th c. BC-1st c. AD (Ferencz 2006, p. 113-128; Gheorghiu 2005), it still leaves unsolved many of the major problems connected to the history of this area, in particular the relations between the Dacians and the Celts.
Discoveries with this sort of weapons are known from tumular tombs, such as those in Popeşti, Radovanu, Lăceni or Cugir (Vulpe 1976, p. 193-215; Moscalu 1977, p. 329-337; Crişan 1980, p. 81-87; Babeş 1988, p. 5-8; Sîrbu 1994, p. 123-160), as well as in the flat ones from the Padea-Panaghiurski Kolonii area in northern Bulgaria, north-eastern Serbia, southern Romania and south-western Transylvania (Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947, p. 17-33, ill. I-V; Zirra 1971, p. 223-227, fig. 23; Wozniak 1974; Dimitrova, Gizdova 1975, p. 39-87; Popović 1989-1990, p. 165-176; Sîrbu 1993, p. 22-25; 71-79; Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 77-91; Theodossiev 2000; Rustoiu 2002, p. 11-61; Torbov 2004, p. 57-69; Sîrbu, Arsenescu 2006, p. 163-186). The area with flat Dacian tombs from 2nd - 1st c. BC kept expanding as the research went, the clearest example being the tombs in Chirnogi (Şerbănescu 2006, p. 165-179) and Ezerče (Radoslavna 2005, p. 277-283).
Since many have analyzed the problems associated with these tombs, especially those cited earlier, we need not discuss them yet again. We only want to make a number of observations. It has generally been considered that the tombs with similar items south of the Danube belong the Scordiscians and that those north of the river are from the Dacians, but the analysis of the whole of the discoveries points, maybe, to another reality.
The discoveries between the Balkans and the Danube be they “field of pits”, such as in Bagachina (Bonev, Alexandrov 1996, p. 39-50, fig.74-105, ill. XXX-XLVII) or Russe (Varbanov, Dragoev 2007, p. 243-264), or treasures, such as in Galice (Nikolov 1988) or Jakimovo, or other types of items characteristic of the lay or warrior aristocracy (large fibulae with knots and multi-spiral silver bracelets, daggers with eagles), prove that the Geto-Dacians represented the main demographical and political forces in the area during 2nd – 1st c. BC (Sîrbu 2006, p. 102). Of course, the presence of Scordiscian communities from the second half of the 3rd c. until mid-1st century BC, in particular in north-western Bulgaria and north-eastern Serbia, next to the Thracian ones, is visible in a number of discoveries (Wozniak 1974, p. 76, map 2; Sladić1986; Popović 1989-1990, p. 165-176; 2000, p. 83-111).
Things are much clearer north of the Danube, where the archaeological inventory from settlements, fortresses or cult sites is almost entirely Dacian, with the Celtic items (graphite vessels, wearable items, mostly fibulae) accounting for no more than 0.5% of the total (Sîrbu, Arsenescu 2006, p. 167-170). That’s the way it is with most of the settlements and fortresses in Socol (excavations by Caius Săcărin), Stenca Liubcovei, Divici (Gumă, Rustoiu, Săcărin 1997, p. 401-427), Schela Cladovei (Boroneanţ, Davidescu 1968, p. 253-260), Gropşani (Popilian, Nica 1998, p. 43-95), Sprâncenata (Preda 1986), Spahii (Gherghe 1978, p. 15-31), Ocniţa (Berciu 1981) or in the Căscioarele area (Sîrbu et alii 1996), not to mention southern Transylvania, a region with many Dacian settlements and fortresses (Daicoviciu, Ferenczi, Glodariu 1989).
When the ethnic character of some archaeological discoveries from the area is analyzed, one must, first and foremost, take into account the archaeological material from other settlements, fortresses or cult sites because some categories of inventory from tombs, such as weapons, wearable items or prestige goods are “supranational”.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

The Society of the Living – the Community of the Dead
(from Neolithic to the Christian Era)
 Proceedings of the

7 th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology

Editorial board:

Editor: Sabin Adrian LUCA (Universitatea „Lucian Blaga” din Sibiu, România); Members: Paul NIEDERMAIER (membru corespondent al Academiei Române), (Universitatea „Lucian Blaga” din Sibiu, România); Dumitru PROTASE (membru de onoare al Academiei Române) (Universitatea „Babeş-Bolyai” Cluj-Napoca); Paolo BIAGI (Ca’Foscary University Venice, Italy); Martin WHITE (Sussex University, Brighton, United Kingdom); Michela SPATARO (University College London, United Kingdom); Zeno-Karl PINTER (Universitatea „Lucian Blaga” din Sibiu, România); Marin CÂRCIUMARU (Universitatea „Valahia” Târgovişte, România); Nicolae URSULESCU (Universitatea „Al. I. Cuza” Iaşi, România); Gheorghe LAZAROVICI (Universitatea „Eftimie Murgu” Reşiţa, România); Thomas NÄGLER (Universitatea „Lucian Blaga” din Sibiu, România); Secretaries:Ioan Marian ŢIPLIC (Universitatea „Lucian Blaga” din Sibiu, România); Silviu Istrate PURECE (Universitatea „Lucian Blaga” din Sibiu, România); Special number Editors: Sabin Adrian LUCA, Valeriu SÎRBU; Web editor: Cosmin Suciu
 
See 7 th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology

with pictures and abstracts
 Dacian settlements and necropolises in Southwestern Romania (2nd c. B.C.-1st c. A.D.)

Valeriu Sîrbu, Muzeul Brăilei, Brăila, România,

valeriu_sirbu@yahoo.co.uk

Margareta Arsenescu Universitatea Bucureşti, Bucureşti, România,

m_arsenescu@yahoo.com

The analysis of the relations between the “world of the living” and the “afterworld” in this region and period is extremely interesting, as it shows a series of original features: a) there are funerary vestiges only between 170/150 – 50 BC; after that period, they are lacking until the Roman conquest (106 AD), b) taking into consideration the funerary inventory, we could assign these vestiges to warriors, especially horsemen, as long as we have only a few pieces of information about the after-death treatment of the rest of population; c) the settlements and the fortresses continue their existence all along this period, which is after the graves become “invisible”. d) although funerary vestiges and settlements are known in the entire region, only in exceptional cases could the two be linked to one another.

That’s why we are going to speak first about the funerary discoveries and the settlements and, in the end, we’ll try to give an explanation. Our analyses will take into account only those elements of the vestiges useful to the topic of this colloquium.

 

The geographical area we are referring to includes the regions of Banat, Oltenia, West Walachia and southeastern Transylvania (Fig. 1); however, we’ll take into account the discoveries of other areas as well, namely southern and northern Danube, in order to make some analogies and comparisons.

The period under analyses is about three centuries (200 BC – 106 AD) long, when deep changes took place in the beliefs and the funerary practices of the Geto-Dacians (Sîrbu 1985, p. 89-126; 1993; 2002, p. 374-393; Babeş 1988, p. 3-32)

The analysis of the funerary vestiges from this time and place has generated different, sometimes even contradictory opinions, on their cultural or ethnic origin. They were attributed to the Celts ( Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947, p.17-33, Popescu 1963), Thracians (Nikolov 1990, p. 14-26) or to mixed communities of Dacians and Celts (Zirra 1971, p.234;1976, p. 181; Sîrbu 1993, p. 25) . The documentary background available at one point in time or the meddling of political and ideological factors in the interpretation of history for half a century account for some of this confusion.

The items found in Gruia allowed V. Pârvan (1924, p. 35-50) to analyze the pieces of information available from ancient historians on the developments in the Lower and Middle Danube area over the last three centuries before the pre-Christian area. V. Pârvan said in the published work on the vestiges identified at Gruia that the Celts were already present in the Middle Danube region, namely the area between Belgrade and Vidin, around the middle of the fourth century BC, which pushed the Thracians and Illyrians farther east ( Pârvan 1924, p. 43-46). V. Pârvan dated the tombs in Gruia to the middle of the 3rd century BC and believed he was dealing with Celts that Brennus left behind in Moesia to fight the Gets and Triballi, on the occasion of the Balkan expedition (278-277 BC). One should note that urn cremation tombs from the 4 th-5 th centuries BC were found in Gruia (Crăciunescu 1999, p.46).

The study by C.S. Nicolăescu-Plopşor, the one that brought to the archaeologists’ attention the vestiges from Oltenia, marked a fresh beginning in the investigations on the correct identification of items belonging to the collections of local museums (Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947, p.17-33) . He emphasized how the warrior tombs represented north-Danubian group that included Celtic-type items but also noted the presence of Thracian artifacts (curved daggers, bridle bits and hand-made vessels) (Fig. 2-4).

 

 

 

 Vlad Zirra made an essential contribution to the research on Celtic vestiges, as his study continues to be a basis for the typological-chronological analysis of La Tène items found in the Carpathian-Danubian space ( Zirra 1971, p. 171-238) .

Given the presence of many well-structured and dated settlements and necropolises present inside the Carpathian arc ( Zirra 1971, p. 171-238) , an increasingly interesting issue is the emergence of Celtic archaeological vestiges, but at a later date and south of the Carpathians, visibly concentrated in southwestern Romania.

The two categories of vestiges are not only in different areas and date back to different time periods, but also have different histories.

The presence of bracelets with Steckverschluss closing systems (Fântânele, Murgeni) or simple with bolded ends (Copşa Mică, Şeica, Archiud, Fântânele), of early Dux fibulae (Fântânele, Murgeni) stand proof of the presence of Celts here from as early as Lt. B1 – Lt. B2, namely from the last third of the 4 th century – beginning of 3 rd century BC (Zirra 1991, p. 177-184; Rustoiu 2005, p. 45-64).

The Celtic vestiges are concentrated in the Transylvanian plateau and plain, plus the upper Someş basin, whereas the surrounding valleys (Haţeg, Hunedoara, Făgăraş, Bârsa, Sf. Gheorghe and Ciuc) do not have any necropolises or settlements but only tombs or isolated items (Sîrbu 2006, fig. 1-2); on the other hand, these valleys, and then Banat and Maramureş, have included Dacian findings – true, just a few so far (Sîrbu 2006).

This suggest that the Celts occupied the territory between Mureş and Someş, west of the Apuseni Mountains, and the plains and plateau in the intra-Carpathian space, plus the valley in the upper basin of Someş (Zirra 1974, p. 138-164; Vaida 2004, p. 375-392; Voinescu 2001).

There are no findings of Celtic vestiges of this type in Transylvania after the 2 nd century BC (the lack of oppida centers is revealing to that end), but the causes of their disappearance are not yet clear. On the other hand, the Dacian findings in this area increase in number starting with the middle of the 2 nd century BC.

It is difficult to admit that the Dacians assimilated the Celts, since the Celtic vestiges preserve their characteristics until the end, and the inventory of the Dacian settlements and fortresses from the 2 nd – 1 st centuries BC shows decreasing Celtic influences. Perhaps, the Celts’ migration to the west followed both internal causes and the growing power of the Dacians. The advancement of the Dacian warrior from the southwestern Carpathians may have played a part here (Rustoiu 2002, p. 25-40), an issue that will be dealt with towards the end. It may also be that the Bastarns’ settling in north-central Moldova around 200 BC (Babeş 2001, p. 522-529) pushed the Dacians there towards Transylvania.

The documentation available at present allows one to date the Celtic findings to 330/220 – 170/160 BC, but the Celts may have stayed west of the Apuseni Mountains until the second half of the 2 nd century BC.

The specialized literature, from Zenon Woźniak’s work, still uses the concept of the “Padea –Panagjurski Kolonii group” to designate, from a cultural-archaeological point of view, the vestiges in Bulgaria (in particular the northwestern region), northwestern Serbia and southwestern Romania (Woźniak 1974). Some of the first discoveries of this type, found in the two eponymous localities - Panagjurište and Padea (V. Zirra 1971, p. 234, reference 303 and fig. 23/16, 18, 20, 22, 26, 29), point here to a cultural aspect of the second iron age in the region in question. Still, these are not among the most spectacular findings, such as the one in Panagjurište (Najdenova 1967, p. 70-74); Dimitrova, Gizdova 1974, p. 321-331; 1975, p. 39-87).

Funerary discoveries

Flat tombs. We are dealing with 40 discoveries with more than 90 confirmed tombs, most of them fortuitous, including a necropolis – Spahii, small groups of graves, such as Cetate (Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947 p. 19-20) or Cepari, Corlate (Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947, p. 22-23), Gruia (Pârvan 1924, p. 35-50; Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947, p. 26), Padea (Zirra 1971, p. 234, footnote 303), Chirnogi (Şerbănescu 2000, p. 34-35) isolated tombs or only isolated objects, mainly weapons (Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947, p. 17-33; Zirra 1971, p.222-228, Abb. 23; Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 77-91).

Sometimes, even systematic excavations (Rast) did not find any cremated bones but only inventory items (Tudor 1968, p. 517-526), meaning we could be dealing here with either cenotaphs or votive deposits.

A real necropolis was identified at Turburea-Spahii and Remetea Mare.

Salvage excavations in Turburea-Spahii (Gorj county) revealed some 30 flat cremation tombs, almost all of them in-pit cremation. Only one tomb is a case of urn cremation (M10) but there may have been others among those destroyed. Several item and glass items were published, which might be the inventory of 9 tombs: weaponry and harness gear (at least one LtD1 iron sword, spearheads, the blade of a curved knife, a LtD1 spur, a bridle bit, the fragments of a shield umbo (?), all of them iron, then some clothing accessories and jewelry (the extremities of a torques made of silver sheet, the fragment of a bronze fibulae, a white-yellowish glass pearl, a fragment from blue glass bracelet with a white zig-zag decoration and a fragment from a situla vessel. The area of the necropolis yielded several ceramic vessel fragments, most of them hand made (including the mug-urn), but also fragments of wheel-made pottery. The vestiges of the settlement were observed nearby, one contemporaneous with the necropolis, also destroyed by farming works. Some of the items from the inventory of the complexes were saved (Gherghe 1978, p. 15-31)

Salvage excavations in Chirnogi (Călăraşi county) found 6 flat in-pit cremation tombs, which stand proof of the existence of such vestiges significantly farther down the Danube. Two of the tombs, probably warrior tombs, were the sites of harness gear, pieces of a bronze helmet and an iron bracelet with three oves, while the other four tombs had only a wheel-made Dacian little mug, all of the same type, deposited on top of the bones (Şerbănescu 2000, p. 34-35)

In Remetea Mare (Timiş county), Florin Medeleţ researched a necropolis with 17 tombs (16 cremation, one inhumation) plus 3-4 destroyed tombs. Three or four were tombs of cremation in urns with lids, which were hand-made vessels that can be attributed to the Dacians, plus an inhumation tomb with an assortment of Illyric female items. We might be dealing with a community having a majority of Scordiscians, arrived here after the Balkan expedition but that did not last here long, because the inventory is from a narrow timeframe (about 270 – 240 BC) (as noted by the late colleague Florin Medeleţ and by Aurel Rustoiu).

Although this necropolis is from the same period as the Celtic vestiges from Transylvania and the western Apuseni Mountains, namely before the discoveries from the “Padea-Panaghiurski Kolonii” group in southwestern Romania, its presence in Banat and apparently belonging to the Scordiscians led us to believe it should be taken into account. Obviously, it is only after the findings here are published that we can compare them thoroughly with the vestiges in Transylvania and Oltenia.

 

Another representative item is the flat cremation tomb in Corcova (Mehedinţi county), the site of a gray wheel-made mug-urn and of a funerary inventory consisting of folded and burnt weapons (a long sword in its scabbard, a curved dagger in a decorated scabbard, a spearhead – all of them iron), a porringer and two La Tène C iron fibulae, highly deformed (Stîngă 1992, p. 154; Sîrbu, Rustoiu, Crăciunescu 1999, p. 217-229) (Fig. 6).

 

 

 

We will shortly introduce some of the characteristics of these findings.

Exterior shape – only flat graves.

Funerary rite - cremation exclusively.

Rituals. 80% of the discoveries revealed the in-pit cremation, while in a small number of cases they used urns (Padea, Corcova, Gruia, Spahii, Slatina); usually, a few cremated bones were deposited. The cremation of the dead took place elsewhere; only at Spahii we might have identified the pyre (Gherghe 1978, p.16-17), but it might also be the cremation of the offering since no human bones were found in the area .

Sometimes the pits, usually circular, were burnt, and the objects were passed through fire and folded, especially the weapons.

The recuperated funerary inventory consists mainly of weaponry, harness gear, then clothing accessories and jewelry, very seldom, pottery vessels (Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947, p. 17-33; Zirra 1971, p. 134-137; Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 77-91; Sîrbu, Rustoiu, Crăciunescu 1999, p. 217-229)(Fig. 2-4).

One often finds that the weapons, the large ones in particular (the sword, spearhead and shield), have been folded and placed on the pyre together with the dead. It remains to be seen the extent to which this part of the ritual can differentiate the Thracians from the Celts, given that this practice is also documented in late Halstatt necropolises (Vulpe 1967 pl. 20/4, 22/11, 16, 20/9).

The offensive weapons are the long swords (about 27 items in 21 localities), knives, spears (about 50 items in 27 localities) and curved daggers (about 22 items in 18 localities), while the shields make up the defensive ones (Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 80-81) (Fig. 2/1-12; 3/1-3, 5-8; 4/1, 3, 5).

As a rule, the harness gear consists of Thracian-type bridles, but there are other types too (Zirra 1981, p. 124-128; Werner 1988, p. 81-101) (Fig. 2/13; 3/4).

The jewelry and the clothing accessories, especially the fibulae, which are not that numerous or varied, are, for a change, important chronological guides because they date from the Lt. C2 – Lt. D (Popović 1991, p. 319-324; Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 82-84) (Fig. 4/4, 6-7).

