PROCEEDINGS OF THE 12 TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THRACOLOGY "The Thracians and their Neighbors in...

PROCEEDINGS OF THE 12TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THRACOLOGY

”The Thracians and their Neighbors in the Bronze and Iron Ages”

- Volume I -

Institutions involved in the organization of the Congress:

Dâmboviţa County Council „Valahia” University of Târgovişte

Institute of Archaeology „Vasile Pârvan” – Center of Thracology Bucureşti

International Union of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences – 30th Commission

„Curtea Domnească” National Museum Complex of Târgovişte Braşov County History Museum

Museum of Brăila

Persons involved in the organization of the Congress:

The Honorary Committee Prof. univ. dr. Ion Cucui, president

Conf. univ. dr. Călin D. Oros, vice-president Conf. univ. dr. Adrian Țuțuianu, vice-president

Acad. Alexandru Vulpe, vice-president Prof. univ. dr. Marin Cârciumaru, secretary

Organizing Committee Prof. dr. Valeriu Sîrbu, president

Prof. dr. Cristian Schuster, secretary general Conf. univ. dr. Marian Cosac, vice-president

Dr. Ovidiu Cîrstina, member Dr. Radu Ştefănescu, member

Prof. univ. dr. Ionel Cândea, member

Secretariat Prof. dr. Cristian Schuster Dr. George Murătoreanu

Dr. Ana Ilie

It is the authors who are responsible for the contents and the quality of studies. Due to the late reception of manuscripts, the Editorial Board could not in all cases intervene to any significant extent in order to ensure a standard language.

DÂMBOVIŢA COUNTY COUNCIL INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY „VASILE PÂRVAN” BUCHAREST

„CURTEA DOMNEASCĂ” NATIONAL MUSEUM COMPLEX OF TÂRGOVIŞTE

„VALAHIA” UNIVERSITY OF TÂRGOVIŞTE

The Thracians and their Neighbors in the Bronze and Iron Ages

PROCEEDINGS OF THE 12TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THRACOLOGY

TÂRGOVIȘTE

10TH -14TH SEPTEMBER 2013

“Settlements, Fortresses, Artifacts” - Volume I -

Editorial Board Cristian Schuster, Ovidiu Cîrstina,

Marian Cosac and George Murătoreanu

Covers: Valeriu Sîrbu, Dana Smaznov DTP: Dana Smaznov, Valeriu Sîrbu Descrierea CIP a Bibliotecii Naţionale a României

INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THRACOLOGY. Proceeding (12 ; 2013 ; Târgovişte)

Proceedings of the 12th International Congress of Thracology : the Thracians and their Neighbors in the bronze and Iron ages : Târgovişte, 10th-

14th September 2013. - Târgovişte : Cetatea de Scaun, 2013 2 vol.

ISBN 978-606-537-208-5 Vol. 1 : Settlements, fortresses, artifacts / editorial board: Cristian Schuster, Ovidiu Cîrstina, Marian Cosac and George Murătoreanu. - Bibliogr. - ISBN 978-606-537-207-8

I. Schuster, Cristian (ed.) II. Cîrstina, Ovidiu (ed.) III. Cosac, Marian (ed.) IV. Murătoreanu, George (ed.)

904(398.9)(063)

ISBN general 978-606-537-208-5 ISBN vol. I 978-606-537-207-8 Editura Cetatea de Scaun, Târgoviște, 2013 www.cetateadescaun.ro , email: [email protected]

SUMMARY

FOREWORD ......................................................................................................................................... 9

A NEW BANIABIC TYPE AXE FROM SOUTHERN ROMANIA Radu Băjenaru (Bucharest – Romania), Alin Frînculeasa (Ploieşti – Romania) ............................. 13

A SPECIAL RED DEER ANTLER ARTEFACT FROM THE DACIAN SETTLEMENT OF UNIP, TIMIŞ COUNTY, ROMANIA Corneliu Beldiman (Bucharest – Romania) ..................................................................................... 17

DATA ABOUT THE OSSEOUS MATERIALS ARTEFACTS FROM DACIAN HILLFOR OF ARDEU, HUNEDOARA COUNTY, ROMANIA Corneliu Beldiman (Bucharest – Romania), Iosif Vasile Ferencz (Deva – Romania), Diana-Maria Sztancs (Bucharest – Romania) ........................................................................................................ 39

WOMEN AT PISTIROS Jan Bouzek (Prague – Czeh Republic), Lydia Domaradzka (Sofia – Bulgaria) ............................... 67

WHETSTONES WITH A HANGING HOLE IN STEPPE ZONE CULTURES OF THE NORTHERN PONTIC AND THE GREAT HUNGARIAN PLAIN FROM THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND THE EARLY IRON AGE Marcin Burghardt (Rzeszowsk - Poland) ........................................................................................ 83

REPERES CHRONOLOGIQUES OFFERTS PAR LA CERAMIQUE GRECQUE IMPORTÉE Livia Buzoianu, Maria Bărbulescu (Constanţa – Romania) ............................................................ 95

VIEWPOINTS IN INTERPRETING LATE IRON AGE HILL-FORTS AND FORTIFIED SETTLEMENTS BETWEEN THE SOUTHERN CARPATHIANS AND THE DANUBE (2ND CENTURY BC – 1ST CENTURY AD) Vlad Cărăbiși, Monica Nicolăescu (Bucharest – Romania) .......................................................... 111

THE TRIBAL WORLD OF ANCIENT THRACE Peter Delev (Sofia – Bulgaria) ....................................................................................................... 127

DATA ON LIVESTOCK MANAGEMENT IN THE IRON AGE HABITATION FROM CÂRLOMĂNEŞTI (BUZĂU COUNTY), IN THE LIGHT OF RECENT ARCHAEOZOOLOGICAL RESEARCH Georgeta El Susi (Reşiţa – Romania) ............................................................................................ 135

TEI CULTURE SETTLEMENTS IN BUCHAREST AND ILFOV COUNTY Elena-Florentina Gavrilă (Bucharest – Romania) ......................................................................... 153