The belts found at Corlatele (Fig. 4/11), the bronze and iron buckles (Babeş1983, p. 196-221), the beads and the glass bracelets form another category of objects.

There are not that many pottery vessels and they are all of Dacian origin, which could be explained either by their not being recuperated during the fortuitous discoveries, although their presence has been mentioned, or their looking less spectacular than the weapon gear. While one found in Oltenia either hand-made jars and typical Dacian jugs, or jugs and plates found also in Scordiscian territory (Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 84), all the Transylvanian vessels are hand-made and are characteristic of the Dacians, be they jars and jugs (Ciugudean 1980, p. 425-432; Moga 1982 p. 87-91).

Chronology. The analysis of the funerary inventory of all these discoveries shows their dating in the Lt. C2-D1, namely between 170/160 – 50 BC.

As in more than 70% of the discoveries, weaponry, military equipment and harness gear were found, we might assume they were warriors, mainly horsemen ( Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947, p.17-33 ; Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999, p. 88); unfortunately, a small number of cremated bones were recuperated and we have so far only three anthropological analyses, made by Alexandra Comşa, two from Blandiana and one from Tărtăria, consequently all we could do is to issue general considerations.

Tumular tombs. In the same region as the flat tombs, tumular graves have been unveiled - all of them cremation and belonging to adult males - in Oltenia, Poiana (Berciu 1934, p. 25; Vulpe 1976, p. 208), western Wallachia - Lăceni and Orbeasca de Sus (Moscalu 1977, p. 329-340) and southwestern Transylvania as well, Cugir (Crişan 1980, p. 81-87) (Fig. 6) and Călan (Rustoiu, Sîrbu, Ferencz 2001-2002, p. 111-127). The objects found inside the tumular tombs, similar to those of the flat ones, plus, sometimes, helmets and mail shirts, allow us to assume that they belonged to aristocrat horsemen (Vulpe 1976, p. 193-215; Babeş 1988, p.5-8; Sîrbu 1994, p. 83-121; Rustoiu 1994, p. 33-37). The pottery vessels are Dacian, but sometimes we found Hellenistic imports. Such tombs have also been unveiled in the rest of Wallachia and Moldavia and they date from the 1 st century BC in the south of the Carpathians and southwestern Transylvania and from the 1 st century AD in Moldavia (Vulpe 1976, p. 193-215; Babeş 1988, p.7; Sîrbu 1994, p.135). After assessing the situation of these tombs near the residential Dacian centers, the Dacian or Hellenistic origin of the pottery vessels and the majority of the metallic objects, we may conclude they buried there Dacian warrior aristocrats.

A large number of tumular tombs are concentrated south of the Danube in the same period. Often, they make up actual necropolises, such as in Altimir, Gorna Malina, Tărnava (Theodossiev, Torbov 1995, p. 11-58) or the ones around the city of Vraca (Theodossiev 2000)

The tradition of building tumuli is already recorded in the late bronze age and early iron age in the Thracian and Autariat inhabitation area (Theodossiev 2000, p. 26), but this type of funerary monument is no longer present in the Oriental Celtic world of the 3 rd-1 st centuries BC (Todorović 1968, p. 16-18), which suggests either that the tumuli may belong to the local populations – Thracian and Dacian, or that they adopted the practice from them.

“Non cremated human bones in non funerary contexts”.

Another interesting thing is the presence of “non cremated human bones in non funerary contexts” all over the excavated area. We are talking here about entire skeletons, parts of skeletons and isolated bones - of the skull or any other part of the body (Fig. 7). They have been unveiled in the settlements of Divici, Ostrovul Şimian, Celei, Ocnitsa; and we’ll add to all these the Orlea “field of pits” containing 23 individuals (Comşa 1972, p. 65-78). Similar findings are known all over the Geto-Dacians’ inhabitation area, being a characteristic of the “graveless period”, a situation that can be met in other cultural regions too.

They don’t belong to the category of common graves, as long as their features are obviously different: they are not found in necropolises, but inside the settlements, in isolated pits or cult places; there are no rules in the deposing and orientation, skeleton parts or isolated bones make up a large percentage of it, several entire skeletons are in abnormal positions or bearing traces of violence, there are a lot of children but no old people, and there are no traditional inventories (Sîrbu 1986, p. 91-108; 1993, p. 31-36, 86-100; 1997, p. 193-221; Babeş 1988, p. 13-16).

The recent discoveries in Hunedoara – Castle’s Garden show some unusual characteristics. We are dealing with only 24 inhumed deceased, comprising almost 36 individuals, with a number of unusual features: no graves were dug for the dead, instead the cavities present in stone were used, the dead are all children, there is no consistent manner of depositing or orienting the dead, most of them were deposed in one piece, but there are also skeletons that are missing parts or some are just skull or postcranial bones, the inventory consists mostly of clothing items and weapons and there is no pottery. Only three cremated deceased were found, all of them young, between 16 and 22 years old, one of them being a warrior; the findings date back to 40/50 – 106 BC. (Sîrbu, Luca, Roman, Purece 2005, p.18-19; more on this in the present volume).

The settlements and the fortresses  

Countless settlements, fortified or not, and fortresses, dating from the 4 th –3 rd centuries BC and the 2 nd century BC – 1 st century AD are present south of the Carpathians and north of the Iron Gates.

 

 

 As we are referring now only to the 2 nd century BC – 1 st century AD, allow us to recall some of them: Socol (excavations Caius Săcărin), Stenca Liubcovei, Divici (Gumă, Rustoiu, Săcărin 1997, p. 401-427)(Fig. 8), and Schela Cladovei (Boroneanţ, Davidescu 1968, p. 253-259), on the left bank of the Danube, north of the Iron Gates, Celei, Gropşani (Popilian, Nica 1998, p. 43-95), Sprâncenata (Preda 1986), Bâzdâna (Tătulea 1984, p. 92-110), Spahii (Gherghe 1978, p. 15-31) and Ocniţa (Berciu 1981) in Oltenia, Cugir (Crişan 1980, p. 8), Costeşti, Piatra Roşie (Daicoviciu 1954), Şeuşa (Ferencz, Ciută 2000, p. 22-29) and Lancrăm (Popa, Simina 2004)(Fig. 11), in southeastern Transylvania.

 

 

 

The inventory of these settlements is almost entirely Dacian, and the Celtic objects represent less than 0.5% (graphite vessels, jewelry, clothing accessories, especially fibulae). Certainly, Hellenistic and Roman imports have also been found in the sites, but they are not representative for our analysis, their importance is only chronological. Two exceptional objects, maybe of Celtic or Gallo-Roman origin are the mask of Ocniţa (Berciu 1981, p. 100-101) and the bust of Piatra Roşie (Daicoviciu 1954, p. 117-118, fig. 37-38).

 

 

Among these sites, we intend to introduce Ocniţa, with two cultural complexes: the underground chamber no. 2, which contains a rich and varied inventory - weaponry, harness gear, jewelry and clothing accessories, anthropomorphic figurines and pottery vessels, many of them painted (Berciu 1981, p. 80-96)(Fig. 10) and pit nr. 125, with 28 entire objects (rushlight cups, jars, shield umbo, dagger scabbard, fibula etc.) (Berciu, Iosifaru, Diaconescu 1993, p. 149-156)(Fig. 9). As one can see, only certain objects are similar to those discovered in graves (spear and arrow heads, bridle, shield umbo, fibula).

Special attention should be paid to the fortified settlements around the Scordiscian inhabitation area, such as the sites in Židovar and Mihailovac, fortified with a ditch and defense vallum. The archaeological inventory here, dating back to the 2 nd-1 st centuries BC (and, perhaps, 1 st century AD) is made up mostly of pottery, clothing accessories and jewelry (in particular fibulae), knives and harness gear, which have their counterparts in the region of the La Tène civilization. However, some of the items could be classified as being made in the La Tène fashion, but not characteristic to the Celtic civilization. Namely, the curved knives or LtD spurs are part of the items that the Celts borrowed from the inhabitation areas in the northern and northwestern Balkan Peninsula (Božič 1984, fig. 3)

It also worth noticing that the fortified settlements in Židovar and Mihailovac include quite a few Dacian vessels (about 10% of all the items in Židovar), probably because of the tight trade relations between the two peoples, as well as of a Dacian ethnic presence in the Scordiscian environment. The kinds of vessels characteristic of the Dacians and Scordiscians (Popović 2000, p.83-111) are different enough to be able to tell them apart in the sites in this region, meaning one could compile rather reliable statistics of their presence in the various types of discoveries. Southern Banat, right next to the Danube (Popović 1989-1990, p. 165-176), is an area rather consistent in cultural-archaeological terms, meaning Danube, around the Iron Gates, does not seem to have constituted a political border.

It is obvious that the fortified settlements in southern Romania are Dacian. Based on the documentation available, no positive cultural, archaeological or ethnic classification is possible for the fortified centers in northwestern Bulgaria. For the time being, no fortresses with the stone wall characteristic of the northern Dacian world have been called attention to, such as those in the Carpathian mountains (Glodariu 1983, p. 75-130; Antonescu 1984, p. 99-174), although some scholars do mention the presence of fortifications on mountaintops in northwestern Bulgaria (Theodossiev 2000). What the occurrence of objects also present in the Scordiscian La Tène area in this region points to is the existence of an active trading life in the Balkans, beyond the sometimes unstable borders of a number of political entities of late antiquity.

Final considerations

The studies made so far call for a analysis of the vestiges in two distinct parts: a) 170/160 – 50 BC, a period that includes many fortresses and settlements, as well as necropolises; b) 50 BC – 106 AD, with countless fortresses and necropolises, but none of the common funerary vestiges.

For the first period, the archaeological excavations attest one remarkable reality: the graves from a large area - northwestern Bulgaria, northeastern Serbia and southeastern Romania - show rather similar funerary inventories: long swords, battle knives, Celtic type belt chains, Dacian type daggers and bridles, plus spearheads and shields, in the so-called Padea – Panaghiurski Kolonii group.

Nevertheless, certain differences of zone exist. South of Danube, namely in northeastern Serbia, jewels and Scordiscian-type vessels are dominant, and in northwestern Bulgaria, the findings are either Thracian, Illyrian or Dacian. However, when it comes north of the river, most of the objects, pottery vessels in particular, are of Dacian origin.

However, the rites and the rituals are different. While in the south of Danube there are not that many tumular and flat inhumation graves altogether, there are only cremation flat graves associated with inventories of this type north of the river.

These findings show standardization of weapons (spear-sword-shield and, pretty often, knives, then bridles), in particular for the cavalry, which might indicate a collaboration between the Dacian, Scordiscian and Illyrian aristocracies of the region during their plundering expeditions to the South or fight against the Roman offensive in northern Balkans.

The archaeologists considered these graves belonged to mercenaries because such objects have also been found in areas farther away (the northern and western coasts of the Black Sea).

In order to establish the ethnical and cultural origins of the funerary vestiges, we have to take into consideration the settlements, fortresses and cult places of the region. On the northern bank of the Danube, mainly near the Iron gates, a series of cities and fortified settlements have been discovered (Socol, Divici, Stenca Liubcovei), which “fortified” the big river, and this means the masters of the place lived here.

A number of Dacian vessels have been found in Scordiscian fortified settlements (Mihailovic and Zidovar), sometimes in significant amounts (10% at Zidovar) (Gavela 1952). How can we explain their presence? Either through the commercial relations between the two peoples, or an effective Dacian presence in Scordiscian territory, in southern Banat, nears the Danube. In the Iron Gates zone, both banks of the Danube are similar as far as the archaeological remains are concerned, which might suggest the Danube was neither ethnically, nor politically, a frontier. It is obvious that the fortified settlements of the northwestern Bulgaria or southern Romania are not linked to the Scordiscian population. The presence of Scordiscian-type objects found also in La Tène area indicates nothing else but intense commercial exchanges in the Balkans, beyond the frontiers, unstable often, of certain political entities of the late Antiquity.

We must recall that the Scordiscian materials, Celtic, in general, are very rare in the northern Danube settlements, less than 0.5%

The presence of some tumular tombs, with a similar inventory as in the whole northern-Danube area, near the Dacian residential centers, demonstrates the existence of a local military aristocracy.

If we take into consideration the archaeological realities of the northern Danube, we could conclude that the remains should be attributed to the Dacians. There is no archaeological evidence to attest the existence of Scordiscian settlements and necropolises at north of Danube but, certainly, there might be some isolated Scordiscian tombs.

Illuminating to that end is the discovery in Veliki Vetren, on the Juhor Mountain in Serbia, were one found a chest containing some 14 sets of weapons, harness gear, jewelry and clothing accessories characteristic of knights, items of types usually found in the tombs of that period (Stojić 1999, p. 105-107). This discovery stands proof of the fact that such classes of items circulated wide areas and various peoples, and they cannot be used as final arguments in attributing vestiges from this area to certain ethnic or cultural groups.

Still, other historical realities are important in this respect: the Scordiscian power was destroyed by the Roman expansion by the end of the 2 nd – beginning of the 1 st century BC, while Dacian power increases significantly starting from the beginning of the 1 st century BC. Thus, it is difficult to accept the Scordiscian domination north of Danube, which is proved neither by written sources, nor by the archaeological vestiges. Moreover, there is archaeological evidence for the existence of powerful Dacian communities south of Danube, one of them in the region between Lom and Iskăr.

For example, an important cult place was revealed at Bagačina, consisting of several pits (the so-called “field of pits”), with abundant and varied votive deposits. The countless vases (jars, jugs, cups, kantharoi, in relief decorated bowls) are typical to the Dacian pottery of the 2 nd – 1 st century BC (Bonev, Alexandrov 1996, p. 39-41, fig. 8) (Fig.12).

 

 

The findings, some of them from earlier periods, attest the existence of powerful Dacian communities nearby. Unfortunately, very few settlements from the region have been excavated, which is why most of the vestiges are the result of fortuitous funerary discoveries.

The “fields of pits” containing deposits such as the one at Bagacina are attested in almost all the Geto-Dacians’ inhabitation area for this period (Sîrbu 1993, p. 96-100; 1997, p. 193-221).

Also important are the discoveries consisting of typical Dacian silverwork items, sometimes even in treasures, such as those in Galice (Fettich 1953, fig. 5-12) or Jakimovo (Milčev 1973, p. 1-14). We are dealing with stemmed cups, mastos vessels, figurative phalerae, fibulae with bulges or multi-spiral bracelets made of plates with zoomorphic extremities, all of them made of silver, sometimes gilded. Such items are characteristic of the north-Danubian Dacian elite, in particular the Transylvanian one.

All these types of sites (settlements, cult sites, some tombs, possible mountaintop fortifications) and artifacts (pottery, clothing accessories, several categories of weapons and harness gear, silverwork items) suggest that the 2 nd-1 st centuries northern Bulgaria could be classified as part of the “classic Geto-Dacian culture”.

The findings in the Iron Gates region stand proof of the existence, by 200 BC, of a warrior aristocracy, cavalry in particular, with standardized weaponry and equipment. By the middle of the 2 nd century BC, such findings appear in Oltenia and western Wallachia, and by the end of the same century, in southwestern Transylvania.

The tumular tombs in southwestern Romania, as well as in the rest of Wallachia date from the end of the 2 nd – beginning of the 1 st century BC. The inventory of the settlements and the funerary objects, in all these categories of graves, the pottery vessels in particular, indicate we are dealing with Dacians. Perhaps it is not fortuitous at all that most of the tombs with weapons are dated in the first half of the 1 st century BC, a period of Dacian expansion, mainly under Burebista’s reign (Crişan 1975).

The migration of these “southern warriors” to southeastern Transylvania could have caused the departure of the Celts. It is not by chance that the Geto-Dacians established in the region their political, military and religious center – at Grădiştea de Munte (Sarmizegetusa Regia) and built the most impressive fortification system in the autochthonous society (Glodariu et al. 1996).

The vestiges found in the settlements and the necropolises of this place and period are not relevant when we have to assess the relations between the “world of the living” and the “afterworld” or the “world of the dead”.

We have also have settlements and necropolises for the first period, 170/160 – 50 BC, but a number of other issues arise. Based on their content, we could say the warriors, horsemen in particular, were buried in these tombs, but what we don’t know is how they treated the other kinds of dead (common people, women, children, old people). Certain findings, such as those including buckles, are part of typically feminine objects. Only at Spahii could we state the association of the settlement with its own necropolis; as for the rest, we should be glad to note the existence, for the same place and time, of funerary vestiges together with settlements and fortresses. Due to the fact that warriors were buried in those graves, it is difficult to compare their inventory with the settlements’ because the outcome would be irrelevant: in the first case, it is an inventory that belonged to a single category (warriors), while in the second, it is an inventory necessary to all the community members.

Thus, we have the following evidence and reasons for assigning the flat funerary remains to the Dacians and not to the Scordiscians: all the cities, settlements and tumular graves in the northern Danube are Dacian, some of their objects, especially the vessels, are typically Dacian, while a series of offensive and defensive weaponry represent standardized battle sets, common on a geographical area much larger and including different populations.

b) The situation becomes more serious in the last century and a half previous to the Roman conquest, a period with lots of fortresses and settlements, but no funerary vestiges. The lack of tombs is a common phenomenon all over the Geto-Dacian inhabitation area (as in certain zones of the Celts), and it could not be explained either by the lack of researches or by Herodotus’ (IV, 94) statement about Thracians knowing how to become immortal!

  

Bibliography

 

Antonescu 1984 : ANTONESCU (I.).- Introducere în arhitectura dacilor , Editura Tehnică, Bucureşti.

Babeş 1983 : BABEŞ (M.).- Paftalele Latène târzii din sud-estul Europei, SCIVA 34, 3, Bucureşti, p. 196-221

Babeş 1988: BABEŞ (M.).- Descoperirile funerare şi semnificaţia lor în contextul culturii geto-dace clasice, SCIVA 39, 1, 1988, p. 3-32.

Babeş 2001 : BABEŞ (M.).- Spaţiul carpato-dunărean în sec. III-II a. Chr. In: Istoria României, I. Editura Enciclopedică, Bucureşti, p. 511-528.

Berciu 1934 : BERCIU (D.). - Materiale pentru preistoria Olteniei, Craiova, 1934.

Berciu 1981: BERCIU (D.). - Buridava dacicăI, Editura Academiei R. S. R., Bucureşti, 1981.

Berciu, D., Iosifaru, M., Diaconescu, M., 1993 .- Descoperiri şi însemnări de la Buridava dacică, Thraco-Dacica XIV, 149-156.

Bonev, Alexandrov 1996: Bonev (Al. G.), Alexandrov (G.) .- Bagačina. Selišče ot kăsnata, kamenno - medna epoha i trakijski kultov centăr (III - I hiljadoletie pr. Xp.), Montana, 2000.

Boroneanţ, Davidescu 1968 : BORONEANŢ (V.), DAVIDESCU (M.).- Două bordeie dacice de la Schela Cladovei, Turnu Severin, Apulum VII/1, 1968, p. 253-260.

Božič 1984 : BOŽIC, D.- O starosti konjeniškega groba št. 16 z latenskega grobišča na beograjski Karaburmi (About the dating of the horseman's grave 16 from Karaburma in Belgrade), Keltski Voz (M. Guštin, L. Pauli eds.), Brežice, p. 133-139

Ciugudean 1980 : CIUGUDEAN (H.).- Mormântul tracic de la Blandiana , ActaMN XVIII, 1980, p. 425-432.

C omşa 1972  : Comşa (E.).- Contribuţie la riturile funerare din secolele II–I î.e.n. din sud-estul Olteniei (Mormintele de la Orlea), Apulum 10, 65-78.

Crăciunescu 1999 : CRĂCIUNESCU (I.).- Découvertes de l’âge du Fer dans le Sud-Ouest de l’Olténie. In : Le Djerdap/Les Portes de Fer à la deuxième moitié du premier millénaire av. J.-C. jusqu’aux guerres daciques, Kolloquium in Kladovo-Drobeta-Turnu Severin (September-October 1998), Beograd, 1999, p. 41-46.

Crişan 1975 : CRIŞAN (I. H.).- Burebista şi epoca sa, Editura Enciclopedică Română, Bucureşti, 1975.

Crişan 1980 : CRIŞAN (I. H.). - Necropola dacică de la Cugir, Apulum XVIII, 1980, p. 81-87.

Daicoviciu 1954  : DAICOVICIU (C.).- Cetatea dacică de la Piatra Roşie , Editura Academiei R. P. R., Bucureşti, 1954.

Dimitrova, Gizdova 1974 : DIMITROVA, (A.), GIZDOVA, (N.).- Der Charakter der Thrakischen Kultur Während der Jungeren Vorrömischen Eisenzeit in dem Gebiet des Sredna-Gora-Gebirges, Thracia III, Serdicae, p. 321-331

Dimitrova, Gizdova 1975 : DIMITROVA, (A.), GIZDOVA, (N.).- Trakijski mogilni nekropoli v Panagjuriskite Kolonii pri gr. Panagjurište (Thracian Hillock Necropolises in the Panagyurishte Camps at the Town of Panagyurishte , Izvestija na Muzeite ot Bălgarija IV, p. 39-87

Ferencz, Ciută 2000 : FERENCZ (I.V.), CIUTĂ (M.).- Finds from Şeuşa (Alba county) belonging to middle Latène. In: Les Celtes et les Thraco-Daces de l’est du bassin des Carpates, Accent, Cluj-Napoca, p. 22-29.

Fettich 1953 : FETTICH, (N.).- Beiträge zur Geschichte der sarmatisch-dakischen Beziehungen, ActaArchHung III, p. 127-178.

Gavela 1952 : GAVELA (B.).- Oppidum Židovar. Prilog kulturnoj istoriji nase zemlje protoistoriskog doba (L’oppidum celtique Židovar. Sur le protohistorique yugoslave), Beograd.

Gherghe 1978 : GHERGHE (P.).- Cercetările arheologice de salvare efectuate în necropola şi aşezarea geto-dacică de la Turburea-Spahii, Litua I, 1978, p. 15-31.

Glodariu 1983 : GLODARIU (I.).- Arhitectura dacilor. Civilă şi militară (sec. II î. e. n. –I e. n.), Cluj-Napoca.

Glodariu et al. 1996  : GLODARIU (I.), IAROSLAVSCHI (E.), RUSU-PESCARU (A.), STĂNESCU (F.). - Sarmizegetusa Regia, capitala Daciei preromane, Deva.

Gumă, Rustoiu, Săcărin 1997 : GUMĂ (M.), RUSTOIU (A.), SĂCĂRIN (C.).- Raport preliminar asupra cercetărilor arheologice efectuate în cetatea dacică de la Divici între anii 1988-1994 , CAANT I, p. 401-426

Milčev 1973: MILČEV (A.).- Novootkrito sreb’rno trakijsko săkrovišče ot s. Jakimovo III, Mihajlovgradskogo , ArheologijaSofija XV, 1, p. 1-14.

Moga 1982 : MOGA (V.). - Mormintele dacice de incineraţie de la Teleac, Apulum XX, 1982, p. 87-91.

Moscalu 1977 : MOSCALU (E.).- Sur les rites funéraires des Géto-Daces de la Plaine du Danube, Dacia N. S. XXI, 1977, p. 32-340.

Najdenova 1967 : NAJDENOVA (V.).- XII Otčetna arheologičeska konferencija, ArheologijaSofija 9, 3, Sofia, p. 70-74

Nicolăescu-Plopşor 1945-1947 : NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR (C.S.). – Antiquités celtiques d’Olténie, Dacia XI-XII, 1945-1947 (1948), p. 17-33.

Nikolov 1990 : NIKOLOV (B.).- Trakijski nahodniki ot Severozapadna Bălgaria, ArheologijaSofija, XXXII, 4, p. 14-26.

Pârvan 1924 : PÂRVAN (V.).- Considération sur les sépultures celtiques de Gruia , Dacia I, 1924, p. 35-50.

Popa, Simina 2004 : POPA (I. P.), SIMINA (N.-M.).- Cercetări arheologice la Lancrăm-Glod, Alba Iulia, 2004.

Popescu 1963 : POPESCU (D.).- Două descoperiri celtice din Oltenia, SCIV 14, 2, p. 403-412.

Popilian, Nica 1998: POPILIAN, (GH.), NICA, (M.).- Gropşani. Monografie arheologică , Bucureşti.

Popović 1989-1990 : POPOVIĆ (P.). - The Late Iron Age on the Territory of Djerdap, Starinar XL-XLI, 1989-1990, p. 165-176.

Popović 1991 : POPOVIĆ (P.). - „Orlea-Maglavit” Fibula Types, Zbornik Narodnog Muzeja – Beograd, 14.1, p. 319-324.

Popović 2000 : POPOVIĆ (P.). - La céramique de La Tène finale sur le territoire des Scordisces (Ier siècle av. n. è – Ier siècle de n. è), Starinar L 2000 (2001), p. 83-111.

Preda 1986 : PREDA (C).- Geto-dacii din bazinul inferior al Oltului. Dava de la Sprîncenata , Bucureşti, 1986.

Rustoiu 1994 : RUSTOIU (A.). - Observaţii privind înmormântările tumulare din Dacia preromană. In: Studii de istorie a Transilvaniei, Cluj-Napoca, 1994, p. 33-37.

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

Rustoiu 2005 : RUSTOIU (A.).- Repere arheologice şi istorice privind începutul colonizării celtice a spaţiului intra-carpatic, Istros XII, p. 45-64.

Rustoiu, Sîrbu, Ferenczi 2001-2002 : RUSTOIU (A.), SÎRBU (V.), FERENCZ (Al. I.).- Mormântul tumular dacic de la Călan (jud. Hunedoara), Sargetia XXX, p. 111-127.

Sîrbu 1985  : SÎRBU (V.).- V. Sîrbu, Ritualuri şi practici funerare la geto-daci în secolele II î.e.n.-I e.n., Istros 4, p.89-126.

Sîrbu 1986 : SÎRBU, (V.).- Rituels et pratiques funéraires des Géto-Daces (II e siècle av.n.è.-I er siècle de n.è.), Dacia, N.S. 30, 1-2, p.91-108.

Sîrbu 1993  : SÎRBU (V.).- Credinţe şi practici funerare, religioase şi magice în lumea geto dacilor , Brăila-Galaţi, 1993.

Sîrbu 1994 : SÎRBU (V.).- Mormintele tumulare din zona carpato-dunăreană (sec.I î. Chr.-I d. Chr.), Istros VII, 1994, p.123-160.

Sîrbu 1977  : SÎRBU (V.).- Sacrifices humains et pratiques funéraires insolites dans l’aréal thrace du Hallstatt et du La Téne . In: Actes du Colloque International « Premier âge du Fer aux bouches du Danube et dans les régions autour de la Mer Noire », Tulcea, 1993 (1997), p.193-221, 295-296.

Sîrbu 2002: SÎRBU (V.).- Funeral and Sacrificial Beliefs and Practices with the Geto-Dacians (5 th c. BC – 1 st c. AD) . In: Sbornic v čest na Prof. Margarita Tačeva, Sofia, 2002, p. 374-393.

Sîrbu 2004 : SÎRBU (V.).- Les Thraces entre les Carpates, les Balkans et la Mer Noire ( V e s. av. J. - C. – I er s. apr. J.-C.). Quatre conférences données à la Sorbonne, Editura Istros, Brăila.

Sîrbu 2006 : SÎRBU (V.).- Dacii şi celţii din Transilvania şi vestul României (in press, the volume dedicated to Prof. Dumitru Protase).

Sîrbu, Rustoiu, Crăciunescu 1999 : SÎRBU (V.), RUSTOIU (A.), CRĂCIUNESCU (G.). - Descoperiri funerare din La Tène-ul târziu din zona Porţilor de Fier, Thraco - Dacica XX, p. 217-229.

Sîrbu, Rustoiu 1999 : SÎRBU (V.), RUSTOIU (A.).- Découvertes funéraires géto – daces du sud – ouest de la Roumanie (±150 - ±50 av. J.- C.) . In : Le Djerdap/Les Portes de Fer à la deuxième moitié du premier millénaire av. J.-C. jusqu’aux guerres daciques. Kolloquium in Kladovo-Drobeta-Turnu Severin (September-October 1998), Beograd, 1999, p.77-91.

Sîrbu, Luca, Roman, Purece 2005 : SÎRBU, (V.), LUCA, (S.A.), ROMAN, (C.), PURECE, (S.).-The Dacian settlement and children necropolis of Hunedoara, a unique discovery in the Dacian world. Archaeological approach. In: Abstracts, Sibiu, p. 18-19.

Stîngă 1992  : STÎNGĂ (I.).- Découvertes archéologiques inédites appartenant à l'époque Latène dans le département de Mehedinţi, Symposia Thracologica nr. 9, Bucureşti, 1992, p. 151-154.

Stojić 1999 : STOJIĆ, (M.).- Le dépôt de parures, d’armes et de pièces de harnais du site de Veliki Vetren dans le massif du Juhor . In Le Djerdap/Les Portes de Fer à la deuxième moitié du premier millénaire av.J.-C. jusqu’aux guerres daciques, Kolloquium in Kladovo-Drobeta-Turnu Severin (September-October 1998), Beograd, p. 105-107*.

Şerbănescu 2000 : ŞERBĂNESCU (D.).- Contribuţii arheologice la civilizaţia geto-dacilor din centrul Cîmpiei Romîne. Rezumatul Tezei de doctorat, Bucureşti.

Tătulea 1984 : TĂTULEA (C. M.).- Aşezarea geto-dacică fortificată de la Bâzdâna, Thraco-Dacica V, 1984, p. 92-110.

Theodossiev 2000 : THEODOSIEV (N.).- Northwestern Thrace from the Fifth to First Centuries BC, BAR 859, Oxford.

Theodosiev, Torbov 1995 : THEODOSIEV (N.), TORBOV (N.). - Trakijski moghili ot kăsnoelenističeskata epoha pri Tărnava, Izvestija na muzeite v Severnozapadna Bălgaria 23, p. 11-58.

Todorović 1968: TODOROVIĆ, (J.) Kelti u jugostocnoj Evropi (Die Kelten in Sűd-Ost Europa), Beograd.

Tudor 1968 : TUDOR (E.). – Morminte de luptători din a doua epocă a fierului descoperite la Rastu, SCIV 19, 3, 1968, p. 517-526.

Vaïda 2004 : VAÏDA (L.). - Cimitirele celtice din nord-vestul Transilvaniei, Arhiva Someşană III, 2004, p. 375-392.

Voinescu 2001 : VOINESCU (L.).- Repertoriul descoperirilor de tip Latène din Transilvania, Banat şi Crişana (sec. IV –II a. Chr). Teză de licenţă, Universitatea Bucureşti, Bucureşti.

Vulpe 1967 : VULPE, (AL.).- Necropola hallstattiană de la Ferigile , Bucureşti.

Vulpe 1976 : VULPE (Al.). – La nécropole tumulaire gète de Popeşti, Thraco-Dacica I, p. 193-211.

Werner 1988 : WERNER (W. M.). - Eisenzeitliche Trensen an der unteren und mitleren Donau. PBF XV/4, Munchen, p. 81-101.

Wozniak 1974 : WOZNIAK (Z.).- Wschodnie pogranicze kultury Latenskiej. Wroklaw-Warszawa-Krakow-Gdansk.

Zirra 1971 : ZIRRA (Vl.). - Beitrage zur Kentnnis der Keltischen Latene in Rumanien, Dacia N. S. XV, p. 171-238.

Zirra 1974: ZIRRA (Vl.). -Descoperiri celtice în depresiunea Bistriţei, File de istorie 3, p. 138-164.

Zirra 1976 : ZIRRA (Vl.). - Le problème des Celtes dans l’espace du Bas-Danube. Thraco-Dacica I, p.175-182.

Zirra 1981 : ZIRRA (Vl.). - Latènezeitliche Trensen in Rumänien. Hamburger Beiträge zur Archäologie, 8, p. 124-128.

Zirra 1991 : ZIRRA (Vl. V.). - Les plus anciennes fibules laténiennes en Roumanie. Dacia, N. S. XXXV, p. 177-184.

 

ABREVIATIONS 
 

ActaArchHung = Acta Archaeologica Hungarica, Budapest

ActaMN = Acta Musei Napocensis, Muzeul Naţional de Istorie al Transilvaniei, Cluj-Napoca.

Apulum = Apulum. Acta Musei Apulensis, Alba-Iulia.

ArheologijaSofia = Arheologija na muzeite i institut arheologij, Sofia

Arhiva Someşană = Arhiva Someşană, Muzeul Grăniceresc Năsăudean, Năsăud.

BAR = British Archaeological Reports, Oxford

CAANT = Cercetări arheologice în aria nord-tracă, Bucureşti

Dacia, (N.S). = Dacia. (Nouvelle Série). Revue d'archéologie et d'histoire ancienne, Bucarest.

File de istorie = File de istorie, Muzeul judeţean Bistriţa, Bistriţa-Năsăud

Istros = Istros. Muzeul Brăilei, Brăila.

Litua = Litua, Muzeul Judeţean Gorj, Târgu-Jiu

PBF = Prähistorische Bronzefunde, München

Sargetia = Sargetia. Acta Musei Devensis, Deva.

SCIV(A) = Studii şi Cercetări de Istorie Veche (şi Arheologie). Institutul de Arheologie "V. Pârvan", Bucureşti.

Starinar = Starinar. Institut Archéologique. Beograd

SympThrac = Symposia Thracologica. Institutul Român de Tracologie, Bucureşti

Thracia = Thracia, Institute of Thracology, Sofia

Thraco-Dacica = Thraco-Dacica. Institutul Român de Tracologie, Bucureşti

Ziridava = Ziridava. Muzeul judeţean Arad

Geto-Dacian Tombs South of the Danube

 

Thracian tomb with half-tubular vault arch was found by archaeologists at Zarevo municipality.
Director of the studies Daniela Agre announced that this is the first tumulus from this type that is found in Strandja mountain. “This is probably tomb of local possessor who ruled South-Eastern Thracia” adds Daniela Agre. The tumulus has been constructed by ductile limestone, unfortunately demolished by treasure-hunters. Part of the tomb is not affected, there were found amphoras, glue Thrace ceramic and walled grave of white limestone, was confirmed lately front of the BTA.

The Archaeologists supposes that this find is from about 370-360 BC. As Daniela Agre told earlier, this find is familiar to the Thrace tumulus at Sboryanovo

, which is under the protection of UNESKO.



Dacian Doctors

 

 

Despre medicina dacilor dialogurile lui Socrate cu Charmides 

 

 

 

 

Thracian-Dacian Wine

  Wine

Istoria cultivarii vitei de vie pe teritoriul Romaniei este intr-o stransa interdependenta cu istoria poporului roman, care, din cele mai vechi timpuri, incepand cu stramosii sai geto-daci, s–a ocupat permanent de aceasta cultura, viticultura constituind deci unul din argumentele continuitatii de locuire a poporului roman in spatiul carpato-danubiano-pontic.