FIRST MILLENIUM BC THRACIAN SETTLEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY IN THE UPPER MARITSA REGION AND ITS ADJACENT AREAS Alexei Gotzev (Sofia – Bulgaria) .................................................................................................... 169


6

L′EXPLOITATION DES SOURCES SALÉES DU BASSIN SUPÉRIEUR DE LA RIVIÈRE IALOMIŢA, DE L′ ÂGE DU BRONZE JUSQU′AU IER SIÈCLE AP. J.C Ana Ilie, Gheorghe Olteanu, Ovidiu Cîrstina, Adrian Păunaş, Bogdan Ilie (Târgoviște, Roumanie) .................................................................................................................. 183

SPARADOKOS: BRUDER ODER SCHWAGER DES ODRYSENKÖNIGS SITALKES? Dobriela Kotova (Sofia – Bulgarien) ............................................................................................. 207

LES SPÉCIFITÉS DE L'EMPLACEMENT DES HABITATIONS DU PREMIER ET SECOND ÂGE DU FER DANS LA ZONE DE STEPPE BOISÉE DE LA MOLDAVIE CENTRALE Alexandru Levinschi (Chişinău – R. Moldavie) ............................................................................. 213

IN QUEST FOR QUALITY STONE: LA TÈNE ROTARY QUERNS FROM ŽIDOVAR, SOUTH BANAT Marija Ljuština (Belgrade – Serbia) .............................................................................................. 225

MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH IN THE PRUT-DNIESTER INTERFLUVE BARBARICUM Sergiu Mateev (Kishinev – R. of Moldova) ................................................................................... 237

ON A POSSIBLE FUNCTION OF THE GETO-DACIAN DECORATED HEARTHS Alexandru S. Morintz (Bucharest – Romania) ............................................................................... 255

LA FORTIFICATION GÈTE DE HORODCA MICA, RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDAVIE: TECHNIQUES DE CONSTRUCTION ET PHASES DE L’ÉDIFICATION Octavian Munteanu, Vasile Iarmulschi (Chişinău – R. Moldova) ................................................. 269

DIACHRONIC EVOLUTION OF SITES FROM SAHARNA AREA, THE REGION OF MIDDLE DNIESTER Ion Niculiţă, Aurel Zanoci, Mihail Băţ (Chişinău – R. of Moldova) ............................................. 295

LES POLEIS-EMPORIA ET LES MARCHES THRACES DU ROYAUME ODRYSE (VE– MILIEU DU IVE SIECLE AV. J.-C.) Kalin Porozhanov (Sofia – Bulgarie) ............................................................................................. 315

HELLESPONTUS, THE THRACIAN BOSPORUS AND INFORMATION RELATED TO THRACIANS ON THEIR COASTS DURING THE HALF OF THE FIRST MILLENIUM BC Alexandar Portalsky (Blagoevgrad – Bulgaria) ............................................................................. 321

DISCOVERIES OF CELTIC NATURE ON THE MIDDLE AND SUPIRIOR COURSE OF THE OLT RIVER IN THE SECOND IRON AGE Lucica Savu (Braşov – Romania) ................................................................................................... 327

DIE GETISCHEN DAVA VON RADOVANU IM LICHTE DER NEUSTEN FORSCHUNGEN Cristian Schuster (Bukarest – Rumänien), Done Şerbănescu (Olteniţa – Rumänien), Alexandru S. Morintz (Bukarest – Rumänien) ..................................................................................................... 335

THE GETO-DACIAN FORTRESS OF PIETROASA MICĂ – “GRUIU DĂRII”, BUZĂU COUNTY (ROMANIA) Valeriu Sîrbu (Brăila, Bucharest - Romania) Sebastian Matei (Buzău - Romania) ...................... 347

NEWLY DISCOVERED MONUMENTS OF THE ANCIENT IRON METALLURGY: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVE AND EXPECTED OUTCOMES Nino Sulava, Rusudan Chagelishvili, Nino Kalandadze, Tamar Beridze (Tbilisi - Georgia) ........ 375


7

SPECIAL ASPECTS OF GRAECO-BARBARIAN CONTACTS IN THE EARLY COLONIZATION PERIOD OF THE NORTHERN BLACK SEA COASTAL REGION IN THE LIGHT OF THE EXAMINATION OF THE MATERIALS OF THE CITY-SITE NEMIROV ON THE RIVERSIDE OF SOUTH BUG Marina Vakhtina, Maya Kashuba (Saint-Petersburg - Russia) ...................................................... 379

TRANSCARPATHIAN FINDS OF STAMPED CERAMICS Izabela Wnuczek (Rzeszow - Poland) ............................................................................................ 397

THRAKISCH UND DAKISCH – SPRACHEN ODER DIALEKTE? Svetlana Yanakieva (Sofia – Bulgarien) ......................................................................................... 407

FOREWORD

Our country has previously hosted once more this Congress, 17 years ago, when the 7th edition

was held at Constanţa-Mangalia-Neptun/Olimp. Since then, other editions of this congress have been organized by colleagues from Bulgaria (2000), Republic of Moldova (2004), Greece (2005) and Turkey (2010). In 1996, when the 7th edition of the Congress was held, the status of this research direction – Thracology – was most probably different than today both in Romania and in the other countries. At that time, our research field benefited from the existence of an independent institution (The Romanian Institute of Thracology, director prof. dr. Petre Roman), with its own juridical status and budget. Today, the Centre of Thracology activates harmonically as part of the “Vasile Parvan” Institute of Archaeology of the Romanian Academy.

As other peoples from antiquity were dedicated distinct branches of research that included

historical, archaeological, linguistic, anthropological, archaeo-zoological, and ethnographical investigations it was only natural that the Thracians also had their own distinct discipline. The Thracology was and still is a field of extremely interesting scientific disputes. An example in this direction is the dispute concerning the appearance of the first Thracians in the Balkans.

Many research opportunities are still offered by the study of antic written sources. The archaeology and the linguistic studies permit (and most surely will still do so in the future) the discovery of new faces of the material and spiritual culture of this people.