         Vechimea acestei indeletniciri pe teritoriul Romaniei se pierde in negura vremurilor, vita salbatica (Vitis vinifera silvestris) fiind existenta si astazi pe aceste meleaguri. Cercetarile academicianului Emil Pop, mare botanist roman, au dus la descoperirea pe teritoriul Romaniei a peste 300 de localitati unde vita de vie se gaseste sub forma salbatica, fapt pentru care se poate afirma ca pe acest teritoriu vita de vie din cultura (Vitis vinifera sativa) s-a gasit, de la inceput, la ea acasa.

         Aceasta constatare confirma ideea savantului german A. Griesbach, exprimata inca din secolul trecut in lucrarea sa Die Vegetation der Erde nach ihrer klimatischen Ordnung (Leipzig, 1872), conform careia „patria vitei de vie trebuie cautata in tinuturile paduroase ale Pontului si ale Traciei, pana dincoace de Dunare, tinuturi bogate in liane“. De aceea, nu gresim cand spunem ca teritoriul in care s-a dezvoltat mai intai viticultura in aceasta parte a Europei este Tracia, de unde apoi s-a raspandit in Grecia continentala si in Europa Centrala.

         „Patria cea veche a Geto-Dacilor, Tracia - scrie istoricul roman A.D. Xenopol - era o regiune viticola, cauza pentru care si era considerata ca locul de nastere a zeului vinului, Dionysos.“

         O afirmatie similara a fost facuta, la inceputul secolului trecut (1908), de catre istoricul francez Raymond Billiard, care scrie: „Dintre toate partile Europei, Tracia a fost, poate, cea mai veche si cea mai respectata pentru vinurile sale si aceea care si-a pastrat mai mult timp prestigiul“.

         Interesante sunt si precizarile profesorului roman I.C. Teodorescu: „Vita de vie s-a aflat la ea acasa in regiunile carpatice, nu numai in forma ei salbatica, obisnuita, ci chiar intr-una evoluata, din care se trage vita nobila de astazi... Geto-Dacii au dezvoltat in mod deosebit aceasta cultura pe ambele versante ale Carpatilor... Cultura vitei de vie este deci de origine pur locala in regiunea Carpatilor. Ea s-a dezvoltat gratie existentei in stare naturala a vitelor in zona din apropierea Dunarii si a Marii Negre“.

         Numeroasele descoperiri arheologice, intre care si cele de la Cetatenii din Vale, Fitionesti, Frumusica, Histria, Mangalia, Piscul Crasani, Popesti, Sancraieni, Teiu, Urechesti, Candesti, Zimnicea etc. atesta cultivarea vitei de vie pe teritoriul Romaniei din vremuri stravechi, urmele activitatii viticole aparand chiar din neolitic.

         Herodot (484-425 i.e.n.) a descris multe obiceiuri ale locuitorilor din tinuturile Marii Negre, printre care folosirea vinului in anumite ritualuri, iar exceptionalele vase de tip rhyton, din argint sau sculptate in os, demonstreaza existenta unui ceremonial fastuos si a unui ritual in legatura cu vinul. Asa, de pilda, rhytonul de la Poroina Mare, judetul Mehedinti, reprezinta zeite sau preotese ce tin in mainile lor un rhyton si o fiala (vas de libatie).

         „Tracii beau vin neamestecat deloc (cu apa - n.n.)... si il imprastie pe hainele lor, socotind ca este o deprindere frumoasa si aducatoare de fericire“ - scria Platon (427-347 i.e.n.) intr-unul din Dialogurile sale, descriind un ritual sau un ceremonial.

         Descoperirile arheologice, precum si mentionarile documentare dovedesc deci prezenta din cele mai indepartate timpuri a unei intense preocupari vitivinicole pe aceste meleaguri unde se gasea, implicit, o populatie stabila, geto-dacii, cu continuitate de locuire in masura sa aiba asemenea indeletniciri. Istoricul roman de origine greaca, Diodor din Sicilia (90 - 20 i.e.n.), referindu-se la ospatul dat de Dromichete, conducatorul unei uniuni de triburi geto-dacice, in cinstea prizonierului sau, generalul macedonean Lisimah (anul 292 i.e.n.), arata ca macedonenilor li s-a turnat vin in cupe de argint si aur. Asemenea cupe au fost descoperite in tezaurele de la Sancraieni din judetul Harghita, Muncelul de Sus din judetul Iasi si in numeroase alte locuri, iar una din scenele finale ale Columnei imparatului Traian din Roma infatiseaza o imensa prada de razboi, intre care cupe si vase de argint si aur, despre a caror capturare consemna si Criton, medicul personal al imparatului in timpul campaniilor dacice.

         Mentionam si faptul ca olarii autohtoni au confectionat amfore de tip local, asemanatoare, ca forma si calitate, cu amforele grecesti, cum sunt cele descoperite la Zimnicea, Stoenesti, Popesti si Candesti.

         Dupa cum mentioneaza Strabon, in lucrarea Geografia, in timpul regelui geto-dac Burebista (82-44 i.H.), viticultura in Dacia a capatat o asemenea dezvoltare incat s-a ordonat distrugerea plantatiilor. Masura preconizata de Burebista, la indemnul sfetnicului sau Deceneu, nu s-a implinit, cateva decenii mai tarziu cultura acestei plante cunoscand din nou o larga raspandire.

         Exilat la Tomis de imparatul Octavianus Augustus, poetul Ovidiu (43 i.H - 17 d.H.) descria in Tristele si Ponticele sale viata localnicilor geti, amintind atat „toamna... manjita de mustul de struguri“, cat si iernile geroase, incat „...ingheata vinul/de-l scoti in bolovani pastrand figura oalei/ si-n loc de a soarbe spuma, mananci bucati de vin“.

         Din aceasta perioada au ramas in limba romana, ca o alta dovada a continuitatii, cuvintele de origine daca: strugure, butuc, curpen - termeni caracteristici activitatii viticole, iar o seama de obiecte identificate pe cale arheologica se leaga, de buna seama, de cultivarea vitei de vie. Intre ele, cutitul curbat - cosorul - si butoaiele de vin, despre care si istoricul Vasile Parvan consemna in Getica. O protoistorie a Daciei: „In ceea ce priveste cosoarele de vie si de lucru, cu lama dreapta si numai cu varful... recurbat si subtire... le gasim, poate, e drept, intr-o forma deosebita (oricum mult stilizata) in reprezentarile de la Columna Traiana...“. In alta parte a aceleiasi lucrari, scrie: „Tot de lemn, asa cum sunt butoaiele reprezentate pe Columna lui Traian, erau desigur si vasele mai mari intrebuintate de Geti pentru tinutul lichidelor: apa, vin, ulei“.

         In timpul stapanirii romane asupra provinciei Dacia, cultivarea vitei de vie a continuat cu aceeasi mare intensitate. Astfel, medalia Dacia Felix - al carei original se pastreaza la British Museum -, emisa in anul 112 de imparatul Traian, poarta ca emblema o femeie asezata pe o stanca, pe ai carei genunchi doi copii prezinta un spic de grau si un strugure, simbolul principalelor bogatii ale Daciei.

         Aceleasi reprezentari (spicele de grau si ciorchinii de struguri) apar si pe emisiunea monetara a imparatului roman Decius (249–251). Un alt exemplu este si consemnarea referitoare la decurionul coloniei romane din Napoca, Aurelianus Marcianus, care aduce omagii lui Liber Pater, o zeitate populara a viilor.

         Romanii au cautat sa mareasca suprafetele cultivate cu vita de vie pe teritoriul Daciei si sa introduca noi soiuri si unelte mai perfectionate, ca vasele (calcatoare) din trunchiuri de lemn pentru calcatul strugurilor si teascurile de mare capacitate cu barna orizontala si surub. Dar exemplele cele mai convingatoare ale raspandirii acestei indeletniciri ni le ofera documentele (inscriptiile, tablitele cerate) si reprezentarile artistice de pe stelele funerare. Un oarecare din Sucidava (Celei) lasa peste 1 ha de vie pentru ingrijirea mormantului sau, iar sarcofagul lui Aelius Iulianus este asezat intre „stufarisuri de vita“. Pe un fragment de basorelief de la Bucovicior-Dolj este reprezentat Silvanus (o zeitate a vegetatiei) tinand in mana un cosor dacic, iar pe stelele funerare de la Sucidava si Romula apar vita de vie si strugurii. Multi termeni proveniti din limba latina legati de cultura vitei de vie si de prepararea vinului din aceasta perioada intra in vocabularul limbii romane: vie (vinea), vin (vinum), vita (vitea), must (mustum), coarda (chorda), cep (cippus).

         Cultivarea vitei de vie pe pamantul Romaniei a continuat sa fie practicata de catre populatia daco-romana si dupa retragerea armatei si administratiei romane, in vremea lui Aurelian (271-275). Vasile Parvan mentioneaza ca si in epoca migratiilor (sec. III-XIII) un rol principal in activitatea localnicilor de aici l-a avut viticultura: „In tot acest timp, viticultura a devenit principala ocupatie, constituind fundamentul insusi al existentei Daco-Romanilor in regiunile carpatice“.

         Continuitatea acestei indeletniciri in perioada migratiilor este confirmata de descoperirile arheologice. La Padureni-Marasesti a fost descoperit, alaturi de alte vestigii, un fragment ceramic apartinand unei baze de vas din secolul al III-lea e.n., ce avea ca ornament doi struguri stilizati. La simleul Silvaniei, a fost gasit un colier dublu de aur, ce dateaza de la mijlocul secolului al IV-lea e.n, avand insirate pe el o seama de pandative, intre care un cosor si o foarfeca, precum si cinci frunze de vita stilizate, iar la Jaristea s-a gasit un cosor din fier din secolul al XI-lea. Si in alte parti ale Romaniei, la Constanta, Cosna-Floreni, Sarbi-Tifesti etc., s-au descoperit obiecte specifice culturii vitei de vie ce se incadreaza cronologic in secolele III-XIII, epoca migratiilor.

         Cronicarul bizantin Priscus din Panion, cu ocazia trimiterii in solie la capetenia Hunilor, Attila (449), si mai tarziu canonicul Rogerius (1241), referindu-se la marea invazie a mongolilor, aratau ca popoarele migratoare au intalnit in acest spatiu carpato-danubiano-pontic intinse plantatii de vii, precum si o populatie numeroasa (daco-romanii n.n), care se indeletnicea cu viticultura.

         Una din cele mai puternice dovezi despre nivelul ridicat al viticulturii de pe teritoriul actual al Romaniei este faptul ca in perioada de cristalizare a relatiilor feudale, numeroase documente ale timpului fac mentiuni despre viticultori (vinitores) si pivnicieri (pivcenarii), acestia fiind considerati ca o categorie superioara de agricultori, un fel de specialisti in cultura vitei de vie si in mestesugul prepararii vinului. Desigur, aceste categorii de specialisti nu ar fi existat daca nu ar fi fost o continuitate, atat de cultivare a vitei vie, cat si de locuire a populatiei autohtone.

         „Cand Ungurii au cucerit acest pamant - scria Herczeg Mihály in Istoria viticulturii ungare (Budapesta, 1896 - referindu-se la Transilvania n.a.), ...s-au folosit de tot ce au aflat acolo“. Era firesc sa nu schimbe metodele agricole si nici metoda viniculturii, iar Kazal Zsigmond, la randul sau, folosindu-se de informatii cronistice de la inceputul primului mileniu, scria:  „Nu putem presupune ca viticultura deja dezvoltata sa fi incetat in epoca de migratie a popoarelor“. El arata ca in anul 1051, regele Andrei al Ungariei i-a trimis imparatului Henric al III-lea, in dar, „o foarte mare cantitate de vin“, ce nu putea proveni decat din podgoriilor autohtone, deci ale romanilor. Permanenta culturii vitei de vie, atestata si confirmata de numeroase izvoare istorice si descoperiri arheologice, e o dovada cat se poate de convingatoare a faptului ca si in Transilvania triburile migratoare au gasit o populatie romanesca densa si stabila.

         Arta prepararii vinurilor, transmisa si imbunatatita din generatie in generatie - pe care numai o continuitate de locuire si de preocupari o putea realiza - a ajuns la un asemenea nivel, incat inca din primele secole ale celui de al doilea mileniu vinurile romanesti erau printre cele mai apreciate din Europa.

         Pietro Molmenti, in lucrarea sa La vie privé à Venise depuis les premiers temps jusqu’à la chute de la République, arata ca pe la anul 1173 vinurile obtinute pe teritoriul romanesc se bucurau de un atat de mare renume incat au fost exceptate la stabilirea preturilor maximale. Acelasi autor mai arata ca in anul 1293 s-au construit in arsenalul Venetiei 15 galere pentru transportul vinurilor din tinutul carpatin. Putem cita si alte aprecieri facute asupra calitatii vinurilor romanesti si a plantatiilor viticole existente. Medicul italian Matteo Mauriano, venit pentru a-l ingriji pe Stefan cel Mare, scrie in Raport din Moldova, redactat si adresat in 1502 catre dogele Venetiei, ca in Moldova se obtin „vinuri de felul acelora din Friul“. Georg Reichersdorffer, consilier al imparatului Ferdinand I de Habsburg, nota in lucrarea Chorographia Moldovei, alcatuita pe la mijlocul secolului al XVI–lea, ca aici „nimic nu lipseste din cele ce ar putea fi de folos oamenilor“, tara fiind bogata „in locuri de aratura, vii si vite“, iar in Chorographia Transilvaniei, scrie, printre altele, ca „locuitorii sunt foarte bogati in turme, vite de tras si in folosinta pamanturilor, ca sa nu mai spun cat e de productiva regiunea in vinul cel mai bun“.

         Cronicarul maghiar Anton Verancsics (1504-1573) confirma, in lucrarea Descrierea Trasilvaniei, Moldovei si Tarii Romanesti, ca in aceste tinuturi romanesti exista foarte multe plantatii de vie: „in tot locul se ivesc dealuri acoperite de vii“, iar „vinurile, fie ca le vrei tari sau slabe, aspre sau dulci, albe sau rosii, sunt asa de bune la gust si de soi asa de ales, incat nu mai doresti nici vinurile de Falern din Campania si chiar comparandu-le intre ele iti plac mai mult acestea“. Tot in aceasta perioada, din zona viticola de Alba-Iulia pleca catre Statul papal vinul produs aici, preferat de Pontif. De retinut ca acest vin era cunoscut la Roma inca din antichitate, din timpul administratiei romane.

         Carturarul Sebastian Münster (1489-1552), un reputat savant european al vremii, scria la randul sau: „Langa targul Medias (din Transilvania - n.n.) se face vin in mare cantitate si de aceea se numeste Tara vinului“ (vinifera regio). Plantatiile viticole constituiau o mare si nepretuita bogatie a Tarilor Romane, ceea ce explica atentia deosebita pe care Domnia, autoritatea centrala, o acorda cultivarii si intretinerii vinurilor, pedepsindu-i pe cei care le lasau in paragina si rasplatindu-i pe cei ce ingrijeau de bunul lor rod.

 

Viticultura a constituit de-a lungul timpului o ocupatie de baza a unor populatii existente pe globul pamantesc. Viticulture has been over time an occupation of the existing population of the globe. Tinandu-se seama de modul specific de cultura a vitei de vie, opinez ca intre continuitatea activitatii viticole si stabilitatea si continuitatea de locuire a unei populatii exista o stransa interdependenta si aceasta din urmatoarele consideratii: Keeping in mind the particular culture of the vine growing view that between business continuity and stability and continuity of a living population and that there is a close interdependence of the following considerations:

Lasata in stare libera, nedirijata de om, vita de vie produce, ca si cea salbatica, struguri multi de dimensiuni mici, cu bobite marunte, must putin si acru, iar prin cresteri anuale rodul se indeparteaza sistematic de sol. Left in the free state, unaided by man, the vine produces, like the wild, many small grape with small berries, mash slightly sour, and the annual increase is the result of systematic soil away. De aceea, pentru a preveni un asemenea fenomen, procesele de crestere si cele de rodire se regleaza si se conduc pe calea unui complex de masuri agrotehnice, pe care numai o populatie stabila il poate asigura. Therefore, to prevent such a phenomenon, and the growth processes of regulating and lead to fruition via a complex agro-technical measures, which only you can ensure a stable population. Acest lucru e demonstrat de faptul ca la popoarele antice intalnim o tehnologie complexa de cultivare a vitei de vie, cu o ierarhizare a importantei lucrarilor specifice. This is demonstrated by the fact that ancient peoples meet the complex technology of cultivation of the vine, with a hierarchy of importance of specific works. Teofrast si Columella spun ca „nici una din lucrarile aplicate viilor nu depaseste in importanta taierea“. Teofrast and Columella say that "none of the works used vine cutting does not exceed in importance."

Un alt factor in sprijinul acestei opinii il constituie si faptul ca o activitate vitivinicola presupune in toate timpurile existenta chiar rudimentara a unor „teascuri“ , a unor „ recipiente “ si a unor „ constructii “ - deci elemente de stabilitate. Another factor in support of this view is the fact that an activity Wine and requires at all times even rudimentary existence of "stockpiling" of "containers" and "Construction" - so the elements of stability. Acestea au facut ca activitatea viticola sa initieze si sa dezvolte si o activitate mestesugareasca specifica, de care a fost tot timpul strans legata. They have made the vineyard work and to initiate and develop a specific handicraft activity, which has always been closely linked.