The development and the evolution of the Thracians cannot be fully comprehended without knowledge of their neighbors and of the connections between the Thracians and the Celts, the Greeks, the Macedonians, the Scythians, the Romans, etc. This is what justifies the theme of this congress, namely “The Thracians and their Neighbors in Antiquity, in the Bronze and Iron Ages”.

Of course, not all the specialists that research the Thracians accept the existence of a separate field of research dedicated to this people. Some do it out of belief, having, in their opinion, the necessary arguments in this direction, others, unfortunately, do it for reasons that include fashion or pure opportunism. As long as the disputes are carried at a scientific level, the things subscribe to normality. But, unfortunately, we notice that sometimes this pseudo-conflict is transferred to the relations between institutions or even between persons which is damaging to the scientific research.

On behalf of the Organizing Committee, we convey our thanks to everyone for the personal,

scientific and financial efforts made in order to attend this prestigious scientific event. We need to express our gratitude to the Dâmboviţa County Council, and to its President –

Professor Adrian Ţuţuianu, who, understanding the meaning of a scientific manifestation of the amplitude of the present one, accepted from the start to grant us a decisive financial help without which we could not have organized this event. We also thank the “Valahia” University, its rectors – Professor Ion Cucui and Professor Călin Oros, who allowed us to use their International Conference Center and the Campus. And we also thank the colleagues, Dr. Marian Cosac and Dr. George Murătoreanu, for their support. We must not omit from the “thank you” list the “Curtea Domnească” National Museum Complex from Târgovişte and its director, Dr. Ovidiu Cârstina and his colleagues, the Brasov County Museum and its manager – Dr. Radu Ştefănescu, and the Brăila Museum and its director – Professor Ionel Cândea. Another “thank you” we direct towards the manager of the “Vasile Parvan” Institute of Archaeology – Academician Alexandru Vulpe and to the colleagues from the Centre of Thracology.

We also want to express our high appreciation towards the efforts of Professor Marin Cârciumaru, who, with his well-known ability and determination, was the generator of energy that made all the people involved in the organization of the Congress to resonate in unison.


10

The Institute of Archaeology, an institution with a smaller budget compared to the other partners, wishes to thank for the financial help granted by the ArchaeoCommunity Foundation from the USA and “Sebastian Morintz” Foundation from Oltenita and to Cristina-Hannelore Schuster.

One can say – and many have said upon departure and in messages sent afterwards – that this

congress was a scientific and cultural success, but also a success in terms of the interpersonal relations. The congress was attended by 96 distinguished researchers, from 14 countries, which held 67

lectures of great topical, geographic and chronological diversity. Without a doubt, the lectures and the discussion that took place resulted in a significantly

wealthier body of knowledge on the Thracians and neighboring peoples. Furthermore, the publishing, before the end of the year, of the lectures will result in the quick adoption by the international scientific world of many finds, ideas and interpretations of the phenomena in question.

It is worth noticing that the participants voted, unanimously, in favor of establishing an association with legal personality – The International Association of Thracian Studies –, which will be able to include all the specialists across the globe involved in the research and scientific and cultural application of the Thracian vestiges, of course as interacting with the neighboring peoples. This association will be able to promote a more fruitful scientific cooperation across borders, between researches with such interests.

Also, all the participants to the Congress adopted a Statement of protest against the destruction of historical monuments, in general, and of Thracian vestiges, in particular, destructions which have multiplied lately.

The lectures held at the congress will be, for topic and financial reasons, published in 2013, in two volumes. The first volume, containing the lectures on the topic ”Settlements, Fortresses, Artefacts”, will be published in Târgovişte, while the second one, on the topic “Necropolises, Cult places, Religion, Mythology”, will be published in Braşov.

On behalf of the Organizing Committee, Prof. Dr. Valeriu Sîrbu

Chairman Prof. Dr. Cristian Schuster

Secretary General

Th

e p

arti

cip

ants

at

the

Con

gres

s

DATA ABOUT THE OSSEOUS MATERIALS ARTEFACTS FROM DACIAN HILLFORT OF ARDEU, HUNEDOARA COUNTY,

ROMANIA

Corneliu Beldiman (Bucharest – Romania)

Iosif Vasile Ferencz (Deva – Romania) Diana-Maria Sztancs (Bucharest – Romania)

Keywords: accessories, Ardeu, craft, Dacian civilisation, osseous materials artefacts, bone artefacts, red deer antler artefacts, roe deer antler artefacts, technology.

Abstract: The archaeological excavations done in the Dacian hillfort from Ardeu in the past decade led to the discovery of an important osseous materials assemblage that has documented a practice of an ancient craft, in a domestic or specialised form1. This craft consists in manufacturing artefacts from bone and antler. There are 43 bone and antler objects from Ardeu, discovered both from the cultural layer and from complexes (the blacksmith’s workshop – that was partially excavated; a funerary or cultic complex). In the inventory of the blacksmith’s workshop, along with manufactured deer antlers, we may include several cattle long bones with traces of cut, splitting and fracturing, as well as a wild boar tusk, taken out from the mandible. The artefacts are included in some categories as it follows: raw materials, blanks, debris, finite objects, wastes, pieces deteriorated by use. Several typological categories are represented: accessories for tools and weapons – red and roe deer antler handles for knives or rasps and waste (32); handle plates for usual knives or fighting ones (sicae) (3); weapons: antler arrowhead (1); various accessories, adornments: antler disc (1); bead made of fish vertebrae (carp?) (1). Cut horns of cattle (3) and goat (2) are also included in this assemblage. There are 6 so-called “special” pieces. The most important is a decorated plate unique until now in the Getic-Dacian area. This was discovered in 2001 in a cultic or funerary context, together with several pieces of military equipment. It comes from a specialised workshop and, because of its deterioration in Antiquity, it was preserved in a fragmentary condition. The study of these artefacts takes into account the actual methodology of the domain. This follows the complete analysis of the artefacts’ characteristics: raw material, shape, dimensions, manufacture procedures, way of use. Alii these are done by applying optical “classical” and digital microscopy which helped the observation and the interpretation of various traces produced during the manufacturing and utilisation.

The site The Ardeu Village is placed in the South-Western part of Transylvania (Fig. 1/1) in a hilly area

where in the rocky slopes, numerous natural cavities open and offer a special perspective of the landscape (Fig. 1/3). The “Cetăţuie” Hill is placed at 17 km of the Mureş Valley and due to its position the way to Apuseni Mountains could have been controlled (Fig. 1/2-3).

Maybe this is the reason for which it was chosen for building a hillfort in Antiquity. The small distance at the main access way was also a great advantage because it allowed the access coming from the South part of Transylvania.

The hillfort was discovered by Téglas Gábor at the end of the 19th century. He was the one who offered the first information and interpretation concerning the site (Téglas 1885, p. 299-307; Téglas 1888, p. 134-138; Ferencz 2012d). Another important moment regarding the excavations in the site dates from 1973 (Nemoianu, Andriţoiu 1975). The reduced scale of the research and especially the poor publication of the results created certain doubts regarding the site Thus, Ion Glodariu includes it in the category of the Dacian fortresses (Glodariu 1983, p. 82), and Ion Horaţiu Crişan, at a several years latter, considered it a fortified settlement (Crişan 1986, p. 149). The doubts regarding the inclusion of the fortification in one of the two mentioned categories appear in literature at those times (Daicoviciu et alii 1989, p. 52). The lack of recent information, determined Ferenczi István (quoting information from

1 This article is a considerably enriched variant of text and especially of illustration published in 2012: Ferencz, Beldiman 2012; Ferencz 2012c; Beldiman 2012b; Beldiman 2012c; Beldiman et alii 2012b, p. 73-76, 226-228.


40

Téglas) to suppose that the walls of the fortification were made of limestone blocks, similar to those from the Orăştie Mountains which were at the South of the area (Daicoviciu et alii 1989, p. 55).

In the past years, the hillfort became famous due to the interest that the Museum of Dacian and Roman Civilisation of Deva paid to it (Ferencz, Roman 2010, p. 174; Ferencz 2012a, p. 70; Ferencz 2012d). The Dacian hillfort of Ardeu was an aristocratic residential area probably dated from the 1st century BC and it was inhabited until to the wars with Romans (beginning of the 2nd century AD) (Ferencz, Roman 2010, p. 174-175).

The enclosure with local stone, clay and filled with wooden structures surrounds the top of the hill. The area seems to have been divided into two parts: in the Northern part, on a rocky area which dominates the entire plateau (Figs. 1/4, 2/1), is located the so-called “tower dwelling” where the Dacian aristocrat lived (Glodariu 1983, p. 25-29). The Southern part was probably reserved for the members of the noble court or most probably, for the warriors and their families (Ferencz 2007).

In the Western area, the traces of a workshop were discovered (Figs. 1/4, 2/1-2). There, the craftsman manufactured objects of iron, bronze, but also of bone and antler (Ferencz et alii 2005; Ferencz et alii 2010; Ferencz et alii 2011). Raw materials, blanks, but also wastes of osseous materials, ferrous and non-ferrous slag, specific tools and installations demonstrate these activities. For the osseous materials artefacts from Ardeu see Ferencz 2010; Ferencz, Beldiman 2012 and the text below with detailed bibliography. The excavated complex on the top of the hill seems to have not been the only workshop of a bronze craftsman discovered at Ardeu. Another one was identified at the base of the Southern slope (Ferencz, Bodó 2003).

The objects discovered during several excavation campaigns indicate a maximum intensity of habitation in the Dacian Kingdom time in comparison with other habitations dated from various historic epochs (Ferencz, Roman 2010, p. 175). The weapons (Ferencz, Dima 2009; Ferencz, Gurgu-Ţârdoiu 2009), the adornments (Ferencz 2003; Ferencz 2006) or the pieces imported from the Roman Empire (Ferencz 2005) or other areas (Ferencz 2012b) were also discovered at Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”.

The assemblage The archaeological excavations carried in the Dacian hillfort from Ardeu in the past decade

(2001 – 2011) led to the discovery of an important archaeozoological assemblage (bones, antlers, horns, teeth). Their first examination revealed the fact that the domestic species such as cattle, goat, pig, and horse are dominant. The wild species such as the red deer, roe deer and wild boar are also present, but they have minor importance in the exploitation of the animal resources (Beldiman et alii 2012a).

The study of faunal remains allowed us to identify the anatomical pieces that preserve the traces of technical intervention that attest the processing of the carcasses and their butchery: traces of impact (bone fragmentation for marrow extraction); traces resulted from the disarticulation, removal of the meat from the bones and bone fragmentation (fracture, cutting); traces of burning produced during the cooking process; traces of skinning (fine cutting at the level of the skull and at the epiphyses of the long bones) (Beldiman et alii 2012a).

The Dacian hillfort from Ardeu and its artefacts have documented the practice of an ancient craft, in a domestic or specialised form. This craft consists in manufacturing of artefacts from bone and antler (osseous materials industry) (Ferencz, Beldiman 2012; Beldiman 2012b).

Raw materials come from domestic species (cattle, sheep/goat, pig) and wild species (red deer, roe deer, wild boar, fish – carp) (Fig. 3/4).

There are 43 bone and antler objects analysed from Ardeu, recovered both from the cultural layer and from two complexes (the blacksmith’s workshop – that was partially excavated and a funerary or cultic complex).

The artefacts are: raw materials, blanks, finite objects, pieces deteriorated by use, and waste (Beldiman et alii 2012a).

The following typological categories are represented: accessories for tools (red deer antler handles, roe deer antler handles, red deer antler plates), accessories and adornments (red deer antler disk, bead made of fish vertebra), weapons (red der antler arrow head), waste (red deer antler, roe deer antler, horn of cattle and goat), raw material (roe deer antler). Quantitative distribution is shown in two tables and a chart – see Fig. 3/1-3.


41

In the inventory of the blacksmith’s workshop, along with manufactured deer antlers, we have several cattle long bones with traces of cut, splitting and fracturing. A wild boar tusk, taken out from the mandible, is also included here; this could have been used as raw material in order to manufacture some plates or beads.