Cunostintele legate de cultura vitei de vie si de prepararea vinurilor acumulate, transmise si imbogatite din generatie in generatie au contribuit la cresterea continua a calitatii produselor obtinute, dand faima locurilor respective pe care, de asemenea, numai o continuitate de locuire o putea realiza. Knowledge about vine growing and wine preparation accumulated, transmitted and enriched from generation to generation have contributed to the continuous growth of the quality of their products, giving those famous places that are also only a continuity of housing could achieve. De mentionat si faptul ca, pe langa stabilitatea populatiei respective, a fost necesara si o densitate mai mare a ei, complexitatea activitatii vitivinicole avand nevoie si de multa forta de munca. It mentioned that, besides the stability of the population that was necessary and a higher density of them needing the complexity of wine and a lot of labor.

In concluzie, putem afirma ca popoarele antice cultivatoare de vita de vie au fost stabile, dense si au avut un grad de civilizatie ridicat, fiind in masura sa aplice complexele tehnologii ale activitatii vitivinicole. In conclusion, we can say that ancient peoples growing vines were stable, dense and had a high degree of civilization, being able to apply complex technologies wine business. Din aceste considerente se desprinde clar ideea ca popoarele barbare migratoare, in drumul lor, nu puteau avea ca ocupatie de baza viticultura. From these considerations it clearly reveal the idea that migratory Barbarians, their way, they could not have the occupation of the wine.

Istoria cultivarii vitei de vie pe teritoriul Romaniei este intr-o stransa interdependenta cu istoria poporului roman, care, din cele mai vechi timpuri, incepand cu stramosii sai geto-daci , s–a ocupat permanent de aceasta cultura, viticultura constituind deci unul din argumentele continuitatii de locuire a poporului roman in spatiul carpato-danubiano-pontic. History of vine cultivation in the territory of Romania is a close interdependence with Romanian history, which, since ancient times, beginning with his ancestors Geto-Dacians , was permanently occupied by this culture, wine being one of the arguments so continuity of the Roman people living in the Carpathian-Danubian-Pontic.

Vechimea acestei indeletniciri pe teritoriul Romaniei se pierde in negura vremurilor, vita salbatica (Vitis vinifera silvestris) fiind existenta si astazi pe aceste meleaguri. Age occupations in Romania that is lost in the mists of time, wild grape (Vitis vinifera silvestris) is still existing in this region. Cercetarile academicianului Emil Pop, mare botanist roman, au dus la descoperirea pe teritoriul Romaniei a peste 300 de localitati unde vita de vie se gaseste sub forma salbatica, fapt pentru care se poate afirma ca pe acest teritoriu vita de vie din cultura (Vitis vinifera sativa) sa gasit, de la inceput, la ea acasa. Research Academician Emil Pop, large Roman botanist, led to the discovery in Romania more than 300 localities where the vine is in the form wild, for which we can say that this area of ​​the culture of vine (Vitis vinifera sativa ) was found from the beginning, at her home.

Aceasta constatare confirma ideea savantului german A. Griesbach, exprimata inca din secolul trecut in lucrarea sa Die Vegetation der Erde nach ihrer klimatischen Ordnung (Leipzig, 1872), conform careia „patria vitei de vie trebuie cautata in tinuturile paduroase ale Pontului si ale Traciei, pana dincoace de Dunare, tinuturi bogate in liane“ . This finding confirms the idea of the German scholar A. Griesbach, expressed since the last century in his work Die Erde nach ihrer klimatischen Vegetation der Ordnung (Leipzig, 1872), that "the homeland of the vine must be sought in the wooded lands of Pontus and Thrace, up side of the Danube lands rich in lianas. De aceea, nu gresim cand spunem ca teritoriul in care sa dezvoltat mai intai viticultura in aceasta parte a Europei este Tracia, de unde apoi sa raspandit in Grecia continentala si in Europa Centrala. It is therefore not wrong to say that the territory has developed the first vineyard in this part of Europe is Thrace, where it then spread to continental Greece and in Central Europe.

„Patria cea veche a Geto-Dacilor, Tracia - scrie istoricul roman AD Xenopol - era o regiune viticola, cauza pentru care si era considerata ca locul de nastere a zeului vinului, Dionysos.“ "The old homeland of Geto-Dacians, Thrace - Xenopol AD Roman historian - a wine region was the cause for which she was regarded as the birthplace of the god of wine, Dionysus."

O afirmatie similara a fost facuta, la inceputul secolului trecut (1908), de catre istoricul francez Raymond Billiard, care scrie: „Dintre toate partile Europei, Tracia a fost, poate, cea mai veche si cea mai respectata pentru vinurile sale si aceea care si-a pastrat mai mult timp prestigiul“. A similar statement was made ​​at the beginning of last century (1908) by French historian Raymond Billiard, who writes: "Of all parts of Europe, Thrace was perhaps the oldest and most respected for its wine and one that has kept more prestige. "

Interesante sunt si precizarile profesorului roman IC Teodorescu: „Vita de vie sa aflat la ea acasa in regiunile carpatice, nu numai in forma ei salbatica, obisnuita, ci chiar intr-una evoluata, din care se trage vita nobila de astazi... Precisions are interesting and novel IC Professor Teodorescu: "Vines was at her home in the Carpathian region, not only in its wild form, the usual, but even in a highly evolved, which draws noble today ... Geto-Dacii au dezvoltat in mod deosebit aceasta cultura pe ambele versante ale Carpatilor... Geto-Dacians were developed in this particular culture on both sides of the Carpathians ... Cultura vitei de vie este deci de origine pur locala in regiunea Carpatilor. Culture of the vine is so purely local origin in the Carpathian region. Ea sa dezvoltat gratie existentei in stare naturala a vitelor in zona din apropierea Dunarii si a Marii Negre“. It was developed in its natural state due to the existence of cattle in the area near the Danube and Black Sea. "

Numeroasele descoperiri arheologice, intre care si cele de la Cetatenii din Vale, Fitionesti, Frumusica, Histria , Mangalia, Piscul Crasani, Popesti, Sancraieni, Teiu, Urechesti, Candesti, Zimnicea etc. The numerous archaeological discoveries, among which those of citizens in the Valley, Fitionesti, Frumusica, Histria , Mangalia, Peak Crasani, Popesti, Sâncrăieni, Teiu, Urechesti, Candesti, etc. Zimnicea. atesta cultivarea vitei de vie pe teritoriul Romaniei din vremuri stravechi, urmele activitatii viticole aparand chiar din neolitic. attest to the cultivation of vines on the Romanian territory since ancient times, wine trail activity appeared even in the Neolithic.

Herodot (484-425 ien) a descris multe obiceiuri ale locuitorilor din tinuturile Marii Negre, printre care folosirea vinului in anumite ritualuri, iar exceptionalele vase de tip rhyton, din argint sau sculptate in os, demonstreaza existenta unui ceremonial fastuos si a unui ritual in legatura cu vinul. Herodotus (484-425 BC) described the many customs of the inhabitants of the Black Sea provinces, including the use of wine in certain rituals, and the exceptional type vessels rhyton, silver or carved in bone, demonstrates the existence of a pompous ceremony and a ritual about wine. Asa, de pilda, rhytonul de la Poroina Mare, judetul Mehedinti, reprezinta zeite sau preotese ce tin in mainile lor un rhyton si o fiala (vas de libatie). So, for example, the Poroina rhyton Mare, Mehedinti county, are goddesses or priestesses to keep their hands and a rhyton fiala (vessel libata).

„Tracii beau vin neamestecat deloc (cu apa - nn).. . "The Thracians mixed drink wine at all (with water - Ed) ... si il imprastie pe hainele lor, socotind ca este o deprindere frumoasa si aducatoare de fericire“ - scria Platon (427-347 ien) intr-unul din Dialogurile sale, descriind un ritual sau un ceremonial. and spread it on their clothes, thinking it's a beautiful skill and bring happiness "- wrote Plato (427-347 BC) in one of his dialogues, describing a ritual or ceremonial.

Descoperirile arheologice, precum si mentionarile documentare dovedesc deci prezenta din cele mai indepartate timpuri a unei intense preocupari vitivinicole pe aceste meleaguri unde se gasea, implicit, o populatie stabila, geto-dacii, cu continuitate de locuire in masura sa aiba asemenea indeletniciri. Archaeological discoveries, documentary evidence and the indications from the far so this time the wine of intense concern in this region where there was therefore a stable population, the Geto-Dacians, the continuity of habitation in a position to have such occupations. Istoricul roman de origine greaca, Diodor din Sicilia (90 - 20 ien), referindu-se la ospatul dat de Dromichete , conducatorul unei uniuni de triburi geto-dacice, in cinstea prizonierului sau, generalul macedonean Lisimah (anul 292 ien), arata ca macedonenilor li sa turnat vin in cupe de argint si aur. The Roman historian of Greek origin, Diodorus of Sicily (90-20 BC), referring to the banquet given by Dromichete , a union leader Geto-Dacian tribes in honor of the prisoner or the Macedonian general Lysimachus (the year 292 BC), shows that Macedonians were poured wine in cups of silver and gold. Asemenea cupe au fost descoperite in tezaurele de la Sancraieni din judetul Harghita, Muncelul de Sus din judetul Iasi si in numeroase alte locuri, iar una din scenele finale ale Columnei imparatului Traian din Roma infatiseaza o imensa prada de razboi, intre care cupe si vase de argint si aur, despre a caror capturare consemna si Criton , medicul personal al imparatului in timpul campaniilor dacice. Such cups were discovered treasures from Sâncrăieni Harghita County, Upper Muncelul of Iasi and in many other places, and one of the final scenes of Column Emperor Trajan in Rome depicting a huge booty, between the cups and vases silver and gold, whose capture on record and Crito , the king's personal doctor during the Dacian campaigns.

Mentionam si faptul ca olarii autohtoni au confectionat amfore de tip local, asemanatoare, ca forma si calitate, cu amforele grecesti, cum sunt cele descoperite la Zimnicea, Stoenesti, Popesti si Candesti. Mentioned that local potters have made local amphora type, which is similar in shape and quality, Greek amphorae, such as those found at Zimnicea Stoenesti Popesti and Candesti.

Dupa cum mentioneaza Strabon , in lucrarea Geografia, in timpul regelui geto-dac Burebista (82-44 iH), viticultura in Dacia a capatat o asemenea dezvoltare incat sa ordonat distrugerea plantatiilor. As mentioned Strabo , Geography in the work during the Geto-Dacian king Burebista (82-44 BC), viticulture in Dacia has gained such a development that has ordered the destruction of plantations. Masura preconizata de Burebista, la indemnul sfetnicului sau Deceneu , nu sa implinit, cateva decenii mai tarziu cultura acestei plante cunoscand din nou o larga raspandire. Burebista actions envisaged at the urging counselor or Deceneu , did not come true, a few decades later knowing the culture of this plant again widespread.

Exilat la Tomis de imparatul Octavianus Augustus, poetul Ovidiu (43 iH - 17 dH) descria in Tristele si Ponticele sale viata localnicilor geti, amintind atat „toamna... Exiled to Tomis by Emperor Octavianus Augustus, the poet Ovid (43 BC - 17 AD) described in his Tristia and Ponticele Getae local life, recalling both "fall ... manjita de mustul de struguri“ , cat si iernile geroase, incat „...ingheata vinul/de-l scoti in bolovani pastrand figura oalei/ si-n loc de a soarbe spuma, mananci bucati de vin“. stained grape, and cold winters, that "... freeze wine / de-keeping figure him out boulders pot / And instead of a foam drink, eat pieces of wine."

Din aceasta perioada au ramas in limba romana, ca o alta dovada a continuitatii, cuvintele de origine daca: strugure, butuc, curpen - termeni caracteristici activitatii viticole, iar o seama de obiecte identificate pe cale arheologica se leaga, de buna seama, de cultivarea vitei de vie. From this period have remained in Romanian, as another proof of the continuity, if the home words: grape, vine, tendril - terms growing business features and a series of archaeological objects found by link, of course, the cultivation vine. Intre ele, cutitul curbat - cosorul - si butoaiele de vin, despre care si istoricul Vasile Parvan consemna in Getica. Between them, curved knife - sickle - barrels, which recorded in history and Vasile Parvan Getica. O protoistorie a Daciei: „In ceea ce priveste cosoarele de vie si de lucru, cu lama dreapta si numai cu varful... A proto-history of Dacia: "In terms of living and working pruning knives, straight blade and only the top ... recurbat si subtire... recurbat thin ... le gasim, poate, e drept, intr-o forma deosebita (oricum mult stilizata) in reprezentarile de la Columna Traiana...“ . we find, can, indeed, a special form (however much stylized) in representations of Traiana Column .... " In alta parte a aceleiasi lucrari, scrie: „Tot de lemn, asa cum sunt butoaiele reprezentate pe Columna lui Traian, erau desigur si vasele mai mari intrebuintate de Geti pentru tinutul lichidelor: apa, vin, ulei“. Elsewhere in the same paper, writes: "wooden drums as they are represented on Trajan's Column, and vessels were certainly higher for land used by the Getae liquids: water, wine, oil.

In timpul stapanirii romane asupra provinciei Dacia, cultivarea vitei de vie a continuat cu aceeasi mare intensitate. During the Roman domination of Dacia province, continued cultivation of vines with the same high intensity. Astfel, medalia Dacia Felix - al carei original se pastreaza la British Museum -, emisa in anul 112 de imparatul Traian, poarta ca emblema o femeie asezata pe o stanca, pe ai carei genunchi doi copii prezinta un spic de grau si un strugure, simbolul principalelor bogatii ale Daciei. Thus, the medal Dacia Felix - whose original is kept at the British Museum - issued in 112 by Emperor Trajan, as the emblem of a woman seated wearing a cliff, the two children whose knee shows an ear of corn and a bunch of grapes, symbol main wealth of Dacia.

Aceleasi reprezentari (spicele de grau si ciorchinii de struguri) apar si pe emisiunea monetara a imparatului roman Decius (249–251). The same representations (ears of wheat and bunches of grapes) appear on the monetary issue the Roman emperor Decius (249-251). Un alt exemplu este si consemnarea referitoare la decurionul coloniei romane din Napoca, Aurelianus Marcianus, care aduce omagii lui Liber Pater, o zeitate populara a viilor. Another example is the record on decurionul Roman colony of Napoca, Aurelianus Marcianus, bringing tributes of Liber Pater, a popular deity of the vineyards.

Romanii au cautat sa mareasca suprafetele cultivate cu vita de vie pe teritoriul Daciei si sa introduca noi soiuri si unelte mai perfectionate, ca vasele (calcatoare) din trunchiuri de lemn pentru calcatul strugurilor si teascurile de mare capacitate cu barna orizontala si surub. The Romans tried to increase the areas planted with vines in the territory of Dacia and introduce new varieties and more refined tools, the dishes (ironing) of tree trunks and ironing presses grapes high capacity horizontal beam and screw. Dar exemplele cele mai convingatoare ale raspandirii acestei indeletniciri ni le ofera documentele (inscriptiile, tablitele cerate) si reprezentarile artistice de pe stelele funerare. But the most compelling examples of the occupations spread gives us the documents (inscriptions, coated tablets) and artistic representations of the stars of the funeral. Un oarecare din Sucidava (Celei) lasa peste 1 ha de vie pentru ingrijirea mormantului sau, iar sarcofagul lui Aelius Iulianus este asezat intre „stufarisuri de vita“. A certain amount of Sucidava (Celei) leaves over 1 ha of vineyards grave care, and Aelius Iulianus's sarcophagus is located between "beef bushes." Pe un fragment de basorelief de la Bucovicior-Dolj este reprezentat Silvanus (o zeitate a vegetatiei) tinand in mana un cosor dacic, iar pe stelele funerare de la Sucidava si Romula apar vita de vie si strugurii. On a bas-relief fragment is represented in Dolj Bucovicior-Silvanus (a deity of vegetation) Dacian holding a pruning knife, and the burial of the stars appear Rum Sucidava and vines and grapes. Multi termeni proveniti din limba latina legati de cultura vitei de vie si de prepararea vinului din aceasta perioada intra in vocabularul limbii romane: vie (vinea), vin (vinum), vita (vitea), must (mustum), coarda (chorda), cep (cippus). Many terms come from Latin tied vine growing and wine preparation of this period between the Roman vocabulary: life (comes), wine (vinum), beef (cattle), grape (mustum), chord (chord) pins (cippus).

Cultivarea vitei de vie pe pamantul Romaniei a continuat sa fie practicata de catre populatia daco-romana si dupa retragerea armatei si administratiei romane, in vremea lui Aurelian (271-275). Growing vines in the land of Romania continued to be practiced by people Daco-Romanian and Romanian government after the army and, during the reign of Aurelian (271-275). Vasile Parvan mentioneaza ca si in epoca migratiilor (sec. III-XIII) un rol principal in activitatea localnicilor de aici la avut viticultura: „In tot acest timp, viticultura a devenit principala ocupatie, constituind fundamentul insusi al existentei Daco-Romanilor in regiunile carpatice“. Vasile Parvan says that in the era of migrations (sec. III-XIII) a leading role in the work of local people had wine here: Meanwhile, wine became the main occupation, is the very basis of existence Daco-Romanians in the Carpathian region .