Methodology The study of these artefacts takes into account the actual methodology of the domain. This

follows the complete analysis of the artefacts’ characteristics: raw material, shape, dimensions, manufacture procedures, use wear traces and hypothetic way of use. The applying of optical “classical” and digital microscopy is crucial for the observation and the interpretation of various traces produced during the manufacturing and utilisation (Beldiman 2012a).

The catalogue comprises 43 records of osseous materials artefacts discovered in Ardeu-“Cetăţuie” site as well as anatomic pieces showing traces of human/technological interventions (cutting marks etc.). The site that has provided the artefacts was designated by the code ARC. The records of the artefacts are arranged according the raw materials: red deer antler, roe deer antler, cattle and sheep/goat horn cores, bones, teeth. The standard record presents the data regarding the each artefact as it follows: Code (example: ARC 1) ● Type ● Category (tools, weapons, adornments, raw materials, accessories etc.) ● Institution/Collection ● Inventory number ● Context ● Dating (epoch, period, culture, centuries) ● Plate ● Raw material ● Status of conservation (entire, fragmentary piece, fragment) ● Description (morphology, technical data regarding the manufacture, use-wear traces, functionality etc.) ● Dimensions (mm) ● Bibliography/Unpublished piece (Beldiman et alii 2012b, p. 226).

Red deer antler plates In the assemblage analysed there are 6 so-called “special” pieces. The most important is a decorated plate unique until now in the Dacian and Getic areas (Figs.

4-8). This was discovered in 2001 in a cultic or funerary context, together with several pieces of military equipment. It comes probably from a specialised workshop and, because of its deterioration in Antiquity, it was preserved in a fragmentary condition (around a half of its initial length). It is made of red deer antler (beam fragment, compact tissue) using the technical procedures of splitting, chopping and abrasion. According to the hypothetical solution proposed for its reconstruction, the edges could have been both rounded, or one was rectilinear and the other rounded. The plate has three preserved perforations used for fastening with rivets. The engraved ornamentation comprises double circles with a central dot, bands of oblique lines and notches on the edges. The ornament probably continued in a symmetrical manner, on the unpreserved part. The double circles were probably obtained using two small metal compass-type instruments, with different diameters. The dot was first engraved with the point of a knife, then the small circle was done and at the end, the big circle. The microscopic analysis of the ornamentation elements allowed us to propose the following sequence of operations: the notches on the edges, perforations, circles, bands with oblique lines. The object was probably used as plate for a knife handle, end of belt or ornamental plate set on a piece of leather (Pescaru et alii 2002, p. 42; Ferencz, Dima 2009, p. 21, 24-25, 33, fig. 3/2; Ferencz 2010, p. 79, 87, pl. II/1-2; Beldiman et alii 2012a; Beldiman et alii 2012b, p. 73-76, 226-228; Beldiman et alii 2013a; Beldiman 2012b, p. 228; Beldiman et alii 2013b).

Two red deer antler plates (one is fragmentary, the other is entire, but it was obtained after the reshaping of the fractured one) have a trapezoidal shape, with a perforation at the narrow end, and one of them has an engraved double circle (Fig. 9). These were probably combined with other pieces and served as elements of hafts for knives or ornamental plates (Beldiman 2012b, p. 205; Beldiman et alii 2012b, p. 228-229).

Red deer antler arrowhead Another special piece is a conic arrowhead made of the terminal part of a red deer tine, detached

through axe chopping or cutting with a knife (Fig. 10/1). The surface was shaped using abrasion and scraping with a knife. The same procedure was applied in order to shape the point. The longitudinal


42

perforation was drilled. This type of arrowheads is exceptional among the discoveries of the osseous artefacts dated from Dacian and Getic period (Beldiman 2012b, p. 205; Beldiman et alii 2012b, p. 229).

Red deer antler disk A unique piece is the disc made of red deer antler. It has small size and was probably used as

an ornamental piece or as an accessory for metal objects (Fig. 10/2). It was done using chopping, cutting and the meticulous notching with a knife and the superior surface was finished using abrasion. The shaping traces were observed due to the microscopic analysis (Beldiman 2012b, p. 205; Beldiman et alii 2012b, p. 229).

Bead made of fish vertebra The bead made of fish vertebra (carp?) presents traces of burning (Fig. 11/1). It was done by

cutting the apophysis, shaped using abrasion and perforated using a narrow point (probably of iron?) (Beldiman 2012b, p. 205; Beldiman et alii 2012b, p. 245-246).

Red deer and roe deer antler handles The Dacians from Ardeu paid a special attention to the manufacture of handles from red and roe

deer antlers (Figs. 11/2, 12-15). These raw materials were obtained by their gathering from wild or by animal hunting.

The manufacture of handles is attested in the blacksmith’s workshop as a complementary occupation to the iron tools production (knives). This proves that finite objects were produced there in order to be locally used or as products for trade. This is one of the rare situations of this type identified in a Dacian or Getic settlement.

The use of red deer tines and roe deer beams was preferred due to their superior mechanical properties and due to the advantage offered by their anatomical shapes and dimensions which were very close to the ones of the finite products. In the assemblage from Ardeu, some unworked pieces, blanks, waste and finite artefacts have been also preserved.

The detachment of the raw materials was done using axe chopping or saw cutting; the surfaces and the edges were shaped using a very precise procedure of chopping (Fig. 14/1). The longitudinal perforation was obtained by drilling after a previous carving of the piece. A fragmentary piece (debris? fragmented by usage) had a perforation at one of the edges that was made in the lateral part using the knife chopping. It seems that this served to fix the hanging wire (Ferencz 2010; Beldiman et alii 2012a; Beldiman 2012b, p. 206; Beldiman et alii 2012b, p. 229-240) (Fig. 12/2).

Cattle and goat horn processing At Ardeu, the manufacture of cattle and goat horns is also attested. The keratin stratum that

covers the horn core was taken off in order to be used as a drinking vessel or as raw material for manufacturing ornamental accessories for various objects made of wood, leather, textile or metal etc. As evidence in this respect the discovery of five pieces may be mentioned. These are an entire cattle horn core detached of the skull and segments of goat horn cores cut with a saw (Beldiman et alii 2012a; Beldiman 2012b, p. 206; Beldiman et alii 2012b, p. 240-241) (Fig. 16).

Some analogies The analogies published for the pieces from Ardeu were especially found within the sites from

the East of Romania (Moldova) in the dava-type settlements placed on the Siret River: Poiana (Piroboridava), Galaţi County (Vulpe, Teodor 2003, p. 562-563, fig. 83/4 and fig. 84/2) (Figs. 17-18, 20/1); Brad (Zargidava), Bacău County (Ursachi 1995, p. 407, pl. 20; p. 409, pl. 23-24; p. 410, pl. 25-26; p. 412, pl. 30/4-5, 8; Florescu, Popescu 1997, p. 317-318, no. 688-689, 691-693) (Fig. 19). An exceptional piece is the knive preserving its red deer antler handle discovered at the Piatra Neamţ-Bâtca Doamnei Getic settlement (Tanţău 1972, fig. 12) (Fig. 20/2).

Other significant assemblages of osseous materials artefacts have been discovered last century until now in various Dacian and Getic sites from the country, but they are still expecting to be studied and published: Cârlomăneşti, Pietroasele-Gruiu Dării, Piscu Crăsani, Popeşti etc.


43

Conclusion Until now the Dacian osseous materials artefacts of Ardeu are the first ones of Romania that

have been studied according to the present and complete methodology of the field which takes into account various aspects related to typology and palaeo-technology and it uses the microscopic means. The study of the assemblage of Ardeu offers methodological benchmarks for this type of analysis which have not been previously applied in Romania in order to study an assemblage dated from the Second Iron Age.

Usual types of pieces such as handles of knives were analyzed. These were discovered in a unique complex – the blacksmith’s workshop. Some rare or unique pieces coming from the area inhabited by the Dacians and Getae were studied. For example the ornamented plate comes from a grave or a cultic deposit with elements of military equipment, the arrowhead, and the disc, all made of red deer antler.

The results of the analysis made for the Ardeu assemblage have already been disseminated in 2012 when an exhibition at Museum of Dacian and Roman Civilisation of Deva was realized and a rich illustrated catalogue with full version text in Romanian and English was published (Ferencz, Beldiman 2012).

The example of approach illustrated by Ardeu bone and antler artefacts should be extended on various assemblages in order to have a coherent perspective regarding the importance of the craft of working osseous materials in Dacian and Getic world.

Bibliography Beldiman 2012a = C. Beldiman, Metodologia studiului artefactelor din materii dure

animale/Methodology of study of osseous materials artefacts. In: Ferencz, Beldiman 2012, p. 40-42, 194-196.

Beldiman 2012b = C. Beldiman, Artefacte din materii dure animale descoperite la Ardeu-„Cetăţuie”/The Dacian osseous materials artefacts discovered at Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. In: Ferencz, Beldiman 2012, p. 50-53, 204-207.

Beldiman 2012c = C. Beldiman, Artefacte din materii dure animale descoperite la Ardeu-„Cetăţuie”. Figuri/The Dacian osseous materials artefacts discovered at Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Figures. In: Ferencz, Beldiman 2012, p. 109-164.

Beldiman 2012d = C. Beldiman, Artefacte din materii dure animale descoperite la Ardeu-„Cetăţuie”. Planşe/The Dacian osseous materials artefacts discovered at Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Plates. In: Ferencz, Beldiman 2012, p. 286-359.

Beldiman et alii 2012a = C. Beldiman, D.-M. Sztancs, I. V. Ferencz, Date privind artefactele de os şi corn de cervide descoperite în cetatea dacică de la Ardeu, jud. Hunedoara. Paper presented at The Annual Session of the Museum of Dacian and Roman Civilisation, Deva, 14th – 15th of June 2012.

Beldiman et alii 2012b = C. Beldiman, D.-M. Sztancs, I. V. Ferencz, Catalogul artefactelor de os şi corn/Catalogue of bone and antler artefacts. In: Ferencz, Beldiman 2012, p. 73-108, 226-259.

Beldiman et alii 2013a = C. Beldiman, I. V. Ferencz, D.-M. Sztancs, A decorated red deer antler plate discovered at Ardeu-Cetăţuie, Hunedoara County. Some technological observations. Paper presented at The International Symposium “Archaeological small finds and their significance”. The third edition: “The costume as an identity expression”, Museum of Dacian and Roman Civilisation, 4th – 5th of April 2013, Deva.

Beldiman et alii 2013b = C. Beldiman, I. V. Ferencz, D.-M. Sztancs, Data about the osseous materials artefacts from Dacian fortress of Ardeu, Hunedoara County. Paper presented at The 12th International Congress of Thracology, 10th – 14th of September, Târgovişte; http://thracologycongress12.com/program/.

Daicoviciu et alii 1989 = H. Daicoviciu, Şt. Ferenczi, I. Glodariu, Cetăţi şi aşezări dacice în sud-vestul Transilvaniei, Bucureşti.

Ferencz 2003 = I. V. Ferencz, Două fibule deteriorate descoperite la Ardeu (com. Balşa, Jud. Hunedoara), Sargetia 31, p. 99-110.


44

Ferencz 2005 = I. V. Ferencz, On a Roman lamp discovered in the Dacian fortress from Ardeu, Hunedoara county, Romania. In: Fontes Historiae. Studia in honorem Demetrii Protase, Bistriţa, p. 371-377.

Ferencz 2006 = I. V. Ferencz, Două fibule cu resort bilateral mare şi coarda înfăşurată de arc, provenind din aşezarea dacică de la Ardeu, com. Balşa, jud. Hunedoara, Bruckenthal. Acta Musei, I. 1, p. 67-76.

Ferencz 2007 = I. V. Ferencz, Cetatea dacică de la Ardeu, Magazin istoric, anul XLI, Serie nouă 4 (481), p. 66-67.