Continuitatea acestei indeletniciri in perioada migratiilor este confirmata de descoperirile arheologice. The continuation of such occupations in migration is confirmed by archaeological discoveries. La Padureni-Marasesti a fost descoperit, alaturi de alte vestigii, un fragment ceramic apartinand unei baze de vas din secolul al III-lea en, ce avea ca ornament doi struguri stilizati. On-Marasesti Padureni was discovered, along with other relics, a fragment of ceramic pot base rd century AD, which had two grapes stylized ornament. La simleul Silvaniei, a fost gasit un colier dublu de aur, ce dateaza de la mijlocul secolului al IV-lea en, avand insirate pe el o seama de pandative, intre care un cosor si o foarfeca, precum si cinci frunze de vita stilizate, iar la Jaristea sa gasit un cosor din fier din secolul al XI-lea. At Simleul Silvaniei found a double necklace of gold, which dates from the middle of the fourth century AD, having strung together a series of pendants on it, between a hook and scissors, as well as five stylized vine leaves, and at Jaristea found a hook of iron in the eleventh century. Si in alte parti ale Romaniei, la Constanta, Cosna-Floreni, Sarbi-Tifesti etc., s-au descoperit obiecte specifice culturii vitei de vie ce se incadreaza cronologic in secolele III-XIII, epoca migratiilor. And in other parts of Romania in Constanta Cosna-Floreni, Serb-Tifesti etc. Were discovered vine crop specific objects that fall chronologically III-XIII centuries, the age of migrations.

Cronicarul bizantin Priscus din Panion, cu ocazia trimiterii in solie la capetenia Hunilor , Attila (449), si mai tarziu canonicul Rogerius (1241), referindu-se la marea invazie a mongolilor, aratau ca popoarele migratoare au intalnit in acest spatiu carpato-danubiano-pontic intinse plantatii de vii, precum si o populatie numeroasa (daco-romanii nn), care se indeletnicea cu viticultura. Byzantine chronicler Priscus of Panion, when sending the message to the captain of the Huns , Attila (449), and later the Canon Rogerius (1241), referring to the great Mongol invasion, showed that the migrating peoples have met in the Carpatho-Danubian space Pontic-large vineyards and a large population (nn Daco-Romans), which are engaged in viticulture.

Una din cele mai puternice dovezi despre nivelul ridicat al viticulturii de pe teritoriul actual al Romaniei este faptul ca in perioada de cristalizare a relatiilor feudale, numeroase documente ale timpului fac mentiuni despre viticultori (vinitores) si pivnicieri (pivcenarii), acestia fiind considerati ca o categorie superioara de agricultori, un fel de specialisti in cultura vitei de vie si in mestesugul prepararii vinului. One of the most powerful evidence of the high level of winemaking on the actual territory of Romania is the fact that during the crystallization of feudal relations, many documents are mentions of time winemakers (vinitores) and pivnicieri (pivcenarii), considered as a superior class of farmers, as specialists in a vine growing and wine making craft. Desigur, aceste categorii de specialisti nu ar fi existat daca nu ar fi fost o continuitate, atat de cultivare a vitei vie, cat si de locuire a populatiei autohtone. Of course, these types of specialists would not have existed had it not been a continuity of growing both living and housing the local population.

„Cand Ungurii au cucerit acest pamant - scria Herczeg Mihály in Istoria viticulturii ungare (Budapesta, 1896 - referindu-se la Transilvania na), ...s-au folosit de tot ce au aflat acolo“ . "When the Hungarians conquered the earth - Mihály Herczeg wrote in History of the Hungarian viticulture (Budapest, 1896 - referring to Transylvania na), ... and they used everything they learned there. " Era firesc sa nu schimbe metodele agricole si nici metoda viniculturii, iar Kazal Zsigmond, la randul sau, folosindu-se de informatii cronistice de la inceputul primului mileniu, scria: „Nu putem presupune ca viticultura deja dezvoltata sa fi incetat in epoca de migratie a popoarelor“ . It was natural farming methods and does not change the method viniculturii and Kazal Zsigmond, in turn, using information from the early first millennium cronistice, wrote: "We can not assume that viticulture was already developed in the era of migration have ceased to peoples. " El arata ca in anul 1051, regele Andrei al Ungariei ia trimis imparatului Henric al III-lea, in dar, „o foarte mare cantitate de vin“ , ce nu putea proveni decat din podgoriilor autohtone, deci ale romanilor. He shows that in 1051, the Hungarian King Andrew King Henry III sent century, but "a large quantity of wine that could only have come from local vineyards, so the Romans. Permanenta culturii vitei de vie, atestata si confirmata de numeroase izvoare istorice si descoperiri arheologice, eo dovada cat se poate de convingatoare a faptului ca si in Transilvania triburile migratoare au gasit o populatie romanesca densa si stabila. Permanent culture of vines, certified and confirmed by numerous historical sources and archaeological finds, is a convincing proof how can the fact that tribes in Transylvania Romanian migrant population have found a dense and stable.

Arta prepararii vinurilor, transmisa si imbunatatita din generatie in generatie - pe care numai o continuitate de locuire si de preocupari o putea realiza - a ajuns la un asemenea nivel, incat inca din primele secole ale celui de al doilea mileniu vinurile romanesti erau printre cele mai apreciate din Europa. Art of cooking wines, delivered, and improved from generation to generation - that only a continuity of habitation and concerns could achieve - has reached such a level that from the early centuries of the second millennium were among the Romanian wine popular in Europe.

Pietro Molmenti, in lucrarea sa La vie privé à Venise depuis les premiers temps jusqu'à la chute de la République, arata ca pe la anul 1173 vinurile obtinute pe teritoriul romanesc se bucurau de un atat de mare renume incat au fost exceptate la stabilirea preturilor maximale. Molmenti Pietro, in his private life had come at depuis les temps jusqu'à Premiers at chute de la Republique, in the year 1173 show that the wines made on the Romanian territory enjoyed a great reputation so that they were exempted from the pricing maximum. Acelasi autor mai arata ca in anul 1293 s-au construit in arsenalul Venetiei 15 galere pentru transportul vinurilor din tinutul carpatin. The same author also shows that in 1293 were built in the arsenal of Venice, 15 galleys to transport wine from the Carpathian region. Putem cita si alte aprecieri facute asupra calitatii vinurilor romanesti si a plantatiilor viticole existente. We can cite other assessments made on the quality of Romanian wines and vineyards available. Medicul italian Matteo Mauriano, venit pentru al ingriji pe Stefan cel Mare, scrie in Raport din Moldova, redactat si adresat in 1502 catre dogele Venetiei, ca in Moldova se obtin „vinuri de felul acelora din Friul“ . Mauriano Matteo Italian doctor who came to care for Stephen the Great, writes in the Report of Moldova, drafted in 1502 and addressed to the Doge of Venice, as in Moldova is getting "those kinds of Friuli wines. Georg Reichersdorffer, consilier al imparatului Ferdinand I de Habsburg, nota in lucrarea Chorographia Moldovei, alcatuita pe la mijlocul secolului al XVI–lea, ca aici „nimic nu lipseste din cele ce ar putea fi de folos oamenilor“ , tara fiind bogata „in locuri de aratura, vii si vite“ , iar in Chorographia Transilvaniei, scrie, printre altele, ca „locuitorii sunt foarte bogati in turme, vite de tras si in folosinta pamanturilor, ca sa nu mai spun cat e de productiva regiunea in vinul cel mai bun“. Georg Reichersdorffer, advisor to Emperor Ferdinand I of Habsburg, was writing in Moldova Chorographia work, composed in the middle of the sixteenth century, as here, "nothing is missing from those that might be useful to people," being rich country "in places plowing, vineyards and cattle, and in Transylvania Chorographia writes, inter alia, that "people are very rich in cattle, shot cattle and use the land, not to say how productive is the best wine region .

Cronicarul maghiar Anton Verancsics (1504-1573) confirma, in lucrarea Descrierea Trasilvaniei, Moldovei si Tarii Romanesti, ca in aceste tinuturi romanesti exista foarte multe plantatii de vie: „in tot locul se ivesc dealuri acoperite de vii“, iar „vinurile, fie ca le vrei tari sau slabe, aspre sau dulci, albe sau rosii, sunt asa de bune la gust si de soi asa de ales, incat nu mai doresti nici vinurile de Falern din Campania si chiar comparandu-le intre ele iti plac mai mult acestea“. Tot in aceasta perioada, din zona viticola de Alba-Iulia pleca catre Statul papal vinul produs aici, preferat de Pontif. Hungarian chronicler Verancsics Anton (1504-1573) confirms the work description Trasilvaniei, Moldova and Romanian Country, as in the Romanian lands there are many wine country "in every place covered hills emerge alive" and "wines or that they want strong or weak, harsh or sweet, white or red, are so good in taste and variety so choose, that you do not want any Falern wines in Campania and even comparing them with each other more than they love you . During this time, the vineyard area of Alba Iulia to leave the Papal State wine produced here, rather than the Pope. De retinut ca acest vin era cunoscut la Roma inca din antichitate, din timpul administratiei romane. Note that this wine was known since ancient Rome, during the Roman administration.

Carturarul Sebastian Münster (1489-1552), un reputat savant european al vremii, scria la randul sau: „Langa targul Medias (din Transilvania - nn) se face vin in mare cantitate si de aceea se numeste Tara vinului“ (vinifera regio). Scholar Sebastian Münster (1489-1552), a prominent European scholar of his time, wrote in his turn: "Near Medias fair (in Transylvania - Ed) is making wine in large quantities and is therefore called Wine Country" (regional vinifera). Plantatiile viticole constituiau o mare si nepretuita bogatie a Tarilor Romane, ceea ce explica atentia deosebita pe care Domnia, autoritatea centrala, o acorda cultivarii si intretinerii vinurilor, pedepsindu-i pe cei care le lasau in paragina si rasplatindu-i pe cei ce ingrijeau de bunul lor rod. And vineyards, was a priceless wealth of the Romanian Countries, which explains the special attention that rule, the plant, cultivate and maintain a given wine, punishing those who neglected them and sucking in rewarding those who care for their good fruit.

In Muntenia si Moldova, podgorenii plateau vinariciul sau disetina, a zecea parte din vinul obtinut, ceea ce este inca o dovada a existentei unor intinse suprafete de vii si a marilor venituri obtinute din viticultura, de vreme ce erau supuse impozitarii de catre Curtea Domneasca. In Wallachia and Moldova, or disetina podgorenii vinariciul paid, a tenth of the wine obtained, which is another proof of the existence of vast areas of vineyards and the large income derived from the wine, since they were subject to taxation by the Royal Court. Cele mai vechi manastiri au primit buti de vin din camarile domnesti, apoi li s-au daruit vii, in podgoriile mai importante. The oldest monasteries Buti wine received the royal chambers, then were given live in the greatest vineyards. In 1388, voievodul Mircea cel Batran daruieste ctitoriei sale de la Cozia, printre altele, vii pe Arges, o vie in patru locuri, dintre care unul in hotarul Calinestilor, pe Lotru, si o vie la Ramnic. In 1388, Prince Mircea the Old, the tails gives its founders, among others, live in Arges, one living in four places, one in the border Calinesti on Lotru, and a vineyard at Ramnic.

In Moldova, prima mentiune a indelungatelor traditii viticole este din 7 ianuarie 1407, constand intr-o intelegere dintre Alexandru cel Bun si mitropolitul Iosif, privitoare la manastirea Neamt, intre ale carei bunuri erau doua vii, una daruita de Petru Musat (1375-1391), iar a doua cumparata de mitropolit. In Moldova, the first mention of wine is long-standing traditions of 7 January 1407, consisting of an agreement between the Good and Bishop Joseph Alexander, about the Neamt monastery, whose goods were between two vineyards, one given to him by Petru Musat (1375-1391 ) and the second bought by Metropolitan. La 1429, Alexandru cel Bun daruieste manastirii Neamt mai multe bunuri, intre care si „un mertic anual de 12 buti de vin din disetina Neamtului“. Manastirea Putna avea vii la Harlau. In 1429, the monastery Neamt Alexandru cel Bun gives more goods, among which "a 12-year Mert Buti Neamt disetina wine." Putna monastery had come to Harlem. Mai renumite erau viile de la Cotnari. Were the most famous vineyards Cotnari. Podgoriile insirate pe o lunga fasie intre Cotnari si Dunare au ajuns, dupa cum spune Dimitrie Cantemir, sa intreaca toate celelalte bogatii ale pamantului. Vineyards strung on a long strip between the Danube and reached Cotnari, says Demetrius Cantemir, surpass all the other riches of the earth. Vinul de Cotnari il considera „mai ales si mai bun decat alte vinuri europenesti si chiar decat vinul de Tokay. Cotnari wine he considers "more choice and better than other wines and even europenesti than Tokay wine. Cand este pastrat in pivnite adanci si boltite, cum se obisnuieste la noi in tara, si e tinut trei ani, in cel de-al patrulea capata o asemenea tarie, incat arde ca vinul fierbinte... When preserved in deep cellars and vaulted, as is customary in our country, and it made ​​three years in the fourth gain such strength, that burns as hot wine ... Indata dupa acesta, vinul de la Husi, in partile Falciului, e socotit mai bun; in al treilea rand vine vinul de Odobesti, in tinutul Putnei, pe raul Milcov; in al patrulea rand Nicorestii, in tinutul Tecuciului, pe Siret; in al cincilea rand Grecesti, in tinutul Tutovei, pe raul Berheci; in al saselea rand, cel pe care il dau viile Cotestilor din acelasi tinut“. Immediately after, the wine Husi Fălciu in parts, is considered better, in the third row comes Odobesti wine in land of Putney on the River Milcov; in Nicorestii Fourth, in the land Tecuci, Siret, in the Greek Fifth, in the land Tutovei, Berheci River, in the sixth row, the one you give the same land Cotesti vineyards.

Vinul a facut obiectul unui larg comert intre principatele feudale romanesti, Moldova, Transilvania si Muntenia, in tot cursul Evului Mediu, contribuind astfel la strangerea legaturilor dintre ele si la intarirea unitatii de neam. Wine has been the subject of a broad trade between the Romanian feudal principalities, Moldavia, Transylvania and Wallachia, throughout the Middle Ages, thus contributing to strengthening ties between them and strengthen the family unit. Carpatii, care nu au constituit niciodata o bariera intre romani, erau strabatuti de numeroase pasuri si trecatori dintre care una, Tabla Butii, adica locul in care se facea socoteala - tabula - butiilor de vin, dovedeste in chip evident acest lucru. „Romanii au fost pururea, fara nici o intrerupere, o natiune vitivinicola“ - scria istoricul roman BP Hasdeu, cu peste un secol in urma. Carpathians, which were never a barrier between the Romans, were crossed by numerous passes and passes one of which, Butii board, that place is made ​​accountable - clean - from contributions of wine, he had certainly proves this. "Romans was always, without any interruption, a nation Wine "- Hasdeu Roman historian wrote, with over a century ago. si avea perfecta dreptate, considerand acest fapt ca o dovada a continuitatii poporului roman pe aceste meleaguri. and he was absolutely right, considering it as a proof of the continuity of the Romanian people on these lands.

Bibliografie suplimentara: Further reading:

Gelu Florea, Dacians and Wine ( 1st Century BC - 1st Century AD ), in Orbis antiquus, Cluj-Napoca, 2004, p.517-522; Gelu Florea, Dacians and Wine (1st Century BC - 1st Century AD), in Orbis antiquus, Cluj-Napoca, 2004, p.517-522;

Maria Comsa, Date privind cultivarea vitei de vie la traco-daci (sec. VI ien-sec. i en) în lumina cercetărilor arheologice , in Pontica , XV, 1982, p. 57-79. Maria Comsa, data on the cultivation of vines at the Thracian-Dacians (VI century BC-sec. And AD) in the light of archaeological research, in Pontus, XV, 1982, p. 57-79.

Vezi si: See also:

www.daciagrup.ro www.daciagrup.ro

www.cimec.ro www.cimec.ro

www.muzeulolteniei.ro www.muzeulolteniei.ro

Y-DNA of the Geto- Dacians

 

 Haplogroup R1b

The point of origin of R1b is thought to lie in Eurasia, most likely in Western Asia.[7] T. Karafet et al. estimated the age of R1, the parent of R1b, as 18,500 years before present.[1]

Early research focused upon Europe. In 2000 Ornella Semino and colleagues argued that R1b had been in Europe before the end of Ice Age, and had spread north from an Iberian refuge after the Last Glacial Maximum.[8] Age estimates of R1b in Europe have steadily decreased in more recent studies, at least concerning the majority of R1b, with more recent studies suggesting a Neolithic age or younger.[7][9][10][11] Only Morelli et al have recently attempted to defend a Palaeolithic origin for R1b1b2.[12] Irrespective of STR coalescence calculations, Chikhi et al pointed out that the timing of molecular divergences does not coincide with population splits; the TMRCA of haplogroup R1b (whether in the Palaeolithic or Neolithic) dates to its point of origin somewhere in Eurasia, and not is arrival in western Europe.[1]

Barbara Arredi and colleagues were the first to point out that the distribution of R1b STR variance in Europe forms a cline from east to west, which is more consistent with an entry into Europe from Western Asia with the spread of farming.[11] A 2009 paper by Chiaroni et al. added to this perspective by using R1b as an example of a wave haplogroup distribution, in this case from east to west.[13] The proposal of a southeastern origin of R1b were supported by three detailed studies based on large datasets published in 2010. These detected that the earliest subclades of R1b are found in western Asia and the most recent in western Europe.[7][9][14] While age estimates in these articles are all more recent than the Last Glacial Maximum, all mention the Neolithic, when farming was introduced to Europe from the Middle East as a possible candidate period. Myres et al. (August 2010), and Cruciani et al. (August 2010) both remained undecided on the exact dating of the migration or migrations responsible for this distribution, not ruling out migrations earlier or later than the Neolithic.[7]

Haplogroup I2a2a

Former I2b1 in the Y2010 tree. I2a2a (M223) has a peak in Germany and another in eastern Sweden, but also appears in Russia, Greece, Italy and around the Black Sea.[21] Haplogroup I2a2a has been found in over 4% of the population only in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, England Cornwall), Scotland, and the southern tips of Sweden and Norway in Northwest Europe; the provinces of Normandy, Maine, Anjou, and Perche in northwestern France; the province of Provence in southeastern France; the regions of Tuscany, Umbria, and Latium in Italy; and Moldavia and the area around Russia's Ryazan Oblast and Republic of Mordovia in Eastern Europe. Of historical note, both haplogroups I1 and I2b appear at a low frequency in the historical regions of Bithynia and Galatia in Turkey, possibly descendants of the Varangians, who are historically recorded to have invided those parts of Anatolia from the 9th to 11th centuries. They ventured southwards along the rivers of Eastern Europe, connecting Scandinavia with Constantinople and Byzantine Empire.[22] Haplogroup I2a2a also occurs among approximately 1% of the Sardinians.