Ferencz 2010 = I. V. Ferencz, Obiecte de os şi corn descoperite la Ardeu. In: Studii de istorie şi arheologie. Omagiu cercetătorului dr. Eugen Iaroslavschi (Eds. I. Glodariu, G. Gheorghiu), Cluj-Napoca, p. 79-90.

Ferencz 2012a = I. V. Ferencz, Aproape un secol de uitare. Unele repere istoriografice privind cetatea dacică de la Ardeu. In: Studii de istorie a Transilvaniei. Volum dedicat istoricului Ioachim Lazăr la 70 de ani (Eds. C. Drăgan, C. Barna), Cluj-Napoca - Deva, p. 70-84.

Ferencz 2012b = I. V. Ferencz, Late Iron Age brooch which enamelled plaque from Ardeu, Marisia 32, p. 79-84.

Ferencz 2012c = I. V. Ferencz, Cetăţuia dacică de la Ardeu/The Dacian fortress of Ardeu. In: Ferencz, Beldiman 2012, p. 47-49, 201-203.

Ferencz 2012d – Ardeu-Cetăţuie. Ten years after, Sargetia, Serie nouă 3, p. 119-130. Ferencz et alii 2005 = I. V. Ferencz, C. Bodó, M. Căstăian, Raport privind săpăturile

arheologice pe şantierul Ardeu (com. Balşa, jud. Hunedoara). In: Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România. Campania 2004. A XXXIX-a Sesiune naţională de rapoarte arheologice, Jupiter-Mangalia, 25-28 mai 2005 (Eds. M.-V. Angelescu, I. Oberländer-Târnoveanu, Fl. Vasilescu), CIMEC, Bucureşti, p. 56-57.

Ferencz et alii 2010 = I. V. Ferencz, C. C. Roman, M. C. Căstăian, C. Dima, Raport privind cercetările arheologice pe şantierul Ardeu – Cetăţuie, Campania 2009. In: Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România. Campania 2009. A XLIV-a Sesiune naţională de rapoarte arheologice, Suceava, 27-30 mai 2010 (Eds. M.-V. Angelescu, C. Bem, I. Oberländer-Târnoveanu, Fl. Vasilescu), Ministerul Culturii şi Patrimoniului Naţional, Comisia Naţională de Arheologie, CIMEC, Complexul Muzeal „Bucovina” Suceava, Muzeul Naţional de Istorie a României, Bucureşti, p. 28-29.

Ferencz et alii 2011 = I. V. Ferencz, C. C. Roman, M. C. Căstăian, C. Dima, Raport privind cercetările arheologice pe şantierul Ardeu – Cetăţuie, Campania 2010. In: Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România. Campania 2010. A XLV-a Sesiune naţională de rapoarte arheologice, Sibiu, 26-29 mai 2011 (Eds. M.-V. Angelescu, C. Bem, I. Oberländer-Târnoveanu, Fl. Vasilescu), Ministerul Culturii şi Patrimoniului Naţional, Comisia Naţională de Arheologie, Muzeul Naţional Brukenthal, Sibiu, p. 11-12.

Ferencz, Beldiman 2012 = I. V. Ferencz, C. Beldiman (coord./eds.), Artă şi meşteşug în epoca Regatului Dac. Artefacte de os şi corn. Catalog/Art and craftsmanship during the Dacian Kingdom. Bone and antler artefacts. Catalogue, Consiliul Judeţean Hunedoara, Muzeul Civilizaţiei Dacice şi Romane Deva, Universitatea Creştină „Dimitrie Cantemir”, Facultatea de Istorie Bucureşti, Muzeul „Castelul Corvinilor” Hunedoara, Muzeul de Istorie Sighişoara, Asociaţia „Pro Corvina” Hunedoara, Cluj-Napoca.

Ferencz, Bodó 2003 = I. V. Ferencz, C. Bodó, Über eine in Ardeu (gem. Balşa, kr. Hunedoara, Rumänien) entdeckte unvollendete Fibel, Instrumentum 18, 2, p. 20-21.

Ferencz, Dima 2009 = I. V. Ferencz, C. Dima, Piese de armament dacice descoperite la Ardeu (jud Hunedoara), Studia Universitatis Babeş-Bolyai – Historica 54, 1-2, p. 18-34.

Ferencz, Gurgu-Ţârdoiu 2009 = I. V. Ferencz, D. Gurgu-Ţîrdoiu, Parts of a sica discovered at Ardeu, Corviniana 13, p. 159-164.

Ferencz, Roman 2010 = I. V. Ferencz, C. C. Roman, The Dacian fortress from Ardeu – research directions, Acta Terrae Septencastrensis 9, p. 173-184.

Florescu, Popescu 1997 = R. Florescu, Gr. A. Popescu (eds.), I Daci. Mostra, Pallazzo Strozzi, Firenze, 26 marzo – 29 junio 1997, Catalogo, Firenze.


45

Glodariu 1983 = I. Glodariu, Arhitectura dacilor, civilă şi militară, sec. II î.e.n. – I e.n., Cluj-Napoca.

Nemoianu, Andriţoiu 1975 = L. Nemoianu, I. Andriţoiu, Sondajul arheologic de la Ardeu, com. Balşa, jud. Hunedoara, Cercetări arheologice 1, p. 181-190.

Pescaru et alii 2002 = A. Pescaru, C. Bodó, M. Căstăian, I. V. Ferencz, Ardeu, com. Balşa, jud. Hunedoara, punct „Cetăţeaua”. In: Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România. A XXXVI-a sesiune naţională de rapoarte arheologice, Buziaş 28 mai − 1 iunie 2002 (Eds. I. Oberländer-Târnoveanu, M.-V. Angelescu, C. Borş), CIMEC, Bucureşti, p. 41-43.

Tanţău 1972 = R. Tanţău, Meşteşugurile la geto-daci, Bucureşti. Téglas 1885 = G. Téglas, Emlékek és leletek. Az Erdőfalvi barlangok, Archeologiai Értesitö 5,

p. 299-307. Téglas 1888 = G. Téglas, Újabb barlangok az erdélyrészi Érczhegység övéből, Matematikai és

természettudományi Közlemények 13, p. 134-138. Ursachi 1995 = V. Ursachi, Zargidava. Cetatea dacică de la Brad, Bibliotheca Thracologica

X, Bucureşti. Vulpe, Teodor 2003 = R. Vulpe, S. Teodor, Piroboridava. Aşezarea geto-dacică de la Poiana,

Bibliotheca Thracologica XXXIX, Bucureşti. Corneliu Beldiman “Dimitrie Cantemir” Christian University, Faculty of History, Bucharest E-mail: [email protected] Iosif Vasile Ferencz Museum of Dacian and Roman Civilisation, Deva E-mail: [email protected] Diana-Maria Sztancs “Dimitrie Cantemir” Christian University, Faculty of History, Bucharest E-mail: [email protected]

Fig. 1. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. 1 The location of Ardeu Village (after Ferencz 2010). 2 Aerial photograph, photo taken by Zoltán Czajlik, May 2012. 3 Balşa Depression – panoramic view, photo taken by I. V. Ferencz 2013. The arrow indicated the “Cetăţuie” Hill. 4 The topographic plan with the specification of the researched areas on the upper plateau made by Maria Magdalena Ştefan, S.C. Digital Domain S.r.l. Bucharest 2004, completed until 2010; topographic detail 2010, Raul Bogdan Tomuş – P.F.A. Tomuş Raul Bogdan, Deva.


47

Fig. 2. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. 1 The top of the hill. The A arrow indicates the area where the tower was built; The B arrow indicates the blacksmith’s workshop. 2 Image from the excavations, with the hearth of the blacksmith’s workshop in the foreground. Photos taken by Iosif Vasile Ferencz.


48

CATEGORY TYPE Accessories for tools 20 Accessories and adornments 2 Weapons 1 Waste 16 Raw material 4

1

CATEGORY TYPE NUMBER Accessories for tools Red deer antler handles 15

Roe deer antler handles 2 Red deer antler plates 3

Accessories and adornments Red deer disk 1 Bead made of fish vertebra 1

Weapons Red der antler arrow head 1 Waste Red deer antler 10

Roe deer antler 1 Horn of cattle 3 Horn of goat 2

Raw material Roe deer antler 4 5 8 43

2

3

4

Fig. 3. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. 1 Osseous materials artefacts: categories and types. 2 – 3 Osseous materials artefacts: quantitative distribution of categories and types. 4 Domestic and wild species that provided raw materials for the osseous materials industry.

0

5

10

15

20

25

Accessories fortools

Accessories andadornments

Weapons Waste Raw material


49

1

2

Fig. 4. 1 ARC 1. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler plate. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 287, pl. 1). 2 Red deer antler plate: hypothesis of reconstruction (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 289, pl. 3/12).


50

Fig. 5. 1 – 6 ARC 1. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler plate – details. Various scales. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman.


51



52



53

Fig. 8. 1 – 14 ARC 1. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler plate. Engraving decoration – hypothetic restoration of stages of engraving (1 – 11), hypothetic restoration of piece (12) and ways of use (13 – 14). Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 289, pl. 3).


54

1

2

Fig. 9. 1 ARC 2. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler plate. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 290, pl. 4). 2 ARC 3. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler plate. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 291, pl. 5).


55

1

2

Fig. 10. 1 ARC 4. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler arrowhead. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 292, pl. 6). 2 ARC 5. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler disc. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 293, pl. 7).


56

1

2

Fig. 11. 1 ARC 55. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Bead of fish vertebra. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 341, pl. 55). 2 ARC 6. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler handle. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 294, pl. 8).


57

1

2

Fig. 12. 1 ARC 7. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler handle. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 295, pl. 9). 2 ARC 8. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler handle. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 296, pl. 10).


58

1

2

Fig. 13. 1 ARC 9. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler handle. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 297, pl. 11). 2 ARC 11. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler handle (blank). Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 299, pl. 13).


59

1

2

Fig. 14. 1 ARC 13. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler – waste. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 301, pl. 15). 2 ARC 21. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Red deer antler plate (blank). Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 309, pl. 23).


60

1

2

Fig. 15. 1 ARC 30. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Roe deer antler handle (blank). Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 315, pl. 29). 2 ARC 33. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Roe deer antler – raw material. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 318, pl. 32).


61

1

2

Fig. 16. 1 ARC 37. / Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Cattle horn core – waste. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 322, pl. 36). 2 ARC 40. Ardeu-“Cetăţuie”. Sheep/goat horn core – waste. Photos taken by Corneliu Beldiman (after Beldiman 2012d, p. 325, pl. 39).


62

1

2

Fig. 17. 1 – 2 Osseous materials artefacts discovered in the Getic settlement from Poiana, Galaţi County (after Vulpe, Teodor 2003, p. 563-564, figs. 84-85).


63

1

2

Fig. 18. 1 – 2 Osseous materials artefacts discovered in the Getic settlement from Poiana, Galaţi County (after Vulpe, Teodor 2003, p. 565, 568, figs. 86, 89).


64

1

2

Fig. 19. 1 – 2 Osseous materials artefacts discovered in the Getic settlement from Brad, Bacău County (after Florescu, Popescu 1997, p. 317-318, no. 688-689, 691-693).


65

1

2

Fig. 20. 1 Decorated plates discovered in the Getic settlement from Poiana, Galaţi County (after Vulpe, Teodor 2003, p. 562-563, figs. 83/4 and 84/2). 2 Iron knive with red deer antler handle discovered in the Getic settlement from Piatra-Neamţ – Bâtca Doamnei, Neamţ County and iron tools used for manufacturing wood and probably osseous materials artefacts discovered in the Getic settlement from Popeşti, Giurgiu County and Dacian settlement from Grădiştea Muncelului/Sarmizegetusa Regia, Hunedoara County (after Tanţău 1972, figs. 12-14, 25, 27).

PROCEEDINGS OF THE 12 TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THRACOLOGY "The Thracians and their Neighbors in...

Documents

Transcript of PROCEEDINGS OF THE 12 TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THRACOLOGY "The Thracians and their Neighbors in...