Haplogroup J2

Haplogroup J2 is widely believed to be associated with the spread of agriculture from Mesopotamia (Iraq and Syria).[1][7]

"The main spread of J2 into the Mediterranean area is thought to have coincided with the expansion of agricultural people's during the Neolithic period."[2] The age of J2 has been estimated as 18,500 +/- 3,500 years ago.[1] Its distribution, centered in Western Asia and Southeastern Europe, its association with the presence of Neolithic archaeological artifacts, such as figurines and painted pottery,[21] and its association with annual precipitation have been interpreted as evidence that J2, and in particular its J2a-M410 subclade belonged to the agricultural innovators who followed the rainfall.[22] However, Di Giacomo stressed the role of post-Neolithic migratory phenomenon, specifically that of the Ancient Greeks, as also being important in the dispersal of Hg J2.[10]

Haplogroup E

Underhill et al. (2001) proposed that haplogroup E may have arisen in North East Africa.[4] Some authors as Chandrasekar et al. (2007), continue to accept the earlier position of Hammer et al. (1997) that Haplogroup E may have originated in Asia, given that:

  • E is a clade of Haplogroup DE, with the other major clade, haplogroup D, being East Asian.
  • DE is a clade within M168 with the other two major clades, C and F, considered to have a Eurasian origin.

 

 

 

 

 

The Hungarian Point of View

  The Hungarian Point of View

{1-42.} 2. THE DACIAN KINGDOM (András Mócsy)

The date and credibility of the earliest reports concerning a Dacian people are contested. The ancient assumption, that slaves, who figured in New Attican (4th century B.C.) plays under the name of Daos, were in fact Dacians, is less than plausible, for the first confirmed report of the Dacians' existence refers to a time at least two centuries later, whilst the Romans first reached the Danube even later, between 76-73 B.C. The utility of our data is limited both by the fact that only fragments of the detailed chronicles survive, and by the fact that the reflections on individual peoples found in these chronicles often compress events stretching over several historical periods. Thus historical research has not been able to establish clearly whether King Oroles of Dacia made war against his eastern neighbours, the Celtic Bastarnae, in the 2nd century B.C., or in some much later, equally indeterminate period. There is a similar lack of consensus over such an essential question as the identity of King Rubobostes, who is claimed by one source to have built up the power of Dacia; was he the first significant Dacian ruler, some time during the 2nd century B.C., or was his name merely a misspelling of Burebista, the king who is generally credited with founding a powerful Dacia? A further difficulty derives from the fact that more than one name has been attributed to the Dacians. The tribes that spoke Thracian and lived in the eastern half of the Balkan peninsula, the lower Danube valley, and Transylvania were called by a variety of names in Greek and Roman literature. The Thracians proper, who had very early contact with Greek culture, inhabited a region bounded in the north by the Balkan Mountains and in the west by Macedonia, while the Getae lived in a region north of the Balkan Mountains, along the lower reaches of the Danube. The Dacians of Transylvania, who were the {1-43.} last Thracian-speaking people to come to the notice of Greco-Roman world, are also called Getae in Greek sources; and Roman historians, who drew upon Greek sources, often — and arbitrarily — translated the appellation 'Getae' as 'Dacian', even when, as it happened, they were referring to authentic Getae. Thus caution must be exercised when dealing with the fragmentary sources that mention Dacians in the context of the wars, waged by the Romans in the 2nd and 1st centuries B.C., on the northern borders of Macedonia, against various Thracian, Getian, and Celtic tribes.

The Getae came into early contact with the Greeks. The development of their trade, crafts, and art was stimulated by contact with the Greek cities on the Black Sea, both directly and through the mediation of Thracian tribes. Within Transylvania, there is no significant trace of such Greek influence in the late Iron Age. It is all the more surprising, then, that Greek coins from the 2nd century B.C. (Macedonian and Thasos tetradrachma) have been found in larger number in southern Transylvania than in the lowlands south of the Carpathians. It is not known when these coins reached Transylvania. What is clear is that the Getae started producing silver copies of Greek coins well before such minting began — around 50 B.C., according to a recent study — in Transylvania. Thus the beginning of coinage in Transylvania coincides with that of Burebista's rule, and finds abound precisely at the center of the nascent Dacian state, in an area bounded by the Ruszka, Szörényi and Kudzsir mountains, and, in the north, by the Maros valley.

That region's mountainous borders to the south impeded access, but the Maros, Zsil, and Olt valleys allowed access to the Danube. The center of the nascent state was in the valley of the Városvíz, a tributary of the Maros. Numerous fortified hill settlements were established in the 1st century B.C. Recent research points to a significant growth in the number of non-fortified settlements in the 2nd and 1st centuries B.C., which implies a progressive transformation of Dacian society, but the nature of this change {1-44.} is not clear. The strong Celtic influence northern Transylvania presumably contributed to technological development. Besides the iron tools, potter's wheels, and other technical innovations, the hill fortresses can also be attributed to the influence of late Celtic, Oppidum culture. Coins and the advent of local minting indicate that silver was becoming a measure of the value of certain goods and a means of accumulating wealth. However, as in the case of the Danubian Celts, it cannot be concluded that the existence of coinage signified general acceptance of this measure of value or the advent of market-oriented production. By all indications, the Dacians lived in a predominantly subsistence economy; even domestic pottery was produced mainly in homes, and not for the market but for personal or local consumption. In this respect, even at the time of the Dacian kingdom, the economy of the Dacians was less developed than that of the Danubian Celts.

The building of fortified settlements, the accumulation of silver and other valuables, and, above all, the spectacular and unexpected consolidation of Dacian power all point to a high degree of social stratification. What internal factors might have spurred this development? The little light shed by historical sources on Dacian society projects the image of two sharply-divided, caste-like strata: the 'tarabostes', or 'cap-wearing people', and the 'long-haired people'. Indeed, subsequent portrayals of Dacian notables show them wearing headgear made of felt, sometimes of fur, and resembling Phrygian bonnets. The polarization between a small caste of notables and a vast, exploited mass of people explains the duality of Dacian archaeological finds, a feature that is absent in other late Iron Age finds in the Danube region. The typical finds in Dacian fortresses consist of Greek pottery and mirrors, and elaborate, locally-produced silver objects; the finds in unfortified settlements, on the other hand, consist of hand-formed pottery that is very simple, even coarse, and bears the mark of the early Iron Age, as well as of primitive metal goods.

{1-45.} To be sure, the history of the Balkan and Danubian regions in the last centuries B.C. reveals other instances of a tribe, or group of tribes, investing vast territories in short order, and of linguistically different tribes being recruited as allies or subjugated and exploited. Even before the Dacians had come to power in the lower and middle reaches of the Danube, Roman Macedonia had come under attack, first by the Celtic Scordisci, and then, after 100 B.C., by the Dardani. From the middle of the 3rd century B.C., the Scordisci based themselves in the region of what is now Belgrade; the Dardani's ancient homeland lay in the southern part of today's Serbia and in Macedonia. Early sources identify the Scordisci as Rome's sole or principal enemy in the Balkans; the Dardani were seldom mentioned, and then only as one of the Thracian tribes allied with the Scordisci against Rome. When the Scordisci's power waned around 100 B.C., they came to be listed less and less frequently among Rome's Balkan foes, while references to Dardani and other Thracian 'allies' of the Scordisci become more frequent.

Similarly, the political history of the Carpathian basin in the last few centuries B.C. is marked by transitional supremacy of a tribe or group of tribes. At the end of the 2nd century B.C., the northwestern part of the Carpathian basin was ruled by an alliance of Celtic tribes led by the Boii. The Scordisci were predominant in the Sava valley, and they kept the Pannonic tribes, who lived between the Sava and the Drava rivers, in subjection until ca. 100 B.C.; their local hegemony collapsed probably in consequence of the successive defeats they suffered at the hands of Romans attacking from Macedonia. When King Mithridates of Pontus made plans to attack the Romans by way of the Balkan peninsula and the Apennines, he referred to the Pannonic tribes, and not to the Scordisci, as masters of the region on his path; it appears, therefore, that around 70–60 B.C., the Pannonic tribes were no longer subjugated.

Around 50 B.C., these tribes of the Carpathian basin and Balkan peninsula were confronted by the Dacian ruler Burebista, {1-46.} who began suddenly to expand his domain. As noted, the sources do not indicate clearly whether Burebista was the original unifier of the Dacian tribes, or whether his efforts at unification built upon the work of his predecessors, such as the mysterious Rubobostes. The sources date the period of his rule by reference to important events in Roman history: the high priest Decaineus, Burebista's chief assistant and adviser, reached Dacia in the year of Sulla's accession to power (82 B.C.), and the assassination of Burebista coincided with that of Caesar (44 B.C.). These correlations indicate that Burebista reigned in the middle of the 1st century B.C. By all accounts, he ruled for a long period, perhaps as much as forty years. According to our most important source, Strabo, Burebista completed his vast conquest in a short period of time. An epigraph at Dionysiopolis (Balczik, Bulgaria) indicates that by 48 B.C. he was regarded as the 'first and greatest king to rule over Thracia'.[9]9. G. Michailov, Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repartae I (2nd ed., Sofia, 1970), no.13 = Dobó, Inscriptiones... 837. The same inscription mentions that Dionysiopolis sent a delegation to the father of a Getae ruler, and that the latter met the envoys at Argedava. Due to the fragmented state of the text, it cannot be ascertained whether this ruler in Argedava was Burebista's father. Nor is it evident that Argedava is the same place as Arcidava (Varadia), situated on the eastern fringe of the Banat. If that is the case, then the ruler who received the Greek delegation in Argedava may well have been Burebista's father. On the other hand, there is no indication that Burebista exerted any influence over Greek cities on the Black Sea during the first half of his reign. The Dacians do not feature in the bold plans of King Mithridates in 70–60 B.C., either as enemies or as allies, which suggests that their sphere of influence did not yet extend to the lower Danube or the Black Sea coast. In all likelihood, then, Burebista completed his conquests in a brief space of time between 60–50 B.C. In the earlier, and longer phase of his rule, he must have concentrated on unifying the Dacian tribes, and on establishing and consolidating a centralized realm. In this task, which no doubt involved bloodshed, he had the aid and {1-47.} counsel of the high priest Decaineus, who was said to enjoy 'virtually regal' powers.

With the considerable accomplishment of unifying the Dacian tribes behind him, Burebista proceeded to conquer in short order vast territories. The sequence of his conquests is not clear, for sources provide only a few bare facts. Burebista expanded the Dacian domains in three major directions. To the southeast, he reached as far as the Black Sea and seized Greek cities from Olbia, at the mouth of the Dnieper, to Apollonia (Sozopol, Bulgaria). It is likely that before he launched this campaign, Burebista subjugated the Getian tribes along the lower reaches of the Danube, and also the Bastarnae, who lived to the north of the Getae, on the eastern side of the Carpathians. A people of Germanic or Celtic origin, the Bastarnae had already supplied troops to the kings of Macedonia in the 2nd century B.C., and they would continue to serve as mercenaries of foreign powers; after Burebista's death, they fought against the Romans as allies or mercenaries of the Dacians.

Much to Rome's alarm, Burebista's second target was Macedonia. His armies crossed the Danube and, plundering their way across the Balkan peninsula, headed for the Roman province of Macedonia and the Dalmatian coast, which was also under Roman control. In the last years of Julius Caesar's rule, fending off the Dacian menace was a prime concern of Roman foreign policy. In the event, the only tangible evidence of this conquest is that the Scordisci, defeated by Burebista, became his allies in subsequent campaigns, and that the Dacians established a lasting presence south of the Danube, in the northern part of today's Serbia.

The third, westward direction of Dacian expansion touched the neighbouring Celtic tribes. In the first half of the 1st century B.C., the Boian alliance encompassed Celtic tribes that had settled in northern Transylvania. Burebista first objective was probably to subjugate these tribes, the Taurisci and the Anartes; in the process, he confronted the Celtic tribal (Boian) alliance that dominated the {1-48.} entire northern half of the Carpathian Basin. The clash occurred when Burebista crossed the Tisza and headed towards the Boian tribe's heartland in northwestern Transdanubia and western Slovakia. His victory over the Celts led not only to the breakup of the Boian alliance, but also to the establishment of Dacian settlements in the southern parts of today's Slovakia. Evidence of this settlement includes characteristic hand-formed Dacian pottery, as well as the 'Dacianization' of Celtic names in the region during the 2nd century A.D.

The resulting change in the balance of power on the middle and lower reaches of the Danube worried the Romans, all the more because a people virtually unknown to them and living beyond their sphere of influence had suddenly emerged as a major political factor in the hinterland of Illyricum (the Dalmatian coast) and Macedonia. Thus the destruction of Dacian power became one of Julius Caesar's key political objectives, and he made plans to launch an offensive from Macedonia. Had Caesar not been assassinated, the campaign would probably have got under way in 44 or 43 B.C. Burebista, too, fell victim to his political enemies at about the same time. The plot (the sources speak of a rebellion) may have served the interests of dissident Dacian nobles, for the unification of the Dacian tribes no doubt required the dismissal of many independent chieftains. Nor can it be ruled out that the Romans had a hand in the plot; in the period after Burebista's demise, more than one Dacian ruler kept contact with Octavian and Mark Antony.

At the peak of his power, Burebista had 200,000 soldiers, although somewhat later the Dacians' military strength was estimated at no more than 40,000. The late ruler's domain was divided into five, then four parts. At the center of that domain, Decaineus managed for a time to rule over Burebista's tribe; the merging of the roles of king and high priest was probably made permanent by his successor, a certain Comosicus. The kingdom over which ruled monarchs from Burebista to Decebalus obviously encompasses the {1-49.} central territory, which lay in southwest Transylvania; the other Dacian or Getian kings mentioned during the reign of Augustus ruled over the isolated Getian tribes on the lower reaches of the Danube. Identification of the actual Dacian kingdom's rulers is not without problems, for the commonly cited list names Comosicus as successor to Burebista and Decaineus but ignores Cotiso; yet the latter is identified in a number of sources as the Dacian who ruled over the region around the Iron Gate, the Danube's mountainous gorge. Since there are other misspellings in the list, it may be that Comosicus and Cotiso are one and the same; in any case, all sources agree that the latter ruled over the central part of Burebista's onetime kingdom.

Of the fragments of Burebista's domain, only the one within the Carpathians, in Transylvania, can be considered a Dacian kingdom, for the rest encompassed Getian tribes. Sources indicate that a king named Dicomes ruled over one of those regions; he kept in touch with Mark Antony in the turbulent period following Caesar's death and offered him help before the Battle of Actium. Cotiso, meanwhile, tried to court favour with Octavian — at least according to Antony, who charged that Octavian even considered linking the two families by marriage. Other Getian or Dacian kings tried to sell their support to one or the other of the Roman factions. Such farflung diplomatic initiatives were uncommon among Barbarian peoples at the time, but each of these kings considered himself to be Burebista's legitimate successor and sought foreign help to realize his hegemonic ambitions. The reality of this struggle for hegemony is attested by the fact that the empire's five fragments were soon reduced to four; presumably a king had succeeded in eliminating one of his fellows. In these circumstances, the Dacian menace continued to worry the Romans even after Caesar's death. Octavian wanted to wage war on the Dacians in fulfilment of Caesar's intentions, although the timeliness and feasibility of such action became increasingly doubtful. Even the Iapodic war (35–33 B.C.) was {1-50.} launched on the pretext of preparing for a Dacian war, whereas its real objective control over the hinterland of coastal link along the Adriatic between Italy and the Balkans. One tangible gain was the town of Siscia (Sisak), in the Sava river valley; Octavian claimed that it would serve as an important base for a war against the Dacians.

The bellicose project faded as Caesar's successors intensified their struggle for undivided power, and in later years Rome's other concerns took precedence over a Dacian menace that was declining. Thus Rome contented itself with driving Cotiso out of his domains south of the Danube. The campaign was launched in 29 B.C., shortly after Octavian's victory at Actium. In the first phase of Balkan war that lasted several years, M. Licinius Crassus defeated Cotiso, who nevertheless hung on to the left bank of the Danube and probably continued to rule for some time over the heart of Burebista's kingdom.

Augustus' drive to the Danube threatened the Dacians, but Rome confronted them only later, in the context of a vast military and diplomatic operation aimed at stabilizing the political situation north of the Danube. In the first phase, the Romans occupied two regions south of the Danube, Pannonia and Noricum; formed a Moesian army in Macedonia; and prepared to extend their influence west of the Danube. In 10 B.C., during the Pannonian campaign, the Dacians had launched an attack across the Danube, and were repulsed. In retaliation, Augustus dispatched an army that 'compelled the Dacians to submit to the rule of Rome'.[10]10. Res gestae divi Augusti (Monumentum Ancyranum) 30 = Dobó, Inscriptiones... 769. The commander was probably M. Vinicius; it is recorded that in one of his campaigns, he had defeated an army of Dacians and Bastarnae, and then compelled the Celtic peoples living on the northern flank of the Great Hungarian Plain to join the Romans in 'alliance'.[11]11. Dobó, Inscriptiones... 769a. This northward thrust across the Great Plain probably coincided with Lentulus' campaign, in which 'a people difficult to reach' — the Dacians — were drive out of their highland homes, and north of the {1-51.} Danube; the Romans then established military outposts along the right bank of the river. One source notes that although this operation 'did not defeat Dacia, it kept that power distant'.[12]12. Florus, Epitome II, 28 = IV, 12. Of the subsequent Roman campaigns, only a few details survive, e.g., that Roman soldiers sailed up the Tisza and the Maros rivers to reach the Dacians. A poet's comment, that Dacia's Appuli tribe (presumably people in the region of Apulum [Gyulafehérvár]) lived within early reach of the Pontus, must have been prompted by some event. In fact, this is the only surviving indication that the Dacians sought to make contact after Burebista's death with people in the lower reaches of the Danube. The shortest route from Apulum to the Black Sea lies along the Olt valley; and it is hardly coincidental that Augustus, who saw no necessity in militarizing the new frontier on the Danube, chose a spot near the mouth of the Olt to establish one of the first Roman military camps in the Danubian region (Oescus-Gigen). The second camp (Carnuntum-Deutschaltenburg), probably also established during Augustus' reign, lay near the lands of Rome's other dangerous opponent in the Danubian region, the German king Maroboduus. All this indicates that despite the fragmentation and territorial losses suffered after Burebista's death, the Dacian kingdom remained one of the better-organized — as well as less accessible — political units in the region.

In these circumstances, the Romans, who had barely consolidated their positions on the Danube, must have welcomed the gradual advance of two tribes of Sarmatian horsemen along the lower reaches of the river. The Jazyges, closely followed by the Roxolani, drove a wedge between not only the Getae and the Dacians, but also the Roman empire and the Dacians; moving westward, they came to serve as a buffer between Pannonia and the Dacians. The main body of Jazyges reached the northeastern part of the Great Plain in first decade A.D., expelling Dacians who had settled there in the time of Burebista. It is possible that the Sarmatian migration — which Rome may have sporadically encouraged — was a factor in {1-52.} Dacian incursions of varying scale, and that some of those were joint Dacian-Sarmatian operations. Already in Augustus' time, the Romans had resorted to resettlement measures in an attempt to pacify the region north of the Danube; to make way for the Sarmatians, they moved large numbers of Getae (or Dacians?) to Moesia. The turbulence took long to dissipate, for Sarmatians and Dacians were warring in Moesia even towards the end of Tiberius' reign. The subsequent period of peace coincided — according to the list of kings noted earlier — with the forty-year reign of the Dacian ruler Coryllus.

Since Coryllus is not mentioned in any other source, it is probably a misspelling of Scorilo, a relatively common Dacian name. An anecdote has survived about a Dacian king called Scorilo: To dissuade his people from meddling with the Romans, he set two dogs fighting, then introduced a wolf, whereupon the dogs joined forces to attack the wolf.[13]13. Frontinus, Stratagemata I, 10, 4. Such prudence must have been characteristic of the long reign of Coryllus-Scorilo; the example of the dogs was certainly apposite during the Roman empire's first great crisis (68–69 A.D.), when legions left the Danube frontier unguarded to join in the civil war. The Sarmatians repeatedly exploited this situation, annihilating several Roman legions and even governors. On one occasion, probably in the winter of 68–69, the Dacians, too, crossed the Danube into Moesia, where they seized a few Roman camps along the border. It is not known if this raid was mounted by Scorilo or by some independent Dacian group. If the attribution of the dog anecdote is valid, it is more likely that the attack was launched by some Dacians from Wallachia, and that it served as the stimulus for Coryllus/Scorilo's cautionary stratagem.

In reference to the raid, Tacitus noted that the Dacians were 'always unreliable'.[14]14. Tacitus, Historiae III, 46, 2. Admittedly, his observation also drew on subsequent experience of Roman-Dacian clashes, but the Romans had been wary of the Dacians since the time of Burebista. Their strategy of forging alliances (in which the 'allies' were actually {1-53.} client states) was generally successful, but the Dacian kingdom proved less tractable. It is reported that, towards the end of Augustus' reign, the Dacians had become less menacing and more ready to accept Rome's supremacy — presumably a reference to the relatively peaceable relations in the time of Scorilo. It seems, however, that the Roman-Dacian alliance (foedus) lacked a solid foundation. Dacia differed in several respects from the German and Sarmatian client states along Rome's Danubian frontier. For one thing, the Dacians were favoured by geography, for high mountain ranges impeded access to their kingdom's heartland from the direction of the Danube. Rome's armies had to make long detours along the Maros or Temes valleys in the west, and the Olt or Zsil valleys in the east; in either case, they confronted easily-defended narrows and passes. Thus tactical advantage lay with the Dacians, and particularly so at a key stretch of the imperial frontier, where the Danube passes through a narrow gorge at the southern extremity of the Carpathians. There, a road had to be cut into the cliff face to serve as a towpath for shipping; this, one of the great engineering feats of Antiquity, was completed towards the end of Tiberius' reign. It is probably not coincidental that Daco-Roman relations took a peaceful turn at this juncture. Rome must have resorted to bribing the Dacians in order to keep this fluvial route secure.

Rome had to take into account not only Dacia's geographical defences but also the strong central organization of the kingdom. The 'royal' fortress on the heights of Sarmizegethusa, in the western Kudzsir Alps, was surrounded a ring of hilltop forts, and thus the center of power was easily defensible even against attack from the kingdom's outlying regions. These forts not only served as accommodation for troops but also as industrial centres, storehouses, treasuries and even shrines. The fortified emplacements, which covered several hectares, were protected by earthworks and generally had thick walls as well as towers; they served not only military purposes, but also as treasuries, industrial centres, warehouses, and {1-54.} even shrines. The ruler's ability to marshall great manpower is best attested by fortresses's walls, built of huge stone blocks on timber frames, by the paved yards and roads, stone steps, and by the drains hewn out of the rock. All this no doubt also served to make an impression on the ordinary folk, who lived in primitive conditions; a function that must not be underrated, for the great social gap between the 'capped' and 'long-haired' people probably necessitated an awesome display of kingly might.

Religion also served to buttress the monarch's authority and power. Religious sites include the fortresses and the more recently discovered shrines. The latter come in two shapes: round ones, marked by evenly laid stones, which probably also served as calendars, and quadrangular ones enclosed by four peristyles. All indications are that the cults had an astrological dimension. According to ancient sources, these cults originated with the Thracian Zalmoxis or Zamolxis, who was said to be a disciple of Pythagoras. The teachings of the legendary, deified Zalmoxis encompassed an ascetic way of life. This religion of Thraco-Getian origin was probably introduced by Decaineus, who had been invited by Burebista and became the latter's closest advisor. Burebista presumably perceived the potential utility of the cult and exploited it to consolidate his authority. To serve the cult was a privilege, and the priests were the guardians of its mystical truth; the head priest served in effect as mediator between the king and the transcendent sphere. The priestly privileges may well have included healing functions. The fact that ancient Greek treatises on medicine mention many Dacian medicinal herbs, along with their Dacian names, points to a high level of botanical and medical knowledge, and it can be surmised that the experience of sheep-rearing in a mountain environment contributed to the Dacians' knowledge.

The excavation of Dacian fortresses has uncovered not only locally produced objects but also Roman ones. Some of the latter are luxury goods that are commonly found beyond the frontiers of {1-55.} the Roman empire amidst the belongings of Barbarian leaders. It is noteworthy, however, that the goods of Roman origin include not only those attributable to a tribal aristocracy, but also high quality iron tools that probably served advanced crafts practiced in the fortresses. It is also probable that the Dacians had recruited Greek and Roman experts to design the fortifications. Some of the ashlars that have been unearthed, most commonly those from shrines, bear incised, Greek characters that were probably intended to guide the sequence of assembly; others may be linked to the calendar function of the shrines. Latin-character sealmarks bearing a remarkable similarity to those on Roman bricks were found on a huge, inverse conical dish which was probably used in religious functions: one seal reads DECEBALUS, and the other PER SCORILO.

Most Romanian experts interpret these two sealmarks to mean 'Decebalus, son of Scorilo'. The problem with this interpretation is that the names figure on separate sealmarks, as if one was the owner who commissioned the object, and the other, the artisan who produced it. It is likely that the first name refers to King Decebalus, although the omission of 'rex' (king) is puzzling. However, if the interpretation 'Decebalus, son of Scorilo' is taken literally, then a further problem arises, which is that another reign, that of Diurpaneus, came between those of Scorilo and Decebalus. The Dacians' new political orientation, that which led to the demise of the Dacian monarchy after the golden era of Decebalus, is generally ascribed to the same Diurpaneus.

As noted, Scorilo found acceptable the associated relationship (foedus) that Rome tried to establish with neighbours all along the European borders of the empire. He may have been motivated by the exceptionally high annual stipendium that he received from Tiberius after the construction of the road along the Danube at the Iron Gate. According to a historian, the late Count Jordanes, King Diurpaneus only launched his attacks across the borders of the Roman empire when the Dacians, 'after a long wait, grew wary of {1-56.} the greed of the reigning emperor Domitian and renounced the contract that they had concluded with earlier emperors.'[15]15. Jordanes, Getica, p. 76. Domitian may well have wished to reduce the exorbitant stipend, but it is hardly likely that he would have done so at a time when the Danubian Germans were preparing for war. It is more plausible that the Dacians timed their devastating surprise attack to exploit the tense situation on the German front.

The Dacian attack must have occurred no later than the winter of 85–86 A.D., and probably across a frozen Danube, as they had done in earlier raids. Oppius Sabinus, proconsul of Moesia, was one casualty of the surprise attack, which led to the capture of several settlements on the Moesian shoreline. The gravity of the situation is attested by the fact that Domitian rushed to Moesia and spent months preparing a retaliatory campaign. The operation was entrusted to Cornelius Fuscus, commander of the Praetorian Guard, who crossed the Danube and advanced steadily into Dacian territory. At this critical moment, Diurpaneus abdicated in favour of Decebalus, who started his reign by inflicting a crushing defeat on Fuscus' army in 87 A.D. Fuscus was killed in battle, and there were so many casualties that the Romans had to write off an entire legion. The third Roman to take charge of the campaign, Tettius Iulianus, finally managed in 88 A.D. to inflict a decisive defeat on the Dacians at Tapae, a mountain pass on the way to the royal capital.

It is difficult to discern, on the basis of the fragmentary evidence, the extent to which Daco-Roman relations were altered by the peace treaty and the new alliance concluded in 88 A.D. Roman historians, hostile to Domitian, regarded the peace terms as a victory for Decebalus: a sizeable stipend, and Roman experts whose knowledge he was evidently free to exploit for warlike as well as for peaceful ends. On the other hand, after the victory but before the peace treaty was concluded, a legion could already march unhindered 'across the kingdom of Decebalus' on its way to the German {1-57.} front on the Great Plain.[16]16. Dobó, Inscriptiones... 502 = 774a. Moreover, Decebalus had proposed peace on several occasions before his defeat at Tapae, at a time when it was hardly in Domitian's interest to prolong the war, given the growing problems with the Germans.

Nor did Decebalus take advantage of the Romans' difficulties subsequently, when Domitian was drawn into prolonged warfare in Pannonia with the Germans and the Sarmatians. In all likelihood, his ambitions were satisfied by the peace terms. He did not participate in the peace talks himself but sent an envoy, Diegis (possibly his brother); it is upon the latter's head that Domitian placed the diadem symbolizing the powers of a subordinate ruler.

The time of construction of the Dacian fortresses has yet to be ascertained. It is quite possible that at least some of the stone walls and towers date from Decebalus, for it is during his reign that Roman experts were made available to direct such projects. It might well have been a Roman military engineer who produced the seal bearing the name of Decebalus, in the form of a stamp used by the Roman army's brickmakers. The roof-tiles of the fortresses also suggest the presence of Roman architects.

While maintaining his alliance with the Romans, Decebalus significantly enlarged the territory of his kingdom in the decade following the peace treaty. The Romans tolerated such expansion, as long as it respected the foedus system, i.e., did not put at risk the agreements with other kings and the network of client states which had been so painstakingly constructed. The best indication of Decebalus's territorial gains is probably found in Ptolemy's geographical manual. The latter was written well after the conquest of Dacia, but the borders it describes are not those of the Roman province; and although, in reference to many provinces, it mentions the presence of Roman legions, it fails to do so in the case of Dacia. Moreover, since Ptolemy calls Sarmizegethusa 'royal', he must be referring not to the Roman colony established at Várhely but to the royal castle near Grădiştea Muncelului. According to Ptolemy, {1-58.} Decebalus' Dacia was bounded in the west by Tisza River, in the north by the Carpathians, and in the east by the Dniester River. This immense territory, the greater part of which was inhabited by Celtic, Sarmatian and other peoples as well as the Dacians, must have been conquered progressively, and not without bloodshed. Ptolemy lists the peoples under Decebalus' rule, though in a manner that makes it hard to identify their precise location. Other sources confirm that the northernmost regions were inhabited by the Celtic Anartae and Taurisci — peoples of the former Boian alliance living in northern Transylvania —, and the Thracian-speaking Costoboces who lived beyond the Carpathians. The other groups noted by Ptolemy are not mentioned in other sources; among them, a significant number bear the name of settlements (Predavenses, Ratakenses, Kaukoenses, Buridavenses, etc.). Since these groups were located at the center of the Ptolemaic map, one possibility is that Decebalus divided the people of Dacia into territorial units, each with its administrative center, thus erasing the traditional tribal delineations; it is significant that the one Dacian tribe previously identified, the Appuli, do not appear on Ptolemy's list even under the name of Apulenses, derived from the locality of Apulum. In this case, the structure of Decebalus' kingdom differed little from that of the conqueror Burebista, who had amalgamated a number of tribes and peoples; as noted, the latter kingdom was reduced after Burebista's death to its central region, which reached from the Maros to the Danube, and from the Banat to the Olt.

Trajan probably did not need Decebalus's conquests to convince himself that the Dacian kingdom should be eliminated. As for Decebalus, his style of statesmanship makes it unlikely that he ever entertained ambitions to conquer parts of the Roman empire; after the peace treaty, he avoided any action that might have jeopardized his relations with the Romans. Yet there are indications that in the years following Domitian's death, the Romans were already preparing for a showdown with the Dacians. Trajan initially concentrated {1-59.} on forging alliances with the Danubian Germans, and then, in the fourth year of his reign, moved against the Dacians.

There were numerous factors favouring a showdown: The already excessive stipend might have to be raised again; the terms of Domitian's treaty were difficult to sustain; further expansion of Dacia would threaten the alliance network along the Danube; the Dacians might resort to diplomatic blackmail; opposition elements were mobilizing in Decebalus's realm; and the security of navigation on the Danube had to be assured. The only trouble spot along the Danube that Rome was unable to neutralize permanently with money and diplomacy was the Dacian kingdom.

Few details survive concerning the two short but bloody campaigns, in 101–102 and 105–106, by which Rome conquered Dacia. A commemorative monument, Trajan's column, does bear an ascending, serpentine relief that evokes the war, but no amount of expert analysis has succeeded in translating this into a plausible account of the historical highlights. Trajan had marshalled considerable military force in the two campaigns, and these armies advanced on the Dacian capital from several directions, along the river valleys and through mountain passes. In the first war, the Romans, having reached the fortresses, forced their opponents to make a stand, and defeated them. Trajan stationed garrisons in the fortresses and laid down peace terms that spelled the political demise of the Dacian kingdom and aimed at a final solution to the Dacian problem: disarmament and the surrender of weapons; demolition of the fortresses; surrender of the territories annexed by Decebalus; the release of refugees; and loyalty, or indeed passivity in foreign policy. After this victory, the Romans built the first permanent bridge over the Danube, at Drobeta (Turnu-Severin); it allowed assured access to the territory of what was considered a defunct kingdom. Although, during this first war, Decebalus had shown a disposition to negotiate, after defeat he turned obdurate and prepared to continue the struggle. He rebuilt his forces, sought {1-60.} help from neighbouring peoples, and retook some of the lost territories; he even tried blackmail, taking as hostage a Roman officer who had come at his invitation to parlay.

The second Roman expedition ran into a well-planned counterattack led by Decebalus, who was determined to fight to the last. Nevertheless, the fortresses fell to the Romans in the spring of 106. If the triumphant reliefs on Trajan's column are to be believed, suicides, beheadings, precipitous flight, and attempts to parlay marked the disintegration of the ruling elite of 'capped ones'. Hunted down by the Roman cavalry, probably in eastern Transylvania, Decebalus took his own life; his head was brought back to Trajan.

With the demise of the kingdom, Dacian society also fell apart. Some of the common folk emigrated, and of those who remained, some were taken into slavery. The rigidly stratified society's highest caste, the 'capped ones', were decimated, and the survivors lost their status. The priesthood's authority vanished along with the kingdom; there is no surviving trace of a Dacian religion during the Roman period. Those Dacians who remained in place had great difficulty in becoming integrated into the society of a Roman province. In other conquered lands, the Romans could work with the only interlocutors that they were prepared to acknowledge, the aristocracy; but in Dacia, the aristocrats had disappeared, leaving the people without representation. It was this social vacuum, as well as the loss of population, that prompted Trajan and his successors to encourage people from other parts of the empire to settle in conquered Dacia.

 

Recent Videos

1320 views - 0 comments
1457 views - 0 comments
1687 views - 0 comments
1323 views - 0 comments

Webs Counter